Sequel to Ultima Underworld out on Kickstarter now!

[HoonDing]

Just two words: Back it!

No.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

Might & Magic X was pretty much crowdfunded, despite the developer being under the wings of Ubisoft, and it turned out to be a great choice for all parties involved, including the gamers.  If EA was behind a developer looking to kickstart a new and interesting game design, I don't see why that would stop me.  It gives us a chance to see good studios branch out in different directions.

 

Ubisoft owns the Might & Magic trademark.  And guess what?  Ubisoft was involved with Might & Magic X.  Ubisoft is the publisher.  Might & Magic X requires UPlay activation. 

 

BTW, I looked through the Might & Magic X wiki page on information about its development, and it does not say anything M&M X being a crowd-funded project.  I do not think it is.  I know Ubisoft partially if not entirely funded the game.  Where did you get the information that M&M X was crowd-funded?

 

 

M&M X used early access to help drive the development of the game.  Early access is a form of crowdfunding, the game was in the very early stages when they opened it up to people.  They kept detailed developer updates and used the feedback of the crowd.  

[Zoraptor]

"No."

 

Yes!

 

This is legal common sense, and I do not know rjshae could be so ignorant and/or stupid about it. 

 

 

It's called 'Underworld Ascendant', there is no "Ultima" and hence no trademark infringement EA as EA does not own the rights to the word 'Underworld'.

 

The thread title is somewhat misleading since it is not an official sequel.

[ktchong]

It's called 'Underworld Ascendant', there is no "Ultima" and hence no trademark infringement EA as EA does not own the rights to the word 'Underworld'.

 

The thread title is somewhat misleading since it is not an official sequel.

 

Then the title and topic of the OP is incorrect.  The kickstarter is NOT for a sequel to Ultima® Underworld.

Edited February 8, 2015 by ktchong

[Tigranes]

Let me get this right. You're calling the other guy stupid for thinking that EA is not involved in this project, and then your narrative is that they're in it to get KS money, get a cease and desist letter from EA, then run off with the money? Heh. Alright, I guess you're the smart guy.

 

It's the Underworld creator, making the Underworld game, with Richard Garriott's blessing. So if it matters to anybody whether it's an Ultima game, it's as close as it gets - without being an EA game. Sounds like the best solution. 

 

M&MX was an official in-house Ubisoft production, just low budget and with lots of fan involvement.

[Infinitron]

Man, this thread got dumb fast.

 

Guess what other game got made with EA's blessing? That's right - Wasteland 2. Brian Fargo was just smart enough to keep the fact that Wasteland was an EA-owned intellectual property on the down-low.

 

Anyway, here's a link to the actual Kickstarter and some videos:

 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/othersidegames/underworld-ascendant

 

Edited February 9, 2015 by Infinitron

[Zoraptor]

Fargo talked about it a bit though he generally didn't volunteer information. There was a bit of a flap when he said W2 would be on Origin because people thought he would be forced at gunpoint to link all copies to Origin by EA, for example. Which would have been hilarious but didn't happen. As it was they allowed the original Wasteland to go for free to all backers, so who knows, maybe they'll give a free UU to all backers here.

 

Don't hold your breath though.

[marelooke]

I'm afraid I have to agree with the other sceptics here, while I never played any of the Underworlds (or any other Ultima, for that matter) having a much improved TES-style game certainly appeals to me (so sue me for comparing Underworld to TES), but as a developer I can't help but feel that the scope they've set for themselves is pretty much impossible with the funding they are aiming for.

 

If they would have the budget of a modern Elder Scrolls game, then maybe I'd be more willing to accept that it can be done, but as it stands: nope.

 

There are also some other things that I have my reservations about (aside from the ones already voiced by other people): linking a single player/co-op game to what seems to basically be a MMO (which is why I didn't back it back then), how the hell is this going to work? Practically as well as technically (I mean, how are they going to manage the complexities involved with the small budget they have?). And how will this impact modding, or does this just mean no modding (which would be bad imho and is in my mind also one of the huge shortcomings of DA:I when compared to TESV: Skyrim)?

[Infinitron]

I'm afraid I have to agree with the other sceptics here, while I never played any of the Underworlds (or any other Ultima, for that matter) having a much improved TES-style game certainly appeals to me (so sue me for comparing Underworld to TES), but as a developer I can't help but feel that the scope they've set for themselves is pretty much impossible with the funding they are aiming for.

 

If they would have the budget of a modern Elder Scrolls game, then maybe I'd be more willing to accept that it can be done, but as it stands: nope.

 

There are also some other things that I have my reservations about (aside from the ones already voiced by other people): linking a single player/co-op game to what seems to basically be a MMO (which is why I didn't back it back then), how the hell is this going to work? Practically as well as technically (I mean, how are they going to manage the complexities involved with the small budget they have?). And how will this impact modding, or does this just mean no modding (which would be bad imho and is in my mind also one of the huge shortcomings of DA:I when compared to TESV: Skyrim)?

 

There is no actual link to SotA, it's just a lore thing.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Infinitron

[rjshae]

 This is legal common sense, and I do not know rjshae could be so ignorant and/or stupid about it.

 

It sounds like you were mislead my the thread title and so I forgive you. Take care.

[rjshae]

I'm afraid I have to agree with the other sceptics here, while I never played any of the Underworlds (or any other Ultima, for that matter) having a much improved TES-style game certainly appeals to me (so sue me for comparing Underworld to TES), but as a developer I can't help but feel that the scope they've set for themselves is pretty much impossible with the funding they are aiming for.

