Poll: Knowing what we know today, would you have backed UA?


I would be interested in how people think about their contribution to the KS.

If you had a time machine and had to decide again knowing how the game is going to turn out, would you still have backed it?

I have a feeling that many backers are going to vote no, but maybe there is a silent majority who isn’t posting much.

Please backers only (sorry, Flug, but you’re still kindly invited to comment/post).


Absolutely not lol. Honestly, patches won’t fix this game. It’s not a matter of bugs, but of the fundamental game design that destroys this game. There are plenty of absolutely great games with bugs. Imagine if they were transparent in their kickstarter campaign; “In Underworld Ascendant, you the player take generic missions from a bulletin board then get teleported to a separate dungeon that resets after every mission! You also cannot save the game!”


No. I backed, specifically for the opportunity to participate in the development process and watch the project grow. The first, and only, playable build for my OS wasn’t published until a couple weeks before final release – and that crashes at the end of the tutorial. But hey, at least it opens… right?

This doesn’t even address the swath of other issues the game is facing.


You can’t make a Kickstarter and sell the idea of a “spiritual Underworld sequel” and around launch, casually announce “oh by the way, we meant to make a Dark Messiah game, sorry you didn’t get the memo, lolilol”.

Voted no.


This easy pickings, you’re not going to get any positive votes on this, why bother? :smiley:


For the record, as expected I also voted no, because no NPC dialog, underwhelming story/lore and no connection to Ultima (and very loose connection to UU1).


Yes, I would have. For me, it’s less about getting UU 3 and more about getting LGS 2, and I’d fund any chance for that, no matter how remote.

Also, I do not think the game is a lost cause. I have had fun with it even in its current unfinished and buggy state and I think it has a lot going for it even if it falls short in other aspects. At the very least I think that, when they do work, things like the atmosphere, the sound design, the level design and some of the gameplay systems show a lot of potential for an absolutely great immersive sim.


I backed it for a very low amount, and enjoyed watching the project unfold. So I guess so.


This is sort of unfortunate exercise of pointless what-if. You never know what will be the result (ahead), and would I be again in similar situation - project with similar pitch and names behind - I would probably back it again.

Would I know exactly how it would pan out in the end, then no. I’m glad they could try and show, but in my opinion this is from KS campaign point of view beyond salvageable (the game can probably stand on it’s own as spin-off, but the “spiritual successor” … no, that’s maybe even slightly insulting).


Just as Starker said. There’s a real difference between “failed to meet expectations” and “deliberate cash-grab.” There’s one recent game that falls into that latter category IMO (and I won’t be backing any further projects from that source) – Underworld Ascendant is not that game.

So I have zero regrets about doing my small bit to help OtherSide get off the ground. That’s not a failure to see – it’s properly seeing the bigger picture.


Hear hear! I’m with you. I loved the process, was disappointed by the final product, but am still pumped I got to help OSE boot up. I just hope they can do something positive with the momentum.

Out of curiosity, what was the cash-grab regret, if you don’t mind sharing?


Truthfully, I had expected better and a lot more. The initial beta which I was allowed to see was a disappointment. I was hoping for something a bit “darker” and less “cartoony”. Also this has a cookie cutter feel. Every time you do a quest, it is the same dungeon, only with very crappy loot. It is nearly pointless to look in chests, or search containers. The breaking of boxes feels so much like mini-games every time. I was expecting at least SOME of the digital awards at release. Having none at all felt akin to an insulting slap.




I naively kickstarted both of these atrocities.


Sadly no – and I have a deep connection to UW and UW 2 as you might know. To make it short, UA is just a kind of Thief game playing in the Stygian Abyss. No dialogs with NPCs, no interaction with different peoples, no real save system. I’m very disappointed. However, if OtherSide implements a true save game system, UA is worth a look for all the Thief fans. But it is still not the game I backed for.


Saddest no vote I ever had to give. I have UU1 and 2 in a shrine on my wall. The UU1 box art has been my desktop wallpaper for years. I hear the music in my head every time I walk down a dark stone corridor.

This was supposed to be UU3, no matter what they say…that was what we were all expecting. The worst part is I think we all fooled ourselves. I don’t think we were cheated so much as they just didn’t have enough of a vision to make something meaningful (or even functional apparently). Part of the problem is we all got a case of the “hazies” remembering our youth first booting up that game on our ancient computers. Back then we were overwhelmed with a sense of presence in a living dungeon filled with great lore, adventure and tantalizing mysteries. Today we can’t even save our game.

I don’t think they utilized that nostalgia as a way of stealing from us, but nor did they know how to make use of it while still creating something that was an evolution of the original games. There was a fundamental disconnect between the original concept (lets reboot UU!) and what was delivered (we don’t know what we’re doing!) I think they meant well but there is clearly a lack of the technical and project management skills required for something of this scope.

I backed this thing with a lot of money and yes, I wish I had that money back. There is one small glimmer of hope here though. I am praying that in amongst those who kickstarted this there is an indie programmer who was so affronted by what was produced that they feel compelled to make the spiritual successor we all wanted to see. Smaller teams than this have made amazing products.

I think all we really want is an immersive first person dungeon crawler with a living environment and a real sense of agency, adventure and mystery. They just don’t make them like they used to. Lets hope someone figures out how to make them like they were and like they can be today, the best of both Underworlds as it were.

Whoever does that though, please, don’t make us move like a zamboni with a sword. Thank you for your kind attention.


I voted yes for the reasons stated by Starker, Flatfingers and Brodo.

But I don’t like this “properly seeing the big picture” talk.

Some people are just really big Ultima Underworld fans. They’re not beholden to support the founding of a new studio or the potential of that studio’s future games.

The Kickstarter pretty explicitly targeted them with promise of a spiritual successor to the game they loved. That alone is what they supported; that alone is what they paid for.

They didn’t get that with Underworld Ascendant. There’s nothing wrong with them being upset about that, and there’s nothing wrong with them expressing regret for having supported the Kickstarter. It shouldn’t be implied that they’re inferior for not “seeing the big picture” just because they’re disappointed and regretful.


That sounds as accurate and likely as any explanation or excuse I’ve seen.

Have you heard of Monomyth? It might be exactly what you’re looking for:


I guess we’ll see how that turns out.


On the upside, Monomyth is not asking for your money upfront, while shoving grandiose promises in your face.

It’s even NOT made by “industry veterans”, so it might actually turn out ok. ::slight_smile:

And for anyone trying to suggest Shroud of the Avatar is somehow worse and more of a lying cash grab than UA, let me remind you that SotA is 58 / 65 on metacritic and UA is 39 / 19. :wink:


There are worse offenders than SoTA. It does offer a complete game, and I never said Portalarium was “lying” about anything.

But SoTA did, and does, feel “cash grabby” to me, and has from the start. I have never liked Portalarium asking for money for a game, and then asking for more money or you don’t get some valuable basic content (player housing). One or the other method would have been fine; doing both – which OtherSide did not do with UA – seems excessive.

Fair comment.

My comment was in part a response to Katana’s imputation that anyone who still would have backed UA is somehow willfully blind. By “big picture” I was trying to suggest that there’s value in supporting OtherSide even if the first major game from them didn’t meet every expectation. I can be disappointed somewhat with UA and still calculate that the odds for getting more immersive sims from them (and more immersive sim elements from other developers) are better if OtherSide continues to exist.

My point wasn’t to criticize those disappointed about UA; it was to offer a reason why those who focus more on OtherSide as an ongoing studio than UA as just one game aren’t completely nuts.