The One and Only Pre-UOR Thread! Update -- 3 Polls of Results

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Yep. I knew that I don't die when my character dies. But Thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

Dying is not always bad, I hate to dying to monsters much more than dying to PK's. When dying to PK's, I have a chance to charm/RP me out of trouble but when I die to 3 dark wisps who decite to gamk me, they will try to res kill me no matter how mysh I smile or RP when trying to get to my body.

Monsters are heartless because they have no heart, it's different with PK's, only very few heartless.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

you're drawing on what numbers?


[/ QUOTE ]
The numbers that say UO, with free for all Non-Con PvP has NEVER hit 400K subs.

The numbers that say that ANY other successful MMORPG out there (i.e. Persistent, and with more than 400K subs), do NOT offer what everyone SAYS will make a Pre Ren shard great; absolutely unfettered PvP. The numbers that say that PvP that is either Consentual, or at the VERY least, a LOT more structured and fair, is FAR more popular than Free for All PvP, as offered by UO.

The numbers that say that MMORPGs that DID try this type of ruleset failed.

I believe firmly that the resources needed to do this would only be pleasing a small microcosm of the UO playerbase, and that a Pre-Ren Shard will NOT be bringing back 150K or more subs, or anything close to that number, as has been claimed.

Of course, that is just MY opinion

[/ QUOTE ]
You want to talk about numbers? How about the fact that UO was steadily gaining subscribers up through the launch of UOR. In fact there was a press release the month before the UOR launch stating UO had around 180,000 subscribers. After about a year of UOR, subscriptions peaked around 240,000 and started declining. Only AOS brought a surge of subscriptions up to 250,000 and is declining once again (Data on UOSE is not available yet). So clearly UO was doing something right in those initial days and hasn't been lately.

I find it ironic that the recent marketing is about "The game that started it all." Wrong. That game is basically dead and was re-invented in AOS to something quite different. To make that statement true they need to put up a pre-UOR shard enhanced with the best of today's features.

*Subscription data taken from www.mmorpgchart.com and EA's own Press Releases*

 

[Nisse]

just jumping on here on the last post.


If a pre ren chard was created i would like to se one thing on it in the begining to set it strait direct and it would be heavy gm time there to direct ban all who in any way tryes to use scripts to pvp or train up their chars.

 

[Chamfort]

Hemi, thats why I stated that to ME it just doesnt feel right after the Fel/Tram split. I never said that they havent made some nice improvements over the years. I wish some of the minor improvments were actually done back in '98.

But I still dissagree about adding content from nowadays into a pre-ren shard. Like I said, you cant have your cake and eat it too. It's all or nothing here. Why would I want to return to a shard thats not truely pre-ren but isnt nearly as item-based as now? I might as well go play Siege in that case.

Like I say, there's nothing to debate/poll. Create a pre-ren shard, or as some have commented pre pub 16, with pre-ren (pub 16) rules/items. Anything else added we might as well either play a player-run shard or Siege.

Just the way I see it.......simple.


Chamfort-(DoC) Great Lakes

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

You want to talk about numbers? How about the fact that UO was steadily gaining subscribers up through the launch of UOR.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK...and how many competitors were around then (Before UO:R)?

Then how many competitors were there RIGHT AFTER UO:R?

Then how competitors were there 1 year after UO:R?
<blockquote><hr>

So clearly UO was doing something right in those initial days and hasn't been lately.


[/ QUOTE ]

As I have stated countless times before, what they did "Right" was be the only game in town.

Answer the questions above objectively, and you may see what I see...a game that was very popular, at first, as it was the ONLY game of it's kind...then a game (EQ) comes out, and just kicks the ever-lovin' crap outta UO's subscriptions...and guess what...it has NO Non-Con PvP...at all!!

Guess that makes the point that "Free for All PvP is what made UO Great" a little less cogent.

Otherwise, EQ would have folded, and Fel would be full, yes?

Well...is it?
<blockquote><hr>

I find it ironic that the recent marketing is about "The game that started it all." Wrong. That game is basically dead and was re-invented in AOS to something quite different. To make that statement true they need to put up a pre-UOR shard enhanced with the best of today's features.


[/ QUOTE ]

It WAS the game that started it all. Some people seem to think the Ruleset is what made it great. If that was true, few would have left for a Game that was NO PvP...but that was not the case. Just look at EQ's stellar rise in subscriptions, from inception, to now, and just how badly it beats UO's subscriptions, and this becomes blatantly obvious.

MANY People LOVE MMORPGs. UO was the first, and hence, the most popular...for a while...until a Choice was offered.

SOME people love MMORPGs that have Free for All PvP. Key word being "Some".

MOST people do NOT like Non-Consentual PvP as offered by UO (Simply compare subscriptions for UO and games that have PvP, but NOT completely Non-Consentual with Dry Looting, Rez Killing, No Consideration for skill level of the person being Attacked, etc.).

So yes...I love discussing true objective numbers, without the numbers or logic being skewed by perceptions that support an argument, but may not be valid for the reasons cited.

 

[V(r6)dubEr]

<blockquote><hr>

We have two chars on Siege.

Both are Ghosts. Both were PKed within 10 minutes of being born, and dry looted.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have the same attatude in game as you have on these boards i would pk you myself?

You do realize this is about OPENING A NEW SHARD AND NOT CHANGEING THE EXISTING SHARDS? So why are you debateing this? theres a huge market out there for pvp games WoW has more PVP servers then PVM so i hear. if uo opened a shard with t2a rules and some of the current additions and bug fixes and "advertised"(overstatement) tward the PvP population.they could pull alot of Pvp players from WoW, Halflife,unreal,exc, people who have never heard of uo but love pvp they could possably bring back alot of the vets who quit after pub 16. If the "great Fall" (when they turned on decay) didnt tell you how many people closed thier accounts due to some of the current tram/item based content then your in denial sir. So the big question here is... Are you afraid that if ea. opened a T2a rule set server and that if it does better then a normal server it would prove every anti fel rule post you have ever written wrong? IMHO im all for it with proper marketing I can see it cuaseing the need for additonal servers.

 

[Scare]

I'd play it, my guild mates would all play it, my sisters fiance would play it, 2 friends on aim say they would come back, several on ICQ, infact, nearly every person I know and asked about a pre-publish 16 shard, said they would play it, look at the success of player ran shards, they have larger populations then some production shards... im for it, and hope they will atleast attempt to make a pre-aos/publish16 shard...

