[UO Herald] Producer's Update

[Woodsman]

Why aren't the veteran players BEGGING the dev team to drop the old client entirely?

Let's flip that around.

It's important to mention this again to remind others, but the graphics update is happening. It's not up for debate or discussion, it's not a theory, it's happening.

There are at least 10 million MMO players who have never played UO. Those 10 million players are used to interfaces that look like the EC. Again, that's not up for debate or theoretical discussion either, because you need only to look at the major MMO websites to see interfaces that resemble the EC. There are huge websites devoted to helping people customize those interfaces. Major MMO makers showcase those mods and customizations and invest a lot of developer resources into make it easier for players to work with those interfaces.

My question is, why aren't more CC players supporting the graphics update, the work on the EC, the new questing system, and the updated new player experience?

EA is not doing away with the CC anytime soon, so you shouldn't feel threatened, and yet, and not necessarily in this thread, I come across players who are incredibly adamant that EA should not upgrade the graphics and should kill off the EC and that no work should be put into new quests or new player experiences. Those same players will tell you that the quests as they are now pretty much suck, and that he new player experience is horrible.

All CC fans should be incredibly supportive of any serious efforts to bring in new players. Instead we get a lot of dev bashing, and a lot of people who think that UO can't appeal to younger players.

This last really bothers me, because I've played all of the major MMOs and I think UO can offer a lot to younger players, especially those who fill up the latest and greatest MMOs and then leave in droves when the free month is up. The problem is you have to get them in the door, and you have to give them an interface they are used to. I believe very much that if EA can finally get a decent modern client and graphics update into the game and keep it, that it can keep younger players who would give it a chance.

If you want to play the CC, great, more power to you. If you want UO to stay profitable, then you should be supportive of any efforts EA is making to bring in new players, especially given that at times in the past that some in upper EA management seemed hell-bent on dividing the player population or ensuring that UO was going to lose subs. This represents a change in the attitude towards UO and we should be happy about it. I still have serious concerns about EA management given what the CEO has said and what has actually happened over the past few years, but somebody at EA has decided that UO should get a shot at bringing in new players.

Everybody should be 100% unified behind the attempt to bring in new players.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

The "EC must die" types of posters remind me a lot of the Wesley Mouches, James Taggarts, Orren Boyles, and others from Atlas Shrugged. They know they are faced with an ever worsening situation, but their "answer" is to tear down everything that could and will make things work. Everything that is a possible improvement must be shouted down.

I'll even add in the "gold wipe" and "shard consolidation" crowd into this mix as well.

None of these groups use any real logic in their arguments, nor do they look beyond their own shortsightedness of what would make them feel better about where UO is at the current moment ("sure UO is losing players, but if we close shards, at least it will looks like there are more people per shard than it does now!"... "Sure it doesn't change how much people actually have if we reduce gold by 90%, but at least the numbers will look smaller!"... "The new features of the EC are exploiting therefore it must be shut down"... "I would never use an EC mod because it may hack my system" (I still wonder if this person uses UOA which is in reality an external program hack)).

Instead of finding ways to improve the new client, grow the existing game, and bring long-term balance the economy (where "balance" means that there is a good inflow/outflow of gold, NOT where everyone has nearly the same amount of gold), they go the "quick fix" route which in the end makes things worse than they already are and the slide continues.

 

[claudia-fjp]

Ford doesn't base its current success on cars it designed in the 1960s.

and EA doesn't base its current success on games it designed in the 1990s.

My analogy was trying to enlighten you and others as to why the following statement is still true after so many years and different attempts to change it.

"A dominant number of players still use the Classic Client."

Face it we're playing EAs 1960s game and a dominant number STILL use the CC. Star Wars: The Old Republic is it's 2011 game that's why it getting money poured into it not to mention the resources they have stripped away from UO to give to TOR.

I don't WANT them to abandon EC, you can have your fancy client all you want. I'm not even worried about them abandoning the CC because it's still in the dominant majority. To quote The Rev. Sir Dr. Stephen T. Colbert, D.F.A. "The market has spoken!"

 

[Lord Frodo]

OMG Listen to the EC fan boys whinning when someone says to shut down thier EC. CC users have been hearing this for how long now. LOL If your graphics are so great then why are they redoing them again?

UOAssist is an approved program to use with UO. Have all your mods been tested by EA/UO?

UOAssist has been tested by McAfee Site Advisor and holds a GREEN listing. Have any of you submitted any of your sites to McAfee?

Nobody said they are not supporting UOs effort to fix the EC, more power to them. But unlike you, no matter how great you may think the graphics are, we (CC Users) will not be forced to use an inferior (graphicaly) client just to make you die hard EC fan boys happy.

Allow us the choice CC/EC/KR Graphics and make everybody happy.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Come back when you've had a client you use shut down AND when you can prove that the EC mods are in fact dangerous to your system.

UOA IS a hack program, while legal to use, it in fact hacks the client data to do many of the actions it can do... actions that are simply NOT POSSIBLE with the base program. Everything done via an EC UI is done INTERNALLY.

The point remains the same.

 

[HD2300]

Why aren't the veteran players BEGGING the dev team to drop the old client entirely?

I did a poll a couple of months ago and 31% said that the EC gave them motion sickness.

Blurry (substandard) graphics, which causes the motion sickness, were identified as an issue when the KR client was released 4 years ago. THIS STILL HASNT BEEN FIXED, as the EC is just KR rebadged.

