Is Anyone else concerned?

[SchezwanBeefy]

This topic has been brought up many times before, but I'm hoping this can open a discussion on how things could be run instead... The Devs have made it very clear there will be no shelf life for SA. With that being said, I am concerned no new players will come to the game as there will be no advertising (I say this because when KR was release, I never saw a single ad on any website, be it Photobucket, Myspace, Facebook, or other gaming sites that I often see ads on).
With that being said, how do you think new players will be drawn in, and what should be done for advertising to attract new players to the game? Can we really say that UO will be able to compete with WoW (who's players are, I have been told, eagerly awaiting the arrival of the Lich King or whatever) and other games like D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, etc?

 

[hawkeye_pike]

My opinion:

Advertising would be a waste, as UO cannot compete with WoW. It is a totally different game. Young folks mostly prefer 3D action MMORPGs. UO is a niche game for those who understood why depth is more important than nifty graphics. That's why no budget for advertising will be granted. The expansions and game enhancements are made to keep existing players and maybe make veterans return to UO.

To make UO a competitive game, the client and the whole game code would need a major overhaul in a way that it would look like Diablo 3 or Titan Quest. Then it would be worth advertising.

 

[Fink]

I've said for some time (and LotRO has adopted this idea recently) that UO should be cheaper to subscribe than the other mmorpgs. This would be its first selling point.

It can't compete shoulder to shoulder with the WoW's and such, so there should be some immediate, attractive lure for new players. I think more players with a cheaper cost would even out. At the very least, existing players could afford more accounts to explore more templates, races, and characters. In either case the subscriber count would be bolstered, hedging UO's pitiful share of the market.

That said, I think LotRO is now $10/month? So I think UO has missed the window; they probably couldn't get significantly cheaper than that.

 

[Magistry]

A diablo3 looking mmo based around UOs gameplay would be bigger than WoW imo young or old

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I've said for some time (and LotRO has adopted this idea recently) that UO should be cheaper to subscribe than the other mmorpgs. This would be its first selling point.

It can't compete shoulder to shoulder with the WoW's and such, so there should be some immediate, attractive lure for new players. I think more players with a cheaper cost would even out. At the very least, existing players could afford more accounts to explore more templates, races, and characters. In either case the subscriber count would be bolstered, hedging UO's pitiful share of the market.

That said, I think LotRO is now $10/month? So I think UO has missed the window; they probably couldn't get significantly cheaper than that.

I pay $10/month for my subscription to UO...which is what I have been paying for the past 10 years at least, probably for the past 12 years...

UO has a few downfalls, one is what I have always called the "current state of gaming" where as graphics are defining a games popularity.

Second is UO's long history, the game is old everyone knows it is old.

Third is UO and EA's reputation, UO has a rep as the most cheatful game on the market, unfortunately this will be hard to get rid of. EA has a terrible rep for customer service and putting out sub-quality games.

I do not believe UO needs a shelf life, perhaps a little advertising here and there, but nothing major. No tv ads, maybe a few small adds on social sites but nothing to major. UO needs to undergo significant changes before it can advertise, not all of them have to be graphical and none of the need to take away the depth UO has.

 

[wee papa smurf]

I'm not concerned, just get out there and do your own "uo promotion" days

 

[pacific lily]

This topic has been brought up many times before, but I'm hoping this can open a discussion on how things could be run instead... The Devs have made it very clear there will be no shelf life for SA. With that being said, I am concerned no new players will come to the game as there will be no advertising (I say this because when KR was release, I never saw a single ad on any website, be it Photobucket, Myspace, Facebook, or other gaming sites that I often see ads on).
With that being said, how do you think new players will be drawn in, and what should be done for advertising to attract new players to the game? Can we really say that UO will be able to compete with WoW (who's players are, I have been told, eagerly awaiting the arrival of the Lich King or whatever) and other games like D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online, etc?

I don't think it's a marketable game outside of the current base of subscribers. So I'm curious... If you think it is, what exactly is the target audience? How would you market it and what kind of visuals would you use? Screenshots or artist renderings? What would the goals of a marketing plan for this game be, outside of trying to get current players to continue paying their subscription fees?

When I ask myself those questions in terms of what UO is now and what I understand the development plan to be... I can't come up with any reason to invest in marketing to a non-playing audience. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Lily