Do You Want A Classic Shard??

[Tina Small]

I have heard it said that the core code has changed so much that it would be a near-rewrite, and that there are no backups of the old code. But I think what most (not all) Classic Fans want could be done without a total code rewrite. In fact, I think rewriting the code is a bad idea. That just lends itself to a new set of problems.

Altering the existing code, scripts and dynamic libraries to suit the purpose would not only be easier, but it would pretty much enjoy the benefits of bugs that have been fixed in the past. Of course, it would introduce problems. You don't change anything code-wise without something breaking and going nuts. Just doesn't happen. But EA/Mythic have some talented developers on their staff, and it really comes down to a question of do they want to do it...not can they do it.

Morgana, yesterday I went through the long long list of publishes made to UO over the years. Found out that the "official list" on uo.com only goes back to May 15, 1999. (You can find copies of the publish notes for before that on the wikipedia site, though.)

Anyway, just for grins and because it was snowing like a son of a gun here and it seemed like an interesting project, I looked through all approximately 200 publish note documents and totalled up the number of changes (3,172). In doing the counting, I tried not to count as more than one change the addition of unique subsystems. What I couldn't count, though, were the changes that occured when there was an expansion, e.g., all the new quests, animals, NPCs, buildings, etc. So, keep that in mind as you look at the totals below.

I just thought looking at this information might provide a little food for thought when someone starts thinking about just how much or how little would actually have to be edited out of the code if you wanted to work backwards from "now" to some previous stage in UO's history.

Also note this list doesn't cover patches to the client. I tried to keep track of those separately, but wasn't sure the listing of the client patches was all that comprehensive the further back in time I went, so I'm not bothering with showing the total changes to the client over time.

Date		# of Listed Changes	URL	
03/26/2009	9			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=549	
03/19/2009	67			http://update.uo.com/design_598.html	
02/12/2009	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/	
01/06/2009	7			http://www.uoherald.com/news/	
12/19/2008	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/	
12/18/2008	3			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=483	
12/17/2008	56			http://update.uo.com/design_512.html	
11/11/2008	?			http://www.uoherald.com/news/	
11/05/2008	14			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=464	
10/29/2008	16			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=456	
10/29/2008	88			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=454	
09/10/2008	41			http://update.uo.com/design_595.html	
07/15/2008	9			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
07/10/2008	46			http://update.uo.com/design_593.html	
06/23/2008	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
06/10/2008	26			http://update.uo.com/design_592.html	
05/06/2008	32			http://update.uo.com/design_590.html	
04/03/2008	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
03/26/2008	27			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=336	
02/20/2008	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=324	
02/14/2008	40			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=316	
01/23/2008	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
12/17/2007	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
11/28/2007	6			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=283	
11/27/2007	23			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=279 and http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=280	
11/07/2007	8			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=265	
10/26/2007	4			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=257	
10/18/2007	14			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=248	
10/03/2007	4			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=239	
09/25/2007	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=230	
08/24/2007	3			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=211	
08/11/2007	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
08/10/2007	15			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=203	
07/26/2007	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=186	
07/16/2007	8			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=177	
07/10/2007	3			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
07/02/2007	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
06/30/2007	1			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
06/27/2007	48			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=152	
06/08/2007	3			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=129	
06/07/2007	8			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=126	
05/25/2007	16			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=116	
05/12/2007	26			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=100	
05/03/2007	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
05/02/2007	7			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=88	
04/30/2007	15			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=82	
04/20/2007	4			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=71	
04/13/2007	8			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=67	
03/27/2007	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/		
02/15/2007	2			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
02/13/2007	2			http://www.uoherald.com/news/news.php?newsid=9	
02/02/2007	4			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
01/18/2006	7			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
12/21/2006	11			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
11/30/2006	2			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
11/21/2006	3			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
11/16/2006	10			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
11/09/2006	11			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
10/30/2006	9			http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
10/17/2006	41			http://update.uo.com/design_530.html	
08/15/2006	28			http://update.uo.com/design_528.html	
08/15/2006	4			http://update.uo.com/design_527.html	
05/05/2006	44			http://update.uo.com/design_524.html	
01/27/2006	39			http://update.uo.com/design_520.html	
12/12/2005	31			http://update.uo.com/design_519.html	
10/27/2005	137			http://update.uo.com/design_518.html	
09/16/2005	41			http://update.uo.com/design_516.html	
06/16/2005	15			http://update.uo.com/design_515.html	
05/17/2005	10			http://update.uo.com/design_514.html	
04/14/2005	28			http://update.uo.com/design_513.html	
03/14/2005	25			http://update.uo.com/design_511.html	
02/02/2005	16			http://update.uo.com/design_509.html	
01/28/2005	78			http://update.uo.com/design_506.html	
01/12/2005	101			http://update.uo.com/design_505.html	
01/12/2005	68			http://update.uo.com/design_504.html	
01/12/2005	15			http://update.uo.com/design_503.html	
01/12/2005	46			http://update.uo.com/design_502.html	
04/29/2004	16			http://update.uo.com/design_486.html	
03/25/2004	8			http://update.uo.com/design_485.html	
12/12/2003	21			http://update.uo.com/design_484.html	
11/26/2003	83			http://update.uo.com/design_482.html	
10/15/2003	5			http://update.uo.com/design_481.html	
09/17/2003	36			http://update.uo.com/design_478.html	
07/??/2003	110			http://update.uo.com/design_459.html	
07/01/2003	6			http://update.uo.com/design_451.html	
06/13/2003	2			http://update.uo.com/design_452.html	
05/29/2003	105			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
03/31/2003	14			http://update.uo.com/design_454.html	
03/13/2003	4			http://update.uo.com/design_437.html	
03/07/2003	4			http://update.uo.com/design_438.html	
02/10/2003	200			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
12/12/2002	4			http://update.uo.com/design_432.html	
09/27/2002	25			http://update.uo.com/design_343.html	
02/08/2002	16			http://update.uo.com/design_405.html	
01/10/2002	136			http://update.uo.com/design_402.html	
12/21/2001	5			http://update.uo.com/design_400.html	
11/30/2001	117			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
11/13/2001	5			http://update.uo.com/design_398.html	
10/25/2001	19			http://update.uo.com/design_365.html	
10/12/2001	12			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
09/14/2001	11			http://update.uo.com/design_338.html	
09/12/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_370.html	
09/10/2001	1			http://update.uo.com/design_368.html	
08/20/2001	35			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
08/15/2001	1			http://update.uo.com/design_364.html	
07/24/2001	61			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
06/14/2001	5			http://update.uo.com/design_342.html	
06/13/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_340.html	
05/30/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_339.html	
04/25/2001	8			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
04/13/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_333.html	
040/3/2001	7			http://update.uo.com/design_328.html	
03/29/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_326.html	
03/27/2001	11			http://update.uo.com/design_324.html	
03/17/2001	4			http://update.uo.com/design_323.html	
03/14/2001	38			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
02/08/2001	1			http://update.uo.com/design_304.html	
01/25/2001	1			http://update.uo.com/design_303.html	
01/22/2001	8			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
01/18/2001	1			http://update.uo.com/design_292.html	
01/09/2001	2			http://update.uo.com/design_287.html	
12/20/2000	5			http://update.uo.com/design_286.html	
12/08/2000	4			http://update.uo.com/design_285.html	
12/06/2000	36			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
12/05/2000	3			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
12/04/2000	5			http://update.uo.com/design_279.html	
11/29/2000	5			http://update.uo.com/design_225.html	
11/27/2000	2			http://update.uo.com/design_277.html	
11/03/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_274.html	
10/03/2000	2			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
09/27/2000	3			http://update.uo.com/design_270.html	
09/26/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_269.html	
09/14/2000	2			http://update.uo.com/design_268.html	
09/11/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_267.html	
09/08/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_266.html	
09/06/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_265.html	
08/23/2000	24			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html
08/16/2000	6			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
08/07/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_229.html	
08/02/2000	12			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
07/14/2000	1			http://update.uo.com/design_212.html	
07/10/2000	21			http://update.uo.com/design_210.html	
06/29/2000	20			http://update.uo.com/design_209.html	
06/22/2000	7			http://update.uo.com/design_208.html	
05/11/2000	6			http://update.uo.com/design_200.html	
05/10/2000	2			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
05/06/2000	6			http://update.uo.com/design_198.html	
04/28/2000	95			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
03/09/2000	29			http://update.uo.com/design_180.html	
02/23/2000	28			http://update.uo.com/design_168.html	
01/24/2000	24			http://update.uo.com/design_146.html	
12/22/1999	5			http://update.uo.com/design_62.html	
12/17/1999	6			http://update.uo.com/design_54.html	
11/23/1999	30			multiple documents on http://update.uo.com/latest.html	
09/22/1999	7			http://update.uo.com/design_29.html	
09/09/1999	1			http://update.uo.com/design_28.html	
09/01/1999	10			http://update.uo.com/design_26.html	
08/26/1999	23			http://update.uo.com/design_25.html	
05/25/1999	26			http://update.uo.com/design_22.html	

TOTAL		3172

 

[Drakhan]

Classic shard(s) would sure make me sign in again. Can only hope.

