Interactive world

One thing I loved most about Ultima since Ultima VI (and partially even since V) is the interactive world. You could move and place objects IN the world unlike games like Baldurs Gate, Diablo, WOW etc.

E.g. in Serpent Isle you even had to build steps with rocks in the knights tests cave early in the game.

I know RG already said that everything that looks usable should be usable. but pre-defined usable things and a world that you can really manipulate are still two different things.

So I was wondering if this is planned too. (I hope so )

 

I hope so, too. You could place every object in your house yourself where you want. There could also be hidden items beneath or behind objects etc.

 

The Kickstarter page does say "if it looks usable, it should do something", so I'm optimistic. I hope we can bake bread (with the blood of innocents )

 

And, importantly, the interaction shouldn't be menu-based if at all possible. So instead of making sure you have all the necessary crafting implements in your inventory, you should actually have to use each component on the previous component (or assembly of components in turn) in order to arrive at the final product.

 

I think you could use Minecraft as an example for building. Simple items could be created just by using items in your inventory, but larger items might need a workbench or even a blacksmith shop.

Using one at a time might be tedious, but put a few things together to make a shaft, then a few more things to make a blade, then the blade and the shaft make an axe.

 

@Skybly: Yeah you're right but I stated in my original post that I see a difference between usable objects and being able to manipulate the world. Each is great, both is Ultima.

@Umbrae: Minecraft is based on menus. I am with WtF Dragon here, it should mostly be without menus. We don't have to use modern games as an example. Just take Ultima VII. It was so far ahead of its time. To this day I don't know why games haven't been up to that standard.. a standard of a game from the early 90s. Skyrim is the only game that at least goes a little in that direction and Todd Howard stated that Ultima VII is his blueprint.

Well actually I do know why they are not up to that standard. Because you can make tons of money with less effort.

I never liekd that Diablo was basically more successful than Ultima just as I never liked that Half Life was praised as the first Shooter with real story and deeper gameplay when in fact System Shock came before it and was in EVERY ASPECT a better, more interesting game.

I think it's simple. Britney Spears sold more albums than the Smashing Pumpkins (put in your favorite alt. rock band here) - still her music sucks compared to your fav band. But she appeals to the mass market.

But hey, that's why crowd funding is so great. This way we don't just get games publishers think will be most successful with the least effort but actual games for gamers like us. Now RB just has to listen to our pleas

 

Corv:

You mention some concerns about the level of detail/usecode in SotA. I think this video might answer some of your questions: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29860059. About 2m30s in they talk about the expected levels of interactivity and state that the game should have "Ultima 7"-levels of use. It does not say whether or not you'll be able to move objects, explicitly, but it seems implied.

 

Thanks for the link! I have watched that already of course since I am sucking up all the info I can get And as you said yourself it does not answer this question. So far we only know that objects should be usable.

 

True, Corv. The early stages of development can be a bit nebulous. No worries, though.