• Hail Guest!
    We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
  • Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
  • Hail Guest!,
    Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
  • Hail Guest!
    Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!

Its time for a much needed change to the facets

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
People take the path of least resistance. That's the nature of humans. That doesn't mean to say its introduction didn't harm the fundamental foundation of what UO was suppose to be about, though.
Then what was it "suppose to be about"? Getting PKd after what should have been a fun time killing monsters, finding the evening completely wasted? Bank thieves snagging an item to run as far as they could, so that after the guard-whacking, a partner could get the looted item? I never minded a fair fight, but even before stat loss became an excuse, most any PK wouldn't attack without superior numbers and/or with victims already low on health from fighting monsters. Most people simply didn't want such "risk" or "thrill," or any fight at all, because it comes down to lost time. Of course people want what is easier, but after all, even a single flowing electron seeks least resistance. Why should people derive any enjoyment from something that's more difficult than it needs to be? Thus in the same way many people eschewed dungeons during peak hours, people prefer safer places to live, work and shop, rather than any "risk" or "thrill" of dealing with dangerous areas. Yet the converse of "too easy" becomes boring, perhaps more. Ever see the Twilight Zone episode "A Nice Place to Visit"?

The entire game was balanced around the fact you were forced to play it in an often hostile environment and either band together to minimize those dangers or learn other ways of dealing with them. With that gone, you just have mindless drones collecting from a pool of endless, unfettered resources whose only "excitement" appears to be the prospect of getting more re-hued crap they add as "gifts" periodically. How thrilling.
If that's all the "excitement" people want, then what's it to you? Who are you to declare that people aren't having enough fun? If people are only going through the motions of gameplay, that's their business, and it's what the playerbase has wanted since 1997. Go read some of the rec.games.computer.ultima online threads to gauge what the majority of the playerbase wanted. Shall I repost some old Stratics and Crossroads of Britannia posts I saved?

For most people, the original state was not with mere risk. It was in fact "with no chance." Most people then, now and always do not want to gear up a miner with AR33 and fighting skills, and yet still get mowed down by half a dozen PKs. They didn't want to explore the woods only to find the screen suddenly go gray on the way to Skara Brae. Depending on how long you've played, you may not know that UO wasn't always 100% subscription. Most people did not want to buy the game (I think I paid $60), log in for the first time, get slain at the crossroads, place a house to have it stolen, then realize they wasted money.

You talk about "band together," but MMORPG does not mean multiplayer is a requirement before someone can dare to mine or chop outside a town, let alone place a house or venture into a dungeon. People should not have to sit around waiting for a big enough group so they can have fun, notwithstanding PKs could escape as quickly as anyone else (and without being one of a few people already at 1/3 from fighting a blood elemental). Remember that Garriot's original vision lacked town guards and would have relied 100% on player justice. It was obvious with any need for a second's thought that it wouldn't work. It couldn't work even on Siege and Mugen. Then the mythological Great Lord/Dread Lord wars proved what "player justice" is all about, because Great Lords typically fought off out Dreads not to save the day, but to return on their own reds to PK the weaker blues.
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
And those poor little PKers didn't want fights they might loose. They wanted easy to win fights so they could dance around in their armor and wave their big swords over the bodies of characters in regular clothing holding a shovel screaming "I pwned you!!! I kicked your a**!!!! I'm a big stud!!!!" and so on and so forth. Those experiences in Fel back in the UO:Ren and UO:AoS days I remember so well. A bunch of Bleeps...

Those new arrivals didn't have the bad game experience memories to sour the taste of playing UO. They could now have fun themselves for their $10 a month, instead of just being fun for the PKers for their $10 a month.

Call those bleeps what they actually were and are, PKers, don't keep insulting true PvPers. PvPers act like they have a pair and a lot of class, PKers don't. Two very different breeds of people.
Yup, yup and yup again, though technically you're speaking of pre-UO:R (which was the introduction of Trammel). I wish I had saved an old UO comic about a genuinely roleplaying murderer, who more often than not seemed to help the weak. The first frame showed him standing hidden at a mountain outside Brit, watching miners work at a certain hour. The second frame was the same, except an hour later. The third frame was an hour later, showing "u sux!"-type PKs gloating over the miners' corpses. Lots of people resented it for implying PKs were logging on once school was out, but there was a point.

Among posts I saved from far back was one on Crossroads of Britannia, by "Quaestor" on March 2, 2000:

Yes, the pk- lands WILL do away with pking. You will only find a very few totally lost newbies, probably with nothing but newbie stuff which you cannot take, and you will face all those who are READY to fight you, and no longer be able to miner-kill and newbie-kill for any real profit, and THAT you cannot handle.

So you will quit the game, making it a better game.

Don't let the door hit you. BYE!
 

Tanivar

Crazed Zealot
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Yup, yup and yup again, though technically you're speaking of pre-UO:R (which was the introduction of Trammel).
I bought a copy of UO:Ren fall of 2000 which I think had been released half a year earlier. My experiences in Fel ran from the fall of 2000 to a while after UO:AoS was released, whereupon I stopped going to Fel. Wasn't accomplishing anything there other than 'rewarding' the PKers, who were taking no 'risk', with all my work.
 

Warpig Inc

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
A new land that a built character can go to with nothing but their skills and the skin on their back. A land without all the candy coating gear that can be looted or crafted. Unique drops that support stats and skills and not speed and perfection. Crafting that is watered out to an extreem. Uber tames are found as petrified skeletons on the landscape or with tame option gone (to this day none my tamers have a GD and still most my hunting is done on a tamer) A land wear gold coin is rare and insuring anything is a thought out rationing. Fel ruleset area with well placed guardzones just not regulated to cities. With politics now. Mayors elected by the driving population would decide how far out/size guardzones would be in there control. Active players would decide how trammed out their elected areas would be. Bring out the silver, copper and bronze coin as a new exchange. Gold only can be loot found and not traded up on.

