http://news.com.com/Online+game+rising+from+the+dead/2100-1043_3-6073611.html

Hmm that poster with the Great Zero.. Is that the logo I made a few days ago or did Cyan provide that..?
http://news.com.com/2300-1043_3-6073478-1.html
If it is Cyans logo, could it be released for public use on t-shirts and sigs and websites.

_________________

This was also picked up by Tech Republic, one of CNet's web sites for IT pros. Imaging my delight when I found a picture of Relto while reading my morning emails!

The article is well written, and hopefully will draw even more people in.

And I would love to have that image of the great zero as a large poster to hang on my wall!

Yeah if just Cyan could release it as extreme high resolution I can host it if it's neccesary.
A 2711x4093 would be a great resolution. (I have a Doom poster in that resolution. )

_________________

no thats Cyans UL logo they have a few different versions

_________________
Beneath - Journey of an explorer in D'ni
UruBlogs - Blogs from Uru Explorers
Tweek@Guild of Writers - Age development Blog.

It's great that Uru Live is finally getting into the news more than just the press release. Thanks for posting the link!

I would like to comment that the article gets several quotes from Ron Meiners, former Ubisoft "Uru Live" community manager. The article also fails to hold Ubisoft responsible for any the things the Uru Live community believes Ubisoft mismanaged. The language of the article almost casts Ron Meiners as active in the revival of Uru Live. It does not say whether he is or isn't, or whether he still works for UbiSoft, for Cyan, or neither. For this reason, I am suspicious of a conditional agreement, to get the interview, between CNet staff writer Daniel Terdiman and Meiners or Ubisoft in general to not say anything negative about Ubisoft. Ubisoft's responsibility got the glossy treatment.

I disagree. The article is about the rebirth of Live, and the community's involvement in keeping it on life support in the interim. Focusing on the end of Live 1, and playing the "did Ubi kill Live" game again, would be both extraneous, and unnesiciarily negative.

_________________
Officially bonked R.E.B.E.L.
Falling Man Group Secretary
Storyteller & Creatrix
MOULAgain Houligan KI#00001498

Im pleased to see the artical on live, its long overdue!! It should get more people interested.

Eleri wrote:

I disagree. The article is about the rebirth of Live, and the community's involvement in keeping it on life support in the interim. Focusing on the end of Live 1, and playing the "did Ubi kill Live" game again, would be both extraneous, and unnesiciarily negative.

I had the same thought, initially. Those things are a real testiment to why Uru Live is getting a second chance. And let's keep it positive, right?

But there are two passages from the article which made me thing twice.

The first one is in the first paragraph saying, "Exactly who made the call to squelch it was never entirely clear, but both the game's publisher, Ubisoft, and its developer, Cyan Worlds, agreed that there weren't enough financial resources to keep it going." This is a false claim. We all know Ubisoft made the call, and Cyan knew the financial resources were at Ubisoft, the company which distracted Cyan with the offline version and claimed there would be no more subscribers than those who signed up for beta - ludicrous and specious reasoning - so what could Cyan say? Once mentioned, the article had a responsibility to accurately explain.

The second passage was Rand saying, "I'm not afraid to fail at things. The worst thing is where you get right up to the point where you start to learn and spend resources on (something) and you don't get a chance to succeed or fail. That's how we felt with 'Uru Live.'" This is exactly where the explanation belonged, but I think it was just omitted.

I guess the question is - was it omitted to keep the article positive? Or was it omitted to be more kind to Ubisoft than they deserve?

Given two chances in the article to get it right, and failing, I'm more inclined to be cynical.

It's also possible that Rand or others at Cyan insist on keeping things positive about Ubisoft. Now, this I would believe, but an objective article wouldn't hold itself to the political wishes of others, especially considering there were quotes from the community.

But yes, I'm quite thankful there is an article at all. The positives are about 97% of my feeling on the article. My negative concerns are about 3% of my feelings on it, but that's what I felt needed to be pointed out.

Before people demonize Ron for being at Ubi let me say a few things

I have worked with Ron for a long time and he is a top guy who genuinly cares about Myst.
He and Khatie started MystWorlds with big hopes that it would benefit the community (wasnt to be as Ubi seemed to have other idea's)
There is Ubi the Corporate company then there are the Ubisoft community employees mixing them up is unwise as from my experience they don't always agree with UbiCorps decisions.

Ron doesnt work for Ubisoft anymore he left a while before EoA to work as community manager for There he has since left for pastures anew.

I don't wish to come across harsh here not my intention but its just a few things to bair in mind before hopping on the Ubi hate wagon ^_^

_________________
Beneath - Journey of an explorer in D'ni
UruBlogs - Blogs from Uru Explorers
Tweek@Guild of Writers - Age development Blog.

Ron has already acknowledged on the DRC site he no longer works for Ubi or Cyan and how "jazzed" he is about Uru Live's revival.

Also, I contacted the writer of the article about my concerns and he has already responded that he just wanted to keep things positive the best way he could, and has edited the article to clarify Ron's status.

I believe Cyan is reluctant to point out that Ubi killed it, and Ubi is unwilling to admit it. Therefore, to the reporter, "Who made the call to squelch it" was unclear. An objective reporter could have gotten those facts from third parties, yes, but it would still be hearsay if it didn't come straight from either Cyan or Ubi. Given that neither would say how the first Uru Live was cancelled, I believe the reporter did the right thing.

Edit: Well, that was my theory, at any rate. Already discredited...

_________________

MOULa 26838 | Prologue Video Project: On Hold pending Minkata support
Visit rel.to to explore Myst, Uru, and D'ni communities!

Alahmnat wrote:

JWPlatt wrote:

The language of the article almost casts Ron Meiners as active in the revival of Uru Live. It does not say whether he is or isn't, or whether he still works for UbiSoft, for Cyan, or neither.

Why wouldn't Ron be excited, and why wouldn't they want to contact someone who was involved in the first launch for opinions on the current revival? As for not saying where Ron works, I think you simply missed that part of the article, a it says quite clearly,

Quote:

...said Ron Meiners, who was Ubisoft's "Uru Live" community manager at the time of the closure, but who currently works for neither Ubisoft nor Cyan.

You didn't read the original article. It wasn't clear until the writer clarified things. As written, it implied that Ron still works for Ubisoft and that Ubisoft and Cyan are still cooperating somehow on Uru Live as a happy family. We know better, but the casual reader wasn't informed well on Ron's status.

But to answer both your questions, I will quote myself from just a few messages back if you will check again:

JWPlatt wrote:

I contacted the writer of the article about my concerns and he has already responded that he just wanted to keep things positive the best way he could, and has edited the article to clarify Ron's status.

_________________
Ryan Warzecha (greydragon)
Former Cyan Employee

Er...

I thought the article was great! It's really amazing to see acknowledged the very real impact that all the fans had on keeping the dream alive. (And yes, man, I would TOTALLY hit that GZ picture as a poster. Hint, hint!)

_________________
I still love my umbrella!

Sosiqui in Cavern