Why I Feel Disconnected From Shroud... And Still Can't Persuade Others

Hello all,

This is going to be a somewhat personal post, but I will try and write it as factually as I can. It's also not meant as a personal critique of the Development team nor the community here, and yes the game is still in Alpha of course.

So with that in mind, some background; I was in the recent Hangout, and one of my questions was misunderstood in chat, one answered but not necessarily satisfactorily. I want to start with the former, as it increasingly forms the core of why I log in for a few hours, then leave Shroud until the next release feeling detached...

Why Do The Devs Not Centrally Release Information

Which is how I roughly stated it in IRC, and was misunderstood. I had a brief chat with FireLotus and Lum The Mad who all pointed out the community support done; and I agree, it is of high quality and they do a fine job. But it's not authoritative and it doesn't serve as a design document; On another thread people sarcastically ask what relevant business experience people have. I don't believe you need any (although I will return to this later), just to be a consumer who knows their own mind... and people need to know what they are buying into because their mind is usually set. Community support doesn't have the same persuasion there; people have been online long enough to know what they say about people and their opinions. They need to see it from the people actually making the product.

Here's what I mean. I log into the game, and with single player content not visible, questing only very basic, and admittedly I'm not socialising much to share the user generated content, what I see is a lot of things I have no idea will ever be available. Now I'm reasonably well informed, and I've been looking around for evidence for this post, so let's get into the nitty gritty....

On the Add Ons page, the following is stated for a Row Lot, as an example;

It also links to the FAQ, which is almost exhaustive... but it jars with the in game experience where I see the following I may one day wish to own online, and the information on availability in game is not stated anywhere;

* Ships (Other than Backer Rewards)
* Castles and Castle Sized Lots
* Player owned towns.
* House Pets.

Some other things I know from my own experience are intended, but not mentioned in the FAQ, such as Heraldry; Bank slots are in the Pledge details but I only know from the forums they will be purchasable in game; and others are mentioned in the FAQ but not on the store page that they can be purchased in game, such as basements in general. The last time I was in game, I looked those up in the store, as I was depressed by how small a row house was, and wondered whether I could expand it. I saw the add on, saw the real cash price, but that it didn't have the same disclaimer as the House Lots, and didn't know if I could actually get one in game... so I switched my computer off, even more despondent. Today, researching this thread, I find the comment in the FAQ instead.

Now let's take Castle Lots. One of the joys of Ultima was saving, saving, saving to buy a player owned Castle, waiting until one came on the market, praying the trader was honest... I have no problem with them being rare. The problem is, if everyone who places one also has a Rent Free lot, and there's no subscription fee for people to let their account lapse, and logging in once every 4 or more months refreshes it, why would any Castle ever come onto the market?

You need more Castle Deeds than are available to backers, to ensure ones with Rent exist which can fall when their players cycle out of the game... I'm not opposed to them being a grind to afford either; or looking much more ramshackle and Gormenghast than the fine homes the Lords and Ladies have purchased now. My point is, by not stating currently there will be any way to get one except via a player, unlike other houses which clearly do, the suspicion is there that there won't be.

Likewise the Ships. Or even the Lighthouse. Nemo is a fisherman in UO, he wants to carry on the trade here in Shroud. But I every time I see their tall masts I sigh deeply, because there's no evidence that will be available to him... At present I'm hoping there are enough spare berths at launch, and that someone with a pledge sells the ship; I've seen one or two say they might, but when there's no cap on placements, I expect most will save for the rent if a ship now is truly unique. And the real cash prices asked I expect to be... painful. It just makes me feel despondent again seeing them and wondering.

Non Combat Pets? They aren't the same as House Pets, and no indication how they'll work; Consider the ones in Star Trek Online for instance, where they vanish when crossing a Zone, and can't be auto equipped, so people hardly ever use them. And then again STO is considering removing Zones in space, so maybe they'll be valuable again! Again though, we can't know. And I'm not sure Nemo wants to be followed around by 3 ravens on land; they'll scare away the fish for a start. And what's a ship's cat when you don't have a ship?

