Editorial: Shroud of the Avatar
How does this all apply to Shroud of the Avatar?
That is the question of course.
And it’s a question that is of course hard to answer based only on some few gameplay videos and general presentations by Richard Garriott and his team. The ambition of the game is clear, and many aspects shown or discussed thus far are very reassuring. Rather than list eveything that we know about Shroud of the Avatar, I am going to list what I feel are specific things that it does require as a quasi-Ultima game, explain what we know about these aspects in Shroud of the Avatar at present, and outline how I feel they should improve on them to make a proper Ultima successor.
- A true single-player offline mode
Shroud of the Avatar aims to be a successor to the Ultima series, to the trilogy of trilogies. One thing to keep in mind is that the Ultimas always were single-player games. Multiplayer is fine, but the fact is that many Ultima fans yearn for something simpler: a true single-player game in the veins of the core Ultima series. Shroud of the Avatar needs this: it needs to be fully playable offline, alone, like a proper single-player game, with saving allowed at any point during gameplay, and so on. And it needs to have its content built around this aspect so that, in essence, nobody will feel like they’re playing a gimped experience if they decide to play it solo. - A strong storyline with ethics and philosophical depth
Garriott has already confirmed that this is his goal, and that he plans to deal with real issues. As for ethics, there is little doubt from the “Forsaken Virtues” subtitle that he plans to have something similar to our traditional Ultima virtues at the center of the game. - Interactivity
This is again an aspect that the developers have said time and again they want to develop as much as possible. Indeed, as we see in one of the videos, Richard Garriott’s character seamlessly enters a house and plays an actual piano within the house, with the camera simply zooming in on the piano keys, allowing the player to click on them. Needless to say, this is exactly the kind of immersive, menu-less interactivity we’ve come to love in Ultima. I would argue however this needs to be pushed even further, however: let us move things around! Indeed, while some games (such as the Gothic series) have tried to push forward interactivity, very few have offered the possibility to move pretty much anything around with the mouse in the way Ultima VII onward did. This was even possible in Ultima IX, 14 years ago. This ought to be possible in Shroud of the Avatar. We want to be able to move chairs, books, plants, and all kind of items. If I drop a sword on the ground, I want to see it on the ground, and I want to be able to move it around. This is the kind of interactivity that made Ultima unique, and it’s what would make Shroud of the Avatar as wonderful as Ultima VII was back in the day. The same is true about crafting: remember how rewarding it could be to be done in a menu-less way in Ultima VII? - NPC and Dialogue Depth
We want to talk with NPCs that feel real, not just filler characters. So I would say: avoid generic NPCs, give all (or at least most) NPCs a proper name and story, have dialogues that can be short or long, but most of all are well written, and let us get to know the characters. “Name”, “Job” and “Bye” might feel outdated…but in the end they easily allowed for the easy introduction of additional depth. I won’t comment on the few dialogues shown in the prototype since there is no doubt this is just a placeholder system, and obviously a proper Ultima successor will need much more than what was shown. - NPC Schedules and Activities
I’m happy to say that the developers have reported their intent to implement NPC schedules. This is wonderful news, because if there is one thing that helps build immersion a great deal, it’s NPCs that live out their own lives from day to day in-game. But don’t just make schedules for the sake of it: USE them. Don’t just make NPCs move around, have them perform different activities — sitting, sleeping, eating, training in combat — and have them say different things depending on the time of day. Most importantly, use them in plot and dialogues. Remember how some characters would only appear at night? Remember how you could follow Patterson after 10 PM and find out he had an affair? This is the difference between just a gimmick and a core gameplay mechanic. Schedules as gimmicks are great already. Schedules as a means for side quests and contextual dialogue are what will make them unique and special. - Companions
The party is for many an aspect that made Ultima truly unique. While the developers did confirm that solo players will be able to have a party, specific details are scarce. I can only stress that if we get to have a party, it NEEDS to be a party with true NPC companions with lives of their own. Companions in the vein of Iolo, Shamino and Dupre, that live the adventure with you like good friends, and who won’t hesitate to speak up once in a while. If it’s not going to happen in this form, if (for instance) we are just going to be offered some generic henchman, we might as well not have a party at all since it would remove the whole point of having one. - A living landscape
This goes along with something mentioned above: the game needs day/light cycles, it needs various weather conditions; the world needs to feel alive as much as its people do. This seems to be in the plans for Shroud of the Avatar, with additional aspects like seasonal transitions, and that is a very reassuring thought. - Open world and exploration
This has kind of become the first bit of controversy surrounding Shroud of the Avatar, after it was revealed that the game was going back to Ultima’s deeper roots by using a dual scale map rather than the seamless world approach of Ultima VI onward. In this case, though, I’d like to defend the decision by explaining that first, this actually makes it easier to put a non-linear open world in place, and that, second, this is not incompatible with exploration. A good overland by itself will give a grand sense of exploration, and nowadays it allows for the creation of a wide variety of points of interest (POIs) which can be anywhere and of variable size -– big enough indeed to be large, explorable zones unto themselves! This could also bring out other possibilities, like dynamic evolutions of POIs (i.e. remember how Ultima IX couldn’t do a pre and post-destruction Skara Brae? That would not be an issue here!), or secret POIs only discoverable by the most trained explorer. Basically, while it’s not the same as a huge seamless world, the potential is there and there is grounds to be happy with the dual scale world, as even with that dual scale the game can have a proper seamless feel none the less.
