KickStarter Underworld Ascendant Pre-Prototype Thread

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Don't beg for them to reproduce UU. The fresher the better I say. All new races and factions, all new level design ideas, New mechanics. Make it awesome and make it something that is not directly comparable to the classic. Just because we look back with such fondness, it was frontiering that gave us UU. I want them to Pioneer the next level because nobody else has been able to in 22 years.

 

[Zombra]

If you're on their forums, please vote for Mushroom Man. Fungi Guy sucks, just a human with a goofy haircut.

 

[Shaewaroz]

How many ex Looking Glass guys does Otherside have at the moment? Just Paul and Tim? The other guys like Austin Grossman and Warren Spector are just consultants. Key members like Doug Church, Eric Brosius, Dan Schmidt, Marc LeBlanc, Randy Smith and others are nowhere to be seen.

Yey, Looking Glass has truly been reborn!

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

How many ex Looking Glass guys does Otherside have at the moment? Just Paul and Tim? The other guys like Austin Grossman and Warren Spector are just consultants. Key members like Doug Church, Eric Brosius, Dan Schmidt, Marc LeBlanc, Randy Smith and others are nowhere to be seen.

Yey, Looking Glass has truly been reborn!

I count seven, not two. In responses to questions, Warren is more that just a consultant, he is described and fairly integral in design decisions. Be a pessimist if you want but be right first.

 

[Shaewaroz]

How many ex Looking Glass guys does Otherside have at the moment? Just Paul and Tim? The other guys like Austin Grossman and Warren Spector are just consultants. Key members like Doug Church, Eric Brosius, Dan Schmidt, Marc LeBlanc, Randy Smith and others are nowhere to be seen.

Yey, Looking Glass has truly been reborn!

I count seven, not two. In responses to questions, Warren is more that just a consultant, he is described and fairly integral in design decisions. Be a pessimist if you want but be right first.

Well there's Chris Siegel (Producer), Robb Waters (Concept Artist) and Stephen Pearsall (another Producer). At least they're not going to run out of producers since Warren is also one. Truly a technological marvel this team of producers.

Austin and Warren are listed as advisors, which probably means they're not paid and therefore will not contribute in any significant way. Deal with it.

 

[Zetor]

Backed for $20 because why not. UW1-2 (especially 2) were my favorite Ultima games by far.

Obligatory mention of System Shock 2 co-op.

I... I actually finished SS2 in co-op mode first. I seem to remember some kind of webapp linked from TTLG where you could leave your ICQ# and playtime availability to organize co-op sessions. I ended up playing through the entire game in about 6 sessions with some random dude from Brazil. He also kept stealing my assault rifle ammo. :hue:

 

[mindx2]

Great talk guys and I'm seeing some good questions and concerns to ask Otherside but could you also post them here: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/codex-questions-for-othersides-underworld-ascendant.96935/ It will help me gather and sort through them if they're all in the same spot, thanks.

 

[J_C]

No idea why you people always go for these kickstarter scams. Just contributes to more devs spreading the early access cancer and never releasing finished games.

As far as I see, the kickstarter games which we were hyped for were delivered, or will be soon released. Kickstarter and early access are 2 different beasts.

 

[imweasel]

Oh I don't blame them, but is their passion to make an exceptional game or money?

If all they want is money, well then then just go to some damn Publisher then. Not Kickstarter.

Both actually. Making money to support the studio and the employees is what game developers do. Even passionate ones.

I'm sure they would rather go to a publisher for funding, but publishers aren't interested in producing old school (indie) RPGs.

Of note, HBS STILL won't add co-op to Shadowrun: Hong Kong. Because THEY are passionate about making a great core game. Same with Obsidian and inXile and......

Might have to lower my pledge now...

I don't see any reason why an optional co-op mode would definitely the "spoil" the single player experience.

But feel free to lower you pledge. I do the same when I am butthurt too.

Still, the fact that they even want it feels questionable. I dunno about you bros but part of the appeal to me in UU was how lonely you felt. Finding the occasional person willing to talk to you (And then, shock, some small settlements) felt rare and surprising since most of the time you're crawling around in a maze like dungeon with all manner of nasty critters.

I'm pretty sure you will be completely alone in a single player game.

 

[Durante]

Oh I don't blame them, but is their passion to make an exceptional game or money?

It's really fucking stupid to act like making an exceptional game is somehow opposed to making a co-op game.

Divinity: Original Sin, Baldur's Gate 2 and Dark Souls all support co-op play, and are all exceptional games made even better by it.

And if you read or watch interviews with HBS, they really want to do co-op, but their current engine simply won't handle it. They certainly don't seem worried about destroying the sanctity of their single-player experience.

 

[General Maxson]

Baldur's Gate 2 is improved by having co-op? I don't think so.

 

[Darkzone]

It's really fucking stupid to act like making an exceptional game is somehow opposed to making a co-op game.