A lot of man hours and effort has been wasted on trying to breath some life into the PVP side of the game. Just listen to chat on any given night to find the state of PVP. Better time would of been spent on revamped Doom, Quest, Marty and BoD reward list.
 

icm420

Sage
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
jeez this thread really took off huh?

the bottom line is this
item properties and insurance ruined this game

the need for dumping gold into things like regs, potions, bandages, horses etc became unnecessary
all this extra gold that is not being used for consumables is now being used for armor or weapons
armor and weapons are now not lost or destroyed so the excess money is doing what?
saving up for artifacts?
you have all the artifacts.. now what's that gold doing..
paying for insurance so you dont loose your artifacts when you die.
that gold keeps accumulating and accumulating and now we have the average player sitting on 100mil + because the more they introduce the stronger it gets and the stronger it gets the less you die

AND the majority of people who enjoyed the pre trammel ruleset left soon after tram was introduced and have bounced around looking for a similar style of uo since. Many free shards offer this. PKs in this game are an enforcement of types, they kill the people who farm non stop so they can't get out of control and have huge savings. Kind of like today.. The idea was that the 'blues' would rally and protect each other. The added incentive is a bounty system that allows you to make money by killing reds, and inflicting a penalty to them. I don't think anyone is saying it was perfect, but it was certainly a hell of a lot better then what is going on now, and it offered a style of MMORPG that is unlike anything else on the market.

Point of all this being if this style of UO wasn't wanted then free shards wouldn't exist with a higher population of players then all of OSI combined. OSI is boring and frankly the only reason we keep paying is for our virtual houses and stuff... and friends..
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
A new land that a built character can go to with nothing but their skills and the skin on their back. A land without all the candy coating gear that can be looted or crafted. Unique drops that support stats and skills and not speed and perfection. Crafting that is watered out to an extreem. Uber tames are found as petrified skeletons on the landscape or with tame option gone (to this day none my tamers have a GD and still most my hunting is done on a tamer) A land wear gold coin is rare and insuring anything is a thought out rationing. Fel ruleset area with well placed guardzones just not regulated to cities. With politics now. Mayors elected by the driving population would decide how far out/size guardzones would be in there control. Active players would decide how trammed out their elected areas would be. Bring out the silver, copper and bronze coin as a new exchange. Gold only can be loot found and not traded up on.

A lot of man hours and effort has been wasted on trying to breath some life into the PVP side of the game. Just listen to chat on any given night to find the state of PVP. Better time would of been spent on revamped Doom, Quest, Marty and BoD reward list.
very good ideas, sounds like it could be a popular FTP browser game.
 

cazador

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
This thread is compiled off all blues..not sure it's relative..sure some went to fel many years ago, when there was no tram..I guess "Fel Born" holds some meaning to them. As long as they don't ever have to go back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Point of all this being if this style of UO wasn't wanted then free shards wouldn't exist with a higher population of players then all of OSI combined. OSI is boring and frankly the only reason we keep paying is for our virtual houses and stuff... and friends..
As I have pointed out several times, not specifically to you, there's no apt comparison to free shards. What do you think their populations would be if they charged $10 per month? (And should you bring it up, yes, I'm aware there are legal reasons they couldn't charge formal subscriptions. But it's a simple matter of prices.)

Given the alternative of people so frustrated with PKs and bank thieves that many didn't stay more than a few months, or people flourishing with more resources than what you say they should have, I will happily take the latter. There would not have been a game had the former continued. Any players who quit because they could no longer PK indiscriminately were a tiny fraction, and far more from the rest of the playerbase were already quitting because they didn't want that kind of "fun." It's lucky that after the Devs finally caved on PvP-free zones, taking a year to implement Trammel, enough players held on to keep the game alive. I don't know how many times I and others must point out that most people simply don't want the encounters in the first place, no matter what satisfaction is claimed they'll derive from seeing player justice.

Of course the greater availability of powerful armor came an inversely proportional reliance on reagents, and less frequent dying which in turn means less spent replacing items. But what is the fun of the reverse, a society that's always working to replace what's consumed? What is the fun of getting a nice weapon that becomes only a display piece, because a single lost connection means dying to another player or monster? With the AoS changes, item insurance became a necessity for two reasons: the difficulty of assembling a suit with just the right resists (contrasted with throwing on exceptional armor made by anyone), and the rarity of top items multiplied by their power. Do you think anyone would have brought an Arcane Shield or Inquisitor's Resolution out of the bank box if there were no insurance?
 

old gypsy

Grand Poobah
Professional
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Campaign Patron
This thread is compiled off all blues..not sure it's relative..sure some went to fel many years ago, when there was no tram..I guess "Fel Born" holds some meaning to them. As long as they don't ever have to go back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“You can't go back home... back home to a young man's dreams of glory and of fame..."

Gotta love Thomas Wolfe.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
As I have pointed out several times, not specifically to you, there's no apt comparison to free shards. What do you think their populations would be if they charged $10 per month? (And should you bring it up, yes, I'm aware there are legal reasons they couldn't charge formal subscriptions. But it's a simple matter of prices.)
probably double what they are now, if they put even half that money into advertising / development. the general argument for free shards is that they are BETTER than OSI, and happen to be free.

thats the problem with the state UO is in. theres little incentive for anyone to come back when they can get a better product elsewhere. We are in a situation where whats keeping people paying the osi sub isnt the intrinsic value of the game design, it isnt a better product, but its worth the "rental fee" for mass amounts of virtual wealth built up over 20 years.
 