Now... relevant business experience again; I've actually worked as a paid employee on an MMO team. NDA says I can't declare where; let's just say it was a famous title with a tiny staff. And so I fully understand the "Don't Lawyer Me Bro" element, especially in development. Content may not turn up, or do so in a radically different form, or as intended but the coding, she says no! when released into the wild. Hence I'm not too worried by things like Heraldry, which is being largely supported by the community in the form of the College Of Arms; people disappear, lives take them different places, I understand.

But some things should be stated as absolute; because I also know the chaos and disappointment that arises when you can't communicate basic information, or even that thanks to incoherent management there isn't basic information to have, and everyone is just trying to stay on top of the last understanding they came too. Look at the outcry with Elite: Dangerous, which shipped almost as intended bar for a fully offline mode; I have no knowledge of Portalarium's inner workings and I don't intend to lawyer them; but I will say again that, when I try and interest people in this game, not being able to answer issues like whether they can ever hope to own all the above online is where I just can't persuade them. They want to know there's hope one day they'll get a castle that their friends can visit.

And they're not getting that. I'm not getting that, despite all the copious public interaction and the emails and the reading around the subject that I do. Again, I admire the openness and vision of the team; but you could run a train through the gaps in the actual experience unless you're hugely financially involved. We really do need some sort of centralised vision on where the development is, and where it's absolutely, certainly going. Agile development is all well and good behind the scenes, but people like certainty.

Are The Current System Requirements Expected To Come Down Again?

This was my second, answered question, although it perhaps might have thrown them. Darkstarr answered No, but felt the current was pretty competitive. I have to say I don't feel so; not when I can run Skyrim on all High settings on the same system, with the High Resolution patches installed, but Shroud in Ardoris lasts only a few minutes at a time. That's not the point here today though; it's about the right to feel disappointed... and how to reasonably express that.

Darkstarr commented that he didn't feel the Steam reviews were representative of the balance of opinion; I totally agree with that. Much of the negative comments are coming from the same obsessives who have lauded or trolled any game over the last 15 years which didn't match their fantastical narrative of the unrepeatable experience of a few years of early UO. I noticed Gordon Walton recently commented on the reality of Trammel, player numbers doubled, even as badly as the solution was handled; yet we still have people dissing Shroud today because it doesn't support their long waged war to write alternative history.

This is an example of unreasonable disappointment. However the question of whether the game can even be run is not. I found an interesting discussion on the Steam Forums about it earlier; Note two different Developers post, and both say they expect the requirements to ease up. Who should I trust? As I say, having been briefly the other side of the table, I'd say they're all trustworthy; it's probably just differing levels of access to the technical side of things, rather than confusion. But it's not academic; as Shroud currently is, I can't really run it, even on lowest settings.

Likewise, the game just not being for you is not unreasonable to state. Nor is concerns about in game systems. Or anything else. The problem is I think here on the forums, because they puncture the positivity and the genuine respect for the team we all have, it's often discredited as being trolling or demanding. I don't think so, and I think we should recognise and support critical voices.

Partly perhaps because I increasingly am one; I log into the game and I just don't feel what other people seem to be feeling for the game. I wouldn't go onto Steam and review it currently, as I don't think I could do so fairly in it's incomplete stage... In a way, I suppose what I'm trying to say is that, just like real life Valentine's Day only the other day, when everyone else seems to be in love, and you're not (at least, not requitedly) it's even more alienating than just being alone. The community here is good... but the relentless positivity can be a bit much, sorry. Even Avatars lose an Eight every now and then, y'know. And I think I prefer hearing "You're probably not going to be able to run it", at least assuming that's the accurate truth.

Anyway, this has gone on too long, so here's the shortened version for the wall of text haters;

TL: DR - Information, especially on systems for launch purchasers, needs sharpening up, from above, and made uniform. And I'm not in love, but that's alright.