This should about cover it.
There are of course many other Ultima aspects that could be mentioned, but I feel we have covered the general case here. Shroud of the Avatar seems intent on being true to most of these aspects, as you would expect from a Lord British game, but with a long development period ahead I feel it was important to post this lengthy reminder of what, as hardcore long-time and single player Ultima fans, we came to love in this series, and why we loved it.
And it’s why we want Shroud of the Avatar to be, first and foremost, built around all of these aspects that made us Ultima fans in the first place.
Exciting times are ahead of us, and while Lord British must leave the Ultima name behind…let us hope he can lead us to a brand new living world where we’ll find the same pleasures and adventures than in our memories of our beloved Britannia.
I think there are 3 camps of Ultima fans;
Camp 1. Die hard single player Ultima series fans, despise mmorpgs with a passion (Including UO /especially UO)
Camp 2. Ultima series fans who loved the single player games but recognize the ultimate Ultima must be an evolved ascended game and to be such must be multiplayer, (These fans love mmorpgs and love UO).
Camp 3. The modern day Ultima fan who knows little about the Ultimas except for Ultima Online and maybe Ultima IX, they are younger and are swayed either way.
I’m clearly in camp 2, I would say Ultima VII is much better than UO, but I recognize UO has many aspects that are evolved beyond what any single player game can offer, I do not claim Shroud of the Avatar is evolved or innovative as I have not played it, I hope it is. The future of gaming is online and multiplayer, I would say anyone who would deny this statement would be in denial.
P.S. found these 2 typos;
and these are aspect that are completely optional
* aspects
Because indeed, this leads to very simple question:
*a very simple question
Fourth camp: Die hard UO fans who have either never/barely heard of the single-player side of the series and/or who despise said games with a passion.
^ These, are going to be a constant issue now, through, and after release. We better get use to hearing from them.
Camp 2a (5?). Ultima series fans who loved the single player games, the Runes of Virtue games on the Nintendo Game Boy (casual multiplayer action Ultima), and enjoyed some parts of Ultima Online but hated Everquest, World of Warcraft, and other MMORPGs that revolved around killing X number of critters to complete “quests”.
It’s only the future because gaming corporations see the largest profits to be made there. Micro-transactions/Hamster-wheel grinds/Time-sink tactics/Recycling of old content. No thank you. I support creative independent publishers who have the goal of making art first and profits second. I want to see something interesting. Maybe Shroud will be it. If not, I’ll keep looking. There’s always gardening (the actual outside kind), at least it’s still single player. And more enjoyable than most games I’ve played lately.
Hoe about, the Ultima fan that’s in their mid 20’s that has played a minimal amount of uo and has no interest in uo or mmorpgs. Yet loves the ultima single player games and plays quite a bit of online multiplier games with strangers.
What camp does that fit into bro.
Camp 3 – and I believe that we are the majority! Am I wrong?
You are correct. Ultima Online sold more than “all of the previous Ultima games combined and then some” (by a factor of 10 or something, see Richard Garriott’s comments on the three ages of games), meaning that the number of players who bought and played only Ultima Online outnumbered players who bought and played the eariler Ultima games.
Probably not the majority here at the Codex though. At least based on the people who comment regularly. . .
At this point the debate is amongst us alone, as the market has moved on. Whoever shouts the name “Ultima” the loudest and makes the most money will define what an Ultima is. That’s why I do what I do, although I’m terribly excited (despite myself) about Garriott’s new project. To me, it’s about as official as it gets.
I also agree with WtF’s original general assessment of what an Ultima is, including the observation that really pinning it down is a rabbit’s hole. One of its beauties I suppose.
Great editorial !
I think that when they abandoned the dual-scale maps the worlds kept getting “smaller”, not in tile number but in “feel”.
Anyhow I’m really excited by this new -solo- game !
Thanks for your contribution Sergorn. I think you really hit the nail on the head. I also think the others hit the UO quandary on the head too and that the multiplaying elements in this will go a long way to satisfy them. Maybe what LB has in mind, really, is a kind of better, evolved fusion of what the split communities experienced with Origin.
