U9: DING DONG! DEL CASTILLO HAS FLED!
Carlos DaSilva
ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
The news is at http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
Break out the champagne!
There may yet be hope...
CJD
robb
a demo of the game, and realized that it was no longer ultima.
- robb
Carlos DaSilva wrote in message
<6op6lf$582$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Contrapuntal Dragon
Hash: SHA1
In Chapter rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons on Sat, 18 Jul 1998 06:57:22
- -0400, "robb" <joyma...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> scribed into the Great Tome
of Farnarkling thusly:
[slight reformatting]
> Carlos DaSilva wrote in message
> <6op6lf$582$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> >It's official...
> >
> >ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
> >
> >He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
> >
> >The news is at
http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
> >
> >I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
> >
> >Break out the champagne!
> >
> >There may yet be hope...
> >
> >CJD
> >
> >
>
> about fucking time, garriott probably got up off his ass finally and
played
> a demo of the game, and realized that it was no longer ultima.
<G> Too true. It must be said that DeCastillo was the worst possible
advertisement for Origin's Ultima team possible, especially given his
statements to folks like Sith Dragon, whose been slogging his guts out
getting info together for ages now (Sagacious passed it on about '95ish?)
IMO the clown oozed arrogance and contempt for the longtime fan base, and I
for one will not miss him. Seems his penchant for going against common
RPG-design sense and constructive criticism from the public finally turned
and bit him on the arse. Good.
Let's hope it's not too late after all..
> - robb
Contrapuntal.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3i
Comment: Accept only signed messages - see homepage for keys
iQA/AwUBNbAXHH66PsYO+OWCEQKlNgCggKCfc68EbXNgDbdLlbxkCM+vhVQAoNgc
Frp9fnIdN88omVJJK1et5k2D
=JJFv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Contrapuntal Dragon (Michael Fleming) -=(UDIC)=- <<SDAAS>>
mfle...@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~mfleming/ultima/
AWE FAQ Maintainer, Official RGCUD Troll/Spam Nemesis and Greybeard.
"Anyway, this is just an offical 'I'm stupid' post." - Twilight Dragon
Christoph Nahr
<cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>It's official...
>
>ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
>
>He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
Who would have thought it? I wonder who was behind this?
Judging from the report he sure didn't leave on his own account: his
affiliation with Origin was "terminated immediately", and he refused
to comment...
Can Garriott actually fire an important member of the team without
EA's approval? Or was it an EA supervisor who came in and decided
that something had gone wrong, and put Garriott in place as the
temporary project leader?
Oh well, the press release next week will probably show us what will
happen to Ascension. Perhaps you should wait for a while with the
champaign, it might well be that EA has decided that the game was too
complex and too demanding!
--
Chris Nahr (cn...@hal.net, replace hal with ibm to reply by e-mail)
MM6 Quick Reference at http://home.t-online.de/home/Christoph.Nahr
joelm...@geocities.com
"Carlos DaSilva" <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> It's official...
>
> ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
>
> He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
>
>
> I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
>
> Break out the champagne!
>
> There may yet be hope...
This isn't necessarily a good thing. Remember that Garriott okayed all the
changes, its not like Castillo decided that he would just recreate Ultima
on his own, you know. And of course, Garriott was the one who made U8.
I don't think Castillo would have made the game I want, but I also don't
think that swapping this much staff around is good for the project in
general.
Joel Mathis
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Ophidian Dragon
joelm...@geocities.com wrote in article
<6or0qm$v8v$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> In article <6op6lf$582$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> This isn't necessarily a good thing. Remember that Garriott okayed all
the
> changes, its not like Castillo decided that he would just recreate Ultima
> on his own, you know. And of course, Garriott was the one who made U8.
Garriott hasn't been seriously involved in Ultima since U7 (U6?), IIRC.
-Ophidian Dragon
Kangaeru Hito
>
>ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
>
>He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
>
>The news is at http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
>
>I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
>
>Break out the champagne!
>
>There may yet be hope...
>
>
>
I'm ecstatic! Castillo was too interested in making U9 a mainstream title
(sell a million copies at whatever cost). I just hope Garriot allows his
hands to get dirty with this one (unlike U8).
Juha Jantunen
> On Fri, 17 Jul 1998 23:55:53 -0400, "Carlos DaSilva"
> <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Oh well, the press release next week will probably show us what will
> happen to Ascension. Perhaps you should wait for a while with the
> champaign, it might well be that EA has decided that the game was too
> complex and too demanding!
I think that the worst thing that could happen was that somebody would
consider any Ultima to be "too complex and too demanding"... I, having
played through most of the Ultimas, think that U7 part 2 was the best of
them, primarily because it was quite complex and occasionally demanding...
Which apparently upset a lot of people and resulted in the platformer
called U8... I hope that the next time Origin decides to release something
like that again, it won't be called Ultima... The Avatar is a hero of
virtues, philosophy... How can one make a game from someone like that so
that it's "simple"...?
It's been interesting to see his fall from grace, and that, if nothing else,
was continued in Ultima 8... Consider the state of things in Pagan... I hear
of the dead walking the streets, the weather isn't just bad, it's raining fire
and brimstone, and generally the people seem more likely to die than survive
all of it... And why was all that? The Avatar just wants to get home.
So much for the hero of the people... ;)
Just my thoughts, what do I know, I started Ultima IV again two nights
ago. ;)
Thine, "the new guy", Shifter Dragon,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Juha Jantunen | ========================== Talgor - Janus - Shifter
Sädetie 2 | ===== Minna baka. =============== Shadowrun - Magic
45910 Voikkaa | ====================== Life - Universe - Everything
Finland | == Anime - Manga - MAY - Babylon 5 - Trek - Sandman
tal...@iki.fi | Jean-Michel Jarre - Bob Marley - Christopher Franke
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
\+358-40-566 6543/ \-UDIC-/ \http://iki.fi/talgor/me.html/
\--------------/ \----/ \--------------------------/
AcK!
<cdas...@earthlink.net> babbled:
>It's official...
Another huge thread is born!
>ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
>
>He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
fled, tossed, just semantics, eh? ;)
>The news is at http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
That link appears down. What happened? Some many dragons landed on the
headline server that it crashed?
If you can't get the news there, try the long story at
http://ultima.scorched.com/
>I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
ditto
>Break out the champagne!
>There may yet be hope...
Will we get a party? Will Ultima be turned around?
If the game is released this year, probably not.
I suspect that most dragons, however, wouldn't mind waiting a bit to
get the game turned around.
Hmm... Origin's going to release more info on the game next week. Time
to watch the cheering and idle speculation...
BTW, that 'philosophical differences' crap looks like he got the boot.
<g>
TTYL
Do what you will with this tagline, just don't bother me about it!
EASYSIGN98....http://easysign98.home.ml.org
krup...@yahoospa.com
remove "spa" to email
Destrius
-clip-
> Who would have thought it? I wonder who was behind this?
Perhaps Moa's inbox floods worked after all.
I mean, nobody can take so much lousy spelling... :)
--
+------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Destrius Dragon | |
| Official Mad Mage | "Am I dreaming of the |
| -=*[~UDIC~]*=- -=*[UnSPLUT!]*=- | butterfly, or is the |
| moc.seiticoeg@suirtsed | butterfly dreaming |
| (read that backwards...) | of me...?" |
| UIN: 4404418 | |
| http://destrius.simplenet.com | ooO(...) |
+------------------------------------+-------------------------+
UDIC: d+++ e+ N++ T-- Om+ U1234567!8!AWS'! u++ uC++++ uF-
uG++++ uLB+ uA+++ nC+ nR nH+ nP++ nI++ nPT++++
nS++++ nT-- wM wC+ wS wI+ wN+ o- y a16
---| 庄心宇 |---
Sir Cabirus Dragon
Destrius schrieb in Nachricht <35B1A413...@the.sig.addy>...
>Christoph Nahr wrote:
>-clip-
>> Who would have thought it? I wonder who was behind this?
>-clip-
>
> Perhaps Moa's inbox floods worked after all.
> I mean, nobody can take so much lousy spelling... :)
>
Your German isn't better as Christophs's English I guess ;-)
Sir Cabirus Dragon
-=UDIC=-
KReverri
Think about ED's Feelings when he sees these
Then savory it
Eric
because what it boils down to is now OSI has yet another excuse to delay the
game. I downloaded the AVI of the gameplay and I thought the engine was
really hitching bad. I think the game's future is in serious trouble and
wouldn't be surprised to see a major overhaul of what they have done thus
far.
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
Kangaeru Hito wrote in message <6orl46$2...@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>...
>
>Carlos DaSilva wrote in message
><6op6lf$582$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>>It's official...
>>
>>ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
>>
>>He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
>>
>>The news is at http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
>>
>>I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
>>
>>Break out the champagne!
>>
>>There may yet be hope...