 

[Deathjesters]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

you're drawing on what numbers?


[/ QUOTE ]
The numbers that say UO, with free for all Non-Con PvP has NEVER hit 400K subs.

The numbers that say that ANY other successful MMORPG out there (i.e. Persistent, and with more than 400K subs), do NOT offer what everyone SAYS will make a Pre Ren shard great; absolutely unfettered PvP. The numbers that say that PvP that is either Consentual, or at the VERY least, a LOT more structured and fair, is FAR more popular than Free for All PvP, as offered by UO.

The numbers that say that MMORPGs that DID try this type of ruleset failed.

I believe firmly that the resources needed to do this would only be pleasing a small microcosm of the UO playerbase, and that a Pre-Ren Shard will NOT be bringing back 150K or more subs, or anything close to that number, as has been claimed.

Of course, that is just MY opinion

[/ QUOTE ]
You want to talk about numbers? How about the fact that UO was steadily gaining subscribers up through the launch of UOR. In fact there was a press release the month before the UOR launch stating UO had around 180,000 subscribers. After about a year of UOR, subscriptions peaked around 240,000 and started declining. Only AOS brought a surge of subscriptions up to 250,000 and is declining once again (Data on UOSE is not available yet). So clearly UO was doing something right in those initial days and hasn't been lately.

I find it ironic that the recent marketing is about "The game that started it all." Wrong. That game is basically dead and was re-invented in AOS to something quite different. To make that statement true they need to put up a pre-UOR shard enhanced with the best of today's features.

*Subscription data taken from www.mmorpgchart.com and EA's own Press Releases*

[/ QUOTE ]


how about the fact that UO:R (2000) was the year of DSL ..many got it and started online games.... also ever sinces t2a.. UO never won a year-award!!

blizzard took em all this year...(ofc) and thats a game DESIGNED for PvP and then added Crafting and PvM on top (unlike UO)



and tbh i believe UO had more ppl playing back then.. cus we didnt have 2-3-4-5+ accounts.. we had 1!! now days u got 2-6accts... so ofc the account number (active) is higher.. but less ppl play..just look how hard it is to find ppl doing all dungeons and pvp in all spots.. like back then

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

You do realize this is about OPENING A NEW SHARD AND NOT CHANGEING THE EXISTING SHARDS?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep. I do. Completely.
<blockquote><hr>

So why are you debateing this?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because I believe it would be a waste of resources, except for a small percentage of UO Players.
<blockquote><hr>

theres a huge market out there for pvp games WoW has more PVP servers then PVM so i hear.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep. They do.

But you need to do your homework, AND re-read my posts.

Tell you what...you go read this link:

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/pvpcombat.html

My main point is that, yes, other MMORPGs DO have PvP.

NONE of the successful and/or lasting MMORPGs offer anything close to the Free for All that IS UO PvP. In particular, the UO PvP that was Pre Ren...the UO PvP that caused the creation of Trammel in the first place.

WHY would EA spend money and resources on a PvP ruleset that has PROVEN to NOT attract large numbers of players, EXCEPT when there is no competition, and the type of gaming is brand new to everyone?

WoW HAS PvP, with MANY participants.

UO does not have "Many Participants" with the UO PvP Ruleset. Otherwise Fel and Siege would be brimming, and these boards would be full of posts about how to re-populate Trammel, not Fel.

There MUST be a difference in there somewhere, other than JUST the Graphics...
<blockquote><hr>

if uo opened a shard with t2a rules and some of the current additions and bug fixes and "advertised"(overstatement) tward the PvP population.they could pull alot of Pvp players from WoW, Halflife,unreal,exc, people who have never heard of uo but love pvp they could possably bring back alot of the vets who quit after pub 16

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is so, why haven't they done so already? Seems to me it would just make good business sense, if what you say is true.

Do you really not believe that EA HAS evaluated this, from a Cost Benefit Analysis standpoint?

I believe they have. I believe that IS the reason there is no Pre UO:R Shard. It is also the reason I do not believe there should be, due to the fact that the playstyle UO offers does NOT attract millions of players. Lineage II and WoW DO attract millions of subscribers.

So what...exactly, IS the difference, in your opinion, between WoW/Lineage II, and UO, with regards to the PvP Rulesets each currently offer?
<blockquote><hr>

If the "great Fall" (when they turned on decay) didnt tell you how many people closed thier accounts due to some of the current tram/item based content then your in denial sir.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what you are referring to here. Sorry.
<blockquote><hr>

So the big question here is... Are you afraid that if ea. opened a T2a rule set server and that if it does better then a normal server it would prove every anti fel rule post you have ever written wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]
Nope. Not in the least.
I am afraid that EA would be throwing good money after bad, in that case. THAT is my main concern. It didn't work, EXCEPT when there was no competition. AS SOON AS there was competition, even from MMORPGS that offered NO PvP at all, the UO subscriber base went down, or levelled out, and the non-PvP games went through the roof.

Do you have a good explanation for that phenomena?
<blockquote><hr>

IMHO im all for it with proper marketing I can see it cuaseing the need for additonal servers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, that being said, WHY hasn't EA (or ANYONE who has a lasting MMORPG Title out there) done this already, if the demand is that huge?
Otherwise, SOMEONE would have done this already. Who would miss out on 150,000 X 10 X 12 (or $18,000,000.00 Annually) for very long?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

You want to talk about numbers? How about the fact that UO was steadily gaining subscribers up through the launch of UOR.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK...and how many competitors were around then (Before UO:R)?

Then how many competitors were there RIGHT AFTER UO:R?

Then how competitors were there 1 year after UO:R?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well how convenient, all that information can be found on mmorpgchart.com!

Before UO:R the only mentionable online games were Ultima Online, Lineage, Everquest, the Realm Online, and Asheron's Call.

Right after UO:R there were only the games mentioned above.

The next major release was over a year later with Dark Age of Camelot. Then out came Runescape. He also lists Final Fantasy XI, but that is clearly a mistake and I have already emailed him about fixing it. Minor releases included Anarchy Online (60,000 subscribers), Majestic (which failed months later), WWII Online (12,000 subscribers), and Motor City Online (topped at 35,000 subscribers and is now dead).

Your arguement that EQ "just kicks the ever-lovin' crap outta UO's subscriptions" holds no water. If you notice UO had an increase in subscription growth following the release of EQ. The release of Everquest may have actually helped UO by focusing attention to the emerging MMORPG market.