Vets are not going to beg the dev team to ditch the CC, when the alternative has worse graphics and makes 31% want to puke because of motion sickness.

 

[Woodsman]

and EA doesn't base its current success on games it designed in the 1990s.

My analogy was trying to enlighten you and others as to why the following statement is still true after so many years and different attempts to change it.

"A dominant number of players still use the Classic Client."

A dominant number of Mustang owners are not driving 1960s Mustangs.

A dominant number of Mustang owners would be driving 1960s Mustangs if Ford hadn't gotten around to advancing the Mustang line. Of course, if Ford hadn't gotten around to advancing the Mustang line as well as its other lines, Ford probably would have gone under or been bought out, and there wouldn't be very many Mustangs on the road today.

It boils down to EA repeatedly (and deliberately at times) botching the new clients, whether it was dev team turnover or simply not providing enough resources and not giving them enough time. When you introduce a new client, and then within a fairly short amount of time you ditch part or most of that dev team and bring in more people, who are then expected to get up and running with developing both clients, and oh by the way here are some huge expansions and system changes to throw into the mix, there are going to be serious issues that will never get resolved. That goes back to my theory that UO was deliberately being sabotaged by somebody, because the moves made were the perfect moves if you were wanting to cause an MMO a lot of harm. They were moves that Activision and Sony and Turbine would not have made with their MMOs.

Face it we're playing EAs 1960s game and a dominant number STILL use the CC. Star Wars: The Old Republic is it's 2011 game that's why it getting money poured into it not to mention the resources they have stripped away from UO to give to TOR.

You'll get no arguments from me on that - EA makes no bones about the fact that they are putting nearly everything on TOR. That worries me a lot, given what happened to UO the last time EA put all of their MMO eggs in one basket and it blew up in their face a few years ago.

However, the fact that they are willing to allow certain things with UO that would bring in new players gives me a little hope. I even take it as a good sign that The Sims Online is being revived.


Somebody is very interested in UO all of the sudden, and is interested in expanding the player base. Hopefully that somebody doesn't read UO-related forums because they'd see a playerbase that is divided against itself over some of these issues.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

It boils down to EA repeatedly (and deliberately at times) botching the new clients

I was catching up on posts when that statement stopped me cold.

Deliberately?

Any way you can elaborate?

I play the CC but personally think that developing the EC (and, let's face it, fixing the EC) should be a dev team priority right up there with providing a steady stream of content.

Honestly, and I hate to say this, developing/fixing the EC may be of more long-term importance than bug fixes. And in fact I bet working on the EC will let them fix bugs along the way, the same way that working on High Seas let them finally smoothen out boat movement somewhat (though, sadly, not movement ON boats).

As a CC player I'd be happy, or at least not unhappy, with art slapped into the CC with placeholder models and the like so long as they didn't flat-out suck. (I can't honestly claim to speak for the majority, though.)

-Galen's player

 

[Lord Frodo]

...

Come back when you've had a client you use shut down AND when you can prove that the EC mods are in fact dangerous to your system.

UOA IS a hack program, while legal to use, it in fact hacks the client data to do many of the actions it can do... actions that are simply NOT POSSIBLE with the base program. Everything done via an EC UI is done INTERNALLY.

The point remains the same.

Did I say they were dangerous? No! I said why hasn't the mod sites submitted thier sites to McAfee. It is a free service.

I said UOA was an approved program and asked if the mods were tested and approver by EA/UO. No they are not. Well EA/UO has tried now three times to build a new client. Well before 3rd Dawn if you played UO then you used the CC and back then they tried to force us to use it. Didn't work then and it will not work now. Your graphics stink. I do not care how good the UI is, I will not play a game I can not stand to look at.

I will go play the dominant client now. LOL

 

[Hannes Erich]

CC isn't going to attract new players, and to be quite honest out of all the returning players I've talked to in the past few months, all of them that have been gone any considerable length of time, playing other MMO's are playing exclusively in the EC. Why? Because it is a modern UI experience. You can't expect someone who's played WoW, LOTRO, WAR, or any of the other multitude of modern MMO's to walk up to UO and say "Wow the CC is great!". It's not going to happen, it's limited, clunky, and has very little potential for improvement or growth. It is time for Bioware to make a decision, phase out the CC or phase out UO.

I disagree with the notion that it's time for Bioware to make that decision (the EC has a long road ahead of it, the CC will see play for many long years, trust me). But I am forced to agree with every other point, if uneasily. See, for several years, I was a staunch CC fan, unwilling to drop it; yes, even at the expense of reason. Its familiarity and simple charm are a powerful draw for many old-timers and returning players; and even some new players, like those who find 2D pixel art attractive, fans of ancient console systems like the Super Nintendo, or indie gamers who prefer gameplay over graphics (any Space Empires fans here? ).

Unlike many EC players, I'm not going to hold a preference for the CC against anyone. I would be a hypocrite to do so, after some of the things I've said about previous upgraded clients. I've been in those shoes, I know how the other side of the argument feels. I also think all these hangers-on are a testament to the CC as a masterful work of art--one that has remained attractive to subscribers for over a decade. That is an achievement, not a failing, of Origin Systems, Inc.

But even so (back to Nexus's point), after the last several years, having played modern MMOs and other games...I can only play with the CC; it is no longer possible for me to play in it, to be immersed like before. I am older, refined, more experienced, more particular in my tastes. The EC--albeit after some tinkering (bless its beta-ful heart)--has just enough realism, in some abstract sense, to grant me a meager portal to another world.