>>
Kenneth G. Cavness
message <199807191911...@ladder03.news.aol.com>:
> Hmmm after viewing the title and a few of the posts
>
> Think about ED's Feelings when he sees these
I doth cogitate mightily.
> Then savory it
*grin*
--
Kenneth G. Cavness
http://conan.proxicom.com/~kcavness
MdmeDis
dev...@ix.takethisout.netcom.com says...
> Garriott hasn't been seriously involved in Ultima since U7 (U6?), IIRC.
Well - looks like he's gonna be now! Wonder if he might speak to us
now?
--
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?
Ophidian Dragon
Kenneth G. Cavness <kcav...@proxicom.com> wrote in article
<MPG.101c18518...@news.erols.com>...
> KReverri <krev...@aol.com> foolishly gave up the right to remain silent
in
> message <199807191911...@ladder03.news.aol.com>:
> > Hmmm after viewing the title and a few of the posts
> >
> > Think about ED's Feelings when he sees these
>
> I doth cogitate mightily.
Well I do feel a bit guilty about saying mean stuff.
But I'm pretty much a cream puff :-)
-Ophidian Dragon
Eric
probably asking for a lot more time (and money) for development (he did have
an excuse for asking this since U:A lost three developers recently...maybe
OSI placed the blame for this on Ed...OSI lost several good people and you
have to wonder where all of these "philosophical differences" are
originating from). I think EA is very tired of all the delays and bad press
this game has received, and to have their project manager come to them and
say "it'll ship when it is ready" when they were expecting an Xmas release
did not sit well at all. I also have to wonder if the rest of the
developers were preparing to leave, if they were not treated better. I must
retract my earlier statement that the game may go through yet another
overhaul. I downloaded the 40 meg avi of Lord British demoing the game and
I think this is the type of direction he has always wanted to go with the
series. Oh well, the soap opera continues...
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
joelm...@geocities.com wrote in message
<6ouae0$s2q$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <6otidf$2...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>,
> "Eric" <eli...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> I find it strange how people are overjoyed about Ed leaving (or being
fired)
>> because what it boils down to is now OSI has yet another excuse to delay
the
>> game. I downloaded the AVI of the gameplay and I thought the engine was
>> really hitching bad. I think the game's future is in serious trouble and
>> wouldn't be surprised to see a major overhaul of what they have done thus
>> far.
>
>Yep, ironically banishing the Dark Lord of Mainstreamization may kill U9.
>I have to wonder, though, if the firing had something to do with the
>initial stirring up of the fans through his comments.
joelm...@geocities.com
Destrius
-clip-
> Your German isn't better as Christophs's English I guess ;-)
Errr.... *scratches head*
I don't get you. I don't know a single word of German, btw... :)
James Dowd
>I disagree. I think Ed was let go because he mismanaged the project
and was
>probably asking for a lot more time (and money) for development (he did
have
>an excuse for asking this since U:A lost three developers
recently...maybe
>OSI placed the blame for this on Ed...OSI lost several good people and
you
I disagree with you. (now this is confusing) I'd say that Castillo's
comments, especially "it's not about baking bread," did him in. From
what I've read of interviews, RG has consistently insisted it WAS about
baking bread. I mean, the whole engine of U5 was based on using every
little thing in the world, like the harpsichord. I have a feeling - no,
I hope - that RG is realizing that much of what we've been saying since
U9 started its course towards ruin is true.
Talraen "Wishful Thinking" Dragon
Wayfarer
>
> In article <01bdb28e$2ea7f020$e9bedfcf@widdershins>,
> dev...@ix.takethisout.netcom.com says...
>
> > Garriott hasn't been seriously involved in Ultima since U7 (U6?), IIRC.
>
> Well - looks like he's gonna be now! Wonder if he might speak to us
> now?
>
and elsewhere haven't been at all that supportive of him. ;)
I'm not even going to start on that Cindy Yans thing again... :P
|
\ / Supernova Dragon -==<UDIC>==- d++e+N+T--Om++U1!2!3!4!5!6!7'!S'!8!A!L!
- * - a.k.a. Telerandil the Wayfarer u+++uC++uF+++uG++++uLB+uA++nC++nR-nHnPn
/ \ jl0...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu I--nPTnS+++nTwM+wC++wS-wI++wN+ y a19
|
joelm...@geocities.com
"James Dowd" <jd...@unix.asb.com> wrote:
> I disagree with you. (now this is confusing) I'd say that Castillo's
> comments, especially "it's not about baking bread," did him in. From
> what I've read of interviews, RG has consistently insisted it WAS about
> baking bread. I mean, the whole engine of U5 was based on using every
> little thing in the world, like the harpsichord. I have a feeling - no,
> I hope - that RG is realizing that much of what we've been saying since
> U9 started its course towards ruin is true.
I don't know about Garriott's emphasis, but if you look back over the
statements made Castillo started with comments that stirred up a real
frenzy and then later (look at the E3 reports) Origin seemed to be
trying to contain the fire that had broken out. Now, if the major part
of Castillo's job was promoting the game, then I can see Origin dropping
him for that. And even if it wasn't the sole reason, I do think that the
problems that errupted were brought up at some point.
AcK!
<dev...@ix.takethisout.netcom.com> babbled:
>> This isn't necessarily a good thing. Remember that Garriott okayed all
>the
>> changes, its not like Castillo decided that he would just recreate Ultima
>> on his own, you know. And of course, Garriott was the one who made U8.
>
>Garriott hasn't been seriously involved in Ultima since U7 (U6?), IIRC.
I hate to read PC Lamer as it groups Ascension with a bunch of other
games under the collective name 'Tomb Raider look-alikes\clones.' The
worst part is of that, is that there's (some) truth to that...
boo...@origin.ea.com
>Hmmm after viewing the title and a few of the posts
>
>Think about ED's Feelings when he sees these
>
>Then savory it
man.. you guys are cold ;)
Boomer
Ophidian Dragon
boo...@origin.ea.com wrote in article
<35b3b1b1....@newshost.ea.com>...
Well, I feel kinda sorry for him.
Of course, I felt kinda sorry for the Emporer in Star Wars.
I'm just a marshmellow.
-Ophidian Dragon
Mark Asher
>I don't know about Garriott's emphasis, but if you look back over the
>statements made Castillo started with comments that stirred up a real
>frenzy and then later (look at the E3 reports) Origin seemed to be
>trying to contain the fire that had broken out. Now, if the major part
>of Castillo's job was promoting the game, then I can see Origin dropping
>him for that. And even if it wasn't the sole reason, I do think that the
>problems that errupted were brought up at some point.
You can kind of sum up Del Castillo's remarks as "Most of those things
the Ultima Dragons liked I think are dumb!" <g>
I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
to be sacked?
Mark Asher
Matthew T. Linehan
wrote:
>I disagree with you. (now this is confusing) I'd say that Castillo's
>comments, especially "it's not about baking bread," did him in. From
>what I've read of interviews, RG has consistently insisted it WAS about
>baking bread. I mean, the whole engine of U5 was based on using every
>little thing in the world, like the harpsichord. I have a feeling - no,
>I hope - that RG is realizing that much of what we've been saying since
>U9 started its course towards ruin is true.
>
Well, on the baking bread thing. One UO was in beta, didn't RG spend a
lot of time hyping how the UO world would allow players to do things
like bake bread? I remember that bread baking was one of his favorite
examples of how open life in UO was. If my memory is correct, expect
baking bread to be in the final U:A product! :-)
From the video, we know that the street lights are interactive (can be
turned on and off by the player). Personally I think the RG will make
sure that the world if highly interactive. The first person view has
nothing to do with the interactivity of the world.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I have Faith in RG. He is
going to make an awesome game. It won't ship until it's ready, as long
as he does not get over ruled by EA.
Selling out to EA was probably a big mistake. On one hand OSI gained
access to the incredible resources of EA, but on the other hand, look
how much control he lost in the bargain. Of course will never know the
truth, but I sometimes wonder if RG ever regrets the decision at
night.
- -
|ZZzz +------------------------------------------------+
|Zzz | |Zzz | Quantum Void Dragon -=(UDIC)=- |
/_\ /\ | /\ /_\ | http://quantum.detour.net |
|*|_||/_\||_|*| | Signature Version 1.2 |
|.....|*|.....| |Error: EARTH.INI is corrupt, reboot planet(Y/N)?|
|____!~!____| +------------------------------------------------+
William Harris
says...
>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>to be sacked?
O to be the fly on the wall. :-)
But I agree. With the way so many things in Ascension have gone, why -now-?
Developer revolt ("we're all quitting") might be one thing. One would hope
that RG was already aware of how they were walking the tightrope on fan
support and on the aspects of the game that were of concern to fans of the
series.
