And yet, I am the one being forced to uproot move from my home shard due to diminished population, or quit. So how is this fair to me? Why does your playstyle get preference?
-
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!
Why does yours? Why do you get to choose? You have 3 choices move, stay or quit. With your opinion people will have 2 choices move or quit. I guess we have to play UO based on YOUR play style or we are not having fun or playing UO the right way all based on YOUR OPINION of how UO should/should not be played.
You aren't forced, you have a choice where you want to play. Yes, if the shard you are currently playing has a change in population due to other players exercising their choice, you may have to move. That can go both ways. I know several players who decided ATL has just gotten too crowded for them, so they moved. Some have decided that slow shards are too slow for them so they moved... But in the end it was their (and your) choice to pursue the playstyle they want. Slow shard weren't forced to be slow and busy shards weren't forced to be busy... They are what the are based on players making choices.
There is a HUGE difference in making a choice to move to get a play style you want and being forced to move for a playstyle you don't. I advocate for player choice not forced playstyle. Can other players choices impact you, of course they can... but that doesn't mean I would advocate taking away their choice any more that I would tell you that you MUST stay on a shard whose population no longer fits your playstyle.
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
And such is the death knell of this game. Everyone wants everything to be solo-able, not have to have any human interaction with other players, and then wonders why those shard's communities die and we keep on having this (rather necessary) shard convergence conversation. DERP DERP.
I mean really, if someone else is in a spot you wanted to go fight, unless its in Fel and you are afraid said players may raid you, is it so hard to just start killing stuff with other players? Say "hey, mind if I tag along for a few?". No one is forcing major amounts of interaction on others, but this game simply isn't built to be played in complete solitary confinement.
Taking offense to someone suggesting a slight bit of human interaction is preposterous, dude. It's no wonder why the lion's share of non-Atlantic shards are in crap shape.
The choice isn't to move, stay, or quit. The choice is to move or quit. Same choice dead-sharders face in a merger.
No play style is sacred. How many play styles have been tossed onto the sacrificial altar to make way for the UO we have today? What of the PKs and thieves of yore? What of the bards before their skill overhaul (I'll admit they were overpowered but I had fun with it)? What of the play styles of the old Europa roleplayers in Yew that were structured around pre-AOS mechanics? And how many others? Who is going to call for the return of these "unjustly" demolished playstyles? The truth is you couldn't care less about these play styles, and it is because you are the one that is truly selfish. Correct me if I have misjudged.
I do not have an opinion on which shards should stay and which should close, for as I have stated, without actual numbers I can only speculate. I would leave it to the devs to find a reasonable balance for all.
#3 What is the hidden cost of players that leave due to diminished shard populations and a less engaging community?
Take a chill pill. Don't accuse me of prioritizing my play style over yours when you do exactly the same. What bed have I made that I must now lie in?
I play Catskills primarily. Napa, I still play from time to time as I know a few players that are still there. Same with Atlantic. I have houses on all three of these shards.
No sir you had a choice based on your play style and you chose to move but in your opinion you want to force players to move yet again all based on your play style and what you think UO should/should not be. You do not like less populated shards and that is no problem but do not force your opinion or put others down just because we do not share your opinion as to how UO should/should not be. This is all based on how UO is suppose to be played all based on your opinion. Well guess what not everybody shares your vision of UO and not everybody id forcing you to play UO based on their opinion. Yes you did ave a choice but because you chose to move you think everybody should have to do the same or they are not playing UO the right way all based on your opinion as to how UO should/should not be played.
I like the part where you are not prioritizing your play style over others when it is you not anybody else wanting to close shards all based on your opinion. Nobody has told you you have to stay on a dead shard and play, you chose to move all based on the way you like to play UO. Just because you like to play UO that way does not mean other share your opinion but yet you want us all to just jump on your bandwagon on go along for the ride because you think you have a grand idea on how to fix UO all based on what, YOUR OPINION.
I guess I really don't understand, Deraj, why you think that it is necessary to force people into making painful decisions and indeed force some people to quit playing if the end goal is really to beef up shard populations.
Doesn't it make more sense to brainstorm ways to get more people to play UO on all of the existing shards? Then no one has to decide to move or quit.
Why not instead try to get people to list what would make a shard like Napa Valley, for example, a place where you enjoy playing? What causes you the most pain when you log on there and what could be done to make it better that doesn't involve just getting rid of the shard?