 

There may be some confusion between requirements and performance. It is unlikely that the requirements will change, but the switch to Unity 5 will bring improvements in performance. Further improvements in performance will come later as various things are optimised. Things like reducing the number of packets that must be sent over the internet, tweaks to occlusion culling, etc. These things take time, and are often left until late in the development cycle, so that they only have to be done once.

 

Thank you very much for the article from Gordon Walton. I've added it to my repertoire I use to show those die-hard PvP fanatics that their world-view is completely wrong.

 

Psst. That isn't Gordon Walton, that is a troll. There are several hints in the text and a disclaimer at the bottom.


"My answer: if you are serious I'm quitting today, because some of the players are going to kill (IRL) the people responsible for such a decision. "

"Edit: I'm not Gordon Walton, I just thought the post was interesting as a former UO player."

If you want the real Gordon Walton you got him here

 

Nemo,

I understand your concerns but disagree with your reasoning. Part of being in Early Alpha, which you knew when buying into Shroud is that significant portions of the game could change and in fact will change.

So how can you expect the Developers to provide you with a hard coded roadmap and list of promises when the game is still being developed?

The very nature of an MMO from the beginning is the simple fact we subscribe to a living and evolving world. Some of the evolution will be positive to a player some will be negative. If your sole purpose for playing Shroud is to be a fisherman and explore the ocean, then it's your fault for not verifying the possibility was absolutely in the game before you purchased.

You are placing very unfair demands upon the development team and unrealistically expecting the team and the rest of the gaming community to cater to your individual needs.

How can you expect a developer to tell you at this stage of development such specific criteria? You are being completely unreasonable and as a previous MMO team member you should know better.

 

The OP has valid concerns about the need for improved communication. Especially when it comes to the Add-on store items, POTs, LOTs and etc. It is so poorly documented that we get a constant flow of questions. That is just good business practice and sets the right expectations so most people are happy with the results. I have a 3-week sanity hiatus from the forum planned for when the POTs start to go in the game.

However, when it comes to game features I think it is pretty wise not to turn the game into a democracy so it can get done.

 

Here I absolutely disagree. Maybe with a normal development this would be the case but not with a Kickstarter project. People gave money up front because of what was promised so the devs should deliver on those elements that were promised. Of course things can be added and adjusted but significant portions of the game cannot change, simply because people paied up front for them.

This is one reason why people are so upset about the single player mode. During Kickstarter SP was a significant part of the game. It was even mentioned first along with the story. Now it seems that this has changed and the game seems to become more and more a sandbox MMO. This is not what people paid for.
This may be a dilemma for the devs but I think it is essential that they stick to what was promised during the Kickstarter campaign.

 

The forums, hangouts, faqs etc... are all points in time, unreliable narratives, conjecture at best and more. This is a work in progress. There is the "goal" for various features. There is the intent... but like many things in life, the realities of what is in-game when this ships will probably be different. Some things will ship as intended, some with subtle differences, some completely different.

To answer your core question, I'm guessing that they're too busy making the game to write a definitive guide of all the game mechanisms which may well need to be changed before the game launches anyway.

 

There should be a design document...it may be a ever changing item, but it should be there. I'm sure they have a whiteboard or whatever with a flow diagram with thoughts and requirements.

I don't agree that it should change as it develops on the whims of people in the forums.

 

It is natural to feel that the the SP component is "missing", simply because none of it can be revealed without spoiling the plot. These things are to be discovered by individual players after the game launches.

 

They're definitely not changing the design of the game on the whims of people in the forums. Starr and Chris are both very fond of getting evidence that things are working for not working in the game before they change things. This often leads them to say things like "we're not going to listen to conjecture". Still, they do a wonderful job of listening to feedback.

The devs are very deliberate and methodical in their approach to game design. We have at least a year left of development and you can bet that they plan to change things one step at a time. This is much to my dissatisfaction sometimes as I often wonder what the heck we're doing from release to release. But despite any concerns I have day to day, I think we continue to get a better game release to release because of the developers experience and prudence.