Zing.

 

[Dodge]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

You want to talk about numbers? How about the fact that UO was steadily gaining subscribers up through the launch of UOR.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK...and how many competitors were around then (Before UO:R)?

Then how many competitors were there RIGHT AFTER UO:R?

Then how competitors were there 1 year after UO:R?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well how convenient, all that information can be found on mmorpgchart.com!

Before UO:R the only mentionable online games were Ultima Online, Lineage, Everquest, the Realm Online, and Asheron's Call.

Right after UO:R there were only the games mentioned above.

The next major release was over a year later with Dark Age of Camelot. Then out came Runescape. He also lists Final Fantasy XI, but that is clearly a mistake and I have already emailed him about fixing it. Minor releases included Anarchy Online (60,000 subscribers), Majestic (which failed months later), WWII Online (12,000 subscribers), and Motor City Online (topped at 35,000 subscribers and is now dead).

Your arguement that EQ "just kicks the ever-lovin' crap outta UO's subscriptions" holds no water. If you notice UO had an increase in subscription growth following the release of EQ. The release of Everquest may have actually helped UO by focusing attention to the emerging MMORPG market.

Zing.

[/ QUOTE ]



Acctually UO pre uo:r ripped ALOT from tibia wich game out in 95 , yes thats right 2 years before uo came out ..so stop this bloody UO came first bull.. if you dont belive me hop over to tibia.com and read up ..

 

[DragonFar]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

you're drawing on what numbers?


[/ QUOTE ]
The numbers that say UO, with free for all Non-Con PvP has NEVER hit 400K subs.

The numbers that say that ANY other successful MMORPG out there (i.e. Persistent, and with more than 400K subs), do NOT offer what everyone SAYS will make a Pre Ren shard great; absolutely unfettered PvP. The numbers that say that PvP that is either Consentual, or at the VERY least, a LOT more structured and fair, is FAR more popular than Free for All PvP, as offered by UO.

The numbers that say that MMORPGs that DID try this type of ruleset failed.

I believe firmly that the resources needed to do this would only be pleasing a small microcosm of the UO playerbase, and that a Pre-Ren Shard will NOT be bringing back 150K or more subs, or anything close to that number, as has been claimed.

Of course, that is just MY opinion

[/ QUOTE ]

ehh, even with trammel UO hasn't come anywhere NEAR 400k subscriptions so I'm not sure what the point of that argument was, other then to show that it's graphics that get the subscriptions. You're comparing 2 completely different style games, and the superior game gets the more subscriptions.

Why are you ignoring my posts that are telling you the 2 largest MMO's out there Lineages 1 + 2 are non-con pvp?

as for a microcosm of people being pvp'ers...I suggest you take a look at the WoW pvp servers, they filled up first with waiting queues of 2000+ to get on the server. There has been more pvp servers created since it's launch then any other servers. You're speaking with a personal bias towards what is interesting for you. a pre uo:r server would fill up faster then that origin server the launched, faster then that lake austin server that they launched, faster then aol legends, have more players then those dead servers (ie sonoma) that are currently out there.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

Your arguement that EQ "just kicks the ever-lovin' crap outta UO's subscriptions" holds no water. If you notice UO had an increase in subscription growth following the release of EQ. The release of Everquest may have actually helped UO by focusing attention to the emerging MMORPG market.

Zing.


[/ QUOTE ]
OK...so you think a game that topped out at 250K Subscribers (UO) is NOT, and DID NOT get their arses handed to them, when the Non-PvP game (EQ) beats our current subscriber levels by almost 100% at the top end?

Of course UO had an increase after EQ came out...they one of three offered large MMORPGs (UO, EQ, and Lineage), until DAoC came out.

You can "Zing" all you want, JC.

The numbers don't lie. The Glory Days of UO Free For All PvP were over when EQ came out. I have seen posts on these boards continuously to help repopulate Fel after Trammel was launched. Along with multiple failed attempts to do so.

ALL MMORPGs that do NOT offer the type of PvP action that UO does, BEAT UO in Total Subscriptions.

NO MMORPG that has offered true Free for All Pvp, like Pre Ren UO did, have lasted, nor seen HUGE jumps in subscribers, and been able to maintain those subscribers.

Is that NOT clear enough for you?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


Acctually UO pre uo:r ripped ALOT from tibia wich game out in 95 , yes thats right 2 years before uo came out ..so stop this bloody UO came first bull.. if you dont belive me hop over to tibia.com and read up ..

[/ QUOTE ]
The only thing I have been able to find out is that Tibia copied the earlier Ultima games. Please provide information where Ultima Online copied something of Tibia's?

 

[Dodge]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>


Acctually UO pre uo:r ripped ALOT from tibia wich game out in 95 , yes thats right 2 years before uo came out ..so stop this bloody UO came first bull.. if you dont belive me hop over to tibia.com and read up ..

[/ QUOTE ]
The only thing I have been able to find out is that Tibia copied the earlier Ultima games. Please provide information where Ultima Online copied something of Tibia's?

[/ QUOTE ]


Non con PvP (wich people here seams to belive is something uniqe for uo)

Some early combat systems (insta hit , old style archery (run and shoot , defence loss)

the extrem grind for skills (a small joke but kinda true )

seams to be the largest agruments of what made UO so "uniqe" (or to others what made UO so much like lineage 1 and tibia)

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

look at the success of player ran shards, they have larger populations then some production shards

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh huh...and Runescape beats UO's subscriptions by a small margin currently. Does that mean Runescape is better than Prod UO is?

Hardly...it's just that Runescape AND Player Run Shards are both...

Yup...they are both free.

Go figure.

I am 100% certain that if EA opened free shards, they would quickly be more populated than shards that people actually have to pay to play. 100% sure

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


OK...so you think a game that topped out at 250K Subscribers (UO) is NOT, and DID NOT get their arses handed to them, when the Non-PvP game (EQ) beats our current subscriber levels by almost 100% at the top end?

Of course UO had an increase after EQ came out...they one of three offered large MMORPGs (UO, EQ, and Lineage), until DAoC came out.

You can "Zing" all you want, JC.

The numbers don't lie.

.......................

Is that NOT clear enough for you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Numbers do lie. Ultima Online was originally launched with the intention of hold around 25,000 subscribers. Ultima Online was also designed to run on Windows 95! Do you even remember windows 95?