MalagAste

Belaern d'Zhaunil
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Supporter
jeez this thread really took off huh?

the bottom line is this
item properties and insurance ruined this game

the need for dumping gold into things like regs, potions, bandages, horses etc became unnecessary
all this extra gold that is not being used for consumables is now being used for armor or weapons
armor and weapons are now not lost or destroyed so the excess money is doing what?
saving up for artifacts?
you have all the artifacts.. now what's that gold doing..
paying for insurance so you dont loose your artifacts when you die.
that gold keeps accumulating and accumulating and now we have the average player sitting on 100mil + because the more they introduce the stronger it gets and the stronger it gets the less you die

AND the majority of people who enjoyed the pre trammel ruleset left soon after tram was introduced and have bounced around looking for a similar style of uo since. Many free shards offer this. PKs in this game are an enforcement of types, they kill the people who farm non stop so they can't get out of control and have huge savings. Kind of like today.. The idea was that the 'blues' would rally and protect each other. The added incentive is a bounty system that allows you to make money by killing reds, and inflicting a penalty to them. I don't think anyone is saying it was perfect, but it was certainly a hell of a lot better then what is going on now, and it offered a style of MMORPG that is unlike anything else on the market.

Point of all this being if this style of UO wasn't wanted then free shards wouldn't exist with a higher population of players then all of OSI combined. OSI is boring and frankly the only reason we keep paying is for our virtual houses and stuff... and friends..

I agree about item properties..... however I would NEVER want things back to pre-tram... I would have been with those quitting in mass and "divorcing" UO like my brother. Filled with hatred for the game.

And for your assessment of the "average joe" player..... I consider myself "average"... and I can guarentee I do NOT have 100million in gold.... most times I"m lucky to keep 30 or 40 million... Maybe if I pooled all my gold from every character on every shard.... maybe I might break 100.... but no. And the average joe returning player has even less and quickly goes through that they do have trying to "update" themselves. But with insurance and new crap all the time and constantly having to "retool" my characters everytime there is some update to stuff along with having 60+ characters on my shard and working on working up characters on other shards just to have folk to do things with given the dwindling populations all around and my new late hours.... I spend quite a lot on things.

My guess is the "average" joe player does too. The ones who don't spend hardly anything are the ones who play only 1 or 2 characters and only on ONE shard. I'm gonna guess most of them don't much leave Fel and haven't spent time doing the other 85% of of the game.
 

icm420

Sage
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
i agree with the free shard's having much more interaction with the owners/gms

i get why pks are not all over. i get why we have trammel. it's not my style i prefer the older style of uo, but i can see the problem with having the option of pking everyone you see. it's hard to resist. heh

also i don't have 100 mil either. i have like 5 mil on my account because i don't save gold for anything except insurance. lol
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
probably double what they are now, if they put even half that money into advertising / development. the general argument for free shards is that they are BETTER than OSI, and happen to be free.

thats the problem with the state UO is in. theres little incentive for anyone to come back when they can get a better product elsewhere. We are in a situation where whats keeping people paying the osi sub isnt the intrinsic value of the game design, it isnt a better product, but its worth the "rental fee" for mass amounts of virtual wealth built up over 20 years.
Try "far from what their populations are now." When things go up in price, both demand and quantity demanded go down. There would have to be a massive amount of advertising and better game experience for free shards to maintain their population, you realize. Whatever people think of what's available on free shards, their biggest allure is that they're free, not that they have such superior content, which is why they're attractive to returning players who don't have houses and items to return to. After all, if they were so much better, then why do some of us still pay for EA's shards (and actively play)?
 

cazador

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
After all, if they were so much better, then why do some of us still pay for EA's shards (and actively play)?
Because everyone is so attached to their little pixels..it's all it has ever come down to. Free shard players aren't players that just happened to stumble upon a game and were like wow free 2d game!! There literally is maybe 1-2 people "per free shard" if that, that have never played UO..it's players who have quit OSI or are bored for whatever reason. Wether it's pre-aos, lack of content, the lack of hacking, no item properties..maybe friends brought them, or they just wanted to take a break from the OSI grind and play a simpler version of the current UO. No matter which way you look at it, nothing will ever make them ALL happy..period. The fact still will remain no matter how hard you or anyone else tries to philosophically put a spin on it..odds are those specific players are lost forever, there's no turning back. Those players are attached to their little pixels as much as we are. Except they don't deal with lackluster buggy content, no GM's, no policing..maybe instead of Mesanna harking how they stole our content wah wah..take a page from their book and see how they keep a player base.. :/ Econ 101 away my friend!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spock's Beard

Sage
Stratics Veteran
probably double what they are now
Ahahahahahaha.

Yeah, the entire MMO industry have been UTTER IMBECILES to not realize what a financial goldmine hardcore UO-style PK action is. They've foolishly allowed their minds to be clouded by the fact that UO developers repeatedly announced that it was driving away subscribers, the fact that every game that tried to recapture it was a failure, so on and so forth, etc.

Only a few brilliant minds, who only coincidentally happen to be UO dinosaurs pining for the days of the Clinton administration, have looked at the population of a few crappy freeshards and realized the truth! But that truth can't be kept down forever! (Only for 15 years and counting.) Someday the rest of the professional gaming industry will see the light, and a new wave of hugely popular full-gank MMOs will take the world by storm! Then all those Trammies will be sorry!

Bahahahaha.

In other news, did you know that disco record sales were up 400% for the year ending 1976? If these trends continue… ayyyy!

 

DreadLord Lestat

Forum Moderator
Administrator
Moderator
Professional
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Social Media Liaison
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
PvP is always shard hopping anyways so why would there be a need for anything other than Fel? I do not PvP but it seems like many guilds will leave a shard if they cannot control it. PvP on my shard is on for a month and then off for 3 months then people come back for a month, then leave for 3 again. Some truly like to PvP and some like to dominate the weak until they are challenged and leave.