Divinity: Original Sin, Baldur's Gate 2 and Dark Souls all support co-op play, and are all exceptional games made even better by it.

And if you read or watch interviews with HBS, they really want to do co-op, but their current engine simply won't handle it. They certainly don't seem worried about destroying the sanctity of their single-player experience.

It is not that a co-op game makes automatically the single-player game bad, but it is about allocating resources. Resources like Workhours in Time and Money, that can be better spend on a single player campagne. Nobody would blame them, if they would after the release of UA, where they have the money, add a co-op add-on, but currently this is a far fetched goal, that would influence the production of a single player game. HBS is using Unity like Otherside so they have the same pull on their resources for implementing a co-op modus, and HBS had much more money for the development. If you look at D:OS then you will see that this took them very long to make it finally ok, this means that they needed also many hours to make it.

 

[Infinitron]

 

[Perkel]

Oh I don't blame them, but is their passion to make an exceptional game or money?

It's really fucking stupid to act like making an exceptional game is somehow opposed to making a co-op game.

Divinity: Original Sin, Baldur's Gate 2 and Dark Souls all support co-op play, and are all exceptional games made even better by it.

And if you read or watch interviews with HBS, they really want to do co-op, but their current engine simply won't handle it. They certainly don't seem worried about destroying the sanctity of their single-player experience.

That really depends only on game design.

BG2 supported coop but wasn't designed as coop thus it was annoying to play in coop especially since it was RTwP game AND 2D&D which by definition made things worse especially at lower level where one magic missle could obliterate your mage

So yeah DOS and DS yes but BG2 definitely no.

 

[Infinitron]

Shakespeare English confirmed? http://www.othersideentertainment.com/forum/index.php?topic=122.0

As far as the form of English used in the game, rest assured we will be as flavorful as we can while remaining faithful to the originals. Would'st thou have it another way?

I hope so!

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

Shakespeare English confirmed?

flavorful

The ever-reliable combo of "Shakespeare" English and Kwan spelling incoming

 

[Durante]

It is not that a co-op game makes automatically the single-player game bad, but it is about allocating resources. Resources like Workhours in Time and Money, that can be better spend on a single player campagne. Nobody would blame them, if they would after the release of UA, where they have the money, add a co-op add-on, but currently this is a far fetched goal, that would influence the production of a single player game. HBS is using Unity like Otherside so they have the same pull on their resources for implementing a co-op modus, and HBS had much more money for the development. If you look at D:OS then you will see that this took them very long to make it finally ok, this means that they needed also many hours to make it.

This is all more or less true, but "adding" co-op later in the development (which is also what HBS would have to do with their current engine) is much harder than planning on integrating it from the start. Like most things in software engineering really.

Still, my point was not that co-op doesn't require resources - obviously it does, that's why it's a stretch goal. My point was that it's completely wrong to accuse a developer of not having "passion to make an exceptional game" because they want to support co-op play.

 

[Renegen]

These guys have exclusive kickstarter only items? wow. I think I'll just go finish Arx Fatalis, I don't feel too comfortable with this one.

 

[Darkzone]

This is all more or less true, but "adding" co-op later in the development (which is also what HBS would have to do with their current engine) is much harder than planning on integrating it from the start. Like most things in software engineering really. Still, my point was not that co-op doesn't require resources - obviously it does, that's why it's a stretch goal. My point was that it's completely wrong to accuse a developer of not having "passion to make an exceptional game" because they want to support co-op play.

On the both points i agree with you. If they plan ahead with the co-op, they can make it more easy to integrate it in a later time point, but this is also consuming precious resources. The accusation that due to support of co-op they lack the passion to make an exceptional game, is not a valid one. But on the priority scale i would classify the Co-Op with an C priority, because it does not make a game better or more desired (at least not nowadays due to all the mmorpg). It is a nice add-on for people who like to play with their friends from times to times, but the gross of the people will play it alone, and the focus and allocation of all the resources should lay on / towards this group.

 

[Zombra]

One of their 15 producers addressed co-op mode and how it won't suck up all their resources or ruin single-player:

The single player aspect is the most important part for us, but to think that doing co-op is going to be this huge distraction is a myth. In this day and age with the current technology, all the design that has gone on in the co-op space over the past 15 years, there is a myriad of ways to tackle the feature. We are not a team prone to over scoping. If we do multiplayer there are pretty much 3 different tiers we could do, depending on funding, team size exc. It could be simple, it could be full blown. It depends on a number of things, mostly to do with design. Our programmers know this stuff, with years of backend programming on TEN and MMO's. They were pioneers.

Let me be clear though, we do not just want to go timidly into the space we already did 20 years ago. I have zero interest in doing a modern 1:1 reboot of the original. That means attempting things that may make us feel slightly uncomfortable, looking at the more risky ideas we have, and rediscovering some old ideas that were abandoned, but actually make sense in the modern era. LGS was going to go multiplayer. Did we decide what that meant then? Not really, but there were some interesting ideas, some ideas that I still haven't seen done.
I will say for me, playing around with the Improv Engine with multiple people, makes me giddy. If one person can manipulate the enviroment and the NPC's and creatures...what do you get when 2 people start doing it? I'm giggling like a mad hatter just thinking about the possibilities.

