Any news on progress of Offline game?

With regard to making the game "regional" - are you referring to the regional economies?

If the "regional" mentioned in your post refers to regional economies, I don't think regional economies are working very well in the online game. All I see is people circumventing them by

• teleporting to friends
• teaching others recipes
• purchasing unteachable recipes and resources from player vendors

I recognize that the ability of players to sell recipes and resources not available everywhere are also part of the regional economy. So in that respect, the scarcity of recipes and resources does have a positive effect on trade between players. So maybe I'm being too harsh in my initial statement.

In the offline game, the only aspect of the regional economy that is evident is the scarcity of recipes and resources. There is no way to get them other than to venture into other regions, find them and harvest/purchase them yourself. There is no reason for this other than to make it harder for the offline player to craft anything. And even if the offline player manages to get the resources and recipes to make anything, he may have to cross into another region to find the appropriate crafting table.

These are things that ruin the game for me as an offline player. And I am one of the lucky ones who have several lot deeds in my account, so I can claim lots next to crafting pavilions and spend 5000g to purchase the one crafting table that is missing from each pavilion. If I didn't have a lot deed and had to live out of the bank, I don't think I would have continued playing beyond the initial beginner scene. My original purpose of playing the offline game (buy up property and beautify the world) is impossible. Property is too expensive, it is taxed, and I can't find the recipes to craft what I want to. I've been playing for over two weeks and still don't have a recipe to craft a trunk or a simple table. These are things I did on my very first day of playing the online game.

With regard to the Devs needing to focus on the most high priority things, I accept that as a valid argument. Where I disagree is where they are setting their priorities. I am not a game developer, but I can't imagine that fixing the most glaring obstacles to offline game fun would be very time-consuming or resource-consuming. In my opinion 90% of the fun-destroying offline problems could be solved with the following 4 steps:

1. Add the missing crafting table to major town crafting pavilions
2. Adjust the prices of housing to a reasonable level
3. Remove property tax
4. Make basic (or all) recipes available in every region by adding them to the current recipe merchants.

How hard would that be? How time-consuming would that be? You could then even leave the control points and passes in place because the new avatar could achieve a certain status as a landowner and crafter in his initial region before moving on. Players would start enjoying the game and sales would be made to offline players.

Instead, the devs are trying to raise money with development time spent on mounts. It is a mystery to me.

 

I'm curious as the to the source of the assertion that online people are keeping the game going. Do you mean in terms of purchasing add-ons, or that the majority of players are online?

Are there are stats that indicate what mode players are in?

 

Yes, I mean in terms of purchasing : Cotos (for money in the online game), Towns (no need for this in offline game).

My comments are just my opinions based on my experiences and may or may not be factually correct.

It is my strong belief tho that SoTa is not competetive as a single player game where it has much stronger competition for graphics, quests, and interaction, and is more competetive in the MMO marketplace, where many of it's strengths lie, and where I believe future efforts to fix bugs and increase online features should take priority over single player game which can basically be played online anyway....

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then about SotA's potential as an offline game. I notice you don't mention the housing system in your list of areas where there is stronger competition. I remember how excited I was to acquire property in Skyrim, but there was no decoration system and there were only a few places where I could have a home. In SotA the whole world is there for the taking, if the Devs would let it be taken. I see the quest system as a secondary bonus.

Last year I took 6 months off of playing SotA and played Minecraft instead. The graphics of that game are as primitive as they come, and there were no quests and only minimal interaction with villagers, but creating my own world with simple chunky blocks was the most fun I've ever had in a game.

 

I didn't mention housing becauase housing also exists identically in the online game, in fact, it even influences the offline game, since it's placed by online players - another thing that would fall by the wayside if SoTa starts wanting to be an offline game and not focus on online. Also, in the online game, other players can actually come visit it and you might even be there occasionally when they do, something that will never happen offline.

As for graphics, I was thinking about the Witcher 3, or Shadow of the Colossus, or other 1p FRPGs I've played in the last year. I wasn't really thinking about Minecraft, which I agree is a fun game. Graphics is one of the reasons people get put off by Sota, so it still seems important to me, because I'm interested in immersion.

