Compare what Everquest gets to UO for expansions

[JC the Builder]

Here are the details for the next expansion of Everquest, not to be mistaken with Everquest II.

• +5 Level Increase – Achieve a New Max Level of 90 and set a new standard of gameplay
• More than 800 AAs – Elevate your power and abilities beyond the norm
• In-game Housing Addition – Make your permanent mark on the world! Collect and display treasured items
• New Housing Trophy System – Display your trophies and receive statistical benefits
• Hundreds of new housing items to decorate your house to your own style
• 18 Raids – Collect valuable rewards from all new adventures
• 13 Zones – Be the first to discover untouched lands of Norrath
• 450+ Spells – Exponentially add to your caster's arsenal
• 17 Missions – Experience intriguing lore and immersive Missions
• 120+ Quests – Challenge your skills and gather useful loot
• Inventory increase – Indulge the packrat in you and collect even more game goodies

Compare this to what we got in Stygian Abyss:

• Gargoyle Race
• A dozen new boss monsters
• 3 new areas
• 16 new spells in Mysticism
• A couple dozen new quests
• Imbuing, which should have probably been added with Age of Shadows

Why is Everquest getting so much more out of their expansions than we do? This seems to be more than normal for an EQ expansion, but it is still way more than we got in Stygian Abyss which was 3 years in the making.

 

[jtw1984]

I'm glad they didn't add on 450+ new spells. Who has the time for that now and days? lol

 

[Tazar]

Looks to me like Everquest is playing catch-up...

Many things on that list we have had for ages now...

 

[Cear Dallben Dragon]

Here are the details for the next expansion of Everquest, not to be mistaken with Everquest II.

• +5 Level Increase – Achieve a New Max Level of 90 and set a new standard of gameplay
• 18 Raids – Collect valuable rewards from all new adventures
• 13 Zones – Be the first to discover untouched lands of Norrath
• 450+ Spells – Exponentially add to your caster's arsenal
• 17 Missions – Experience intriguing lore and immersive Missions
• 120+ Quests – Challenge your skills and gather useful loot


• Housing and things involved - UO has already
• Inventory increase – UO has already

Compare this to what we got in Stygian Abyss:

• Gargoyle Race
• A dozen new boss monsters
• 3 new areas
• 16 new spells in Mysticism
• A couple dozen new quests
• Imbuing, which should have probably been added with Age of Shadows

I changed the quote around a bit

no need for EQ to mention all that housing crap as separate content.
And it seems to me a lot is missing from the Ultima Online list that could have been added. Such as near non-stop live event action, weekly in game events (RIP Eris) new housing tile-sets hundreds of new artifacts and weapon properties, and countless items in general, unprecedented dungeon architectures as well. I could probably go on.
But i see what you mean. Tho Ultima Online is not the type of game that i feel adding 400+ spells to would do any good.

 

[Mapper]

450 spells?! I haven't gotten round to learning and using all 64 of the magery ones!

 

[Nexus]

450 spells?! I haven't gotten round to learning and using all 64 of the magery ones!

A lot of that is because of the class system EQ uses, Some spells cross class, but have different names, and as you increase in levels you can learn more powerful versions of the same spells. In UO on the other hand spells naturally increase in power as skill improves (to an extent), that 450+ spells really is more like maybe 100 when to simplify it. UO isn't far behind on that in all honesty, when you look at all the spells for Magery, Necromancy, Spellweaving, Chivalry, Mysticism, Ninjitsu And Bushido. You also have to factor in "Why" EQ has to do what they do in expansions, but sitting on a leveling system you constantly have to raise the upper limits, you can't modify your characters template to explore new avenues with a character. By the time you invest in leveling a toon to high levels you usually don't want to delete it and build a new one.

 

[JC the Builder]

Looks to me like Everquest is playing catch-up...

Many things on that list we have had for ages now...

I am not focusing on the specific additions, I am pointing out how much stuff they are getting. Housing we already have, but when was the last time UO got an addition as big as housing?

