Interplay and Origin
Eric Lopez
I just thought I'd take a moment and point out a difference between
these two companies....
Interplay representatives have been posting to this newsgroup on a
fairly regular basis answering questions about Fallout and Baldur's
Gate. The subjects range from release dates all the way to such obscure
topics as localization issues. The president of Bioware has taken quite
a bit of time to speak at great length about Baldur's Gate and, I'll
admit, I'm excited about it. I respect the fact they they know who
their potential customers are and are willing to speak with them
publically and regularly.
Origin, on the other hand, has remained silent. I find this especially
odd since most of the messages in this newsgroup have to do with Ultima
Online, most of which are vehemently negative. Call me silly, but if I
was an Origin executive I'd be very concerned about this trend. I'd be
sending in my PR people to do damage control ASAP. But then again,
maybe that's the problem. Maybe the people who create the worlds and
write the code are the victims of incompetent managament at the EA level
and are doing the best they can under impossible circumstances. I don't
know.
Ultima Online, Fallout and Baldur's Gate: Guess which two I plan on
buying?
-E
Eric Lopez
Boomer wrote:
> I hope everyone understands that releasing (and keeping up with) a
> pioneering product like UO (with other titles like Wing
> Commander/Prophesy, Longbow II, F-15 in the works as well) means
> everyone is seriously burning the candle at both ends. It's certainly
> not because Origin is wanting to ignore its customers, avoid the
> issues or due to 'incompetent management'. Nor is it meant to imply
> that noone at Origin is reading the UO groups (I just saw a post by
> Designer Dragon in another group). It is, as you say... everyone at
> EA/Origin is doing the best they can under the current conditions.
OK, then it's up to the program and/or product managers to learn from
past mistakes and come up with an action plan for the future. If it's
this difficult and haphazard on a regular basis then something must be
wrong at a fundamental level.
> But you are right... EA/Origin absolutely recognizes the need to have
> a better presence here and elsewhere. Online gaming is a brand new
> genre for Origin and the need to have resources dedicated to the task
> simply hasn't existed in the company until now. Personally, I
> applaude them for jumping head first in an emerging industry that by
> all accounts is a very risky business to be in at this point in the
> evolution of online gaming. I love online gaming and EA/Origin
> certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
>
> And that's why they (very recently) hired me. They *know* they need
> to build their online organization beyond the designer/developer
> staff. So they've done something about it and here I am... I know the
> genre, I know the business, I know the community. I've played online
> games for over 7 years (Genie, Imagination, ICI) and I have 2+ years
> of direct (marketing) business experience with a successful large
> scale, persistent online gaming service that had the 'Online Game of
> the Year' last year. I know it doesn't sound like much, but there's
> *very* few people in the gaming business that can claim even that.
That's a step in the right direction, and I appreciate you stepping
forward and speaking up and behalf of your company. As I said
previously, I admire that, especially given the circumstances.
> Now TBH, I *just* started at Origin. I need some time to settle in,
> get my bearings. Note I'm not specifically 'responsible' for UO or any
> other particular product at Origin/Janes (just their online features,
> the community, etc.). It's my role to develop (improve, if you will)
> Origin/Janes online presence. So I intend to do everything necessary
> to keep everyone much better informed and heard in the future.
Which is part of the problem. See, Origin should have thought about
this long before they ever intended on releasing a product. You may
have a great track record but, as you said, you need time to get up to
speed. No offense to you, it's an incredible task you're undertaking.
However, Origin can't honestly expect most people to pony up the cash
for what is, in all honesty, still an unfinished product.
> Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
> Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
> complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
> former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
> latter.
The UO community will appreciate this, I'm sure.
> I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
> few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
> scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
> the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
> before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
> evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
> there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
> better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
> thinks UO sucks.
And I hope for Origin's sake that it works out for everyone. Otherwise,
they can be in deep trouble not only by not bringing in the expected
revenue on UO, but by alienating thousands of dedicated Ultima fans (and
future customers). The hardest folks to convert will be the fans who
were waiting to buy U9 until Origin delayed that project so they could
dedicate all their resources to UO.
> But UO is not for everyone. Having been in the business, one of the
> things I'm aware of is that not everyone even understands what this
> 'open ended' business is even all about. Gamers are used to having
> plots handed to them, dictated (if you will) by the designer. They're
> used to being able to 'solve' a game.. sometimes assessing their own
> skill by how fast a game can be completed. This is not that kind of
> game. And there will be some that wholly reject this idea and will
> 'vehemently' say so (even though it is enthusiastically received by
> others).
Common sense ought to show that if UO was as bad as the ng
> would have you believe, I wouldn't have problems getting into a server
> because it's full.
That's false logic. A sizable amount of messages are about not being
able to connect in the first place.
> There has been a tremedous surge of new players during the release of
> UO. I know how this works ... Once the curiousity seekers are
> satisfied, once the thieves/PK'ers get bored and want something more,
> Britannia will turn into a mature community where its citizens will
> come to know one another (if not 'personally', then by reputation).
> Friends will be made, enemies sworn. Then Britannia will come mean
> something to it's inhabitants and they'll do what's needed to protect
> it's meaning, values and nature.
Well, I'll believe it when I see it. Like I said, I hope it happens not
only for Origin's sake, but for all those people buying non-returnable
copies of UO.
> Sorry for the length of the post. I just felt it was time for me to
> 'step out front', make a statement of how things are at Origin (an UO)
> and you gave me the perfect opening ;)
Glad I could be of service ;)
> When you see me online.. make sure you say hi!
>
> Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
> (UO: Ferric the Pathfinder)
> Internet Product Manager
> Origin/Janes Combat Sims
>
> http://www.origin.ea.com
> http://www.owo.com
> http://www.janes.ea.com
> Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
>
> Remove the '*' at the end of my email
> boo...@cris.com
Ben & Karen
Boomer wrote:
> I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
>
> few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
> scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
> the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
> before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
> evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
>
> there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
> better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
>
> thinks UO sucks.
That is wonderful, and I think everyone here understands that. I would
still like to know why UO was released so suddenly, before the
completion of the scheduled beta testing, and with a good number of bugs
and game balance issues still unresolved. As I have not played the game,
all of this is based on second-hand information, but I have yet to see
any player or Origin employee dispute these claims. Did the UO budget
run short? Why are people now being charged to play a game which, by all
accounts, is still in beta condition?
> But UO is not for everyone. Having been in the business, one of the
> things I'm aware of is that not everyone even understands what this
> 'open ended' business is even all about. Gamers are used to having
> plots handed to them, dictated (if you will) by the designer. They're
>
> used to being able to 'solve' a game.. sometimes assessing their own
> skill by how fast a game can be completed. This is not that kind of
> game. And there will be some that wholly reject this idea and will
> 'vehemently' say so (even though it is enthusiastically received by
> others). Common sense ought to show that if UO was as bad as the ng
> would have you believe, I wouldn't have problems getting into a server
>
> because it's full.
Outpost sold quite well in its initial release, and Sierra has one of
the best return policies in the business. UO is non-returnable at every
store I have seen it at. Not everyone thinking of buying UO reads this
newsgroup, either. UO is a big title from one of the biggest game
designers in the industry- I would put my money on high initial sales
even if the box came with nothing in it.
But all of that is besides the point. I am not so much interested in why
so many people are trying UO as I am in why so many people seem to
dislike it.
> There has been a tremedous surge of new players during the release of
> UO. I know how this works ... Once the curiousity seekers are
> satisfied, once the thieves/PK'ers get bored and want something more,
> Britannia will turn into a mature community where its citizens will
> come to know one another (if not 'personally', then by reputation).
> Friends will be made, enemies sworn. Then Britannia will come mean
> something to it's inhabitants and they'll do what's needed to protect
> it's meaning, values and nature.
That is a matter which only time will decide. The scenario you paint is
a good one, and one that I am sure many decent players hope will come
true. There is another possibility, however- that the PKers and thieves
and general morons will drive all of the good players away, and
Brittania will grow into a community populated only by idiot
game-wreckers. Much like battle.net is today. It really could go either
way.
> Sorry for the length of the post. I just felt it was time for me to
> 'step out front', make a statement of how things are at Origin (an UO)
>
> and you gave me the perfect opening ;)
No problem. All UO questions/problems aside, you have my kudos for
making your presence known on this group. As has been stated before,
Origin needs to do more of this- or at least some teams within Origin do
(Andy Hollis already does an excellent job answering questions on
.flight-sim). Keep it up!
-Ben
Critical Bill
>Ultima Online, Fallout and Baldur's Gate: Guess which two I plan on
>buying?
If you're an Origin Worshipper, two copies of Ultima Online.
-
Exclusive Nippolena Interview!! http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/interview.htm
BattleCruiser 3000 AD FAQ! http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/bc3kfaq.htm
"Game Junkets: Gift or Graft" http://www.gamepen.com/therapy/industrial/bill.html
Mark Asher
> Critical Bill <gd...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
<3449e8ff...@snews.zippo.com>...
> On Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:23:56 -0700, Eric Lopez
> <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Ultima Online, Fallout and Baldur's Gate: Guess which two I plan on
> >buying?
>
> If you're an Origin Worshipper, two copies of Ultima Online.
One of the nice things about Fallout is that I'll be able to find it for
$45 (or less) and play it, and then when I'm done I can probably sell it
for $20-25. If I get UO, I can't sell it, which is a real drag. That really
ups the ultimate price of the game.
--
Mark Asher
Nippolena Speaks!
http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/interview.htm
Ben & Karen
Mark Asher wrote:
> > Critical Bill <gd...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
> <3449e8ff...@snews.zippo.com>...
> > On Fri, 03 Oct 1997 17:23:56 -0700, Eric Lopez
> > <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Ultima Online, Fallout and Baldur's Gate: Guess which two I plan on
>
> > >buying?
> >
> > If you're an Origin Worshipper, two copies of Ultima Online.
>
> One of the nice things about Fallout is that I'll be able to find it
> for
> $45 (or less) and play it, and then when I'm done I can probably sell
> it
> for $20-25. If I get UO, I can't sell it, which is a real drag. That
> really
> ups the ultimate price of the game.
And if past experience is any gauge, Fallout should be a damn good game
to boot. Stonekeep had some of the best atmosphere of any CRPG I have
played, and while I had some reservations about some elements of the
gameplay in Stonekeep, it seems that many of them have been addressed in
Fallout. I am anxious to see how it all works out.
Baldur's Gate looks intriguing as well. Their implementation of
multiplayer looks to be the best I have seen yet, at least in terms of
what I am looking for in a multiplayer CRPG. The gameplay looks like it
will be pretty straightforward AD&D, so I have no worries there. If they
manage to throw a good story into the mix, I will definitely be pleased.
UO concerns me, though. I did not participate in the beta test, but many
of the concerns I had regarding the gameplay seem to be echoed in the
host of negative comments on this group. I will give the game a good
month or two (at least) to settle down before I consider buying it.
Maybe the problems will be worked out- that would be great. If not,
there are plenty of other good games coming this winter.
-Ben
Boomer
Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Ultima Online, Fallout and Baldur's Gate: Guess which two I plan on
>buying?
Your choice... but I hope I can confuse the issue ;)
Origin has 'remained silent' simply because there's been noone with
the time to keep up with the (literally) hundreds, sometimes thousands
of messages each day about UO on comp.sys.ibm.games.rpg,
rec.games.computer.ultima.online, alt.games.ultima-online and
alt.games.ultima.dragons. This isn't even counting the messages on
players web based UO message boards, or the hundreds of calls and
emails received *daily* at Origin about UO. TBH, it's been pretty
overwhelming.
I hope everyone understands that releasing (and keeping up with) a
pioneering product like UO (with other titles like Wing
Commander/Prophesy, Longbow II, F-15 in the works as well) means
everyone is seriously burning the candle at both ends. It's certainly
not because Origin is wanting to ignore its customers, avoid the
issues or due to 'incompetent management'. Nor is it meant to imply
that noone at Origin is reading the UO groups (I just saw a post by
Designer Dragon in another group). It is, as you say... everyone at
EA/Origin is doing the best they can under the current conditions.
But you are right... EA/Origin absolutely recognizes the need to have
a better presence here and elsewhere. Online gaming is a brand new
genre for Origin and the need to have resources dedicated to the task
simply hasn't existed in the company until now. Personally, I
applaude them for jumping head first in an emerging industry that by
all accounts is a very risky business to be in at this point in the
evolution of online gaming. I love online gaming and EA/Origin
certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
And that's why they (very recently) hired me. They *know* they need
to build their online organization beyond the designer/developer
staff. So they've done something about it and here I am... I know the
genre, I know the business, I know the community. I've played online
games for over 7 years (Genie, Imagination, ICI) and I have 2+ years
of direct (marketing) business experience with a successful large
scale, persistent online gaming service that had the 'Online Game of
the Year' last year. I know it doesn't sound like much, but there's
*very* few people in the gaming business that can claim even that.
Now TBH, I *just* started at Origin. I need some time to settle in,
get my bearings. Note I'm not specifically 'responsible' for UO or any
other particular product at Origin/Janes (just their online features,
the community, etc.). It's my role to develop (improve, if you will)
Origin/Janes online presence. So I intend to do everything necessary
to keep everyone much better informed and heard in the future.
Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
latter.
I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
thinks UO sucks.
But UO is not for everyone. Having been in the business, one of the
things I'm aware of is that not everyone even understands what this
'open ended' business is even all about. Gamers are used to having
plots handed to them, dictated (if you will) by the designer. They're
used to being able to 'solve' a game.. sometimes assessing their own
skill by how fast a game can be completed. This is not that kind of
game. And there will be some that wholly reject this idea and will
'vehemently' say so (even though it is enthusiastically received by
others). Common sense ought to show that if UO was as bad as the ng
would have you believe, I wouldn't have problems getting into a server
because it's full.
There has been a tremedous surge of new players during the release of
UO. I know how this works ... Once the curiousity seekers are
satisfied, once the thieves/PK'ers get bored and want something more,
Britannia will turn into a mature community where its citizens will
come to know one another (if not 'personally', then by reputation).
Friends will be made, enemies sworn. Then Britannia will come mean
something to it's inhabitants and they'll do what's needed to protect
it's meaning, values and nature.
Sorry for the length of the post. I just felt it was time for me to
'step out front', make a statement of how things are at Origin (an UO)
and you gave me the perfect opening ;)
When you see me online.. make sure you say hi!
devere1
<SNIP UO STUFF>
In it's present form, UO is not terrible, but it represents everything
wrong with Origin, from the broken promises to their downright arrogant
view of their fans.
I remember back in 1996. DragonCon. Richard Garriot, lord British, bought
everyone supper there, and lots of Ultima Dragons attended. Richard said
that he thought the Dragons were great. He said that the older Ultima
games would be available on the OSI website, for all to enjoy. He said
that OSI was planning on having a closer relationship with it's fans,
particularly the Dragons, perhaps to the extent of having a Dragon's-only
e-mail address.
This year, 1997, Richard didn't even bother coming to DragonCon.
I don't know about you, but to me that's very symbolic.
-Ophidian Dragon
Zac bond
Reknaw Dragon
Boomer wrote:
<snippage>
> the time to keep up with the (literally) hundreds, sometimes thousands
> of messages each day about UO on comp.sys.ibm.games.rpg,
> rec.games.computer.ultima.online, alt.games.ultima-online and
> alt.games.ultima.dragons. This isn't even counting the messages on
> players web based UO message boards, or the hundreds of calls and
> emails received *daily* at Origin about UO. TBH, it's been pretty
> overwhelming.
Hmm... not too many messages on the alt groups, I would have to imagine.
<evil grin>
--
Reknaw Dragon
-==(UDIC)==- d+ e N T- Om-- U1!26!W7'!S u+ uC++ uF+++ uG++++ uLB+
\/ uA++ nC+ nR---- nH++ nP+ nI-- nPT nS++ nT y+S a19
Unofficial UDIC Info Pages: http://www.nd.edu/~aburke2/udic/main.htm
Mark Asher
boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) wrote:
snip
>Origin has 'remained silent' simply because there's been noone with
>the time to keep up with the (literally) hundreds, sometimes thousands
>of messages each day about UO on comp.sys.ibm.games.rpg,
>rec.games.computer.ultima.online, alt.games.ultima-online and
>alt.games.ultima.dragons. This isn't even counting the messages on
>players web based UO message boards, or the hundreds of calls and
>emails received *daily* at Origin about UO. TBH, it's been pretty
>overwhelming.
We didn't expect you to answer every post. But a message once or twice
a week about what's going on, what people are concerned about would
have been nice. Perhaps Origin should have budgeted for someone to
take an active role on Usenet?
>I hope everyone understands that releasing (and keeping up with) a
>pioneering product like UO (with other titles like Wing
>Commander/Prophesy, Longbow II, F-15 in the works as well) means
>everyone is seriously burning the candle at both ends. It's certainly
>not because Origin is wanting to ignore its customers, avoid the
>issues or due to 'incompetent management'. Nor is it meant to imply
>that noone at Origin is reading the UO groups (I just saw a post by
>Designer Dragon in another group). It is, as you say... everyone at
>EA/Origin is doing the best they can under the current conditions.
I remember when Privateer 2 was released in it's buggy condition and
U.S. gamers complained to Origin and were told that they'd have to
redirect their complaints to the UK division. I rather think that OSI
ignores the newsgroups out of a policy decision.
>But you are right... EA/Origin absolutely recognizes the need to have
>a better presence here and elsewhere. Online gaming is a brand new
>genre for Origin and the need to have resources dedicated to the task
>simply hasn't existed in the company until now. Personally, I
>applaude them for jumping head first in an emerging industry that by
>all accounts is a very risky business to be in at this point in the
>evolution of online gaming. I love online gaming and EA/Origin
>certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
>
>And that's why they (very recently) hired me. They *know* they need
>to build their online organization beyond the designer/developer
>staff. So they've done something about it and here I am... I know the
>genre, I know the business, I know the community. I've played online
>games for over 7 years (Genie, Imagination, ICI) and I have 2+ years
>of direct (marketing) business experience with a successful large
>scale, persistent online gaming service that had the 'Online Game of
>the Year' last year. I know it doesn't sound like much, but there's
>*very* few people in the gaming business that can claim even that.
A step in the right direction. I assume you will be a regular here on
Usenet from now on?