About the code being gone...I simply refuse to beleive that. There must be a backup tape out there with all the data from at least UO:R.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I just thought looking at this information might provide a little food for thought when someone starts thinking about just how much or how little would actually have to be edited out of the code if you wanted to work backwards from "now" to some previous stage in UO's history.

Once again, I don't have access to UO's actual code, but judging by how most applications similar to it are coded, most of the changes you are referring to are accomplished by separate files that called on by the core code. So you would not have to actually go through and edit every single file, you would just adjust the core code to ignore them. Each of the files that the core code calls upon are doc'ed somewhere, so when you look a the core code, you would know, pretty easily, which files the code was calling on, and why, and what they are. I have done enough with free shard code (and yes, I am well aware they are completely different) to know that there are instances of sloppy coding where you have to manual check each file to figure out what they are, but I would imagine that there is a huge difference in a company like EA and a couple of college kids in a basement where QA is concerned.

I understand you point Tina, but you have to understand that 100 changes in UO can be made by dropping in a handful of files and adding a few lines to some already existing code.

Not having the UO server code in front of me, I couldn't begin to tell you how much work it would take, but neither can you...so let's agree that any speculation regarding the core code or the files it access is strictly that...speculation.

 

[CORRECTUO]

At least you quoted where I clearly stated UO past and present both have issues. Sorry, but I disagree that an earlier version of UO would have less issues in this 2009; rather I think it would have more issues now that there are more willing to seek enjoyment (or even profit$) from (selfishly) abusing games especially since there are more avenues available now to reach that 'goal'.

Well, then, there is where I know your logic is flawed in this matter. You see, you obviously never played the old UO. Where I have the advantage: Ive played both the old UO and the Post AOS UO and I can say, without a doubt and with complete honesty and confidence, that the old UO did have fewer bugs and glitches. And even then, they werent game breaking. Yes, people duped gold, but they didnt need to. It didnt give them any advantages, save for the fact they have tons of gold. But it was T2A, it didnt matter. Gold was only a part of the equasion for survival. So what if they could afford 50 castles, big deal! Its not like there were a ton of places to place a castle.

What avenues? Continuing with the post AOS content? LOL, right because thats been so successful.

Aes, are you dilusional? You must be if you cant see that the post AOS content is failing. Its so blantent that anyone, and I mean ANYONE, can see it.

You're probably a very smart person but you truly have misunderstood my point of view, as well as my aspirations for the evolution & improvement of UO. Btw, jumping the shark is, in other words, exponentially multiplying the inevitable death march... Which seems to be what you want: So for your wishes: I hope you get what you desire and Retro arrives at a bad time & UO does get buried... for as you said at the end of the post I referred to up above, that seems to be exactly what you want.

You say I fail to realize where youre coming from? No, you are the one who failes to realize my position. You keep preaching about UO's evolution, yet you continue to blatently ingore the evidence supporting my position that has been provided by the past 7 years since the AOS launch. It has done nothing, NOTHING, but drive players away. It hasnt attracted new players, nor has there been a massive revival of the game, not even with Kingdom Reborn, which was advertised and still failed.

Your asperations have been failing for the past 7 years. I am amazed that you cannot see that.

UO was meant to be a sanxbox game, not an amusement park game. And for those who cant tell the difference between the two, here you go:

Sanbox= player driven and dependent

Amusement park= EM dependent.... completely

As for your comment about the shark and the march. Currently, UO is on the death march into the sharks mouth.

I hope the devs release classic servers, because then Ill get the chance to rub it in your face when they are packed with players, and your AOS shards remain the ghost towns they are now. Then I will have the greatest of vindications. The only thing that would make it better is if you came to the classic server and liked it. Then you'd have to admit to yourself that you were indeed wrong and that you, and those who think like you, were holding back something amazing.

Your asperations for UO's "evolution" has been failiing for the past 7 years. Since AOS, UO has only gone down. And the fact that you fail to realize this, that AOS and everything that has followed it is not working, is just sad. You just dont get it.

Whereas I disagree, and I don't want to see a death march or shark jump any time soon re: UO.
(Don't you hate when people paraphrase and take the meaning of your post out of context in a feable attempt to add leverage to their point?)

Well, then you must be eating your heart out, because that is EXACTLY, what UO is on right now; a death march into a shark's mouth.

UO has many decades in front of it, as long as it continues to evolve and improve. Which includes not getting screwed around by constant corporate turmoil every few years, amongst many other variables; including wasted resources rather than focused investment in a unified future that could breathe much new life into our beloved ol' granpappy mmo. If I were a betting man I would give Stygian Abyss 10:1 odds on improving UO's future more-so than any retro-UO-version would. Gamebryo creates a potential bridge to the future whereas any retro shard would just be milking off the rose shaded memories from the past & milking resources that could be devoted to the future of UO... (btw, if ya' think about it, those memories of the past could very well be recreated in the future, albeit in more modern circumstances... so give up on modern UO if you must, but you just might miss out on a modern UO that suits your fancy as much as & maybe even more than it did in the past)

Okay.... here is where it gets really, really, dumbfounding. Your comprehension skills and grasp of things is just so clearly flawed that.... I am at a loss for words of how to describe it.

Aes, you do realize that they have been putting 100% of UOs budget into the post AOS servers and expansions yes? That they have been indeed focusing on that unified future you speak so highly of, yes? That the past 7 years since the launch of AOS has been a unified effort, yet it has continued, CONTINUED, to yeild unimagineably failed results, as evident in the massive decline in subscription fees, that the towns are empty, and that practially every skill is gimped and that the game is completely item dependent. Not to mention the RAMAPANT, mindblowing and BLATANT amount of hacker, cheater, and explioter dominance not seen EVER in UO's hisory.

Thank goodness you arent a betting man, because you'd be broke and hunted by loan sharks.

Seriously? SERIOUSLY?! You honestly believe, give the evidence provided by the past 7 years of failed, HORRIBLY FAILED, expansions put out by EA that contiue to push the proven disliked and hated AOS content, that SA will succeed?! SA, which will add in even MORE imbalances and issues, that it will succeed?!

You're Dilusional. Thats the conclusion I draw from you. You are out of your mind. You must want UO to fail. You must subconciously hate this game with a passion to actually believe that ANY post AOS content, the content which drove away the majority of UOs players and has made it a joke on so many gaming forums, can possibly succeed.

I dont have rose shaded memories of the old days of UO. I had my bad days on old UO. I had some really bad days. Believe me, it wasnt all a joy ride. But it wasnt as bad as things are today.

Ive played the modern UO! I tried to play the old school way. It didnt work! I tried every thing I could think of to re-create the old days, and it failed! The new UO just wont allow for it! Dont you get it!? Obvisouly not. If the problem were that freaking simple, then people wouldnt be asking for classic servers, now would they?!

However, if you go on any MMO out there, which I have, the old UO players will tell you: Despite the 2d graphics, despite the out dated tech, they would come back. They have the option of free shards, but its not the same as the p2p servers. They would leave their level 80's and level 100's and come back and start all over again as a newbie on a UO classic server.

People want their business model for Classic Servers, just go out into the web and talk to the old UOers out there playing the other MMOs. There are A LOT of them. And they would come back...

 

[Tina Small]

Once again, I don't have access to UO's actual code, but judging by how most applications similar to it are coded, most of the changes you are referring to are accomplished by separate files that called on by the core code. So you would not have to actually go through and edit every single file, you would just adjust the core code to ignore them. Each of the files that the core code calls upon are doc'ed somewhere, so when you look a the core code, you would know, pretty easily, which files the code was calling on, and why, and what they are. I have done enough with free shard code (and yes, I am well aware they are completely different) to know that there are instances of sloppy coding where you have to manual check each file to figure out what they are, but I would imagine that there is a huge difference in a company like EA and a couple of college kids in a basement where QA is concerned.

I understand you point Tina, but you have to understand that 100 changes in UO can be made by dropping in a handful of files and adding a few lines to some already existing code.

Not having the UO server code in front of me, I couldn't begin to tell you how much work it would take, but neither can you...so let's agree that any speculation regarding the core code or the files it access is strictly that...speculation.

Morgana, I understand that all of the code isn't in one large file and that the server code is split up into lots of smaller sets of coding. I get that. However, think about all the decisions that would have to be made regarding something as simple as changes made to one magery spell over the years. None of us knows how well anyone documented changes over the years and as pointed out many times in this thread, where do you stop unwinding the changes?

 

[CORRECTUO]

Here is why it is a bad business model to implement a Classic Shard.

There has been little to no statistics that implementing a Classic Shard will bring additional subscribers. This means none to negligible increase in income.

Go out into the other MMO forums out there and get the attention of the old UOers playing there. I did. I got tons of responses from old UO players stating they would leave WoW, AOS, LOTRO, and come back to UO if there were classic servers.