Now up comes Everquest. It has a decent looking 3D enviroment, designed on a much better operating system (Windows 98), and had a huge marketing blitz by Sony. Of course it shot up in subscriptions and hooked a lot of players. I can't remember a single time ever seeing an advertisement for Ultima Online on a meduim other then the Internet. The first time I ever heard of it was from a friend who started playing. Everquest however had television spots, countless full page magazine ads, and probably even some billboards.

And why are you snubbing 250,000 subscribers as if it is some bad numbers? Most MMORPGs would die for just having 100,000 subscribers. EA thought they had a sure hit with The Sims Online, but clearly that was a big flop and may even be on the chopping block someday soon. You are speaking as if a game's subscription number could grow indefinitly. Well Everquest proved that doesn't happen as it has always hovered between 400-500k subscribers. All we know is UO had 180,000 subscribers and was growing before UOR, and a few months ago it definitly dropped below that number. We will have to wait and see what the numbers for UOSE are.

 

[Nisse]

LOL tibia is a fre online game and my son played it when he was 10-11 and all hes frends to. Its a freking kidds game.

 

[Dodge]

<blockquote><hr>

LOL tibia is a fre online game and my son played it when he was 10-11 and all hes frends to. Its a freking kidds game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Acctually it was a great game a few years back the pvp was so much sweater then UO's until the nerfed the hell out of that

 

[Ray]

FYI Surgeries, full loot worked for UO because of game mechanics. It would not work for any other games because of game mechanics.

Dying and losing all your gear in UO once you're at the end-game (back then) = Killing about 10 mid-level mobs and taking a trip to a vendor, or about 15 minutes of time.

Dying and losing all your gear in WoW/EQ/DAOC/etc once you're at the end-gane = losing approximately 60+ hours of work. Sometimes in excess of 120+ hours.

Different game mechanics. It's apples and oranges, so stop comparing them.

Also, lets see..

EQ has PvP servers
DAOC is a PvP game
WoW has more PvP servers than PvE+RP
AC1 has the highly successful Darktide server
Shadowbane sold through to over 100,000 boxes, but unfortunately was extremely buggy and hemmoraged accounts. It's still going today, after two years

Would a Pre-UO:R server attact PvE-oriented players like yourself? No, probably not. But that's okay. It will attract the thousands of PvP-oriented players like myself. And that's all it needs to do.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

FYI Surgeries, full loot worked for UO because of game mechanics. It would not work for any other games because of game mechanics.

Dying and losing all your gear in UO once you're at the end-game (back then) = Killing about 10 mid-level mobs and taking a trip to a vendor, or about 15 minutes of time.

Dying and losing all your gear in WoW/EQ/DAOC/etc once you're at the end-gane = losing approximately 60+ hours of work. Sometimes in excess of 120+ hours.

Different game mechanics. It's apples and oranges, so stop comparing them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Looting is but one small part of what makes Free for All Non-Con PvP so less than attractive to most people that pay to play MMORPGs.

Please address the other points I made, before you discount my argument. How about killing Brand New Players, like Pre Ren allows? Who else allows that in the Big MMORPGs?

How about just whacking a Guild Mate, anytime anywhere that you feel like it? What other Big MMORPG allows this, like a Pre Ren ruleset would? et al....

<blockquote><hr>

Would a Pre-UO:R server attact PvE-oriented players like yourself? No, probably not. But that's okay. It will attract the thousands of PvP-oriented players like myself. And that's all it needs to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Never said it would attract players like me. In fact, I stated clearly I would not play a server like that. But thanks for the question.

You say it will attract thousands of players like you. No proof on your part of course. You do, however, have the backing of about 15-20 unique posters in this thread, which is great.

I wonder how much of a new server can be purchased with 21 X 12 X 12? or even 1000 X 12 X 12, or $144,000 annually?

Oh wait...there are Payroll costs...development costs...etc etc. Not to metion Maintenance, upgrades, bug fixes, etc. etc.

I am betting this has already been looked at hard by EA, who does enjoy making money. I am betting that is why they made the statement years ago that there would be no Pre Ren server. At least back then.

Now, I would agree that this is not then.

But that does bring me full circle to the Ultimate Question:

If this burgeoning market for Free for All PvP is SO real...and just WAITING to be tapped (although it was already attemted...at least a few times), then:

Why does NO MMORPG offer the playstyle you say thousands of players will pay to play?

WHY?

Are they all idiots? Do their marketing departments need to be replaced?

Probably not. More than likely they know that Griefing will be just as rampant now as it was back when this was introduced, and that the end result will be exactly the same. People will leave for a game or shard that gives them a choice of whether to PvP or not. Not all will. Some will love it.

Most simply will not, based on the history of UO and it's evolving rulesets.

 

[Guest]

Just a reminder: DO NOT advertise or name third party shards here. Normal RoC still applies.

 

[Ray]

EDIT: I'm a jackass. I apologize. Reposting.

 

[Ray]

This should be fun:

How about killing Brand New Players, like Pre Ren allows? Who else allows that in the Big MMORPGs?
Both DAOC and EQ on their PvP servers and AC1 on Darktide. Hey hey! That's three of the big boys!

How about just whacking a Guild Mate, anytime anywhere that you feel like it? What other Big MMORPG allows this, like a Pre Ren ruleset would? et al....
How is that a bad thing? Why is that a bad mechanic in a PvP+ game?
To answer your question: DAOC, EQ, AC1. Off the top of my head.

You say it will attract thousands of players like you. No proof on your part of course. You do, however, have the backing of about 15-20 unique posters in this thread, which is great.
EDITED PM ME FOR NAME, a PvP UO Emu shard, currently has 600 players logged in. There have been over 52,000 accounts created (sort of meaningless, but still interesting). The commonly-used ratio for off-peak connections to total subscribers is 10%. So that's at least 6000 players on just that one shard. It's free, yes. All 6000 obviously wouldn't subscribe.
EDITED PM ME FOR NAME, the Pre-Ren freeshard, averaged 1500 concurrent players, with over 100,000 accounts created. Again, using the 10% rule, you're looking at 15,000 people that wanted to play pre-ren enough to go through the hassle of setting up on a freeshard that could (and did) go down on a whim.

Even a mainstream gaming magazine (GMR) picked up on the story and had this to say:
Their new UO server, called EDITED PM ME FOR NAME (named after one of the game's magic spells), eschews the ridiculous, EverQuest-ish direction that UO has taken over the past two years. Instead, it casts players back to the heyday of player conflict, guild wars, and adapt-or-perish gameplay--the way it should have stayed in the first place.