Ed's departure -really- leaves Ascension in a swamp. Just when some
fans were beginning to accept the game for what it was going to be; maybe not
another U7, not a U8, but something unique for itself.
--
William Harris
http://home.earthlink.net/~williamharri
Wilhelm Elmore
boo...@origin.ea.com wrote in message >man.. you guys are cold ;)
>
>Boomer
Cayuga Dragon
Eric
them. Sure, they had a great reputation, but they also had severly
overspent on Ultima 7, Wing Commander, etc.. Dr. Cat said it was a miracle
that EA stepped in when it did. Now look what OSI has become since the
takeover...they have been producing fewer titles, their staff has become
bloated, they delay products by years with impunity. Sounds like a dream
job for Richard...go to the trade shows and have no deliverables.
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
Matthew T. Linehan wrote in message <35b6c204.102351718@news-server>...
Eric
together. I don't think OSI is as concerned with what the press/public
thinks after they see an early alpha build...they have come under criticism
before...and usually emerge on top. But when fairly long term employees
start leaving your company you have to question why. And if you are
concerned about keeping the rest of the team together you had better answer
that question real quick.
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
Mark Asher wrote in message
<35b3c2ef....@gatekeeper.impacttech.com>...
>On Mon, 20 Jul 1998 14:43:59 GMT, joelm...@geocities.com wrote:
>
>>I don't know about Garriott's emphasis, but if you look back over the
>>statements made Castillo started with comments that stirred up a real
>>frenzy and then later (look at the E3 reports) Origin seemed to be
>>trying to contain the fire that had broken out. Now, if the major part
>>of Castillo's job was promoting the game, then I can see Origin dropping
>>him for that. And even if it wasn't the sole reason, I do think that the
>>problems that errupted were brought up at some point.
>
>You can kind of sum up Del Castillo's remarks as "Most of those things
>the Ultima Dragons liked I think are dumb!" <g>
>
>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>to be sacked?
>
>Mark Asher
>
>
>
>
Humbreto
<snip>
> From the video, we know that the street lights are interactive (can be
> turned on and off by the player). Personally I think the RG will make
> sure that the world if highly interactive. The first person view has
> nothing to do with the interactivity of the world.
<snip>
The first person/3D close-up view makes it so that you cant easily show
interactivity with objects in the world. In U7, for example, the view
was from far enough away and the resolution was low enough that the
character could move a few pixil-arms over an object and create the
illusion that he/she was "using" the item. But with the U9 engine, with
the greatly detailed characters and rotateable view, it will be
extremely hard to realisticly show interaction with the world, such as
walking up to a wall and throwing a switch, or turning on a lamp.
Mary Jo DiBella
it looks a lot like a pattern I've seen repeated so many times in
different sorts of development endeavors: the project is put into the
hands of a manager that nobody can stand working for...all the best
creative people bail out because the guy is such a jerk...finally,
senior management figures out what's happening and they fire him...
But it's too late because all the best people are gone and the project
has nobody left to work on it.
How sad...
Rest In Peace, Ultima.
MJ
William Wueppelmann
> In article <01bdb28e$2ea7f020$e9bedfcf@widdershins>,
> dev...@ix.takethisout.netcom.com says...
>
>
> now?
``Why can't you people just shut up and smile and buy my game?!?''
I won't say this shatters my faith in the game (what faith)? But if
this development results in having to make a choice between another
lengthy delay and rushing the product out with serious flaws, I'd like
to remind the people at Origin that they may still have the Original
Ultima IX lying around somewhere. Maybe it's time to finish that one
and have it done with?
--
The Silly Dragon | It is pitch black. You are likely to receive spam
-=(UDIC)=- | from a grue.
joelm...@geocities.com
mlin...@nospam.columbus.rr.com (Matthew T. Linehan) wrote:
> From the video, we know that the street lights are interactive (can be
> turned on and off by the player). Personally I think the RG will make
> sure that the world if highly interactive. The first person view has
> nothing to do with the interactivity of the world.
Castillo said that much of the interactivity had been removied due to
the use of the 3D engine.
Jena
<md...@roch875.mc.xerox.com> wrote:
>While clearly I have no way of knowing this is what happened here...boy,
>it looks a lot like a pattern I've seen repeated so many times in
>different sorts of development endeavors: the project is put into the
>hands of a manager that nobody can stand working for...all the best
>creative people bail out because the guy is such a jerk...finally,
>senior management figures out what's happening and they fire him...
>
>But it's too late because all the best people are gone and the project
>has nobody left to work on it.
>
This isn't that bad, it gives new talent the chance to show off their
ideas....it could be bad though....
Castellan
>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>to be sacked?
He probably made Lord British killable, or had him killed as a
plot device. :)
--- ---
Douglas L. Erickson - ECN Computer Publications and Training Specialist
mail to: dou...@mailhost.ecn.ou.edu --- http://www.ecn.ou.edu/~douglas
SegaNet: http://www.seganet.com/ for Sega-related info ICQ#: 12822495
--- ECN does not, in any way, sponsor or endorse my rabid opinions. ---
Matthew T. Linehan
>Castillo said that much of the interactivity had been removied due to
>the use of the 3D engine.
>
>Joel Mathis
First, I don't see a good reason why a polygon engine would have to be
"less interactive". Sounds like a cop out to me. Anyways Castillo is
now gone, so anything he said is now suspect! If he was flying the
straight and narrow, management would not have removed him, so
therefore even if he WAS correct in his statements, the system will
soon be revised to render him wrong.
Carlos DaSilva
>ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) writes:
>
>
>>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>>to be sacked?
>
> He probably made Lord British killable, or had him killed as a
>plot device. :)
"Plot? Plot. What an interesting word that is. Plot. Plotplotplotplotplot.
What is it?"
- Most Recently Del Castillo, originally a Hollywood Exec on The Critic
CJD
Robert Perrett
Carlos DaSilva wrote:
It's official...ED DEL CASTILLO has been DEL CANNED!
He was tossed from the project and Richard Garriott has taken command.
The news is at http://headline.gamespot.com/news/98_07/17_ascen/index.html
I might actually give Ultima IX a chance...
Break out the champagne!
There may yet be hope...
Break out the champagne. It sounds like you want to have a party. I am SHOCK by this. Amazing.Oh Great, this sounds like a Soap Opera. Oh golly, I am probaly the stuip newbie that is why Ultima 9 is being desinger for us newbies, maçios. I never tried an Utilma game. Most people dislike RPG because they act as if you need a degree to play one. Thanks goodnes for Sir-tech. They think about everybody in mind. They FAQ's are funny, too.
Filarion Dragon
roaming the skies on Tue, 21 Jul 1998 15:57:35 -0700 ,screamed out::
>
>--------------EC24F7E767D20D1CE4E9FF4A
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
>
>
>
>Break out the champagne. It sounds like you want to have a party. I am SHOCK
>by this. Amazing.
>
A gaming magazine I read (PC-Player for german Drags) just stated that
U:A will be released the first quarter of ´99 ..dunno if they´re right
there....
Filarion Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
***The other Co-Founder of the CinnaGuard***
aka Fractal unLtd. ho3...@hof.baynet.de
U C :d++ e- N+ T+ Om+ U1234!5!6!7´!S´!8!KA!L u++ uC++ uF-
D O :uG+ uLB- uA+ nC++ nH+ nP+ nI++ nPT nS+++ nT-- wM++
I D :wC++ wS wI- wN+ o- z+ a19
C E /UIN:12658441
"And I will send the demons-You´ll run but you cannot hide-
And I will send all my minions-To haunt you..."by Lake of Tears
Wyatt R Johnson
Castellan <douglasBE...@mailhost.ecn.uoknor.edu> wrote:
>ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) writes:
>
>
>>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>>to be sacked?
>
> He probably made Lord British killable, or had him killed as a
>plot device. :)
>
Wyatt
Jeff Howell
>In article <6p3jnp$q...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu>, wjoh...@shay.ecn.purdue.edu
>says...
>> > He probably made Lord British killable, or had him killed as a
>> >plot device. :)
>> >
>> ...using LB's own fork
>>
>> Wyatt
>
>Good Lord, someone actually remembers the fork!
>
Ah, the immortal 'fork' thread.. I remember that fondly..
Say, Tina, it's nice to know you still wander through the ng once in a
while.. whatever happened to ya, anyways? :P
--
Ash Dragon An oldtimer from the 'agud'
-=(UDIC)=- days and relic of a forgotten
time.
Eric
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
William Wueppelmann wrote in message ...
JP Morris
>
> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 23:07:52 -0500, gwn(^)@gameworlds.com (GWN) wrote:
> >Good Lord, someone actually remembers the fork!
> >
>
> Ah, the immortal 'fork' thread.. I remember that fondly..
> Say, Tina, it's nice to know you still wander through the ng once in a
> while.. whatever happened to ya, anyways? :P
The Fork is a myth! It's actually the mug of ale that you mustn't
touch..