>Now TBH, I *just* started at Origin. I need some time to settle in,
>get my bearings. Note I'm not specifically 'responsible' for UO or any
>other particular product at Origin/Janes (just their online features,
>the community, etc.). It's my role to develop (improve, if you will)
>Origin/Janes online presence. So I intend to do everything necessary
>to keep everyone much better informed and heard in the future.
Just keep your ear to the tracks. There are a lot of legitimate issues
raised here, such as the maximum number of players on a UO server, how
OSI plans on trying to reduce lag, why the dynamic world doesn't work,
etc. Plenty for you to answer to.
>Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>latter.
>
>I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
>few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
>scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
>the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
>before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
>evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
>there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
>better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
>thinks UO sucks.
What happened to Phase 3? To most of us, UO was pushed out before it
was ready. What do you have to say to that? Were all the player
reported bugs fixed before the game was released? If not, why was is
released?
What is the return policy? Can anyone ask OSI for a refund? This is a
sensitive issue, since internet problems beyond the control of OSI can
make the game unplayable.
Babbages has been reported as saying they will accept no returns. Is
this true.
Please answer these questions.
Mark Asher
Kay-Yut Chen
>
>And if past experience is any gauge, Fallout should be a damn good game
>to boot. Stonekeep had some of the best atmosphere of any CRPG I have
>played, and while I had some reservations about some elements of the
>gameplay in Stonekeep, it seems that many of them have been addressed in
>Fallout. I am anxious to see how it all works out.
>
>Baldur's Gate looks intriguing as well. Their implementation of
>multiplayer looks to be the best I have seen yet, at least in terms of
>what I am looking for in a multiplayer CRPG. The gameplay looks like it
>will be pretty straightforward AD&D, so I have no worries there. If they
>manage to throw a good story into the mix, I will definitely be pleased.
>
>UO concerns me, though. I did not participate in the beta test, but many
>of the concerns I had regarding the gameplay seem to be echoed in the
>host of negative comments on this group. I will give the game a good
>month or two (at least) to settle down before I consider buying it.
>Maybe the problems will be worked out- that would be great. If not,
>there are plenty of other good games coming this winter.
>
>-Ben
>
>
>
I am exactly using your strategy. If UO does not improve significantly
(meaning no bugs, no crashes and balance gameplay) by Xmas, Baldur
Gates got my money and time.
I only have time to play ONE rpg at a time. And right now, UO does not
seem to be getting my money.
Kay-Yut
Alan & Carolyn Poulter
Fortran Dragon wrote:
snippity
>
> How about starting an Ask Origin thread? We should hear about
> things like online chats with Richard Garriott from Origin and not
> dubious people.
>
> --
>
> Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==- | "There isn't enough darkness in the world
> -=={MDLAM}==- | to quench the light of one small candle."
> Hidalgo Trading Company: http://www.ponyexpress.net/~xyzzy/index.html
BINGO Fortran! exactly. I first played an online game on the net
in 1975 (and to the chappie from Origin who posted - yes I can prove
that!)
In those days they were called MUDS. OK. it was nothing like UO. And
to be
honest I don't have the time, money or inclination to play UO. I
will buy U9 if it ever comes out and yes I did buy all the add ons
fo the various other games. And the books. Plus, though I was not
a Prodigy Dragon I have been around since Eth started this, I was
around for Mono's marriage - and even send him a package when he
was miserable in the army! I have battled with Aaron, defended the
greeters, mediated between F-15 and Fallible as far as possible and
done my damndest to maintain the roster - however flawed it may be -
trust me, I babysit that thing and my greeters every single day.
I heard from Brian every now and then but now for some considerable
time now. But apart from that, I am pretty appalled by the
short-sightedness
of the marketing people at EA that they do ignore the dragons so very
badly. Yes, at my age and with my business experience (and more
important
my brother's experience -I have discussed this with him and though I may
be
a nobody he makes a hefty living advising on marketing matters - way
more
than the chappie from EA who posted) I do have some clue about this.
You are missing a major opportunity here. And all this group has ever
asked
is a drop of interest from the corporation. I doubt rock stars have
such long lived and devoted clubs....except possibly for Elvis and he
he had to die to get that kind of adoration. Is that it then? Ultima
dies and we all wax nostalgic at the funeral? I hope not.
But (to use an unusual show of ire for Unicorn) get your damned heads
out
of your self congratulatory arses and take some notice of this group.
Off to have a calming glass of wine,
Unicorn
Please do e-mail me or call me if you want to discuss this further.
Regards to Brian if he still works for the company.
--
--------------------------------------------
Alan & Carolyn aka Soup & Unicorn(UDIC)
http://www.witchweb.net
For Canadian Immigration Info go to:
http://www.cool.mb.ca/~carolyn
--------------------------------------------
Andrew Charlton
boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) writes:
>Origin has 'remained silent' simply because there's been noone with
>the time to keep up with the (literally) hundreds, sometimes thousands
>of messages each day about UO on comp.sys.ibm.games.rpg,
>rec.games.computer.ultima.online, alt.games.ultima-online and
>alt.games.ultima.dragons.
I'd just like to point out those last two are considered obsolete. The
list of active Ultima newsgroups should probably read
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg
rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons
rec.games.computer.ultima.online
rec.games.computer.ultima.series
[...]
>And that's why they (very recently) hired me. They *know* they need
>to build their online organization beyond the designer/developer
>staff. So they've done something about it and here I am... I know the
>genre, I know the business, I know the community. I've played online
>games for over 7 years (Genie, Imagination, ICI) and I have 2+ years
>of direct (marketing) business experience with a successful large
>scale, persistent online gaming service that had the 'Online Game of
>the Year' last year. I know it doesn't sound like much, but there's
>*very* few people in the gaming business that can claim even that.
Wow! An Origin rep in the newsgroups! It's been nearly two years since we
drove Brian Martin away ;-)
Welcome aboard... Now, any news on Ultima 9?
--
____/\___ Erraticus
___/__\__) -==(UDIC)==-
(__/ \__ \\//
/ \ \/
foamy
<snipped>
>>Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>>Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>>complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>>former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>>latter.
This would be your first BIG mistake. Posts that are untrue and "balderdash"
have to be addressed, otherwise they de facto become true. Unanswered
posts dealing with factual issues, as opposed to " it sucks", type of
messages, take on a life of their own. They must be corrected pronto.
Please reconsider, and while your at it, try and get the web site simplified.
An individual can spend an hour navigating all the stupid links and come away
with nothing. Just give me the basics and a good faq page please.
Jim Clarke
Norman McHan
Boomer wrote in message <619dtg$6...@examiner.concentric.net>...
>Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>latter.
>
Okay then. I have posted positive comments on UO and some
compalints(but I think they are on the money as you say). UO definitely
needs more servers to just sustain the current user base. I think with the
current usage they must also lower the limits of connections per server.
But in doing so, they must change the client program a little to offer a
mesage like "Sorry but the server is full currently". Also the economy
needs more tweeking along with the environment. The current eco/environ is
so bad it promotes PK'ing and looting. When there are no monsters and no
shopkeepers are buying anything what is left to do? Maybe i'll walk for
four hours and find nothing. Maybe they should add some code for new
characters where for at least the first 500GP shopkeepers will buy all the
time. A lot of hints and support says find a trade make something and sell
to shopkeeper to make money, but in this virtual world it doesn't work that
way. I didn't make my first 500GP until UO handed it to me, just
mysteriously shows up in your backpack. I tried mining, I tried bowery, I
tried tailoring, I tried cooking, I tried carpentry, and I also tried
fishing (which helps your notoriety when you give fish away to NPC's).
Shopkeepers are always out of money, I find myself waiting for up to 1/2
hour realtime to see someone ask shopkeeper for training or to buy something
so he/she will have money. But other people are doing the same, it becomes
a click fest to see who clicks first on shopkeeper to get some stuff sold.
Also something needs to be done about doorways. Too many newbies stand
right in the door and block other peoples movements, they don't know what
they are doing which makes it worse. Maybe everyone within 1/2" of doorway
should be etheralized. I am enjoying this game tremendously when there is
no lag or crashing servers and is well worth $10/month, but at the current
state it is worth less than 25% of that. This game has such a huge
potential for fun but the problems need to be fixed. I know they won't be
fixed in a week or possibly even a month, but Origin should do the right
thing and extend the one month free to at least two months free for current
users. They would do that if they care about me, and the fact they didn't
give a decent manual in the box. A little 8 page reference sheet is not
even close to what you need to understand things in this game. Well there
is my two cents.
Norman McHan
james patrick hogan
xy...@ponyexpress.net (Fortran Dragon) writes:
> Excuse me for being cynical, but Origin has consistently ignore a
>active, visible, and vocal fan base of over 10,000 people. How many
>companies can do that and not take a lot of flak for it?
They're more than fans. They're fanatics. They name themselves after
dragons. They create newsgroups, web pages, FAQs, stories, even MUDs
devoted to Ultima.... probably as much becuase they truly want(ed?) to
spread the Ultima name around as much as for their personal
satisfaction. (None of this is intended to present the Dragons in a
negative way, but rather to applaud their devotion... and the devotion of
other non-Dragon Ultima fans, as well.)
And in return, Origin has done more than ignore them, Fortran. They've
broken promises about game features and bug fixes. They have simply lied
about their gaurantees for CE pre-orders to arrive before the actual
release. They have knowingly, intentionally, and needlessly accepted
money from people in exchange for a product that doesn't work. (Shouldn't
that be illegal?) If there wasn't the complication of UO being an ongoing,
open-ended game, I wouldn't be surprised to see it yanked from the
catalogs and shoved under the rug the way they did with Pacific Strike.
The fact that Origin has all but ignored complaints is just the icing on
the cake.
These actions do not warrant excuses or shallow justifications, and they
certainly do not warrant the lack of respect OSI seems to have for their
customers. It warrants a public apology, account credit to those who are
being charged money for a product they thought was working, and probably
some other things too.
While I don't speak for all gamers, I think the things that would do the
most to ease my spite, and restore a little bit of my faith in Origin, are
pretty simple. Quit lying. Quit making excuses. Quit making your fans
feel like dirt. Do the right thing for once in your dispicable,
corporate, EA-owned life.
</vent>
james
james patrick hogan
xy...@ponyexpress.net (Fortran Dragon) writes:
> I hear you, but I wanted him to think of us a bit cranky, but not a
>bunch of cranks. I didn't want to unload the full cargo of bile and
>bitterness that corporate Origin has created for him.
I certainly didn't mean to indicate my post was representative of the
Dragons... I don't even consider myself a Dragon :) Apologies if that
was not clear in the post. I do have a lot of respect for the group as a
whole (and other selfless Ultima fans), though, hence my message.
> Hopefully he'll deal with the hand he has been dealt be Origin's
>own stupidity and can make sometime useful out of the situation.
>
> As long as he treats us with respect I'll work with him.
Same goes... I guess I just feel that treating us with respect would
entail an apology.
It isn't Boomer's fault personally, of course. He is an OSI employee and
couldn't take it upon himself to apologize for them or badmouth them no
matter how he felt, without risking his job. My message was more to make
the usenet readers realize the extent of what OSI is doing, and not to
attack Boomer personally.
james
Archimedes Dragon
Boomer wrote in message <619dtg$6...@examiner.concentric.net>...
>Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Your choice... but I hope I can confuse the issue ;)
>
>Origin has 'remained silent' simply because there's been noone with
>the time to keep up with the (literally) hundreds, sometimes thousands
>of messages each day about UO on comp.sys.ibm.games.rpg,
>rec.games.computer.ultima.online, alt.games.ultima-online and
>alt.games.ultima.dragons. This isn't even counting the messages on
>players web based UO message boards, or the hundreds of calls and
>emails received *daily* at Origin about UO. TBH, it's been pretty
>overwhelming.
Boomer, its always been the job of a company to support their audience with
not only a quality game, but quality support. I'm sure you know all the
details, but the truth is, osi made a mistake. They allocated far too much
of their resources to their development team, and too few to their public
relations. I of course understand that the response to UO has been
overwhelming, but OSI should have taken into account its possibility.
>I hope everyone understands that releasing (and keeping up with) a
>pioneering product like UO (with other titles like Wing
>Commander/Prophesy, Longbow II, F-15 in the works as well) means
>everyone is seriously burning the candle at both ends. It's certainly
>not because Origin is wanting to ignore its customers, avoid the
>issues or due to 'incompetent management'. Nor is it meant to imply
>that noone at Origin is reading the UO groups (I just saw a post by
>Designer Dragon in another group). It is, as you say... everyone at
>EA/Origin is doing the best they can under the current conditions.
Yes, I see no problem with the dev team at all. They've been doing a damn
fine job. But you have to take a look at the choices they've made for an
online product. Instead of making it 'fun', they've made a virtual world.
This is only personal preference of course, but I would much prefer a 'fun'
game than a simulator. I mean.. hell.. Maxis could have made SimBritannia ;)
heh. Anyway. I do applaud the team for doing such hard work, but the turn
that the work took was my only disappointment.
>But you are right... EA/Origin absolutely recognizes the need to have
>a better presence here and elsewhere. Online gaming is a brand new
>genre for Origin and the need to have resources dedicated to the task
>simply hasn't existed in the company until now. Personally, I
>applaude them for jumping head first in an emerging industry that by
>all accounts is a very risky business to be in at this point in the
>evolution of online gaming. I love online gaming and EA/Origin
>certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
osi is slowly catching up to their fans in the way of PR, I agree. And yes,
they did take a big jump when they decided to get into online gaming...
risky indeed. But, it begs the question: Did they bite off more than they
could chew?
>And that's why they (very recently) hired me. They *know* they need
>to build their online organization beyond the designer/developer
>staff. So they've done something about it and here I am... I know the
>genre, I know the business, I know the community. I've played online
>games for over 7 years (Genie, Imagination, ICI) and I have 2+ years
>of direct (marketing) business experience with a successful large
>scale, persistent online gaming service that had the 'Online Game of
>the Year' last year. I know it doesn't sound like much, but there's
>*very* few people in the gaming business that can claim even that.
I won't argue with your credentials ;)
>Now TBH, I *just* started at Origin. I need some time to settle in,
>get my bearings. Note I'm not specifically 'responsible' for UO or any
>other particular product at Origin/Janes (just their online features,
>the community, etc.). It's my role to develop (improve, if you will)
>Origin/Janes online presence. So I intend to do everything necessary
>to keep everyone much better informed and heard in the future.
Hey, more power to ya. Reliable representatives of osi are few, and far
apart.
(You'll just have to hear my numerous bitchings.. ;)
>Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>latter.
I agree, I'd attribute a good part of the postings as plain crap. Even
though the helpful postings may be sparse, there -are- a few good ones. (ie.
posts about UO by Nox and Kythorn)
>I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
>few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
>scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
>the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
>before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
>evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
>there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
>better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
>thinks UO sucks.
Again, just my opinion on this. OSI doesn't need excuses for reasons why
things aren't done. If they have the willpower for it, it will be done. But
really, what company would release a game up to its 'knees' in bugs? Even
though certain osi reps have assured us that EA never rushed the release of
UO, I -highly- doubt that. Many companies would have taken an extra month to
fine-tune it. I know that OSI has to turn some sort of a profit, but it
shouldn't be at the price of the quality of their products. This game went
straight into 'release' from beta. Not even a week after. I see the same
problems making themselves apparent in the 'release' as they were in the
beta. Sure, UO will get better, I believe that. But osi shouldn't risk
damaging its reputation.
>But UO is not for everyone. Having been in the business, one of the
>things I'm aware of is that not everyone even understands what this
>'open ended' business is even all about. Gamers are used to having
>plots handed to them, dictated (if you will) by the designer. They're
>used to being able to 'solve' a game.. sometimes assessing their own
>skill by how fast a game can be completed. This is not that kind of
>game. And there will be some that wholly reject this idea and will
>'vehemently' say so (even though it is enthusiastically received by
>others). Common sense ought to show that if UO was as bad as the ng
>would have you believe, I wouldn't have problems getting into a server
>because it's full.
Yes, it depends on what people look for in a 'game'. I don't consider it a
game really, that's only my preference to what a game is anyway. UO is
making tracks for future gaming companies, but I still think it should have
retained some aspects of its predecessors. It should have been an Ultima.
But it has so few things in it that make it an Ultima, that its truely hard
to consider it one. (ie.. plot *cough*)
Oh... so you've been having problems getting into the server, eh? ;)
heheh
>There has been a tremedous surge of new players during the release of
>UO. I know how this works ... Once the curiousity seekers are
>satisfied, once the thieves/PK'ers get bored and want something more,
>Britannia will turn into a mature community where its citizens will
>come to know one another (if not 'personally', then by reputation).
>Friends will be made, enemies sworn. Then Britannia will come mean
>something to it's inhabitants and they'll do what's needed to protect
>it's meaning, values and nature.
thieves and pk's belong in every game. Sure, in fewer numbers, I'll agree to
that. But what are people going to kill amidst the lag, and the fact that
the monsters aren't spawning? And gaming audiences don't change just because
their gaming environment changes. Britannia will become no more 'mature'
than Diablo became. People go to play for fun, they do as they please. But
really, how much fun is it to come home, then start your second job (second
life?) online.... blacksmithing for example. Britannia will have a few
people that stuck with it for the long run. I was a UO fanatic since I
participated in the pre-alpha. And britannia lost its glamour for me. Sure,
osi -hopes- that people will magically become cooperative, but the chances
are very poor that they will. Long-term gaming is a very risky business. I
know that 9/10 people would rather buy a game then play it for a month or
two, then go seek their entertainment in the latest game.
>Sorry for the length of the post. I just felt it was time for me to
>'step out front', make a statement of how things are at Origin (an UO)
>and you gave me the perfect opening ;)
Hey.. thanks much for posting. At least we know someone's listening :)
>When you see me online.. make sure you say hi!
Always welcome to drop by EFnet, I'm known as Archimed there. ;)
Sincerely,
Archimedes Dragon.
Michael Carmack
james patrick hogan (j-h...@students.uiuc.edu) wrote:
: I certainly didn't mean to indicate my post was representative of the
Well hell, you've been pretty vocal around here for some time now...what's
holding you back, boy?!? Your feet stuck in molasses? <g>
--
Mike Carmack mcar...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
Vulcan Dragon -==(UDIC)==- mr_...@ix.netcom.com
ICQ: 2703979 http://www.netcom.com/~mr_worf/vulcan.htm
*** CHEWIE CHEWIE CHOMP!!! ***
Boomer
ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) wrote:
(snip)
>We didn't expect you to answer every post. But a message once or twice
>a week about what's going on, what people are concerned about would
>have been nice. Perhaps Origin should have budgeted for someone to
>take an active role on Usenet?