There have been a few petitions circulated around, the biggest ones long gone by now (it's been 5 years since UO:R).
http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?bbuo

Then, of course, there's the thousands of players that have quit since UO:R that do not check these boards and don't follow any potential emu scene. Who are you to say that they have no interest in playing this shard?

 

[Blind fury]

What would you rather the Devs put game resources into? Just wondering.

 

[Surgeries]

No...THIS should be a BLAST.

You said:

<blockquote><hr>

How about killing Brand New Players, like Pre Ren allows? Who else allows that in the Big MMORPGs?
Both DAOC and EQ on their PvP servers and AC1 on Darktide. Hey hey! That's three of the big boys!


[/ QUOTE ]

EQ II does not have PvP...at all.

And their website states, with the emphasis being mine:
<blockquote><hr>

Is EQII PvE or PvP?

Just as the original EverQuest was geared towards PvE (player vs. environment), EverQuest II has a similar focus. PvP combat is not currently available, nor is there any news on when it will be.

[/ QUOTE ]

and...you need to actually READ stuff, BEFORE posting.

The question was:

What Big MMORPGS allow PvP combat like UO does, paricularly the Pre Ren version of UO. You held up a "Big Boy", EQ, as having Free For All PvP. Incorrect, Ray. Please do your homework.

Here is the link to the Zek Server info...read it CAREFULLY before replying. mmmmkay?

http://eqlive.station.sony.com/library/rz_rule_sets.jsp

To respond to the rest of your post on which "Big Boys" offer the same ruleset that you are proposing for a Pre Ren Shard is not worth doing, IMO.

To compare a Free Shard to a Pay to Play Shard is not a valid comparison, either.

Again, Runescape beats UO subscriptions.

Doesn't mean it is better,...it just means that your Free Shards are, like Runescape, Free. Not hard to get subscriptions like that.

<blockquote><hr>

Then, of course, there's the thousands of players that have quit since UO:R that do not check these boards and don't follow any potential emu scene. Who are you to say that they have no interest in playing this shard?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I say that?

I said there wouldn't be enough people willing to pay to play this type of shard, and that any mnies spent on this Shard, since Siege and Fel are not highly populated, would be less than attractive from an ROI standpoint.

But I am betting the actuarial staff at EA already figured this out.

Looked at Siege lately? How about Fel?

Sheesh. Keep the head in the sand if you'd like.

Just remember to breathe

*EDIT*

OK...go read about DAoC. Is this YOUR definition of "Free for All PvP"?

You be the judge.

Directly from the DAoC Guide...

<blockquote><hr>

You will not be able to fight characters from your own Realm, in any normal playing sense. However, there is a dueling system, which will allow you to test your combat skills against your friends and realm mates.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't sound like "Free for All" like UO Pre Ren offered, to me...

OK...so EQ being comparable to UO Pre Ren is out...DAoC being comparable to UO Pre Ren is out...hmmm...

You still having fun, Ray?

I know I am

OK...the last example you brought...AC1.

Ugh. Wouldn't want to be responsible for their subscriptions.

Yes...AC1 DOES offer Free for All PvP. You were correct.

Their subscriptions peaked at about 125K subscriptions in about Jan 02.

They currently have about 30K subscriptions.

NOT one of the Big Boys, indeed, at least as of today.


So............next to refute the argument that NO LARGE PERSISTENT MMORPG offers what the proponents of a Pre Ren Shard SAY would draw thousands and thousands of people back to UO?

By the way, if Siege and Fel are ANY indicator AT ALL, these boards would be flooded with posts that ask the question:

"How Can We Get More People to the New Pre-Ren Shard??"

Know what I mean?

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

What would you rather the Devs put game resources into? Just wondering.

[/ QUOTE ]
Something that isn't a proven losing situation would be fine.

 

[Guest]

You know what type of game allows PvP like Pre-UOR? I can name dozens. Counter Strike, America's Army, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament, etc. All these games allow total newbies to be thrown in the arena with professional players. They all need to build their "skills" just as any other player would. The difference between these games is most of what they do is not saved, while in a MMORPG it is.

In all the first person shooters I have played, the first thing I did was die. The second thing was probably dying again. But I quickly built my "skills" and became a real competater. That is basically how everyone starts out in a first person shooter and how it was in UO. Once you knew the ropes and had some friends and/or guildmates, UO turned into a great game. That feeling just isn't here anymore, which is why a lot want Pre-UOR back.

Now you could argue that first person shooter's are not subscription based games. It is because, generally, all first person shooter content is in new game releases or expansion packs. They don't have GMs or new content being added all the time. I think we will eventually see a first person shooter based on a subscription model and if the game is good you will see millions of subscribers. PVP is all about competition, and if the rules are good the players will come.

 

[Blind fury]

Which would be? New neon boats, because adding new items and hues seems to be doing very well at keeping people in the game. The devs arn't adding anything but new items and that's all they will keep doing. Making a Pre-UOR shard could bring people back adding new items does jack all for the game, except make it easier. What's better for the game... Bringing in more subscriptions or pleaseing some people that want the game easier for them?

Clearly you are going to come up with a bunch of statistics and facts from that will own me.

 

[V(r6)dubEr]

<blockquote><hr>

I said there wouldn't be enough people willing to pay to play this type of shard, and that any mnies spent on this Shard, since Siege and Fel are not highly populated, would be less than attractive from an ROI standpoint.

But I am betting the actuarial staff at EA already figured this out.

Looked at Siege lately? How about Fel?

[/ QUOTE ]

How would you know if it was populated or not you claim to never go to those areas. most that play those areas dont waste thier time bank sittin, as for siege theres a ok population but the ruleset there is totaly diferent from production fel and most prefer production fel over siege.

but let production be compaired to siege(bieng close to pre uo:r)

Which has a community? .......Siege
Which has a good economy?.....siege
which has the highest % of mature players?....Siege
Which has the highest amount of scripters and umers?......production(most siege players would kill on sight)
which has the highest amount of scammers.... production(Siege has player justice).

But to say siege is empty is wrong if you knew anything about siege you would find more players at player run towns then you would find at the citys and i see new players there everyday.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


Which has the highest amount of scripters and umers?......production(most siege players would kill on sight)
which has the highest amount of scammers.... production(Siege has player justice).

