As the Britain Stone Turns

[Kael]

Maybe this batch of devs can revisit creating a pre AoS server. I believe this is a different group that decided against it in the past.

There is a demand for it, for sure. The unmentionable places have better numbers than we have just about any day of the week. It seems to me like there wouldn't be a ton of work involved to maintain such a server once they actually create a pre AoS server. My guess is that a legit pre AoS server could help keep this game afloat with paid subscriptions. Heck, if they made a Siege-like pre AoS server that would be awesome. Ultimately, it was the addition of AoS and everything since that has killed the original success of Siege.

I know it would bring a ton of players back and probally poach alot of players from current shards. I think it would ultimately depend on the level of support (gm's, events ect) that would determine if it was a success or not.

Not trying to bring another game into this thread but Shards (filled with former lead designers of UO) has a wild concept. You have the game itself and official shards. You also have the option to have player run shards through the game. UO would be awesome in this format. Like a particular era create a shard. UO has some incrediblely talented and creative players involved in the game.

 

[Wulf2k]

f2p would be great for UO

Give me unlimited accounts and within a week I would have 200 mages casting synchronized explosions on any character in Luna GZ not naked and reciting Gilbert and Sullivan.

And by "I", I mean "a friend of mine".

F2P is not the way to go.

 

[Kael]

Whats to stop you now setting up beginners accounts?? Can't you get a free trial anymore?

 

[Wulf2k]

Trial requires the entry of a registration key provided above. A major credit card is required to validate your account but will not be charged during the trial period. Please note the credit card will be automatically charged at the end of the trial unless cancelled.

 

[Kael]

I wonder if the other F2p games experienced this type abuse? Couldn't they just ban the ip address of those abusing the system?

 

[Wulf2k]

Most other F2P games don't have the problem because a newbie doesn't matter.

UO is unique because even a brand new character can block movement, and their combat skills are enough to bring down any vet if you co-ordinate enough of them.

Any other MMORPG you could have thousands of newbie accounts and an established character would down them in a single AoE without losing 1% of his HP.

 

[Wulf2k]

Couldn't they just ban the ip address of those abusing the system?

IP bans are incredibly easy to get around, and incredibly inaccurate.

How would you like to log in one day and be told that you can't log in because your ISP randomly assigned you an IP from the pool that had previously been banned?

 

[Dust_Priest]

Hmm...

 

[tangar]

Give me unlimited accounts and within a week I would have 200 mages casting synchronized explosions on any character in Luna GZ not naked and reciting Gilbert and Sullivan.
F2P is not the way to go.

Trial requires the entry of a registration key provided above. A major credit card is required to validate your account but will not be charged during the trial period. Please note the credit card will be automatically charged at the end of the trial unless cancelled.

The same restricton has to be provided to f2p. So, if you wanna make f2p account you have to validate your account with a credit card. So no crown of twinks. That's all Get catched at some kind of hack (cheater's report proofs now really easy with video capture) - you credit card got banned and you can't make new f2p account with this CC.

 

[Spiffykeen]

with a pre-aos ruleset, I could teach the newbies how ruin might force their power to be vanquished again!

 

[Wulf2k]

The same restricton has to be provided to f2p. So, if you wanna make f2p account you have to validate your account with a credit card. So no crown of twinks. That's all Get catched at some kind of hack (cheater's report proofs now really easy with video capture) - you credit card got banned and you can't make new f2p account with this CC.

Ask for a CC and you lose 98% of the people that will play a F2P. You have to hook them first before you ask for a CC or they just won't do it. They'd be suspicious of surprise charges.

 

[Dust_Priest]

You better stay away from him, he'll rip ye lungs out Jim.
Hah.. I'd like to meet his Tailor.

 

[Kael]

IP bans are incredibly easy to get around, and incredibly inaccurate.

How would you like to log in one day and be told that you can't log in because your ISP randomly assigned you an IP from the pool that had previously been banned?

Funny you mention that. Other games that I play that are free and are similar in nature to "uo" haven't an issue with limiting accounts to two per unique ip. In fact may people were banned for having more than this set limit. I'm sure there are multiple ways around this...but for the average joe it won't be an issue if UO went F2p. There are dupers and exploiters now. Deal with them when they arise...

