D'mala, Until Uru and player created content.

D'Lanor · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:22 pm

Actually the auth server for the private shards is still hosted by chip. D'mala always had its own auth server. However, D'mala also hosts the common dataserver and the client will not start if it can not find that dataserver. I suggest to look elsewhere for a workaround.

Rex Havoc · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:28 pm

Gametap & Cyan do need to concentrate on those who do not have access to Live.

Maztec, nice to see you again!

Jakah · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:30 pm

So what will happen to all those folks on Dial up and those who are not included in the initial set of countries? Are they not permitted to be a part of URU any more??

Ashtar · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:53 pm

TomahnaGuy wrote:

Cyan have done a lot of things over the years that many people may have disagreements over. But in my opinion it has been the shard owners and the until uru community that have kept Uru alive in its darkest times. Cyan owe us that to keep the auth server and the UU shards alive!

Yes, if the auth server is removed I will leave

TG, many of us have been shard owners far longer and it's not easy for us either. But in the back of my mind I had the feeling that this day might be inevitable. Until Uru was named as such for a reason, until Uru can return again. It has, so our chapter in the history of Uru has come to a close. We fulfilled our purpose keeping the interest in Uru while Cyan got back on their feet, and I'm proud of the contributions we made. Now it's time to join our fellow explorers and celebrate our dream that Live is really here.

Ashtar

maztec · **Joined:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:05 am **Posts:** 393

Rex: Hey to you too

Zardoz: I completely understand the pain of the existing shard owners. Perhaps my get a grip was a bit too harsh

D'Lanor: I believe it is not on chip's server anymore.

Oh.. Zardoz: It is not a technical problem as far as I am aware. The issue is legal. And it is a lot of red tape. It does not just involve Cyan, but also involves Turner. Turner is unlikely to give permission to something they would see as competitive in nature.

And I would not recommend running afoul of Turner's legal department - they will bury you.
If you want to discuss the legal ramifications, I recommend you hop over to COBBS:
http://www.cobbs.ca/bbs/forumdisplay.php?f=6
and start an appropriate thread.

Jakah: People in your boat are back to square one - where the first Uru Live was. Your options are limited. There are ways to get GameTap to work on dialup - but spending the many hours a week to participate may not be within your preference.

--- Something I would like to see is a way to access your KI while on the surface

So you can participate in the cavern, when you can't be in it..

Dan'nee · **Joined:** Mon Oct 16, 2006 2:18 pm **Posts:** 722

I'd just like to reiterate a few of the important comments that I've seen so far on this thread:

First of all, Cyan, like Gametap, is a business. The whole point of businesses is to make money. I know Cyan hasn't always had that as a central, or sole, focus, but they certainly need it to survive.

That being said, I applaud Cyan for making the sound business decision of allowing people to host Until Uru on their own servers. At little to no cost for them they kept the hope of Uru alive and advertised it through Until Uru. But Until Uru is only that and has always been that, Until Uru. Uru is now here.

I'm not going to tell people how they should feel, whether or not they should be upset, disappointed, etc. But I hope we can all come to see this as a final move to bring the Uru community together in one place once and for all.

Would some of the users prefer it if Until Uru was left open? Maybe. Would it continue to be a good business decision for Cyan and Gametap? Certainly not. I have friends in RL that are very business minded. They've reminded me that, most often, if there isn't any profit or gain in something for you, don't do it. Obviously this doesn't mean in our personal life, and it doesn't rule out generosity either. I just mean in making sound business decisions.

maztec · **Joined:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:05 am **Posts:** 393

Well said Dan'nee.

I would also like to ask of everyone hear, which would you prefer:

1) Cyan spending their resources on bringing new content, improving Uru, working with legal to get everyoneinvolved (no matter where you live), and user created content; OR
2) Cyan spending their resources on bringing some new content, improving Uru, working with legal to allow people to use private Auth Servers, and keeping Until Uru alive?

There are many plusses and minuses to each branch, but I know my preference.

JWPlatt · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:23 pm

Forced choices like that are logical fallacies. I'm surprised you would use it.

I would ask to anyone who agrees that UU has served its purpose and is no longer necessary, would you really object if Cyan is willing and able to come to an alternative arrangement with the small community of shards and their members?

tkwiggins · **Joined:** Tue May 09, 2006 8:26 pm **Posts:** 557

In reply to Maz' post, I'd prefer #1.

That said, I'll miss UU greatly. Good times -- the best. Starting that first day in August '04 on your shard Maz. Many thanks to you, all the shard owners, Cyan, and the indomitable Chip!!

EDIT: In reply to JWP, I'd (reluctantly) object, if for no other reason than it would be bad marketing. No matter how any other parallel version of Uru was defined, and even if contained to a semi-public or private space, its co-existence with MO:UL would confuse and ultimately dilute the brand.