How about when they added Ninjitsu and Bushido skills. One has 8 abilities, the other has 6. A total of 14 new "spells". This EQ expansion is adding over 450. That is about 3 times the spells that exist in UO today (UO has 137 spells total), in an expansion. The current standard for a new magic skill appears to be 16 spells. But Magery has 64! Why are additions to UO always so paltry?

 

[longshanks]

im sorta surprised this coming from you jc.

im only playing for 3 years. for the first 1-1/2 years nothing changed. the last 1-1/2 have changed dramatically.

i think there is a good crew in place at the moment. We also lost some good people over the past year.

i really don't give a flip what everquest gets. i think our crew is on the right path right now. Changes to t-chests are very nice. t-hunting is now a really good quild event. nice items, good drop rates.... cant say enough

450 spells, jeez louise, no thank you.

 

[Stupid Miner]

A lot of that is because of the class system EQ uses, Some spells cross class, but have different names, and as you increase in levels you can learn more powerful versions of the same spells. In UO on the other hand spells naturally increase in power as skill improves (to an extent), that 450+ spells really is more like maybe 100 when to simplify it.

Well, take Magery... if we include all the weaker and stronger versions of the same spell as a different spell we have (including success and fail %)

120 Magery x 120 Eval Int x 64 Spells = 921,600 spells just for Magery!

It's really easy to get impressive-looking numbers with a bit of deceptive... er... creative mathematics.

 

[NuSair]

Those are not 450 'new' spells.

There are 3 types of classes in EQ. Non-magic, hybrid and pure caster.

Each expansion the hybrid and pure casters get like 5 spells per level.

Chances are (and without looking) they would go something like this:
For the Enchanter:
level 90
Clarity X single target
Rune XIX
Direct Damage Nuke IV
Haste XI single target
Mez single target up to level 92

level 91
Slow XI single target
Tash
Magic Resistance Buff X
Damage Over Time IX
Group Mez upto level 92

level 92
Clarity X group
Haste XI group
Mez single target upto 95
Stun XV

Yeah- it's like that.

To give a similarity in UO would be if they 'levels' of spells you could cast depending on your skill level. Example- Fireball I at 30, Fireball II at 50, Fireball III at 80, IV at 100 and X at 120 (kinda like that idea actually).

That is why I have said that designing an expansion for EQ is MUCH easier than designing an expansion for UO.

While the list looks impressive, having played EQ for 5 years in a highend raiding guild, it's not as impressive as it looks.

 

[NuSair]

450 spells?! I haven't gotten round to learning and using all 64 of the magery ones!

95-99% of those are just level upgrades of previous spells.

 

[Silverbird]

I havent played/tested Eq but I know that you cannot really compare those two.

With increasing the max lvl of chars you need new zones becourse the old ones are usually obsolete. EQ's endcontent is raiding while UOs is ... aehm ... having fun. *g* If the spell system of Eq is similar to that one in WoW you would need to count all of UOs weapon specials into that cathegory, too. (And dont forget that you are having different lvls of them in EQ.)

 

[Viper09]

Me thinks you're intentionally down-playing the stuff that UO got. The land additions including the dungeons are pretty nice. Unlike EQ though, no areas go obsolete due to levels so there is no dire need to add in "high level areas."

UO doesn't do raids, we don't have levels, the additional spells as mentioned are just upgrades and if we counted all abilities/spells we probably have the same amount. Not even sure what an AA is, lol. We don't need inventory increase. Your list is obviously biased here and intentionally trying to bash UO by comparison.

 

[Llewen]

I hate level based games. Absolutely hate them. I don't particularly care if a list of expansion content is longer than every UO expansion combined if the base game is something I can't stand...

 

[phantus]

I completely agree. Any other game comes out with an expansion the amount of actual content dwarfs the typical UO expansion. SE was trash and wouldn't have been worth a free digital download. ML was one of the best expansions and it was tiny.

Why are additions to UO always so paltry?

2 reasons:

1.) Entire teams moving every 2 years.
2.) Look through the answers in this thread. When it's not expected you don't have to meet it.