 

[tangar]

Ask for a CC and you lose 98% of the people that will play a F2P. You have to hook them first before you ask for a CC or they just won't do it. They'd be suspicious of surprise charges.

I don't think so. Who wanna play f2p UO (A LOT of people who playing now at free shards) would come, get registered f2p acc with CC and play for free forever hehe.

 

[Klapauc]

Funny you mention that. Other games that I play that are free and are similar in nature to "uo" haven't an issue with limiting accounts to two per unique ip. In fact may people were banned for having more than this set limit. I'm sure there are multiple ways around this...but for the average joe it won't be an issue if UO went F2p. There are dupers and exploiters now. Deal with them when they arise...

You miss some important difference here . Free f2p uo shards are not run by a company that needs to make a profit for shareholders. The people behind those shards can ban everyone they want to ban without any real consequence.

Official UO does need to make a small profit to pay those people working on it. Unfortunalty, uo has a small player base including a lot of people that do run a metric ****ton of accounts, often old time vets with too much rl money. A certain amount of them does cheat, script and afk macroing whereever possible. If Broadsword would want to get rid of them, they would need to ban alot of accounts. That does mean lots of money lost, thats why you will not see it.

Agra-Lem

 

[Wulf2k]

Other games that I play that are free and are similar in nature to "uo" haven't an issue with limiting accounts to two per unique ip

Right now, if you limit accounts to two per IP you'll piss off a non-negligible percent of the Siege userbase.

 

[Kael]

Right now, if you limit accounts to two per IP you'll piss off a non-negligible percent of the Siege userbase.

My guess is that more than two accts could be a paid fee. It is free to pay basic level...extras cost. That is were unprofitable games have begun quite profitable. Keep the hard core gamers but add serious numbers through free casual accts

 

[Kael]

You miss some important difference here . Free f2p uo shards are not run by a company that needs to make a profit for shareholders. The people behind those shards can ban everyone they want to ban without any real consequence.

Official UO does need to make a small profit to pay those people working on it. Unfortunalty, uo has a small player base including a lot of people that do run a metric ****ton of accounts, often old time vets with too much rl money. A certain amount of them does cheat, script and afk macroing whereever possible. If Broadsword would want to get rid of them, they would need to ban alot of accounts. That does mean lots of money lost, thats why you will not see it.

Agra-Lem

I wasn't really going into the economies of those games that can't be mentioned. But by your rationale, keep the exploiters, dupers and griefers in the game for their 15 bucks a month. Thus losing players every week as they get fed up with those very same exploiters, cheaters and dupers. This has bled UO for years.
If you compare a few of the F2p games out there, LOTR for one. They would have closed due to low subscriptions, now they seem to be more vibrant and profitable. D & D online was the same I believe.

 

[Wulf2k]

Your version of F2P keeps the exploiters, cheaters, and dupers, except now they don't have to pay for disposable accounts.

 

[Klapauc]

I wasn't really going into the economies of those games that can't be mentioned. But by your rationale, keep the exploiters, dupers and griefers in the game for their 15 bucks a month. Thus losing players every week as they get fed up with those very same exploiters, cheaters and dupers. This has bled UO for years.

Its not my personal opinion. I would like it different. But welcome to a world that is run by cold economics and short term goals.

 

[Kael]

Your version of F2P keeps the exploiters, cheaters, and dupers, except now they don't have to pay for disposable accounts.

How do you figure?? It will allow a ton of griefers to play...well a ton more because more might be playing. It isn't my version. Its a version that is the current trend in mmorpg. Have you even read up on the success that many mmorpg's have had with this method or you just opposed for personal opinion? Like I said...actually ban the accounts and ip's of abusers.

 

[Kael]

Its not my personal opinion. I would like it different. But welcome to a world that is run by cold economics and short term goals.

The cold reality is that UO seems to have fewer and fewer players logging in every day. Some get bored of the game...most seem to quit because they are just "bored" in the game without as many friends playing. The game needs more people playing to survive.

 

[Troll The T Hunter]

I'm confused do elected officials have the ability to ask for changes to the game now or something?

 

[Wulf2k]

Nope, just people feeling important.

 

[Wulf2k]

Have you even read up on the success that many mmorpg's have had with this method or you just opposed for personal opinion?