Is the pain caused by not having enough people to PvP with/against?
Is the pain caused by not being able to round up people to PvM with? And if you can't find people to PvM with, is it because they just aren't present on the shard when you are? Or is it because they are bored with currently available group-type PvM activities? Is it because currently available group-type PvM activities don't offer everyone in the group rewards that are commensurate with the amount of time/effort involved in participating in the activity?
Is the pain caused by not being able to find items to buy to update your characters' skills and gear? If yes, what keeps people on Napa from selling those necessary items to you? Do they not have them to sell in the first place? Or if they have them to sell, are they not able to sell them for a price that they feel covers their cost of obtaining the item in the first place plus a reasonable profit? Or if they have them to sell, are they not able to sell them quickly enough to cover the cost of the vendor fees incurred while waiting for the item to sell?
In other words, why is Napa "dead"? What needs to change to make it more lively again?
Doesn't it make a lot more sense to brainstorm solutions that are a win/win for everyone, players and EA/Broadsword alike? Why keep going through this exercise of stirring up things and suggesting painful solutions when it would be a heck of a lot more fun and probably a lot more interesting and likely to get the dev team's attention if we instead put our heads together and came up with ideas, as crazy as they might be, for making EVERY shard a place where players can find other people to play with, if that is what they want, and where they can find most of the items that they want to find to keep their characters up to date or can find other people to group with to get those items themselves in an enjoyable process?
Doesn't it make more sense to brainstorm ways to get more people to play UO on all of the existing shards? Then no one has to decide to move or quit.
Why not instead try to get people to list what would make a shard like Napa Valley, for example, a place where you enjoy playing? What causes you the most pain when you log on there and what could be done to make it better that doesn't involve just getting rid of the shard?
Is the pain caused by not having enough people to PvP with/against?
Is the pain caused by not being able to round up people to PvM with? And if you can't find people to PvM with, is it because they just aren't present on the shard when you are? Or is it because they are bored with currently available group-type PvM activities? Is it because currently available group-type PvM activities don't offer everyone in the group rewards that are commensurate with the amount of time/effort involved in participating in the activity?
Is the pain caused by not being able to find items to buy to update your characters' skills and gear? If yes, what keeps people on Napa from selling those necessary items to you? Do they not have them to sell in the first place? Or if they have them to sell, are they not able to sell them for a price that they feel covers their cost of obtaining the item in the first place plus a reasonable profit? Or if they have them to sell, are they not able to sell them quickly enough to cover the cost of the vendor fees incurred while waiting for the item to sell?
In other words, why is Napa "dead"? What needs to change to make it more lively again?
Doesn't it make a lot more sense to brainstorm solutions that are a win/win for everyone, players and EA/Broadsword alike? Why keep going through this exercise of stirring up things and suggesting painful solutions when it would be a heck of a lot more fun and probably a lot more interesting and likely to get the dev team's attention if we instead put our heads together and came up with ideas, as crazy as they might be, for making EVERY shard a place where players can find other people to play with, if that is what they want, and where they can find most of the items that they want to find to keep their characters up to date or can find other people to group with to get those items themselves in an enjoyable process?
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
Painful solutions are sometimes necessary and we simply can't avoid them just because it might involve causing someone some pain or hurt feelings. I am certain no one wants that to happen, but the state of the game calls for it. Making painful decisions is something all adults and any business person has to do from time to time.
I wish I had the optimism you did that we could some how get the "dead shards" to be more lively by coming up with some good ideas that would facilitate some more player involvement, but that may be based more in hope than reality. I also note that the entire answer for that cannot simply only come from the existing player base: it needs to come from the 'powers that be' in the form of marketing money for UO on overall basis to get new players and more returning players to stay in game. However, as the marketing budget for this game seems non-existent, that's also a thought based more on hopeful optimism on my part rather than reality.
So what are we left with? I can't say I have the answer to the shard merger question, or whatever you want to call it. I do however think a lot of the items discussed through out this thread are relevant. It's a necessary conversation to have, and simply believing that we can re-populate the dead shards with good ideas probably just isn't going to get it done at this point. Tough decisions need to be made, or atleast discussed.