 

[JC the Builder]

UO doesn't do raids, we don't have levels, the additional spells as mentioned are just upgrades and if we counted all abilities/spells we probably have the same amount. Not even sure what an AA is, lol. We don't need inventory increase. Your list is obviously biased here and intentionally trying to bash UO by comparison.

UO added raid style encounters with Peerless.

As for people saying Everquest has the same amount of spells as UO, I went and counted the Wizard spells. I stopped after 100, excluding the 1x 2x 3x etc. duplicates.

http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spelllist.html?classes=WIZ&source=Live&page=1

While the spell system might be different, it looks like the Wizard has more than every UO spell combined in one class.

 

[MalagAste]

Thank god I play UO not Everquest.

 

[Lord Chaos]

UO has a small team and they have to duplicate efforts to two clients. (and also create the EC originally)

 

[Coldren]

While the spell system might be different, it looks like the Wizard has more than every UO spell combined in one class.

Quality over quantity, if you ask me.

If you break it down, here's the spell types:

Direct Damage
Area of Effect
Healing
Summoning
Teleportation/Movement Augmentation
Damage Over Time
Cone
Party/Raid Spells
Buffs

You don't need over 100 variations to do essentially these 9 things, or a combination thereof. It's overkill. I'm sure there may be a type or two I'm missing, but the point remains.

My guess is that wizard needs to kill things. Odds are, over 75% of those spells do the same thing with different spell effects, and maybe slight variations based on type (Fire, ice, etc).

I can change the colors and effects of Magic Arrow and give it 100 different names and call them separate spells if that'd impress you.

Quests? Kill this, gather that, go here, or go online and read the guide that tells me where to stand and what to do.

Raids? Keep'em. Raiding is why I don't play WoW, which does raids better than anyone else anyway.

Missions? Quests? So why differentiate? A quest 10x as long and broken up over time is still a quest none the less, and again, same elements.

Inventory Increase? Fine. I could use some more bank space, but if I need more than what a house and bank could provide across all my characters.. Maybe have more than I really need or will ever really appreciate?

Zones? I barely leave the old lands. I barely if ever have stepped foot in SA (Outside of beta testing, of course), Tok, or Malas.. Barely been to Ish, and I'm still too busy to bother. What good is land if there's nothing going on in it anyway? Or more of the same in it?

Now don't get me wrong, I can see a lot of improvements UO needs, but this isn't the comparison I'd make.

 

[Evlar]

No interest here in Everquest.

The only MMO I've subscribed to, was UO.

Now waiting on the "yay" or "nay" on classic shards.

If it's "nay", then I guess that's it for me with MMO's, as nothing else has captured my interest or my imagination.

 

[Nexus]

Damage Over Time

That's what I wish UO would have more of. A healthy dose of DoT damage would be awesome... The Necro I play in EQ when I get the itch and re-activate my account every few years does huge damage off DoT's while my summon tanks.

 

[Coldren]

That's what I wish UO would have more of. A healthy dose of DoT damage would be awesome... The Necro I play in EQ when I get the itch and re-activate my account every few years does huge damage off DoT's while my summon tanks.

And, in some way, you are kind of making my point.

You have various poison spells and attacks, as well as bleed attacks (Or chance of bleed attack). Not missing any, am I? In your case, isn't a pet technically considered a DoT, since it does damage independent of your actions at a generally fixed rate (Aside from the order to kill or stop, of course)?

How many would you really need, and how many should their be before they become a balancing problem? Especially in a sandbox like UO. Say there were 3 skills that have DoT attacks - What happens when you have all 3 skills and can use them all? And more importantly, if they're so widely available, what about them makes them unique? They all DO the same thing, just with different names and maybe different visuals, with slightly different requirements.

Sure, it's nice to have options, but if it's only a perceived difference, not a substantial one or more importantly, one that can adversely affect game play, is it really necessary?

 

[Spree]

• +5 Level Increase – Achieve a New Max Level of 90 and set a new standard of gameplay



If uo raised the skill points do you know how unbalancing that would be

 

[JC the Builder]

You don't need over 100 variations to do essentially these 9 things, or a combination thereof. It's overkill. I'm sure there may be a type or two I'm missing, but the point remains.