Though I'll admit, it is time spent in modern MMOs that has MADE the EC so palatable. For me, the ground terrain looks more realistic. For me, the characters and monsters (sans red dragons) look more realistic, making creatures in the CC appear like hastily drawn cartoons. HOWEVER, here is an unfortunate admission, I don't believe I could have stepped from years of CC right into the EC.

You get used to seeing things a certain way, in ways that you don't even know--ask any researcher who studies the effects of habits or patterns upon the human psyche. I stepped from CC into KR and found only a grotesquely twisted mirror of Sosaria. Now I'm actually wondering if I'd have grown to enjoy it. Not because KR changed; because I changed, or rather a strong familiarity with classic Britannia loosened with time and distance. Few have acknowledged this factor, though I believe it is a factor. I'm at a loss for how EA Mythic can make the EC anything less than jarring for long-time current players, and I'm starting to doubt whether it should even be aimed at them.

 

[Woodsman]

I was catching up on posts when that statement stopped me cold.

Deliberately?

Any way you can elaborate?

All of the different layoffs, budget cuts, and everything else that EA is known for - pushing out things way too early, etc.

If you look between late 1999 and February 2003, there was way too much being squeezed into that period - Trammel/Renaissance, Third Dawn/New Client/Ilshenar, Blackthorn's Revenge, and top it off with Malas and Age of Shadows. When you toss in layoffs and reassignments, you're creating a lot of problems. At one point during that time, UO was bringing in over $30 million a year when you count subs plus the retail boxes that were being sold, but it never felt like they were sinking even $20 million into UO. You also had a lot of missteps being made, and steps being taken backwards or that seemed to indicate that they couldn't decide what to do with the clients, including opening up previously 3D-only areas to 2D after they told the media that 3D was their future.

On top of all of that, you had the Ultima Online 2 fiasco, which was a clear indication that EA couldn't decide what to do, and which created way too much drama among players and developers and employees at the Origin studio. In the middle of all of that you had the various EA turf wars that Richard Garriott, Raph Koster, and others have talked about that hurt Origin and by proxy UO, and that saw the demise of the Origin studio.

Combine that with ditching the counselor programs, ditching the official forums, etc., and you start creating a situation where you are pushing your customers away, and a gulf begins to develop. Major, successful MMOs see a polished website plus official forums as a way to interact with customers and keep those customers. All of EA's active major titles have official forums and polished websites. All of BioWare's active titles, and even some of their 15 year old DOS games, have official forums. Warhammer has official forums and an updated website, but UO and Camelot, no. That's a leftover remnant from how UO was treated and the things that were deliberately done to hurt UO.

Just take a look at the official Star Wars: The Old Republic website - forums, guides, means for players to setup guilds (And there isn't even a game yet!) and in general lots of interaction. Contrast that with UO and Camelot. The Star Wars website is a sign that EA is aware of how important official websites are for bringing in new players.

1999 - 2004 should have been a time where things were being done with an eye on 2010, especially with the success of EverQuest and with Warcraft on the horizon and it should have been a time when the player community was expanded and reinforced. Instead, a lot of uncertainty and tension was created both within and outside of the UO community and long-term problems were given short-term (or short-sighted) fixes, and the player community was broken up and pushed off to third party websites.

Some of what I mentioned (and there is a lot more) could be attributed to incompetence at the upper levels of EA management - not knowing what to do with MMOs, and this is reinforced with how they handled Camelot to an extent, but some of it, such as closing down the UO.com forums and pushing players out to third party sites, and all of the layoffs over the years that set UO back time and again, that's not incompetence. Neither are the turf wars that hurt Origin that Garriott and Koster and others have talked about (although that's incompetence at the CEO level for letting turf wars happen). Looking at how Star Wars is being handled, as well as it's website, and then ask yourself why that is not being applied on a smaller scale to UO or Camelot?. A 15 year old DOS game gets an official forum, but UO and Camelot which are bringing in possibly $20 million a year combined don't? A 15 year old DOS game gets an official EA BioWare forum and UO and Camelot get...official Facebook and Twitter accounts.

I would top it all off with the layoffs that affected UO in over the last few years. UO went from a large team that made a huge and well-received expansion with Stygian Abyss and then gutted that team, and expected a smaller team to fill in the blanks with Stygian Abyss, work with a beta client, and also push out High Seas. This after the CEO claimed that EA was going to stop micro-managing studios and screwing them up. It is especially ironic in light of the fact that UO was hurt by Warhammer Online and other games having revenue problems.

As long as UO was profitable over the years, there should not have been any massive dev team turnovers. Companies like Blizzard actually have to figure out how to keep dev team members from getting burned out after working on the same game for years on end, and they are looking at Pixar-like internal training as well as moving those developers to sequels (such as WoW devs moving to Titan). UO saw an amazing amount of turnover over the years for an MMO. It would be one thing if UO had been constantly running nearly in the red, but they would have a bunch of layoffs and then hire a bunch of people, then a bunch of layoffs, then hire a bunch of people. A new client would be created, people would be laid off, new people would come in having to support two clients and not being given the time to get up to speed on both, etc.

Something has changed recently though. Somebody at a higher level has taken a serious interest in UO. I don't want to get my hopes up too much though, at least not until I start seeing more hiring done for the current dev team.