I don't care about other F2Ps, I care about UO.

You are suggesting specific changes to UO and I am pointing out why they are not good changes.

 

[kelmo]

Hallelujah! It is raining sense!

 

[Kael]

I don't care about other F2Ps, I care about UO.

You are suggesting specific changes to UO and I am pointing out why they are not good changes.

I don't care about other F2Ps, I care about UO.

You are suggesting specific changes to UO and I am pointing out why they are not good changes.

I am repeating a formula that has been successful in keeping games that were quickly dying due to a huge lack of population afloat and actually bring in a much larger playerbase and profitability. You on the other hand are just spouting your opinion on how exploitation "would" happen and how in fact you could exploit the game. I guess I care about UO as well ... other than I hope to play it with more than 20 other people.

 

[Kat]

You miss some important difference here . Free f2p uo shards are not run by a company that needs to make a profit for shareholders. The people behind those shards can ban everyone they want to ban without any real consequence.

Official UO does need to make a small profit to pay those people working on it. Unfortunalty, uo has a small player base including a lot of people that do run a metric ****ton of accounts, often old time vets with too much rl money. A certain amount of them does cheat, script and afk macroing whereever possible. If Broadsword would want to get rid of them, they would need to ban alot of accounts. That does mean lots of money lost, thats why you will not see it.

Agra-Lem

That first part is not quite true. The f2p shards make money in other ways. When they end up having to ban players for breaking the rules, they are indeed cutting their paying player base. Just because they are not required to pay to play, does not mean they aren't paying for other services. The UO powers that be just have not caught on or are maybe just too lazy [IMO] to make that source of revenue more lucrative.

 

[Wulf2k]

I am repeating a formula that has been successful in keeping games that were quickly dying due to a huge lack of population afloat and actually bring in a much larger playerbase and profitability

And you are doing it at the cost of UO.

I'd rather it die as UO than survive as nameless F2P #834834782.

Edit: Regardless, enough time has been spent on F2P talk. Let's talk about something relevant.

Kill anybody interesting in Brit lately?

 

[Kat]

And you are doing it at the cost of UO.

I'd rather it die as UO than survive as nameless F2P #834834782.

Edit: Regardless, enough time has been spent on F2P talk. Let's talk about something relevant.

Kill anybody interesting in Brit lately?

This is a very relevant topic.

I think most of us here prefer to play UO legitimately. This conversation isn't so much about F2P shards as much as it is about what Broadsword could do to make a lot of current and, most definitely, old UO players happy. I have been a guild leader here for nearly 10 years now and I cannot count how many players have drifted in and out of my guild, disappointed that Siege isn't the old UO they knew and loved.

Lets face it, UO really isn't getting many, if any new players at all. UO has a niche market. Instead of attempting to keep up with the WoW's of this world, many of us feel they should be catering to and cashing in on what their share of the market really wants. Trammelites like Trammel, a great many Siege/Mugen players like what they are playing now and there is a relatively large portion of that player base AND old players who would love to PAY to play a pre AoS version of the game. There is a fairly large untapped group of players who want a previous version of UO and we all want legit UO to survive for many years to come. If the devs would allow a little open communication and hear some of the details, they might see there are many other ways beyond basic subscriptions, to bring in a lot more money. Allowing some open conversation on this subject where they can sit back and hear/read about all the possibilities and brainstorming that would undoubtedly happen, could potentially help them claim a bigger portion of their niche market and cash in.

 

[tangar]

F2p wouldn't change anything in YOUR (person who reads this words) gamestyle, you just would see A LOT of new players. Are you scared of gold sellers? They already here. If you don't buy gold - you wouldn't see difference. Are you scared of bots and macroses? They already here for a 10+ years. For PKers it's even fun to kill macroser and took all his stuff, then report him and get him banned Nothing would change except there would be more players = more fun.

Also economy would stay alive because of a lot of new people have to buy and sell things. More consumption = healthy market.

 

[Kael]

This is a very relevant topic.

I think most of us here prefer to play UO legitimately. This conversation isn't so much about F2P shards as much as it is about what Broadsword could do to make a lot of current and, most definitely, old UO players happy. I have been a guild leader here for nearly 10 years now and I cannot count how many players have drifted in and out of my guild, disappointed that Siege isn't the old UO they knew and loved.