[/ QUOTE ]
You bring up an extremely good point. UOR basically took out a lot of methods for players to deal with problems. For instance, the recent mass energy vortex issue in Tokuno Dungeons. That would never happen in Pre-UOR because someone would "police" the players using the mass dispel spell.

Someone hogging your spawn? Bring in a PK friend to kill them.

Is someone harrasing you? Lure them out of town and have a PK friend kill them, or do it yourself.

Is someone disrupting your player event or EM quest? Kill them.

Someone hacked your account and is looting your account? Have a friend kill them until GMs can block the account (This happened once)

Crafted items never devauled, because there was no item insurance!

You see all the problems which were solved in old UO, that are impossible to handle today.

Here is just a great excerpt of T2A developer thinking from the 1 inch think Playguide that came with the game:
<blockquote><hr>


Making Friends
The most important thing for you to do until your character is ready to leave town is to get to know other player characters, because:

The best thing about playing in a game with thousands of other people is getting to meet some of them, and ...

When you do leave town to go adventuring, you don't want to go alone.

The most important thing to remember when dealing with other PC's is that they are real people. They have feelings, opinions and freedom of choice. This suggests a few things.

Be friendly. Remember that you are a new character and most of the people you meet will be tougher than you. Don't annoy them.

Don't be pushy or demanding. Nobody has to help you. It's up to you to make people want to help you. If you're lucky you might get help getting outfitted for your first adventure, but they won't want to help you if you come across as a whiner or begger.

Don't be too trusting. Not everybody you talk to will have your best interest at heart. Watch out for people who are too eager to get you in a secluded area or out of town -- they may be up to no good.

Don't get mad. If you get tricked, ambushed or set up, don't take it personally - it's just roleplaying. Chalk it up to life experience and don't be fooled the next time. Likewise, if somebody is being obonxoius, insulting or offensive, don't let him bait you. (See Interface Options, Filters, p. 7.11) Ignore him.

The above warnings aside, you should find many other players who are just as eager as you are to meet new people, engage in friendly conversation and plan adventures. This cooperation with other players is the true heart of Ultima Online.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what the best part is? One of the very first experiances I had was someone luring me out of town and killing me, just as it said would happen. I could probably defend the whole Pre-UOR arguement with quotes from this thing.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

You know what type of game allows PvP like Pre-UOR? I can name dozens. Counter Strike, America's Army, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hrrrmmmmph...just checked the Big Boy Chart for MMORPG Subscriptions for the names you listed.

Couldn't find any of the games you listed...didn't see these on there.

The question wasn't what GAMES offered the Free for All PvP...the question was:

What Persistent, LARGE MMORPG offers the kind of Free for All Pvp That Was UO Pre Ren?

I see you do not have an answer.

That's OK. I fully expected you would not be able to find one.
<blockquote><hr>

In all the first person shooters I have played, the first thing I did was die. The second thing was probably dying again. But I quickly built my "skills" and became a real competater. That is basically how everyone starts out in a first person shooter and how it was in UO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you are comparing First Person Shooters to MMORPGs, to prove that a Pre Ren Shard in an MMORPG will be successful????

Your logic is failing quickly now....
<blockquote><hr>

Once you knew the ropes and had some friends and/or guildmates, UO turned into a great game. That feeling just isn't here anymore, which is why a lot want Pre-UOR back.



[/ QUOTE ]
A Lot? Yet to be proven. Some? No doubt.

Enough to make it a viable and profitable investment.

I doubt it, seriously.
<blockquote><hr>

Now you could argue that first person shooter's are not subscription based games. It is because, generally, all first person shooter content is in new game releases or expansion packs. They don't have GMs or new content being added all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was going to argue that...but that would just be stating the obvious.

Let's try Apples to Apples for comparisons, OK?
<blockquote><hr>

I think we will eventually see a first person shooter based on a subscription model and if the game is good you will see millions of subscribers. PVP is all about competition, and if the rules are good the players will come.

[/ QUOTE ]
OK...the major point you seem not to be able to grasp (although you are most certainly not alone in your views that EVERYONE should love PvP like you do)...is that MOST people who pay a subscription to play an online game

DO NOT ENJOY THE PvP ASPECT.

Now...maybe...just maybe...you can convince that majority that they SHOULD like Non-Consentual PvP llike you do. Like your friends do.

The sad fact is that MOST people do not, or will not, engage in Non-Consentual Free for All PvP.

The Largest MMORPGs already know this.

That, IMO, is precisely why they do NOT offer it the way UO does, or Pre Ren did.

Simple.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

How would you know if it was populated or not you claim to never go to those areas. most that play those areas dont waste thier time bank sittin, as for siege theres a ok population but the ruleset there is totaly diferent from production fel and most prefer production fel over siege.


[/ QUOTE ]
I understand the rulesets.

I am also painfully aware of the constant posting by people that want to bring more people to Fel.

Ever wonder, exactly, why that is? I don't. Most people that pay to play do not care for the Fel Ruleset.

<blockquote><hr>

But to say siege is empty is wrong if you knew anything about siege you would find more players at player run towns then you would find at the citys and i see new players there everyday.


[/ QUOTE ]
Never said Siege was empty.

Siege is NOT bursting. Otherwise, there would have NEVER been a Dev comment about how if more people get attracted to Siege, that the server could be in danger of being shut down, eh?

I am glad that there is a Fel and a Siege and a Mugen for those that enjoy that playstyle.

However, SINCE these are not highly populated shards, why would something that lends itself to absolutely Forced PvP be more popular?

Why would any company spend money on something they KNOW doesn't attract the largest number of players?

And conversely, again, why would ANY company turn a blind eye to such a HUGE market, if it REALLY existed?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


The sad fact is that MOST people do not, or will not, engage in Non-Consentual Free for All PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is probably the very last point I will reply to of yours, because you are just grasping at whatever you can to justify you views. People did and were "engag[ing] in Non-Consentual Free for All PvP." The subscription numbers show this up to the release of UOR, showing a promising and strong growth. If people did not like UO then subscriptions should have been dropping or leveling off before the release of UOR.

I am not saying everyone should love PVP, and old UO wasn't all about PVP as you seem to think. Old UO was mostly about the community which dealt with the PVP. A great example of this were the anti guilds that formed to patrol areas and dispatch PKs. Also UO felt like Ultima series that people loved, not some flashy neon amusement park it has become today where no one wait's in line and there is bubblegum stuck on your shoe.