Chivalry only has 10 spells. I could write 22 more in about an hour or two, each would be different enough to be useful in some situation.

UO expansions have a history of consisting of a lot less content compared to other games. There hasn't been an expansion since Age of Shadows which has really added to the game. Even Stygian Abyss has fallen short of what we expected it to be. Is crafting fixed? No. Do player's play Gargoyles? Not really.

 

[Coldren]

Chivalry only has 10 spells. I could write 22 more in about an hour or two, each would be different enough to be useful in some situation.

Would they be 22 more that are significantly different in style or purpose than any other existing ones?

If you can, how many will you make for every other skill, that are all unique and different for one another?

And what happens when you combine skills?

It's one thing to do this on a class-by-class basis in a PvE only game with pre-defined roles, static content, and a completely lossless system, but much bigger issues arises when you consider that ANY combination of skills is possible (within the point limit, of course) in an open world scenario that includes item loss and PvP.

It's not the same discussion.

UO expansions have a history of consisting of a lot less content compared to other games. There hasn't been an expansion since Age of Shadows which has really added to the game. Even Stygian Abyss has fallen short of what we expected it to be. Is crafting fixed? No. Do player's play Gargoyles? Not really.

You can slant this any way you want, really, I can't change your perception. It might be less in some areas, but have you ever stopped to think what is really needed to be ADDED to the game compared to what needs to be UTILIZED and FIXED?

If they spent as much time fixing bugs, balancing issues, etc., as they do adding expansions with stuff we don't really need, or content that's only marginally appreciated/experienced/used, UO would be a much more polished machine. I'd rather they give us NO expansions personally, and just fixed what vast, underused resources we already have.

 

[JC the Builder]

Would they be 22 more that are significantly different in style or purpose than any other existing ones?

Of course. While some spells may have similar abilities, they could be of different strengths. Here are 2 quick examples:

Knight's Shroud: 15 Mana - Increase Physical Resistance by 5 for 60 seconds.

Holy Brilliance - 50 Mana - 3x as damaging as Holy Light

I think it would be good when deciding to create or add to a skill, developers just go off for a little while and write down every spell idea they have. They should easily have a few dozen. Then pare that down to a reasonable number. The problem is they seem to think 6, 8 or 16 spells is enough for a skill.

Also what is with the reluctance to add spells to existing skills? The only skill in the history of UO to get an additional spell was Necromancy. One spell added in 13 years!

If you can, how many will you make for every other skill, that are all unique and different for one another?

Skills are themed. For example, Necromancy would focus on death.

Summon Zombie - 20 Mana - Summon a zombie that takes 1 control slot, no corpse required.

Raise Dead - 75 Mana - Bring a dead player back to life (like a changeling), takes 4 control slots.

You can slant this any way you want, really, I can't change your perception. It might be less in some areas, but have you ever stopped to think what is really needed to be ADDED to the game compared to what needs to be UTILIZED and FIXED?

This whole topic is about having more content added to the game and how past UO expansions seem rather thin.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

• 450+ Spells – Exponentially add to your caster's arsenal

How many of these are simply variations on a theme... Lit 1, Lit 2, Lit 3, etc. How amny actual INDIVIDUAL spells are being added here. Every instance of X mana = Y damage is 1 spell, DoT spells are another 1 spell, etc.

 

[Uvtha]

Its a different game. Different set up, different play. SA added a huge amount of content, and I'm willing to bet big money that a lot of the stuff in that list isn't as impressive as it sounds, the 450 spells in particular.

I know what "spells" and "skills" are like in most of those games, and lots of them are just different version of the same spell but leveled up for higher level characters.

 

[five oclock]

wait a moment..EQ is still around? and people still pay to play it??? I mean come on now..are they not down to like one server only? Plus a few years back when they took Everything out of the game from players no matter what lvl they were and made them start again with newbie weapons????

Heck Im never going to listen to another UO is being canceled post as long as EQ is still around...

yeah I did EQ for the first year it came out..and came back to UO...Heck if EQ can still survive with WoW being out there...UO is not going anywhere for a long time

 

[Coldren]

...

