An underrated aspect of UO

Comments

• Garth_Grey Posts: 1,459

  June 2023

  I admit I have no clue what you're talking about....
  

  You and Several Others like this.
  
  
  Please make the Grizzled Mare a 5 slot mount, it's incredibly rare and deserves it. Some of us have been waiting a long time for this simple addition.
  
• Pawain Posts: 10,200

  June 2023

  Garth_Grey said:

  I admit I have no clue what you're talking about....
  

  1. The universe is spread out in four similar dimensions, which together make up a unified, four-dimensional manifold, appropriately called spacetime.
  2. Any physical object that is located at different times has a different temporal part for each moment at which it is located.
  3. There are no genuine and irreducible A-properties; all talk that appears to be about A-properties can be correctly analyzed in terms of B-relations. Likewise, the temporal facts about the world include facts about B-relations, but they do not include any facts about A-properties.
  4. The correct ontology does not change over time, and it always includes objects from every region of spacetime.
  5. Propositions have truth values simpliciter rather than at times, and so cannot change their truth values over time. Also, we can in principle eliminate verbal tenses like is, was, and will be from an ideal language.
  6. There is no dynamic aspect to time; time does not pass.

  Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
• Pawain Posts: 10,200

  June 2023

  Or 
  
  

  1. The universe is spread out in the three dimensions of physical space, and time, like modality, is a completely different kind of dimension from the spatial dimensions.
  2. Any physical object that is located at different times is wholly present at each moment at which it is located.
  3. There are genuine and irreducible A-properties, which cannot be correctly analyzed in terms of B-relations. The temporal facts about the world include ever-changing facts involving A-properties, including facts about which times are past, which time is present, and which times are future.
  4. The correct ontology changes over time, and it is always true that only present objects exist.
  5. Propositions have truth values at times rather than simpliciter and can, in principle, change their truth values over time. Also, we cannot eliminate verbal tenses like is, was, and will be from an ideal language.
  6. The passage of time is a real and mind-independent phenomenon.

  Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
• Jepeth Posts: 542

  June 2023 edited June 2023

  Pawain said:

  1. The correct ontology does not change over time, and it always includes objects from every region of spacetime.

  I know you're likely just quoting something from somewhere, but one of the things that has stuck with me from grad school was the day we really delved into epistemology, ontology, and axiology.
  
  At the end of the lecture our professor said "Now that you know these words, you must promise me to never, ever to use them in a normal conversation." 
• Pawain Posts: 10,200

  June 2023

  Jepeth said:

  Pawain said:

  1. The correct ontology does not change over time, and it always includes objects from every region of spacetime.

  I know you're likely just quoting something from somewhere, but one of the things that has stuck with me from grad school was the day we really delved into epistemology, ontology, and axiology.
  
  At the end of the lecture our professor said "Now that you know these words, you must promise me to never, ever to use them in a normal conversation." 

   
  
  I had an Astronomy professor that  would say that it is possible to have more dimensions.  He came up with some very interesting lectures on what the inhabitants and life would be like there.
  

  Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
• Tyrath Posts: 542

  June 2023

  JohnKnighthawke said:

  For the most part everything is, or at least seems to be, unfolding forward, in real time.

  
  

  By contrast, I've read that in Lord of the Rings Online, Elder Scrolls Online, and even (didn't notice this when I played it for awhile...) World of Warcraft, it's understood that certain places and events only happen once, and that when you do that content in the game you just happen to be there when it happens. Even if it was, say, chronologically before the previous thing you did.

  
  

  To me that's really weird and I was shocked to hear from folks on Reddit that this is kind of standard in MMOs.

  
  

  Has that been your experience in other games too? Or am I being misled?

  
  

  Assuming I'm not being misled, I'd like to praise UO for following a different model -- everything is unfolding forward, in real time, and it just happens that certain big bosses regenerate and are difficult to perma-kill. There's rarely if ever a pretense that these battles occur only once unless you want to pretend so, for RP purposes. Let alone that when you fight a boss that you're joining a battle that already happened in the past.

  
  

  PS Before someone says this, I do not accept the logic that this kind of weird timeline twisting is the price we must pay for story-driven content. I can conceive of story conceits that allow us to repeat content without pretending we're not.
  

  
   A LOT of content in other games is one and done but A LOT of other games are not the Sandbox and force you into arcs and styles. I think RuneScape hit a good balance with quest chains but kind of goes overboard with mini one time content but also has the Sandbox do whatever you want to.  UO other than Dynamic Grinds and A event here and there along with the holiday give aways has stayed pretty true to the Sandbox that I prefer even if there are more than a few cat turds in it.
  
• JohnKnighthawke Posts: 433

  June 2023

  *shrugs* Oh well.