Yes, pain will be involved. Yes, some people would likely have to make more sacrifices than others. Yes, some people will have to adjust their play style. It's unfortunate, but unavoidable. The longer we wait... the harder it likely will be in the end to actually do it. I also fully am aware that the developer's have stated that the likelihood of this happening are slim to none, so maybe these are all wasted words.
Am I really the only one that actually enjoyed this game more seeing people running around in all facets? Running through shame and seeing groups on each level hunting? Logging in and on a whim deciding to go somewhere and just see what people are up to?
A shard doesn't die because the players somehow collectively or separately decided they wanted a small shard. It dies because people leave due to gameplay or a diminished and broken community, and what's left are those who just happen to be there. It's purely incidental. A tragic story. If we are indeed bound irrevocably to our pre-destined play-styles, then then truly, I had as little choice as any dead-sharder facing a shard merge.
I'm happy to hear it. So in my next thread I will be advocating for the axing of the trammel ruleset so that we may celebrate the glorious return of a long-extinct playstyle, the PK. I know I can count on you to back me up as I explain why everyone needs to stop attacking the PK play-style and accept a player's right to choose that playstyle. I am being sarcastic of course but this isn't meant to sound rude. Hopefully you see where I am coming from.
Not exactly misunderstanding, maybe, more a difference in perspective ...
Your suggestions are perfectly reasonable ones IF we can't get the underlying issues addressed, they would make some places more active although at a cost to others, and the net result is likely to be fewer players but those who remain more concentrated in areas, so it could give a boost for those who want the greater sense of activity .... but I fear that it would just be keeping something alive while it slowly dies, and the effort put into a merging process would be far better spent trying to reverse the decline. Now I am far from convinced that the ownership UO currently has are able to achieve that turnround, for various reasons - I wish that I will be proved wrong, but honestly, I cannot see anything really fundamental changing - but even if I was persuaded that they could maybe get the direction back, I'd be prepared to bet real money that they cannot both do that AND manage a merger process, and whatever resulted after such mergers would, I fear, decline even faster in the medium term, never mind the 'long run'. If we had to choose one course of action, I'd want to take the longer shot at fixing the underlying issues first, difficult as it may be.
What opinion am I "forcing" and who have I "put down" in this thread? (and calling me selfish isn't a put down? Come now). You talk as if I have some deep hatred and desire to persecute anyone that dares to live on a dead shard. Except I don't. I do not dislike less populated shards. I do not have any more concern or regard for your play style than you have for mine (and I think both are irrelevant to the discussion). I came here to have a discussion on the gameplay merits of shard consolidation. I have also acknowledged that what I am suggesting is indeed a painful process, and it's not one that I suggest lightly. There is also a sentiment that I want every shard to be as populated as Atlantic. Also not true.
Without knowing the actual population numbers, yes, I have only an opinion informed by a subjective experience and therefore can only speculate.
Players come and go for all sorts of reasons... Again, still their choice. And you are right, it doesn't usually happen all at once. In addition to coming and going, existing players can find their preferences change over time. All still within their choice. The availability of that choice is one of the things that makes UO, well UO.
Personally, I think the creation of trammel was horrible for the game. They did it with the intention of giving players the choice (there it is again) whether to subject themselves to non-consentual pvp. IMO, the intention was good, the implementation was a disaster in the making. Again, IMO, I think the split the way it was implemented was the single biggest factor that fractured the player base in the history of UO. HOWEVER, it was not the creation of Tram that killed the PK, it was the players exercising their choice not to go. Tram just made the choice to risk nothing far to easy.
A good point, and I can't really argue against it.
I share your preference. Still, if UO continues to decline, it's hard to imagine a future where mergers, or shard's closing in some way, isn't inevitable. That might be overly pessimistic, but if I am right, then I think my proposal would be a reasonable way to rip off the bandage.
No you are not but at the same time you are not asking people to leave their shard and to do a force move to a shard they may not like. Do I want to be forced to move to Alt, NO. Do I want to be forced to a shard with a bad ping and lag, NO. Do I visit Alt with my shard shields, yes because I am able to get supplies that I need and take them back to my home shard. Am I asking anybody to think that my play style is the only way to play UO, NO. Play UO any way you want to because that is your right as a paying customer to do so and until somebody pays my subs then they do not have the right to tell me how to play UO or where. Yes I would love to see UO back to its glory days but I am not so self centered that I require other to play UO the way I do as some have stated.