Dave Litchman
>
>Jeff Howell wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 23:07:52 -0500, gwn(^)@gameworlds.com (GWN) wrote:
>> >Good Lord, someone actually remembers the fork!
>> >
>>
>> Ah, the immortal 'fork' thread.. I remember that fondly..
>> Say, Tina, it's nice to know you still wander through the ng once in a
>> while.. whatever happened to ya, anyways? :P
>
>The Fork is a myth! It's actually the mug of ale that you mustn't
>touch..
If you've come for the fork, you'll be sorely disappointed...
(Sorry, a little off topic, even for this thread.)
--
Dave Litchman
da...@discovernet.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SF2 Code v1.0: t- c+ T r-(++) f g++ m+ s -> + v+(++) M+ n+: o+
---------------------------------------------------------------------
^ GWN
> Ah, the immortal 'fork' thread.. I remember that fondly..
> Say, Tina, it's nice to know you still wander through the ng once in a
> while.. whatever happened to ya, anyways? :P
You mean the immortal fork *years*, dontcha? :) Those were fun times
indeed.
I've always been around. As you can see by my .sig file, I run the Game
Worlds Network, which is coming along quite nicely. We're about to
launch a kid's section that will cover all children's titles, both fun
and educational. Been pretty swamped with that sort of thing. Drop me a
line anytime, I'm always here.
--
Tina Haumersen
Editor/Publisher
Game Worlds Network
http://gameworlds.com
(remove (^) to reply)
Panu Aaltio
Humbreto wrote in message <35B409...@geocities.com>...
>the greatly detailed characters and rotateable view, it will be
>extremely hard to realisticly show interaction with the world, such as
>walking up to a wall and throwing a switch, or turning on a lamp.
Yes it will, but that gladly doesn't seem to be a problem for the design
team, not yet anyway. Garriott was happy to demonstrate the Avatar using
levers etc. in the Gamestar movie, even though there was no animation, which
is of course just like in U7. I don't think they'll go the "if you can't do
it perfectly, don't do it" way here, luckily.
--
Panu Aaltio, paaltio <at> mikrobitti.fi
Grotto Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Lord Kinbote
Dave Litchman wrote in message <6p4ssa$1gp$1...@206.165.146.114>...
>If you've come for the fork, you'll be sorely disappointed...
>
>(Sorry, a little off topic, even for this thread.)
>
Wasn't Bioforge a "Lord British Production?"
Kinbote
Desslock
>
> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 12:02:10 GMT, joelm...@geocities.com wrote:
> >Castillo said that much of the interactivity had been removied due to
> >the use of the 3D engine.
> >
> >Joel Mathis
>
> First, I don't see a good reason why a polygon engine would have to be
> "less interactive". Sounds like a cop out to me. Anyways Castillo is
> now gone, so anything he said is now suspect! If he was flying the
> straight and narrow, management would not have removed him, so
> therefore even if he WAS correct in his statements, the system will
> soon be revised to render him wrong.
And the engine was always the same one that was demonstrated before.
Interactivity was, at least for a time during production, not emphasized
because it may have been considered relatively unimportant by some
members of the development team, like Del Castillo. I strongly suspect
the final version of Ultima: Ascension will have a considerable amount
of interactivity.
Desslock
--
Desslock's RPG News: http://www.gamepen.com/rpg/
Desslock's Domain at Gamespot:
http://www.gamespot.com/misc/columns/desslock_980417.html
Desslock's Guide to RPGs - http://www.gamepen.com/desslock/ For detailed
interviews/previews relating to Asheron's Call, Baldur's Gate,
EverQuest, Might and Magic VI, Wizardry 8 and more...
Chris McCubbin
No, Bioforge was created by a team called Brute Force, produced by Eric
Hyman. It was that team's only major release - Hyman left Origin about a
year later.
--
____________________________________________
A writer wants to affect his reader. He'd prefer that effect not be
expressed in the form of death threats, but beggars can't be choosers. -
Jose Chung
Chris W. McCubbin, Writer
"A very sick man indeed" - Mondo 2000
Lord Kinbote wrote in message <6p6ee4$cp7$2...@supernews.com>...
Ophidian Dragon
Chris McCubbin <cmcc...@incanmonkey.com> wrote in article
<6pa7vd$opv$1...@hiram.io.com>...
>
> No, Bioforge was created by a team called Brute Force, produced by Eric
> Hyman. It was that team's only major release - Hyman left Origin about a
> year later.
Did they break Hyman..........'s spirit?
Oh man, that's another pretty bad name.
-Ophidian Dragon
omega_1
Carlos DaSilva <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
6p355u$6iq$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>>
>>
>>>I would like to know what caused the reputed blow-up between Castillo
>>>and Garriott. I have to think that dropping the party, the focus on
>>>graphics at the expense of interaction, etc., were all approved by
>>>Garriott. What was it that Castillo pushed for or did that caused him
>>>to be sacked?
>>
>>plot device. :)
>
>
>What is it?"
>- Most Recently Del Castillo, originally a Hollywood Exec on The Critic
>
>CJD
>
Its something the U9 don't have.
Fortran Dragon
says...
[Snip]
> First, I don't see a good reason why a polygon engine would have to be
> "less interactive". Sounds like a cop out to me. Anyways Castillo is
> now gone, so anything he said is now suspect! If he was flying the
> straight and narrow, management would not have removed him, so
> therefore even if he WAS correct in his statements, the system will
> soon be revised to render him wrong.
If U9 is going to be out for Christmas there simply isn't time to
revise anything. The U9 team would be working their asses off to make sure
they could ship a product that was stable with the features currently
present.
Adding features would delay U9 past the XMAS sales season.
--
Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==- | "There isn't enough darkness in the world
-=={MDLAM}==- | to quench the light of one small candle."
Hidalgo Trading Company: http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/index.html
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Selling out to EA was probably a big mistake. On one hand OSI gained
> access to the incredible resources of EA, but on the other hand, look
> how much control he lost in the bargain. Of course will never know the
> truth, but I sometimes wonder if RG ever regrets the decision at
> night.
If Origin hadn't you wouldn't see Origin around today. Origin was
constantly skirting on the edge of bankruptcy since at least the days of
Ultima VI.
Fortran Dragon
krev...@aol.com says...
> Hmmm after viewing the title and a few of the posts
>
> Think about ED's Feelings when he sees these
>
> Then savory it
I don't know how savory Del Castillo is (my guess is: not very), but I
will savor his moving on.
Perhaps this means that U9 will focus more on its CRPG roots, but I
doubt it.
Fortran Dragon
says...
[Snip]
> man.. you guys are cold ;)
Last time you were bitching that we were too hot... :)
Matthew T. Linehan
Dragon) wrote:
> Adding features would delay U9 past the XMAS sales season.
yea, and that surprises ya. There is no way were going to see U:A in
98.
Christopher Van Allen
3 years ago. Until I actually see it on the Shelf, it's Vaporware,
never to actually be available to the public.
Dave Litchman
says...
>
>On Sun, 26 Jul 1998 18:43:04 -0500, for...@earthlink.net (Fortran
>Dragon) wrote:
>
>> Adding features would delay U9 past the XMAS sales season.
>
>yea, and that surprises ya. There is no way were going to see U:A in
>98.
Methinks you underestimate the lenths that EA will go to for a big name holiday
release. Do the words "not beta-tested" mean anything to you?
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> yea, and that surprises ya. There is no way were going to see U:A in
> 98.
It doesn't surprise me. I'm a programmer you see. ;)
Jon...@my-dejanews.com
for...@earthlink.net (Fortran Dragon) wrote:
> My glass typewriter shows Matthew T. Linehan saying...
> [Snip]
> > yea, and that surprises ya. There is no way were going to see U:A in
> > 98.
>
> It doesn't surprise me. I'm a programmer you see. ;)
There isn't a lot of information available either publicly or privately about
the timing of U:A, but based on what I've heard, I'd guess that the game
*could* be finished this year if Origin puts the hammer down, and if they
don't make any substantial changes to what's already in progress.
If this guess/analysis is accurate, the big question is whether they will
decide to do that or re-set their schedule for some time next year. Based on
little more than gut feel, my guess is next year, March or later.
Jonric
The Vault Network
http://www.vaultnetwork.com
The web's #1 source for CRPG news and information
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> If this guess/analysis is accurate, the big question is whether they will
> decide to do that or re-set their schedule for some time next year. Based on
> little more than gut feel, my guess is next year, March or later.
What else does Origin have lined up for this Xmas season?
My gut guess is that Origin will continue to cut features until they
have something shippable for the xmas buying season. They'd miss too many
potential purchasers otherwise.
<Obscure radio reference>
Then again, I could be wrong. They call me Mel.
