Kickstarter campaign launches on 4th Feb

[Tomi]

Yeah, the editor would be really nice! Definitely more exciting than the co-op mode. If done right, it could really breathe some new life in here too and keep the game alive for a long time.

Here we are on TTLG, discussing whether coop belongs in the game. Who cares?

Huh? Are you saying that all of us TTLGers are some anti-social people who only want to play on their own, or what do you mean by that? I've played some co-op games with other TTLG folks before, so we're not all lonely hermits or something.

[Renzatic]

That's the way I've become with my game playing time. I don't have as much time to play them anymore, so when the chance arises, I want to lay back, relax, and spend a couple three hours setting my own pace. I've become cantankerous.

As for hitting a cool million, if it keeps at the pace it's been going, which is about $50,000 a day, it'll make it and then some. Thing is, most kickstarters tend to slow down during the middle, then see a flurry of activity at the end, when random people with a lot of money to spare start dumping $100,000 on it to push it past some point.

I'll say it still has a good chance of getting high enough to get the editor even with that in mind, but it'll probably just squeeze past.

[ZylonBane]

Good thing they never added co-op to System Shock 2. Who knows how badly the single player would've suffered if they had. It probably would've been the worst game ever made.

Irrational did not want to introduce multiplayer support into System Shock 2 because we considered it a tangential feature that did not contribute to our core strengths. However, marketing concerns dictated it, so ultimately we acquiesced.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...es_.php?page=3

It was a real distraction. There are a number of people who really enjoyed it, but the amount of time versus the amount of reward for that versus what we could have done with the rest of the game... I don't think it was a win. The single player game would have been much, much, much stronger if we had that time back.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...System-Shock-2

Any more feet you'd like to stuff in your mouth?

[driver]

Here we are on TTLG, discussing whether coop belongs in the game. Who cares?

What we should care about is the Underworld Builder Toolkit at 1.05 million. That's the stretch goal we ought to be rooting for.

This.

This right here.

[Renzatic]

Any more feet you'd like to stuff in your mouth?

Given the way it's set up on the reward tiers, and what they already know about development, I doubt it'll do much to distract them from all the single player experience. They're making it sound like it's nothing more than a throwaway bonus, not something they'll be balancing the entire game around.

Plus, with all the middleware we've all got these days, doing an MP patch would be considerably easier than it was back in the late 90's.

[ZylonBane]

I'm sure. Not really relevant to the quoted post though.

Still, no matter how easy it is, it would take effort that would be better spent elsewhere. People who want to dick around in a multiplayer RPG, that's what MMOs are for.

[Tomi]

People who want to dick around in a multiplayer RPG, that's what MMOs are for.

Eh, it's not really the same though. Playing a game together from start to finish with a good friend is a bit different than playing a bunch of quests with some random strangers.

That's the way I've become with my game playing time. I don't have as much time to play them anymore, so when the chance arises, I want to lay back, relax, and spend a couple three hours setting my own pace.

That's very much like me then. I may have come across as some hardcore multiplayer gamer in my earlier posts, but the truth is that I don't even play much nowadays (and I certainly can't stand the idea of MMOs these days) and all multiplayer gaming for me happens over LAN a couple of times a year. But those rare events are pretty damn fun.

Given the way it's set up on the reward tiers, and what they already know about development, I doubt it'll do much to distract them from all the single player experience. They're making it sound like it's nothing more than a throwaway bonus, not something they'll be balancing the entire game around.

Plus, with all the middleware we've all got these days, doing an MP patch would be considerably easier than it was back in the late 90's.

I think that Renz pretty much nailed it here.

[Brethren]

Not to pile on, but...

Huh? Are you saying that all of us TTLGers are some anti-social people who only want to play on their own, or what do you mean by that? I've played some co-op games with other TTLG folks before, so we're not all lonely hermits or something.

I think it has more to do with the fact that no LGS game has ever had multiplayer (unless you count the aforementioned SS2 patched coop). In other words, his comment had more to do with the LGS style of game design than with the gaming habits of TTLGers.

[Tomi]

Oh right, that makes more sense then. I was genuinely wondering what he meant by that.

I still think that the "who cares?" is a bit harsh though. I'm sure that plenty of people care. It's true that the LGS games had no multiplayer, but these games were released at a time when multiplayer gaming wasn't such a big thing. LGS were all about innovating and coming up with new ideas and designs, so if even the founder of LGS talks about "redefining the fantasy RPG for this generation of gamers" and mentions the co-op play in the same breath as one of those innovative features, I have faith that they can pull it off adequately without messing up everything else in the game.

[GodzillaX8]

Any more feet you'd like to stuff in your mouth?

So what exactly is wrong with SS2? Because Ken Levine mentioned once that he thought it took away from single player, somehow that means the game was horrific and wrecked by adding it, and every game that ever implements co-op (after achieving twice their initial budget) will be a miserable, hideous, unplayable failure?

As it stands, I still think SS2 is the single greatest game ever made, what could they really have done with the extra budget gained from scrapping co-op? A handful of bug fixes? Time has rendered that obsolete thanks to fan patches. A new deck/new missions? I think if the game were much longer it'd feel pretty bloated and would completely kill the pacing.

I think Ken's speaking from the perspective of an artist that is never happy with their own work, or possibly some bitterness towards the publisher, and you're taking it as though it's some quantifiable fact that the game was objectively worse than it could have been otherwise.