I don't understand how you think getting rid of the players who don't want to move is going to solve anything. Jamming whoever is left onto a far smaller number of servers isn't likely to induce people who haven't played in years to come back. Once they hear/read that some serious shard merging has happened and that many people left because of the mergers, they would probably figure the end of UO isn't far off and there is no point in them investing any further time or money into the game, especially if the few servers that are left are short on available real estate for people to place decent-sized houses themselves (instead of paying RL cash to some broker to buy a house).
UO will never be back to it's glory days due to how many other games there are out there. My guild of 30+ members all play other games. We are in an area of technology that is overabundant causing our attention to be easily distracted.
Some sort of consolidation is necessary, but at this point it's all about finding the most appropriate one.
Some sort of consolidation is necessary, but at this point it's all about finding the most appropriate one.
I don't understand why people think it is necessary? Do people think that those who have chosen a quieter shard are somehow unhappy with the game because of that? I think that is flawed logic. The option for consolidation is already there for those that want it. Many have taken advantage of it. I don't understand the logic in thinking that forcing everyone else into that bucket makes the game better. Consolidation is only necessary if you think that the only way to enjoy UO is on a high population shard. I don't think that is true... Quite to the contrary... There are plenty of folks that would close accounts rather than be forced into that playstyle.
Raising the average shard population has a number of benefits. More active community, better virtual economy, an overall more engaging experience, and, I would argue, better player retention. It's a painful process and this is not a suggestion I make lightly.
Do you mean way to improve the game to bring new players or ways to convince existing players to go to other shards?
Napa Valley is dead because it has an extremely low population. The needed change is simply, "more people". Its community is non-existent. Two things happen on Napa from time to time: EM events and sporadic net-tosses. Attempts at organized events have met with failure due to no attendance. Banksitters at prime-time hours number 5. This is not to disparage the players of Napa Valley. The point is simply that the shard is demonstrably dead, and no good-will campaign can save it. All of the things you mentioned are things which stem from a lack of players.
I too would like to see improvements to the gameplay that result in new players, but do you foresee the game's population returning to a higher, former level?
You are not alone.
You can run around to many places on Atlantic and still not see anyone hunting. Go to Shame most days and there are barely any people there. Go fishing for a few hours and if you're lucky you'll run into maybe two people who are fishing unattended.
I don't think you see many people hunting anymore because in many cases people are bored with it or don't need the resources that they would get from hunting. A lot of people have so much gold they don't know what to do with it. Or they are sitting on huge stockpiles of resources that they got from IDOCs or from running AFK bots.
I think we all would see more activity all over the facets in UO if there were more things to do that actually appeal to people. Just jamming everyone onto 4-5 shards without changing what is available to do and making it appeal to people won't solve anything. It will drive away a good number of people and the people who are left still won't be interested in going out and doing anything if it's still boring for them. They'll just stick to selling off their stockpiles of stuff or their EM event rares.
Much of what you use to justify your position is just an opinion though. Those things you think make the game better, don't necessarily make the game better to everyone. Napa is my home shard. I play there 99% of the time. And while Napa may be quiet, I always find stuff to do. Rarely am I on when there aren't at least a couple other guild mates on to play with. This is the playstyle I want! I have characters on ATL. I have a house there. I have PvP characters there. I have event characters there. I have PvM characters there. I have fisherman and crafters there. I have been in guilds with 400+ members. I have tried playing there... And I prefer Napa. It is my choice! More players is not what makes everyone happy.
The hell it is...
I don't want to be consolidated.
I have characters on low, medium, and high populated shards. It's a fact that I'll my accounts out of anger, however, the real reason I'll close my other accounts because I don't need that many houses on any given shard.
Shard mergers will reduce revenue for UO because players won't need accounts to keep their houses. Additionally, you'll lose revenue because players won't transfer as often.
What a great idea (reduce the income of a game whose struggling as it is)...
And those people with shard shields to consolidated shards? What happens to them?
Another thoughtless terrible idea on Stratics...
I agree with everything you have said. But that is an entirely different topic. There is a lot of game changes that could be made but this topic is about consolidating shards and the fact alone that it would increase player interaction.