</Obscure radio reference>
Matthew T. Linehan
Dragon) wrote:
> It doesn't surprise me. I'm a programmer you see. ;)
he he he, the question I all ways hate the most when I take on a
software project is the dreaded, "How many man hours is this going to
take?" question. It's all ways a shot in the dark. You never quite
know what complications your going to run into, like my favorite, the
moving target problem. Every time you think ya got it nailed down,
some nit wit changes the system specs. *sigh*
When are the suits going to learn, writing software is an art form,
not a science.
AcK!
babbled:
>Official U:A QA schedule
>--------
>Day 1 -
>9 am: Set up the test bed system of a P500 with a pair of 12 meg VooDoo2
>cards running in SLI mode.
>10 am: Install game under clean installation of Windows 98.
>10:30 am: Run it once and make sure that there are not obvious animation
>glitches.
>11 am: Pass to FedEx guy so that it can be duplicated immediately.
Mental note. Become that FedEx guy...
TTYL
8 of 10 people suffer from hemorrhoids. Two enjoy them.
EASYSIGN98....http://easysign98.home.ml.org
krup...@yahoospa.com
remove "spa" to email
jep
Robert S. Gregg wrote in message ...
>
>Software is
>becoming less of a black art, and more of a pseudo-engineering discipline.
It
>will move more and more into the realm of engineering (with mathematics and
>logic as its base "science") over the next 20 years. And thank goodness,
it's
>about time.
>
That won't make scheduling software any easier. I'm an engineer nerd in
real life (use lots of math), and I cannot predict how long anything new
will take. Its hard to estimate how long it will take to solve a problem
you have not precisely described. Don't expect software development of
anything new to EVER be predictable. As computers get better and more
complexity/realism/whatever becomes possible, computer game development is
going to be even harder to schedule. And more expensive. And often more
buggy. Bummer.
jep
Jon...@my-dejanews.com
for...@earthlink.net (Fortran Dragon) wrote:
> My glass typewriter shows Jon...@my-dejanews.com saying...
> [Snip]
> > If this guess/analysis is accurate, the big question is whether they will
> > decide to do that or re-set their schedule for some time next year. Based
on
> > little more than gut feel, my guess is next year, March or later.
>
> What else does Origin have lined up for this Xmas season?
>
> My gut guess is that Origin will continue to cut features until they
> have something shippable for the xmas buying season. They'd miss too many
> potential purchasers otherwise.
That would be short-term thinking - bring out a game early to grab some extra
holiday sales, but with the increased likelihood of being panned by the media
and by gamers. Better to lose those early sales, but to bring out a better,
more polished game that will "have legs". And I'd like to think the FAQ
question about release timing presages taking the latter course. But we'll
see.
Jonric
The Vault Netwotk
Robert S. Gregg
>When are the suits going to learn, writing software is an art form,
>not a science.
Ehh.... I wouldn't go quite that far. I mean, yes, I *would* go that far
right now, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that way. Software is
becoming less of a black art, and more of a pseudo-engineering discipline. It
will move more and more into the realm of engineering (with mathematics and
logic as its base "science") over the next 20 years. And thank goodness, it's
about time.
Writing *games*, on the other hand, is and always will be an art form.
Bob Gregg aka Underworld Dragon
The Notable Ultima: www.scott.net/~rgregg/ultima/
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Ehh.... I wouldn't go quite that far. I mean, yes, I *would* go that far
> right now, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that way. Software is
> becoming less of a black art, and more of a pseudo-engineering discipline. It
> will move more and more into the realm of engineering (with mathematics and
> logic as its base "science") over the next 20 years. And thank goodness, it's
> about time.
Except that your statement really only applies to existing, solved
problems. :) New problems and programs will still be in that unique
sphere of programming which is half art and half
engineering/science/routine.
Fortran Dragon
> holiday sales, but with the increased likelihood of being panned by the media
> and by gamers. Better to lose those early sales, but to bring out a better,
> more polished game that will "have legs". And I'd like to think the FAQ
> question about release timing presages taking the latter course. But we'll
> see.
Yes, waiting might be a better thing, but US corporations live and die
by their quarterly financials any more. Thus short-term myopia is rampant.
Raven
>
> Then again, I could be wrong. They call me Mel.
>
> </Obscure radio reference>
Hey! Quit posting in HTML! :)
Raven
jep
Robert S. Gregg wrote in message ...
>can be employed to make the situation better. Don't tell me it can't be
>done - it IS being done today, by organizations that understand what it
takes.
>
>
Care to tell me which orgainizations? And no upgrades/re-releases please,
but real, new developments.
I'm not flaming you, but I am a real, respected engineer at a good,
respected company (not a software weenie, though, but an analyst) and I've
never seen a high tech R&D company schedule a brand new developemt well.
Maybe the software industry is different, I truly do not know. I'm in
communications theory, that's all i really understand. I've seen big and
small projects. Some under schedule, some over, some on. Most way over.
Even a well managed project can become FOBAR. Even when it come sout on
schedule, it never comes out with the work break-down or budget right on.
It's true that the stuff I do often hasn't had the theory worked out yet,
but, i suspect thats true in these games too. And they're getting more
complex every year.
jep
Robert S. Gregg
>Its hard to estimate how long it will take to solve a problem
>you have not precisely described.
Precisely. Most software organizations do not adequately describe the problem
they are trying to solve, and then do not maturely control those requirements
as development proceeds. But this doesn't mean the problem is intractible; it
just means people still don't understand the importance of design.
>Don't expect software development of
>anything new to EVER be predictable.
Now *that* is complete rubbish. I'm sorry, but software development times
*can* be predictable, particularly when you've been developing in a given
genre for a while. The fact that most organizations fail to do it doesn't
mean it isn't possible. There *are* organizations that exist today that have
taken the steps necessary to get this sort of control over the development
process. Game development is a bit of an exception, as it invariably requires
writing to new hardware for which no existing prototyping has been done, but
even there, prototyping, incremental or iterational development, better
modularization, and plenty of just plain old non-technical management tactics
can be employed to make the situation better. Don't tell me it can't be
done - it IS being done today, by organizations that understand what it takes.
Bob Gregg aka Underworld Dragon
The Notable Ultima: www.scott.net/~rgregg/ultima/
Robert S. Gregg
>> Ehh.... I wouldn't go quite that far. I mean, yes, I *would* go that far
>> right now, but it doesn't necessarily have to be that way. Software is
>> becoming less of a black art, and more of a pseudo-engineering discipline.
It
>> will move more and more into the realm of engineering (with mathematics and
>> logic as its base "science") over the next 20 years. And thank goodness,
it's
>> about time.
>
> Except that your statement really only applies to existing, solved
>problems. :) New problems and programs will still be in that unique
>sphere of programming which is half art and half
>engineering/science/routine.
I'm only half convinced this is true. To a certain extent, it's false,
because there is plenty of "slack" in existing development techniques that can
be improved by purely non-technical means which have nothing to do with
engineering. Which is to say that most software project management today...
well, sucks. :-) But yes, if you're in a domain that requires rewriting
low-level libraries continuously, and rewriting everything you do from scratch
every time, then yes, it's hard to be very predictable. Which is to a large
extent where the game industry is right now.
Will it *always* be that way? I'm not convinced. Eventually, the low-level
stuff will be wrapped away in libraries, and *new* "intractable" problems will
arise. Witness the "pathfinding" problem evinced by the U:A staff. But those
are more algorithmic problems, less hardware oriented, and most problems of
that sort are getting to the "reasonably well known" point. (I'm willing to
bet that *somewhere* in the academic world, some Ramen-noodle-eating PhD
student has already written a thesis on the very problem they were trying to
solve. I'd bet half your salary they didn't even look. :-) It seems to me
that at some point, enough such domains will have been explored that 90%+ of
new games can be developed without resorting to "unknown" domains. At that
point, development should be reasonably predictable.
In fact, even if this doesn't happen, I'd step out on a limb and bet that in
the future, the market itself will demand that more "predictable" platforms
for game development are created. As an example, think about writing to an
established console, like the PlayStation. Would you expect that development
of a brand-new PlayStation game would be more, less, or equally as "uncertain"
as the development of a similar game on the PC? What about development cycle
time? Project cost? To me, that's what a console is - a stable, known
platform for game development. There are a *heck* of a lot of good games for
the PlayStation. If PCs continue outpacing consoles the way they are, the
same sort of thing will evolve in the PC world to fill the same niche. Heck,
isn't that what DirectX is supposed to be?
Fortran Dragon
<chuckle> Is that tag a new Netscape 'extension'?
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> because there is plenty of "slack" in existing development techniques that can
> be improved by purely non-technical means which have nothing to do with
> engineering. Which is to say that most software project management today...
> well, sucks. :-) But yes, if you're in a domain that requires rewriting
> low-level libraries continuously, and rewriting everything you do from scratch
> every time, then yes, it's hard to be very predictable. Which is to a large
> extent where the game industry is right now.