I know players who before UOR had nothing to do with PVP and avoided it as much as possible. But it brought a sense of danger and excitement to the game which they say is now lacking. And even if they go to Felucca that danger is no longer present due to low population.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

You bring up an extremely good point. UOR basically took out a lot of methods for players to deal with problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anthony Castoro, himself, said that Player Justice was a failed concept. It didn't work.
<blockquote><hr>

Someone hogging your spawn? Bring in a PK friend to kill them.

Is someone harrasing you? Lure them out of town and have a PK friend kill them, or do it yourself.

Is someone disrupting your player event or EM quest? Kill them.

Someone hacked your account and is looting your account? Have a friend kill them until GMs can block the account (This happened once)


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. All of these are SURE to drive subscriptions up. Yah...Sure...You Betcha.
<blockquote><hr>

You see all the problems which were solved in old UO, that are impossible to handle today.



[/ QUOTE ]
Unbelievable logic. Simply unbelievable, IMO.
<blockquote><hr>

You know what the best part is? One of the very first experiances I had was someone luring me out of town and killing me, just as it said would happen. I could probably defend the whole Pre-UOR arguement with quotes from this thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
You could try.

You obviously do not mind dying to other players. If MOST people felt this way, there would never have been a Trammel.

Most people do not feel this way.

 

[Guest]

Can you attack your guildmate whenever you want? Nope...you cannot.

Yes you can /duel in WoW I duel my guildmates all the time. It is a yes/no confirmation message so you don't have to worry about someone exploiting the system to get free kills. You can /duel anyone in the same faction (ie: alliance can duel alliance)

So...they offer dry looting? Also..."In Contested Lands" isn't "Everywhere".

You ever think that people need a little time to lvl and be a little more protected when they enter contested areas? If not then everyone would be ganked everyware at any time. So say you never played wow before you want to be hardcore, join pvp server and soon as you log in your dead. Believe me there are enough people playing that they can camp all the new player places. There is no "haven" its one big world.

On the other hand you can RAID non contested areas. Yes you and your guild can try and hold towns and the other side can fight back. The raids on enemy towns are probably far greater then any UO faction/guild war/order-chaos system.

As for looting does that matter? resources and items in UO are too easy to get, the better items would be nothing more then house decorations if you could lose them easily. I don't know about you but I like to be able to use the items I worked hard to get and not have to worry about losing my hard work to a gank squad.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


You obviously do not mind dying to other players. If MOST people felt this way, there would never have been a Trammel.

Most people do not feel this way.

[/ QUOTE ]
<blockquote><hr>


Exploring
.............................................

There are two things to keep in mind the first time you venture out into the wilderness.

You are very likely to die.

This is OK.

Death and Ressurection are just part of character development. You're not seriously penalized for dying, and it's not really difficult to get resurrected. Your skills do deteriorate at a faster rate while you're dead, so it's a good idea to get raised as soon as possible. But the worst thing about dying is You Can't Take It With You. All your hard-earned possessions will stay right where you fell, untill someone or something comes along to claim them. For this reason it's always a good idea to go adventuring with companions you can trust. If you fall, they can gather your stuff and either stay with it until you return from the Other Side or take it with them and return it to you when next you meet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should remind you that
<blockquote><hr>


Talking
...........................................
Finally, it should be noted that in Ultima Online, as in most text-based net communications, typing in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is considered to be "shouting." While typing in all caps is fine in a "yell," or if you're trying to address a whole group, it is considered rude in ordinary conversation. Tiy sgiykd cultivate the habit of turning your Caps Lock key off while playing UO.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you should you the bolding BB Code tags if you want to get your point across, not "shouting".

 

[Blind fury]

I've never talked to someone so sarcastic before. Good job.

But we already know why you don't want a Pre-AoS shard(wasted resources) so why keep posting, you are just going to get this thread locked cause you are borderline trolling.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

This is probably the very last point I will reply to of yours, because you are just grasping at whatever you can to justify you views.

[/ QUOTE ]
Reallllllly? Promise?

At least I don't compare First Person Shooters and what I THINK could happen with them, to why a Pre Ren Shard would be successful, know what I mean?

<blockquote><hr>

People did and were "engag[ing] in Non-Consentual Free for All PvP." The subscription numbers show this up to the release of UOR, showing a promising and strong growth. If people did not like UO then subscriptions should have been dropping or leveling off before the release of UOR.


[/ QUOTE ]
Forcefully, yes. In a game they had invested a lot of time in, yes. Once they had a choice in Ren, most left.

Hence the constant pleading with the Devs to add cool stuff to Fel not available anywhere else to get the people that left to come back. So were born Power Scrolls, Champ Spawns, Etc Etc Etc.

Again, Ren KEPT subscribers, like me and my wife, that were all but done with the Non-Consentual PvP that UO offered. Did Ren lose subscribers? I am sure it did.

But in my opinion, Ren saved UO from an AC1 demise.
<blockquote><hr>

I am not saying everyone should love PVP, and old UO wasn't all about PVP as you seem to think. Old UO was mostly about the community which dealt with the PVP. A great example of this were the anti guilds that formed to patrol areas and dispatch PKs.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please see above...Player Justice was a failure, by the game's Producers' own words.
<blockquote><hr>

I know players who before UOR had nothing to do with PVP and avoided it as much as possible. But it brought a sense of danger and excitement to the game which they say is now lacking. And even if they go to Felucca that danger is no longer present due to low population.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right. You know why the population is low in Fel?

I'll give you one guess

 

[Guest]

Siege is completely different from this type of server... It doesn't take a player survey to understand why Siege isn't all that popular.... all they did was cut out Trammel, cut out insurance....

It's not even close to what a pub 16 server would be like (from what I understand)... and with people running around with blessed stuff etc etc... shouldn't take a survey to figure out why it's not bursting with players.

 

[Surgeries]

Red13...are you talking to me?

If you are, your answers don't make sense.

I asked if you can Attack Your Guildmates at any time. You said you can Duel anytime.

Not the same animal.

I was explaining to the other posters that looting, et al, is not good for getting and keeping subscriptions.

Not sure why you posted what you did, but we all have that right.

By the way, if you read my posts, you will see that I am a proponent of Consentual, NOT Non-Consentual PvP.

I think you may have it backwards....

 

[Chamfort]

replying to last for conveinence.

can we stay on topic please? is all this bickering about what other games have pvp and the numbers of subscriptions really necessary? i just dont want this post get locked, its our only post allowed on this topic. i'm not singling anyone out, it just seems we are getting off-topic here.

if you have nothing the contribute about the pre-ren dream then please dont post.