 

I might actually mess around with the single player game for a little bit, but there was one question I was wondering.

In offline, if you claim your rewards, but then say, you some how lose your save game, if you start a new character, can you claim the rewards again?

 

Never mind that a huge portion of the Kickstarter pledges came from people who were only interested in the offline SP mode. Yeah most of them are gone already, but reading here again that it's "not important" just feels like a giant slap in the face.

 

That is an issue of perspective. Just because you focus on one thing doesn't mean it's more important or other things are not important. It mean using your available resources to tackle and implement what they can... instead of spreading your resources even thinner and trying to do a little bit on even more... and taking even longer to accomplish. I think you're taking it too personally as that was not even the intent of the posts. Maybe take a step back, breathe, and look at it from a bigger perspective and less "how is this hurting me" angles.

 

Yeah I love minecraft too, though its had its problems as well, especially older full java versions. But, as simple as people may think it is, it was built from the ground-up as a single player game where you could build/react/change the entire world... this huge voxel world. Co-op/MP came as an afterthought. It focuses on doing whatever you want in a randomly generated sandbox world. Im sure SotA could've been that if thats what their focus was.. i even look forward to more of this kinds of worlds where you can do whatever, build whatever, etc to the world around you in more modern graphic engines. Thats why I love 7 Days to Die as well. SotA would have to completely redo their game from the ground up to incorporate something like Minecraft and as much as I'd probably like it, it would take too long and definitely not a good use of their resources. Not to mention the usual "angry villagers" would have a heart attack.

 

I am with you, that each content is important.

About points of view: I don't think, @Corv took it personal

The development could have been done and could happen (in future) by focusing on solo game play (what makes the feeling of an UO7 different?).
So the whole quest / journal and map system would be more improved as it is now.
This also will affect the online game play experience.

A lot of people are complaining about a bugged quest system.
Well, why is that? Because the focus on storyline was very small (too small) - a reason why a lot of players (and investorsand Ultima fans) were sad and (unfortunately) left this game.

The told improvement/rework of the whole quest system (including journal) is a very important part - for Episode 2 AND also for Episode 1.
And this counts a lot for the online experience, too.

I am sure, a lot of players will follow the game (again), if the quest/dialogue system is more improved - so the story can be enjoyed like it should be (yes, also more like a solo experience).

This will happen - and I stay tuned for the rework of the Dialogue/Quest/Journal (and where necessary) map system.
Both, offline and online mode will benefit from

 

I don't need to take a deep breath, I followed, played and hoped since 2013. My point of disappointment came with release when it became clear to me that the SP storymode is an afterthought. I was super extremely optimistic in a silly way. I even made videos and was an ambassador.

Shroud was advertised as single player Ultima that harkens back to Ultima IV and VII with optional multiplayer. What we got was a multiplayer game with some optional single player components. No it is not a narrow view or just a personal standpoint when thousands of Ultima (not Online) fans pledged because of this promise. They played a huge role in making this project possible in the first place. Take a step back and think about it.

Since what was done over the years in terms of SP experience was by far not enough to satisfy the huge Ultima (not Online) fanbase most of them left over the years. Some lost hope sooner than others. People who play Shroud now are mostly the ones who are interested in the multiplayer part and logically in their mind the sp offline part is not important.

So yeah with the CURRENT playerbase I even absolutely agree with you, if they (Port) want to concentrate on them, and from what I gather that is the case, then investing time in the promised Ultima VII like experience is a waste of time. What happened can not be undone anyway. At least it would take a LOT of effort to get those fans back.

Sincerely, the calmly disappointed Corv

 

People keep saying that. I have never seen it advertised as a focused on "single-player game" and "multi-player" second type of game. Even from kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalarium/shroud-of-the-avatar-forsaken-virtues-0
3rd Bullet:

• Shroud of the Avatar is a Selective Multiplayer game, allowing players to choose how they want to play! Whether in Single-Player Offline mode or any of three online modes, the main quest line will provide greater than 40 hours of focused, story driven content.

I think people keep believing "spiritual successor" means "exactly like".

 

Show us where it was advocated as a single player game primarily, please...