Lord Chaos · **Joined:** Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:57 am **Posts:** 1337

There's one specific thing I'll really miss. Uru Live has the ages, the future, new stories and new explorers. I look forward to that. What Uru Live lacks is any art materials. I've spent many a contented hour herding cones to a work location and then making designs with them. Cones in live can't be manipulated in any real way; they just tumble around.

So, I hope that the resources freed by the demise of UU will liberate some time to spend working out how to bring art back to the Cavern. Maybe it will be something better than cones!

Marten · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:36 pm

JWPlatt wrote:

Forced choices like that are logical fallacies. I'm surprised you would use it.

I would ask to anyone who agrees that UU has served its purpose and is no longer necessary, would you really object if Cyan is willing and able to come to an alternative arrangement with the small community of shards and their members?

It isn't a logical fallacy. Yes, I would object, because Cyan doesn't have infinite resources and what is described there would require some effort from Cyan, and Turner to approve it.

I would rather see the time and effort spent on enriching and bringing community work into Uru Live rather than on furthering a division in our community between Uru Live and Until Uru.

maztec · **Joined:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:05 am **Posts:** 393

JWPlatt wrote:

Forced choices like that are logical fallacies. I'm surprised you would use it.

I would ask to anyone who agrees that UU has served its purpose and is no longer necessary, would you really object if Cyan is willing and able to come to an alternative arrangement with the small community of shards and their members?

I used it because I do not see how it is fallacious in the particular construct I used. The question I asked is based upon resources. Cyan still has reasonably limited resources. They can choose where they place these resources. The potentially fallacious part is that they can do both, but one, the other, or both will take more time. To improve the question I could have added, "Which would you prefer is done first at the cost of the other taking longer." Which would have potentially been more accurate. But, due to the nature of the options in #1 and the amount of time involved in them, I can foresee the options in #2 either slipping back or significantly holding up the options in #1.

It is possible that you could apply a logical tautology to doing both, but it too would be fallacious and based upon an assumption of infinite resources.

Please explain why you believe the options given to be fallacious.

I know I would rather see something like this:
http://www.urulive.com/forums/viewtopic ... 197#101197

I could see you arguing that the options I gave are biased - but I do not see the argument for fallaciousness.

-M

JWPlatt · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:40 pm

Lord Chaos wrote:

So, I hope that the resources freed by the demise of UU will liberate some time to spend working out how to bring art back to the Cavern. Maybe it will be something better than cones!

Haha, well, if there was ever a logical fallacy I favored, this would be it:

1) Do you want Until Uru preserved like a Dorian Gray picture?

or

2) Do you want cones we can use in Uru Live?

:lol:

Each of us can present our own two choices, yet none of them would really be valid. Personally, given my constraints, I'd choose #2. But I'd still be in favor of a preservation, if possible, which would only be visible to those who already know of it. The forced choice doesn't leave room for that.

maztec · **Joined:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:05 am **Posts:** 393

JWPlatt wrote:

Lord Chaos wrote:

So, I hope that the resources freed by the demise of UU will liberate some time to spend working out how to bring art back to the Cavern. Maybe it will be something better than cones!

Haha, well, if there was ever a logical fallacy I favored, this would be it:

1) Do you want Until Uru preserved like a Dorian Gray picture?

or

2) Do you want cones we can use in Uru Live?

:lol:

Uhmm... #2?

This is only a logical fallacy if you assume that everyone would choose #1 to be false. I can see the attraction of some people to have #1 instead of #2. In reference to my original question, I can see some people choosing #2 rather than #1.

With that in mind. My original set of options were more illustrative of a point and descriptive of limited resources. A rhetorical question. These types of arguments and questions do have their place within logical reasoning.

Please choose one of the following as the truth:
1) If #1 is false, then #2 is true.
2) If #1 is true, then #2 is false.

Please choose one of the following as the truth:
1) If #1 is true, then #2 is true.
2) If #1 is true, then #2 is false.

Please choose one of the following as the truth:
1) If #2 is true, then #1 is true.
2) If #2 is false, then #1 is false.

Logic is a nasty beast. But you can still illustrate a point with it.

*shrug* But, point still stands, I don't see the fallacy in my original question. To me both options are valid and come down to preference, not a fallacy. The fallacy would exist if I had phrased it so that UL completely dies at the cost of UU.

-M

Rex Havoc · **Posted:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:02 pm

Hmm, Maz, there is a way to get dial-up to work?

I am able to get on at work and have brought all the files home with me. I just can't get past the initial update at the very beginning of the game. (Dial-up mode) It finishes the update, then end up with the dreaded 0 sec message that never goes away. Greydragon indicated it was a timing/timeout issue.

D'mala, Until Uru and player created content.

Who is online