Ah one of my all time favorite Movies.Strange how Patrick Stewart and Excalibur is mentioned in this thread. I watched Excalibur on the BBC America the other night
Ah one of my all time favorite Movies.Strange how Patrick Stewart and Excalibur is mentioned in this thread. I watched Excalibur on the BBC America the other night
And a few minutes ago I ran into a young player named King Arthur in Delucia on LS.Strange how Patrick Stewart and Excalibur is mentioned in this thread. I watched Excalibur on the BBC America the other night
I read it the same way you did. I expect the answer to be "we decided against a classic shard, BUT this is what we're going to do to in an attempt to pacify those classic shard supporters." I hope I am wrong, but I guess we will find out soon.The video tape will cover:
The verdict on the classic shard, how we plan to grow the game, updates for the Enhanced Client, and finally our plan for increased pace for arcs, updates, storytelling and connecting with the community over the next 10 months.Based on the bold text, it looks like they want to improve on the existing train wreck of a game they call UO, and not waste any effort on a classic shard. Such a shame, and I really hope i'm wrong.Absolutely our focus this cycle is to improve the existing game (which also means progressing existing story lines). We like to share information we have a level of certainty on to prevent misinformation and confusion as features and changes come and go.
You'll see that the team is quite passionate about the upcoming months and focused on improving the game for everyone in the upcoming video.
Thanks all
T2A ended around 1999 or whatever, more than 10 years ago. I doubt more than 20 people will stop subscribing just because there wont be a classic shard.I read it the same way you did. I expect the answer to be "we decided against a classic shard, BUT this is what we're going to do to in an attempt to pacify those classic shard supporters." I hope I am wrong, but I guess we will find out soon.The video tape will cover:
The verdict on the classic shard, how we plan to grow the game, updates for the Enhanced Client, and finally our plan for increased pace for arcs, updates, storytelling and connecting with the community over the next 10 months.Based on the bold text, it looks like they want to improve on the existing train wreck of a game they call UO, and not waste any effort on a classic shard. Such a shame, and I really hope i'm wrong.Absolutely our focus this cycle is to improve the existing game (which also means progressing existing story lines). We like to share information we have a level of certainty on to prevent misinformation and confusion as features and changes come and go.
You'll see that the team is quite passionate about the upcoming months and focused on improving the game for everyone in the upcoming video.
Thanks all
More than 20? Silly rabbit ! I've already cancelled 3 accts myself.T2A ended around 1999 or whatever, more than 10 years ago. I doubt more than 20 people will stop subscribing just because there wont be a classic shard.
Mythic et al. are still deciding what to do this year or what the new carrots for this year are, hence the delay. Ho Ho Ho and a Bottle of Rum
I find that rather ironic considering that UO's overall demographic is one of the least likely to care for your insight/analysis.This entire thread is nothing but dozens of arguments, wholly unrelated to the original topic or each other, all featuring several sides, each of which are subtly wrong in subtly different ways, all adding up to a tangled web of faulty logic, deliberate obfuscation, and outright lies.
I hereby declare this thread a total loss.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
This thread was a total loss the second people started turning this into a dev bashing thread. If this thread was purged of all the flames and pointless arguments we would probably see this thread go down to approximately 20 whole posts as opposed to over 150.This entire thread is nothing but dozens of arguments, wholly unrelated to the original topic or each other, all featuring several sides, each of which are subtly wrong in subtly different ways, all adding up to a tangled web of faulty logic, deliberate obfuscation, and outright lies.
I hereby declare this thread a total loss.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
I cancelled 3. 4 of my friends cancelled 9 between them. I have seen others cancelling multiple accounts.People who currently play UO aren't going to quit because of the classic shard
3 down, 1 to go.Going to comment this one...
People who currently play UO aren't going to quit because of the classic shard (well some will do, but not a consistent part). The lack of a classic shard will simply keep some old players who would otherwise return, away.
I hadn't thought of that, but I can imagine it would be too complex as, right now, you can bring followers. Maybe a non-transferrable "join shard token" for all characters on an account that has had a character transfer to a shard. It could be used to join the other character at whatever shard he went to. eExpires after like 7 days or something.Yeah! Transfer token for multiple characters would be good too.
What's the super shard?
And, yes, it would be Pacific. And it wouldn't be easy to get people to move there. Cheaper transfer tokens removes one huge hurdle though.
If you were this serious about a shard with a classic ruleset and were actually around for those days, you would have quit sometime in the past 8 years since AOS launched, or sometime in the past 8.5 years since Publish 16, or sometime in the past 10 years since Renaissance/Trammel launched.I cancelled 3. 4 of my friends cancelled 9 between them. I have seen others cancelling multiple accounts.
This IS going to cost EA/Mythic accounts if they decide not to create a Classic Shard.