 

I suspect you're probably right. Has anybody successfully completed and released a Kickstarted FPS game?

[Tigranes]

Fantasy first person RPG is not a first person shooter...

[Humanoid]

So you're telling me that the Tex Murphy Kickstarter game was not an FPS? Goodness me.

[ShadySands]

I'm a bit surprised this is doing so poorly*

 

 

*If nearly 400k in a week can be considered doing poorly

[Infinitron]

Cool new update: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/othersidegames/underworld-ascendant/posts/1132136

 

[BruceVC]

Cool new update: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/othersidegames/underworld-ascendant/posts/1132136

 

Thats cool, I like it 

[marelooke]

 

I'm afraid I have to agree with the other sceptics here, while I never played any of the Underworlds (or any other Ultima, for that matter) having a much improved TES-style game certainly appeals to me (so sue me for comparing Underworld to TES), but as a developer I can't help but feel that the scope they've set for themselves is pretty much impossible with the funding they are aiming for.

 

I suspect you're probably right. Has anybody successfully completed and released a Kickstarted FPS game?

 

Consortium was a first person RPG, but the scope was rather different when compared to UA, the graphics style was also rather stylized.

 

Judging by the "slow" backing (compared to say, Shadowrun: Hong Kong) I suspect quite a few people have their concerns about how they'll be able to pull off what they're trying to sell, at least I doubt there's that many who doubt there are cool ideas here. I'm hoping they go into the *how* in one of the next updates, if they can convince people that what they're proposing is actually feasible with the budget they have then I'm convinced the speed at which contributions roll in will go up rather a lot.

[rjshae]

Judging by the "slow" backing (compared to say, Shadowrun: Hong Kong) I suspect quite a few people have their concerns about how they'll be able to pull off what they're trying to sell, at least I doubt there's that many who doubt there are cool ideas here. I'm hoping they go into the *how* in one of the next updates, if they can convince people that what they're proposing is actually feasible with the budget they have then I'm convinced the speed at which contributions roll in will go up rather a lot.

 

Hairbrained also benefits from having an established reputation by completing their first KS and publishing a follow-on. They have an established market, whereas OtherSide is new to the KS game.

Edited February 11, 2015 by rjshae

[Zoraptor]

They should have the reputation from both Ultima Underworld and Looking Glass though- and Warren Spector for that matter. They're quite old reputations now, but very highly respected.

 

Personally I'd have gone for a System Shock game (or 'System Shock' game, depending on how the insurance company that owns the IP feels) rather than UU since it's more suited to the sort of modular design that kickstarter's variable funding makes necessary.

[mieu]

^{This sums it up perfectly,  "Personally I’m happy to throw out some money for a game developed by Looking Glass alumnus because it’s a game developed by Looking Glass Alumnus and will result in the possibility of more games developed by Looking Glass Alumnus to come"..........Jackablade@RPS}  

Edited February 12, 2015 by mieu

[Keyrock]

^ Gah, that formatting and that GIANT horrific font.  It burns!  It burns the eyes! 

[ktchong]

Man, this thread got dumb fast.

 

Guess what other game got made with EA's blessing? That's right - Wasteland 2. Brian Fargo was just smart enough to keep the fact that Wasteland was an EA-owned intellectual property on the down-low.

 

WRONG!

 

Here, from the Wasteland 2 Gamepedia FAQ:

 

But didn't Electronic Arts own it?

 

The rights to the title were owned by Electronic Arts, but when they expired, Konami registered the trademark for use with their Yu-Gi-Oh series. In 2003, InXile acquired the rights to the Wasteland title from Konami.

 

http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Wasteland_2_FAQ

 

I buy EA games. I have no problem with EA in general.   I just do not think EA - as a major corporation and publisher - should be able to "free ride" and use Kickstarter to fund their corporate businesses.  I'd be equally upset if Activision or Ubisoft attempts to hijack Kickstarter to fund their game or a game that is owned by them.  Kickstarter should be OFF LIMIT for big corporations.

Edited February 13, 2015 by ktchong

[Tigranes]

I think we all agree about that. It just doesn't seem to be relevant for WL2 or Underworld Ascendant, at least given what we know.

[Zoraptor]

It isn't really relevant, but since I dislike incorrect info almost pathologically and he is doing himself what he accuses others of doing:
 

We (inXile) own the name Wasteland (and Bard's Tale). EA owns the intellectual property rights (so the names of locations, characters, factions), but they let us use them for Wasteland 2.

sauce
 
So EA does own the IP, it is only the trademark to Wasteland (2) that InExile owns.

[Infinitron]

 

Man, this thread got dumb fast.

 

Guess what other game got made with EA's blessing? That's right - Wasteland 2. Brian Fargo was just smart enough to keep the fact that Wasteland was an EA-owned intellectual property on the down-low.

 

WRONG!

 

Here, from the Wasteland 2 Gamepedia FAQ:

 

But didn't Electronic Arts own it?

 

The rights to the title were owned by Electronic Arts, but when they expired, Konami registered the trademark for use with their Yu-Gi-Oh series. In 2003, InXile acquired the rights to the Wasteland title from Konami.

 

http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Wasteland_2_FAQ

 

I buy EA games. I have no problem with EA in general.   I just do not think EA - as a major corporation and publisher - should be able to "free ride" and use Kickstarter to fund their corporate businesses.  I'd be equally upset if Activision or Ubisoft attempts to hijack Kickstarter to fund their game or a game that is owned by them.  Kickstarter should be OFF LIMIT for big corporations.

 

 

See the post above this.