ROFL Susan! You can tell when there are additional pages by checking the lower right hand corner to see if it's turned up.... leaves a triangular piece of the next page showing.

Feel free to contact me online.

Good Luck!

Yvonne

ladyyve ID# 01404741 <Atrus>
Y've ID# 00404847 <Katran>

I appreciate the tip. I think I have a contender for a new DOH moment

I had noticed the different pages on the 2 reading books. I just didnt see it on the linking book.

I am not on live (only have dialup) but I might very well beg a hint or two. Thanks for the offer!

Crispeto, thank you for explaining your definition of "evolved." I now understand that you mean the software and game processes have evolved so that we can wander new worlds together, etc. This is a relief to me, because my own definition of evolved (within your previous statement) would mean that it had gone beyond the intelligence of those that don't appreciate it, and that isn't the case. I know now that you didn't mean it that way, though, so I appreciate the fact that you answered my question.

I understand the value of evolving concepts so that there is something different and new in computer games to offer to those who are not satisfied with the way things have been and the way things are. I played In Memoriam, an online mystery game that utilizes the Internet for gameplay but also is played from a CD-ROM and utilizes e-mail, and I enjoyed it. I don't consider the differences that are evident in In Memoriam to be an evolution in game playing, but rather an offshoot from traditional gaming that may or may not grow into something that lasts. I consider Uru to be in that category, as well. Personally, I hope to see more of this type of game, but I can understand why many people wouldn't consider it their cup of tea, because it (In Memoriam) had a little bit of arcade in it and required the player to be online during play. I don't consider those other players to be resistant to change or unworthy to call themselves "adventure gamers" just because they would prefer to play games that don't use the Internet. I just consider them players who prefer a different type of game. Now, within their own game preferences they may embrace changes that improve the game experience. For instance, an adventure game might end up using virtual reality yet would not include any action sequences or jumping, and that might fit in with that player's vision of how they would like to see computer games evolve.

It's a gamble as to whether Uru-type online games will survive or not; they are not definitely going to become the standard in PC gaming, and could just be only the next new thing on the way to the next new standard. Conversely, games like Uru could fix all of their online problems and they may become the standard type of game when most players have upgraded their computers enough to use them. I guess the sales for Uru will tell us more and we will see later, maybe in a few years, how well it will succeed as the next progression in computer game technology. Sierra Online tried online gaming several years ago and it failed miserably; however, most people were not on the Internet at that time and didn't understand it. It's entirely possible that this time around online gaming could be the next big thing, and maybe they will offer games that don't require any action or jumping and just involve wandering around a nice environment solving puzzles, and that would probaly please a lot of the people who are put off by Uru's jumping, etc. As I said previously, In Memoriam is an online game concept and I really enjoyed it, and I hope to see more of it. Even if we do enjoy a game, it doesn't help to ignore the possible pitfalls of an online game. For instance, In Memoriam requires the use of websites for information, and you have to use that exact website to get the information, like a man's name, so you can't just look up the information anywhere online. This can be a real problem in the future if they don't keep up the websites and that information is lost. It wouldn't be nearly as fun to look at the information on a walkthrough instead of finding it on your own during gameplay. They could have avoided that if they would have asked questions that could be answered by research of any websites instead of ones they manufactured, and hopefully if they make a sequel they will use that idea. I think that a lot of people who bought Uru and are upset by it felt that the advertising on the box promised an online world that didn't yet exist in useable condition for everyone who bought the game. If Uru doesn't sell quite as well as the publishers hope, will the online gaming world still be there two years from now with new environments, etc. as the game box promises? I think this is a question the average person would ask before they pay $50 for a game that they hope to play online (assuming they don't have a coupon). I don't think the question is unreasonable. I also think that it isn't unreasonable to be upset when a game will not work with your video card, even when your computer is a gaming computer. A game may work fine for one person's computer, but that doesn't mean that the game has no bugs and that everyone else's computer specs aren't high enough for the game; it may just mean that it worked with one video card and has a bug for another video card. I have bought gaming computers (with my husband moaning in the background from the cost) for almost 20 years now. I could buy a new gaming computer tomorrow with high specs and that doesn't mean that I won't go out and buy another brand new game and find that it won't work on my computer with my sound or video card. I think it is normal to be upset about that sort of disappointment, and I think the company that produced the game should have worked harder to make sure that didn't happen, and if they find out later about it they should make a patch for it.

I remember when all games were linear text games, and people complained when the mouse came out and it was point and click, because they liked typing out the commands. I do consider this evolution because it took gaming in a direction that improved it in most ways. We could tell that it was an evolution to a better thing because most of the text games died out. Of course, some of us still enjoy a text game because we've always liked them, but we still enjoy the mouse. I don't consider Uru's changes to be an evolution to the next thing because I don't think it is better than what we have now and I don't think it will replace what we have now. If they perfect it and most computers are upgraded to use it and there are lots of different games available that use the technology, I may change my mind.