Yes, I agree that the level of ability will increase and the building
blocks will improve, but the key is that putting it all together (and I am
and was, though not clearly indicating, thinking of the business area) will
continue to be a non-engineering discipline.
A programmers _problem-solving_ skills are more important than their
facility with code, in my opinion. :)
[Snip]
> In fact, even if this doesn't happen, I'd step out on a limb and bet that in
> the future, the market itself will demand that more "predictable" platforms
> for game development are created. As an example, think about writing to an
> established console, like the PlayStation. Would you expect that development
> of a brand-new PlayStation game would be more, less, or equally as "uncertain"
> as the development of a similar game on the PC? What about development cycle
> time? Project cost? To me, that's what a console is - a stable, known
> platform for game development. There are a *heck* of a lot of good games for
> the PlayStation. If PCs continue outpacing consoles the way they are, the
> same sort of thing will evolve in the PC world to fill the same niche. Heck,
> isn't that what DirectX is supposed to be?
In other words, we should return to the days of the Apple ][ and
Commodore 64 (as far as a stable hardware platform)? If so, I would agree
with you. Having the time to push a hardware platform to its limits mean
that game designers can focus on making a great game over making a so-so
game with eye-candy.
Desslock
>
> On Mon, 27 Jul 1998 09:17:36 -0500, for...@earthlink.net (Fortran
> Dragon) wrote:
>
> > It doesn't surprise me. I'm a programmer you see. ;)
>
> he he he, the question I all ways hate the most when I take on a
> software project is the dreaded, "How many man hours is this going to
> take?" question. It's all ways a shot in the dark. You never quite
> know what complications your going to run into, like my favorite, the
> moving target problem. Every time you think ya got it nailed down,
> some nit wit changes the system specs. *sigh*
>
> not a science.
Hey, only some "suits" need to learn.
Desslock
(offended suit)
--
Desslock's RPG News: http://www.gamepen.com/rpg/
Desslock's Domain at Gamespot:
http://www.gamespot.com/misc/columns/desslock_980417.html
Desslock's Guide to RPGs - http://www.gamepen.com/desslock/ For detailed
interviews/previews relating to Asheron's Call, Baldur's Gate,
EverQuest, Might and Magic VI, Wizardry 8 and more...
Apteryx
>>Dragon) wrote:
>>
>>> Adding features would delay U9 past the XMAS sales season.
>>
>>98.
>
holiday
>release. Do the words "not beta-tested" mean anything to you?
>
>--
A.G.Mutch -=UDIC=- Apteryx Dragon
[extended signature with cute quote under construction. Due for release
late 1998]
Robert S. Gregg
>blocks will improve, but the key is that putting it all together (and I am
>and was, though not clearly indicating, thinking of the business area) will
>continue to be a non-engineering discipline.
> A programmers _problem-solving_ skills are more important than their
>facility with code, in my opinion. :)
Ah, but given a sufficiently advanced set of building blocks, doesn't the
activity *become* engineering? Or does it? <g> I'm kind of playing devil's
advocate here; we had lengthy discussions about the fate of software
development from time to time in our degree program. I mean, pick your
battleground: specification languages, standard architectural studies, design
patterns, mathematical program "proof" techniques - at what point do we say,
yes, now we're acting like engineers and not just hackers with really cool
toys?
> In other words, we should return to the days of the Apple ][ and
>Commodore 64 (as far as a stable hardware platform)?
Of course not. Those systems weren't advanced enough to provide the kinds of
things people are doing now. But eventually, *any* platform is going to
evolve and mature this way. At least, I'd argue that it would.
Besides, who said the Apple II was a stable (or, perhaps more properly,
mature) platform for development? Yes, the hardware didn't change very often,
but I never saw decent development suites, debugging tools, testing tools,
adequate graphics libraries, or practically any other desirable element of a
stable development platform appear for it. But then, maybe I wasn't looking
hard enough.
Robert S. Gregg
>>can be employed to make the situation better. Don't tell me it can't be
>>done - it IS being done today, by organizations that understand what it
>takes.
>>
>but real, new developments.
Sure thing. There are a number of organizations who have become case studies
in how to build software predicatably and reliably. If you're really
interested, go to the search engines and look up things like the Capability
Maturity Model (particularly if you can find articles on organizations which
are level 3 and above), or "Six Sigma", or other subjects within software
project management. But a couple of organizations have sort of become
legendary in this area. One is Motorola India. Certain parts of Motorola's
Indian development organization became so good at managing their products,
that they could *statistically predict* the number of defects which would
appear in their code. I know, it sounds crazy - but they tracked things so
well, that they were actually able to do it. They got their detected defect
rates down to 6 defects per million lines of code. Compare that with a
standard software organization, which has (based on industry estimates, and
the limited historical tracking which has been done) about 20 defects per
*hundred* lines of code. Everything about their development process is
predictable - development time, man-months, lines of code, you name it.
Another example is a certain portion of the Space Shuttle software development
which was headed by IBM. They used similarly well-managed techniques, with
the additional caveat that they required far greater amounts of testing and
*proof*, for safety reasons, that their code worked. Their testing techniques
were a wonder. If you really want more details, I can dig through my research
papers and come up with them; otherwise, you'll probably do better searching
the 'Net. Hopefully I've given you a couple of places to start. Mind you,
I'm not saying this is the typical experience, or even that all domains could
even possibly achieve this kind of accuracy. But compared to what's accepted
as "normal" in software houses today (see below), things can be a *hell* of a
lot better.
>I'm not flaming you, but I am a real, respected engineer at a good,
>respected company (not a software weenie, though, but an analyst) and I've
>never seen a high tech R&D company schedule a brand new developemt well.
I'm not surprised. Few people have. I hadn't until about four years ago.
But that doesn't mean it can't be done.
>Maybe the software industry is different, I truly do not know.
Oh, it's different all right - it's MUCH WORSE! :-) Software is inherently
harder than most "engineering" disciplines - we don't even have a mature
science to fall back on! Imagine trying to do a materials engineering
project, where the tensile strength of 90% of the materials was unknown, and
the other 10% were upgraded every six months! <g>
I'm in
>communications theory, that's all i really understand. I've seen big and
>small projects. Some under schedule, some over, some on. Most way over.
>Even a well managed project can become FOBAR. Even when it come sout on
>schedule, it never comes out with the work break-down or budget right on.
No, of course not right on. Nobody's saying things can be perfect; no
large-scale development ever is. But we're talking about an industry
(software) where not just small overruns, but overruns of 2 or 3 *orders of
magnitude* are accepted as a matter of course. That's just plain nuts.
That's what I mean when I say things can be better... *much* better... than
they are today.
Fortran Dragon
I'm setting the followup to line to the Dragons newsgroup because this
is really only on-topic there.
My glass typewriter shows Robert S. Gregg saying...
[Snip]
> Ah, but given a sufficiently advanced set of building blocks, doesn't the
> activity *become* engineering? Or does it? <g> I'm kind of playing devil's
> advocate here; we had lengthy discussions about the fate of software
> development from time to time in our degree program. I mean, pick your
> battleground: specification languages, standard architectural studies, design
> patterns, mathematical program "proof" techniques - at what point do we say,
> yes, now we're acting like engineers and not just hackers with really cool
> toys?
No. not really. It is the problem solving skills that matter, more
than any specific techniques.
I heard an interesting story on NPR the other day: An engineering
firm was trying to replace its aging engineers (most were close to
retirement). They started hiring the best and brightest grads who had
learned the latest computer-based design techniques at school.
As time went on, the company found out that these new engineers
couldn't solve the complex problems they were being given. After some
research they discovered that of the older engineers, 70% had maintained
their cars since their teenage years, 10% were "eggheads" whose mental
processes no one could figure out, and the remaining 20% had (if I remember
correctly) had be taught on the job how to do things.
From then on the company wouldn't hire an engineer that wasn't his own
mechanic or had been a mechanic. Too much of an engineer's success
depended on having practical experience over theoretical knowledge.
Now, I don't know how much this story applies to programming :), but I
suspect that people with real world experience and lesser techniques are
more important that people will lesser (or no) real world experience and
greater/more advanced techniques.
Another thing is that the programming field suffers from is the Fad-
Of-The-Year disease (CASE, expert systems, data warehouses, etc.). Only
OOP has shown real promise, and then only for large projects.
It would help to have a better flow of ideas, information, and
techniques between the real world and academia. (Academia tends to be a
step ahead, a step behind, and a step in the wrong direction, all at once.)
[Snip]
> Of course not. Those systems weren't advanced enough to provide the kinds of
> things people are doing now. But eventually, *any* platform is going to
> evolve and mature this way. At least, I'd argue that it would.
I should have said "imitate the stability of a console".