A little market research... thats all it would require.

Implementing a Classic Shard will force developers and staff to dedicate resources and time. This means increase in operating costs.

Thats bull because they are devoting 100% of their resources to the current post AOS servers and yeilding no results.

Now, increasing operating costs without a significant increase in income drives down the profit margin. So, there you have it. This is why it is not a good idea, and this is why it is a poor business model.

Its a poor business model to keep on with the AOS Servers. It has been proven by 7 years of development that it is failiing. Subscription fees are waaaaay down and the game is losing money.

Soooo, by your logic, AOS UO is a bad business model.

Now, as a player, I'd like the Classic Shard idea. Then my blacksmith would be relavent again, and if I lost my "uber" equipment, well, I could get that back in a few hours of dungeon crawling. Or, I could just smith me some GM stuff and be just as well off.

Right there, that is proof for a good business model. "Classic Shards would help improve game play, which in turn would help to attract more players".

Its that simple.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Morgana, I understand that all of the code isn't in one large file and that the server code is split up into lots of smaller sets of coding. I get that. However, think about all the decisions that would have to be made regarding something as simple as changes made to one magery spell over the years. None of us knows how well anyone documented changes over the years and as pointed out many times in this thread, where do you stop unwinding the changes?

Well, I don't post here thinking in my head that there is a big red button they can push and a Classic Server will pop up...

Of course it will take work...I am just trying to explain what they would need to do in order to avoid re-coding the core from day 1.

Where do you stop unwinding the changes?? ... for my preference, the day before UO:R went live.

That would put us back to T2A era, with several bugs fixed. But that's not going to be possible unless they really do have a backup of the code. (Which it is highly suspect that they don't. Everyday the servers perform a snapshot at server down, those files have to be backed up somewhere in case a revert needs to be done)

But, it would probably be more beneficial from a support standpoint to actually simulate a Classic Ruleset than it would to pull some old code out of archives. If the code is the same, with modifications, it is easier to support than if it is an entirely separate and different entity.

The question being asked in this poll is somewhat misleading...there are some no votes that voted that way because they wouldn't care to play on a Classic Shard, but also wouldn't object to the existence of one. But it would seem that there are a few posters here at least that have a genuine fear, dislike, distain, or outright hatred for the UO of old, and seek to prevent it from ever seeing the light of day again. I just cannot for the life of me understand the mentality behind that. I could if it were being suggested that all shards were to be made Classic ruleset, but we are talking about 1 or 2 shards out of dozens, and no one would be forced to log on to it, or them.

SA is about to launch (I assume), everyone will scurry about seeing the new lands, and learning the new client, and collecting the new items that make all our old items completely useless and worthless...so its not like non-classic players will have a lack of anything to do, or a lack of new content. So what is the harm in having the devs give something to the players that couldn't give one **** about the new content for a change?

 

[CORRECTUO]

They've the the old data on backup somewhere. If they dont, Im sure they could ask the old developers of the game if they have a copy. Im sure Richard Garriot does.

Heres an Idea that will yeild EA a lot of money. They should sell UO and everything Ultima back to Richard Garriot. Then UO would really make them some money and UO would be fixed. It would cost EA a penny, as a matter of fact, it would make them several millions of pennys.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

They've the the old data on backup somewhere. If they dont, Im sure they could ask the old developers of the game if they have a copy. Im sure Richard Garriot does.

Heres an Idea that will yeild EA a lot of money. They should sell UO and everything Ultima back to Richard Garriot. Then UO would really make them some money and UO would be fixed. It would cost EA a penny, as a matter of fact, it would make them several millions of pennys.

I doubt Garriot has the code. Why would he? He sold the property rights to EA. Having that code is an invitation to a lawsuit.

I don't think selling UO to Garriot is a realistic scenario. He likely wouldn't want to buy it. I do wonder sometimes what EA would want for it...the code, the servers, all of it. I am sure it would be an astronomical figure. Maybe I'll hit a lottery or something

 

[CORRECTUO]

I doubt Garriot has the code. Why would he? He sold the property rights to EA. Having that code is an invitation to a lawsuit.

Im glad you brought up Garriot wanting UO or not. I recently read on MMORPG.com about an article Garriot did not too long ago. He would like to start working on Ultima projects again.

Link to Interview

BIZ: If Electronic Arts wanted you to return and author a single-player Ultima for the consoles, would you do that?

Garriott: Conceptually? Sure. The property Ultima is still very near and dear to my heart. I think that if, by hook or by crook, I had access to that property, either in solo-player or multiplayer, I would absolutely love to continue to play in the Ultima universe.

Oh, Id say ge still wants to work on Ultima.... And he would like to have access to it.....


And if that lawsiut thing is the case, then EA should be suing the balls off of those free shard owners.

I don't think selling UO to Garriot is a realistic scenario. He likely wouldn't want to buy it. I do wonder sometimes what EA would want for it...the code, the servers, all of it. I am sure it would be an astronomical figure. Maybe I'll hit a lottery or something

Hes got the money. He dropped 30 mill to go up into space, Im sure he can afford to buy UO and all other Ultima content off of EA.

Its more of a realistic scenario than you think...

 

[AesSedai]

Well, then, there is where I know your logic is flawed in this matter...

- Wow, I don't even know where to begin with this. Do you have any idea how many secret UO projects they have heavily invested in since AoS? 100% towards development since AoS?!?... you sir are either misinformed or a liar.
You speak of obtaining gold and castles as having no effect on UO 'back in the day'. Towers alone used to sell for $1-2500 USD all the time. Yet you think duping gold and buying / selling high-end was a non-variable from way back to the beginning (or even as late as your favorite time period of pre:AoS)? Obviously castles & gold (real estate & money) didn't mean anything to you... but guess what? It afforded people to be geared up in all the uber gear they wanted, without a care in the world if they lost any of it. Yes, cheating began when UO began & it still needs to be dealt with...
Surely before you decided to put words in my mouth, you noticed the age of my Stratics account (& btw, I was a devoted MyUO Forums poster before EA decided to stop supporting their own forums for our game).
From what I can gather, you think UO is dead. Then why are you even here trying to fight for a new stepchild when you feel UO is already dead?
See, I know UO is far from perfect; yet I see UO's evolution quite able to move in a more positive direction, just as I see adopting the responsibility for an old classic child to be a step in the wrong direction.
If you were willing to play a simple mental game and weigh the possibilities without so much hate towards how UO has evolved since the AoS time frame you like to refer to, then perhaps you could see how it would be a benefit to improve what is now rather than jump the shark and swiftly adopt what was, once more (& effectively juggle 2 problems rather than focus on one).... btw, news flash: UO Classic would be mightily abused by cheaters and jerks now that they have evolved and it hasn't. Sandboxes and playgrounds are fun until easily controlled tornadoes can target and destroy the playsand with ease. UO could deconstruct what they have now to assimilate some retro version, but it has been clearly stated that they lost the code years ago. So if you want to play a time period before they moved to San Francisco then you would have to rely on your free shards for that source code & that just isn't happening in the corporate world where they have to pay for their mistakes whereas a free shard runner could just say screw you guys, pick up his ball, and go home.
As well, I did not quote your two versions of delusional, days ago in this thread, for nothing. It was a play on the entire post you made where you decided to start using that term in this thread. You've caught me at a very bad time, so I apologize if I cut a bit too close to the bone here. I'm dealing with real time situations that are above and beyond any of this. This was just a little elementary stress release for me. Enjoy. Peace

 

[ElRay]

Yes, cheating began when UO began & it still needs to be dealt with...

Sure, just like in any game, there is cheating.....BUT the people who run those games actually DO SOMETHING about it. Back in the day, the company who ran UO, ALSO took care of cheating, not like now, where the devs are NON-FACTORS enforcing the "no cheat"(lol) rule

See, I know UO is far from perfect; yet I see UO's evolution quite able to move in a more positive direction

Pray tell, what would give you THAT idea? Was it all of EA's expansions that came out with overpowered items/skills so that you would HAVE TO BUY the new expansion? Or was it ALL the bugs that they released and expected they playerbase to find them and report them? Or perhaps it was the dupes/hacks/exploits they never took care of for 6 months+ until some of the community left and the boards were actually on fire. Is that where you are getting your visions of positive direction?

Yes, I can see how you can think UO is far from perfect, but please spare us your rhetoric about moving in a positive direction. Its insulting.

just as I see adopting the responsibility for an old classic child to be a step in the wrong direction.

Yes, opening up a shard when the game was at its most popular, would DEFINATELY be a step in the wrong direction /end sarcasm

 

[Surgeries]

Sure, just like in any game, there is cheating.....BUT the people who run those games actually DO SOMETHING about it. Back in the day, the company who ran UO, ALSO took care of cheating, not like now, where the devs are NON-FACTORS enforcing the "no cheat"(lol) rule




Pray tell, what would give you THAT idea? Was it all of EA's expansions that came out with overpowered items/skills so that you would HAVE TO BUY the new expansion? Or was it ALL the bugs that they released and expected they playerbase to find them and report them? Or perhaps it was the dupes/hacks/exploits they never took care of for 6 months+ until some of the community left and the boards were actually on fire. Is that where you are getting your visions of positive direction?