My point was, they (finally) did... me. I'll do what I can to keep
everyone informed, answer questions, etc. as often and as accurately
as I can. More importantly, I'll try and keep up (as I have other
responsibilities as well). But we feel a presence here (and other
groups) is very very important so most of my time is spent 'weeding'
thru all the messages (I d/l'd 2000 headers this morning alone ;)
(snip)
>I rather think that OSI
>ignores the newsgroups out of a policy decision.
If that were the case (i.e. OSI policy) I wouldn't be here <g>
(snip)
>A step in the right direction. I assume you will be a regular here on
>Usenet from now on?
yep...
>>Now TBH, I *just* started at Origin. I need some time to settle in,
>>get my bearings. Note I'm not specifically 'responsible' for UO or any
>>other particular product at Origin/Janes (just their online features,
>>the community, etc.). It's my role to develop (improve, if you will)
>>Origin/Janes online presence. So I intend to do everything necessary
>>to keep everyone much better informed and heard in the future.
>Just keep your ear to the tracks. There are a lot of legitimate issues
>raised here, such as the maximum number of players on a UO server, how
>OSI plans on trying to reduce lag, why the dynamic world doesn't work,
>etc. Plenty for you to answer to.
(snip)
>What happened to Phase 3? To most of us, UO was pushed out before it
>was ready. What do you have to say to that? Were all the player
>reported bugs fixed before the game was released? If not, why was is
>released?
>What is the return policy? Can anyone ask OSI for a refund? This is a
>sensitive issue, since internet problems beyond the control of OSI can
>make the game unplayable.
>Babbages has been reported as saying they will accept no returns. Is
>this true.
>Please answer these questions.
Good questions all. Stay tuned. Just understand that:
a) it may take some time to find the right answer.
b) I won't answer 'when' questions (that *always* gets game companies
in trouble ;)
c) There may not be an answer at all. If that's the case, I'll say
so. Along these lines, I have no problem saying 'I/we don't know'
either. I hope people can accept that cuz I'm not gonna BS anyone.
d) I likely won't answer/respond to internal business
decisions/practices. Company Policies, yes... but why something was
decided may not be appropriate and TBH, in some cases none of anyones
business ;). And answers to even 'innocent sounding' questions may be
considered proprietary. Again, if that's the case I'll say so.
e) It may not be an answer you want to hear.
f) By and large, I can't/won't act as 'user support' (i.e. answer "how
do I..." questions that can be easily found on owo, in the manual,
etc). I hoping/asking that 'old hands' and/or more knowledgable
players will help in this regard.
g) I have virtually no 'puter technical skills (I'm in marketing ;) so
I'm the last one you want getting advice from to fix your computer.
I really don't want to appear I'm severely limiting what info I
will/will not provide (I think the above is just common sense). I just
want to make sure peoples expectations of what I *can* do is
appropriate.
Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
(UO: Ferric)
>Mark Asher
Ray@BioWare
Thanks Kay-Yut - but so you know, the release date for Baldur's Gate
is the 1st Q 1998 - it's coming along well but we want to allow
adequate time for QA to occur.
More info at our website (www.bioware.com) or Interplay's
(www.interplay.com/bgate) - there's a nice message board there as well
that we try and answer questions on daily as well.
We should have some screenshots out soon and the non-interactive demo
will be downloadable in the next few weeks up at both sites.
ray
------------------------
dr ray muzyka
cfo and joint-ceo, bioware corp.
producer, baldur's gate
www.bioware.com
www.interplay.com/bgate
------------------------
Misfit
After scanning this thread (in DejaNews), I can't help but agree with
the original poster. Interplay has been posting weekly updates
about Fallout. Origin? Dead silence. Interplay asks for suggestions
and tries to keep their promises. Origin? Ultima 9. WHERE is it?
Backburnered in favour of a graphical MUD (remember...FANS.TXT).
's why I've given up on Origin and Ultima 9. I'm not interested, and I'm
sick and tired of waiting. Interplay might not be perfect, but hey,
at least they are listening. (Hell, there was even talk about porting
Descent III to Linux! Origin would rather limit their audience to
Windoze/microsoft only. Looks like the Guardian really HAS conquered
britannia.) Heck even Neverhood is more forthcoming, and their attitude
stinks! (they screwed all the PC owners by making Skullmonkeys
playstation-only)
--
Hey man, nice duck.
Boomer
At 12:27 PM 10/6/97 -0500, you wrote:
>[This followup was posted to rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons and a
>copy was sent to the cited author.]
>
>My glass typewriter shows Boomer saying...
>[Snip]
>>It is, as you say... everyone at
>> EA/Origin is doing the best they can under the current conditions.
>
> That's funny, people like Ken Williams of Sierra Online and Laird
>Malamud, the Project Director of Zork: Grand Inquisitor, have time to
>post in the newsgroups.
Well.. what can I say... (Other than this is an 'argument' I have no
hope of winning? ;)
>> I love online gaming and EA/Origin
>> certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
>
> Uh huh. Ever hear of a MUD or a MOO? Online gaming has had
>credibility long before Origin ever turned their eyes to the 'net.
Not implying online gaming doesn't have a history/credibility (I've
been playing online games via the internet for close to 10 years now).
OTOH, *commercial* online gaming (i.e. by established gaming companies
trying to make $$$ at it) is a brand new industry. The more 'credible'
companies like Origin that 'blaze a trail', participate in evolving
the genre, the more likely other online games will be offered in the
future as well. And to me that's goodness.
> I'm sorry to disabuse you, but we don't give a damn about any paper
>credentials. It is what you choose to _do_ that matters.
And you are absolutely correct.. I only offered my 'credentials' so
people would know I'm not just some marketing suit. I *play* these
games, know how important it is to be responsive, interact with the
online community. Further, I wanted people to know I have direct
experience in the online gaming business and I'm not 'on the job'
training. I offered this in hope people would recognize there is
someone within Origin that a) evangelizes the benefit of being
responsive and b) can frame it in business terms.
> We'll give you a chance, but you need to actually produce results
>for us to take you seriously. Whether you like it or not, there have
>simply been too many broken promises for us to believe any newcomer
>without seeing real results.
> I know you won't like the deck stacked against you, but that is the
>mess the people before you have left. You've got to clean it up before
>you can move on to better things. We aren't going to just take your
>word that things are better or are going to be great now.
Well, thank you very much for your approval & support. Actually, just
so you know, I much prefer how someone else put it tho:
"Nice job sticking your head in the lion's mouth. It was an unenviable
task, but it was a very brave and good thing to do."
I'm very much aware of the current situation both within Origin and
the market (I'm not stupid ;) And I absolutely comprehend the hill
I'm climbing here (and within Origin). Not just so you and others will
eventually 'take me seriously' but as you say, there's some
significant 'clean up' to do across the board. Of course the deck is
stacked against me. Otherwise Origin wouldn't have gone out of their
way to hire me (creating a new position, hired as quicky, etc). Think
they did that just to accomodate me? <g>
(snip)
>> Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>> Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>> complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>> former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>> latter.
>
> Bad move. If you are going to answer questions here, you need to
>deal with all of them. The Dragons are smart. Trust 'em. They'll know
>when you are dealing with the idiots of Usenet.
But do the idiots? <g>
What I mean is, I'm not going to go 'toe to toe' and argue/belabor a
point that is simply absurd, personal, rhetorical, or intended to
'prove' something by someone in order to establish their own
worth/importance. A 'rational' debate is another thing entirely (but
alas, I don't think I'm gonna have much time for that myself...
Others.. rage on.. I'll just lurk for the time being if you don't mind
;)
I suspect... hope.. I will come to rely on the Dragons for
direction/feedback/help. I absolutely understand/believe in the value
of the user community helping/supporting/contributing/etc. to making
the game (and community within) a success. And I'll do everything I
possibly can to motivate/encourage players & the 'community at large'
to do so. I have a whole laundry list of things I want to impliment.
Unfortunately, right now I see my main priority is to hang out here,
respond as best I can.
Note tho I'm purely focused on the online elements of Origin/Janes
Games... Do the Dragons have a significant presence in UO (forgive me,
I'm the new guy :)
If so, we need to talk <g>
>> I just hope everyone understands Origin is currently one of the *very*
>> few that's willing to even *try* developing/offering such a large
>> scale, persistent 'virtual world' type of gaming environment. But
>> the've stepped out there and are doing something they (and very few
>> before them) have never done before. Yes, for a profit, but for the
>> evolution of gaming and the vast legions of Ultima fans as well. Yes,
>> there are going to be problems at first. Yes, it will certainly get
>> better. No, UO is not 'in trouble'. No, not everyone (by a long shot)
>> thinks UO sucks.
>
> Yeah, but we wanted an Ultima, not a 'bland, graphical MUD'. Where
>is the uniqueness of the NPCs of an Ultima VII or the engaging storyline
>of any of earlier Ultimas?
Hafta ask the Designers/Producers that question. But maybe I can shed
some light (note: this is just my *opinion* understand? Not officially
an Origin position or response and I therefore could be completely
wrong ;). I submit the only common thing between the Ultima Series (a
stand alone, retail product with a predesigned plot, characters, etc)
and Ultima Online (an intangible, online 'persistent environment') is
the name and "story line". It's a completely different market, with
completely different wants/needs/requirements (as you yourself
distinctly point out).
Sounds to me like you might have been much happier if it'd been called
'Medieval Kingdom Online' (or something other than 'Ultima Online')?
But I think you must agree there wouldn't have been nearly the
pre-release excitement, right? Can you blame Origin for leveraging
the Ultima legacy?
(snip)
> A lot of people want UO to succeed, if only to see a real Ultima:
>Ultima IX.
Again, I'm talking off the top of my head here, but I'd be surprised
if the success (or lack thereof) of one would impact the other simply
because each is addressing two distinctly different markets (with the
only common denominator of being similarily named rpg's). I'm sure
you'll correct me if I'm wrong <g>
>> There has been a tremedous surge of new players during the release of
>> UO. I know how this works ... Once the curiousity seekers are
>> satisfied, once the thieves/PK'ers get bored and want something more,
>> Britannia will turn into a mature community where its citizens will
>> come to know one another (if not 'personally', then by reputation).
>> Friends will be made, enemies sworn. Then Britannia will come mean
>> something to it's inhabitants and they'll do what's needed to protect
>> it's meaning, values and nature.
>
> In other words, large cliques will form that keep out newcomers?
well... cliques will occur in any social environment. Both informally
(close friends) and formally (Guilds). And there will always be those
that will take advantage of newcomers. But to answer your question,
not at all. In time, the UO community will grow more umm... mature
and stablize and become supportive. But it *will* become a real
community. And *that* is the attraction (for me anyway) of large
scale, persistent environment online gaming like UO. I've seen
online game communities rally together, create (temp) treaties among
sworn enemies, factions united, purely in order to run a publically
self proclaimed 'jerk' out of the game (at least temporarily, until he
'grew up' ;). On the other hand, I've consistently seen people
'sacrifice' themselves, give the edge to a newcomer in order to teach
them the ropes.
I've been a part of (two) established online gaming communities for
close to 10 years now. I could give you example after example of truly
life-affirming experiences occuring as a direct result of the
communities very existence. Acts that likely would not have occured
otherwise. I feel like I know and trust some of the people better
than I do some of the people I see & work with on a daily basis (not
at Origin, mind you... before... ;). Besides, I bet I could go
virtually anywhere in the world and have a beer with someone I 'know'
;)
Such a community will happen in UO as well (despite all the doomsayers
here). Over time, people in UO will come to respect, admire others
(and hopefully, generate the same for themselves as well). So in a
sense, it's the *people* that make the game.. the experience... not
the s/w.. that's just the vehicle used to enable/deliver an online
community. You know what a community is about, being a member of the
Dragons.. but take that to "in-person" in real time and it takes on a
whole new meaning.
(snip)
> How about starting an Ask Origin thread?
It looks like at least for the time being that's what I'm doing
(albeit in the ng's primarily). TBH, I hesitate opening up that "can
'o worms" until I become much more familiar with what I'm supposed to
know as it relates specifically to Origin/Janes 'stuff' <g>
> We should hear about
>things like online chats with Richard Garriott from Origin and not
>dubious people.
Ya know... here I am, offering exactly what everyone here seems to be
asking for (an Origin representive). Yet the response I *immediately*
receive is publically categorized as being dubious, that I have chosen
to work for liars, cheats, blundering idiots, all uncaring and
movitated by greed, etc. And you wonder why Origin doesn't have more
of an interactive presence here? <g>
I fully comprehend the issue of my/Origins credibility. And I
(obviously) perceive a level of frustration that would lead to a
cynical attitude, need to vent. But I hope you understand I'm really
not interested in appearing to make excuses, rationalize, defend, etc.
anything Origin may or may not have done in the past. Sorry, I really
don't have the time to dwell on it.
Let's move on...
Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
(UO: Ferric the poor, pitiful Ranger who had all his gold pickpocked
by a THIEF!!! Arrrgh! )
>--
>
>Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==- | "There isn't enough darkness in the world
>-=={MDLAM}==- | to quench the light of one small candle."
>Hidalgo Trading Company: http://www.ponyexpress.net/~xyzzy/index.html
hmm... 'xyzzy'... now *that* brings back some old gaming memories
Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
Meghan Jenks (Interplay)
On 8 Oct 1997 17:46:56 GMT, Misfit <mIs...@conform.or.be.cast.out>
wrote:
>Interplay might not be perfect, but hey, at least they are listening.
I'm sorry, what did you say? :)
j/k - thanks for the kudos. It's definitely important around here for
us to know what our customers think. Quite a few of us are gamers and
know what we want in a game, but it never hurts to know what our
"audience" likes, dislikes, or wants in our games. Interplay as a
company (and as individuals) actually does value customers and prefer
to have more contact with them than just technical support and
advertising.
Meghan
=====================================================================
Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
Adrian Bisson
Three cheers for Interplay! Whoo! Pee!! Doo!!!
Now if only Stonekeep had worked right...
---
>> Bad move. If you are going to answer questions here, you need to
>>deal with all of them. The Dragons are smart. Trust 'em. They'll know
>>when you are dealing with the idiots of Usenet.
I would think that if Boomer wants unbiased opinions, he should *avoid* the
Dragons.
The Ultima Dragons, by design, are dedicated Ultima fans. The majority of
posts I've seen by Dragons (actual or no) favor UO regardless of some pretty
obvious flaws.
All the Dragons and UO beta testers put together are not going to make or
break UO. The plain ol' consumers will.
devere1
--- <SPAMjm...@netxpress.comKILLER> wrote in article
<61hh3v$jva$1...@news3.realtime.net>...
> I would think that if Boomer wants unbiased opinions, he should *avoid*
the
> Dragons.
>
> The Ultima Dragons, by design, are dedicated Ultima fans. The majority
of
> posts I've seen by Dragons (actual or no) favor UO regardless of some
pretty
> obvious flaws.
>
You have either broken eyes or really weird luck.
-Ophidian Dragon
John Pacer
Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Meghan Jenks (Interplay) wrote:
>(snip)
> Interplay as a
>> company (and as individuals) actually does value customers and prefer
>> to have more contact with them than just technical support and
>> advertising.
>>
>> Meghan
>>
>> =====================================================================
>> Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
>> Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
>> www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
>My point exactly. Thank you, Interplay.
>-E
What a pathetic piece of ass-kissing on Interplay's part! And you
clowns bought it! So, now you're all going to run out and buy Fallout
just because they have such a sweet ass-kissing PR person. Did you
ever notice something? If the company is run by professionals (Most
aren't, and Interplay AS WELL AS Origin is one of the most
UNprofessional companies around. In fact, I can't think of one that
is run well), or at least run by someone with some level of
competance, they don't need to kiss ass to the fans, because they'll
win anyways. Why? Because they're good! LucasArts has the worst
online support around, but will people still buy Monkey Island 3? Hell
yes, they will! Why? Because, barring a few clunkers and missed dates
(like I said, no professionalism around), LucasArts has proven track
record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
And now everyone's complaining and whining as usual because Origin
won't kiss their asses.
"Oh! How can they treat their fans like that? We're the ones who got
them where they are."
I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
bastards definately don't deserve it.
And so now you run to Interplay, ready to embrace their latest rip
off. Apparently no one notices their track record either? Stonekeep,
anyone? I have more fun in Paintbrush. But you clowns can't possibly
remember that! Anything before breakfast is Ancient History to you.
Have fun.
"Cogito Ergo Sum"
Boomer
"Norman McHan" <nor...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>Boomer wrote in message <619dtg$6...@examiner.concentric.net>...
>>Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>Now.. what say I about messages in this (and other) newsgroups about
>>Ultima Online, most of which are "vehemently negative"? Some are
>>complete balderdash, some are right on the money. I will ignore the
>>former, do everything possible to help resolve the issues of the
>>latter.
>>
> Okay then. I have posted positive comments on UO and some
>compalints (but I think they are on the money as you say).
snip lotsa suggestions/observations
> Well there
>is my two cents.
whew! Been thinking about his have you? <g>
All I can offer is the assurance Origin designers are *still*
developing UO, and will be for a long long time. They'll be fixing
bugs, refining gameplay balance, adding new features and improving the
communications code (among other things).
That's the whole idea with a good persistent environment online gaming
strategy... it just keeps getting better and better all the time.
OK, some would rather wait until it's 'finished'. Since it'll never be
really 'final', when do you start? Or you might argue (and rightly
so) that there is a point you should reach *before* releasing the
product. There is, but there's *never* going to be agreement exactly
where that point is, so you might as well go for it ;)
Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
> Norman McHan
Syed Noman Ahmad
In article <61hs6r$k2h$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>,
james patrick hogan <j-h...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>jcp...@voicenet.com (John Pacer) writes:
>
>>record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
>>years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
>
>include more. I'd definitely say WC3 and U8 blew, by "old OSI" standards, at least.
>
>
>james
The only thing that has clicked for Origin in recent years is the
Andy Hollis flight sim series. And Crusader too, but Tony Zurovec has
left Origin.