 

No, many people will disagree with you in this. Simply because SP is not story only.
What about unique respawning rules for SP, saving the game, sleeping to advance time, repeatable quests, being able to change things and have a lasting impact on the world and it's inhabitants etc. Those are the Single Player aspects people are concerned about, not the story. Single Player specific features and gameplay elements besides the story.

 

Hi Nemo. Thank you for your courage to voice your concerns and voice them so well. I am one of those who are mostly positive regarding this game, yes thats me While I hear your frustration I am not ready to share it, and the reason for that
is.......... I will not give up on this game because that would sink the ship to do that.......and I like you want to sail on a ship. Having a defeatist attitude will not help at this point, and while I do understand that you have the feelings you have,
are they making a difference in getting what you want out of this game? I don't say that as I am right and you are wrong to have your feelings, of course not.

I say either support the game or don't, make a difference, make a demand for what you want to see in this game. I am not one to want a castle, I do want to sail a ship or a boat is fine, but my house could be named castle majoria or whatever
if they allow us to name our homes, which could be another thing to rally for.

The point where I might be a bit devastated is that after we rally for the important things and the game is released, each individual I know, that we have to settle because of budget constraints, and that this game becomes another 'wanna be, that could have been'.
I don't believe we are at that point yet. Imagine setting out to make a 2nd rate game. The only thing we can do at this point is argue for the game we want. We are limited of course by the systems, or are we? We are limited by the budget,
or are we? I would definitely appeal to the team not to make a 2nd rate game, which of course is a matter of perspective anyway, but we can. Ask what it takes for that not to happen.

Overall I say if you'd like to be in this for the long haul, then take a deep breath and get to work, support the game to be the game you want, and realize that some things are not apparent to you yet, or to any of us. Also realize that we don't
always know how it will play out, and usually in the long run, while not at first apparent to us, things do go as they should. It is the adventure, the risk, the out of box, out of our comfort zone that breeds liveliness anyway.

I want so much for this game. I do not want to settle for this game not having, a great fishing system, boats to fish from and explore from; such as a waterway instance that takes you perhaps to the ports of places on the map, treasure maps
discovered by fishing them up or found on dead bodies, mysteries to solve discovered in many places not just from NPCs but we discover them also in our travels by items we find that may very well cause curses or other negatives to solve. I so do
not want to settle. I say we are not at that point yet. So I will rally for what I want to see til there is no more time, and then it will be what it will be, but I did not jump ship. **cheers to you as always**

 

See, I read this and think "yeah those are great questions" for single player OFFLINE. And I can totally support where you're coming from. If I were funding Wasteland 3 those would be the types of questions I'd be asking.

Not that you're doing this, Lord Darkmoon, but there are a lot of "single player" people that are talking about those things for Single Player Offline and I just can't imagine how that's going to work. To me, Single Player Online is really just multiplayer in a single player mode - it needs it's own balance (i.e. no going into shardfalls and pvp areas).

But if we're talking offline then it's really a DIFFERENT game. It's far more static and that's going to create some interesting questions that the devs haven't answered yet.

 

Thank you for the correction, and the video.
The message of the video is essentially the same as the article.

 

It was a repost, and a link to the original was provided at the top.

http://community.crowfall.com/index...you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/#entry1610

 

Thanks, Ristra.

 

True. But we have recently seen something that isn't going to work properly in single player online that instead of taking one route they took the easy route as far as we know, this as you know is shard falls. In offline you can enter those areas, online they force you to full online. You cannot complete everything singleplayer online, singleplayer. My point in this is, how many other decisions are going to be like that? You should be able to do everything you want in online single player that you could in offline minus the shared economy.

 

You confuse me with this one. What is your expectation? With offline, there is really only 2 options for a PvP zone. Either force online or revert to some single player version.

There is nothing to complete there. Not for a single player.

 

That's a reasonable response, I think where you and I probably differ is what's the shared economy and what's not. I'm not going to argue this point here because it may distract from whatever the OP is about. But I think it's safe to say that the share economy can only be shared if everyone is playing by the same rules.