Yes, I can see how you can think UO is far from perfect, but please spare us your rhetoric about moving in a positive direction. Its insulting.



Yes, opening up a shard when the game was at its most popular, would DEFINATELY be a step in the wrong direction /end sarcasm

You are presented with a logical, and objective perspective on the game, good and bad...

And that's the best rebuttal post you can come up with?

Yikes.

Hopefully you are a LOT better at PvP, than you are at actually addressing a point with a logical counterpoint, and demonstrating the "Both Sides" mentality that you were presented with.

Your method seems to be take a part of a sentence, construct some seemingly witty reply to it, and smugly post that as a "Logical Post".

Psssst...that doesn't make your posts appear witty, funny, smart, or logical...it makes your posts appear highly subjective, incredibly myopic and self serving, as well as highly transparent.

But you knew that...right?

 

[Bc-]

I haven't been following a lot of these arguments but I did see a few people talking about bugs.. I also vouch there are a lot more bugs and EXPLOITS in todays PvP than there was back in pre cast or .. well any days pre AoS.

Speed hacks i the major problem now, it has become rampant and was never an issue back in 1998-2006.. that is beyond game mechanics though obviously but something still needs to be done about it.

Scripting is another major problem we see today, requires you to press one button for an entire sequence that would have been skill based before.

There are numerous bugs in PvP as well though, such as pets hitting you from off screen, archer bug etc.. I would say the bugs still out weigh anything we witnessed post rep patch. Early 97 ya there was some serious bugs but the game had just released, by spring 98 the major bugs had been solved and pvp was quite balanced.

I don't really have the time or the resources to get into this with anyone, but I just wanted to post my opinion on the matter. If you want to reply I will try to check this post again in a few days to defend my statement.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Classic Shards would not be immune to speedhacks, etc. The evolution of UO did not create the bugs and exploits we see now...at least not all of them.

It was a matter of time before someone figured out how to speed hack, and either Classic or current rulesets would be affected by it.

But, the impact of scripting and duping is felt much more in current UO because of all the 'uber' weapons and armor made from val hammers that were obtained using script bots, and artifacts that were duped.

Sure, back in the old days, someone could dupe a castle deed, and then sell it for gold, but all that meant is that they could have a bank full of the same exact stuff that most players had 2 or 3 of. It wasn't unbalancing.

 

[CORRECTUO]

*pulls out disection knives and puts on splatter gogles*

Now class, pay attention, 'cause here's where thing's get good.......

- Wow, I don't even know where to begin with this. Do you have any idea how many secret UO projects they have heavily invested in since AoS? 100% towards development since AoS?!?... you sir are either misinformed or a liar.

Secret projects? Oh, you must mean the scrapped UO:X or Ultima Worlds. Yes, I know of them.... and I know they both lasted all of 5 seconds before joining Duke Nukem Forever in the vaporware bin....

Secret projects my arse....... those both have been dead for over 4-5 years now. In that time frame, EA has had nothing but UO on their plate and they have made no improvements. It has been the main focus of resources and they have done nothing great with it, nothing solid, nothing game making, just breaking. So, no, your little projects excuse, fails.

You speak of obtaining gold and castles as having no effect on UO 'back in the day'. Towers alone used to sell for $1-2500 USD all the time. Yet you think duping gold and buying / selling high-end was a non-variable from way back to the beginning (or even as late as your favorite time period of pre:AoS)? Obviously castles & gold (real estate & money) didn't mean anything to you... but guess what? It afforded people to be geared up in all the uber gear they wanted, without a care in the world if they lost any of it. Yes, cheating began when UO began & it still needs to be dealt with...

Uber gear? Okay, now I know you are a trammie n00b, because anyone who played the old days knows that gear was a small factor in anything. Even though people could afford a suit of full on invul gear and all the vanq weapons they could carry, those people still didnt have an advantage in anything, save for a higher armor rating. A skilled player in GM gear could drop a twink in magic armor in a heartbeat.

And do you know how many large towers were placed back in the old days? Not many. They sold the towers for RL money did they? Well what the bloody hell do you think people are doing today with 18x18 plots, hmmm? Fking shiznit, you act as if selling crap for RL cash only happened back in the old days. Hey, news flash, sonny jim, it happens to day and its WAY more rampant.

Ever hear of gold farmers? Oh, wait, forgot about that little bit, didn't we? There you have it folks AesSedai's convenient memory strikes again. You think people selling a large tower, a tower that was one of maybe 5-10 on the server for 2,500 USD back in the day is a big deal? Try how one gold farmer in UO sells millions of gold and makes over 100,000 USD a day in today's UO! And do you know what allows such rampant gold farming? Ill tell you, Its the PvE only trammel, ilsh, and malas that allows it because there is no room for player prevention of things.

Yeah, your right, we had cheating back in the day. But you know what? It was BULLS***T in the eyes of players because it happened on a small, insignificant scale. Today, its all UO is, cheating. Why? Because the AOS content allows for it.

Surely before you decided to put words in my mouth, you noticed the age of my Stratics account (& btw, I was a devoted MyUO Forums poster before EA decided to stop supporting their own forums for our game).

Ooooo, wow, jul 2001! Oh noes, I r beaten! (yeah, right)

Listen here, just because you spent the last....what..... 8 years trolling these forums and kissing EA's collective ass doesnt mean a pile of dog crap. While you were on here pancakes to make UO in WoW, I was playing the game, back when it was still playable and functional. You speak on here like a trammie newb who doesnt have a clue as to how the old days functioned. If you did actually play before trammel, then you wouldnt have made that comment earlier about uber gear back then..... because there was none.

From what I can gather, you think UO is dead. Then why are you even here trying to fight for a new stepchild when you feel UO is already dead?
See, I know UO is far from perfect; yet I see UO's evolution quite able to move in a more positive direction, just as I see adopting the responsibility for an old classic child to be a step in the wrong direction.

If you think that UO is moving in the right, positive direction, then you are blind and just plain ignorant to everything around you. If UO were still moving in the right direction, then how come its barely even haning on anymore? How come those 250K players that joined didnt stay?

If you were willing to play a simple mental game and weigh the possibilities without so much hate towards how UO has evolved since the AoS time frame you like to refer to, then perhaps you could see how it would be a benefit to improve what is now rather than jump the shark and swiftly adopt what was, once more (& effectively juggle 2 problems rather than focus on one)....

Yeah, yeah, mental game, blah blah blah.... Sorry, I leave the being...uhh... "mental" to you.... hehehe......

Save your mental games crap for some gullible fool. No, I dont look at the state of UO through some bull mental game, I look at the proof in front of me, something you are obviously incapable of doing. You want a news flash? Fine, then here it is:

FACT: Ultima Online has seen a severe decline in subscriptions in the past 7 years

FACT: EA has scrapped all of those "scret projects" you spoke of earlier in favor of throwing all of its supposed support behind UO.

FACT: UO has had 100% of its EA staff working on UO's expansions for the past several years.

FACT: All of said expansions have thus far FALIED to attract new or old players, fix any of the current imbalance issues, and have in fact made said issues worse.

Given this trend, a LOGICAL person would be able to deduce that the current path UO is on is a failing one.

So to hell your mental games, Ill stick with logic.

Thats all you keep saying "jump the shark, jump the shark, jump the shark" over and over and over, my god youre like a broken record. Do you even know where that term comes from? Happy Days, when Phonzy jummped over a shark. Oh, and BTW, Phonzy made it....

And even then, its not jumping the shark. Hell, old UO players have been TELLING EA that they would come back if they made classic servers. I believe thats why these forums used to be flooded with classic server requests to the point that the moderators at one point had to lock each and every one that came up! I mean, come on! The only reason the forums on here arent flooded anymore is because people are under the impression that its pointless because the mods will just lock it.

btw, news flash: UO Classic would be mightily abused by cheaters and jerks now that they have evolved and it hasn't.

Riiiiiight, because the cheats of today that allow them to dupe artifacts are going to work in a shard where artifacts wont work.......

The cheats of today wont work on servers from yesterday. Different mechanics, different items, different set of rules. Sure, let some jackass script mine... someone will just PK the character because they know what to look for.

Sure, lets some little creap dupe gold.... whats he gonna buy? A castle? A tower? Sell them for RL cash? Big damn deal, like it isnt happening in todays UO or yesterdays. And even then, its for RL cash. That money is going back in to UO as a sub fee. More so if the person buys more accounts.

Some freak dupes himself a dozen or so full suits of invul armor and vanq weapons? Do you know how many people will kill him the second he sets foot outside of town for wearing gear like that? He wont have those suits for very long.... full loot and open PvP took care of that.

As for speed hackers, well, they didnt start coming along until EA got lazy....