> Besides, who said the Apple II was a stable (or, perhaps more properly,
> mature) platform for development? Yes, the hardware didn't change very often,
> but I never saw decent development suites, debugging tools, testing tools,
> adequate graphics libraries, or practically any other desirable element of a
> stable development platform appear for it. But then, maybe I wasn't looking
> hard enough.
I think the Apple ][ was mature for its day. Having a non-changing
hardware platform and OS means that programmer have the time to push the
capabilities to the max. It takes time and several efforts to figure out
how to use a platform to its best advantage.
Mils
>>--
>Yeh, but what holiday? What year?
>
>A.G.Mutch -=UDIC=- Apteryx Dragon
>[extended signature with cute quote under construction. Due for release
>late 1998]
>
>
What Century ?
Moa Dragon
mi...@club-internet.fr
Mils
>Let's hope it's not too late after all..
Didn't you notice ? Since Ed del castillo left,
Origin announced on their FAQ that there is
no release date, there was one before , Origin
announced it to be released fall 98' now, this
date is no more... Does that mean that Garriot
plan to make a massive change to the game ?
Moa Dragon
mi...@club-internet.fr
Robert S. Gregg
>than any specific techniques.
Engineering is, almost by definition, the application of standard techniques.
In fact, that *is* the definition if you want to become an "official"
professional engineer. That's what the EIT exam is. Saying someone can be a
successful engineer without specific techniques is an oxymoron.
You can become a professional engineer by taking a specific test, the EIT,
after achieving appropriate training. But you can become a *software*
engineer by taking a course at a community college. No proof; no
standardization; no prerequisites. That sort of disparity is going to
disappear over time.
> Now, I don't know how much this story applies to programming :), but I
>suspect that people with real world experience and lesser techniques are
>more important that people will lesser (or no) real world experience and
>greater/more advanced techniques.
Today, while "advanced techniques" are rarely used at all, if ever? Of
course. In the future? I hope not. I hope we can achieve something better
for the profession.
> Another thing is that the programming field suffers from is the Fad-
>Of-The-Year disease (CASE, expert systems, data warehouses, etc.). Only
>OOP has shown real promise, and then only for large projects.
These *are* fads - including OOP. But these "techniques" also have something
else in common - they strike at the wrong level. OOP begins to address the
problem, but is still too low level for developing good software engineers.
What we need is a set of standard *architectural* techniques - well-known
paradigms which can then be applied to the *analysis* of a problem, not just
to writing C++ code. It's at the analysis level that software becomes an
engineering discipline. More recent "fads", like the Design Patterns fad, or
the Universal Modeling Language (UML) fad, are hinting that people are
beginning to figure this out.
Better things are coming, but it's taking time for them to percolate out of
the hallowed halls of academe...
> It would help to have a better flow of ideas, information, and
>techniques between the real world and academia. (Academia tends to be a
>step ahead, a step behind, and a step in the wrong direction, all at once.)
Bingo. But computerheads have the most peculiar damned notion that they're
the smartest people in the world. Why use someone else's techniques, when I'm
smarter than them? <g> Every single one (including me) thinks they could do
better than the guy before by rebuilding everything from the bits up. And
they (we!) are almost invariably wrong...
> I think the Apple ][ was mature for its day. Having a non-changing
>hardware platform and OS means that programmer have the time to push the
>capabilities to the max. It takes time and several efforts to figure out
>how to use a platform to its best advantage.
The Fokker Triplane was advanced for its day, but aeronautical engineering did
it little good, because people were still guessing what made the things fly.
It wasn't until after WW2 that some fellow figured out laminar airflow, and
then the profession finally became mature. In other words, just because the
Apple was stable didn't mean it allowed anyone to do anything resembling
proper engineering, no matter how hard they tried. We just weren't that smart
yet.
Richard Cortese
Probably WAY to strong of an opinion on this, but being a great student
does not necessarily mean you will great practicing the subject you
studied. If it was true that knowledge of a topic gave you practical
skills, then people that scored 100% on the written part of their
drivers licence test would be winning the Indianapolis 500 every year.
Of course the converse is not necessarily true either, but I remember an
inview with Jack Nicholas & Tom Watson<?> about a playoff they had at
<maybe> the US Open ~20 years before. Nicholas was asked how he played
the hole & looked out at fairway & said, "I probably hit a 3 wood." Tom
Watson then said, ~"You hit a one iron and left it it 12 feet from the
pin". A case where the non student & studious are two of the greatest
ever in their field.
IMO: In the US we seem to follow the English school system more then the
German or Japanese models. A lot of emphasis is based on the academic
over the technical. It is almost universally assumed that passing
through what for all practical purposes is a liberal arts program is
equivalent to technical proficiency. Chemical Engineers should study at
a refinery, Mechanical Engineers should work on the assembly line of
Ford or GM. Small wonder we build crappy cars.
When I took a programming class <my real profession is chemist> it was
at night school & taught by a person who owned his own software house.
Almost every assignment he gave involved actual programming & students
were dropping like flies. The only people that made it though the class
actually knew how to program.
There does seem to be a new breed of programmer coming out. The PHd that
is both a student & a real programmer in the Tom Watson model. Of course
*EVERY* PHd I have ever met thinks they are God's gift to the human
race, but that is even more off topic.
MdmeDis
>
> The Fokker Triplane was advanced for its day, but aeronautical engineering did
> it little good, because people were still guessing what made the things fly.
Just to pick nits here - it is widely believed that said triplane was a
copy of the Sopwith Triplane, an infinitely more stable animal that did
not have the same problems as its over publicised German counterpart.
> It wasn't until after WW2 that some fellow figured out laminar airflow, and
> then the profession finally became mature.
I may be way off base here, but I thought that resulted from testing
Spitfires to break the sound barrier - the lack of knowledge of laminar
airflow was what was causing the Spits to crash.
> In other words, just because the
> Apple was stable didn't mean it allowed anyone to do anything resembling
> proper engineering, no matter how hard they tried. We just weren't that smart
> yet.
All of which leaves your point perfectly valid, of course.:)
--
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?
joelm...@geocities.com
"Mils" <mi...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> >Let's hope it's not too late after all..
>
> Didn't you notice ? Since Ed del castillo left,
> Origin announced on their FAQ that there is
> no release date, there was one before , Origin
> announced it to be released fall 98' now, this
> date is no more... Does that mean that Garriot
> plan to make a massive change to the game ?
Garriott's no longer the producer. He's been dropped from that and the
job was given to a Jeff Anderson previously of Paramount pictures.
Presumably he's the one who will make the decision.
Joel Mathis
Chris McCubbin
>Garriott's no longer the producer. He's been dropped from that and the
>job was given to a Jeff Anderson previously of Paramount pictures.
>Presumably he's the one who will make the decision.
>
haven't heard about, I think you're wrong.
When Ed D. was at Origin:
Jeff Anderson was Executive Producer of Lord British Productions (big boss
over both U:A and UO)
Ed Del Castillo was Producer of U:A
Rich Vogel was Producer of UO
And Richard was "Creative Director" of LB Productions.
When Ed Left, Jeff and Rich V. stayed where they were, and Richard G. once
again took the Producer's chair on U:A.
It is true that Richard's Executive Producer job was given to Jeff A.
several months ago, but as of right now Richard G. is definitely the
Producer of U:A.
--
____________________________________________
A writer wants to affect his reader. He'd prefer that effect not be
expressed in the form of death threats, but beggars can't be choosers. -
Jose Chung
Chris W. McCubbin, Writer
"A very sick man indeed" - Mondo 2000
MdmeDis
says...
>
> >Let's hope it's not too late after all..
>
> Didn't you notice ? Since Ed del castillo left,
> Origin announced on their FAQ that there is
> no release date, there was one before , Origin
> announced it to be released fall 98' now, this
> date is no more... Does that mean that Garriot
> plan to make a massive change to the game ?
I think "what game" might be the question.....
MdmeDis
says...
> joelm...@geocities.com wrote in message <6pt02s$j5
> >Garriott's no longer the producer. He's been dropped from that and the
> >job was given to a Jeff Anderson previously of Paramount pictures.
> >Presumably he's the one who will make the decision.
> >
> Unless there's been a major redefinition of terms in the last week that I
> haven't heard about, I think you're wrong.
>
> When Ed D. was at Origin:
> Jeff Anderson was Executive Producer of Lord British Productions (big boss
> over both U:A and UO)
> Ed Del Castillo was Producer of U:A
> Rich Vogel was Producer of UO
> And Richard was "Creative Director" of LB Productions.
>
> When Ed Left, Jeff and Rich V. stayed where they were, and Richard G. once
> again took the Producer's chair on U:A.
>
> It is true that Richard's Executive Producer job was given to Jeff A.
> several months ago, but as of right now Richard G. is definitely the
> Producer of U:A.