I wonder what is Ken Demarest doing? One of the designers
of Ultima 7 and the designer of BioForge. Maybe he has left Origin
too.
--
Noman
Crackerjack (Nothing Dragon)
Holy Crap was that long!!! What was this person thinking?! Yeow!!
Did he really feel it was necessary to respond to everything?! You
don't need to quote the sigs, either!! Oh!
-Nothing Dragon.oO(Who is still reeling by the size of the post!)
Allan Olley
On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 04:24:12 GMT, jcp...@voicenet.com (John Pacer)
wrote:
>"Oh! How can they treat their fans like that? We're the ones who got
>them where they are."
>I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
>them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
>They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
>extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
>bastards definately don't deserve it.
Well, I think the position is a stated a little harshly I tend to
agree. Companies and people should not have to pander to their
customers. At the same time custemer concerns should be treated with
some respect especially if those concerns are stated in a polite and
reasonable way. Also if Origin is not delivering something measurable
and quantifyable as advertised they are committing fraud and do owe
their customers something. I think Origin should spend most of its
energy making computer games and hopefully if they do it well the
games will sell themselves with minimal effort. If Origin wants to be
a no frills computer game company it is its privilage. Just as it is
your privilege not to buy from them.
One other thing Harlan Elison was probably talking about fans who
demand you sign a book because they bought it (at least in the
interview I saw that had that sentement that was the context) rather
than asking politely. The difference here is that UO is not a book.
It is a bit more complicated. When you buy a book you expect it to be
written by the author, all the print to be ledgble(sp) and the writing
on the cover to be acurate about the contents. With a computer game
you expect the game to run at an operable level (with all advertised
features) and to have enough documentation that you can figure out the
standard commands and operation (although their may be secret cheats).
A computer game has a much larger gray area then a book. So the
people who complain about UO may well be justified because of this
gray area of expectation. However, no one should demand from them
things they have not promised.
Note: When I say demand I mean saying "I'm buying (or have bought)
product x and it had better have feature y you owe it to me."
Saying "I will not be buying product x if it does not have feature y,
sorry." Or "I am returning product x because it does not have feature
y." or "Your advertisment/product description clearly said product x
had feature y, however it clearly does not. What is going on? I
expect compensation if you do not have a darn good explanation."
--
Yours Truly Saint George's Dragon
Allan Olley -==UDIC==-
Allan Olley
On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 23:06:06 GMT, pol...@netcom.ca (Allan Olley)
wrote:
>Note: When I say demand I mean saying "I'm buying (or have bought)
>product x and it had better have feature y you owe it to me."
>Saying "I will not be buying product x if it does not have feature y,
>sorry." Or "I am returning product x because it does not have feature
>y." or "Your advertisment/product description clearly said product x
>had feature y, however it clearly does not. What is going on? I
>expect compensation if you do not have a darn good explanation."
Who wants to bet a large number of people will miss this post and take
offence at my badly worded note. Thus turning me into flame bait.
Saint George's Dragon covers himself in flame retardant gel and waits.
spectre911
On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 13:07:50 GMT, boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) wrote:
>All I can offer is the assurance Origin designers are *still*
>developing UO, and will be for a long long time. They'll be fixing
>bugs, refining gameplay balance, adding new features and improving the
>communications code (among other things).
>
>That's the whole idea with a good persistent environment online gaming
>strategy... it just keeps getting better and better all the time.
>OK, some would rather wait until it's 'finished'. Since it'll never be
>really 'final', when do you start? Or you might argue (and rightly
>so) that there is a point you should reach *before* releasing the
>product. There is, but there's *never* going to be agreement exactly
>where that point is, so you might as well go for it ;)
Boomer we have heard the marketting pitch before. The game is not
"persistent", the game is "broken". What we need you for is to tell us
what is being done to fix it and when it will be in place. So far I
have only seen you post messages that pat someone on the head. Why
don't you let us know what is happening? I for one am REALLY pissed at
origin and I havn't seen word one out of you or anyone else that
addressed any of the concerns I have. I logged in last night and the
game was, as far as I could tell, in the exact same state it was in on
Saturday when I decided it wasn't worth wasting my time with. Why is
it that an online game can be released in such a sorry state and in 5
days you can't fix a single problem? At this rate the game will be
stable in the year 2000! Is it Y2K complaint? I frigging doubt it!
Eric Lopez
> years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
> won't kiss their asses.
> them where they are."
> I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
> them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
> They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
> extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
> bastards definately don't deserve it.
> off. Apparently no one notices their track record either? Stonekeep,
> anyone? I have more fun in Paintbrush. But you clowns can't possibly
> remember that! Anything before breakfast is Ancient History to you.
> Have fun.
>
> "Cogito Ergo Sum"
A little tense, are we? Out of curiosity, what games do YOU play?
Regarding my buying the "PR ass-kissing", what I've been saying in
previous messages is that I appreciate a company that responds and
listens to their customers. Official slogans aside, I started this
thread by stating how I appreciated how Interplay reps were up front
with what was happening with their upcoming releases instead of hiding
in the woodwork. I cited Origin as a company who was not responsive to
their customers and Boomer called me on it by stepping forward and
speaking on Origin's behalf.
I remember Stonekeep perfectly well, thank you. I even enjoyed playing
it after the major play bugs were fixed. These bugs, if I remember,
were all patched about a month after the game was released which is a
lot more than I can say about a lot of games out there. What about
Interplay's other games? Seems to me most of those worked just fine....
I find it interesting that you start talking about the companies
succeeding by "hard work" and "quality product" since you've just
expressed your disdain for the entire industry. Regardless, your logic
is flawed. Creating quality product is only half the battle. Game
companies have to attract the customers and persuade them to become
repeat customers.
Ease up on the name calling and relax a bit. It's just a hobby, for
crying out loud.
-E
Craig Fletcher
What about Privateer2 (no decent plot or real improvement in the
WC engine) and Wing Commander Armada?
james patrick hogan <j-h...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<61hs6r$k2h$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
> jcp...@voicenet.com (John Pacer) writes:
>
> >record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past
four
> >years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name
Cybermage.
>
ElCabalero
In article <MPG.ea6be4f2...@news.alt.net>, xy...@ponyexpress.net
(Edward Franks) writes:
> Go to the Dragons if you want a mature group of veteran role-
>players. Go to the .online groups if you want mostly 'kewl doodz', one
>man 'guilds', and pkillers.
>
> The Dragons are going to be the people that explore all of the
>facets of UO, like being a baker, a tailor, etc..
Ahhh.... I see, I can quit wasting my time as a tinker, obviously the
Dragons so far outclass me as a roleplayer that I have no hope of ever
fitting into their world.
You know, if I didn't know better, you would seem a little arrogant.
--Mahrin Skel (Not a Dragon, and not going to be one)
Michael Sellers
Boomer wrote:
> >> I love online gaming and EA/Origin
> >> certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
> >
> > Uh huh. Ever hear of a MUD or a MOO? Online gaming has had
> >credibility long before Origin ever turned their eyes to the 'net.
>
> Not implying online gaming doesn't have a history/credibility (I've
> been playing online games via the internet for close to 10 years now).
> OTOH, *commercial* online gaming (i.e. by established gaming companies
> trying to make $$$ at it) is a brand new industry. The more 'credible'
> companies like Origin that 'blaze a trail', participate in evolving
> the genre, the more likely other online games will be offered in the
> future as well. And to me that's goodness.
Blaze a trail? I hope UO is successful (and by that I mean beyond just the core
market -- I truly hope you guys are able to get 50,000 or more concurrently
active accounts, for example) and that the genre continues to evolve, but to say
you're blazing a trail is just a bit disingenuous. Simutronics, Kesmai, AOL, and
of course my former company Archetype Interactive/3DO have been doing this for
awhile now. Don't get blinded by your own PR; doing so will only hurt your
presence in and responsiveness to the market.
> ... I offered this in hope people would recognize there is
> someone within Origin that a) evangelizes the benefit of being
> responsive and b) can frame it in business terms.
Responsiveness will take you a long way in this industry. I hope you're able to
convince your management of the value of this. As you can see, the natives are
somewhat restless. ;)
> well... cliques will occur in any social environment. Both informally
> (close friends) and formally (Guilds). And there will always be those
> that will take advantage of newcomers. But to answer your question,
> not at all. In time, the UO community will grow more umm... mature
> and stablize and become supportive. But it *will* become a real
> community.
I'd be *very* intereseted in your (or Origin's) definition of a "real community."
How will you know when it's there? What are the necessary conditions for this to
occur? How can the players help or hinder the process?
--
Michael Sellers, Chief Alchemist
Online Alchemy
mi...@online-alchemy.com
Colin P. Barnowe
>Mike 'Boomer' McCoy
>Origin/Janes Combat Sims
>
>(UO: Ferric the poor, pitiful Ranger who had all his gold pickpocked
>by a THIEF!!! Arrrgh! )
Eheeh....wait until you get pk'ed by some back-stabber despite your
skills and knowledge of the game :) Not that such an experience is
never interesting :)
Seriously, I really appreciate your coming in here. The Ultima
Dragons do not have a monopoly on interest in Ultima (and other Origin
products) and quality customer service from Origin (frankly, I've been
too lazy to try joining the Dragons but that's another story :).
Anyway, best of luck as Origin's new de facto newsgroup rep . . .
you'll need flame-retardant armor but I'm sure you're already aware of
that. As a UO beta tester, I might as well state for the record that
I have not yet purchased the game and will not until the skill
advancement, economy and respawn issues are finally resolved. I could
get more specific, but it's all been detailed before ad nauseum . . .
suffice it to say that the comments I'm reading about the current
state of UO echo the sentiments I had during the beta. Wonderful
potential, but it's not there yet and should not have been sold in
the state it was in . . .
Michael D. Hilborn
In article <61hh3v$jva$1...@news3.realtime.net>, "---"
<SPAMjm...@netxpress.comKILLER> wrote:
> The Ultima Dragons, by design, are dedicated Ultima fans.
Ultima fans, yes. Ultima fans who never offer criticism, no. Witness
Ultima VIII, for example, or <gasp> UO.
> The majority of posts I've seen by Dragons (actual or no) favor UO regardless
> of some pretty obvious flaws.
You're obviously reading a different newsgroup than I am. I would say
the exact opposite.
> All the Dragons and UO beta testers put together are not going to make or
> break UO. The plain ol' consumers will.
And that's exactly what a Dragon is: A plain ol' consumer who happens to
enjoy Ultima a bit more than your average plain ol' consumer.
--A New Breed of Dragon
========Biggles 2000: The Gateway to the Next Generation=============
Michael D. Hilborn "Back off, man.
mhil...@bilbo.bio.purdue.edu I'm a scientist."
http://bilbo.bio.purdue.edu/~mhilborn/ --Dr. Peter Venkman
===============================--<*>--===============================
Jedi Master and Bad Boy of the -==(UDIC)==-
Boomer
spectre911 @ hotmail.com (Thrasher) wrote:
>On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 13:07:50 GMT, boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) wrote:
>>All I can offer is the assurance Origin designers are *still*
>>developing UO, and will be for a long long time. They'll be fixing
>>bugs, refining gameplay balance, adding new features and improving the
>>communications code (among other things).
>>
>>That's the whole idea with a good persistent environment online gaming
>>strategy... it just keeps getting better and better all the time.
>>OK, some would rather wait until it's 'finished'. Since it'll never be
>>really 'final', when do you start? Or you might argue (and rightly
>>so) that there is a point you should reach *before* releasing the
>>product. There is, but there's *never* going to be agreement exactly
>>where that point is, so you might as well go for it ;)
>Boomer we have heard the marketting pitch before. The game is not
>"persistent", the game is "broken". What we need you for is to tell us
>what is being done to fix it and when it will be in place. So far I
>have only seen you post messages that pat someone on the head. Why
>don't you let us know what is happening?
Because there is a link at www.owo.com ('update') that covers just
exactly that? i.e. what's going on, being fixed, what's coming, etc.
I'll try and post highlights of the important things, what's going on,
etc. whenever I can in the future in the ng's.. but I'd (personally)
would prefer not having to duplicate those efforts. Especially since
it'll likely create ultra-long posts such as this one <g>
> I for one am REALLY pissed at
>origin and I havn't seen word one out of you or anyone else that
>addressed any of the concerns I have. I logged in last night and the
>game was, as far as I could tell, in the exact same state it was in on
>Saturday when I decided it wasn't worth wasting my time with.
(Cut/pasted from the 'Update' page):
Latest News: October 8, 1997 • Latest Update
We've posted a new 'Comments from the Team' on the www.owo page
(updates) about the interim measure taken to curtail use of offensive
scroll magic in towns, and have also posted in the 'Latest Patch'
section details of what we'll be doing come Friday, when the interim
measure is removed.
NEW SERVER!
There will be a scheduled downtime for the Atlantic server on Saturday
at noon Eastern time (1800 GMT) in order to install the new Chesapeake
server. The downtime is expected to last one hour.
The Latest Patch section has been updated with the details on what is
posted now to the Testing Center. Head on over and check out the new
features and fixes! Highlights: we found and fixed the notoriety
problem, the inability to open windows problem, have a fix in for
reagent scarcity, you can board pets at the stables for a small fee,
and there's a lot more creatures that loot now...
If any problems manifest with these changes tonight, we will rectify
them tomorrow and test again. Only working code will be published to
the game servers. Barring any problems, we will publish to the public
servers on Friday during the regularly scheduled downtime.
October 6, 1997 • Major Update!
Lots of changes today. We have patch reports for the last several
days, plus a new 'Comments from the Team' section. Be sure to read it!
Changes as of 10/4/97
Optimizations and tweaks were done to reduce lag.
We've fixed any server stability problems as they manifested
(including the problem with secure trading).
Ship holds are now only openable when on the ship.
You can no longer teleport onto ships.
The sign on player buildings is no longer pickable.
The rate of item decay was slowed down.
All types of gadgets are now available for sale.
The variety of treasure in creature inventories has been increased,
including higher circle spell availability.
Released pets now have a neutral notoriety, instead of the notoriety
of their former owner.
Cooking now burns food on failure.
Failure at bowyering and fletching now consumes wood.
Failure at tailoring hides now consumes hides.
Dice should work (for the board games).
The skill advancement curve has been adjusted to make it harder to
advance the higher you go.
We have added support for Soundblaster AWE sound fonts. These are
located on your CD.
The skill advancement problems caused by the last patch are resolved
and are no longer occurring. We are working on a solution for those
who were affected by the problem.
The weight problem with depositing large amounts of gold and then
getting stuck will be fixed.
Shops paying extremely high prices for items if you had a lot of them
to sell is fixed.
Counselors are able to understand ghosts.
Orcs (regular ones, not orc captains) will loot corpses of creatures
they kill or see killed. This is behavior that we will eventually make
more widespread.
The frequency of guards in the woods should be drastically reduced.
Guards at road guardposts will stay by their guardposts.
The frequency of magic items on creatures will be reduced.
When purchasing items worth more than 2000 gold, the money will be
automatically withdrawn from your bank account.
The secure trading window will only function at short ranges.
You can now remove items that are too heavy for you.
You no longer lose items that are too heavy for you when you log back
into the game.
Horses that run out of loyalty now buck you off and run away.
(end cut/paste)
Now at the risk of 'patting them on the head', the above doesn't
appear to me, make me think the UO designers are twiddling their
thumbs, resting on their laurels... Since the last update on 10/4...
(Saturday, as you mention), they've been working hard, testing more
features/fixes and there's another update coming, (hopefully) being
made available today/tonite (Friday). If not today, then I suspect
shortly thereafter. If you want to know what this will address, go
over to www.owo.com (updates) and see for yourself.
Still, I'm sure there will be those that will say "But when is Origin
going to fix/impliment (insert most personally annoying bug/missing
feature/etc)?!?! And that's the key, isn't it? That what is bugging
*you* the most isn't being addressed as fast as you would like. I
don't know what the 'system' is that establishes the priorities for
the things the designers are working on. But I'd submit it's highly
likely it is based on what's affecting the *most* people in the
*worst* way.
As far as the *frequency* of updates, well, that's just a difference
of opinion. I would think it's important to players that updates/fixes
be done in an organized manner, fully tested (before release) etc.
Last thing *I'd* want (as a player) is to have to d/l dinky lil
patches everytime I log in or have them something slammed out, only to
find the 'fix' broke something else in the process.
Boomer
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
Michael D. Hilborn
In article <61hlis$4rr$1...@news3.voicenet.com>, jcp...@voicenet.com wrote:
> "Oh! How can they treat their fans like that? We're the ones who got
> them where they are."
> I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
> them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
And if no one decides to buy their hard work and quality product, where
are they then? No doubt their hard work is the primary reason as to why
they got to where they are, but without a consumer base, no company or
individual is going to go much farther than that. In that sense, fans and
consumers deserve some respect and politeness.
Consumers are what make and break a product--no matter what its quality.
Quality helps, for sure, but there are plenty of quality products that
have collapsed simply because nobody chose to buy them, and plenty of
low-quality products have persisted because folks are buying them.
BTW, if Ultima didn't have the fan base that it had throughout the '80s,
would Origin now exist? Would the Wing Commander series have been
produced? Would Ultima Onine be in beta testing even as we speak? I doubt
it...
Don't know who Harlan Ellison is, but he sounds a bit naive. A tad
arrogant as well.
> They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals.
Bullsh*t. If I shell out $50.00+ for their game, they owe me a
well-designed, bug-free, and playable game that offers me hours of
enjoyment and a feeling of satisfaction. If it doesn't, then they can
expect me to return their "hard work and quality product" and demand my
money back.
My opinion, of course.
Incidentally, the UO game package doesn't include a decent game manual,
so apparently Origin's missing a step even by your logic.
> Anything else is extra candy given to YOU by THEM.
Really? So if I shell out $50+ for the game CD and the manual, the fact
that game works well and runs properly is eye candy and I should be
thankful for that?
Think again.
> They don't owe it to you, and you bastards definately don't deserve it.
All in all, you are correct. They don't owe me anything--as long as I
don't purchase anything from them.
[snip]
Jasper Stein
On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Crackerjack (Nothing Dragon) wrote:
: Holy Crap was that long!!! What was this person thinking?! Yeow!!
: Did he really feel it was necessary to respond to everything?! You
: don't need to quote the sigs, either!! Oh!