 

[puni666]

Wow... you guys ever hear of getting to the point? Keep it short and simple or no one's going to read it! I see names and numbers with dates of things you think you know about someones employment and blah blah blah. How are you guys helping make the game better?

 

[Woodsman]

I made a pretty serious allegation, GalenKnighthawke called me out on it to explain my point of view.

I don't expect most to read over that, and it's not the most suitable post for this thread, perhaps I should have sent it PM.

It does reinforce my view that the community is pretty divided, and has been from when the 3D client was released and when the official forums were shut down. While Trammel did more than either of those, Trammel is not being changed, while the client issues and community issues are something that can be fixed by EA.

Whether people disagree or agree with me that a lot of that was just incompetence in the upper levels of EA or deliberately done to hurt UO, a lot is being done with UO right now, and I think one of the most important things they need to do is to work on unifying the UO community in one place.

They are putting a lot of effort into bringing in new players, but new players are still going to land at UOHerald.com, and they are going to follow that to Facebook or Twitter.

 

[Madrid]

Woodsman I enjoyed that post don't apologize for anything. It was entirely appropriate given the history of all that has transpired since 1997. It was an easy read as are all your posts.

I've very much enjoyed this thread as well as the other one going on regarding "new players". There have been some very articulate posts from yourself, Nexus, Hannes Erich, Dermott of LS in the last day or so.

It's refreshing to see posts from players who understand the big picture and who have their eye on the future.

 

[Hannes Erich]

Woodsman I enjoyed that post don't apologize for anything. It was entirely appropriate given the history of all that has transpired since 1997. It was an easy read as are all your posts.

Agreed! I was all proud of myself for writing a lengthy and insightful post...and then I read Woodsman's even more insightful (and lengthy ) post.

 

[claudia-fjp]

A dominant number of Mustang owners are not driving 1960s Mustangs.

A dominant number of Mustang owners would be driving 1960s Mustangs if Ford hadn't gotten around to advancing the Mustang line. Of course, if Ford hadn't gotten around to advancing the Mustang line as well as its other lines, Ford probably would have gone under or been bought out, and there wouldn't be very many Mustangs on the road today.

Yet if Ford currently offered both a 1960s version and a 2010 version side by side today the 1960s would win hands down in sales. CC is dominant for a REASON.

Somebody is very interested in UO all of the sudden, and is interested in expanding the player base. Hopefully that somebody doesn't read UO-related forums because they'd see a playerbase that is divided against itself over some of these issues.

Somebody who? I know you don't mean EA. I would hardly call stripping every resource they can from UO to further efforts on TOR someone being very interested in UO. We have barely any customer service and it seems like we can count the remaining people actually working on UO with one hand. They have the bare minimum of resources devoted to UO to milk it for every last penny they can, if you're expecting an Ultima Online: Renaissance you missed it by a decade.

 

[Hannes Erich]

closing down the UO.com forums and pushing players out to third party sites

Over-speculation isn't my style (not because it's wrong, but because it takes away from my play-time ), though I do have a strong opinion about this. As much as I've enjoyed Stratics over the years, I completely-and-wholeheartedly dislike the fact that non-subscribers, who are not invested in Ultima Online whatsoever, can post freely on the game's "official" community forums, and have been doing so for many years. The Stratics forums are poisonous. UHall alone is a public relations disaster. Trolls from free shards, disgruntled former players, disgruntled former employees, players seeking to raise interest in competing MMORPGs, people who haven't played the game in years can log into these forums and write ranting screeds against the current state of the game. And they do. With abandon. Successful MMOs with decent community standards do not outsource community management to random strangers on the Internet.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

I made a pretty serious allegation, GalenKnighthawke called me out on it to explain my point of view.

I don't expect most to read over that, and it's not the most suitable post for this thread, perhaps I should have sent it PM.

It does reinforce my view that the community is pretty divided, and has been from when the 3D client was released and when the official forums were shut down. While Trammel did more than either of those, Trammel is not being changed, while the client issues and community issues are something that can be fixed by EA.

Whether people disagree or agree with me that a lot of that was just incompetence in the upper levels of EA or deliberately done to hurt UO, a lot is being done with UO right now, and I think one of the most important things they need to do is to work on unifying the UO community in one place.

They are putting a lot of effort into bringing in new players, but new players are still going to land at UOHerald.com, and they are going to follow that to Facebook or Twitter.

Don't apologize.

People's attention spans are too short. This has been a problem since the 1980s at least, maybe since before that.

Please don't start being one of those people who apologizes for being smart and having things to say that don't fit into two-sentence fragments of l33t-speak insults.

-Galen's player

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

I made a pretty serious allegation, GalenKnighthawke called me out on it to explain my point of view.

I don't expect most to read over that, and it's not the most suitable post for this thread, perhaps I should have sent it PM.

It does reinforce my view that the community is pretty divided, and has been from when the 3D client was released and when the official forums were shut down. While Trammel did more than either of those, Trammel is not being changed, while the client issues and community issues are something that can be fixed by EA.

Whether people disagree or agree with me that a lot of that was just incompetence in the upper levels of EA or deliberately done to hurt UO, a lot is being done with UO right now, and I think one of the most important things they need to do is to work on unifying the UO community in one place.

They are putting a lot of effort into bringing in new players, but new players are still going to land at UOHerald.com, and they are going to follow that to Facebook or Twitter.