Sandboxes and playgrounds are fun until easily controlled tornadoes can target and destroy the playsand with ease. UO could deconstruct what they have now to assimilate some retro version, but it has been clearly stated that they lost the code years ago. So if you want to play a time period before they moved to San Francisco then you would have to rely on your free shards for that source code & that just isn't happening in the corporate world where they have to pay for their mistakes whereas a free shard runner could just say screw you guys, pick up his ball, and go home.

*yawns* oh, are you done? Its my turn... okay....

EA has the original code in archives. All they have to do is load it up, apply some fixes, and voila, jobs done. All it would take is one of those lazy lumps to pry their oversized rearends out of their cheap, 5 dollar office chairs, drop the doughnut and coffe, waddle their way down to the archives rooms, and look around.

Lost the code? Yeah, thats as lame, tired and untrue as "Dont worry baby, we dont need a condom".

As well, I did not quote your two versions of delusional, days ago in this thread, for nothing.

Yeah, its because your a grammar nazi gasping at straws to save his lame argument. Oh wow, I mispelled a word. Heavens forbid that im human and make a mistake...... oh the horrors........ I misspelled delusional.... my whole arugment has fallen apart because of that one word....... ooooooh nooooooo......... blech, argh!! I r d34d!111!!ii!1!!

*fades to black*

~fin~

It was a play on the entire post you made where you decided to start using that term in this thread. You've caught me at a very bad time, so I apologize if I cut a bit too close to the bone here. I'm dealing with real time situations that are above and beyond any of this. This was just a little elementary stress release for me. Enjoy. Peace

Play on the entire post? I mispelled a word? My spelling skills dont reflect on the validity of my post. Hell, if grammar were what counted here, I would nail you to the wall for your lack of skills in proper paragraph usages and formation. I mean, all of your posts look like clumped together mounds of run on sentences. Seriously, the space key, discover it.

 

[AesSedai]

-CORRECTUO,

I was playing on your entire post by using it to suggest you were being delusional in the same post you had declared that somone else was.
I use the space bar and the enter key as well. I just tend not to put a blank line between my paragraphs when what I'm writing is not much of a newsflash or worthy of any attempts to grab one's attention.
The two UO related projects you mentioned are just a glimpse of some of the non-UO places that UO's resources have gone over the years.
When they relocated from Austin to San Fran, some of the archived backups did not make it; hence they don't have backups for some of the stuff you think they could just dust off and pop on a new server.
I used the term uber gear to get the point across without spouting off a bunch of words to prove I know what supr. acc./indestr./vanq. and VDP weapons were. And yeah, they did make a significant difference in offense and defense, especially if you knew how to use them. & yeah cheaters could treat them like practice weapons / armor when they had enough duped gold to buy as much of the uber gear as they could ever want. And yeah, I'm fairly sure the term 'uber' was in use long before AoS.
Just because the past few years haven't looked good to you doesn't mean that by focusing and evolving what they have now doesn't stand a chance to improve. However by divesting their interests further, by introducing a retro shard, it would seem they stand a greater chance to improve less; simply due to the increased resources a new shard would require needing to be divided by the finite amount of resources available. <--That was what I meant when suggesting you take a moment and play a simple mental game regarding considering what is now rather doing the Fonz jump (which killed Happy Days & is the point of the phrase. And yes I already mentioned in this thread that I knew where the term originated from; and did you know the Fonz didn't actually jump the shark because he couldn't actually ride a motorcycle; & yes I've used the term a lot in this thread because it feels very appropriate to this subject).
Today there would be just as much cheating in a retro shard, regardless of the player policing advantages of being able to kill anyone you felt wasn't playing the way you liked (whether cheating or because they just look like a 'stupid newb'). Heck people would cheat more there simply because of the belief that cheating happens less and therefore the rewards for cheating would be worth more value than on a production shard.

Again, please stop putting words into my mouth or at least stop thinking you can read my mind: I did not spend all my time on the boards trying to make UO into WoW. And do you really think you're gaining brownie points by declaring someone to be a trammie newb? I've always found it pretty funny when people feel the need to resort to such tactics.

(Do ya' like how I put a blank line before that paragraph? )

 

[Amren]

I did not know this forum was run by liberals as my last post was deleted.

Maybe Stratics should team up with FOX news.

classic server > lame SA expansion.,

 

[Petra Fyde]

Maybe you could read the rules of conduct?

This poll is far from conclusive. It says that just over half the people who a) read stratics and b) bothered to vote (I didn't btw) would like to see a classic shard.
There was no option for people who don't really mind one way or the other.

Please endeavour to post your views in a less confrontational style, that way I won't feel obliged to move posts or lock it.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I don't want to start another thread on this topic, but I do wish there had been more poll options. Something like:

What do you think about having a Classic Shard?

- I would not care if there was one, but wouldn't play on it.
- I would oppose the creation of one.
- I would love to have one, and I would play on it.
- I am undecided because I don't even know what a Classic Shard is.


That would have been a better way to go. But like I said, there is no need go back through it all again.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I don't want to start another thread on this topic, but I do wish there had been more poll options. Something like:

What do you think about having a Classic Shard?

- I would not care if there was one, but wouldn't play on it.
- I would oppose the creation of one.
- I would love to have one, and I would play on it.
- I am undecided because I don't even know what a Classic Shard is.


That would have been a better way to go. But like I said, there is no need go back through it all again.

...la

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

...la

lol!!

 

[CORRECTUO]

I was playing on your entire post by using it to suggest you were being delusional in the same post you had declared that somone else was.

You were playing on nothing. Ive got proof backing my statements, all you have is blind and "delusional" faith.

I use the space bar and the enter key as well. I just tend not to put a blank line between my paragraphs when what I'm writing is not much of a newsflash or worthy of any attempts to grab one's attention.

Well, there is one sure fire way to not grab peoples attention...... dont post at all.....

The two UO related projects you mentioned are just a glimpse of some of the non-UO places that UO's resources have gone over the years.

Over the years? Those two projects have been dead for several years and the only thing EA has been working on with UO's money is UO. And what do they have to show for it? Nothing.

When they relocated from Austin to San Fran, some of the archived backups did not make it; hence they don't have backups for some of the stuff you think they could just dust off and pop on a new server.

They wouldnt even need T2A server data. LBR server data was close to it. All they would need to do is remove things like trammel and that would be it.

I used the term uber gear to get the point across without spouting off a bunch of words to prove I know what supr. acc./indestr./vanq. and VDP weapons were. And yeah, they did make a significant difference in offense and defense, especially if you knew how to use them. & yeah cheaters could treat them like practice weapons / armor when they had enough duped gold to buy as much of the uber gear as they could ever want. And yeah, I'm fairly sure the term 'uber' was in use long before AoS.

VDP? Ive heard of DPV, but that only happened after a player made it that way.... you know, back when skills actually worked. Oh, by the way, its stands for Deadly Poisoned Vanquishing.

Yeah, Uber was used.... in EQ. Back in the day, we called things by their names, or short abreviations to save time. But even then, the gear wasnt uber. It had its flaws. It was only slightly stronger than GM made gear. Even then, having a full on invul set and vanq weapons made you a target. People hunted you for that gear because they wanted it. And if and when you died, it got looted. Things balanced themselves out. A vanq weapon added +5 to your damage and invul armor had a +5 higher defense rating. Not like the gear of today where it adds on all kinds of crazy stats that make your character truly invulnerable.

Just because the past few years haven't looked good to you doesn't mean that by focusing and evolving what they have now doesn't stand a chance to improve. However by divesting their interests further, by introducing a retro shard, it would seem they stand a greater chance to improve less; simply due to the increased resources a new shard would require needing to be divided by the finite amount of resources available. <--That was what I meant when suggesting you take a moment and play a simple mental game regarding considering what is now rather doing the Fonz jump

*sigh* wow, you are repetitive.

Past few years? Its not like we are talking about 1 or 2 years here. We are talking about 7 years. 7 years of nothing but losses. By logics standings, that counts as a trend of failure based on current tactics.

And lets not forget the fact that at one time these forums were flooded by requests for classic servers. So, right there is proof that people do infact want classic servers and would come back and play them.

All your basing your argument off of is a "mental game" AKA playing pretend, and hoping that things will get better if they keep going.

(which killed Happy Days & is the point of the phrase. And yes I already mentioned in this thread that I knew where the term originated from; and did you know the Fonz didn't actually jump the shark because he couldn't actually ride a motorcycle; & yes I've used the term a lot in this thread because it feels very appropriate to this subject).

No, what killed Happy Days was the Scandle of when Erin Morran was ****d by one of her fellow cast members, but never came forward with who. But, with that fact in mind, yes, comparing happy days to UO situation is very apt, because EA is raping the hell out of UO.

Today there would be just as much cheating in a retro shard, regardless of the player policing advantages of being able to kill anyone you felt wasn't playing the way you liked (whether cheating or because they just look like a 'stupid newb').