 

Oh no, I'm not arguing that. You are absolutely correct that it was advertised as a selective multiplayer game. The reason I am encouraged by @Corv 's words is because I truly feel the single player experience, which is part and parcel of the advertised selective multiplayer, has been pushed by the wayside. I am highly disappointed with the story based quest content and where things stand for the single player experience. Whether that be online or offline.

 

Yes, well, that was the whole point on the "focus" comments of having what team they have left and what resources are left to just "focus" on projects instead of trying to do everything. There plenty of things in the online mode that can be fixed which would be mirrored/implemented in the off-line mode. They just need to focus on their primary needs first.

Just like at the latter stages before release/episode 1, they had finally completed and implemented mechanics in game that helped finish or make the quests better for the main story/virtue arcs. They even talked about how nice it was to have those in the game now and that with them they can combine them with other mechanics in quest lines to do things they previously could not. So it's not like they aren't getting done, its going, it's just a slow process, but it's progressing... every single release.

 

Correct and to me that is fixing all the bugs and broken quest content in Episode 1. Also, the content doesn't mirror the offline mode perfectly either. Some quests in the offline mode are truly broken. Now that might be because they haven't pushed these fixes to the offline mode, but they do currently exist and stand to be corrected. In my mind this should be the focus. All bugs, broken quest lines and story components in Episode 1 have to be fixed before they focus on Episode 2. That is just this one Avatar's opinion.

 

Ok first of all, everything else aside. How can you quote this Kickstarter description which clearly puts a huge emphasis (more than 50% of the description) on storyline and being able to play SP offline and not see that with this sentence alone people who are fans of the SP Ultimas are expecting something like that and were pledging money for that and not just for such a feature as an afterthought that is not even fully implemented at release?

Like I said, it was advertised as story driven single player game which CAN be played multiplayer. This is just one of MANY interviews in which Garriott said exactly that (timestamp 3:01):


Direct Garriott quote:
"With Shroud of the Avatar what I am hoping we can do is to create a story-driven solo player experience that hearkens back to somewhere between Ultimas IV and Ultima VII but that ALSO has the ability to play online"

That is exactly what he said over and over again in interviews back in 2013 and that is exactly what I claimed in my post above and that is exactly what motivated SP Ultima (not Online) fans to pledge money to make this project possible.

That's just a simple fact and I don't see the value in trying to bend the truth here. We can argue if, with the current state of the game and with the current playerbase, it's still possible to do, but not if it was ever promised or not.

 

That was not the focus and you're just cherry picking and glossing over everything else. That is a huge problem with making these kinds of statements.

You ask "how" we can look at that... which it clearly lays out and states what it is and what it wants to be as a game... and yet you only take away "single player focus". Seriously? Everything on the kickstarter page includes stuff that can be done/would be done in multiplayer mode not just single player. Not even sure how you disregard everything there, because its in multiple points, that it was singe-player focused at all.

The video says it "also" includes online multiplayer right after he talks about single player story mode at 3:15. It does not say or he does not state that is the focus of the game. Also, he was explaining his game concepts to Warren who helped him before, so seems natural that he'd tell him it would like to have elements from some of the Ultima games he helped work on.

No more cherry picking for an agenda please... all it does is cause unnecessary animosity amongst the player base and potential new players. At least give it a fair judgment and see all the facts before jumping to conclusions.

 

All of these problems, which have been going on for 5 years now, (you'd think by now people would have gotten over it) were due to expectations that went out of control on the part of the players. we only ever raised 1.2 million, and then people raised another 13 or 14 and we did get a 40 hour game, that is playable offline, and online and pretty much we got what we got. It wasn't enough for some people, who wanted the second coming of uh... the avatar. We didn't quite get it. We did get to wear his shroud tho.

The problem was that the players expectations wildly outgrew what was possible. Part of this was unclear communication, part of this was "No Mans Sky" like hype that was self generating, and the rest is history.....

I think it's healthier to try to see what we can do to improve and iterate on what we have, if you still enjoy playing it (I do) rather than the unconstructive "THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WERE PROMISED" type complaints....

If we can improve quests and the offline component, I agree we should, but the focus should be on sustaining the online player base. I don't think this game is a big offline game, although I have no metrics to prove that, just a hunch.