Official forums would be great. If they happen I sure as Hell they don't make us post with out account names or our RL names or something nuts like that...I remember being told about how the WoW forums were going to make you start using your RL name....

*shivers with how bad an idea that is*

Thankfully they backed out of that.

-Galen's player

 

[Coldren]

Might as well add my two cents...

Johnathan posed the question of why are players not begging for a new client. Woodsman's hammer glanced the head of the nail, but he didn't quite "bring it home".

The problem in my mind is, undoubtedly, unquestionably, a complete lack of faith in EA to successfully execute an upgrade that doesn't completely destroy an existing players sense of the world, while simultaneously appealing to new players.

There have been 3 attempts at a new client now. The one that enjoyed the longest life and, by that metric, the most success, was the 3D client. KR attempted to modernize the art style, which resulted in a rejection bordering on that seen by the human immune system - Users avoided it like the plague because it was completely foreign to them. Buggy client code didn't help either. EC somehow manged to take classic UO style, parts of KR, and make something that was WORSE than the sum of it's parts.

This is not a good track record. At all.

Now, I am not laying blame on the Dev's for this. Quite the opposite. I'm 99% sure that given a proper budget (Say 1/10th of what they gave to STWOR) and staff, they could have easily done what most SANE people who reject the EC actually wanted - A stable client with a cleaned-up style (See Saphireena, NOT KR) and a modern interface.

You don't need to have modern, high-resolution art to be successful. You do need clean, stylized, scalable art though. If the team manages to deliver this with the art upgrades, and get the kinks worked out of the code, I think you'd see a much higher adoption rate. But they need to prove they can do it on their shoestring budget before discussions of killing the old client can realistically begin.

To ask people to take a "leap of faith" that a company that has proven time and again that it not only DOESN'T understand what about it's games appeals to players, and continually nickels and dimes it's successes in favor of over-hyped big budget failures can actually manage to attract new players and keep old ones is more lemming-like than rational people who avoid a product that they simply don't enjoy.

Edit: Example of how to visually "remake" something that's old... http://www.gametrailers.com/video/review-pod-final-fantasy/712956. It looks familiar AND modern.

 

[Amber Moon]

Something has changed recently though. Somebody at a higher level has taken a serious interest in UO. I don't want to get my hopes up too much though, at least not until I start seeing more hiring done for the current dev team.

My guess is someone higher up is watching the decline revenue reports and told the team something along the lines of 'Fix this or we will'. I don't think that order came with more resources, which of coarse makes the situation quite difficult.

 

[Deb]

I have played since Beta and have tried a lot of the "New Improved" games
out there. For me it is definitely GAME PLAY over GRAPHICS.

UO has so much diversity in it that other games can not begin to compare.
I think and I definitely could be way off base, but we have a new
generation of gamers out there that are much younger than us old folks.
And they want that instant gratification and "Ewwww Ahhhhh graphics".

I for one love the CC, IF and this is a huge IF, I would play the EC
client if they could smooth out the pixels a little as I am one that does
get motion sickness if I play it too long. I have seen some of the artwork
in the EC and it is truly awesome. It just needs some more fine tuning.

Just my humble opinion

 

[Hannes Erich]

I have played since Beta and have tried a lot of the "New Improved" games
out there. For me it is definitely GAME PLAY over GRAPHICS.

UO has so much diversity in it that other games can not begin to compare.
I think and I definitely could be way off base, but we have a new
generation of gamers out there that are much younger than us old folks.
And they want that instant gratification and "Ewwww Ahhhhh graphics".

I for one love the CC, IF and this is a huge IF, I would play the EC
client if they could smooth out the pixels a little as I am one that does
get motion sickness if I play it too long. I have seen some of the artwork
in the EC and it is truly awesome. It just needs some more fine tuning.

Just my humble opinion

See the link in my sig.

 

[Woodsman]

My guess is someone higher up is watching the decline revenue reports and told the team something along the lines of 'Fix this or we will'. I don't think that order came with more resources, which of coarse makes the situation quite difficult.

While I wasn't playing last year, I was somewhat following things, and my impression was that the booster packs were to address declining revenue and putting UO in some kind of maintenance mode.

The idea that they were dumping big expansions in favor of two-a-year $15 booster packs was both a sign that they were really running a very small team and at the same time that they had accepted the inevitable and were just going to hold it off for a few years longer with these twice-a-year booster packs. The booster packs are not the kind of thing to bring in new players, they are the kind of things that is meant to appeal to existing players. The fact that the booster packs on a yearly basis cost more than an expansion upgrade for an existing customer was also interesting - two booster packs would provide less content than a full expansion pack and yet the end user would be paying more every year (if they bought them). The booster packs could also be done with a smaller team.

If EA executives were closely following UO's revenue over the past 5 years and issuing orders to fix UO at some point, they would have done so with the Stygian Abyss team after it was released instead of seeing a bunch of them being laid off/reassigned and ending up elsewhere. The Stygian Abyss team was the perfect time for EA to get aggressive about UO and instead they went backwards on the graphics as well (rather than overhauling them with the SA team). Not too long after SA and then the layoffs, they started in on booster packs.

I don't have it handy, but on UO Journal in the House of Commons transcript or in another article, there was a mention by Cal of something big happening in January, like they were given new marching orders. So it could be that you are right, maybe they don't think High Seas worked like they thought it would revenue-wise, and they were given an ultimatum. It's possible that UO was put on some kind of timer.