:
: -Nothing Dragon.oO(Who is still reeling by the size of the post!)
:
:
Awww c'mon, Nothing! Be glad he tries hard. Finally some more or less
official word from our beloved company.
---
Aksimur
---
:-) Jasper Stein : Aksimur Dragon : . .
j.j....@fys.ruu.nl : -==(UDIC)==- : | .-- --. | | | | | |\/
jst...@dds.nl : UN, OR, esh US : +-. +-. .-+ | | | | | +-.
jjs...@math.ruu.nl : : | | | | | | -|- `-' `-' | |
UDIC code: d++ e- N T-- Om+ U1A!L!6!7'!S'8 u? uC+++ uF- uG- uLB++ uA+ nC
nH+ nPT nS++ nT wM---- wC- y a22
Het UFO i.o. : zie http://huizen.dds.nl/~jstein
spectre911
Well, I humbly submit that "reagent scarcity" is being addressed
because the maintainer of the UO site at Scorched.com has filled his
webpages with complaints about no reagents for more than a week. I
stopped playing saturday because there were no creatures in the game.
None. When I called a GM he admitted that respawning was turned off
and that creatures were being dropped by GMs in some locations. I have
been complaining about this problem for 9 days now. From what you
posted it seems that there is not only no acknowledment of this
problem but that OSI has no intentions of DOING anything about it.
Wouldn't you say that an empty fantasy world is a pretty boring place?
I think in terms of play balance having some creatures in the game
would be pretty high up there. Right now nobody can make arrows, no
birds. Nobody can make cloth, no sheep. Nobody can make
leather/studded armor, no deer. Nobody can improve fighting skills, no
monsters. Nobody can practice magic, no reagents. WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED
TO DO IN THIS GAME? This is what I want answered, which the text you
pasted did not answer. I would also like to know why the public game
servers have been left in this state for more than a week. I know
about those comments from the developers, they seem just as useless
now as they did in the beta. And another thing, why are you posting
patches to the game servers on Friday? If the history of the last 3
months means anything then the game is going to be COMPLETELY hosed
all weekend long because the patch will make the game unplayable. It
happened the last 5 weeks of the beta. If this is the case, if the
game is unplaybale all weekend due to a bad patch, I am going to go on
a personal crusade to discredit OSI and the UO team as much and as
publicly as I possibly can.
Colin P. Barnowe
In article <343D9033...@earthlink.net>, crck...@earthlink.net
>Holy Crap was that long!!! What was this person thinking?! Yeow!!
>Did he really feel it was necessary to respond to everything?! You
>don't need to quote the sigs, either!! Oh!
I thought the length was appropriate under the circumstances.
Besides, if good old Lord Mar-- I mean, Master Gamer (rofl) gets away
with extensive (read: absurdly superfluous) quoting, why can't Fortran
quote for context? We're (meaning the usenet community and OSI) in an
important transition period, you might say :) The question is, will
Origin really listen or not . . . Fortran spoke for me there more
closely than have most of the posters in this newsgroup. Listen to
him re: the potential PR blitz tactics, Origin . . . I, for one, want
results, not rhetoric about past accomplishments.
I've welcomed Boomer in another post but again I'll say I'm very glad
to see him...and engaging posts like Fortran's (no rear-smooching
intended, believe me . . .)
P.S. hey Fortran I loved the "whisper" reference. Don't think we
missed that one :)
spectre911
On 10 Oct 1997 14:50:45 GMT, elcab...@aol.com (ElCabalero) wrote:
> Ahhh.... I see, I can quit wasting my time as a tinker, obviously the
>Dragons so far outclass me as a roleplayer that I have no hope of ever
>fitting into their world.
>
> You know, if I didn't know better, you would seem a little arrogant.
>
>--Mahrin Skel (Not a Dragon, and not going to be one)
You know, I don't think I saw a single dragon the whole time of the
beta, and I was pretty active. Maybe they play under different names,
I played at least a dozen names. But I would think a group like the
dragons would always use their handle.
Brad Slavin
go beat your dog or something
John Pacer <jcp...@voicenet.com> wrote in article
<61hlis$4rr$1...@news3.voicenet.com>...
> What a pathetic piece of ass-kissing on Interplay's part! And you
> clowns bought it! So, now you're all going to run out and buy Fallout
> just because they have such a sweet ass-kissing PR person. Did you
> ever notice something? If the company is run by professionals (Most
> aren't, and Interplay AS WELL AS Origin is one of the most
> UNprofessional companies around. In fact, I can't think of one that
> is run well), or at least run by someone with some level of
> competance, they don't need to kiss ass to the fans, because they'll
> win anyways. Why? Because they're good! LucasArts has the worst
> online support around, but will people still buy Monkey Island 3? Hell
> yes, they will! Why? Because, barring a few clunkers and missed dates
> (like I said, no professionalism around), LucasArts has proven track
> record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
> years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
> And now everyone's complaining and whining as usual because Origin
> won't kiss their asses.
> "Oh! How can they treat their fans like that? We're the ones who got
> them where they are."
> I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
> them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
> They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
> extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
> bastards definately don't deserve it.
Boomer
spectre911 @ hotmail.com (Thrasher) wrote:
snip
> From what you
>posted it seems that there is not only no acknowledment of this
>problem but that OSI has no intentions of DOING anything about it.
Is this a troll? Am I missing something here? Can folks NOT make it to
www.owo.com 'update' page to find out what's going on?
OK.. (another cut/paste directly from the update web page):
"These are some of things you can look forward to seeing in the game.
Some of these are long-term and some are shorter-term; you'll usually
be able to tell which is which by the amount of detail given.
--> Reagent supply in shops will be increased.
The area west of Trinsic that has no bridges over the river will gain
them.
--> More creatures! We're working hard on the spawning issue, and it
is one of our top priorities.
Weather: snow and rain effects.
Automatic bulletin board postings when orcs or other marauders make
camps and plan incursions."
(cut/paste mode off)
Now does that sound like "there is not only no acknowledment of this
problem but that OSI has no intentions of DOING anything about it" ?
I don't think so...
(and no.. I won't answer 'when' questions ;)
Singen Dragon
Boomer wrote:
> #3 - Even with such extensive testing, there is no way to root out all
> the bugs/issues. It takes the game being 'live', with 'John Q.
> Public' playing it to really beat on it properly.
I agree with this. The thing that no one in any of the newsgroups has
brought up in all their "we're paying money to beta test" comments is
that AOL has been charging people for an unstable online environment for
years. AOL bills itself as an online community. People swear by, and at,
it's features and shortcomings. Still, they keep building the
infrastructure and remain the most popular (in terms of subscribers)
online service. UO is basically doing the same thing, but within the
context of a virtual world. AOL version 1.0 had problems too, but they
were solved through a series of "live" updates.
It's a different way of developing software, people. There's no possible
way UO could have shipped and been bug-free from day 1. Do the best you
can with what you've got.
--
Singen Dragon - Member UDIC
c/o Traveller's Inn, Trinsic, Britannia - Pacific Shard
Boomer
xy...@ponyexpress.net (Edward Franks) wrote:
>> Well.. what can I say... (Other than this is an 'argument' I have no
>> hope of winning? ;)
> I'm not trying to 'win' an argument.
Sorry.. didn't mean to be flippant. Just that we could probably
discuss the topic of 'A proper approach by companies in interacting
with the market on usenet' back/forth forever. <g>
> I'm more curious to see how
>you are going to handle Origin's past mistakes. You can't ignore them
>or sweep them under the rug if you want to have any credibility here.
I'm not ignoring them.. I just don't have a clue what they were. And
TBH, I'm not sure I could do anything about what's happened (or not,
as the case may be) in the past anyway.
> You see, most of the Dragons are bright people. A lot of them are
>young college students who are very good at what they do. They are very
>perceptive. And what they miss, the old grognards, like me, who are in
>their 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, catch.
And as I've said before, I see the Dragons as potentially an extremely
valuable resource to help UO become *the* definitive large scale,
persistent online environment RPG world. One by which all others
judged (and I'm sure there will *be* others). I'm not blowing smoke
here.. I have every intention of doing whatever I can to encourage the
Dragons (and others) to participate in this 'quest'. OTOH, I know
better than to sit here and promise anything because I don't yet know
what I can/will do. I have some ideas, but I'll just keep em to myself
for now <g>
> There are a number of us older Dragons who have a lot of experience
>in the business world and can discern the PR machine from the realities
>of business.
(snip)
> Yes, but you can't turn the PR machine on us. Tell us the truth,
>straight up. If you don't know, that's ok. If you want to offer just
>your opinion, that's cool.
Notwithstanding that marketing is my job, I don't feel I've turned the
"PR machine' on... However, I am definately an 'online community
evangelist'. To me, it's the most exciting development in computer
gaming ever. I'm certain Origin knows how I feel (from my efforts
with another large scale persistent online gaming company),
understands it's significance and believes in it too (or I don't think
they wouldn't have hired me to promote/encourage it).
My 'position' direcly results from the fact online communities are my
passion, from almost the moment I entered my 1st persistent 'virtual
community' back in '89(ish). This goes way beyond the game setting
itself (i.e. I don't care if it's a WWII flight sim or a medieval
setting). It extends to what gaming companies are capable of doing for
the WORLD. I mean here, for the first time ever, we are enabling
people to come together to interact, have fun 'in real time' and there
are no International borders, no politics. There are no mountains or
seas, borders or politics seperating people across the globe. No
black, white, yellow... To me, it is awesomely heady times and not
without social, possibly even geo-political, responsibility and
consequences. Now that may sound awfully 'lofty', but I'm
communicating what I *believe* in, based on past experience with
functional online communities.
I am absolutely convinced such a community is not only viable in UO,
but already present (albiet in a nascent form). Sorry if it sounds
like 'PR Hype', I'm just incredibly excited about being a part of it,
able to help create this whole new genre of interactive entertainment.
> Just please don't try to tell us about all of the Great Works of
>Origin. You see, a lot of us remember Ultima VIII and we are seeing the
>current debacle of the 'final' version of Ultima Online.
Can't comment on Ultima VIII but...
Since I came into Origin about the time UO was released (and didn't
have any 'history' with the Beta), I've inquired about the switch from
beta to 'play for pay'...
The beta Test lasted several months and involved tens of thousands of
people. Apparently, the end was planned and only came as a surprise
to the testers. According to those I've talked to, a *tremendous*
amount was learned from the Beta and there was little more that could
be gained, from a *testing* standpoint, by keeping the beta running
any longer.
#1 - All the bugs/changes/features/etc identified in the beta were not
fixed/implimented in the released version.
#2 - It isn't as if the information gleaned from the test was suddenly
deemed useless simply because it was released/shipped. It's still a
'punch list' being worked on.
#3 - Even with such extensive testing, there is no way to root out all
the bugs/issues. It takes the game being 'live', with 'John Q.
Public' playing it to really beat on it properly.
And right or wrong, contrary to what everyone would want otherwise
(incl the developer), that's just the nature of a persistent online
gaming project... I've 'been there, done that'... ask anyone that has
been around the development of WarBirds if you doubt me. Point being,
there is just a point you have put a stake in the ground and go with
it
Based on my experience with, exposure to this emerging form of gaming,
I'm convinced this is the single biggest hurdle gaming companies (and
not just Origin) have, i.e. the education of the market that such
persistent environments are, and always will be, 'works in progress'.
That they will continually get better and better and have the ability
to reflect the wants/needs of the 'population' as to where the "game"
should go, how it develops (and that such evolution doesn't happen
overnight).
That the gaming public doesn't comprehend/understand this is a real
challenge. Simply because 99% of the (single user) market is used to
receiving a *final* version. And not used to having any
designer/developer support *after* it ships. And not used to the
'open-endedness' of a persistent environment (versus having a 'plot'
already defined... packaged, if you will, for your convenience).
But to me, that it's an ongoing project, that *I* can contribute to
the development (to the degree a 'voter' contributes to who's in
office), is a *strength* and is the attraction I have for such games.
> Heehee. I know you don't give a rat's ass about my approval and
>support, but I will tell you straight up what the situation is that you
>are dealing with.
Good. And while I suspect people expect the same from me, I just hope
they don't get all bent outta shape when it's not what they really
wanted to hear <g>
> Convince the Dragons and they'll do the 'selling' for you, via the
>best way possible: word of mouth. Of course, if the product is a dog,
>they'll say that too. Just look at the reaction to Ultima VIII.
I'm probably mistaking your intent here, but I really would rather not
hafta 'convince' anyone. Rather, I'll tell it like I see it, offer my
views, and when their experience matches what I'm saying I'm sure
they'll come around.
> Yeah, I understand that. Just be honest with us about what is
>going on.
Wouldn't presume to do otherwise...
>Origin needs to re-earn the trust of its fans, so honesty
>will be the best thing you can do. If you are told to PR or Market us
>to death, you won't succeed.
I'm here in the UO ng's because *I* want to be.. noone at Origin has
directed me to 'go schmooze' or whatever...
>
>> If so, we need to talk <g>
> <smile> Good. 'Cause we want to talk to you. We want Origin and
>Ultima to be premiere RPGs on the market.
Which is what *I* want to happen as well... Now.. within what *my*
specific responsibilities are, how can we make that happen?
> Things like this show that Origin has no idea what the core parts
>of their market want in an RPG. It isn't too bright to alienate your
>faithful fans.
Again, that's something you'll hafta take up with the designers. And
again, it appears their objectives for *this* Ultima (Online) were,
and I would submit appropriately so, different than what was expected
by the *other* Ultima market (the stand-alone games). I doubt I could
reconcile those differences (inasmuch as the two markets have
completely different wants/needs/requirements).
OTOH, I might submit that UO is the *ultimate* RPG inasmuch as it's
completely up to *me* what path I want to take, how I want my
character to develop (and not 'defined' by some designer 'thinking'
for me)
> The perception is that Origin is on shaky financial grounds and
>desparately needs to make a success with UO in order to stay afloat.
Well, Origin is not 'on shaky financial grounds' but even if it were,
UO just fixed that... If you want to 'measure' success by the number
of people playing, UP is extremely successful.
> I can't remember if EA is a publicly traded company or not, but if
>so, perhaps you could tell us where we could find EA's and Origin's
>prospectus or quarterly financial statements. Those things would give
>us the information to definitively deal with this question.
Just call your broker... they're the usual source for that kinda
stuff. You can check here for EA history
http://quote.yahoo.com/quotes?symbols=ERTS&detailed=1y
>> But it *will* become a real
>> community.
> Yes, but it is the type of community that Origin wants?
The "type" is dependent on the path the community takes and not
necessarily what Origin may/may not 'want'. Sure, Origin can limit
accounts to those above 18 YOA, etc. but by and large, the community
itself will dictate its umm... personality.
(I probably could get in trouble here, but it's just *my* personal
opinion so here goes ;). The one thing I umm.. disagree with in how
Origin set up UO accounts is I (personally) would prefer people having
only *one* character, and when you sign up you select a name for your
'personna' and that 'sticks' with you for as long as you have the
account. That way, people don't have the ability to be anonymous (by
changing/creating a new char) and are therefore accountable for their
(online) actions/behavior. And people come to know 'Boomer' (there
can't be duplicates), know I'm either a jerk or a respectable citizen
of Britannia.
> At the scale attempted by UO, that would be much harder. It is too
>easy to pick up and move elsewhere.
But if you ever *did* run into 'Boomer', you would know who he is...
> A nice marketing example, but it says nothing about fixing the
>problems with UO and Origin's efforts to deal with their fans.
> Then if Origin wants a better class of community, when are they
>going to fix the problems with UO?
As mentioned in an earlier post.. I don't answer 'when' questions <g>
But (and I've really *really* assured myself of this within Origin
because it's SOoo important), UO is still being designed/developed and
will be "forever" (or at least as long as UO exists)
> <chortle> I didn't mean you were dubious, but that in the past,
>other people who were dubious, tried to capitalize on some supposed
>insider knowledge of Origin. I'm sure someone will whisper a name into
>your ears.
> I apologize for an unclear statement. I did not mean to appear to
>be saying that you were dubious. Quite the opposite, you can give the
>official imprint to the things that Origin is trying to do.
My mistake... it was kinda ambigious ;)
>> And you wonder why Origin doesn't have more
>> of an interactive presence here? <g>
> Mainly because we wanted the truth and honesty, plus for Origin to
>understand our anger and frustration. You'll have to deal with that if
>you want to succe
>
>> I fully comprehend the issue of my/Origins credibility. And I
>> (obviously) perceive a level of frustration that would lead to a
>> cynical attitude, need to vent. But I hope you understand I'm really
>> not interested in appearing to make excuses, rationalize, defend, etc.
>> anything Origin may or may not have done in the past. Sorry, I really
>> don't have the time to dwell on it.
> Bluntly, then you'll fail. You *have* to deal with Origin's
>mistakes in the past, if only to acknowledge them and/or apologize to
>the fans for them.
> I've seen too many management people come in and try to say "Forget
>the past, I'm only going to deal with the future.". You can't do that
>as the past colors the future. If the past isn't dealt with it will
>continue to be a sore spot for the future and will taint everything you
>try to say and do.
I understand your (management) example... But again, I have no idea
what mistakes were made in the past. So how would you suggest I deal
with them? What could *I* do that would make *any* difference... have
any effect.. Being ignorant of the issues, new (as you say, untested
in battle ;) at this point it'd be tantamount to me saying:
OK.. I hereby acknowledge and apologize for any/all mistakes Origin
made in the past.
Just exactly what would that mean to anyone?
And in doing so, I wouldn't be able to focus on the *now* (instead,
burning energy on 'old news')
> Feel free to email me or ask me any questions you want. I'm not
>offended by tough/rough questions.
Nor am I.
One post in this thread noted the length of our discourse (which makes
me want to take this email). Another mentioned they 'enjoyed' watching
the umm.. debate... I'm open for suggestions.
Boomer
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
>[Snip]
>> (UO: Ferric the poor, pitiful Ranger who had all his gold pickpocked
>> by a THIEF!!! Arrrgh! )
> "Guards! Guards!"
>> >--
>> >
>> >Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==- | "There isn't enough darkness in the world
>> >-=={MDLAM}==- | to quench the light of one small candle."