Illshenar and Ter-mur have been dead almost since the beginning, Malas (other then Luna and Atlantic) and Tokuno have been dead for years. I am not sure what one would gain from changing them anyways.

Even if they did change all lands other than Tram to non-consensual PvP, it would not increase the PvPers, just spread them out even more. You can take blue characters to those lands so maybe you just want your reds to PvM or something?
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Because everyone is so attached to their little pixels..it's all it has ever come down to. Free shard players aren't players that just happened to stumble upon a game and were like wow free 2d game!! There literally is maybe 1-2 people "per free shard" if that, that have never played UO..it's players who have quit OSI or are bored for whatever reason. Wether it's pre-aos, lack of content, the lack of hacking, no item properties..maybe friends brought them, or they just wanted to take a break from the OSI grind and play a simpler version of the current UO. No matter which way you look at it, nothing will ever make them ALL happy..period. The fact still will remain no matter how hard you or anyone else tries to philosophically put a spin on it..odds are those specific players are lost forever, there's no turning back. Those players are attached to their little pixels as much as we are. Except they don't deal with lackluster buggy content, no GM's, no policing..maybe instead of Mesanna harking how they stole our content wah wah..take a page from their book and see how they keep a player base.. :/ Econ 101 away my friend!
Nobody ever said that free shards attracted new UO players, so kindly stick to what people have in fact said, rather than implying or putting words into people's mouths. Also, nobody ever said that the Devs must keep everybody happy. Where do you get that?

I still cannot fathom how you're so blind and continue to ignore price as the principal factor. There's nothing "philosophically" about it when something "free" will naturally have a much higher demand than otherwise. I guess you've never seen the simplest supply-and-demand graph. But answer my question: if these free shards are so much better, why are people continuing to pay for regular UO accounts?

And why are you so surprised at people's attachment? It's only natural. The pixels may be intangible, but they represent the results of invested time. It would have to be an exceptional experience for me to start over on a non-EA shard and give up 18 years of content.
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
If Fel set rules and PvP are so popular, then why are players needing to hop shards to find a fight?
And that's consensual PvP. Look how well Siege is doing with its ruleset. It's not the general idea of "fun" to start building hiding and stealth to avoid the old scenario of PKs anywhere outside town, with the lack of recall making it quite difficult to escape.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Try "far from what their populations are now." When things go up in price, both demand and quantity demanded go down. There would have to be a massive amount of advertising and better game experience for free shards to maintain their population, you realize. Whatever people think of what's available on free shards, their biggest allure is that they're free, not that they have such superior content, which is why they're attractive to returning players who don't have houses and items to return to. After all, if they were so much better, then why do some of us still pay for EA's shards (and actively play)?
I pay $$ for a bad product because i have so much invested, not because its a better product. its like staying with an ugly old wife for no other reason than you have 5 kids and a mortgage with the person.

If somehow i lost my accounts, yes i would gladly rather pay 20 dollars a month to one of the more populated free shards than deal with what osi uo has become for 10 dollars a month. but till then, the pixels are keeping me here.
 

Tanivar

Crazed Zealot
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
If somehow i lost my accounts, yes i would gladly rather pay 20 dollars a month to one of the more populated free shards than deal with what osi uo has become for 10 dollars a month. but till then, the pixels are keeping me here.
Continue to pay for the pixels to save them and spend your time on a free shard that has the playstyle you enjoy. You will be having fun, and perhaps won't be so inclined to grouse & gripe so much here.
 

virtualhabitat

Lore Keeper
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
If somehow i lost my accounts, yes i would gladly rather pay 20 dollars a month to one of the more populated free shards than deal with what osi uo has become for 10 dollars a month. but till then, the pixels are keeping me here.
$20/month free shard. That's a good one.
 

Hotwheelz85

Visitor
Stratics Veteran
The people running freeshards have more passion for the game then any of the development team we have.

If they were allowed to modify the client and profit from the game the product they put out would be substantially better. I would say part of the problem is Mesanna has no qualifications for her job and has zero accountability for the product she puts out.
 

Spock's Beard

Sage
Stratics Veteran
If somehow i lost my accounts, yes i would gladly rather pay 20 dollars a month to one of the more populated free shards
Who cares? There aren't enough people like you to support a successful commercial MMO. Otherwise one that catered to you would probably, you know, exist after all these years.
 

The Craftsman

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
There's nothing "philosophically" about it when something "free" will naturally have a much higher demand than otherwise.
Exactly. Thank you for that. And therein lies the case to make UO F2P. It WILL attract new players which this game is desperately in need of. Will it attract enough to make 'shop' purchases turn enough coin to make the game viable? Perhaps. Perhaps not. The alternative however is to watch the playerbase fall and fall until they pull the plug. That is UO's downward spiral that we now have and its irreversable if they dont change the subs model and also continue with their stubbornness about not giving alternative rulesets.

But answer my question: if these free shards are so much better, why are people continuing to pay for regular UO accounts?
.
The security of an 'official' shard? Although in truth theres not much security anymore as EA will pull the plug at some point. It was the official status of the EA shards that stopped me trying out a freeshard until very very recently. Maybe the majority arent aware that there are good, long standing (10 years plus) free shards out there? And that there are multiple rulesets so all players can find one that suits them? Or that they are better supported than the EA shards?

As I said, I very recently decided to give a free shard a go, on recommendation from someone on these boards. It is easy to get set up (uses the standard UO Install from EA), seems very stable, has been around for 10 years, has a great ruleset from 'back in the day' but with some of the better later additions such as custom housing, is better supported than any EA shard I have played on (they DO have customer service as they value their players and want to keep them), and so far has been a fantastic experience and is far from being a PK or gank fest although it seems PvP is excellent from what ive heard.