Recently though, the executive who is over BioWare, Sims, etc. said EA wants to revive some of their older properties, plus they are hiring for a new Sims Online game. Those are both things that bode well for UO.

If there was a timer and it was short and they were given revenue targets to hit this year, I think we'd see a lot of pixel crack cranked out, whether in the UO Game Codes store or in booster packs.

The things being done, such as new graphics, new player stuff, revamped quest, that is not stuff being done for a game that is on a short timer. The OP of this thread, combined with the House of Commons, and combined with PR chopping up the video on Curse.com gives the appearance of somebody at EA or within BioWare taking a long term view of UO.

My guess is that it's being driven within BioWare since UO is behind Star Wars, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and even Warhammer and probably doesn't draw the attention from EA executives that it once did when it was with Origin and then Mythic, where it made up a significant revenue stream. Mass Effect or Dragon Age probably bring in more money than UO, Camelot, and Warhammer combined.

It's really weird. One the one hand, somebody has long term plans for UO. On the other hand, they've got some simple and cheap things that could be done right now, such as working to unify UO's community and bring them within the fold, so to speak. I also can't see them talking about a new player experience without addressing the failings of UOHerald.com, especially given what BioWare has going on with its other community relations websites, official forums, and the Star Wars website. They already have the moderators and web developers in place, it would not take much work to add some official UO forums, even if they tied it to our UO accounts (and the infrastructure is in place for that with UO Game Codes and UO account management). This isn't 2000 when community relations sites were still an alien thing to EA, BioWare has a huge infrastructure dedicated to community relations and it extends down to Warhammer, but not UO or Camelot.

I'd feel more comfortable if we started seeing some new hires or BioWare did more on the community relations side of things, but you take what you can get, and I think there is some kind of long term plan for UO.

 

[Tina Small]

The things being done, such as new graphics, new player stuff, revamped quest, that is not stuff being done for a game that is on a short timer. The OP of this thread, combined with the House of Commons, and combined with PR chopping up the video on Curse.com gives the appearance of somebody at EA or within BioWare taking a long term view of UO.

Maybe someone at EA just wants the original version of UO to look a little bit better by the time NetDragon Websoft rolls out a new, Chinese version of UO.

 

[Woodsman]

I don't think the Netdragon thing is happening anymore, because they've acquired some bigger licenses, and they seem to be focusing their MMO stuff on their Transformers MMO and their Dungeon Keeper World MMO (which is an EA license). If their version of UO was going to happen, they wouldn't have stopped talking about it in their financial reporters. They seem really intent on making the Dungeon Keeper thing work.

They might get around to making their 3D version of UO, but not this year.

 

[Roland']

I did a poll a couple of months ago and 31% said that the EC gave them motion sickness.

Blurry (substandard) graphics, which causes the motion sickness, were identified as an issue when the KR client was released 4 years ago. THIS STILL HASNT BEEN FIXED, as the EC is just KR rebadged.

Vets are not going to beg the dev team to ditch the CC, when the alternative has worse graphics and makes 31% want to puke because of motion sickness.

Lol its funny now that i have played EC full time 2d gives me motion sickness. I just logged on to 2d in a vain attempt to get rid of the crashing EC client. Sadly i cannot go back to stutter stepping, and half visibility. Not to mention for some i stop everytime i bump into something. Oh ya and that hour i spent making macros from that fold down menu. Ya i dont miss that. UOassist only has 16 macros = ( EC doesnt need UOassist to do the same stuff. i can only have ten bars up on screen at a timeon 2d. On 2d there is still a need to accualy "pull" bars. I could go on for awhile.

Honestly i wish they wouldnt touch the graphics on EC i could care less. I wouldnt have played UO since 2003 if i cared about graphics. EC makes the game more playable. Playable games make money, look at WoW.
Accualy on a graphics note the energy, poison and para fields in EC are to "pretty". It is nearly impossible to place fields back to back starting east and working west as there is to more extra artsy crap to click on. Also some terrain issues with placing fields such as despise east bridge are buggy and only place one tile of field on the northmost part of the bridge.

And with all that said screw EC cause you have to close it every 20 minutes so you only randomly DC 2x a day instead of 10x.

Thank you.

 

[Tina Small]

I don't think the Netdragon thing is happening anymore, because they've acquired some bigger licenses, and they seem to be focusing their MMO stuff on their Transformers MMO and their Dungeon Keeper World MMO (which is an EA license). If their version of UO was going to happen, they wouldn't have stopped talking about it in their financial reporters. They seem really intent on making the Dungeon Keeper thing work.

They might get around to making their 3D version of UO, but not this year.

I dunno....their last quarterly report (from March 25, 2011, I think) still has the language in the last paragraph or so saying that they have a new version of UO under development. Could be that it's in the early stages of beta and they won't say anything definite about its status until they finish with that.

Ever wondered if perhaps the reason Cal seems to disappear for long stretches might be because he's working with NetDragon on some UO issues, either in LA or actually in China?

 

[Woodsman]

I dunno....their last quarterly report (from March 25, 2011, I think) still has the language in the last paragraph or so saying that they have a new version of UO under development. Could be that it's in the early stages of beta and they won't say anything definite about its status until they finish with that.

Ever wondered if perhaps the reason Cal seems to disappear for long stretches might be because he's working with NetDragon on some UO issues, either in LA or actually in China?