>> >Hidalgo Trading Company: http://www.ponyexpress.net/~xyzzy/index.html
>>
>> hmm... 'xyzzy'... now *that* brings back some old gaming memories
> I've been playing Adventure since 1975....
>--
>Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==- | "There isn't enough darkness in the world
>-=={MDLAM}==- | to quench the light of one small candle."
>Hidalgo Trading Company: http://www.ponyexpress.net/~xyzzy/index.html
Impossible Dragon
In article <61b9e9$ipf$1...@globe.lynx.bc.ca> fo...@lynx.ca (foamy) writes:
> Please reconsider, and while your at it, try and get the web site simplified.
> An individual can spend an hour navigating all the stupid links and come away
> with nothing. Just give me the basics and a good faq page please.
> Jim Clarke
They absolutely should fix their WWW site! I spend a good deal of time
on UNIX machines which don't have these fancy plugins that are only
for Windows and Mac operating systems! I stopped visiting Bullfrog's
site because I had to deal with Shockwave, and now Origin's site is also
a pain to visit! Before I had no problem, but now I keep on getting
"download the plugin" messages, but they don't have plugins for UNIX
machines! I think writing something in Java would be much more
cross-platform compatible, and I'd give Origin an applause for their
realization that their WWW page should be for everyone! I'll never
download Shockwave until they come out with a UNIX version...
Impossible Dragon
-==UDIC==-
Ben & Karen
John Pacer wrote:
> And so now you run to Interplay, ready to embrace their latest rip
> off. Apparently no one notices their track record either? Stonekeep,
> anyone? I have more fun in Paintbrush. But you clowns can't possibly
> remember that! Anything before breakfast is Ancient History to you.
> Have fun.
Not every game out of Interplay is the Holy Grail, but they do make a
lot more decent games than your post implies: Descent 1 & 2, Alone in
the Dark, Shadow of the Comet, Realms of the Haunting, Carmageddon,
Fallout, et al. But I liked Stonekeep, too, so you may disagree with my
assessment. They make some bad games as well (Star Fleet Academy, Blood
& Magic, et al), but even Lucasarts (which you lauded earlier in your
post) does the same- Rebel Assault 1 & 2, Shadows of the Empire, The
Dig, X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter... no company is perfect.
Both companies put out a good number of good games and a few great ones,
and Interplay provides feedback to their customers as well. I consider
that to be a Good Thing (TM).
-Ben
Ben & Karen
John Pacer wrote:
> What a pathetic piece of ass-kissing on Interplay's part! And you
> clowns bought it! So, now you're all going to run out and buy Fallout
>
> just because they have such a sweet ass-kissing PR person. Did you
> ever notice something? If the company is run by professionals (Most
> aren't, and Interplay AS WELL AS Origin is one of the most
> UNprofessional companies around. In fact, I can't think of one that
> is run well), or at least run by someone with some level of
> competance, they don't need to kiss ass to the fans, because they'll
> win anyways. Why? Because they're good!
IMHO, Interplay does both. Many of their games (Fallout in particular,
at the moment) are very good, and their customer support and PR are
great too. This is not to say that a company with minimal customer
interaction can't make good games (and Lucasarts is a good example,
despite the fact that they have had some real dogs recently), but why
not favor a company which makes good games AND is willing to answer your
questions about them as well?
You can call it ass-kissing if you want, but I always cut a company a
little slack in the flame department if they adopt a open attitude with
their customers. That does not mean I will praise a game even if it is
junk, but I will try to be polite and make my criticisms constructive.
Chris Taylor, as well as other members of the Fallout team, have been
very good about answering questions and receiving criticisms and advice,
and I really wish other companies would do the same. I am curious as to
why you disagree- this kind of policy is in our best interests as
gamers, after all.
-Ben
RevSchaefr
>My 'position' direcly results from the fact online communities are my
>passion, from almost the moment I entered my 1st persistent 'virtual
>community' back in '89(ish). This goes way beyond the game setting
>itself (i.e. I don't care if it's a WWII flight sim or a medieval
>setting). It extends to what gaming companies are capable of doing for
>the WORLD. I mean here, for the first time ever, we are enabling
>people to come together to interact, have fun 'in real time' and there
>are no International borders, no politics. There are no mountains or
>seas, borders or politics seperating people across the globe. No
>black, white, yellow... To me, it is awesomely heady times and not
>without social, possibly even geo-political, responsibility and
>consequences. Now that may sound awfully 'lofty', but I'm
>communicating what I *believe* in, based on past experience with
>functional online communities.
Lofty, and sadly false -- as someone who has a "passion" for online communities
should know. Save for pretty (IMHO hindering and useless) graphics, UO does
NOTHING that the RPGs produced by Simutronics have been doing for years...
Simu who, BTW, just celebrated their 10th anniversary of operating
professional online games (for those folks who believe the Origin hype about
UO being the "first" of anything of the kind).
Of course, we can add Kesmai (remember Island of Kesmai? Still a pretty neat
game, and it was a pretty innovative online community oh, years and years and
years ago), 3DO (I can't comment on Meridian, not having played it, but some
other posters in this group have already provided UO comparisons), and
countless free MUDs and the like. UO might be a lot of things, but it
certainly isn't a trailblazer. Except, once again, for pretty graphics.
As far as the world setting... I'm going to draw a page from my own
experience, as a avid player (junkie <G>) of Simu's DragonRealms. I recall an
event when a mirror wraith, an emissary of the dimension-exiled sorceress
Tezirah, appeared in a vortex during a convocation of the Order of Moon Magic
(just surface detail, in a world that has an incredible amount of it) to
present a prophecy that played out, through weekly events and NPC appearances,
over the course of several months. Meanwhile, a player-run criminal family
was solidifying its bid to take over a major city -- no, not by hacking and
slashing, but by political maneuvering -- and ran afoul of a pair of crusading
paladins who engaged them in a war of propaganda; these seperate plot strands
intwined when a GM-run NPC, fleeing assassins, stumbled in on a private
meeting of the city's pirate guild and inadvertantly became a pawn in a
three-way power struggle.. I could go on for a few hours, but this gives a
pretty good impression.
Over in Ultima Online, the "Festival of Rebirth" was a moderately interesting
event where some NPCs showed up and... Were promptly slaughtered by some
bored players, turning the entire scene into a full-scale bloodbath and
looting frenzy.
Yay.
I'm not saying that the other games are perfect (the perfect online game has
yet to be invented, and probably never will be), and I'm not saying that UO
isn't capable of genuine depth or being a lot of fun. However, it does
irritate me a bit that Origin seems to be claiming in its ads and press
releases that they're creating some sort of new, fully immersive environment
when, in fact, it's been done before and (IMHO as always) far, far better.
If I want to mindlessly hack and slash with online people, I'll go to UO (no,
no, wait -- I'll go to Kesmai. The economy works there.) If I want
roleplaying, world depth and a feeling of really being in another place and
time, I'll go elsewhere.
C. A. Schaefer
(Still an Ultima fan... Well, up to Part Seven anyway. <G>)
John Pacer
Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>John Pacer wrote:
>>
>> Eric Lopez <ejl...@popd.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Meghan Jenks (Interplay) wrote:
>>
>> >(snip)
>>
>> > Interplay as a
>> >> company (and as individuals) actually does value customers and prefer
>> >> to have more contact with them than just technical support and
>> >> advertising.
>> >>
>> >> Meghan
>> >>
>> >> =====================================================================
>> >> Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
>> >> Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
>> >> www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
>>
>> >My point exactly. Thank you, Interplay.
>>
>> >-E
>>
>> What a pathetic piece of ass-kissing on Interplay's part! And you
>> clowns bought it! So, now you're all going to run out and buy Fallout
>> just because they have such a sweet ass-kissing PR person. Did you
>> ever notice something? If the company is run by professionals (Most
>> aren't, and Interplay AS WELL AS Origin is one of the most
>> UNprofessional companies around. In fact, I can't think of one that
>> is run well), or at least run by someone with some level of
>> competance, they don't need to kiss ass to the fans, because they'll
>> win anyways. Why? Because they're good! LucasArts has the worst
>> online support around, but will people still buy Monkey Island 3? Hell
>> yes, they will! Why? Because, barring a few clunkers and missed dates
>> (like I said, no professionalism around), LucasArts has proven track
>> record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
>> years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
>> And now everyone's complaining and whining as usual because Origin
>> won't kiss their asses.
>> "Oh! How can they treat their fans like that? We're the ones who got
>> them where they are."
>> I got news for you kiddos, Harlan Ellison is right! You didn't get
>> them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
>> They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
>> extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
>> bastards definately don't deserve it.
>> And so now you run to Interplay, ready to embrace their latest rip
>> off. Apparently no one notices their track record either? Stonekeep,
>> anyone? I have more fun in Paintbrush. But you clowns can't possibly
>> remember that! Anything before breakfast is Ancient History to you.
>> Have fun.
>>
>> "Cogito Ergo Sum"
>A little tense, are we? Out of curiosity, what games do YOU play?
>Regarding my buying the "PR ass-kissing", what I've been saying in
>previous messages is that I appreciate a company that responds and
>listens to their customers. Official slogans aside, I started this
>thread by stating how I appreciated how Interplay reps were up front
>with what was happening with their upcoming releases instead of hiding
>in the woodwork. I cited Origin as a company who was not responsive to
>their customers and Boomer called me on it by stepping forward and
>speaking on Origin's behalf.
>I remember Stonekeep perfectly well, thank you. I even enjoyed playing
>it after the major play bugs were fixed. These bugs, if I remember,
>were all patched about a month after the game was released which is a
>lot more than I can say about a lot of games out there. What about
>Interplay's other games? Seems to me most of those worked just fine....
>I find it interesting that you start talking about the companies
>succeeding by "hard work" and "quality product" since you've just
>expressed your disdain for the entire industry. Regardless, your logic
>is flawed. Creating quality product is only half the battle. Game
>companies have to attract the customers and persuade them to become
>repeat customers.
>Ease up on the name calling and relax a bit. It's just a hobby, for
>crying out loud.
>-E
Great, but when companies start trying to buddy up with consumers,
they tend to get a little lax and start to slack off. Sierra's been
keeping their fans abreast of EVERYthing they're doing. Too bad not
one of their games (save GK2) from the last two years is worth the
plastic it's pressed on.
And as for the "other half of the battle", one attracts new customers
not by kissing their butts by by actually producing quality product.
If you're good, your name gets around.
You think X-Com and Betrayal at Krondor got big because of those idiot
marketing mavens and their brilliant advertising campaigns? Do you
even remember any such advertising? I sure don't. Those games took
off because they were damn fine. If you're the best at what you do,
people will eventually notice. It may not happen overnight, but it has
a lot more to do with having the skills necessary to do the job than
it does with clever advertising.
"Cogito Ergo Sum"
Crackerjack (Nothing Dragon)
Jasper Stein wrote:
> Awww c'mon, Nothing! Be glad he tries hard. Finally some more or less
> official word from our beloved company.
>
> ---
> Aksimur
> ---
Well, actually, I was referring to a post by a one Edward Franks... he
quoted everything up to that point and made one to two sentence remarks every
paragraph.... I would have foregone all the quotes or just quoted what I
wanted to respond to, that would have made that post a lot shorter...
-Nothing Dragon.oO(Who thinks IE4.0 sucks!!!)
Crackerjack (Nothing Dragon)
Thrasher wrote:
> If this is the case, if the
> game is unplaybale all weekend due to a bad patch, I am going to go on
> a personal crusade to discredit OSI and the UO team as much and as
> publicly as I possibly can.
ummm.... I think you already have :) Good post, tho, I enjoyed it
better than THE PEOPLE WHO FEEL THEY MUST QUOTE EVERYTHING, INCLUDING THE
SIGS!!!
-Nothing Dragon.oO(Who is not bitter, in any way, shape or form)
ES Grey
Boomer wrote:
>
> All I can offer is the assurance Origin designers are *still*
> developing UO, and will be for a long long time. They'll be fixing
> bugs, refining gameplay balance, adding new features and improving the
> communications code (among other things).
>
> That's the whole idea with a good persistent environment online gaming
> strategy... it just keeps getting better and better all the time.
> OK, some would rather wait until it's 'finished'. Since it'll never be
> really 'final', when do you start? Or you might argue (and rightly
> so) that there is a point you should reach *before* releasing the
> product. There is, but there's *never* going to be agreement exactly
> where that point is, so you might as well go for it ;)
>
"go for it" and turn as much of a profit as you can as fast as you can
from the poor/brave people who are financially careless/able enough to
go ahead and spend not only their money (in sofware and monthly fee) but
also their time (a cost seeing as it's more frustrating than fun for
some) on a game.
Sure it's a work in progress, but Origin also has to realize that anyone
buying UO at this point either hasn't thought about it, or is buying it
based on the hope (and promises) of what they have been told, or believe
it can be.
That's fine, but in the meantime, the consumer is getting less than what
they want, while Origin is getting exactly what they want. That,
unfortunately, is not a good way to do business and keep business.
And here is our problem. Whether Origin intends it to be that way means
nothing, because that is the reality that they must deal with now.
Kaleb
PS. My thanks as well, to Boomer for stepping up.
--
"A rainy day heads her way, but she's above the clouds."
-From 'Picture Perfect' by Thurman (1995)
_____________________________________________________
ES Grey.. egr...@gl.umbc.edu
DC United..1996 MLS Champions..UNITE 1997-> http://www.dcunited.com
Kaleb Dragon..Ultima Dragons-Internet Chapter-> http://www.udic.org
*Card-carrying member of the Anti-Flamewar Club :)
*And Official UDIC Caretaker of RGCU-D
Boomer
j...@cory.berkeley.edu (Impossible Dragon) wrote:
Point taken. I'm gonna look into this as soon as I get moved to
Austin.
Boomer
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
>Impossible Dragon
>-==UDIC==-
Boomer
Michael Sellers <mi...@online-alchemy.com.NO-SPAM> wrote:
>Boomer wrote:
>> >> I love online gaming and EA/Origin
>> >> certainly is a company of a calibre that lends it credibility.
>> >
>> > Uh huh. Ever hear of a MUD or a MOO? Online gaming has had
>> >credibility long before Origin ever turned their eyes to the 'net.
>>
>> Not implying online gaming doesn't have a history/credibility (I've
>> been playing online games via the internet for close to 10 years now).
>> OTOH, *commercial* online gaming (i.e. by established gaming companies
>> trying to make $$$ at it) is a brand new industry. The more 'credible'
>> companies like Origin that 'blaze a trail', participate in evolving
>> the genre, the more likely other online games will be offered in the
>> future as well. And to me that's goodness.
>Blaze a trail? I hope UO is successful (and by that I mean beyond just the core
>market -- I truly hope you guys are able to get 50,000 or more concurrently
>active accounts, for example) and that the genre continues to evolve, but to say
>you're blazing a trail is just a bit disingenuous. Simutronics, Kesmai, AOL, and
>of course my former company Archetype Interactive/3DO have been doing this for
>awhile now. Don't get blinded by your own PR; doing so will only hurt your
>presence in and responsiveness to the market.
No disingenuity intended. If you'll notice, at no time did I say
Origin was the first, or even the only company participating in this
business. In fact, read closely and I mention 'companies LIKE Origin'
that blaze a trail. Those include not only Origin, but the companies
you mention as well.
I do however, specifically exclude those that simply 'enable' an
otherwise stand alone game that has LAN multiplayer capability to be
played over the Internet (or private label a commercial network like
AOL, Concentric, Earthlink, etc. to 'redistribute' a game). Those,
IMHO, are SuperKali (fragelistic?) kinda 'WAN administrators' only,
and aren't really risking anything (except their investors money ;).
Rather, I'm referring to those companies specifically attempting to
commercially deliver a large scale persistent environment to the
gaming public.
My point was, the list of companies (which, to my knowledge, is thus
far pretty much limited to those you've identified) is a pretty short
list. So *anyone* attempting this is, IMHO, 'blazing a trail' (and
should be commended, almost irrespective of their results/success).
Because others *will* follow, but only if & because they're closely
watching the 'trail blazers' for signs of success.
>I'd be *very* intereseted in your (or Origin's) definition of a "real community."
>How will you know when it's there? What are the necessary conditions for this to
>occur? How can the players help or hinder the process?
Excellent Question. I'm sure there's a psychologist, etc. out there
that could provide a definition. In fact, I think there are a few
'think tank' like companies in San Francisco area that focuses
specifically on studying the evolutino of the 'virtual online
community' (I think I read something along these lines 'Wired" a while
back).
Much less scientifically, I personally feel the conditions are met
when I can log in and see people I 'know', when people on my 'friends
list' are there, when the community 'at large' rallies to help another
'citizen', etc. In short, you'll know it 'cuz it just *is* <g>
Boomer
Origin/Janes Combat Sims
Singen Dragon
But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
devere1
Singen Dragon <pj...@concentric.net> wrote in article
<344153...@concentric.net>...
> But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
> site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
The older games, U7 etc, work under UNIX.
-Ophidian Dragon
Singen Dragon
Very neat. I play with SGI's a lot - maybe I'll get a chance to load it
up. I looked at the new Origin site. The Shockwave/Flash/whatever is
pretty unneccessary (it seems to be the design du jour) and they should
have a title page before it that lets you access a version w/o the bozo
bells.
--
Singen Dragon - Member UDIC
c/o Traveller's Inn, Trinsic, Britannia - Pacific Shard
(remove NOSPAM from email address to reply)
Riff-Raff
Message Begins:
>Very neat. I play with SGI's a lot - maybe I'll get a chance to load it
>up. I looked at the new Origin site. The Shockwave/Flash/whatever is
>pretty unneccessary (it seems to be the design du jour) and they should
>have a title page before it that lets you access a version w/o the bozo
>bells.
AHA! So Origin have changed their WWW site? I was wondering why I
suddenly could not access the damn thing - I keep getting a
"FORBIDDEN: Your client is not allowed to access the requested
object." message. I _did_ have it delegated as my home page... Oh
well.
Does anyone have any idea which plugin I require to access the new
Origin WWW site? As far as I know I already have the Shockwave plugin
installed...
End of Message
Jasper Stein
: > I'm more curious to see how
: >or sweep them under the rug if you want to have any credibility here.
:
: I'm not ignoring them.. I just don't have a clue what they were. And
: TBH, I'm not sure I could do anything about what's happened (or not,
: as the case may be) in the past anyway.