I didn't criticize the game in my original post, but asked Crispeto to define his/her use of the word "evolved." I don't have to play the game to know that it won't work on my system and that I'm afraid that the online thing won't last with it, so I choose to wait to see if I will ever buy it. I do think it is perfectly fair to discuss the game and point out it's bad points and if this is discouraging someone from buying it, then so be it. If our comments are truthful, there is no reason why we can't voice them here, since the site is here for the purpose of discussing games and helping each other decide if we want to play them and to review them if we choose. Others are able to give their pro-Uru standpoint, so there is equal time for both sides.
Happy gaming,
Beth

Very good response, Beth. Although some may say Uru has no "bugs", there certainly ARE problems with people like me whose DVD/CD player obviously is not one that the game "likes". Am I supposed to get a new computer?? I think not. Mine's only a year old. And it sure does have all the "specs" it's supposed to have. But it won't even install! Am I disappointed? You betcha! But now that I hear all these comments about jumps and such, I'm not sure I'll enjoy it if I ever get it to run. And just because I don't want to run and jump, etc, does NOT mean I'm not willing to move forward. I just know what I like, and what I don't.

Wow, this is a great discussion--tho' it seems to have turned into "Uru as the future of adventure games, yes or no? Support your answer."

I find the question of games that are playable by the general public vs. games that require specialised equipment an intersting one. Like many others MYST was the first game I played. I played it because it looked neat and I had recently purchased a computer that would run it. The idea of a computer customized for gaming was...well, it never even crossed my mind as something that anyone would want. 5 years later, that's changed. But I still think that there needs to be a balance between games that "anyone" could just pop in and play and games that require special systems. If you only cater to those who already game, you're....thinning the gene pool, so to speak.

And I often think that developers, manufacturers, whoever aren't completely honest about what's required to run a game in a satisfying way. I don't know how many games I've played that my system had way more than the "minimum requirements," even way more than the optimal, that still were choppy and glitchy. Sure, there might be ways to fix that, but is the casual gamer going to want to go through that? Instead of gaining a potential new customer, who discovers the wonders of gaming (of any kind), the misinformation is just frustrating and off-putting.

I was asked to beta test Uru, but I could never get it to function (this was on my old system). I was told, "you don't have the requirements," even though at the time the publicized requirements were well within my capabilities. Okay,things change, but it was still frustrating!! When I got my new machine, the first thing I did was download the demo. It took 3 hours and it still wouldn't install. For what that's worth.

I personally am not particularly interested in the MMO gaming experience, and I've been afraid that this would be the only MYST experience available in time. I also...this is another place where I think the developers aren't thinking really clearly, in that they require a DSL. Where I live, there is no DSL provider. But other on-line games don't require it. My brother-in-law plays Everquest on a dial-up and is quite satisfied.

I guess I'm babbling. But one thing I think about a lot is how, when you work in a specialized environment among a group with specialized skills, it's easy to lose track of the fact that it IS specialized: that what you take for granted just doesn't even matter to some people. But that doesn't mean they couldn't be interested. I work in radio, and lots of times the head of production gets so hung up on "tape noise" in his promotional material that he loses track of the fact that the material is incoherent. That's what bothers people, not the noise that they can't even hear because their ears aren't attuned to it.

okay, 'nuff.

WW

I guess you're supposed to get a new CD drive. The question is, which one? It's not like they list the compatible drives on the box or on their website. Besides, it's stupid to expect people to get a new drive every time you find a game where the copy "protection" doesn't like your current drive.

You can play Active Worlds on dialup too. It surprises me how much can be piped down a skinny telephone cord!

Uru is the most graphically intensive MMO ever attempted according to Bicardi Jim's review (and what others have said). Thats what makes it broadband intensive

btw Jim's UruLive review is here:
http://www.adventuregamers.com/display.php?id=330&p=1

for those who havent seen it yet.

I have heard some beta testers say they kept playing Uru after losing dsl temporarily (while moving, until next months allotment etc) and that it ran okay ~ if they had reasonably fast dialup connection, closer to that actual 56K than the 20-30 I usually see AND if they had the updates already. When it came time to update again, life wasnt so good.

I think you make some very good points too, Wysewomon

Susan

IMHO I believe without change the genre will gradually stagnate.

With too much change it will disappear.

I am still waiting for a game which features a fully 3D, fully explorable environment, good puzzles and a compelling story.

Like, say, a spy mission on the Hindenberg.

With too much change it wouldnt be an adventure game. Im talking keeping the elements that make an adventure game an adventure game while improving on things that should evolve.

Absolutely.

As for evolving, jumping puzzles and limited save points (not that there are any major adventures that currently feature such things) don't strike me as adventure game elements that should evolve. They strike me as elements that should be sent home to the consoles where they rightfully belong.

First of all, I just want to say that I'm really happy that we can all discuss this in an intelligent way. I admit that in my first post in this thread I was a little upset, but Crispeto was really kind in reply and it went a long way to help me understand that it's just a game we're talking about, and I am proud that we're able to do that here in a safe environment.