EA abandons us, we abandon them.
Coming back and seeing all of this hoopla over a video, I thought it weird as well.Why the hell do we need a video to tell us how the game is going forward ?
My guess is that Cal just likes the idea of recording a video, and once he'd committed himself to it, it was too late.Coming back and seeing all of this hoopla over a video, I thought it weird as well.
I'd rather they just have typed in something to UO Herald as well.
To me, the only reason to have a video is if they've done some kind of serious work on the graphics and client and want to show off what it looks like in action. That was actually my first thought, and it would explain the long delay as well - something wasn't finished graphics/client-wise and they wanted to have it finished before rolling out gameplay footage.
Actual gameplay footage of any graphics/client upgrades would generate a lot more interest than some static screenshots.
Oh man! Don't put that thought out there. That's not even funny anymore....
EA's irrationality has always been, and remains, the gravest threat to UO.
Isn't it about time for another cross-country move?
*ducks*
Absolutely agree. The problem being is this is still something that should be posted on upcoming development and be hosted on the website. Why download(stream/whatever) a big movie to see something they could just post on the herald and click on individually? I want their time invested in working on the game and not on a video about the game. I don't think that is an unreasonable request or anything that is against ROC B.To me, the only reason to have a video is if they've done some kind of serious work on the graphics and client and want to show off what it looks like in action. That was actually my first thought, and it would explain the long delay as well - something wasn't finished graphics/client-wise and they wanted to have it finished before rolling out gameplay footage.
Actual gameplay footage of any graphics/client upgrades would generate a lot more interest than some static screenshots.
*jingles purse*I already know what to expect of this video...
A little about why no "classic" option, quickly brushed over by what the next failure...*cough* erm... booster will be.
Woo... neon rideable orcs!
I can't see them wanting extra game footage of what we already have.Addendum:
For the Video: The devs are done shooting but PR has to put their STINK on it. They wanted extra game footage and stuff.
That is all.
What could possibly be more impressive, than visuals of someone riding a neon coloured orc?Which leads me back to my point of the only reason for a video is something that would be more impressive in action than say a static screenshot.
I wish you luck with that Dermott. If it's not apparent the EC will not get wide-spread usage without EC only content then this is a pipe dream. There are not enough people that are going to play it until they are made to. This should be obvious to most people that even if it had the old 3D graphics and Sapphireena on the art team it's not going to happen without a shove or a big carrot. Update promises and pretty screenshots are not going to do it. I doubt this is news to you....
I don;t think that "gameplay video" is something you can fault the devs for, I'm sure Cal would have rather had the Dev video done and out to us without it.
The gameplay video issue rests on the higher ups at EA PR, not with the devs.
Also, I'm going to predict that said video will be done in the EC because they will want to push that client and because it's better formatted to give a larger/full screen gameplay window than the Legacy client. I could be wrong, but I doubt it in this case... HOPEFULLY if the EC is used for such videos, we'll have some significantly visible upgrades to see as well.
In-game footage of anything new is not something that can be whipped out in a weekend. My speculation is that it contains gameplay footage (not what EA PR added), and given the issues they had with High Seas setting them back, if they were looking at doing footage of an improved client (EC) or graphics upgrade, what they needed in-game could have been pushed back as well (and would have been pushed back).I don;t think that "gameplay video" is something you can fault the devs for, I'm sure Cal would have rather had the Dev video done and out to us without it.
The gameplay video issue rests on the higher ups at EA PR, not with the devs.
You know I've been thinking just that for months actually. Didn't they put Mythic under Bioware or something some months or a year or so back? (Wikipedia says it was actually June 2009.) I had expected it back then!...
EA's irrationality has always been, and remains, the gravest threat to UO.
Isn't it about time for another cross-country move?
*ducks*
You know, my first thought reading that was 'when's the next booster due', since that would also 'justify' video footage...To me, the only reason to have a video is if they've done some kind of serious work on the graphics and client and want to show off what it looks like in action. That was actually my first thought, and it would explain the long delay as well - something wasn't finished graphics/client-wise and they wanted to have it finished before rolling out gameplay footage.
Actual gameplay footage of any graphics/client upgrades would generate a lot more interest than some static screenshots.
That's interesting.....What has me optimistic isn't anything they've been saying, but some of the things that have been done.Some of the talk in the last few posts has gotten me somewhat cautiously optimistic. Hope the video is out soon.
Mythic's DAOC website has somehow remained functional and informational even after the EA buyout, so Mythic has something..mythical about them.You know I've been thinking just that for months actually. Didn't they put Mythic under Bioware or something some months or a year or so back? (Wikipedia says it was actually June 2009.) I had expected it back then!