• 450+ Spells – Exponentially add to your caster's arsenal

How many of these are simply variations on a theme... Lit 1, Lit 2, Lit 3, etc. How amny actual INDIVIDUAL spells are being added here. Every instance of X mana = Y damage is 1 spell, DoT spells are another 1 spell, etc.

This. A lot of it is variations, indeed, within a theme as JC notices with Chivalry and Necromancy, of the same thing.

And more than that, JC, you argue that the expansions are "thin". You have to consider:

Dev team size
Money
Player Base Size
Code Base - It's a lot easier, likely to add things in EQ than UO due to outdated server code.

It's a pretty safe bet that EQ beats UO in all these aspects.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

450 spells?! I haven't gotten round to learning and using all 64 of the magery ones!

That's because most of them are useless crap.

Some of them have been adjusted to be more useful and yet rely on old mechanics.

And they've never really done a decent pass to magery making the choices available more in-tune with what you need in order to compete in the current UO itemization.

But then, since the best they can come up with is typically 4 to 16 new "spells" for a new class, I'm unsurprised.

 

[canary]

That's because most of them are useless crap.

Some of them have been adjusted to be more useful and yet rely on old mechanics.

And they've never really done a decent pass to magery making the choices available more in-tune with what you need in order to compete in the current UO itemization.

But then, since the best they can come up with is typically 4 to 16 new "spells" for a new class, I'm unsurprised.

Agreed. 64 spells to choose from and I always end up using the same 10-15.

 

[JC the Builder]

SA added a huge amount of content

Going by previous UO expansions, yes Stygian Abyss had more content.

Going by what other games offer in their expansions, it falls far short. A lot of the SA additions had no longevity.

And more than that, JC, you argue that the expansions are "thin". You have to consider:

Dev team size
Money
Player Base Size
Code Base - It's a lot easier, likely to add things in EQ than UO due to outdated server code.

Everquest is the closest to UO in terms of age and subscribers. I'm not trying to compare UO to World of Warcraft, which has a team of hundreds and 11 million subscribers.

If UO was expanded to have more spells, maybe scribes would be useful. Why does every spell need to go into a book, maybe some could only be available in scroll form and are one use. That would keep scribes useful. You find a spell, then you want to find a scribe to make 5 copies. Each spell can only be copied so many times. This would bring about a whole new economy, player trading and interesting mechanics.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Also, consider the fact that the live event system (particularly the Bane War system), and Treasure Map revamp could have EASILY been set aside for a pay-for expansion and have been give to us as a general (i.e. free outside of normal playing costs) update. Both systems being a reasonably significant revamp of the existing lands instead of "yet more zones".

 

[Akalabeth]

Sometimes I get sick when I think of leveling.

I realize people could say skill building was leveling of some sort but it is just not the same as gaining levels. Yuck!

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I don't mind levelling, as long as it makes sense.

For example, if I'm playing a combat character, I expect to need to level through combat in order to access higer end combat. That makes sense.

What DOESN'T make sense is if I want to play a non-combat crafter, yet STILL have to level via combat, gear up for higher level areas, and so forth just to be able to gain access to higher end crafting content. That's where levelling falls apart.

There's also the false economy used in some games that bind your equipment so that you're forced to vendor trash it out of the game when you upgrade (as opposed to repair and resell), that is also an aspect that I'm not fond of.

Level-based play by itself is NOT that bad, it's all in how it is implemented really.

 

[GarthGrey]

Wow, 1 little Tmap update (done poorly imo) and the entire Hall opinion changes. I'll bet the devs are laughing their butts off right now at how easily the majority of Uhallers have been appeased....don't worry JC, your thought didn't fall on just the deaf ears..

 

[Taylor]

Huh...I feel relatively content and I don't even have a t-hunter.

As many problems as you find with the game, there will be people who don't really mind - some who even like - the way that it is.

I know that you, of all people, value the idea that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, GG. I think you should keep in mind that, just because someone disagrees with your perspective, this doesn't mean they've drunk the Kool-Aid. Maybe they just...disagree.

 

[GarthGrey]

....