Woah, there it is. The PvP prejudice rears its ugly head. It took long enough, but the true reason you dont want classic servers shows up. You are prejudice against PvP. The only people who killed newbies were jerks. They were a small percentage under the rest of us. But there it is, the trammie newbie propaganda.

And whats this about killing people because they didnt play how I liked? More propaganda. More Bull. Thats all you got.

The past 7 years of UO beats your evolution crap as proof that UO is failing, so save it for Inherit the Wind and arguing against Darrel Drummond.

They dont need T2As exact code to make a good, pre-trammel classic server, only anything before AOS that shres the same original coding as T2A. Remove trammel and its good.

And yes, classic servers would succeed and bring in more money because its what players have been requesting for years now. The time when the mods had to lock hundreds of threads calling for them is proof of that.

So ive got something tangeble to reference, what do you have? Trammie propaganda and playing pretend?

Not good enough.

You bring me soild proof that the post AOS content is bringing more players and attracting the old, then Ill consider taking you seriously. Until then, can the evolution and mental games and get some solid evidence.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

....
To refresh people's memory, the order of the expansions are:

The second Age (added the t2a lands)
Renaissance (added trammel)
3rd Dawn (added ilshenar)
Lord British's Revenge (no new lands, added fugly graphics, but has swampies)
Age of Shadows (added malas)
Samurai Empire (added tokuno)
Mondain's Legacy (added heartwood and elves)

The second Age (added the t2a lands) <- Were I vote Yes for
Renaissance (added trammel) <- Were I LEFT UO 8 months after it was released. Up to that point I had played UO on Great Lakes, from the day it went live.

 

[AesSedai]

VDP? Ive heard of DPV, but that only happened after a player made it that way.... you know, back when skills actually worked. Oh, by the way, its stands for Deadly Poisoned Vanquishing...

- Wow, did you even play before AoS? That's crazy, you seem to understand the value of old school items yet you aren't even aware of the importance of using VDP when choosing your gear. There's no need for me to use some descriptive term here to make myself feel superior.

 

[CORRECTUO]

- Wow, did you even play before AoS? That's crazy, you seem to understand the value of old school items yet you aren't even aware of the importance of using VDP when choosing your gear. There's no need for me to use some descriptive term here to make myself feel superior.

No, you just made something up to feign superiority in a lame attempt to discredit me. Even then, still, you have proven none of my points wrong by providing solid evidence to support your claims.

VDP when choosing my gear? What in the bloody hell are you talking about? You didnt need to use anything when choosing your gear save for your eyes. The best gear crafted by GMs had their name on it. As for magic Items, you have to depend on either an ID wand or the Item Id skill to find out what it did exactly. Other than that, it just registered as a magic item.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

- Wow, did you even play before AoS? That's crazy, you seem to understand the value of old school items yet you aren't even aware of the importance of using VDP when choosing your gear. There's no need for me to use some descriptive term here to make myself feel superior.

Does VDP perchance refer to that thing you used to do where you could offer to sell your GM-made stuff to a vendor in-town and see the prices the NPC offered you....And the slight variant in prices offered to you by the NPC would refer to differences in the quality of the item that weren't otherwise visible?

I can't recall if I've heard that term before or not.

But if that's what you're talking about, for certain GM-made items (the one that immediately comes to mind is bows, because as a pre-AoS archer I ran through a lot of GM bows) there was a noticeable difference....I forget along what vector, however.

Damn it's been a long time.

It's easy to forget that at this point we've actually had the AoS system for longer than we've had the pre-AoS system.

-Galen's player

 

[CORRECTUO]

Does VDP perchance refer to that thing you used to do where you could offer to sell your GM-made stuff to a vendor in-town and see the prices the NPC offered you....And the slight variant in prices offered to you by the NPC would refer to differences in the quality of the item that weren't otherwise visible?

I can't recall if I've heard that term before or not.

But if that's what you're talking about, for certain GM-made items (the one that immediately comes to mind is bows, because as a pre-AoS archer I ran through a lot of GM bows) there was a noticeable difference....I forget along what vector, however.

Damn it's been a long time.

It's easy to forget that at this point we've actually had the AoS system for longer than we've had the pre-AoS system.

-Galen's player

I never did that. I just looked to see if the GMs makers mark was on the gear. Only exceptionally crafted gear could be marked with the GMs makers mark. Thats how i determined quality.

 

[AesSedai]

Does VDP perchance refer to that thing you used to do where you could offer to sell your GM-made stuff to a vendor in-town and see the prices the NPC offered you....And the slight variant in prices offered to you by the NPC would refer to differences in the quality of the item that weren't otherwise visible?

- Yup. Vendor Determined Pricing (I've heard of other words used, like I think 'Defined' although I'm not positive if that was one.

... for certain GM-made items... there was a noticeable difference....

- Aye, there was.

 

[Harlequin]

Yes Galen, I believe that's what AesSedai is referring to when she said VPD. VDP stands for vendor determined price.

You use it to determine the quality of player made items because there was no durability value shown at that time. The durability in turn determines the AR/damage. Quite different from today.

It was even more useful prior to the maker's mark change. In the early days, the crafter would just get a message that says he has made an item of higher quality (can't recall the exact message), but if you have just made a bunch of items, you can't tell which of the 50 unmarked items was the exceptional piece. So you used the vendor to determine the quality.

But to be fair, not everyone knows of this, esp if they don't have a crafter. And even though I used it extensively, when someone mentioned VDP some time back, it took me a while to realize what he was talking about

Edit: AesSedai beat me to the reply

 

[Harlequin]

I don't want to start another thread on this topic, but I do wish there had been more poll options. Something like:

What do you think about having a Classic Shard?

- I would not care if there was one, but wouldn't play on it.
- I would oppose the creation of one.
- I would love to have one, and I would play on it.
- I am undecided because I don't even know what a Classic Shard is.


That would have been a better way to go. But like I said, there is no need go back through it all again.

And maybe add options like which era to use and whether to include things like house security/skilllocks etc.

That is...if someone decides to do another poll a couple of weeks down the road.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Yes Galen, I believe that's what AesSedai is referring to when she said VPD. VDP stands for vendor determined price.

...

But to be fair, not everyone knows of this, esp if they don't have a crafter. And even though I used it extensively, when someone mentioned VDP some time back, it took me a while to realize what he was talking about

Eh. I never had a crafter; I still knew the system existed, I just didn't know the term for it. I paid attention and minded my gear....Which, even then, was important. UO was always item-based, it's just rather moreso since AoS than before. And items still had many properties, just not as many and they were of a different type. Anyone who went SOLELY by whether or not the item had a GM tag either didn't really play back then or didn't take the time to talk to crafters and learn a bit more about the system.

The best way for a non-crafter to get by with that was to find a vendor who had a reputation for always using that system to sell his or her goods.

Some would sell the inferior goods at a lower price. Some would simply only sell the best. Those were to be preferred.

I was lucky and found 2 bow vendors who had a reputation of always selling the best stuff.

When they were out, I just took my chances with whatever vendor I could find.

Then of course orcish bows started coming out....Slightly better than GM if memory serves. And a nice color. And high durability. And thus did somewhat-commonly-available loot become a viable alternative to player-made stuff.

Oh my, this was a LONG time ago......

-Galen's player

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

- Yup. Vendor Determined Pricing (I've heard of other words used, like I think 'Defined' although I'm not positive if that was one.- Aye, there was.

Oh my....All these memories flooding back.

lol

Thank you for reminding me of this.

-Galen's player

 

[Harlequin]

Eh. I never had a crafter; I still knew the system existed, I just didn't know the term for it. I paid attention and minded my gear....Which, even then, was important. UO was always item-based, it's just rather moreso since AoS than before. And items still had many properties, just not as many and they were of a different type. Anyone who went SOLELY by whether or not the item had a GM tag either didn't really play back then or didn't take the time to talk to crafters and learn a bit more about the system.

The best way for a non-crafter to get by with that was to find a vendor who had a reputation for always using that system to sell his or her goods.

Some would sell the inferior goods at a lower price. Some would simply only sell the best. Those were to be preferred.

I was lucky and found 2 bow vendors who had a reputation of always selling the best stuff.

When they were out, I just took my chances with whatever vendor I could find.

Then of course orcish bows started coming out....Slightly better than GM if memory serves. And a nice color. And high durability. And thus did somewhat-commonly-available loot become a viable alternative to player-made stuff.

Oh my, this was a LONG time ago......

-Galen's player

IIRC, I think orcish bows were equivalent to "Force" (3rd powerful), while GM crafted ones were equivalent to "Might" (1 level below Force weapons).

The original magical system definitely has it's appeals, but being a numbers person, I definitely prefer knowing exactly how much durability my armour and weapon has left without needing to train armslore. That plus the nifty new magic properties is why I actually liked the AOS expansion, minus the crashes.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

IIRC, I think orcish bows were equivalent to "Force" (3rd powerful), while GM crafted ones were equivalent to "Might" (1 level below Force weapons).