But then, if we ask 'why did Origin do such-and-such with U4' or 'why
didn't they include this-and-that in U8', you may ask around at the
company. Past mistakes are, well, past. But when we ask for reasons for
doing things, you may still give them.
: OTOH, I might submit that UO is the *ultimate* RPG inasmuch as it's
: completely up to *me* what path I want to take, how I want my
: character to develop (and not 'defined' by some designer 'thinking'
: for me)
...
:
: The "type" is dependent on the path the community takes and not
: necessarily what Origin may/may not 'want'. Sure, Origin can limit
: accounts to those above 18 YOA, etc. but by and large, the community
: itself will dictate its umm... personality.
Let me say first that I'm not an UO player. I have read, tho, some of the
ongoing debate.
I understand that one of the biggest issues is people murdering other
people; teleporting guards putting your persona to death as punishment,
but after resurrection people go killing just the same. This is dubbed
unrealistic.
I was wondering if it wouldn't help (wild assertion here) if the guards
wouldn't put the people to death, but instead jail them for a couple of
days. I'm sure it is possible to program this thing (you don't need an
actual very big jail on your map: you're teleported in and out, soyou only
need keep track of who's in...) Britannia online is rid of one potential
assassin for a couple of days, and the killers themselves will think more
than twice before killing (as they only see jail walls when they login -
make sure btw. they can't cast any teleport spells while in jail)
Of course this needs working out: you mustn't get imprisoned just for
stealing from dead bodies; people should be able to call guards so they
need not kill highly irritating people themselves, etc.
But I'm sure Origin is smart enough to find solutions to these problems.
Cantankerous Dragon
"devere1" <dev...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> Singen Dragon <pj...@concentric.net> wrote in article
> <344153...@concentric.net>...
>
> > But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
> > site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
>
>
> The older games, U7 etc, work under UNIX.
So where, pray tell, can I buy a HP-UX 10 version? Are you sure you
don't mean that U7 and previous versions can be run on some DOS
simulators which run on UNIX?
In any case, who says Singen Dragon is using only one computer? Maybe
the computer used to browse the web is a well connected UNIX box at
work or school and there is a WinTel machine at home to play the
games. Browsing the web at dialup speeds is getting more and more
painful, as the content/size ratio is going _way_ down. IMO, If you
can't get useful information from a Web page with lynx, then it isn't
worth reading.
On a side note, the one redeeming characteristic of WinTel based
systems is the huge software market. If you want to buy a program,
chances are it will run on Win95 running on an Intel based machine.
Who cares how good or bad an OS or hardware platform is if it's the
only thing that will run the programs you need? With UNIX, except for
a few exceptions you have to use those pesky free programs.
Cheers,
Cantankerous Dragon
Singen Dragon
Riff-Raff wrote:
> Does anyone have any idea which plugin I require to access the new
> Origin WWW site? As far as I know I already have the Shockwave plugin
> installed...
>
> End of Message
Go to macromedia.com and download the Shockwave *with Flash* plug-in. I
suspect they used Flash for their page.
spectre911
>It's a different way of developing software, people. There's no possible
>way UO could have shipped and been bug-free from day 1. Do the best you
>can with what you've got.
Sorry, I have to dispute this. It did not have to be perfect. BUT the
purpose of the beta test, as I understand it, was:
1) Stress test for network stability
2) Find/Fix bugs in code
3) Adjust play balance
So what did they accomplish with the beta?
Network stability? No, the beta only had one server, but that one
server crashed CONSTANTLY. There were a lot of excuses made at the end
of the beta about why this happened. Since the 8? current servers have
been crashing left and right since day one of the release I think it
is safe to say they did not adequately test network stability. I won't
even get into the "lag/server overload" problem.
Bugs? No, there were hundreds of known and reported bugs in the game
at the time it was released, many of them major. Most of them are
still there. No software should ever be shipped with KNOWN bugs. It
happens, people make excuses, but there is no excuse. It should not
happen. If the bugs were few and minor OSI would be able to say "but
everybody else does it". The bugs are not few and minor.
Play balance? If this issue had been adequately addressed we would not
now have a non-funtional economy, shop keepers that never have stock
on something as critical as reagents, extinct creatures, etc. The
"balance" is MORE out of whack now than it EVER was in the beta. I
understand play balance will never be perfect but they never even
bothered to get CLOSE before they shipped it. Now it is in release and
play balance issues have resulted in some very STRANGE problems with
characters that OSI really can't do anything about without a character
wipe.
So in my book they released the game too soon. It is fine and dandy to
talk about "persistant worlds" and "evolving communities" and other
fell-good talk, but they shipped the game without fully addressing a
single beta issue.
Mark Asher
> Boomer <boomer*@cris.com> wrote in article
<61ikro$j...@examiner.concentric.net>...
snip
> That's the whole idea with a good persistent environment online gaming
> strategy... it just keeps getting better and better all the time.
> OK, some would rather wait until it's 'finished'. Since it'll never be
> really 'final', when do you start? Or you might argue (and rightly
> so) that there is a point you should reach *before* releasing the
> product. There is, but there's *never* going to be agreement exactly
> where that point is, so you might as well go for it ;)
Heck, why'd they wait so long to release this game? If they weren't intent
on fixing server crashes, the economy, the ecology, and notoriety before
releasing, they should have shipped it two months ago!
UO is a bit half-baked right now according to people playing it. I was in
the last beta, and frankly, it sounds like there's not much difference
between the beta I played and the game that shipped, despite Garriot's
grandiose insistence of top secret code fixes much, much too large to
bother us beta testers with. He didn't even bother to tell us what was
fixed, but instead just alluded to "fixes." I guess he knew damn well that
the dynamic world was still broken and was only willing to brazen so much.
We gamers are sick of companies pushing games out the door before they are
ready and we are sick of being lied to by the game companies. Origin is
guilty on both counts in my book.
--
Mark Asher
Nippolena Speaks!
http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/interview.htm
Doug Bora
: The beta Test lasted several months and involved tens of thousands of
: people. Apparently, the end was planned and only came as a surprise
: to the testers. According to those I've talked to, a *tremendous*
: amount was learned from the Beta and there was little more that could
: be gained, from a *testing* standpoint, by keeping the beta running
: any longer.
:
: #1 - All the bugs/changes/features/etc identified in the beta were not
: fixed/implimented in the released version.
:
: #2 - It isn't as if the information gleaned from the test was suddenly
: deemed useless simply because it was released/shipped. It's still a
: 'punch list' being worked on.
:
: #3 - Even with such extensive testing, there is no way to root out all
: the bugs/issues. It takes the game being 'live', with 'John Q.
: Public' playing it to really beat on it properly.
:
: And right or wrong, contrary to what everyone would want otherwise
: (incl the developer), that's just the nature of a persistent online
: gaming project... I've 'been there, done that'... ask anyone that has
: been around the development of WarBirds if you doubt me. Point being,
: there is just a point you have put a stake in the ground and go with
: it
This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with anything you've said
above, but it is my opinion that the game was still released before it
should have been even for a "persistant online gaming project". Some of
the bugs that were in the game then and are still now were such glaring
errors that they should have been fixed before release. Even in a
persistent programming environment, the developer needs to shoot for
occasional plateaus of 99% stability. What I mean by this, is that the
addition of new features is temporarily halted, and all current bugs are
fixed until the system is as bug free as it can be. Then you once again
add new features and the process starts all over again. This is
especially important when you're getting a product ready for release. When
your servers are going down every hour or two, it should be pretty obvious
that problems still exist. Saying to yourselves, "Sure the servers are
constantly crashing, but what the hell.... We'll release it and fix the
problems later" doesn't make it a completed product. The bottom line is,
UO at release time simply wasn't ready on the server end. We still
experience what I would consider frequent crashes even today. Sure,
they're much improved since the start of the final, but they're still all
too frequent. If my own company's client/server product crashed this
often we'd have been out of business long ago. Lucky for OSI, they don't
have people DEPENDING on their servers to the extent a business depends on
theirs. You can tell me this product was ready to be shipped till you're
blue in the face, but I and all the other beta testers know that it wasn't
ready yet. Please note that I have never said that it wasn't fun to play
the, or even now, simply that it was NOT ready. I'm still not sure I'd
consider it ready even today. It's far closer, but there are still a
couple major problems that need fixing.
--
Doug Bora
stig...@wwa.com
spectre911
On Fri, 10 Oct 1997 23:25:55 GMT, boomer*@cris.com (Boomer) wrote:
>Is this a troll? Am I missing something here? Can folks NOT make it to
>www.owo.com 'update' page to find out what's going on?
No, its not a troll, it is someone who has been playing the game and
dealing with OSI mis-information since July.
>--> Reagent supply in shops will be increased.
Wrong. They said it was in the patch last Friday, on Pacific no
observable difference. Another case where the DJ or UJ or whatever
you choose to call it comes out with misleading statements that get
people's hopes up and then the UO team drops the ball.
>The area west of Trinsic that has no bridges over the river will gain
>them.
What does this mean?
>--> More creatures! We're working hard on the spawning issue, and it
>is one of our top priorities.
Top priority huh? Well, I don't know when they put that in th UJ it
wasn't there last time I looked. State of the game now? There are
"special events" where the GM's drop creatures, sometimes MANY
creatures, in an area. There seems to be LIMITED spawning in dungeons
now, as of about Wednesday. Since friday it seems there is limited
spawning in the Wilderness too. It is better than having respawning
turned OFF but it still takes about an HOUR of searching for each
creature you may find. I'm not making this up, ask around.
>Weather: snow and rain effects.
is this considered to be important? Like all that time wasted on
"sitting" so that every time I lag-hop past a hoollow log my guy sits
down on it? This was one of the last things they did before release I
think it is amazing that the team couldn't think of more important
things to do, like fixing bugs.
>Automatic bulletin board postings when orcs or other marauders make
>camps and plan incursions."
Who cares? this is a bad idea anyway, it just means that 500 "heroes"
will be there waiting when the 10 orcs show up. Take this out and take
out the special events too. Whenever more than a dozen "actors" are on
the screen the clkient starts acting funny and/or crashing anyway.
>(and no.. I won't answer 'when' questions ;)
So in other words you just repeat the same PR that they put in the
update journal and pat us on the head. I'm glad OSI is attempting some
damage control but it seems like you are proceeding down the same path
that has made so many beta testers so angry in the first place.
Tim Bolin
In article <gihra9p...@nortel.ca>, go...@nortel.ca (Cantankerous Dragon) wrote:
>"devere1" <dev...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>> Singen Dragon <pj...@concentric.net> wrote in article
>> <344153...@concentric.net>...
>>
>> > But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
>> > site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
>>
>>
>> The older games, U7 etc, work under UNIX.
>
>So where, pray tell, can I buy a HP-UX 10 version? Are you sure you
>don't mean that U7 and previous versions can be run on some DOS
>simulators which run on UNIX?
>
>In any case, who says Singen Dragon is using only one computer? Maybe
>the computer used to browse the web is a well connected UNIX box at
>work or school and there is a WinTel machine at home to play the
>games. Browsing the web at dialup speeds is getting more and more
>painful, as the content/size ratio is going _way_ down. IMO, If you
>can't get useful information from a Web page with lynx, then it isn't
>worth reading.
Additionally, sites using shockwave, etc as their excusive form of navigation
and content delivery are absolutely inaccessable to blind users.
why would a blind guy be looking at a game website anyway? you might be
tempted to ask... well, believe it or not, blind folks are just like sighted
folks, with kids, and holidays, and (are you listening, corporate america?)
MONEY TO SPEND... blind folks buy birthday presents, christmas presents, and
so on... this also applies to non-game-related sites, particularly those
commercial in nature... blind people work, own homes, wear clothes, eat
food, etc etc, in short their money spends just as well as anyone elses,
and last time i checked, there werent too many companies out there that could
afford to completely ignore a paying customer, never mind a large number of
them...
also (again, listen up corporate webmasters), there are laws (in
america, for american companies, at least. i dont know about other countries)
governing equal access to the handicapped for information and services.
That's why movie theaters now have assisted listening devices for the hearing
impaired... and while the ADA has never been invoked against a website, i
ASSURE you that it is only a matter of time before it is... and the corporate
webmasters of the world really ought to ask themselves "Do YOU want to be the
company that sets the legal precedent?" isnt it easier to just do the right
thing to begin with, and provide some form of alternate access to the content?
besides, i have yet to meet even ONE person who returns to a site for the
worthless multimedia crap, as opposed to returning for whatever useful content
the site might contain...
<snip>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Cantankerous Dragon
tim
ES Grey
Riff-Raff wrote:
>
> Message Begins:
>
> >Very neat. I play with SGI's a lot - maybe I'll get a chance to load it
> >up. I looked at the new Origin site. The Shockwave/Flash/whatever is
> >pretty unneccessary (it seems to be the design du jour) and they should
> >have a title page before it that lets you access a version w/o the bozo
> >bells.
>
> AHA! So Origin have changed their WWW site? I was wondering why I
> suddenly could not access the damn thing - I keep getting a
> "FORBIDDEN: Your client is not allowed to access the requested
> object." message. I _did_ have it delegated as my home page... Oh
> well.
>
> Origin WWW site? As far as I know I already have the Shockwave plugin
> installed...
You have to delete the bookmark you had. The URL changed a little bit.
Now it's just http://www.origin.ea.com (or ea.origin, I get confused)
without anything after it because of all the new frames.
When you go to the basic URL, the page loads up fine, asking you if you
want to get the plug in if you don't have it.
Kaleb Dragon
--
"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of the
improbable." -- H.L. Mencken
_____________________________________________________
ES Grey.. egr...@gl.umbc.edu
DC United..1996 MLS Champions..UNITE 1997-> http://www.dcunited.com
Kaleb Dragon..Ultima Dragons-Internet Chapter-> http://www.udic.org
*Card-carrying member of the Anti-Flamewar Club :)
*And the Former Official UDIC Caretaker of RGCU-D
Andrew Charlton
Singen Dragon <pj...@concentric.net> writes:
>But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
>site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
It is a common mistake for web designers to assume that computers (And
indeed browsers) are 1-to-1 with users. This is not the case. Someone
using a UNIX machine is quite likely to have a PC at home.
Even if you can identify your target market as being Win95 users, that
doesn't mean they use that all the time.
--
____/\___ Erraticus
___/__\__) -==(UDIC)==-
(__/ \__ \\//
/ \ \/
Andrew Charlton
riff...@space.net.au (Riff-Raff) writes:
>AHA! So Origin have changed their WWW site? I was wondering why I
>suddenly could not access the damn thing - I keep getting a
>"FORBIDDEN: Your client is not allowed to access the requested
>object." message. I _did_ have it delegated as my home page... Oh
>well.
You most likely have http://www.origin.ea.com/english/ bookmarked. They've
moved the homepage to http://www.origin.ea.com/
MdmeDis
In article <34404D38...@earthlink.net>, crck...@earthlink.net
says...
longer than one sentence at a time, and enjoy having a topic as complex
as this put into full context.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
D'ya ever have those days when you think
maybe its you, and not the rest of the world
that's fucked up?
Syed Noman Ahmad
In article <343E30F3...@sprynet.com>,
Ben & Karen <feld...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>
>Not every game out of Interplay is the Holy Grail, but they do make a
>lot more decent games than your post implies
Interplay has published most of the games, that you mentioned.
They didn't make these games.
>: Descent 1 & 2
Parallax Software. (What are these guys doing, currently?)
, Alone in
>the Dark, Shadow of the Comet,
Infogrames (a French co.)
> Realms of the Haunting
Gremlins (a British co.)
>, Carmageddon,
SCI (another British co.)
>Fallout, et al. But I liked Stonekeep, too, so you may disagree with my
>assessment. They make some bad games as well (Star Fleet Academy, Blood
>& Magic, et al)
OK, these four games were developed in house. And so is Descent
to Undermountain.
--
Noman
Riff-Raff
Message Begins:
>>AHA! So Origin have changed their WWW site? I was wondering why I
>>suddenly could not access the damn thing - I keep getting a
>>"FORBIDDEN: Your client is not allowed to access the requested
>>object." message. I _did_ have it delegated as my home page... Oh
>>well.
>
>You most likely have http://www.origin.ea.com/english/ bookmarked. They've
>moved the homepage to http://www.origin.ea.com/
Indeed you are correct. :) It's funny actually, when I typed
http://www.origin.ea.com into my browser's URL window I recieved the
old page (the one where you have to choose English/German) even though
I have, supposedly, cleared my HDD cache several times. Clicking on
reload brought up the new Origin page. Hmmm, maybe it had something to
do with my ISP's proxy...
End of Message
Fallout's Chris
Syed Noman Ahmad (no...@shay.ecn.purdue.edu) probably wrote:
: >Fallout, et al. But I liked Stonekeep, too, so you may disagree with my
: >assessment. They make some bad games as well (Star Fleet Academy, Blood
: >& Magic, et al)
: OK, these four games were developed in house. And so is Descent
: to Undermountain.
Minor Correction: Blood and Magic was developed by Tachyon.
Fallout, Stonekeep, SFA and DTU are all internal projects. We do use
external resources on almost all projects (for some art, sound, testing,
programming), but for the most part the four projects mentioned have all
been done in-house (at least 80-90%).
pax,
-Chris
--
"Wait, wait, just a second. Now we've got to think here. Now let's see.
What would Brian Boitano do?" - Stan
Send technical support questions to: sup...@interplay.com
Chris Taylor --- ana...@netcom.com --- http://www.interplay.com/fallout
Meghan Jenks (Interplay)
I could be misinterpreting your post (and sorry for quoting so much of
the previous), but are you saying that because Interplay is a
publisher as well as a developer, we shouldn't solicit feedback or
communication on games we didn't develop in-house?
Interplay is a company of gamers; granted, not the whole company, but
most of the people here play computer games because it's in the blood.
Everyone here is tremendously proud of such games as Descent 1 & 2,
Carmageddon, Redneck Rampage, Starfleet Academy, Fallout, and *tons*
of others, all the way back to Wasteland and the Bard's Tale series.
Whether the game was created in-house or "just" published by us
doesn't make a bit of difference; we still care about the game and we
still care about what people think of it. If we didn't, I wouldn't
have a job. Well, here anyway. :)
Meghan
=====================================================================
Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
On 14 Oct 1997 17:19:47 GMT, no...@shay.ecn.purdue.edu (Syed Noman
Ahmad) wrote:
>In article <343E30F3...@sprynet.com>,
>Ben & Karen <feld...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>>
>>Not every game out of Interplay is the Holy Grail, but they do make a
>>lot more decent games than your post implies
>
>Interplay has published most of the games, that you mentioned.