At login you get a players online count which is usually between 400-500 and it shows in game. Why any Siege player wouldnt want to play this is beyond me (I played Siege as well as a prodo shard) as i'll bet it has double the playerbase of siege and a better ruleset. Players so far have been friendlier and more social than any prodo shard ive played.

If a free shard can do all of this with virtually zero resources then why cant EA? Simply they dont want to. They are determined to milk the players for every buck they can before they shelve UO.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Who cares? There aren't enough people like you to support a successful commercial MMO. Otherwise one that catered to you would probably, you know, exist after all these years.
theres actually many, plus, im not just speaking of how pvp is handled, but many basic aspects of the game as well such a updates, bug fixes, stance towards third party programs, general game stability, cheating, etc etc
wurm online
mortal online
darkfall unholy wars
asherons call
diablo 2 (hardcore)
path of exile (hardcore)
dayz
the warz
planetside
fallout2238/fonline2/fonline:reloaded
salem/haven and hearth
minecraft
total influence
albion online
eve online
shores of hazeron
spacestation 13
nether
elderlands
xyson
life is feudal
gloria victis
hellmoo/armageddon mud/infernoMOO
dark age of camelot
tibia
neocron 2
 

Ashlynn_L

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
It's pretty clear that you haven't played most of those given several of them aren't even MMORPGs. =P
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
It's pretty clear that you haven't played most of those given several of them aren't even MMORPGs. =P
i didnt say they were, just games that provide a higher element of risk that some people enjoy.
 

Ashlynn_L

Lore Master
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Except not all of them do. Some of them have little or no penalty for death - you don't risk anything.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
https://trialsofascension.com/guide/index
been keeping an eye on this one too. Permadeath and everything. Point is, yes there is a demand for this type of game that UO could have taken advantage of, but instead took the route its come to now. And i personally enjoy what it is now.

I dont play UO for gameplay or a hardcore game experience. I pay to play house and dressup, which is why the majority of the small playerbase also still play. PVM aspects of the game are so out of the running compared to the huge competition that really cant even be considered an attribute of UO anymore.

Point is, if UO had taken the other route, gone back to its roots of what Richard Garriot had envisioned im absolutely sure the playerbase would be substantially higher. Yes, it would have lost 95 percent of the type of players we have now, but would also probably had gained many of the players currently playing freeshards, as well as the niche group of players who enjoy a more hardcore game.

So i stick by my assessment. UO could have taken advantage of a niche market and sustained a much higher playerbase than exposing itself to the overwhelming competition of the other, more popular type of carebear games.
 

The Craftsman

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
https://trialsofascension.com/guide/index
been keeping an eye on this one too. Permadeath and everything. Point is, yes there is a demand for this type of game that UO could have taken advantage of, but instead took the route its come to now. And i personally enjoy what it is now.

I dont play UO for gameplay or a hardcore game experience. I pay to play house and dressup, which is why the majority of the small playerbase also still play. PVM aspects of the game are so out of the running compared to the huge competition that really cant even be considered an attribute of UO anymore.

Point is, if UO had taken the other route, gone back to its roots of what Richard Garriot had envisioned im absolutely sure the playerbase would be substantially higher. Yes, it would have lost 95 percent of the type of players we have now, but would also probably had gained many of the players currently playing freeshards, as well as the niche group of players who enjoy a more hardcore game.

So i stick by my assessment. UO could have taken advantage of a niche market and sustained a much higher playerbase than exposing itself to the overwhelming competition of the other, more popular type of carebear games.
EA could have offered varying ruleset a to make sure any UO fan had a shard that suited them and in doing so kept a large part of the player base that they lost.

EA will tell you that they can't do it as the code is old etc etc but that's a crock of crap. Freeshards can offer custom rulesets whilst using the up to date patched UO client that the production shards use.
 

Arroth Thaiel

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
You all do realize that these "freeshards" exist because they steal everything outright from EA?

The "freeshard" operators made 0 of the art tiles. They made 0 of the sound files. They designed 0 of the database/software infrastructure.

They use the "standard UO Install from EA" because EA, and therefore the Dev Team you loathe so much, built it.

The "freeshard" operators can operate, because someone else is doing all the goddamned work!

Of course they can offer goodies and have time to create new rulesets and dink around like they are the holy ones, they have no development costs. They don't have to worry about actually building/maintaining a working game. They just use what EA puts out as a mod kit and tweak it to their desires.

And some of their mods are popular. But the "freeshards" don't have to spend time and effort on the underlying game systems. Someone else (EA) pays to build that.

Don't for a second think that the people running these "freeshards" are doing anything other than using someone else's work, and claiming a lot of credit for it.

No don't get me wrong. EA's account management is a freaking mess. And the customer service is....well it is just embarrassing. We all know that. But we also know that EA runs those things, not Broadsword. (Despite the UO teams best efforts to pick up the broken pieces - and disgruntled customers - left by EA.) Any money EA gives Broadsword is for development of the game. And we all know EA only allows UO to retain just enough cash to keep the lights on. Our little development team doesn't have the money to do much more then string it together from publish to publish.

And then the "freeshard" operators take it, use it, draw off more of the playerbase, more of the paying customers, and the game dwindles.

And yes. This is Completely EA's fault. EA owns not just UO, but the entire Ultima intellectual property. If they had wanted to stop this, they could have sued the pants of "freeshard" operators years ago for copyright infringement. (Thereby possibly alienating the Ultima community even more and decreasing even further the number of those interested in the game? Who knows EA rationale.)

EA chose not to and now we are left with this mess.

But don't get mad at the Dev team. They are stuck in it with us.
 

GalenKnighthawke

Grand Poobah
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
If the premise of this post were true, the following list of things also would be true.

