R5 Game Interaction & Playability Feedback

I agree completely, I wish it was open world, i hate the whole zone structures and travel maps. It makes the game feel so small.

 

Well, what exactly IS in there? Other than a handful of symbols there's no resemblance at all. However I think the core issue is not missing memorabilia or story elements but rather the fact that we are talking about Multiplayer environment vs. classic single player gaming. The principles of Ultima require the latter. There's only ONE Avatar, not hundreds or thousands. And this Avatar doesn't need a zillion different house decorating options or half a world of useless real estate. He also doesn't really need a clickable map for quick transportation. That's what moongates have been created for...
So, if this is supposed to be also a successor to classic Ultima games (no doubt it can be for UO) this part will need a distinctly different approach than what we currently have, with radically different maps, more emphasis on story development, less economics, a traditional magic system, much more sophisticated NPC behaviour...

 

Yeah right now I am not getting much of an Ultima vibe from this game either. But it is still early we are still in prealpha. Once the things you mention start getting adding plus we start seeing more of the story I think it will start to feel more like an Ultima game and less like just another RPG.

 

I would have preferred an open world too but I just don't think it was in their budget to do a decent open world. I think if they had gone that route we would have just ended up with a really small world. This world feels really small right now, but we have to remember we have only seen a tiny portion of it. Also if they do the overland map right it could become an interesting part of the game. Right now the problem is it really is little more then a fast travel map and exiting from a hex to the map feels like you have stopped playing the game and now need to find another hex to go into so you can start playing the game again.

 

I have backed a lot of Kickstarters. No other game has involved and let people play the game this early.

Star Citizen made so much money you cannot compare it to SOTA. Really its in a different universe with traditional funding type money. Wasteland 2 was pretty well developed from the start. Unlike SOTA they started with a solid plan and set of features, and inXile happened to be REALLY good at Kickstarter campaigns. No one will argue SOTA did not run their KS as well and went into the game flinging ideas around without a solid plan. However, it was a long time before even Wasteland game play video was available. We have gotten to play 2-3 releases in the same period.

I think any comparisons to other KS' are not fair. None of those let you in this early with discussions of features during the early stages of fleshing them out. I can understand that turning people off and giving people the wrong impression. I would just say sit back, avoid the updates and wait for release which would be closer to what other KS' projects have offered. This is why people might be happier with games they funded further into development. It fine to come back and still not like it, but comparing it to other KS which released information and game play like more traditional models is just fair.

You are comparing things in completely different stages of development. Even some KS projects closed at different stages of development: some with a game already made and they only used the funding for distribution. SOTA was a gauge of whether they should spend effort, and thus I doubt it was any further developed than the papers RG wrote about the Ultimate RPG and some internal discussions.

Personally I was not able to play R5 much, but I think the progress is good. Until we see a build with all features implemented I would not expect a lot of content. I also expect the release date to be pushed out because every single KS project has done it, and that is not a bad thing.