If the video is just Cal talking to some people and EA PR tacked on some footage of what we see every time we log in these days, I will be the first to say "that was dumb as hell, how could that have taken a couple of months to produce?"Some of the talk in the last few posts has gotten me somewhat cautiously optimistic. Hope the video is out soon.
No it doesn't. Server upgrades could mean anything and are far too vague to assume anything. If the Oceania incident is any indication of that I'd more likely believe it was a downgrade but , again, it could have meant a whole range of different things.The server upgrades means EA is spending money on UO (even if they hate to, and even if it's the minimum spending possible, they are still spending it).
See, my take is that EA is stupid and EA PR wanted to delay the video and demand changes to it as a means of showing important they were.And EA PR would not want to do some work on the video if it was just going to be Cal and others discussing things. And I can't really see them making such a big deal about a video if it's just Cal and others talking, since that is something that could be banged out over a few lunches. EA does still allow its developers to take a break for lunch. Even if it was existing in-game footage, it would not have taken all that long. In-game footage of new stuff on the other hand is a completely different story and is dependent upon development.
*chuckles*No it doesn't. Server upgrades could mean anything and are far too vague to assume anything. If the Oceania incident is any indication of that I'd more likely believe it was a downgrade but , again, it could have meant a whole range of different things.
That's possible, except the video has been delayed from early January, and they probably would have little more than concept work for the next booster in early January. If the video was to announce a booster in early January, that would mean availability in March, and that's too soon - they were still working on High Seas issues into December/January.You know, my first thought reading that was 'when's the next booster due', since that would also 'justify' video footage...
Except that EA PR has plenty of much higher profile projects to show how important they think they are., and some of those projects are launching in the next few weeks.See, my take is that EA is stupid and EA PR wanted to delay the video and demand changes to it as a means of showing important they were.
I agree with that. But, because he has pinned so much on it, I can't imagine that it's going to be just him sitting around and talking with devs about UO and the future of UO and showing existing footage.Cal was stupid to ever make a big deal about this video, to pin so much on it.
Adding, no, but past experience of EA makes me fairly sure they'd want to edit out stuff far more than they would ever want to add.Plus, EA PR would not have made a fuss over adding anything to videos of developers talking.
I've made may jabs and points but I don't really recall seeing something that I thought would have had more support.
Why the hell do we need a video to tell us how the game is going forward ? I don't recall the team having some great movie producer. I don't recall acclaim for the last video we saw from the team. Am I alone in thinking we need to tell them to discontinue with this great video garbage and just type into the herald what the hell the plan is and ask for feedback?
It's it a little bit like writing a cookbook on microwave pizza when you can just print the instructions on the side of the box?
On a 6 month booster release schedule...Ultima Online: High Seas is the most recent expansion(aka "booster") and launched on October 12, 2010 with Publish 68. It was first announced during a UO Town Hall Meeting held on August 28, 2010
I won't worry about the booster release date.... The dev's always hit their deadlinesOn a 6 month booster release schedule...
August 28 == ~February 28
It is getting real close to ~February 28. The timing is no coincidence.
The State of the Game Video will be the video PR of the next booster. All the EMs (paid EA staff), I mean fanbois, will chime in and say that this booster is the best thing since sliced bread, and everyone will forget about the carrots in last years state of the game.
Except that the video was supposed to be rolled out in early January, when they most definitely would not have even been close to having the next booster pack in a working state, let alone available for game footage.On a 6 month booster release schedule...
August 28 == ~February 28
It is getting real close to ~February 28. The timing is no coincidence.
The State of the Game Video will be the video PR of the next booster.
Did someone say Siege?It will be interesting to see how the team handles events and restores Magincia on the shards that lack an EM presence.
In the rational sense, this is quite true.Except that EA PR has plenty of much higher profile projects to show how important they think they are., and some of those projects are launching in the next few weeks.
After what we've seen EA do over the years, would it honestly surprise you if it went down that way?Do you honestly think they would try to change/add things to the video and then go around telling all of the executives "see how important we are, we did this, this, and this on the Ultima Online video!"
Would be neat. Assuming of course it's not that gorilla in the corner with the word "custom shard" tattooed across its head.To me, the delay has got to be development-related.
Ultima X was a sequel to Ultima IX (hence the X = IX+1) and had nothing to do with Ultima Online. It was a completely different game (based on the Unreal engine if I recall correctly) and wasn't going to have the things that make UO, UO. It was going to pick up right after Ultima IX ended.I saw the previews for the 3D version of UO that they were working on about the time they came out with Age of Sh!@. If they had continued focusing on UOX instead of AOS, it would have looked great. The only problem was that it was axed in favor of AOS and other new games.
Maybe that was to pay off contracts and rid themselves of Spada. Didn't fix it, but ya gotta start somewhere, ya know?Actually years ago, we received a pay hike and one of its selling points was for 'better customer service' from UO.