[twisty]

Dark Souls changed my perspective on how co-op can work in a single player game without detracting from the overall experience. The key to its success in my opinion is that co-op is restricted to certain areas and the actions available to the other players are limited to behaviours that are generally consistent with the game world (as opposed to many fps games). Personally speaking, I'm into the Underworld games for the single-player experience. So if co-op can be done tastefully then I'm keeping an open mind about it.

[ZylonBane]

So what exactly is wrong with SS2? Because Ken Levine mentioned once that he thought it took away from single player, somehow that means the game was horrific and wrecked by adding it, and every game that ever implements co-op (after achieving twice their initial budget) will be a miserable, hideous, unplayable failure?

[Starker]

I don't care much for co-op in games and I played Dark Souls offline to avoid people ruining my experience with spoilers or interrupting my exploration, but if the devs want to make co-op work and are confident that they can make it happen without compromising the single player portion of the game, I don't really see a problem with that. A game does not have to cater to me exclusively.

I got to say that the pledge "rewards" are pretty badly thought of and described though. I went for the $20 "early bird" option and I would have been glad to pledge some more, but there's absolutely nothing interesting for me between the $20 tier and $100 tier. Powerful (?) in-game items, forum badges, access to some exclusive blog, alpha/beta access, digital strategy guide... None of these sound particularly fascinating to me. $100 for a boxed copy is a bit too much in my opinion, and the only truly cool rewards start at the $150 tier, and as excited as I am, I just don't think that it's worth it. And that's a damn shame, because this is kind of a bad deal for both sides.

They have said that they will do their best to make the KS exclusive items not affect gameplay -- which either means that the effect is very small or that their functionality can be easily duplicated.

Regardless, KS exclusive rewards rub me the wrong way in principle, but I am interested in the design notes and making of video. That's worth enough for me to bump it up to 75$.

[Goldmoon Dawn]

......

Rather than just say oh, I didn't know System Shock 2 had multiplayer. I guess I should have at least done cursory research. Buncha clowns sometimes. And you got ZylonBane circling this thread like a shark in a fishbowl. Good times.

[twisty]

Guys, keep any personal bickering out of this forum please. We are here to discuss the Underworld games. In particular, I know that most of us here are incredibly excited at the fact that an UW3 is finally going to be a reality, so we have more than enough interesting things to discuss as it is.

[froghawk]

The third stretch goal seems ideal to me. I really want the Mac version, multiple extra areas will be nice, enhanced sound should be great, and the toolkit is essential.

[EvilSpirit]

SingStar Underworld? Now that would require some drastic changes.

Well, my last project was a music game.

Oh, hi everyone.

[Goldmoon Dawn]

Hey Tim.

[EvilSpirit]

Hey Tim.

Yo. Been a little busy keeping up with the threads on Kickstarter and our official forums, but I'll try to not be such a stranger.

[ShardofTruth]

I'm a bit hesitant to pledge, the sole reason being that the game is sold as a sequel (minus all licensed stuff they can't get their hands on).
My problem is here that I never really got into Ultima, it just didn't click, maybe it's a bit too cheesy for me (please don't kill me, I played Might & Magic I-X if that helps) maybe it's something different, I don't know, but I could never finish a single entry in the series.
But I love the underground setting and I love Arx Fatalis, so I'm really interested.

So what should I expect from this game? A continuation of a two decade old story, the same setting with a different story or just winks and nods? I couldn't find an answer to this question on the Kickstarter page or the reddit AMA, so maybe you know more about this.

[Renzatic]

So what should I expect from this game? A continuation of a two decade old story, the same setting with a different story or just winks and nods? I couldn't find an answer to this question on the Kickstarter page or the reddit AMA, so maybe you know more about this.

Different setting, different story, same sorta mood and vibe. I vaguely recall reading somewhere that this game takes place in Richard Garriot's Shroud of the Avatar world, so while it's gonna be a lot like Ultima in spirit, it's not gonna be Ultima in name.

[Goldmoon Dawn]

So what should I expect from this game? A continuation of a two decade old story, the same setting with a different story or just winks and nods? I couldn't find an answer to this question on the Kickstarter page or the reddit AMA, so maybe you know more about this.

So, TTLG is *not* the place to ask questions about this game. Come to the official Forum, where the answers to your questions are there in detail.

Otherside Forums

[Tomi]

Yeah, it's not like there's a dedicated Underworld sub-forum or anything on TTLG.

[Goldmoon Dawn]

Listen crabby pants, did you see Renz answer to his question?! And he is a mod! So, yeah... if he is serious about backing this game, lets get him to the right place. This aint it, no biggy...

[EvilSpirit]

Yes, the OtherSide forums are the best place to get visibility for this kind of question (of course we also closely monitor the discussion on Kickstarter, but it's not really set up for threaded discussion). Sorry we missed it in the AMA.

We have the rights to all of the lore from the original Underworld games, just not the Ultima brand itself. We can use characters, backstory, creatures, the whole thing. That said, nobody's expecting new players to be up to speed on 20-year-old fiction in order to understand what's going on. It will stand on its own.

We haven't been terribly specific about the connection with Shroud of the Avatar, except to say that they will share some elements of lore, and interdimensional travel is involved (no surprise to anyone familiar with the original games). There's still story development going on, so anything we did say wouldn't be terribly useful at this point.