Chamfort-(DoC) Great Lakes

 

[Surgeries]

*Looks for an "M" by Blind Fury's Name*

Nope...you aren't a Mod.

Sorry my arguements don't agree with your point of view.

I have as much right to post my opinions and beliefs as any other poster.

Until a Mod tells me I am outside the RoC, you have two choices:

Read My Posts

or

Not Read My Posts.

You Decide.

 

[Surgeries]

WOW!

Thanks for the tips.

 

[Dodge]

To get us back on the road without feeding the trolls

How does this sound?

Pre t2a ruleset with ALL new lands

With a few twists

Can only Poison One handed bladed weapons

Cannot Heal through poison

5 controll slots

Factions

Mounts are not ridable at all , still tameable

Rune books exist , "newbified" BUT stealable

Stealth exists with the UO:SE changes

Champ spawns exists without powerscrolls (some other reward could be added)

Old style house rules but limited to 2 houses per account and costumizable without teleporters and "setable" doors

New type of moongates

No Noto patch , Bring back the dreadlords baby

Young system to keep new players from being pk'ed in a sec

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

To get us back on the road without feeding the trolls

How does this sound?

Pre t2a ruleset with ALL new lands

With a few twists

Can only Poison One handed bladed weapons

Cannot Heal through poison

5 controll slots

Factions

Mounts are not ridable at all , still tameable

Rune books exist , "newbified" BUT stealable

Stealth exists with the UO:SE changes

Champ spawns exists without powerscrolls (some other reward could be added)

Old style house rules but limited to 2 houses per account and costumizable without teleporters and "setable" doors

New type of moongates

No Noto patch , Bring back the dreadlords baby

Young system to keep new players from being pk'ed in a sec

[/ QUOTE ]

You basically described Siege minus the power scrolls. Some like having a confined world where players interact more frequently. They like to be going somewhere and suddenly see another player, a rare occurence on production shards today. The only time I see players in Felucca is in houses, at a hot spot, or doing something unattended. Before UOR players were everywhere, some would hunt in forests just to kill the animals. I don't see anyone doing this today.

 

[Ray]

1) Zeks were changed. They were completely open PvP for something like 4 years.

2) "Directly from the DAoC Guide..."
Way to ignore the DAOC PvP shard. I quote...."-Wide open PvP. Any player can attack any other player that is not in their group or guild."

3) You keep ignoring my point. No other MMORPG has the ability to offer a pre-ren enviroment because of game mechanics.It simply isn't possible, so your repeated question is completely invalid Talk about head in the sand.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

Wide open PvP. Any player can attack any other player that is not in their group or guild

[/ QUOTE ]
So, as I said, it is NOT the Free for All PvP that is UO today. Otherwise you coulkd kill anyone you want.

Point made.

Thanks for the confirmation.

<blockquote><hr>

No other MMORPG has the ability to offer a pre-ren enviroment because of game mechanics.It simply isn't possible, so your repeated question is completely invalid

[/ QUOTE ]
Anything's possible.
It's even possible that my arguments are actually valid, too!

 

[Ray]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Wide open PvP. Any player can attack any other player that is not in their group or guild

[/ QUOTE ]
So, as I said, it is NOT the Free for All PvP that is UO today. Otherwise you coulkd kill anyone you want.

Point made.

Thanks for the confirmation.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, see, UO's ability to attack guildmates has nothing to do with open PvP. It has everything to do with having the ability to spar/duel. Again, apples and oranges. The other games don't feature a use-based advancement system, so training via sparring is nonexistant.

<blockquote><hr>

No other MMORPG has the ability to offer a pre-ren enviroment because of game mechanics.It simply isn't possible, so your repeated question is completely invalid

[/ QUOTE ]
Anything's possible.
It's even possible that my arguments are actually valid, too!

[/ QUOTE ]

As I explained, the other games are completely different and would not support the open-looting system of pre-ren. Losing 5 minutes of mob bashing/shopping per death is acceptable. Losing 50 hours of mob bashing/shopping per death is not.
You may not be aware of this, but other games have death penalties too. You realize that WoW, for instance, requires repairing your items after each death, right? You realize that the time investment for that and the time investment to resuit in pre-ren is about the same, right? What's the difference between losing generic GM-crafted items and repairing uber rare drop items? Not much, when it's boiled down.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

No, see, UO's ability to attack guildmates has nothing to do with open PvP. It has everything to do with having the ability to spar/duel.

[/ QUOTE ]
You ARE joking, right?
<blockquote><hr>

The other games don't feature a use-based advancement system, so training via sparring is nonexistant.



[/ QUOTE ]
But Killing is Killing in any game, yes? Player Killing? Murdering?

Then why do you suppose that they do not allow you to just whack a new recruit in your Guild, Ray? Or ANY Guild Mate, for that matter, without both consenting to a Duel?

Because they aren't using a Use-Based Skill Gain System?

You will have to explain that further for me to see it.
<blockquote><hr>

As I explained, the other games are completely different and would not support the open-looting system of pre-ren. Losing 5 minutes of mob bashing/shopping per death is acceptable. Losing 50 hours of mob bashing/shopping per death is not.


[/ QUOTE ]
Well...that IS one way to look at it. However, as I recall, dying was a wee bit more than a 5 minute recovery time. But that is beside the point.

The point is most people do not want to engage in completely Non-Consentual PvP. Some do, indeed, but most do not. That means the market share is in the people that do NOT want completely Non-Consentual PvP, if you follow me.

The trick, then, is to capture the market share being missed. However, in doing so, the company takes the risk of alienating current customers that love Non-Consentual PvP.

Then it comes down to money. Do enough people, do we think, have enough of an interest in paying $12 a month to kill and be killed? Without restrictions? Anywhere...anytime...at any level?

Then History comes into play...and History says that given a choice, most people will not choose completely Non-Consentual PvP.

So...if most people will not pay to partake in completely Non-Consentual PvP in MMORPGs, and what is being asked for is just that, then logic says adding a Pre Ren Shard to UO, if it requires significant resources to accomplish, will not be the success it is being painted to be in this thread.

In fact, if a Pre Ren Shard was introduced, and was as populated as Fel is currently, it would actually hurt the company and the game in the long run, IMO, by draining resources needed to compete in an ever more competitive marketplace.