Again this is just your opinion based on how you like to play UO and has ZERO fact to back it up. Contrary to what you think shard population is not a top ten reason to leave UO when Xfer tokens can be purchased. I wouldn't even give shard population a top 100 reason.
More active community, do you mean more garbage talk on the chat chan, it is already bad enough. Just because there might be more players does not mean the community is more active.
Better virtual economy, no it will be just the other way around because of the limited supplies and a larger population. RMT will sky rocket and maybe we will see the return of Castles selling for $2400 again, is that what you are really trying to do is jack up prices for an alter motive?
A more engaging experience, now let me see I can do what ever I want to on my shard as it is so how does being forced to move to an over populated shard give me a more engaging experience? Oh yea I get to listen to all the children and their garbage talk in the chat chan, you know where the real PvP happens.
Better player retention, right, less money for UO to spend on Devs to give us content, more rude people to contend with, higher prices, RMT people making a fortune selling supplies and houses these are truly all that thing that I look for in a game and want to spend my RL money on.
Where do I sign up for this BETTER UO? That was sarcasm just in case you didn't understand.
People leave for many reasons - and a shard "dies" for even more reasons.
I can speak for Napa (as you personally know).
The shard was known for Role Play - it was home to some of the most hardcore rpers in the game, reds and blues alike. It was also home to some of the most passionate gamers. Adam Ant, Scotia, (dare I say it) Silas... Pelle had a hell of a time keeping the old Stratics boards calm for how many instances of game activity flared up on the boards in RP-stories which branched into flame wars. Auwe! I remember them...
Now what is causing the slow cancer on Napa?
Well, the RPers left - you and I both lamented that passing in our own ways. The "Spirit of Sosaria" struggled, tried to stay - still rears its head from time to time - but has essentially left Napa and the vacuum it has created is stifling.
However, the why's of the RPer-exodus are a multitude. If you look though, their exodus from Napa also mirrored a shift in post content across Stratics - both on the forums as well as the content site. Other fansites, too, were affected. A lot of this coincided with the recession and major loss of jobs for people across the country - that mortgage crisis here in the states. Even I was affected - laid off and then having to somehow get back to Hawaii from Florida due to family issues. Ayuh.... its been a slippery slope.
~~
On a personal level, and I know this has some on Napa in a tizzy, yes, I moved my main characters from the RP shard. A "Kirthag" is still on Napa - and always will be - but more of a "Hi!" and wave type of character for when I want to visit - she will travel the mists between shards and pop up from time to time, but she's now situated on Pacific with a couple of castles and more.
Why did I leave Napa? Foremost - activity. I'm in Hawaii. The majority of players on Napa are not on the west coast - they live central and east coast. So I don't get to play with others except during carefully constructed times which, for the most part, do not coincide with my own schedule. Whereas on Pacific (another west coast shard) there are many people who play on that shard from Hawaii, its interesting seeing some Hawaiian names running through the Abyss!
Second, I have family (my cousins) and some other friends there. I can randomly run into people I know, and not have to carefully time everything to meet schedules. There is even some discussion of people meeting up here in Honolulu! A few people who ping from Guam are even on the shard.
Another point is - and this is a shock even to me - I'm finding it harder and harder to actually role play my celtic persona. Perhaps joining the ranks of the middleaged cougars I've lost that zest - or maybe its just sleeping deep inside me waiting for some inspiration. Maybe I need to get back into D&D.... *shrug* Whatever the reason, the Kirthag of the past is hard pressed to be the crazy, wild celitc warrior. She's more the smooth, silent, observant lady.
omgosh - what has happened to her?
Maybe I'm doing more "harm" to the persona by posting OOC here on Stratics. Perhaps the drudgery of being a forum admin is hurting my RP for it takes a whole lot of energy to do this.... *sigh*
~~
This is good conversation so please keep the personal nit-picking to a minimum. Deraj is not doing this to beat a dead horse - but is a legitimate topic of concern when you look at the state of some shards and how the gaming industry is morphing. Several games are announcing the merge of worlds/servers/maps and at some point, it may actually happen to our beloved UO. No one has a crystal ball that tells the future... only that magic 8-ball that is tweaked by the RNG gods. Lets keep it civil.