Assuming that a certain audience may glance over the comments of your editorial – a piece I can agree with and which was enjoyable to read – I wrote up a little something too. I’ll just queue it up right here if you don’t mind Sergorn (and other codexians). Ultima are my favorite games too you know! I chopped it up same as your editorial’s conclusion so it will fit right in I hope. Knowing ultima fans I’m sure there has to be a bigger wall of text comment somewhere on this site.
• A true single-player offline mode: I’m not sure this is so much the core of older experience. You were definitely alone, but that was a limitation. The flipside of it is you could just as well end up with a gimped coop mode, right? Interest points added dynamically on the map tailored especially for coop experience could be great fun. The interest points could even switch according to how many buddies you’re playing with. If you have this offline/online duality, you can’t gimp either. As a general rule if you include something it shouldn’t be gimped! Agree that I don’t want a UO style game and that I couldn’t get into UO exactly because of the reasons mentioned in this editorial. For references sake I’ll say that I never play any mmo.
• A strong storyline with ethics and philosophical depth: I wouldn’t say there is little doubt. There’s plenty of doubt on this side of my keyboard. The editorial’s conclusion on this topic refers to something called real issues and leaves it at that. I would like to add involving moral issues in a direct way tend to undermine the story experience in my view. Also there are timeless human/moral/ethical issues that can be played around with, but if they’re just a part of some quest giving auto-system then it’s just cheap. There’s a lot of ways to mess this up really. Otherwise everyone would be doing it right. There are many ways to construct story arcs, if they end up being constrained inside their point of interest bubbles for example, then the experience is weakened. Being able to predict if a quest will remain inside its bubble or not could be called unsatisfactory. Storyline is really one of the few aspects of gaming, where as soon as the mechanics of it become apparent, suspense of disbelief is undermined. The older ultimas invented new and fun(ny) ways to deal with engine restrictions to remove mechanical constrains of story arcs. Things like the balloon, or the cage over Horrance, etc. As I was working towards completing the balloon quest in u6, I expected some kind of a cop-out since I didn’t think a flying balloon would actually materialize. But they did it: they beat my expectations! Many times: building a panpipe and then playing it, the whistling cube defense to be conquered with special helmets, the skara brae ferry, the Frankenstein monster rebuilding with body parts, the Frigidazzi (sp?) naked dance, the black sword, the silver serpent horns that called actual serpents, robbing the museum at night (the audacity!), the whistle for the dog, the goblin king, the penguin eggs, the cute bigfootpeople who accepted they would die, heck the entire intro of serpent isle with the disappearing equipment that you could look forward to recovering, and the lightning colors having meaning … there were so many ways the games knocked down my expectations.
• Interactivity: the red glow during combat along with the hit points showing are a huge turnoff for me. Let me humbly insist to only show at the utmost a much shortened glow when a hit occurs. A strong hit could be correlated with a slightly stronger glow. It could even turn a bit green when poisoned. It would be very subtle, you wouldn’t even be sure from the get-go whether it went green or not. Only a trained I should spot the difference. This behavior would somewhat mimic the way hits were shown in previous ultimas (u6, u7, can’t remember in 8). Please make it much more subtle and in name of the uncorrupted virtues: hide the numbers from us! Please! This is what I very much disliked from what I’ve seen so far in the video’s and I really hope you minimize this. One more thing, I strongly agree with the point in the middle of page 3 which praises the lack of menus to interact in the world and promotes the crafting inside the game world, since it’s so much more fun. Had I been in Sergorn shoes I would have added an underlining to the conclusion of that paragraph: Nobody likes menus so don’t do them!
• NPC and Dialogue Depth: one of the video’s bugged me a little I must admit. I think it was the one with Iolo (though nothing bad about that man, I really enjoyed listening to him). It was the scene where RG saves a small settlement but doesn’t accept the wedding ring because they are so poor. Then the settlement is ambushed and he gets a key to a chest full of goodies, goodies he gladly takes as a reward. There were two problems with this: He refuses the ring in one instance and then the next minute he accepts their precious chest full of treasure. It doesn’t make sense! They are so poor! Don’t accept their stuff! Compassion! But it doesn’t matter, because listen to this: they are not broke at all, they have this treasure chest! Actually he should have ended the scene by approaching that earlier lady and demanded the ring he had refused before, which probably wasn’t no wedding ring in the first place! These people must be liars! You could back that particular encounter with the option to inquire why they were masquerading as the poor, and make it a nice side story full of moral ambiguity. Are they avoiding taxes? Does the chest belong to someone else? Are they spies? Why are they there in the wild? Are others npc’s worried about their presence? Is it because they pretend to be someone they’re not? Was the ambush about that chest? The way it was presented these npc’s seemed a bit generic when I think of older ultima titles. It felt a bit like a gimmick, although obviously we weren’t shown the entire quest and I may be deducing wrong.