Welcome back - another weekend with nothing to do but fight Dragons? ;)
Why did Ed "leave"?
MdmeDis
says...
Of course
> *EVERY* PHd I have ever met thinks they are God's gift to the human
> race, but that is even more off topic.
But true! And it doesn't seem to matter on what subject.....
Chris McCubbin
MdmeDis wrote in message ...
>
>Welcome back - another weekend with nothing to do but fight Dragons? ;)
>Why did Ed "leave"?
>
What's to fight about? I was over on the U:A Horizons board today, and since
Richard's manifesto from yesterday, suddenly everybody who flamed me up and
down the stairs for counciling a modicum of patience and cautious optimism
is just bursting with joy and happiness at their renewed faith in the
potential non-suckiness of U9. I keep waiting for my mailbox to flood with
heartfelt notes of abject apology, but it remains curiously empty (I blame
my ISP).
Then again, maybe this is just a tougher "room" than the Horizons crowd. Not
that you would have known it 48 hours ago.
As to Ed's departure, I don't know, I don't want to know, I'm not going to
ask. I have my theories, of course, but in the end they're worth no more
than anybody else's and it would be unprofessional to speculate publically.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> What's to fight about? I was over on the U:A Horizons board today, and since
> Richard's manifesto from yesterday, suddenly everybody who flamed me up and
> down the stairs for counciling a modicum of patience and cautious optimism
> is just bursting with joy and happiness at their renewed faith in the
> potential non-suckiness of U9.
I guess they and you have been in marketing land far too long. Of
course Richard Garriott is going to make a pretty, upbeat speech. He
isn't going to be honest about what is happening with U:A. That would
take more integrity than he apparently has.
Now, if he had the guts to come in here and be honest with us,
well, that might earn him some real respect.
> I keep waiting for my mailbox to flood with
> heartfelt notes of abject apology, but it remains curiously empty (I blame
> my ISP).
<chuckle>
> Then again, maybe this is just a tougher "room" than the Horizons crowd. Not
> that you would have known it 48 hours ago.
Maybe the participants here have IQs two to three times higher than
room temperature. Unlike the Horizon board which seems to fall to its
knees over a predictable Richard Garriott statement. :)
Heehee. Maybe he should sell them a bridge....
> As to Ed's departure, I don't know, I don't want to know, I'm not going to
> ask. I have my theories, of course, but in the end they're worth no more
> than anybody else's and it would be unprofessional to speculate publically.
True, that would be Origin's place to clean up the mess they've
made. I guess you've learned since the last time it isn't good to
interpret, that is, spindoctor what other people say.
Mils
Destrius a écrit dans le message <35B1A413...@the.sig.addy>...
>Christoph Nahr wrote:
>-clip-
>> Who would have thought it? I wonder who was behind this?
>-clip-
>
> Perhaps Moa's inbox floods worked after all.
> I mean, nobody can take so much lousy spelling... :)
Okay... now ... "Moa deletes the Del Castillo Entry
of his Adress Book in Outlook"... Let's proceed to
Richard Garriot... lordb...@origin.ea.com .
I swear to you that i"m e-mailing him... let's hope he don't
killfile me too fast otherwise it won't get funny.
Moa Dragon
mi...@club-internet.fr
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Probably WAY to strong of an opinion on this, but being a great student
> does not necessarily mean you will great practicing the subject you
> studied.
<chuckle> I think I said that in so many words.
> Of course
> *EVERY* PHd I have ever met thinks they are God's gift to the human
> race, but that is even more off topic.
Well, I'm biased. My brother is a Ph.D. and egomania isn't part of
his personality. More like he has Humility down stone cold.
Oh, by the way, very, very few things are off topic here.
Mils
>When Ed Left, Jeff and Rich V. stayed where they were, and Richard G. once
>again took the Producer's chair on U:A.
Ah ? So it was that Jeff some of my mails to Origin were forwarded
to ?
Moa, the talentful Dragon
mi...@club-internet.fr
Alex Beckers
: Now, if he had the guts to come in here and be honest with us,
Yeah, I know. If only Garriot would spend some time getting into
a flame war with rabid fans, then he'd get some respect. I mean, it's not
like he has a job, or anythign better to do with his time.
Pariah Dragon
Official r.g.u.d. Wanker
UDIC d- e+ N+ T-- Om++ U1!2!3!4!5!6!A!W!M!7'!L!S'!8! u+ uC uF uG
uLB+ uA+ nC nR+ nH nP+ nI nPT nS nT-- wM wC+ wS- wI-- wN-
o- oA+ oE++++(----) yS a21
Chris McCubbin
>[Snip]
> I guess they and you have been in marketing land far too long. Of
>course Richard Garriott is going to make a pretty, upbeat speech. He
>isn't going to be honest about what is happening with U:A. That would
>take more integrity than he apparently has.
>
Let's see if I've got this straight.
Before, your beef with Richard was that he was taking the game in directions
you don't like and not listening to the fans (i.e., you) when you
complained, and basically ignoring everybody.
Now that Richard has responded directly to fan concerns and addressed
several (not all, of course) of those concerns, and promised a game that
was, at least in some respects, closer to what fans have been asking for all
along, you're beef is that ... well, he's just lying. Must be. Sure of it.
Paranoid much?
> Now, if he had the guts to come in here and be honest with us,
>well, that might earn him some real respect.
"Honest" here meaning "admitting I was right all along."
>
>> Then again, maybe this is just a tougher "room" than the Horizons crowd.
Not
>> that you would have known it 48 hours ago.
>
> Maybe the participants here have IQs two to three times higher than
>room temperature. Unlike the Horizon board which seems to fall to its
>knees over a predictable Richard Garriott statement. :)
> Heehee. Maybe he should sell them a bridge....
For those of you who may be keeping score, this is the same guy who flamed
me for statements he (mis)interpreted as being derogatory towards the
Dragons in a patronizing and generalizing way.
>> As to Ed's departure, I don't know, I don't want to know, I'm not going
to
>> ask. I have my theories, of course, but in the end they're worth no more
>> than anybody else's and it would be unprofessional to speculate
publically.
>
> True, that would be Origin's place to clean up the mess they've
>made. I guess you've learned since the last time it isn't good to
>interpret, that is, spindoctor what other people say.
No. But there's a difference between speculating on the abstract design
concept behind a game in progress, and speculating about the circumstances
of a professional's seperation from his employment. One's a critical
exercise, the other is destructive gossip.
Then again, you've always had this problem seeing game design as anything
but an attack on you, personally, so I can see how you'd miss the
difference.
I'm ignoring your "spindoctor" remark as the obvious troll that it is.
--
____________________________________________
A writer wants to affect his reader. He'd prefer that effect not be
expressed in the form of death threats, but beggars can't be choosers.
- Jose Chung
Chris W. McCubbin, Writer
"A very sick man indeed" - Mondo 2000
Incan Monkey God Studios / www.incanmonkey.com
Sven
Alex Beckers heeft geschreven in bericht <6q4k64$o7s$2...@paperboy.ids.net>...
>Fortran Dragon (for...@earthlink.net) wrote:
>: Now, if he had the guts to come in here and be honest with us,
>: well, that might earn him some real respect.
>
>a flame war with rabid fans, then he'd get some respect. I mean, it's not
>like he has a job, or anythign better to do with his time.
It depends on Garriot's view whether he has something better to do with his
time; whether he thinks paying attention to a fan club with 10,000+ members,
who are incidentally the strongest word-of-mouth advertisement for Ultima on
the internet (if not the only one) is a good idea or not. I would think he
sees it as a good idea. Believe it or not, there seems to be _some_ concern
for us over at LB's; we've had the pleasant Del Castillo monologue, the
'Words from Lord British', or even fans.txt. What bothers me is that Garriot
goes through the trouble of doing his pooha, but doesn't have the guts to
come on over and 'lay the smack down'.
As for our alleged rabies... <sarcasm> I can well imagine Garriot fears the
hurting, maiming and killing wave of terror known as the UDIC </sarcasm>.
What would he have to fear? Some would bluntly express their concerns; those
concerns would be there if he had popped up or not. But if he does, he gets
a chance to do something about them, or at the very least earn some respect.
Well-Dressed
joelm...@geocities.com
ori...@conan.ids.net (Alex Beckers) wrote:
> Fortran Dragon (for...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> : Now, if he had the guts to come in here and be honest with us,
> : well, that might earn him some real respect.
>
> Yeah, I know. If only Garriot would spend some time getting into
> a flame war with rabid fans, then he'd get some respect. I mean, it's not
> like he has a job, or anythign better to do with his time.
I wouldn't be so nasty, but I have to agree. The only thing that Garriott
starting direct communication now with Ultima fans would do is create a
bigger flame war than BC3K. Better that he writes and lets us argue among
ourselves than make a bigger mess out of it.