I just wish they would throw us on the lower pop servers a bone. For instance, I am just returning to the game and having to update a lot of suits. After wrapping my head around what I wanted to do I set out to make my suit. Currently I am trying to craft a bokuto mage weapon. No runic kits on head to get the -15 magery. So I check vendors ( their are two runic tools for sale on all of Baja atm and they are shadow hammers ;x), nothing their so I farm. 9+ hrs later I got one and I consider that lucky. Well now I need to remove that DI mod from the sword, erhm Need a whetstone, Okay how to get those.... ( none for sale again )Need to farm shame champions, need 10 points to summon a champion. takes about an hour for 2 points farming random mobs down there. 1 in 5 drop rate for the essence I need 3 champions.. do math read stratics, realize I am going to have to farm over 350 hours for a 1 time use item because I cant buy anything on my shard, and I feel its unfair I have to pay $40 in server xfer fees just to even get basic items to play the game. Its a wonder people return and quit again in a month, or why people don't want to come fresh to uo and keep playing on any server that isn't ATL. LISTEN DEVS LOW POP SERVER PEOPLE MATTER TOO!
With less shards to over see wouldn't it make sense that UO would have more availability to overlook these issues you pointed out?
GC is out of control, but with limited GMs it's hard to police every shard. RMT is still a degrading factor to UO's economy, but with condensed shards the team can monitor everything more closely.
Throwing out alternative motives is a nice bait, how about trying to just hold a civil discussion?
Totally agree with you. This is the one drawback of lower populations shards, and why those who have shard shields have a HUGE advantage by being able to transfer for free, while younger and returning players have to pay through the nose.
If there is anything I would consolidate in this game it's the vendors allowing everyone equal access to items. A tall order and unlikely to happen.
Shard Shields are the most unbalancing item in UO's history. I'd post on Baja Forum and see if you can get anyone to get the items you need and bring them to Baja.
I understand your situation, and I don't like it or think it's fair, however, it's unlikely to change.
The other choice is to move to Atlantic, and build characters there so you can shop, and bring back home to Baja. You can look at the transfer token purchase as an additional contribution to help keeping UO alive.
It has very little to do with the shards themselves and more to do with the # of players on at a certain time. The GMs are in one location and monitor all GM calls no matter where they come from. In the US you have 2 server locations, 1 I think in Japan, 1 in Korea, 1 Downunder and 1 in europe. Having fewer shards, unless you are talking about getting rid of servers, changes nothing. From your shard you are routed to your server then to the GMs so how would having fewer shards effect anything? If you look at the shards you only have 2 styles of shards 2 Seige style and the rest are all the same. Monitoring shards is more of a function of the program and not people watching what is going on. If UO wanted to they could put in checks to alert them to any condition that they want to watch, but it all comes down to how much of a big brother does UO really want to be and at what loss in income are they willing to accept. Because UO is on the cloud and we really have 2 types of shards there is no extra cost to keep them the way they are.
Riyana
Operations
Administrator
Professional
Governor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Event Coordinator
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
This is enough right here to nix shard mergers. Housing is one of the most critical aspects of UO. People continue paying subscriptions for years without playing just to keep their houses up. Forcing people to lose housing they've had for years and years, housing that they built themselves, that may be (or was once) part of their player town, that may be grandfathered, in a choice location, unique, or in some other way irreplaceable, will lose Broadsword those subscriptions. How many subscriptions can they afford to lose? We don't know... but I"m guessing not enough to risk it since it's been rejected many times now.
If you want to play on a more populated server, you have the option of doing so. There is no need to force anyone else to.
I would like this post a dozen times if I could. The best thing for UO is more players, not consolidation, and this will not happen until the fundamentals like account management, new player experience, communication, TOS enforcement, and customer support are given serious rethought and overhaul. If people who want to play can't get in, or can't stay in, or can't figure out 17+ years of various accumulated systems, then we've lost that player before we even had a real chance to retain them.
Honestly my favorite idea is for the new landmasses to be accessible from all servers (travel to and from original shard only). No one would lose anything, nothing old would get changed, but you could still interact with lots of new people if you wanted to, and maybe meet new friends before investing in a full move should that be your wish.
I was implying that with shard mergers, UO could police those aspects better. Not saying this is what should happen at all, but what if there was only one shard? We would then have all of the advisors and GMs monitoring that shard pretty much 23/7. Granted they could do what you are stating by putting into effect checks, but having a real life person there witnessing the conversation first hand and teleporting to the suspects to remain watching would bring about much needed change. The UO police of old did their jobs relatively well, I got popped a few times and rightfully so. There was corruption, but that's UO's job to weed it out.
