[Feedback] This is wrong...

[In Flames]

I'm not really sure how to convey this to the UO staff but SA doesn't capture UO any better then it did as KR. Sorry but it's true. The user interface feels like another cheap factory cut and pasted MMO mold. The character/creature art isn't really updated, it's oddly reminiscient of Diablo II and Dungeon Keeper, minus any sort of style or soul. Its like one of those kirf iphones (kirf = keeping it real fake) from china that kinda resemble one, but are anything but.

These words may seem harsh but it's really how I see it. Not just some cheap stab at it for not being exactly the same. It's like the difference between Watchmen the movie and Watchmen the comic. While some people may say the movie was great, all I saw was a sad knock off with everything truely compelling removed in order to kinda tell a somewhat similar story, and embarassing hip movements from some of the most psychologically well developed characters of all time. Yea... it feels like that to me.

UO isn't pretty, but still it retains even today an acceptable level of style for what it is. If you really want to improve it then do so, but you aren't going to be able to recreate it no matter how hard you try. You don't have the love and excitement for it that the original team did, and that's not a knock at you guys as a team at all, it's just that it isn't possible. When this client was created it was one of the first of it's kind and it was ALL new and original to everyone. It was a social experiment and everyone put 200% into it because they were all truely excited for the possibilities.

Now, I fully realize that UO may be shut down as a money draining failure if SA isn't accepted, and it would be a shame if that were to happen, but if there were ever a game that deserved to be brought back from the brink it would be UO.

Give us a classic shard.

;D

 

[Wolfways]

You can play in the "classic" 2D, why would you need a classic shard?

IMO no matter how many little improvements UO gets it will never compete with modern mmo's until it gets a full (3D) rework.
I think it's the 2D crowd that won't let UO improve and ultimately will be the cause of the death of the game.

 

[Sapphirediablo]

@Wolfways - It is also the people who have computers that are from 1991 1992, and think they will work for everything in the 2000's, and they refuse to get a better "insert anything" and would not just be for the game but for their computers also, since it is too much effort, or too "expensive"

 

[Old Man of UO]

@Wolfways - It is also the people who have computers that are from 1991 1992, and think they will work for everything in the 2000's, and they refuse to get a better "insert anything" and would not just be for the game but for their computers also, since it is too much effort, or too "expensive"

Soo... are you saying SA won't be available for my Commodore 64?

 

[Wolfways]

Soo... are you saying SA won't be available for my Commodore 64?

Only if you replace some parts...like all of them

 

[Nestorius]

a coherent artistic vision (in the visual sense)

 

[guum]

I can kind of sympathize with what the OP is saying here...I think the best way to put it is that SA (like KR) lacks a certain measure of "soul". Some of that perception, I'm sure, is just nostalgia, but there are certain aspects of both KR and SA (particularly in the art direction) that come across as a bit bland and generic, areas where there needs to be a more detail-oriented approach...two really obvious examples (which have been mentioned elsewhere) are the gump designs (notably the paperdoll that says "PAPERDOLL" as generically as it is possible to be) and the "gliding" movement of characters along the ground. These sorts of things feel, in comparison to the admittedly dated 2D client, like lazy approximations -- they have that sort of direct-to-video fourth sequel of an originally great film aura of glossiness. I don't know how easy it is to fix all these sorts of things, and they may actually be very difficult for the dev team to identify -- I'd guess that if I were in the dev team, they'd probably be mostly invisible to me, since they're not of the substantive sorts of problems that are easy to pin down as problems. Perhaps a separate list of these sorts of "feel" problems should be maintained somewhere?

 

[Bullet]

guum! The words, "lacking SOUL" sums it up so perfectly. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[Lady Michelle]

they didn't have to change the look of most of the graphics all they had to do is make them a better quality look. but I do like the changes of alot of the creatures in the game.

 

[Storm]

Soo... are you saying SA won't be available for my Commodore 64?

And my vic 20 ?

 

[Sapphirediablo]

Storm... Old man... TRS-80 computers and better i'm afraid... (although i actually can't remember if yours are older... than my precious TRS.. :|)

 

[Beer_Cayse]

Trash 80 was first by a bit, but seems to me the 6802 chip family (Apple II, Como 64 and Atari 800) were a bit before Vic-20. Timex-Sinclair ennyone?

 

[Beer_Cayse]

Let me ask those who seem to think this "lacks soul". What if this was the very first offering of a new game by a new company? Given the background UO has and disregard prior clients.

Does it have merit? Given the admitted state of the client, is this something you would play as a game?

 

[Old Man of UO]

Storm... Old man... TRS-80 computers and better i'm afraid... (although i actually can't remember if yours are older... than my precious TRS.. :|)

I had a Radio Shack Color Computer (6800 family) that I kludge together a new keyboard, added 32 K RAM (from the original 4K), tape drive and eventually a hard drive.

Before that, I was making demos with self made LED displays and a 4 bit CPU, making moving sign displays for my digital lab in 1979.

 

[guum]

Let me ask those who seem to think this "lacks soul". What if this was the very first offering of a new game by a new company? Given the background UO has and disregard prior clients.

Does it have merit? Given the admitted state of the client, is this something you would play as a game?

Yes. I don't think it's "bad". I'm not just mindlessly flaming the client; I think it has its merits. And if they get stuff cleaned up, there's a better than average chance that I'll play the SA client at least 50% of the time. But look at that paperdoll gump and tell me it has any character whatsoever -- I dare you. If you want, pull up the virtue gump (ripped straight from 2D) side by side and consider them. One looks like it's got a story, like it's part of some tradition and world other than our own. The other looks like it was put together in Powerpoint.

 

[Wolfways]

Let me ask those who seem to think this "lacks soul". What if this was the very first offering of a new game by a new company? Given the background UO has and disregard prior clients.

Does it have merit? Given the admitted state of the client, is this something you would play as a game?

I'd look at the artwork (2D or SA) and put it right back on the shelf and move on.
Luckily i've been playing since 2000 so i know UO has much more to offer than other mmo's.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

Soo... are you saying SA won't be available for my Commodore 64?

And my vic 20 ?

Noobs, I can pull out my Altair and IMSAI and see if it will work on those. Ah well patching via paper tape could take .... a while.