My point is/was, it's been a long time since so many Pro UO replies have appeared back to back to back on a topic that involved another game. I don't want to play another game other than UO, but like JC, I hate hearing how another game, regardless of whether it's leveling or not, appears to be getting much more development time than we are.

 

[Marcellis]

• +5 Level Increase – Achieve a New Max Level of 90 and set a new standard of gameplay
• More than 800 AAs – Elevate your power and abilities beyond the norm

*groan* I see EQ is still a second full time job.

 

[Guido_LS]

Here are the details for the next expansion of Everquest, not to be mistaken with Everquest II.

• +5 Level Increase – Achieve a New Max Level of 90 and set a new standard of gameplay
• More than 800 AAs – Elevate your power and abilities beyond the norm
• In-game Housing Addition – Make your permanent mark on the world! Collect and display treasured items
• New Housing Trophy System – Display your trophies and receive statistical benefits
• Hundreds of new housing items to decorate your house to your own style
• 18 Raids – Collect valuable rewards from all new adventures
• 13 Zones – Be the first to discover untouched lands of Norrath
• 450+ Spells – Exponentially add to your caster's arsenal
• 17 Missions – Experience intriguing lore and immersive Missions
• 120+ Quests – Challenge your skills and gather useful loot
• Inventory increase – Indulge the packrat in you and collect even more game goodies

Compare this to what we got in Stygian Abyss:

• Gargoyle Race
• A dozen new boss monsters
• 3 new areas
• 16 new spells in Mysticism
• A couple dozen new quests
• Imbuing, which should have probably been added with Age of Shadows

Why is Everquest getting so much more out of their expansions than we do? This seems to be more than normal for an EQ expansion, but it is still way more than we got in Stygian Abyss which was 3 years in the making.

It's an apples vs oranges comparison, JC. As much as it pains me, Chaos made one of the most valid points in the thread so far - SOE is developing, with *ONE* dedicated support staff per game, as compared to EA/Mythic being spread across multiple games, a single client - one which made the jump from a just slightly better version of UO's overhead 2.5D to a full fledged 3D system, almost 9 years ago.

Also, as others have pointed out, the spells are something of an illusion - those 450 spells aren't *new* spells - they are upgrades to already existing spells, and they aren't all spells, per se, but also *discs* - what UO players would call abilities.

The single biggest reason EQ is able to offer *so much more* than UO does per expansion is (gets ready to hear the collective howling on Stratics) the original lore is actually MUCH deeper, and far more carefully maintained than the lore in UO is. (*note* The players have done an excellent job at maintaining lore from the beginning - please don't make me link the DOZENS of threads screaming about the *gaffes* the current Dev team has made just in the last 3-4 months alone)

After all, there are no gods in UO. There are 3 distinct player races in UO - there are 16 in EQ, each with their own lore, etc. In the Abyss, there are a couple of types of goblins, and they don't seem to like each other. Why not? Where's the lore? Does it really matter which one *we* kill, repeatedly? Nope. In EQ there are close to a dozen races of goblin, and the killing of each one has a direct effect on each of the other tribes, one way or the other, as it relates to faction, the completion of quests, etc.

That being said - after 10+ years of playing EQ myself, 8 of them either in the top end or the bleeding edge, the grind was enough to make me stop, along with many, many others. It certainly wasn't WoW that dragged us away - Aion got far more many ex-EQer's than cartoonland did. And unless, like me, they were prior UO players, they certainly didn't come here. The hard core EQ players are no different than the hard core UO players - 9 out of 10 times, there is no where else to go. Nothing else satisfies.

You see, for all the differences between EQ and UO, there is one, VERY COMMON, as in identical, thing - the players all having the same complaint - *It's always just more of the same thing*

Which game is better? Neither. It's all in what a person enjoys. It's like asking which is better, prime rib or a rib-eye steak? It's still basically the same thing, just prepared differently. Personally, I like both, but I've gotten to the point where I really don't want either or both every day of the week.