I think there are some really good points here. I especially am in agreement about specialization versus availability to the masses, and I think that is what the Nancy Drew games have done well. They are interesting, they are based on a known character with storylines that differ but with the same engine and (mostly) the same graphics, they are affordable and they run well. They always install immediately and play immediately on my computer. I think that's why they are so successful (that and the fact that there are few games that are made to specifically attract girls, and so they are special in that way). When they don't spend enough time on the story, it shows (Haunted Carousel) and when they take the time to build a great game, it shows (Ghost Dogs and DODI). My point is that the average person can buy the game and play it and enjoy it. There were advertisements in Entertainment Weekly for Uru (HUGE, beautiful ads) that just talked about adventuring, and that's it. I think the average person would go out and buy the game and it wouldn't work. They might hesitate to go out and buy another adventure game or another game by Ubi, etc. in the future because of it. The computer game companies want the masses to buy games, but in a lot of instances they aren't willing to make public and accessible the information about the real equipment and specs needed to run the game. They haven't gone out of their way to say on the box that the online gaming world is not ready for everyone to be in it easily, and I'm sure that frustrates many. I just think it's a shame they didn't keep the game for another six months and work on all of that before they released it. If they needed the money from sales before they could get the online world ready, then it seems that they were being dishonest about it, because I don't think it says you can maybe get on a Beta version of an online world on the box.
Beth

SO, what do people think would constitute "evolution" for the adventure game? And by that I mean, gradual change that improves the species without making it into another species? It seems to me like everyone has different ideas about this.

I'd like to see deeper and more complex plots with more carefully integrated puzzles, a better balance of types of puzzles. But I think the more action sequences are added the less adventure-y a game gets. I keep going back to, my standards for gaming are Riven, TLJ and Gabriel Knight. More like that but deeper. And Less focus on bells and whistles unless they actually work!

WW

Well, let me try to give my opinion on this - my opinions only.

There's a couple of issues going on
- Uru Live isn't ready, and it wasn't clear on the box it wasn't. Agreed. The live part is in beta, so if you don't want to be part of the (free) beta, I don't think one should play. If being part of a beta is fun for you, register for the Uru Live Prologue, if you have broadband. I think being in the live beta is kind of fun, but then again, I was in the other Uru beta (the one we couldn't talk about), from January to November! It's rather fun to affect the course of a game. That's what I think.

- machine specs. I think these are fine, completely OK, and specs are clear on the box and on websites. The only issue is that it's a Myst series games and people aren't used to it, so some folks don't read the specs or don't believe them. The game runs on oodles and oodles of graphics cards, but they have to be on the newer side, and not the Intel graphics chip set. Intel is a minor player in the graphics industry. If you want to do a big, gorgeous 3D game, you won't need a gamers machine per se, but you will need a machine with pretty decent specs and a decent graphics card. Uru runs on my 1.2GH machine, with it's Geforce 4 TI4200 card, and 640MB of memory, and Win XP. That's a fairly medium end machine.

- the copy protection thing and some drives. That's a problem - no comments.

- Is Uru an adventure game.
Here's the thing, and we talked about this a lot in the beta, and some Cyan folks talked about it too. Here is what I think Cyan would reply - my words not theirs, based on all that forum chit-chat. I'm not quoting, I'm summarizing and putting my spin on it. Uru is put in the adventure game genre, in the stores, and on websites, but Cyan is not concerned if it's a "pure" adventure game. It's not that they don't want us to love the game (they care about that a whole lot), but they don't care about following the strict adventure game genre rules. So, if you say it's not a "pure" adventure game, Cyan will agree with you. They will also say that, when they did Myst, adventure games were mostly 3rd person, not 1st person, and most of the other games used inventory. In Myst they did the kind of game they wanted, and in Uru they also did the kind of game they wanted. It's not that they aren't listening to people (they listened to us a lot in the beta, particularly with regards to making the action stuff easier), but they are doing the game they want to do. They aren't caving into popular pressure - they are doing the kind of game they want to do. I'm not all that crazy about the action stuff myself, but I'm starting to make my peace with it. Who knows, after this, I might actually be able to attempt Tron 2.0!

On game genres - when I post on Myst Community, there is a section of the forum where people talk about the other types of games they like. Adventure games are a small minority. I think adventure gamers like Myst, but as far as I can tell, people get into Myst who like other types of games, particularly the younger players who all like RPGs, both on PCs and on consoles (Those Final Fantasy games are hot). They also like games with some action elements. The younger gamers on MC don't seem to make the distinctions between adventure games and other games - if it's a game they like they play it. They either only play the Myst series games or they play all sorts of games, with a prepoderance of non Adventure games. Just a thought on who Uru is trying to attract. It's not that they don't want to appeal to adventure gamers, but I don't think it's only adventure gamers that they are targeting. Incidentally, having other types of gamers play Uru can be a humbling experience. I know of action gamers who breezed throught the puzzles on Uru, even the hard logic puzzles!