Publish 16 never would have happened. Posts from the dev team at the time said that Publish happened because most people had left Felucca for Trammel and there was a need to balance out server loads for a greater degree. If Trammel hadn't been a success, most people never would've left, and Publish 16 never would have happened.

But it did happen.

Trammel never would have been created, because the discontent created by Fel never would have existed and thus there never would have been a need for it.

But it was. (Then see also above.)

Richard Garriott's Memorable Moment from UO would not have consisted of a realization, caused by an incident of one player harming another, that he had to think hard about the rules of the world he'd created.

But it was.
Link: http://www.uo.com/article/Memorable-Moments-Richard-Garriot

Starr Long would not have indicated that the creation of Trammel was necessary when he spoke at the UO anniversary party.

But he did. (There used to be a paraphrase up someplace of the talk he gave; others will remember it though not all will admit it.)

Siege and Mugen would be the most-populated shards in UO because people would like to play that way.

But they are not.

There never would have been a need to have the Siege housing gimmick as people would have played there without it, because they liked to play that way.

But there was.

The Fel Abyss spawns would be crowded with folks doing them. (The undead one in particular has a lot of cool content and good rewards.)

But they're not.

There wouldn't be posts on Stratics complaining that VvV was dead, because people would jump at the chance to PvP.

But there are those posts.

Games that came out post-UO that had more of a Fel type environment would be prospering, whereas games that came out post-UO that had more of a Tram type environment would be failing.

But that's not the case. Shadowbane is dead. Darkfall has 3,718 likes on facebook; Everquest has 62,843; UO has 26,939. (Facebook likes aren't a perfect indicator of a game's popularity but it's a much better metric than individual posters.)

https://www.facebook.com/darkfallonline
(Also note how out of date Darkfall's page appears to be.)

https://www.facebook.com/EverQuestLive

https://www.facebook.com/UltimaOnline

No like for Shadowbane because it died.

Finally, Fel would be so popular on its own that threads like these wouldn't exist.

I could go on and on but that's enough for now. Ultimately the argument of these types of threads is "Trammel failed, because failure is defined by the original poster not liking it."

There was a time when most players would see posts like these and just let them pass by, but I'm glad that time is gone. In not responding to posts like these we run significant risks of letting intense opinion be mistaken for popular opinion.

I don't expect to post in this thread again.

-Galen's player
 

Old Vet Back Again

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Honestly, the issue is we don't have a single developer that is active in pvp. Not one of them is consistently pvping in their off time, or even during their working hours monitoring and/or promoting pvp. If Kyronix would simply log in once a month (rather see it ever week) and set up some sort of mini battle with VvV we would get more pvp. Having a Dev there watching the contest would encourage those who normally wouldn't participate to come out and try it. This would also allow them to begin to crack down on the dickheads that ruin pvp for others. The ones that grief and troll after every single death. Let them get caught breaking the ToS or RoC (whichever it is) and start suspending them and eventually ban them. We don't need players like that in the pvp community. Hell I would be ok with banning GC in fel or making it so you can't post in GC if you are HoB or Crim. PVP needs trammies, let them get hooked on the excitement. What PVP doesn't need is the *******s that are running rampant making fun of every "noob" they kill.

I respect Trammel, and I don't expect them all to like pvp, BUT we need to start creating a more friendly environment for people to get their feet wet.
 

WhiteWitch

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Just a small word about Siege, and the housing gimmick.

Siege is not a proper alternative to production shards, simply because it only allows one char per account there, so unless you are willing to run 3+ subscriptions and/or buy literally dozens of soul stones, you simply cannot do all the things there that you can on normal shards.

I mostly play on Siege and I prefer its rule set, but this char limitation means I cannot do all the different things there that I can on a prod shard.

I see the "housing gimmick"(allowing house on siege AND prodo) as really an admission by the devs that Siege is a novelty shard, and players wanting to get full value out of the games many possibilities have no choice but to also play on a prod shard.

Tram was a good idea but executed the wrong way, they should have simply made PvM and PvP shards in the same way WoW does, the PvP shards being exactly like the current prodo ones but with fel ruleset throughout.

This is what I wish Siege was....
 

Ultimaholic

Adventurer
Stratics Veteran
Try "far from what their populations are now." When things go up in price, both demand and quantity demanded go down. There would have to be a massive amount of advertising and better game experience for free shards to maintain their population, you realize. Whatever people think of what's available on free shards, their biggest allure is that they're free, not that they have such superior content, which is why they're attractive to returning players who don't have houses and items to return to. After all, if they were so much better, then why do some of us still pay for EA's shards (and actively play)?
On that you can not be more wrong in your assumption. Hate to break it to you but....They pretty much ALL have superior content! Also they are F2P. Just yesterday I dropped $20 on my free game. See how that works? You have it way backward. Do you honestly think people are attracted to freeshards just cause their free? LOL I`m sorry but wow. If that were the case there wouldn`t be 100`s of them trying to get just the right content to A. attract people and B. To keep people,why do they want people to play their "free" game? So they spend money on things available in that free game. Since their not saddled with a monthly payment to play said game..... they are likely to spend more on said game.

Your one sentence basically invalidated everything you say about freeshards imo because it shows you know nothing about them.

The best thing Broadsword devs could do is open the door to some 3rd part programs that make their product even better. The works been done,capitalize on it. Also they seriously need to go to a F2P model,maybe giving current vets the option to continue payin a monthly and thus seeing no change in service. F2P is the way of future gaming,if you have any doubts you should do some googling. There are alot of F2P games with enormous populations.

F2P could do nothing but help Broadsword UO and I for one would come back in a heart beat....... and it wouldn`t be "just cause its free" I`m sure alot more would come back as well. Why wouldn`t they?
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
I pay $$ for a bad product because i have so much invested, not because its a better product. its like staying with an ugly old wife for no other reason than you have 5 kids and a mortgage with the person.