The original magical system definitely has it's appeals, but being a numbers person, I definitely prefer knowing exactly how much durability my armour and weapon has left without needing to train armslore. That plus the nifty new magic properties is why I actually liked the AOS expansion, minus the crashes.

My emerging memory is something like this.

The magical Damage Increase weapons worked by adding a specific number to damage. GM weapons worked by adding a percentage. The lowest level of magical weapon added so little that, unless your weapon had other properties (for example, "supremely accurate"), it was more worth it to use GM.

Orcish Bows were, like between level 2 and level 3 or 3 and 4, something like that.

Either way, they were the first consistently-available, relatively-easy-to-find weapon that was more worth it than GM.

That I can recall anyway.

-Galen's player

 

[Bc-]

Classic Shards would not be immune to speedhacks, etc. The evolution of UO did not create the bugs and exploits we see now...at least not all of them.

It was a matter of time before someone figured out how to speed hack, and either Classic or current rulesets would be affected by it.

But, the impact of scripting and duping is felt much more in current UO because of all the 'uber' weapons and armor made from val hammers that were obtained using script bots, and artifacts that were duped.

Sure, back in the old days, someone could dupe a castle deed, and then sell it for gold, but all that meant is that they could have a bank full of the same exact stuff that most players had 2 or 3 of. It wasn't unbalancing.

Oh.. yes I know this, never stated it was due to the game state, but the statement said there was not more bugs in the old days than there is now.

Scripting as a natural resource harvester is huge yes, but I was talking more about the guys who have a button they press that runs a script for them, dismounts off their mount, uses dismount attack, tells their mount to attack on success or on failure they remount automatically. Things like that... really take away from pvp.

I remember the first time I saw scripts in use, that I could recognize, was during Pub 16 right before AOS when Alchmey came in as a bonus to explosion pots. People were using scripts to auto throw these and it was a game breaker in any duel. On Chessy we out lawed the use of alchemy in any duels because it was very easy to tell when someone was scripting with it. Things like this really detract from the overall gameplay and I wish EA could find a permanent solution to the problem.

Also AesSedai I like your posts, and your name when the hell is book 12 coming out anyway?, but the reason we put spaces, seemingly random, in the middle of our posts is because wall of text is not easy on the eyes. I know this isn't common place in the literature/academic world, but it makes it easier for people to read your posts.

If I see a wall of text post I usually just skip it, yours I like to skim through because you make some great points. Just something to think about.

 

[Turdnugget]

but I was talking more about the guys who have a button they press that runs a script for them, dismounts off their mount, uses dismount attack, tells their mount to attack on success or on failure they remount automatically. Things like that... really take away from pvp.

I do that with UOA.

I remember the first time I saw scripts in use, that I could recognize, was during Pub 16 right before AOS when Alchmey came in as a bonus to explosion pots. People were using scripts to auto throw these and it was a game breaker in any duel

Another thing that can be done in UOA. There was even a thread here about how to set up a 3 pot throwing macro.

I don't think these 'scripts' are nearly as bad as the other ones out there.

Speeder programs, fields hacks (running over stumps/gravestones/bag balls /poison,para fields that turn into tiles = less lag) and crap like that

The bugs back then didn't effect the PvP aspect of the game nearly as much as it does today. Back then it was skill vs. skill. Even a skilled player today can get run over by someone using a speeder. Kinda hard to do anything against someone who moves 3-4 tiles to your 1 tile movement. At least that's the way it looks and they somehow manage to skip off screen in a split second.

Things like this really detract from the overall gameplay and I wish EA could find a permanent solution to the problem.

And things like Trammel detract from the 'risk' of the game as well. Why do you think so many people quit when Trammel was introduced? It killed their overall gameplay experience...It put the game on easy mode. It took a lot of the fun out of the game.

If UO's PvP wasn't as good as it is (was,hopefully will be...once fixed) I would be playing something else with better graphics if I was in it for the PvM.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Oh.. yes I know this, never stated it was due to the game state, but the statement said there was not more bugs in the old days than there is now.

Scripting as a natural resource harvester is huge yes, but I was talking more about the guys who have a button they press that runs a script for them, dismounts off their mount, uses dismount attack, tells their mount to attack on success or on failure they remount automatically. Things like that... really take away from pvp.

I remember the first time I saw scripts in use, that I could recognize, was during Pub 16 right before AOS when Alchmey came in as a bonus to explosion pots. People were using scripts to auto throw these and it was a game breaker in any duel. On Chessy we out lawed the use of alchemy in any duels because it was very easy to tell when someone was scripting with it. Things like this really detract from the overall gameplay and I wish EA could find a permanent solution to the problem.

There was a member of my first guild that was running a script on the 3rd day of the game. It was set up to cast energy field and then target a spot on the floor. He had a sack full of regs and GMed magery in like 2 days.

Now I know that is a far cry from the complicated scripts some players use today, but they were there from the very beginning.

I think that regardless of how UO evolved, we'd still be dealing with cheaters because they have had 11 years to develop their methods...and it seems that EA/Mythic just doesn't care to do anything about it.

 

[Keep Hope Alive]

I would LOVE to play on a Classic Shard.

Keep Hope Alive.

 

[CORRECTUO]

I would LOVE to play on a Classic Shard.

Keep Hope Alive.

So would a lot of other people. EA just needs to wake up and realize this.

 

[RichDC]

To be honest im not really for or against it anymore, ive grown tried of reading these posts.

I mean, yes, i probably would play the shard for a while...then return to my home shard. Reason, UO has evolved so much. Not just in terms of items but in terms of players skill and intuition(yes i said skill).

What i mean is, the complexity of templates has gone through the roof, yes im guessing in a T2A classic server there would be no chiv/necro/ninja/bush but i guarantee there would be tamer archers/swords.

There would be alchy thieves, the classic tank mage would return obviously and alot more im not clever enough to work out atm.

The main problem i would have would be that given they way old armour worked, tamer melee poisoners(im gna guess as well that now theres no Ps's either) would completly rule the pvp world as there would be nothing to compete with there sheer damage output.

Balance would be shot as people know how to manipulate templates to maximise damage output now. Gimp templates would obliterate the gameplay in weeks. Unfortunatly the non item based skilled fights you all crave wouldnt exist as the new Uber items would be...Pets.

 

[Trebr Drab]

I'd come back to UO in a second if they went back to the old way. I've only barely glimpsed at this thread, I don't expect anything from them on this nor do I want to waste much time on it. But I did want to say very briefly what it is I wanted. Not much detail here though.

What I loved about the old UO was the "worldly" simulation that it was. Since adding the power scrolls and going to a more gamey style, it took away from that worldly feel. It became more gamey. PvP is a big part of that too. I liked what they almost had, with the ability to kill anyone at any time except in cities, but with player justice. They had a tough enough penalty for going red that it would have really slowed it down, except at the time they allowed blues to heal reds, which game the PKers a means of escaping the penalties, and even made it easier to ...ahh, you know what? I'm not wasting any more time on it.

Have a good day, my once-upon-a-time fellow UO players.

 

[CORRECTUO]

To be honest im not really for or against it anymore, ive grown tried of reading these posts.

I mean, yes, i probably would play the shard for a while...then return to my home shard. Reason, UO has evolved so much. Not just in terms of items but in terms of players skill and intuition(yes i said skill).

Oh yes, player skill in UO today, yes the skill of letting your artifacts do all the work for you. Oh yes, such an elite skill indeed.....

Evolved? Into what? An EQ clone? An item dependent, Fked up economy, gimped skill, hemoraging accounts, imbalanced, cheater/exploiter/scripter paradise? Oh yeah, its really evolved..... not.

What i mean is, the complexity of templates has gone through the roof, yes im guessing in a T2A classic server there would be no chiv/necro/ninja/bush but i guarantee there would be tamer archers/swords.

Complexity? Are you serious? First of all, considering the majority of skills in UO today have been gimped into utter uselessness, complexity went out the window a long time ago. Today, things are dominated by a select few templates. Everything else is worthless. Where are the theives? gone. Where are the pure warriors? gone. Were are the pure archers? gone.

Back in old UO, the skills worked. They all had a use. It allowed for true complexity, not just domination by the flavor of the month.

There would be alchy thieves, the classic tank mage would return obviously and alot more im not clever enough to work out atm.

Thats right, a lot more would return. Emphasis on a lot. Why? Because things actually worked back then. Players werent forced to HAVE to have focus or chivalry or bishido or any of those other post AOS skills that threw the game completely out of whack.

The main problem i would have would be that given they way old armour worked, tamer melee poisoners(im gna guess as well that now theres no Ps's either) would completly rule the pvp world as there would be nothing to compete with there sheer damage output.

The way the armor used to work? Okay, another one who has no clue as to how things worked back in then.

Tamer Melee poisoners didnt rule back then. Mostly because poisoning and melee didnt work they way they do now. We didnt have special attacks and all poisoning was good for was poisoning weapons.