 

[JC the Builder]

It's an apples vs oranges comparison, JC. As much as it pains me, Chaos made one of the most valid points in the thread so far - SOE is developing, with *ONE* dedicated support staff per game, as compared to EA/Mythic being spread across multiple games

UO has a dedicated team. Some administrative positions are shared, but developers are not.

 

[Guido_LS]

UO has a dedicated team. Some administrative positions are shared, but developers are not.

The primary point there was not so much the dedicated team, but the fact that there is only one, in many ways superior, client that EQ has to work on, vs 2, arguably weaker clients in UO.

I often think of what might have been if, as was the original intention, the 3rd Dawn client was actually forced to be the *one* client, where UO would be today. EQ is proof that the concept did work. By the same token, UO is proof of the concept that the consumer often times can set the bottom line for a product, even if it means that the product itself is... ummm.... somewhat developmentally crippled. That still doesn't take away from the allure of UO - it's what makes it what it is. And for all its faults and foibles, it still has its hard core userbase. Seriously - if it sucked as bad as some like to claim, Stratics would basically be out of business

It is what it is - a niche product that didn't account for the competition of games like EQ, let alone WoW, and, more than likely, one that probably had no idea it would last 3 years, let alone 13. The fact that it has lasted 13 years is, in and of itself, astounding. And short of a ground up change in clients, and far better support from the top down (which EA is infamous for not believing in), it will never be competition for the EQ style games - nor should it be. UO is UO, and honestly, the vast majority of us wouldn't be playing it if it were anything different.

 

[Coldren]

Wow, 1 little Tmap update (done poorly imo) and the entire Hall opinion changes. I'll bet the devs are laughing their butts off right now at how easily the majority of Uhallers have been appeased....don't worry JC, your thought didn't fall on just the deaf ears..

The T-Map update has nothing to do with any of his post. If you want to rabble-rouse and rebel against the "man" because he ain't treatin' you right, feel free, but that has nothing to do with the subject of expansion packs.

The argument I was making is that the stats for an EQ expansion pack are completely full of bloat. This is especially true with spells, because slight variations in appearance, theme, and percentages aside, they break down to a small group of elements that can easily be manipulated and combined to give the player something "New". And I'd also argue, the time could be better spent elsewhere, as they are largely unnecessary.

This position was in no way a vindication of any expansion pack for UO - It was simply a statement of my belief that the comparison shouldn't be made, and that rather than focusing on expansions, I think it'd be wiser to focus on making the world that we have more complete and compelling. Things like a real graphics updated for the EC (That are an actual update that keep the same style, like Saphireena's work - I'll never forgive them for turning my plate helm into a garbage can), and making old zones and areas useful for something more than housing.

 

[G.v.P]

While the list looks impressive, having played EQ for 5 years in a highend raiding guild, it's not as impressive as it looks.

Having played EQ1 for a day, the word "zone" only brings back painful loading memories, rofl. I love UO because when you cross a server line there is a mere hiccup. Back when I tried EQ1, crossing a "zone" meant a snack break, haha. But as advanced as EQ was, sure took them long enough to add mounts and housing.

Eh, NuSair basically said it. But really, to me, EQ and UO have always been apples and oranges, JC. One offered 3D, other pretty much made the genre in iso. The only game I ever played that I would compare to UO as far as intent would be Diablo II, but that wasn't a MMO really.

 

[[JD]]

eq sucks, unless you like staying up all night for some lame raid. i like uo a lot better. the problem with uo is they need to recapture new clients. they certainly arent doing it with graphics so they need to do it with gameplay and content.

 

[Viper09]

How about we sum it up with this:

If you like EQ better than UO, then go play EQ.

 

[Sergul'zan_SP]

450 spells?! I haven't gotten round to learning and using all 64 of the magery ones!

The macros must be a nightmare!

 

[Old Man of UO]

How about we sum it up with this:

If you like EQ better than UO, then go play EQ.

OO! You forgot this part... ANDQUITCHERBITCHINANDMOANING!

 

[Arcus]

How about we sum it up with this:

If you like EQ better than UO, then go play EQ.

So no one is allowed to have a conversations here on the forums? If not , whats the point of the forums. Don't like the topic, don't click the link.