If somehow i lost my accounts, yes i would gladly rather pay 20 dollars a month to one of the more populated free shards than deal with what osi uo has become for 10 dollars a month. but till then, the pixels are keeping me here.
"Better" is a relative term. At least for the present, paying money is still preferable to the alternative of rebuilding on free shards. I still manage to have fun.

And if someone is "stuck" in a relationship you describe, notwithstanding on the other end is probably a man himself old and less attractive, what brought him into the situation in the first place? Wasn't it meant to be something long-term? UO is not. Leave it at any time if its value falls below the subscription cost.

yeah, more just an example to zog who thinks the main reason people play free shards is because there free.
Actually, yes. You need to distinguish between "most of all UO players" and "most who play free shards." There are people who will pay a premium for a product they're used to, that has features they've invested a lot of time in, that their friends also still play, that they're confident will still be around a while, rather than a free shard which for all we know could shut down next week. We don't know EA wouldn't pull the plug on UO next week, but I have more confidence it wouldn't happen compared to any free shard, nor would I expect shards to shut down because one or two Devs had enough or couldn't continue working.

If you think the price is not a factor, then do you really think they'd have the same playerbase if they charged $5 per month, or the same $10? If it's such a good experience, why not $20 per account per month? And what do you think someone would have to do as his free shard burgeoned with thousands more players and incurred greater operating costs, but start requiring regular payments to deter a free rider problem? I'd expect EA would sooner pull the plug on official shards than invest the money in legal work to shut down non-EA shards that are making significant money.
 

Arroth Thaiel

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
On that you can not be more wrong in your assumption. Hate to break it to you but....They pretty much ALL have superior content! Also they are F2P. Just yesterday I dropped $20 on my free game. See how that works? You have it way backward. Do you honestly think people are attracted to freeshards just cause their free? LOL I`m sorry but wow. If that were the case there wouldn`t be 100`s of them trying to get just the right content to A. attract people and B. To keep people,why do they want people to play their "free" game? So they spend money on things available in that free game. Since their not saddled with a monthly payment to play said game..... they are likely to spend more on said game.
So the "free shards" have stolen someone else's work, and are now profiting from it?

Isn't this exactly the same as showing a movie in a theater, but not paying the studio that made the movie? That doesn't seem like it would go over very well with the studio. Nor does it seem right from a simple right and wrong perspective.

I am surprised EA's legal team isn't going after them.

Since the "free shard" operators have never been and are not currently "saddled" with development costs, it must be nice to be able to just focus on pixel content they can sell, while leaving the studio the difficult work of making the actual framework in which the pixels are sold.

Something about this entire "free shard" thing just seems illegal and wrong to me on a number of levels.

However, it's EA's call, and if they don't care enough to defend their property, it's their business. Or lack thereof.
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
On that you can not be more wrong in your assumption. Hate to break it to you but....They pretty much ALL have superior content!
You're spewing nonsense after nonsense. If the content is so superior, then why do any players still pay for official UO subscriptions? And why are you complaining on a forum for EA's UO shards, when you should be sticking to forums for a free shard you cherish so much?

Also they are F2P. Just yesterday I dropped $20 on my free game. See how that works? You have it way backward.
As I wrote in my previous reply, enough of us are still willing to pay a premium for a product that we, so far, still prefer to alternatives. Others like you are so cheap that you'll complain about UO instead of paying for subscriptions that, in aggregate, could have given the game more development funding.

You may claim to have paid $20 to a non-EA shard, but how many do that regularly? They have a huge problem called the free rider. You should look that up.

Do you honestly think people are attracted to freeshards just cause their free? LOL I`m sorry but wow. If that were the case there wouldn`t be 100`s of them trying to get just the right content to A. attract people and B. To keep people,why do they want people to play their "free" game? So they spend money on things available in that free game. Since their not saddled with a monthly payment to play said game..... they are likely to spend more on said game.

Your one sentence basically invalidated everything you say about freeshards imo because it shows you know nothing about them.
Actually, you're the one invalidating anything you could possibly know about simple business and economics, because you don't realize that if free shards charged what EA did, there would be far fewer people playing. Go ahead, tell us what the populations would be at $5 or $10 or $20 per month. Is the content really so superior, or is the major factor that of price?

Free shard operators have a love of the game I could never have, making what wouldn't be much money for what it takes, but creating UO in their vision and the satisfaction of a playerbase seems to be worth it. In a way it's similar to large-scale development of major open source software.

But I and others have routinely debunked any F2P models as ultimately bringing in less revenue than present. It would be a scripter's dream to pay just $5 per account that don't need houses. Meanwhile, other players would cut back on their accounts.

The best thing Broadsword devs could do is open the door to some 3rd part programs that make their product even better. The works been done,capitalize on it.
And what "3rd part programs" are you talking about? Scripting? The UOA equivalents that are illegal for a reason?

Also they seriously need to go to a F2P model,maybe giving current vets the option to continue payin a monthly and thus seeing no change in service. F2P is the way of future gaming,if you have any doubts you should do some googling. There are alot of F2P games with enormous populations.
I have in fact played a lot of F2P and paid a lot. I know what I'm talking about, but you don't since you think it's something applicable to UO. F2P is about getting players to pay to win based on the human tendency for gratification sooner rather than later, coming out with minor new content that requires additional purchases of game currency for RL money, then coming out with an entirely new game (and non-transferable game currency). It does not lend itself at all to a game of UO's longevity.

F2P could do nothing but help Broadsword UO and I for one would come back in a heart beat....... and it wouldn`t be "just cause its free" I`m sure alot more would come back as well. Why wouldn`t they?
Now why would "current vets" be given a price break unless your F2P model will be significantly more expensive than a flat rate? And why would people return to UO or newcomers try the game if it's going to cost more than current players? What would happen is that the game would never see anyone new at all, thus revenues could only continue declining as long-timers quit for whatever reasons. With your reasoning, you'd better not try to open your own business.
 