This is SO true! Think about some of the past events like the Magincia invasion, the Moonglow invasion, the halloween sparkly event, the Thanksgiving turkeys, etc and how many people came out of their homes to participate.
Anyone that buys this game as is today, and doesn't play on ATL ( ie randomly picks from the shards because they don't know better) is getting ripped off, you can tell by my above point. Shard mergers More Population etc.. etc.. doesn't matter when you have effectively hole uo into a spot where you cant even get base items needed to play the game without spending 1k+ hours to do so. Some of you might have massive amounts of time on your hands, but I do not and the avg person isn't going to want to play a game that has 1990's graphics and takes over a year just to make a single weapon.
In 100% agreement with Crimson Hawk Moth...
UO's low resolution graphics is the underlying reason why the game continues to decline.
The game simply cannot attract new players with low resolution. The few players that do give UO a try, quickly run into issues, because they do not have equal access to items because of low shard populations.
Players on low populated shards gave up stocking items on their home shards because they never sell, and the simply continue to lose money.
As a result, new and returning players can't buy a damn thing because no one wants to keep items in stock and lose money.
It's beyond dumb.
Vendor fees should be subtracted at the time of purchase which will allow vendors on low populated shards to stock items without losing money while providing new and returning players access to items they might not otherwise have.
It's stupid to have a goldsink of any kind when it has such a huge negative impact throughout the entire game.
UO's low resolution graphics is the underlying reason why the game continues to decline.
The game simply cannot attract new players with low resolution. The few players that do give UO a try, quickly run into issues, because they do not have equal access to items because of low shard populations.
Players on low populated shards gave up stocking items on their home shards because they never sell, and the simply continue to lose money.
As a result, new and returning players can't buy a damn thing because no one wants to keep items in stock and lose money.
It's beyond dumb.
Vendor fees should be subtracted at the time of purchase which will allow vendors on low populated shards to stock items without losing money while providing new and returning players access to items they might not otherwise have.
It's stupid to have a goldsink of any kind when it has such a huge negative impact throughout the entire game.
Do not just use the shard forum here UOStratics is a small portion of UOs population to begin with. Also use the Gen Chat on your shard to ask for things and depending on what you are asking for you may have to be willing to pay before you get the item you want/need.
My friend, I have uttered a number of opinions in this thread, and I have openly admitted that much of what I say, without access to hard data is pure speculation, but there is one thing that is not an opinion: Napa Valley is a dead shard, and that's a cold hard fact.
You can not go from this...
To this (zero people at Britain bank by the way)...
...and after observing multiple failed player-organized events, actually tell me that that shard is anything but dead. Yes, the cross-sharders and EM rewards do certainly help to make the shard look a little more populated than it actually is at the EM events, and I realize you have some friends and guildmates to run with, but the community is non-existent. If you're happy with the sorry state of Napa Valley, I'm happy for you (no sarcasm). I'm not married to shard merging. It's not going to ruin my day if it doesn't happen or even that I've been getting my butt burned all day on Stratics in this thread, but it is an absolute, indisputable fact that Napa Valley is dead. I've played this shard long enough, and I've observed it long enough to see this is clear as day.
So you base everything on player-organized events where it may be the other way around that the population did not like the event but in your eyes it is the populations fault and not the event itself. I guess you can use anything to try and prove your point but always there is always two sides of a coin.
Your assumption is that people must be bank sitting in order to be playing? I virtually NEVER bank sit, and neither do most of those I play with. I think most of those that play Napa actually play the game when they are logged on, not just sit at a bank.My friend, I have uttered a number of opinions in this thread, and I have openly admitted that much of what I say, without access to hard data is pure speculation, but there is one thing that is not an opinion: Napa Valley is a dead shard, and that's a cold hard fact.
You can not go from this...
To this (zero people at Britain bank by the way)...
...and after observing multiple failed player-organized events, actually tell me that that shard is anything but dead. Yes, the cross-sharders and EM rewards do certainly help to make the shard look a little more populated than it actually is at the EM events, and I realize you have some friends and guildmates to run with, but the community is non-existent. If you're happy with the sorry state of Napa Valley, I'm happy for you (no sarcasm). I'm not married to shard merging. It's not going to ruin my day if it doesn't happen or even that I've been getting my butt burned all day on Stratics in this thread, but it is an absolute, indisputable fact that Napa Valley is dead. I've played this shard long enough, and I've observed it long enough to see this is clear as day.