Lets face it, UO really isn't getting many, if any new players at all. UO has a niche market. Instead of attempting to keep up with the WoW's of this world, many of us feel they should be catering to and cashing in on what their share of the market really wants. Trammelites like Trammel, a great many Siege/Mugen players like what they are playing now and there is a relatively large portion of that player base AND old players who would love to PAY to play a pre AoS version of the game. There is a fairly large untapped group of players who want a previous version of UO and we all want legit UO to survive for many years to come. If the devs would allow a little open communication and hear some of the details, they might see there are many other ways beyond basic subscriptions, to bring in a lot more money. Allowing some open conversation on this subject where they can sit back and hear/read about all the possibilities and brainstorming that would undoubtedly happen, could potentially help them claim a bigger portion of their niche market and cash in.

agreed.

 

[Troop]

I don't know what the answer is. I do know that F2P = Expensive to Win.

 

[Kael]

What do you mean by that Troop?

 

[Wulf2k]

For F2P to make sense, they must take in more money through transactions than is currently coming in through subscriptions.

The easiest way to do this is by selling ******* Sword of +1 Winningness for $19.99. To combat the ******* Sword of +1 Winningness, you must buy the Calfskin Armor of -1 Losingness. for $19.99.

Some get it right. Many get it wrong.

EA is not the bastion of reasonable in-game purchases.

 

[Kael]

A new classic shard could be a huge money maker right of the start. Homes, ethies, dye tubs, cbd's, more accts...the works. Instead of vet rewards, make new items appear each month that can be bought with donation currency.

Basically, all the extra bling in the game can be had through purchases. Nothing pvp related, skill related or anything that could effectively give others a competitive edge.

 

[Wulf2k]

Are you gonna pay $15 per month rent on your house?

CBDs no longer get rewarded through BODs?

Ethies are now pay to win?

Pay per charge of a dye tub?

So basically everything fun about UO is now a separate purchase?

You're right, that does sound profitable. Count me out.

 

[The Writer]

F2P isn't the answer, people love spending money on games this is a proven fact. If you think by removing the actual subscription cost that it will "REALLY" change the amount of players we actually see on each shard and ultima online altogether you are kidding yourself. I've played LOTRO, DDO, and GUILDWARS all are free to play, I have accounts for each one and guess what? I don't play them, My parent's spent 400 dollars upgrading their LoTRo accounts with new updates and whatever else that was 2 separate accounts 400$, guess what they don't even play them. People don't care that much about subscription costs for it to be worth it. I've said this before and I'll say this again. It's not about making the game cheaper that will bring people here. Why do you think WoW was so popular, it's not free to play. It was something new entirely that honestly already had a player base back with warcraft 1, 2 and 3. I played and hated wow, I loved Warcraft 3.

LoTRo, DDo, and Guildwars all when they came out were overrun with players because why?

It was new and shiny people love to play with things while it's new after so long though people lose interest, In an open world with no ending it's impossible to keep everyone's attention forever so what do games do to even try this? DLC (downloadable content) and not just any DLC viable good DLC things people would enjoy (of course this is difficult to accomplish) Now, this being said Ultima is infinitely older than any of these games, and has lasted so many years as an online game.
But even those games are failing and because of that Guildwars put out Guildwars 2 and other such upgrades exist for other MMO's they upgrade the graphics, the storyline put in a new world here and there for people to explore after they've finished the old.

I've said it before and I'll say it again Ultima Online 2

*After Note*
If Ultima online becomes free 2 play like other games I've listed and more then the best you can hope for, besides never really finding a house location. Is that people will get bored both here and on whatever other games they play and will bounce around between all their "F2P" games.