Last edited:

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
I am surprised EA's legal team isn't going after them.
I can only surmise EA decided long ago that it's too costly to have an attorney and a paralegal or two investigate and file injunctions. There's the problem of it turning into whack-a-shard as one shut down only to reappear somewhere else. They may have also decided, probably correctly, that the expense would exceed any revenue from those who'd come back to "official" UO after their favorite free shard was shut down. I don't think many would come back.
 

The Craftsman

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Truth be told a lot of EA shard players are kept in the 'official' version of the game because of the time and money invested and the pixel count they have. They dont want to start over so they carry on with EA. How many of them do you think would continue paying to play the EA shards if they got wiped tomorrow? Virtually none id bet. So thats another reason why freeshards arent more popular ... a lot of people dont want to give up what they feel they have 'worked' for.
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Exactly. Thank you for that. And therein lies the case to make UO F2P. It WILL attract new players which this game is desperately in need of. Will it attract enough to make 'shop' purchases turn enough coin to make the game viable? Perhaps. Perhaps not. The alternative however is to watch the playerbase fall and fall until they pull the plug. That is UO's downward spiral that we now have and its irreversable if they dont change the subs model and also continue with their stubbornness about not giving alternative rulesets.
Your F2P alternative, though, is to make UO more expensive that people will start canceling accounts to keep their periodic UO expenses at the same level. You want to pull when people will push back, because the lack of new game experience won't be worth the additional expense.

The security of an 'official' shard? Although in truth theres not much security anymore as EA will pull the plug at some point. It was the official status of the EA shards that stopped me trying out a freeshard until very very recently. Maybe the majority arent aware that there are good, long standing (10 years plus) free shards out there? And that there are multiple rulesets so all players can find one that suits them? Or that they are better supported than the EA shards?

As I said, I very recently decided to give a free shard a go, on recommendation from someone on these boards. It is easy to get set up (uses the standard UO Install from EA), seems very stable, has been around for 10 years, has a great ruleset from 'back in the day' but with some of the better later additions such as custom housing, is better supported than any EA shard I have played on (they DO have customer service as they value their players and want to keep them), and so far has been a fantastic experience and is far from being a PK or gank fest although it seems PvP is excellent from what ive heard.

At login you get a players online count which is usually between 400-500 and it shows in game. Why any Siege player wouldnt want to play this is beyond me (I played Siege as well as a prodo shard) as i'll bet it has double the playerbase of siege and a better ruleset. Players so far have been friendlier and more social than any prodo shard ive played.

If a free shard can do all of this with virtually zero resources then why cant EA? Simply they dont want to. They are determined to milk the players for every buck they can before they shelve UO.
Because as someone pointed out, free shards already have the bulk of work set up for them. Do you think free shards could have come up with customized housing? Paragons? Significant amounts of new artwork? Their only strengths are price and responsiveness, but the latter is still largely limited to what already exists.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Truth be told a lot of EA shard players are kept in the 'official' version of the game because of the time and money invested and the pixel count they have. They dont want to start over so they carry on with EA. How many of them do you think would continue paying to play the EA shards if they got wiped tomorrow? Virtually none id bet. So thats another reason why freeshards arent more popular ... a lot of people dont want to give up what they feel they have 'worked' for.
exactly.

player with huge amount of virtual wealth grandfathered into OSI (characters skills items) - Play OSI
returning player or new player with insignificant skills, few characters, non-valueable items - Play Free Shard
player with large amount invested into OSI but unhappy with lack of risk / competitive gameplay - Play Free Shard

that about sums it up. Yes if EA would have made changes over the years it could have been prevented, but its what UO players have now.
 

The Zog historian

Babbling Loonie
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
EA could have offered varying ruleset a to make sure any UO fan had a shard that suited them and in doing so kept a large part of the player base that they lost.

EA will tell you that they can't do it as the code is old etc etc but that's a crock of crap. Freeshards can offer custom rulesets whilst using the up to date patched UO client that the production shards use.
Different rulesets are different to maintain, and what would you have, a "classic" ruleset with no Trammel? The old Notoriety system? When Siege opened, for all people's happy posts about how cool it was to band up with a dozen others to slay a single ettin, the novelty wore off quickly, and that was almost a year before Trammel.

EA is unfortunately correct, just not in the way you're thinking. The code is indeed very old, and I don't think documentation was very properly maintained. The Devs today, alas, don't understand much of how things work, and these days I'm always worried about what they'd break. I've dealt with different database types and having new developers come on board, having to train them in how things are supposed to work while secretly hoping nothing gets screwed up.
 

Spock's Beard

Sage
Stratics Veteran
theres actually many, plus, im not just speaking of how pvp is handled, but many basic aspects of the game as well such a updates, bug fixes, stance towards third party programs, general game stability, cheating, etc etc

(snip list)
Hahahahahah. Yeah what a great list, you sure did win me over. Hey devs, let's turn everything in UO over to Felucca rules, because... uh... something something Minecraft. Yeah those totally have anything in common.

It's 2015. Nobody is going back to Felucca. Deal with it.
 

Smoot

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Hahahahahah. Yeah what a great list, you sure did win me over. Hey devs, let's turn everything in UO over to Felucca rules, because... uh... something something Minecraft. Yeah those totally have anything in common.

It's 2015. Nobody is going back to Felucca. Deal with it.
i get it, your afraid of perma death and dont like hardcore games. point taken sir.
 

Lefty

Lore Keeper
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
I fancied the idea of killing off moongate/recall/gate travel to and from Fel/Trammel facets. At char creation and implementation players would choose what facet. Each would eventually have its own community.
 
Top