As for taming, it was hell to do without musicianship and peacemaking for a warrior, because the dragons back then werent pushovers. They hit, and they hit hard. the melee attacks as well as their magical ones were something to be reckoned with.

So, lets see what skills would be required for a template like th to work, shall we?

For the melee to be effective and keep the warrior alive, they would need:

Swordsmanship
Tactics
Parrying
Healing
Anatomy

5 skills down, 2 left

For the poisoning to work properly, they would need:

Alchemy
Poisoning

Thats all 7 skills, 0 left.

For the taming, they would need:

Animal Taming
Animal Lore
Anatomy
Veternary

Damn, thats, what, 11 skills so far

for the Musicianship, they would need:

Musicianship
Peacemaking

wow, 13 skills. Now, if my memory serves me correctly, and I know it does, players were alotted 700.0 skill points to their character. That means 7 skills could be GM'd. But, wait, 13 is more than 7, isnt it? *GASP* IT IS........ Which means the template you described would be impossible.

You have failed.....

Balance would be shot as people know how to manipulate templates to maximise damage output now. Gimp templates would obliterate the gameplay in weeks. Unfortunatly the non item based skilled fights you all crave wouldnt exist as the new Uber items would be...Pets.

LOL! OMG! Dont tell me... you actually think that UO of today is balanced?! LOL! Wow, thats just... thats just amazing... ROFL! What you just described is post AOS UO to a T, and you dont even realize it. Or you do and youre just hoping that no one who played old UO and actually remembers how things worked sees your post.

Well, youre luck ran out.

UO before AOS was balanced. Hence why players would see such a diverse variety of templates on characters. Today, everyone is a ninja, samurai elf anime reject in a neon suit of artifacts.

Pets didnt dominate back then. If that were the case, then no one woud have ever made anything other than a tamer. But they did. Pets werent invincible. See, unlike the UO of today, once a pet in old UO was dead, it was dead for good. People knew how to counter a tamer with a dragon or two. Because, unlike todays UO, we actually learned back then how to beat things.

Seriously, you people who never played UO back before AOS shouldnt make posts stating how things would turn out on a classic server. You clearly have no idea what youre talking about, and all youre doing is annoying those who do. The Trammie propaganda has to stop.

 

[JoO]

Publish 15 era no runics.

 

[Sindris]

 

[o2bavr6]

Seriously, you people who never played UO back before AOS shouldnt make posts stating how things would turn out on a classic server. You clearly have no idea what youre talking about, and all youre doing is annoying those who do. The Trammie propaganda has to stop.

Good post!!

I don't think you could be any more correct!!

 

[CORRECTUO]

Wow, such an original post..... not...

No, the only is continuing with post AOS content with WOU, World of Ultimacraft. You naysayers have nothing left to fight back with, so you have to resort to simply calling this beating a dead horse. But its not. Its just as valid as when the noobs who couldnt handle getting PK'd came on the forums and cried out for limitations on the PvP. I dont see you condeming them for what they did. How very hypocritical.

Those of us who want the pre AOS content restored on their own servers are doing what those who couldnt handle PvP did way back when, we are simply asking for our own version of the game to play. They got their way with Trammel, why cant we have our version with Classic servers?

It seems unfair, and extremely prejudice, that EA will accomodate the PvE crowd in every way possible, but ignores the PvP old school crowd, the crowd mind you that supported UO in its founding days and made UO the success it was. If UO didnt have its PvP supporting players, then UO would have failed in its early days and there wouldnt be a UO today.

EA owes us that much. Give us back the game we loved, and in return, EA will reap the benefits with increased subscription fees from returning players. Players that AOS, SE, ML and all the anniversary boxes have failed to draw back.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

I hope you're right and that the horse being beaten is dead. We'll see I guess.

What's truly bizarre is the way the thread goes away for 3 weeks only to become resurrected by one player, who manages to exemplify the kind of whining that will be the only possible result of a custom shard when they finally do it. "Why didn't you fix ____." "Why don't we have ____." "EA doesn't care about its customers because all they gave us was a custom shard with _____ but still intact, why couldn't you fix that before you gave us what we literally wanted?" My favorite is: "Why didn't you go with _____ era instead of the one you picked? Anything else is crap!" (Closely derived from an actual quote of a custom shard supporter.)

*chuckles, shrugs*

As is the case with power scrolls; and double resources; and double fame; and the upcoming Felucca-rules portion of the Stygian Abyss map; and greater chance to get a Virtue Artifact in Fel (items that Fellies profess to have no interest in and typically leave on the ground when they get them); and, for that matter, the dungeon Khaldun (the first attempt to lure to Felucca people who have no interest in it and thus giving to Fellies something they profess to have no interest in); and the Age of Shadows expansion (which the devs at the time said much of which was a direct response to the PvP community's wish that more outcomes be dependent upon player choices).....Did I leave anything out? Sadly I probably did.

Anyway, as is the case with all that, the custom shard, when it eventually happens (as I believe it will though I hope I'm wrong) will be a case of EA caving in to a vocal minority. Sometimes throughout history, giving in to a vocal minority has been exactly the right thing to do, but when we're talking not only about an entertainment product, but a vocal minority that wishes to see the entire game as a competition and resorts to such tactics as insults and criticizing the RL physical appearances of their fellow players? Caving in to that kind of minority in that kind of context can never be a good decision. It hasn't been so far.

-Galen's player

 

[Sindris]

Wow, such an original post..... not...

No, the only is continuing with post AOS content with WOU, World of Ultimacraft. You naysayers have nothing left to fight back with, so you have to resort to simply calling this beating a dead horse. But its not. Its just as valid as when the noobs who couldnt handle getting PK'd came on the forums and cried out for limitations on the PvP. I dont see you condeming them for what they did. How very hypocritical.

Those of us who want the pre AOS content restored on their own servers are doing what those who couldnt handle PvP did way back when, we are simply asking for our own version of the game to play. They got their way with Trammel, why cant we have our version with Classic servers?

It seems unfair, and extremely prejudice, that EA will accomodate the PvE crowd in every way possible, but ignores the PvP old school crowd, the crowd mind you that supported UO in its founding days and made UO the success it was. If UO didnt have its PvP supporting players, then UO would have failed in its early days and there wouldnt be a UO today.

EA owes us that much. Give us back the game we loved, and in return, EA will reap the benefits with increased subscription fees from returning players. Players that AOS, SE, ML and all the anniversary boxes have failed to draw back.

Wow, such an original thread.... not.

 

[CORRECTUO]

I hope you're right and that the horse being beaten is dead. We'll see I guess.

What's truly bizarre is the way the thread goes away for 3 weeks only to become resurrected by one player, who manages to exemplify the kind of whining that will be the only possible result of a custom shard when they finally do it. "Why didn't you fix ____." "Why don't we have ____." "EA doesn't care about its customers because all they gave us was a custom shard with _____ but still intact, why couldn't you fix that before you gave us what we literally wanted?" My favorite is: "Why didn't you go with _____ era instead of the one you picked? Anything else is crap!" (Closely derived from an actual quote of a custom shard supporter.)

Oh, god, here we go. Okay, let me tell you something, Galen, it was whining that started Trammel. Yet you dont seem to attempt to crucify or down play that minority who wanted trammel. No, if anything, you praise them.

The difference between those of us who want classic servers and those who cried out for trammel and an end to PvP, those who want classic servers dont want to change the post AOS servers at all. We dont want to change the way you play on AOS servers, but you seem to act as if its okay for you to force your method of play on us.

If anyone is a whiner, and a hypocrite, its you and all of you who oppose classic servers. How does classic servers affect you? It doesnt. You have no reason to oppose it other than to pancake and whine.

As is the case with power scrolls; and double resources; and double fame; and the upcoming Felucca-rules portion of the Stygian Abyss map; and greater chance to get a Virtue Artifact in Fel (items that Fellies profess to have no interest in and typically leave on the ground when they get them); and, for that matter, the dungeon Khaldun (the first attempt to lure to Felucca people who have no interest in it and thus giving to Fellies something they profess to have no interest in); and the Age of Shadows expansion (which the devs at the time said much of which was a direct response to the PvP community's wish that more outcomes be dependent upon player choices).....Did I leave anything out? Sadly I probably did.

That was BS. EA just wanted to copy WoW with itemization and pixle crack to try and cash in on the hype of Theme park games. They failed, horribly.

Anyway, as is the case with all that, the custom shard, when it eventually happens (as I believe it will though I hope I'm wrong) will be a case of EA caving in to a vocal minority. Sometimes throughout history, giving in to a vocal minority has been exactly the right thing to do, but when we're talking not only about an entertainment product, but a vocal minority that wishes to see the entire game as a competition and resorts to such tactics as insults and criticizing the RL physical appearances of their fellow players? Caving in to that kind of minority in that kind of context can never be a good decision. It hasn't been so far.

Caving to a vocal minority? Really? Thats why the moderators had to, at one point, be ordered to lock all of the threads calling for classic servers because the forums were being overrrun with them.

Uh huh, minority indeed.....