I don't believe he stated anywhere about bank sitting. The pics he showed was the player interaction that once was and no longer is. Granted, there really isn't a point to it now due to Gen Chat, but I always had fun looking at peoples suits and seeing people's vendors.
I'm right there with you Ender, I also miss those days.
I'm right there with you Ender, I also miss those days.
I remember that when the EM program was reinstated, a lot of role players seemed to return to play on a certain west-coast shard. It was wonderful that the program was so appealing as to get players to resub their accounts and come back. What was not so great, however, was how seriously some people took the role playing, to the extent of telling other players that they were not role playing "correctly" and making them feel uncomfortable or even unwelcome. It was very sad to watch what was once a vibrant shard slowly disintegrate, to see people who hadn't been around for years come back and/or who were very active on other shards in their role playing community show up on the shard and start cozying up to the EM, while at the same time many of the non-role players fell silent, quit participating in discussions on the shard's forum, and eventually left for other shards or quit UO entirely. An effort that should have helped to grow the shard instead seemed to end up, at least for a while, doing little more than dividing it in spite of what were probably good intentions on the part of most of the people involved.
Merus, you completely missed the point.
The banks (be it WBB or Luna) were the most frequented places on Napa. Even Minoc Bank has a regular crowd that would meet up there before adventuring.
Now, not so much.
The banks (be it WBB or Luna) were the most frequented places on Napa. Even Minoc Bank has a regular crowd that would meet up there before adventuring.
Now, not so much.
I didn't agree with how some took the RP to the point of obsession and it encompassed everything no matter what and if another RPer didn't agree or play along, well, even I was ousted at one point! Couldn't get some ppl to understand that even the "outlanders" have a purpose. That was the entire purpose of the last guild I lead, the Bringers of Light, was to help act as a bridge between the hardcore RPVPer and some of the more relaxed and non-RPers.
Failed miserably I did at that.
I think you all miss the point... and empty bank is just that, an empty bank. People on Napa aren't just sitting at the bank... they are out playing. I could have taken pictures of that many people doing a Harry this weekend, or doing Exodus, or Corgul, or Champs Spawns... Taking a picture of an empty bank doesn't prove that people don't play Napa.Merus, you completely missed the point.
The banks (be it WBB or Luna) were the most frequented places on Napa. Even Minoc Bank has a regular crowd that would meet up there before adventuring.
Now, not so much.
I really don't understand those that oppose a shard merger. When I think of how UO once was, and how it is now, I can't help but be bummed at how little activity there is nowadays. People is what made UO great. Logging into UO and seeing two afk people at Luna bank is a bummer.
Im stupid rich in game, but I'd give it all for a larger player base. I just don't see the need to sit around and hoard **** anymore when there isn't anyone around to gawk at all my friggin loot!
I'm sure this has been brought up before (maybe even in this thread?) but I'm surprised more people don't rage request the devs to create a shard gate. They can even use it as a gold sink, say a mil per transfer or something. Shard transfer shields suck and seem limiting.
Lastly, I like the authors point about new or returning players come to UO, see dead shards, and quit after a week. That is straight truth, and needs to be addressed. Broadsword may just need to take some sort of risk to increase player base. I just don't see how they can continue without getting more players to come to UO and stay when 80% of the shards are bordering lifeless.
What do I know. Love this game tho.
Im stupid rich in game, but I'd give it all for a larger player base. I just don't see the need to sit around and hoard **** anymore when there isn't anyone around to gawk at all my friggin loot!
I'm sure this has been brought up before (maybe even in this thread?) but I'm surprised more people don't rage request the devs to create a shard gate. They can even use it as a gold sink, say a mil per transfer or something. Shard transfer shields suck and seem limiting.
Lastly, I like the authors point about new or returning players come to UO, see dead shards, and quit after a week. That is straight truth, and needs to be addressed. Broadsword may just need to take some sort of risk to increase player base. I just don't see how they can continue without getting more players to come to UO and stay when 80% of the shards are bordering lifeless.
What do I know. Love this game tho.