That language in the footer of those reports has remained virtually unchanged since they first announced it. They haven't even bothered updating it with the games they've released in the last few quarters, which means it's probably just some template that is only updated every few years. It's actually kind of bizarre because they should be updating the footer with the games they are currently releasing or have just released, since those financial reports mention those games and are meant for investors.

I really don't think EA would spend the money on flying Cal or anybody else to LA or China, especially since there is no need - Netcraft gets those licenses and then does their own thing. Dungeon Keeper Online isn't even coming out in any countries outside of China/Taiwan/Hong Kong, and their version of UO was going to be full 3D and not in sync with our UO, and it's not going to be released in any territories that our version of UO covers.

No, I think this is driven by somebody in EA or BioWare wanting to do something serious with UO (but without the proper resources...). Since they seem to be trying to do something with UO, and since they are starting on Sims Online 2 or whatever they are going to call it, maybe they'll work on Motor City Online 2

 

[Trebr Drab]

I dunno....their last quarterly report (from March 25, 2011, I think) still has the language in the last paragraph or so saying that they have a new version of UO under development. Could be that it's in the early stages of beta and they won't say anything definite about its status until they finish with that.

Ever wondered if perhaps the reason Cal seems to disappear for long stretches might be because he's working with NetDragon on some UO issues, either in LA or actually in China?

Cal only disappears when he goes on a binge.

 

[AesSedai]

... maybe they'll work on Motor City Online 2

- lol.

- Aye, interesting conversation going on here. I just hope some of the guesswork is right.

I'd love to see EC improve in many aspects.
My thoughts on EC getting additional graphic attention are that many big projects have finished up artwork and now we get another run; unless it is more outsourced development.

 

[Jonathan Baron]

Jonathan, you are reminding me of another time... and what seems like another place now.

A time when discourse was an art. When the sound was metered out with words in a fashion belonging to ancients. When gods walked the lands of MMORPGs. When gamers actually talked that way.

Yes, I agree - if you mean the people who delivered thoughtful responses to my comments

And, yes, I am an old man.....oddly, though - and this shocked me at first - old folks are far better with math, especially doing math in their heads. Guess it's because we had to.

Some kids get cars or new computers for their HS graduation gifts. I got a splendidly crafted, Ivory (the material itself says something) SLIDE RULE, from my dad...talk about old guys - he worked on Apollo! Folks used to go to the moon. Didn't much care for Huntsville, but I'm a Yankee and I digress.

This morning I finally realized something I should have grasped long before foul and negative material began leaking into what had been my style of rather cheerful posts on these forums:

I don't "get" Ultima Online. It doesn't matter how many hours I devote, how many characters I create, how hard I try, I simply will never grasp the culture and ethos of this wonderful digital world, down to the ground.

And that's fine. What's not fine is leaving a pile of....well...leaving on a negative note.

Without a molecule of anything forced or false I earnestly hope with all my heart that UO survives at least as long as it's already lived.

And I have a hunch that its largest role in the history of digital worlds has yet to be written - the seminal legal test of how far corporate ownership can extend over a digital realm.

Never liked the word, virtual, used for places like UO's many lands. My attempt at plugging in "veritable" in its place wasn't any better, to understate things, but applying ancient thinking of what makes things real never worked for me. These hard, physical keys I'm pressing to create this are just collections of atoms held in suspension after all. And these are more substantial than lines of code because......of....what?

So, if or when darkness falls, the test begins. And I think we all would agree on what the outcome should be.

But no more talk of doom. And no more bewildered rantings from me. I failed to understand this place and I will no longer force you to endure my inability to grasp it. I can only hope that <looks up at topic header> the stewardship of this game never falls into the hands of anyone suffering a similar impairment
-

 

[Trebr Drab]

Jonathan, I too am getting long in the tooth. I remember watching the TV show in you're signature.

Frankly I could go on and on here and I don't even know what to leave out so I'm forced not to start. But don't give up the ghost. This thing, these games, they are new yet. There's a "generation" that has come that's new to what these should be about. Most of them are learning. At least learning that something is wrong with it all if not what exactly that is.

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

...

The "EC must die" types of posters remind me a lot of the Wesley Mouches, James Taggarts, Orren Boyles, and others from Atlas Shrugged. They know they are faced with an ever worsening situation, but their "answer" is to tear down everything that could and will make things work. Everything that is a possible improvement must be shouted down.

I'll even add in the "gold wipe" and "shard consolidation" crowd into this mix as well.

None of these groups use any real logic in their arguments, nor do they look beyond their own shortsightedness of what would make them feel better about where UO is at the current moment ("sure UO is losing players, but if we close shards, at least it will looks like there are more people per shard than it does now!"... "Sure it doesn't change how much people actually have if we reduce gold by 90%, but at least the numbers will look smaller!"... "The new features of the EC are exploiting therefore it must be shut down"... "I would never use an EC mod because it may hack my system" (I still wonder if this person uses UOA which is in reality an external program hack)).

Instead of finding ways to improve the new client, grow the existing game, and bring long-term balance the economy (where "balance" means that there is a good inflow/outflow of gold, NOT where everyone has nearly the same amount of gold), they go the "quick fix" route which in the end makes things worse than they already are and the slide continues.

I've always found Rand's usefulness to be limited even when her stuff is applied to the stuff she meant to write about, let alone to UO.

Wouldn't the market determine what the better product was?

If so, the market's already decided and has decided for some time: CC players are by far predominant. Market decides, market wins.