 

[FrejaSP]

I don't like F2P. It is not cheaper, just a different way to pay. We already have alot stuff we can buy on EA Store, that's fine. No need to make it F2P as it not really are free as you don't get far without buying stuff.
I really don't see a problem in paying a each month.
Maybe we need different level of account:

Iron:
2 char slots (if more chars on account, only 2 first slots can be logged in)
Only access to Trammel (Britania and T2A) and Felucca
No house, let them have 250 items in bank (If house on the account, it will start to decay when account is made iron)
Can't use power scrolls and stats scrolls, and can't get them from spawn
All booster packs and SA are disabled
Do not get Holidays gifts
Do not get vet revards
Montly fee: $ 3

Bronze:
2 char slot (if more chars on account, only 2 first slots can be logged in)
Only access to Trammel (Britania and T2A) and Felucca
Can only place Classic house 7x7 (if house on account, it will start to decay unless they rezise it)
Can't use power scrolls and stats scrolls and can't get them from spawn
All booster packs and SA are disabled
Do not get Holidays gifts
Do not get vet revards
Montly fee: $ 6

Silver:
5 char slot (if more chars on account, only 5 first slots can be logged in)
Access to all facets if SA activated on the account
Can own all Classic houses but large Tower, Keep and Castle and 2 stores customizing houses (if house on account, it will start to decay unless they rezise it)
Can use power scrolls and stats scrolls
All booster packs and SA can be used if account is upgraded with them
Will get Holidays gifts
Monthly fee: $9

Gold:
Max char slots
Access to all facets
Can place all houses and an extra small house on different shard
Access to all SA, High Sea and all booster packs however to get the items, they need to buy the booster packs
With other words, everything is possible
Will get Holidays gifts
Monthly fee: $13

Much better than F2P in my opinion

 

[Kael]

F2P isn't the answer, people love spending money on games this is a proven fact. If you think by removing the actual subscription cost that it will "REALLY" change the amount of players we actually see on each shard and ultima online altogether you are kidding yourself. I've played LOTRO, DDO, and GUILDWARS all are free to play, I have accounts for each one and guess what? I don't play them, My parent's spent 400 dollars upgrading their LoTRo accounts with new updates and whatever else that was 2 separate accounts 400$, guess what they don't even play them. People don't care that much about subscription costs for it to be worth it. I've said this before and I'll say this again. It's not about making the game cheaper that will bring people here. Why do you think WoW was so popular, it's not free to play. It was something new entirely that honestly already had a player base back with warcraft 1, 2 and 3. I played and hated wow, I loved Warcraft 3.

LoTRo, DDo, and Guildwars all when they came out were overrun with players because why?

It was new and shiny people love to play with things while it's new after so long though people lose interest, In an open world with no ending it's impossible to keep everyone's attention forever so what do games do to even try this? DLC (downloadable content) and not just any DLC viable good DLC things people would enjoy (of course this is difficult to accomplish) Now, this being said Ultima is infinitely older than any of these games, and has lasted so many years as an online game.
But even those games are failing and because of that Guildwars put out Guildwars 2 and other such upgrades exist for other MMO's they upgrade the graphics, the storyline put in a new world here and there for people to explore after they've finished the old.

I've said it before and I'll say it again Ultima Online 2

*After Note*
If Ultima online becomes free 2 play like other games I've listed and more then the best you can hope for, besides never really finding a house location. Is that people will get bored both here and on whatever other games they play and will bounce around between all their "F2P" games.

But WOW is F2p...up to a certain level. The head designer has also stated that they see WOW going completely F2p in the next few years as membership declines. Don't forget a few years ago they had 12 million subscriptions and now are closer to 7.7 million. Yes...LoTRo had their legacy accounts...means they just paid their lifelong subscription costs in advance and I'm sorry your parents don't play there anymore. Of course, would they still be playing there if they just paid their monthly??

 

[Kael]

Are you gonna pay $15 per month rent on your house?

CBDs no longer get rewarded through BODs?

Ethies are now pay to win?

Pay per charge of a dye tub?

So basically everything fun about UO is now a separate purchase?

You're right, that does sound profitable. Count me out.

You mean I gotta buy soulstones from the UO Store? And advance chars tokens, and sex change tokens, evil furniture tokens, and hoachi pigments tokens, and heritage tokens and race change tokens and all the upgrade packages so I can make beer and have cool Gothic walls in my house?

You pay 15 per month so after a year you can get an ethy. Would you be willing to buy an ethy straight out for 2 bucks to enhance your gameplay right off the bat?

Or don't buy anything from the store and just farm and play the game. Then use your gold to buy some of these items off other players. You know....the same way people buy tokens and items off players right now or pay for others to buy them timecards for their accounts.