>They didn't make these games.
>
>>: Descent 1 & 2
>
>Parallax Software. (What are these guys doing, currently?)
>
>
>, Alone in
>>the Dark, Shadow of the Comet,
>
>Infogrames (a French co.)
>
>
>> Realms of the Haunting
>
>Gremlins (a British co.)
>
>
>>, Carmageddon,
>
>SCI (another British co.)
>
>
Led Mirage
In article <01bcd82b$1c5d4840$679e...@MarkA.impacttech.com>,
Mark Asher <ma...@impacttech.com> wrote:
>
>Heck, why'd they wait so long to release this game? If they weren't intent
>on fixing server crashes, the economy, the ecology, and notoriety before
>releasing, they should have shipped it two months ago!
>
>UO is a bit half-baked right now according to people playing it. I was in
>the last beta, and frankly, it sounds like there's not much difference
>between the beta I played and the game that shipped, despite Garriot's
>grandiose insistence of top secret code fixes much, much too large to
>bother us beta testers with. He didn't even bother to tell us what was
>fixed, but instead just alluded to "fixes." I guess he knew damn well that
>the dynamic world was still broken and was only willing to brazen so much.
The secret "fixes" really bother me. Since it IS a dynamic economy and
ecology, many of those "fixes" seems to me NEED extensive testing under
GAME environment. Wasn't it what the beta test is al about? Sure, new
animations are huge and hard to DL, but any fixes to the world sure be
stress tested to see if it actually works. Secondly, in the development
journal, it was said that most of the quest generator was turned off for
the test. From my experience beta testing DSO, quests can easily be broken
and also need real environment testing. It sounds to me that Oringin just
wanted to push UO out the door.
>We gamers are sick of companies pushing games out the door before they are
>ready and we are sick of being lied to by the game companies. Origin is
>guilty on both counts in my book.
Worst yet, they keep repeating that same party line saying that UO wasn't
pushed out the door prematurely. That is of course directed at Boomer.
Look, we know what Origin did. I thought at least Origin/LB/online rep
would have the guts to admit that they rushed this thing out. Even
habitual liars like Derek Smart admit that BC3K wasn't finished.
Michael Carmack
Singen Dragon (pj...@concentric.net) wrote:
: But if you're using UNIX, why would you be interested in the Origin
: site? Are any of their games available for Unix? Curious.
Many people have fast connections via UNIX (or other) boxes at work,
school, etc. So they surf the web on those machines, but they still play
the actual games on their PCs at home. (I'm a perfect example: I'm
writing this on an Alpha OpenVMS box.)
--
Mike Carmack mcar...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
Vulcan Dragon -==(UDIC)==- mr_...@ix.netcom.com
ICQ: 2703979 http://www.netcom.com/~mr_worf/vulcan.htm
*** CHEWIE CHEWIE CHOMP!!! ***
Michael Carmack
devere1 (dev...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: The older games, U7 etc, work under UNIX.
What? I'm not so sure about this, at least in the broad scope it's
written. I'll bet you a dollar there's no Ultima anywhere that runs on
Digital UNIX on my Alpha, for example.
Perhaps U7 would run under DOS emulation on a Linux box, as many other
games seem to do (don't know myself, never used Linux), but that's as far
as I'm willing to believe without seeing it for myself.
Led Mirage
In article <6209jj$f...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu>,
Syed Noman Ahmad <no...@shay.ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>>: Descent 1 & 2
>
>Parallax Software. (What are these guys doing, currently?)
Why, Descent 3, of course. At least, its something similar. They're
revamping the engine to allow large areas, with outdoor and indoor levels.
Actually, I don't know if its "Descent 3", but it'd at least be a
spiritual sequel.
Syed Noman Ahmad
In article <3450021c...@snews.zippo.com>,
Meghan Jenks (Interplay) <mje...@interplay.com> wrote:
>I could be misinterpreting your post (and sorry for quoting so much of
>the previous), but are you saying that because Interplay is a
>publisher as well as a developer, we shouldn't solicit feedback or
>communication on games we didn't develop in-house?
>
>Interplay is a company of gamers; granted, not the whole company, but
>most of the people here play computer games because it's in the blood.
>Everyone here is tremendously proud of such games as Descent 1 & 2,
>Carmageddon, Redneck Rampage, Starfleet Academy, Fallout, and *tons*
>of others, all the way back to Wasteland and the Bard's Tale series.
>Whether the game was created in-house or "just" published by us
>doesn't make a bit of difference; we still care about the game and we
>still care about what people think of it. If we didn't, I wouldn't
>have a job. Well, here anyway. :)
>
>Meghan
>
>=====================================================================
>Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
>Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
>www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
I was just trying to point out, that some of the games the initial
poster mentioned were not *made* by Interplay. That's all.
It always makes me mad when I read articles and postings assuming
Ultima Underworld was by Origin, or Eye of beholder 1/2 were by
SSI or the upcoming Age of Empires is a Microsoft game (this one
I hate most :-)
BTW, good job with Fallout. I have seen it running, and would
be playing it right now, if I could find it anywhere. Seems to me the
first in-house Interplay game after Battlechess that I might
end up enjoying.
--
Noman
Meghan Jenks (Interplay)
On 15 Oct 1997 21:37:02 GMT, no...@shay.ecn.purdue.edu (Syed Noman
Ahmad) wrote:
>
>I was just trying to point out, that some of the games the initial
>poster mentioned were not *made* by Interplay. That's all.
Thanks for clarifying - I wasn't sure what you meant :)
>It always makes me mad when I read articles and postings assuming
>Ultima Underworld was by Origin, or Eye of beholder 1/2 were by
>SSI or the upcoming Age of Empires is a Microsoft game (this one
>I hate most :-)
I hear you. :) Although we have outside developers we have in-house
producers who direct the game and administrative aspects (i.e. they're
the interface between Interplay and the developer). What this means
is that most of the time, even though a game isn't programmed
in-house, Interplay does have an influence on the direction of the
game - and feedback from customers influences that direction as well.
Of course the developer has the most influence, being the creator of
the game, but we do more than just package the finished product and
market it. I think this may be what sets us apart from other
publishers (this is opinion, since I don't work for said other
publishers - but we're currently #5 in the industry and I think that
says something). Interplay started out as a developer and that
feeling is still what drives the company.
>BTW, good job with Fallout. I have seen it running, and would
>be playing it right now, if I could find it anywhere. Seems to me the
>first in-house Interplay game after Battlechess that I might
>end up enjoying.
The Fallout team really outdid themselves. :) RPG's have always been
my favorite genre, so I'm stoked to see the positive response.
I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
doesn't surprise me that you can't find it. It seems to be flying off
the shelves. Maybe you can reserve a copy somewhere? It should be a
little easier to find once the momentum eases off!
devere1
Michael Carmack <mcar...@freenet.columbus.oh.us> wrote in article
<622dn4$a...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>...
> devere1 (dev...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
> : The older games, U7 etc, work under UNIX.
>
> What? I'm not so sure about this, at least in the broad scope it's
> written. I'll bet you a dollar there's no Ultima anywhere that runs on
> Digital UNIX on my Alpha, for example.
<shrug>
I remember some guy saying he didn't have to worry about compatability
problems for U7 because he was using Unix and it ran like a charm.
-Ophidian Dragon
Michael J. Solomon
>I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
>doesn't surprise me that you can't find it. It seems to be flying off
>the shelves. Maybe you can reserve a copy somewhere? It should be a
>little easier to find once the momentum eases off!
I posted a question recently, which you did respond to, which asked if
the game was selling. You said it was selling very well, but it didn't
sound like it was selling this well! :)
HS Simpson
On Thu, 09 Oct 1997 04:24:12 GMT, jcp...@voicenet.com (John Pacer)
had these pearls of wisdom to dispense:
>win anyways. Why? Because they're good! LucasArts has the worst
>online support around, but will people still buy Monkey Island 3? Hell
>yes, they will! Why? Because, barring a few clunkers and missed dates
>(like I said, no professionalism around), LucasArts has proven track
Clunkers (not to be confused with poorly selling titles, though a game
may be both) from LucasArts:
Rebel Assault 1 & 2
Indiana Jones Desktop Adventures
Yoda Stories
The Dig
X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
Shadows of the Empire
>record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
>years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
Recent clunkers from Origin:
Cybermage
Ultima 8
Strike Commander
Wing Commander Armada
Wing Commander Academy
Privateer 2
and of course, Ultima Online
>them where they are, THEY did, through hard work and quality product.
>They owe you nothing but the game CD and manuals. Anything else is
>extra candy given to YOU by THEM. They don't owe it to you, and you
>bastards definately don't deserve it.
And where's the manual with Ultima Online? (And please don't give the
tired refrain, "It's on the website.")
To reply via e-mail, be sure to remove the NOSPAM from the e-mail address.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit Game Drek -- your definitive guide to Gaming Grossness<tm>!
http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/gamedrek.htm
* NEW! Game Drek Exclusive! Nippolena...The Drek Interview!
* Web-Exclusive! Nai-Chi Lee's BC3K FAQ!
* Newly-revised & Expanded Game Company Listings
* Desslock's Diablo Information Guide v2.3...get it now...at Game Drek!
Marcin Nowak
This is very good news. I hope it will spin up production of CRPGs.
Marcin
mje...@interplay.com (Meghan Jenks (Interplay)) writes:
>
> I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
> doesn't surprise me that you can't find it.
>
John
Michael J. Solomon wrote:
>
> >I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
> >the shelves. Maybe you can reserve a copy somewhere? It should be a
> >little easier to find once the momentum eases off!
>
> I posted a question recently, which you did respond to, which asked if
> the game was selling. You said it was selling very well, but it didn't
> sound like it was selling this well! :)
the world....rofl
most computer stores dont sell 500-1000 copies a day total, nevermind
of just one title
Fallout's Chris
John (john...@aa.net) probably wrote:
: Michael J. Solomon wrote:
: >
: > >I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
: > >doesn't surprise me that you can't find it. It seems to be flying off
: > >the shelves. Maybe you can reserve a copy somewhere? It should be a
: > >little easier to find once the momentum eases off!
: 500-1000 a day would make it the fastest selling game in the history of
: the world....rofl
: most computer stores dont sell 500-1000 copies a day total, nevermind
: of just one title
I think she is referring to the chains reordering, not the
individual stores. We're just getting some sales figures back, and those
numbers are consistant with an entire chain (as in all the EBs, or
all the SoftEtcs, not one single store) daily sales (at least for the
first four days).
This turns it from 500-1000 for each store to about 3-5 for
each store (or so), a day. This is fairly reasonable. Jedi Knight
is selling better, but we're the number two new title.
We are really pleased with the sales, and so are the retail chains.
pax,
John
Marcin Nowak wrote:
>
> This is very good news. I hope it will spin up production of CRPGs.
>
> Marcin
>
> mje...@interplay.com (Meghan Jenks (Interplay)) writes:
> >
> > doesn't surprise me that you can't find it.
> >
> >
> > =====================================================================
> > Meghan S. Jenks mje...@interplay.com
> > Interplay Productions - By Gamers. For Gamers. alt.games.interplay
> > www.dragonplay.com www.interplay.com www.macplay.com
nothing! sells 1000 units a day
Matt Kimmich
<snip>
>> Feel free to email me or ask me any questions you want. I'm not
>>offended by tough/rough questions.
>
>Nor am I.
>
>One post in this thread noted the length of our discourse (which makes
>me want to take this email). Another mentioned they 'enjoyed' watching
>the umm.. debate... I'm open for suggestions.
<snip>
Just in general - I'm very interested in the debate, although I don't
have any strong views either way. (Switzerland isn't really the Land
of Customer Service... most people here are happy if what they bought
wasn't too expensive.)
We've had threads in the past that were a lot longer and a lot less
interesting or intelligent, IMO, so my suggestion is that you should
keep this here.
Cheers,
--
Matt Kimmich, a.k.a. Thirith Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
"With writing, I find, you can have all the right ingredients, give plenty of time
and care, and still get nothing. Also true of love. Cooking, therefore, can keep a
person who tries hard sane." - John Irving, The World According to Garp
Meghan Jenks (Interplay)
>>I understand that some stores are re-ordering 500-1000 a *day*, so it
>>doesn't surprise me that you can't find it. It seems to be flying off
>>the shelves. Maybe you can reserve a copy somewhere? It should be a
>>little easier to find once the momentum eases off!
>
>I posted a question recently, which you did respond to, which asked if
>the game was selling. You said it was selling very well, but it didn't
>sound like it was selling this well! :)
Yup - when I answered before, the game had only been out for a couple
of days and it was a Monday (I think? time is slipping on me!).
Since then we've gotten some actual numbers in that are very happy
numbers!
You can tell it's selling well, it's taken over the group and even the
Cleve Blakemore threads have lost momentum. ;)
Matt Kimmich
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 06:12:06 GMT, UseReply...@hotmail.com (HS
Simpson) wrote:
<snip>
>Clunkers (not to be confused with poorly selling titles, though a game
>may be both) from LucasArts:
This is very subjective, IMO.
>
>Rebel Assault 1 & 2
IMO, both were very fascinating at the beginning but then got boring -
but they never were supposed to be anything else than quick, effective
fun... which they were.
>Indiana Jones Desktop Adventures
>Yoda Stories
Can't say, but both of them looked as if they belonged on a
Gameboy(tm).
>The Dig
I know several people who liked it a lot.
>X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
Can't tell...
>Shadows of the Empire
From all the reviews it got around here I guess it's similar to RA -
great fun while it lasts.
>>record of top-quality games. As does Origin! Over the past four
>>years, name more than 2 games that blew! I can only name Cybermage.
>
>Recent clunkers from Origin:
See above.
>Cybermage
Got great reviews here.
>Ultima 8
Which is not as unequivocally bad as you say.
>Strike Commander
Which got great reviews, and which I personally liked at the time.
>Wing Commander Armada
>Wing Commander Academy
>Privateer 2
I played the last one - why should it be a clunker? I agree that it is
not the greatest game that ever was, but a clunker...?
<snip>
devere1
HS Simpson <UseReply...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
<3449ad85...@news.zippo.com>...
> And where's the manual with Ultima Online? (And please don't give the
> tired refrain, "It's on the website.")
Why? The manula on the website is exactly what you would have gotten if it
had been printed.
-Ophidian Dragon
Andrew Charlton
UseReply...@hotmail.com (HS Simpson) writes:
>Clunkers (not to be confused with poorly selling titles, though a game
>may be both) from LucasArts:
>
[...]
>Yoda Stories
I played a demo of Yoda Stories, and thought it was great fun. Not a
heavyweight adventure by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly
diverting.
[...]
>And where's the manual with Ultima Online? (And please don't give the
>tired refrain, "It's on the website.")
With respect, that's kind of like saying "What's 1+1? (And please don't
give the tired refrain, '2')"
HS Simpson
On 16 Oct 1997 20:53:53 GMT, "devere1" <dev...@ix.netcom.com> had
these pearls of wisdom to dispense:
>HS Simpson <UseReply...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
>> And where's the manual with Ultima Online? (And please don't give the
>> tired refrain, "It's on the website.")
>Why? The manula on the website is exactly what you would have gotten if it
>had been printed.
>
>-Ophidian Dragon
So why didn't Origin print it and include it in the box?
HS Simpson
On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:16:31 GMT,
mathias....@sm-philhist.unibe.ch (Matt Kimmich) had these pearls
of wisdom to dispense:
>>Clunkers (not to be confused with poorly selling titles, though a game
>>may be both) from LucasArts:
>
>This is very subjective, IMO.
Of course. I thought that was self-evident.
>>Rebel Assault 1 & 2
>IMO, both were very fascinating at the beginning but then got boring -
>but they never were supposed to be anything else than quick, effective
>fun... which they were.
Rail-shooters = clunkers, in my book. I hold LucasArts to higher
standards.
>>Indiana Jones Desktop Adventures
>>Yoda Stories
>Can't say, but both of them looked as if they belonged on a
>Gameboy(tm).
Gameboy aficionadoes would laugh at these two "games".
>>The Dig
>I know several people who liked it a lot.
I know people who liked Outpost. :) Seriously though, The Dig is
probably not all that bad but with the Spielberg pedigree in a
LucasArts game and the rather long development cycle, the expectations
are just a bit higher, hence, "clunker".
>>X-Wing vs TIE Fighter
>Can't tell...
As the climax to the X-Wing/ TIE Fighter trilogy, XvT is hugely
disappointing to many fans of the first 2 games. Again, high
expectations that were not met.
>>Shadows of the Empire
>From all the reviews it got around here I guess it's similar to RA -
>great fun while it lasts.
Fun for the N64 fan who doesn't also play PC games. The rail-shooter
parts are inferior to the Rebel Assaults (for those who like
rail-shooters), the space combat parts are inferior to the X-Wing/TIE
Fighter games, and the first person 3D shooter parts are inferior to
Dark Forces.
>>Cybermage
>Got great reviews here.
Maybe a few "great" reviews (heck even Microforum games can nick the
odd "great" review -- doesn't mean they're actually good games), but
mostly lukewarm reviews. Gamers mostly ignored the game as another
average Doom clone.
>>Ultima 8
>Which is not as unequivocally bad as you say.
Super Mario in Britannia before the patch. Sold so poorly that the
planned add-on was cancelled. Richard Garriott wrote an open letter
apologizing to Ultima fans.
>>Strike Commander
>Which got great reviews, and which I personally liked at the time.
Was way overdue when finally release, yet still managed to bring most
higher end systems of the time to a crawl. Again, reviews were above
average but hardly great. It did sell rather well but do you see a
Strike Commander 2?
>>Wing Commander Armada
>>Wing Commander Academy
>>Privateer 2
>
>I played the last one - why should it be a clunker? I agree that it is
>not the greatest game that ever was, but a clunker...?
Have you also played the first Privateer? If so, then you should
realize why Privateer 2 is a clunker. Did you also know that what
eventually became Privateer 2 was initially developed as an entirely
different game, outside the Wing Commander universe? Somehow, in
mid-stream, it was "transformed" into a Privateer sequel.