So at very least, it appears that they're not just throwing it in to throw it in. They have some idea what they're doing.

 

[Infinitron]

Arvan Eleron interview! http://www.othersideentertainment.com/forum/index.php?topic=131.0

(dude who did the recent Shadowrun interview)

...will be happening on my Twitch channel in two weeks, Thursday the 19th at 8 p.m. EST. That'll put us about halfway through the Kickstarter, and hopefully will give it another boost at that time. When I did a similar interview two weeks ago with the fine folks at Harebrained Schemes about Shadowrun Returns: Hong Kong and their Kickstarter, both they and the community promoted it heavily before and afterwards, and we had a great turnout on the channel and solid buzz for the interview and game several days after--so I'm hopeful that the UA community will come together in a similar fashion. Ultima Underworld was one of the most important and influential games for me when I played it as a sophomore in college in the early nineties (loved Thief too), and I'm really excited to chat with Paul about that game and his vision for the new one. I'll try to post a reminder a couple of days before the interview as well.

--Arvan Eleron
http://www.twitch.tv/arvaneleron

 

[Melan]

That's the correct mindset. Using readymade technology is what makes a low- to mid-budget FPS title possible today. If they use it smartly, they can cut a lot of corners and focus on the core experience. It would be grand if they could develop their own tech like the Dark engine, but that's no longer an option. There are two additional advantages to sticking with an affordable, tried engine:

• it is much cheaper in time and budget to create assets if they avoid the AAA path, allowing the team to focus on building larger levels and more complex environmental interaction;
  
• also, if they hit the 1.1 mil target and release the modding tools, it will be easier to create fan missions.

Modern games have major roadblocks in these areas, which is why they usually come with lunchbox-sized levels and no fanmade content except cosmetic mods.

 

[Darkzone]

Zombra

The single player aspect is the most important part for us, but to think that doing co-op is going to be this huge distraction is a myth. In this day and age with the current technology, all the design that has gone on in the co-op space over the past 15 years, there is a myriad of ways to tackle the feature. We are not a team prone to over scoping.

That happend to many people that are also experienced in game development, to name a few: Sven Vincke (Larian Studios), Tim Schaefer (Double Fine), Obsidian, etc.....
But perhaps the lower kickstarter revenues, will prevent them from going too far.

If we do multiplayer there are pretty much 3 different tiers we could do, depending on funding, team size exc. It could be simple, it could be full blown. It depends on a number of things, mostly to do with design. Our programmers know this stuff, with years of backend programming on TEN and MMO's. They were pioneers.

Yes their programmer know their stuff, and they are already mentioned that it depends on funding, team size and etc. To put in short form: We know how to do it, but to do it right it will cost.
They will use ready made solutions to lower the costs. In the beta i think they will use the steamworks api, but if they want to go beyond steam, they will need supporting structures. And everything costs despite their great talents.

Let me be clear though, we do not just want to go timidly into the space we already did 20 years ago. I have zero interest in doing a modern 1:1 reboot of the original. That means attempting things that may make us feel slightly uncomfortable, looking at the more risky ideas we have, and rediscovering some old ideas that were abandoned, but actually make sense in the modern era. LGS was going to go multiplayer. Did we decide what that meant then? Not really, but there were some interesting ideas, some ideas that I still haven't seen done.
I will say for me, playing around with the Improv Engine with multiple people, makes me giddy. If one person can manipulate the enviroment and the NPC's and creatures...what do you get when 2 people start doing it? I'm giggling like a mad hatter just thinking about the possibilities.

That is really nice to hear. But there is also the problem in the last sentence (AxB)^2 possibilities. I would also giggle madly.

So at very least, it appears that they're not just throwing it in to throw it in. They have some idea what they're doing.

They will need more money, than only the kickstarter revenues. This Kickstarter is just like the Kickstarter for D:OS with the difference, that they need money and backers as a prove for the bank that their project is desired, else they will not get the loans. Which by the way is not bad. Larian also used the kickstarter for funding and to promote their product, and that was a very good move.

 

[Infinitron]

Tim Stellmach is posting on the forums again: http://www.othersideentertainment.com/forum/index.php?topic=106.msg1834#msg1834

Is this an indication of what the final game may look like?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbiT9Qm5Vp0

We really like that Asset Store package too. And we like to think that it's flattering that they called it "Underworld."

With a new version of Unity coming out, and over a year of development, though, we ought to be able to get a better look.

 

[Diablo169]

I think this may be the most passive kickstarter I've seen in terms of communication from the developers on the kickstarter comments. The updates so far have also been fairly lackluster. I think Larian may have spoiled me though.