Again, yes it is a different way to pay for a game you enjoy. Buy what you want...don't purchase what you don't want. But hopefully it reopens the game for people again and makes it busier. Thus keeping more people from leaving cause they are bored playing a mmorpg in single player mode.

Anyways, I said my piece on this and am going to let it die before Kelmo comes back in with a random troll comment that doesn't really apply to the thread

 

[Troll The T Hunter]

The game is dead because it's old not because of the way we pay for it. Someday WoW will be dead. All games get old.

 

[The Writer]

Thank you Troll, someone who seems to understand what was said. Perhaps I should have just kept it to one line like that.

 

[Wulf2k]

Edit: Enough. Free to play is not free to play and I would not enjoy the changes to UO required for it to work.

Nothing more needs to be said by me on the topic.

 

[Kael]

The game is dead because it's old not because of the way we pay for it. Someday WoW will be dead. All games get old.

The game is certainly not dead. Do a little research and you would see 400 plus attend random events on a Tuesday night. SP is dead as are most servers not named Atlantic. The game is old...but many would really like to see the "old" original UO ruleset and era come back compared to the watered down version it is now.

 

[The Writer]

Kael, I think your not understanding that bringing back old uo and the people who enjoy uo as is now would not mix. Even if they decided to bring and open a shard that played only to the so called "Old Uo" ruleset that would only decrease population on the shards we have now. People might come over from the f2p's to play however they would not play here on siege nor most of the other shards in the game. So if your not one of those people who would give up everything to play the old version of ultima then you'd be left on a shard that might be just a little quieter than it was previous to the release of the Pre-Shard.

 

[Kael]

The Writer...or should I call you by the name I know you , maybe your not understanding "my opinion" that people tend to play various shards at the same time. Why would they not also be interested in perhaps checking out something a little bit different and perhaps try the recent client of UO in addition to the era that holds sentimental value and actually gets them to return to the game?

We can all guess at what might be successful and what might not be successful. Same as we can all have a personal preference of whether we would like to see some kind of change happen to UO or not. I personally did not like the new billing system but I adapted... many didn't and just quit. The only reason why F2p even came up was someone was talking about idea's to bring in more players. Guess what, there are thousands of players playing UO in a F2p environment. How much busier would SP be if even 100 of them tried the shard?

Again, stop mentioning me and dragging me back into this conversation...I get very bored at work and can't help but post. Muhahahhaha !

 

[Troop]

What do you mean by that Troop?

Basically I am no expert but I did play 2 different games that were advertised as F2P. Both games were fun in the beginning and I figured what the heck, they are free to play. The problem became that there was absolutely no way to advance in the game and compete unless you shelled out a lot of $$$ like the people that were in the lead did. I felt like I had been tricked into something and gave up never to log in again. I was able to play for free but to have any chance of winning would have cost me a lot more than I invest in UO.

 

[kelmo]

...
Anyways, I said my piece on this and am going to let it die before Kelmo comes back in with a random troll comment that doesn't really apply to the thread

 

[tangar]

The game is certainly not dead. Do a little research and you would see 400 plus attend random events on a Tuesday night. SP is dead as are most servers not named Atlantic. The game is old...but many would really like to see the "old" original UO ruleset and era come back compared to the watered down version it is now.

I totally agreee with Kael.

You guys speaking of your feelings, Kael and I giving you facts. Look:

There are bunch of _new_ MMORPGs which released "dead" because of _old_ model of subscription. For example, LotRo, SWTOR, RIFT, Age of Conan, Fallen Earth.. I could continue this list hehe.

All this games was nearly dead right after release because of subscription model. Nowadays you cant sell pig in a poke. When they went to fp2 they obtain a new life.

I played SWTOR and LotRo with p2p model and after they went to f2p. Its huge difference in a good way. MMORPG without people is quite sad place. Subscription models is dead, not Ultima Online. Even World of Warcraft with all its power would go fp2 soon (first step - they introduced game shop recently).

Troop, thingy is that you could just continue pay subscription and have all benefits which you have right now. You don't have to buy something if you pay subscription. F2P is just giving opportunities to play game without subscription. Its alternative, not a obligatory thing which wouldn't change anything in gaming style of player who would prefer old way to pay for the game.