Confused MMO or Not? ? (Dev) Replied

I think the game is very good as it is. The way it setup is that we will have Spore like online 'massively single player' sharing with the villages and world being influenced by online events, as well as a sort of micro MMO with a NeverWinter Nights type online playerworld setup.

I think its a perfect combination of both and look forward to play it!

As for PvP - according to the videos there will be open pvp that you can cue into and it should be good to go - as long as the Risk vs Reward is high enough there should be more then enough people playing it.

 

I remember how crushed and disappointed I was when UO2 development was canceled. I was hoping this would be that game: 3D updated graphics version of Ultima Online. The developers would do well to move in that direction with the project. UO shards were able to evolve their own distinct communities with fierce player loyalties. I don't see how a semi-persistent, part-instanced world can grow communities.

Meaningful PvP: The rush of never knowing when you might get jumped was an addictive part of UO, and it can be meaningful. I remember my brother and I were traveling down a road to the town of Vesper. A guy jumped out in front of us. He demanded that we hand over our money or else he would attack. We refused. He ended up killing both of us and took our gold. He was role playing as a highwayman the entire time. That was in 1997-98 and I still remember it as a positive experience.

 

I would like to see a more MMO centric game here as well

 

I am also a bit "confused" - as I imagine it currently, it may be a game with hubs where to meet people and from there venture to instances.

Like it was said "you can replay scenes with friends or alone" - I guess that somehow supports that.

So it sounds to be more like "Diablo with Hubs" and not so much like that you would be able to venture in the world and meet random people.

I hope we get more information on that part soon - as this is really important and an important feature for me

I might also raise my pledge depending on that information ... up to now I do not really know what we are dealing with here. Thanks

 

Ah - just have to add. Wether the game being this or that kind of online game is not the main driving aspect for me personally.

What I am longing for is a game: a) fantasy setting b) breaking the "all around fighting" theme most new online games follow and by that c) hopefully changing the industry in general

The just having to fight and nothing else to do is so boring. But at the same time I need and want to have a Dragon Fighter community beside me and live in that! ... maybe only UO gamers can truely understand that spirit and feeling

Of course there have been games which slightly follow that "I want to bake bread" theme - but think is it also needs to be good procuced (for example good User Interface).

That is why all my hope is with Richard`s and the teams project. And I am confident that this is a very proofen and reliable background where everyone can safely rest his hopes at. Go Richard!

 

I think this game has great potential, particularly if the online playing aspects can be worked in properly. For a good player economy there will need to be places where not just your two or three friends goods are, but a host of others.

And as far as crafting goes there needs to be ways to make exceptional gear etc.

 

I hope its not what Richard stated awhile back:

"There are staggeringly important new features unearthed by some of the early movers in this space. Powerful new asynchronous tools allow friends in the real world to aid each other and ?play? together without being forced to play online at the same time every day or risk falling out of the leveling curve and ultimately losing the ability to play with friends. Instead of paying huge upfront costs, it is better to let players try before they buy, and for those who wish to play for free, it?s fair to ask them to help you bring others to the game in return for continued free play. Proper social tools are compatible with the Ultimate RPG.

So when traditional gamers look at all the ?Ville? clones out there in the world, take heart! See not what is popular now, but rather what is happening in this new era that also would benefit them! A great game, like a great movie, need not be inaccessible to the masses. Great story and depth need not come at the cost of up front effort, pain and cost. Free to play does not mean the game has to be riddled with advertising and calls to spam your friends. But, for those unwilling or unable to pay fairly for what they now play, asking them to work for the developer and find us players is not unfair. Great games can and will be made in this new era, to the benefit of all, traditional and new players. We intend to be a leading maker of such games."

 

When I heard multi-player I cried. I was wanting a "back to the old days" "like" Ultima, with no social crap. I'm waiting for more info on this aspect before I get in. If I can play minus any social aspects, WITHOUT GETTING PUNISHED IN ANY WAY, I'll pull the trigger. Other wise, enjoy it with out me.

 

See for me it's the opposite, the social aspect is one *the* most important aspects of the game.

My biggest and proudest memory of UO, was as a volunteer. I performed a marriage ceremony for two players who had met in the game (one Candian, one German).
About a year later, I received an email from these same two players, telling me how much they valued my participation in their in-game marriage, and that it would mean the world to them if I would be able to attend their real life wedding that year. Although I couldn't attend (i'm in the UK, and the wedding was in Canada), it was a magical moment. I have looked for that level of social engagement in every game since, but has just never materialised.

 

The idea of it being a bit of both may be very good, guess we'll have to see.

 

Im really confused, tbh if we dont get a !! full open world !! this is not what I was expecting. Ok lets wait and see , but tbh this frozed my happynes.

 

I dont think it's a good idea to combine both multiplayer and single player types of gameplay.

Be the best at one thing, not kinda good at two.

 

I also am confused I was really hoping for a great persistent open world like UO, as soon as the kick-starter page was live I pledged thinking yes finally a game with the same core ideas that made Ultima the best MMO ever.

Seeing this I am a bit worried, but he has said he wants the players idea to help craft the game. For me a persistent open world MMO where you don't just play with your friends of facebook is key.

None of my friends even play MMO's so does that mean I am going to be playing alone?

 

@Prospero

They said you will play with friends by whatever means you tell them; Facebook and Email were mentioned. I'm hoping Steam friends integration and the ability to 'open' your game to similar skilled players so you can meet more people. I'm guessing there will be the facility to directly add someone by player name/account name, so possibly meeting people on the forums and adding them would be a possibility.

 

UNfortunately I think they have been already enough clear. This is not UO, nor it has the things it made it special and unique still today.
Separation between world map and location map (dungeon, town, cemetery, etc...) means no feeling of real world no matter how many flying dragons you put.
No possibility of just meeting someone in the world and meet new friends, unless you already got to know them in town.
No possibility of a little lovely shop hidden in the woods, nearby a dangerous spot like we used to have in UO.
I doubt we will be able to pic, move, stack tons of items like in UO or U7/8.
They had better to go only offline and give us a new, even more free and more interactive U7, or go full Mmorpg and give us UO2.
This is what we wanted.
Instances, map made with locations and not senselessly, won't ever feel like a real world.
And features like housing here are like just a spot in a hub.
Wow

 

You will still be able to meet other players on the world map, outside of town. Like in M&B you can see various armies close to you.

 

I loved the Ultima games. I never played UO, because I was not interested, nor am I now, in playing an MMO. I am also not interested in playing an online coop. An "UltimaVille" if you will. Send a Facebook request to get friends help you fight the "insert monster here". I hope they give a MORE clear picture of the game and exactly how things are gonna work. Those of us who like an offline single player open non-liner world may have to wait. If SotA is successful, maybe they may think of doing a spiritual successor to the old Ultimas like how they are doing with Wasteland 2.

 

I think there's a good chance that they'll be clarifying a few things on this in todays Dev Broadcast. (3pm CST / 9pm GMT)

 

I'm excited to see what they come up with. My experience with the Ultima (and other Origin games) is that they regularly changed the paradigm of gaming leaving the rest of the industry to catch up. For those of us who play the games, we can only see something new in relationship to what we have played. So we can ask for something like UO or WoW or whatever, but what excites me is to see what this team does building something new and different.

 

I am a little bit disappointed in that it isn't a true MMO... But it also may be that I don't understand enough yet. For example, what does persistent housing matter if other players can't see it or can buy the same plot?

Can we see other players that aren't our friends?

Sounds like many great features many not be able to blossom or truly become emergent due to this.