• NPC Schedules and Activities: in the videos I noticed travelling carts on the road in overworld view. Do they ever stay in a town? If a travelling cart stops in a town, is there a salesman selling his wares on the market now where there was none before? The overworld seems to me to have a lot of potential if it’s done right. Make it a fun place to be, with different schedules and different activities according to the situation. If you see an npc stop in a town you could have to run there too. Make us suspicious. Give us things we can see but can’t reach (yet). Evil-esque guards behind an uncrossable cliff that come out of the fog of war just to go back in. At night some other mystery could come out but stay just out of reach, outrunning the player and then suddenly disappear. Of course there’d be a special way to catch it but it’d be only revealed when the time was right.
• Companions: I belong to that group that really enjoys the companions. Please find a way to have them!
• A living landscape: it could be interesting to add a day/night cycle that is a bit unusual. I also remember the volcano blasts from u6 to make the avatar isle extra terrifying. These are just thoughts, really. I don’t have anything else on that point.
• Open world and exploration: if 3D combat and conversations can be considered as mini games when in that mode, what are the mini games in the overworld? There should be some fun mechanics to it. In older games it consisted of hoping to carefully avoid the monsters. I hope exploration means more than finding interest points only, which sounds fun, don’t get me wrong, but it may not be enough to make it really stand on its own. There should be hesitancy for the player to go forward. What actions can be performed in the overworld that are unavailable in 3D mode? Are there some kinds of mini games? Is it fun? Or are we just crossing filler between points of interest?
Sergorn, thanks for taking the time for your editorial. It’s awesome that the spirit of the games has been able to live on through sites such as this one. Let’s hope the guys at Portalarium take notice of what you wrote, well done.
PS: I’ve been waiting for a new Ultima for so long… best games ever!
These three points really sums it up, I hope it’s a focus for LB and his team.
A strong and focused storyline with ethics and philosophical depth
A living and breathing virtual world.
An open world with a sense of exploration.
LB has mentioned they will be making combat better and more complex. That’s fine but I hope these three points are not left behind. As mentioned U7 is most people’s favourite, yet combat is so unimportant in the game. It’s these three points which is what made the game so great.
Great job on the article by the way.
There isn’t a whole lot of meat in the higher tiers, but I find in interesting the really high tiers sold well early. I suspect that Richard Garriot is so well respected by other game developers, that many professionals were pledging high dollar amounts to support him.
I backed the project and I want it to do well.
I am a little worried that we know next to nothing about the setting, story, etc.
Seeing a developer say that they changed a scripted encounter to a small family of gypsies tells me they didn’t have great direction on the story from the beginning. It seems like they are just throwing individual concepts together.
Ultima IV, V and VI in particular started from a high idea, with the game exploring that concept.
If I knew that SotA had a similar concept it was built around, I’d feel better.
I agree with you, T.J. – but don’t forget that Ultima started just like that. He was throwing concepts together and it was only after the first trilogy that Richard really started to build a world. I don’t believe that the first episode of 5 will be a hit, but I expect that the 3rd and on to be the real deal.
They have a strong background of lessons learned. Richard came back to stay, so this new world is going to take a while to be built. Let’s wait, play and have fun.
These three points actually sum up what I think is missing from RG’s proposal for Shroud of the Avatar.
> A strong and focused storyline with ethics and philosophical depth
What I have heard about the story so far has left me unimpressed. I’m very skeptical. There doesn’t seem to be any depth to this world as yet. I expect a lot more at this stage because they’re basically pitching the game to us as investors and trying to impress us to get us to believe in their vision.
Instead, the focus has been on tech and game mechanics, which are both pretty sub-par in this day and age. Even if you’re comparing only to past Ultimas, this game doesn’t quite live up to the legacy in my opinion.
> A living and breathing virtual world.
Nothing about an instanced world is living and breathing. How can there be any meaning to anything that happens when there are infinite copies of the same space available to anyone in a shared persistent world where the only people you run into are the ones you choose to run into?
I have doubts they’ll be able to reconcile the differences between single-player and multiplayer without compromising on both fronts such that we end up with both being mediocre. This game will essentially become like Diablo but with a map to walk around on instead of a lobby.
Since the game will have a linear story (which implies a beginning and an end), the persistent elements of the game (which will obviously be minimal) will be forced to co-exist with elements designed for the single-player or co-op experience and there won’t be a lot of reason to play the game after you’ve seen all the content.
> An open world with a sense of exploration.
There can be no sense of exploration when you have a dual-scale map. Immersion is also practically impossible in that case. How can you suspend your disbelief when you’re forced to look at an unnatural view of the world and click on an icon to leave or enter an area? Every time you do this, you’re reminded that the world is a loosely connected set of nodes or instances rather than a living, breathing, virtual world.