I support further development of the EC, but not because I feel the principles of positivism apply to client development in UO. But, rather, because sooner or later I suspect the CC will just not be sustainable from a technical perspective.

In other words, the EC shouldn't be worked on because of the free market or competition; per those terms it's already lost.

It should be worked on for the tree-hugging issue of the game's long-term sustainability.

-Galen's player

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

I've always found Rand's usefulness to be limited even when her stuff is applied to the stuff she meant to write about, let alone to UO.

Wouldn't the market determine what the better product was?

If so, the market's already decided and has decided for some time: CC players are by far predominant. Market decides, market wins.

I support further development of the EC, but not because I feel the principles of positivism apply to client development in UO. But, rather, because sooner or later I suspect the CC will just not be sustainable from a technical perspective.

In other words, the EC shouldn't be worked on because of the free market or competition; per those terms it's already lost.

It should be worked on for the tree-hugging issue of the game's long-term sustainability.

-Galen's player

drunk post?

Seriously ...

In NO WAY is the CC "dominate" >in the market<
niche's are NOT dominate ... they are niche's for crying out loud

sober up ... WOW >is the Dominate Format< for crying out loud
if not WOW ... then Farmville.

tree-hugging issue ... sober up

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

drunk post?

Seriously ...

In NO WAY is the CC "dominate" >in the market<
niche's are NOT dominate ... they are niche's for crying out loud

sober up ... WOW >is the Dominate Format< for crying out loud
if not WOW ... then Farmville.

tree-hugging issue ... sober up

You aren't kidding, are you.

lol

The "marketplace" at issue is among UO players.

Click here

Producer's Update | Mythic Entertainment | Ultima Online

And look for this excerpt:

Understand, this does not mean we are abandoning the Classic Client. A dominant number of players still use the Classic Client.

lol

You know I think you have to have been kidding, and you, therefore, must be a comic genius. I apologize, and hats off to your comedy.

-Galen's player

 

[G.v.P]

...

The "EC must die" types of posters remind me a lot of the Wesley Mouches, James Taggarts, Orren Boyles, and others from Atlas Shrugged. They know they are faced with an ever worsening situation, but their "answer" is to tear down everything that could and will make things work. Everything that is a possible improvement must be shouted down.

Ha, an Atlas Shrugged reference on UHall. I think you've won.

I still need to read that, it's been sitting on my bookshelf. Then I began to watch "Mad Men," and they reference it to death. Very nice.

Going blind on the novel, I too must repeat the mantra: every single attempt at a new client--third dawn, kingdom reborn, stygian abyss (enhanced client, or EC)--has failed. By failed, I mean the vast majority of users did not support the launch. This fact has been voiced by many users in this thread, and lastly by Galen.

Has anyone referenced Melville yet? Because the EA devs remind me of Ahab, tirelessly in a search of the white whale. The running joke remains to be how many 2D clients will be made before they catch up with Everquest?

Now, before you flame me because of the word "Everquest," I'm not asking for a UO sequel in which we'll need to grind. All I'm saying is that since "Everquest" surfaced, in 1999, all major MMORPGs have aspired to be 3D.

A 2D facelift will only go so far in a 3D genre of gaming. If not for mounts and housing, UO would have likely fallen apart. Of course, by now, mounts and housing are standard as well, yet UO is still kicking. While I do not believe Galen was addressing the complete market when he made his last statement, but rather the market of UO users, I have to assume the CC, by itself, has sustained this product as the niche MMORPG it remains today. Why? I'm not really sure. But whatever the case, one thing I do know is the devs cannot replace the CC with a 2D facelift. It's going to have to be 3D, and it's going to have to be completely new art, and likely, if ever, a completely new game.

 

[Woodsman]

Has anyone referenced Melville yet?

I would prefer not to.

 

[Woodsman]

Now, before you flame me because of the word "Everquest," I'm not asking for a UO sequel in which we'll need to grind. All I'm saying is that since "Everquest" surfaced, in 1999, all major MMORPGs have aspired to be 3D.

It's interesting that EverQuest 3 or whatever Sony is going to call it, when it comes out this year, will basically be a remake of EverQuest 1 with new technology and using what they've learned since 1999.

I wouldn't want to see a second UO competing with the original though, simply because unlike most other MMOs, we have become firmly tied to UO with our housing and all of our other pixel crack that we have accumulated over many years.

Obviously we are not getting that, nor are we getting a 3D conversion with this graphics update. I think they do realize how tied many of us are. Given how far things have advanced since Third Dawn, I'm actually surprised they haven't made another go at something like Third Dawn.

 

[jaashua]

I'll buy that there are graphics updates coming for the EC when I stop reading about the myriad things they are working on. New Magincia, spring cleaning, booster packs, loading game world, etc. What that tells me is that the graphics update is being halfassed like everything else.

 

[Woodsman]

Would you prefer that rather than them pushing out the update in segments, they just devote everything to the graphics update until it's done?

I can't imagine the outcry among certain people if they devoted 100% of their resources to working on the new graphics and EC for however many months it would take.

 

[G.v.P]

It's interesting that EverQuest 3 or whatever Sony is going to call it, when it comes out this year, will basically be a remake of EverQuest 1 with new technology and using what they've learned since 1999.

I wouldn't want to see a second UO competing with the original though, simply because unlike most other MMOs, we have become firmly tied to UO with our housing and all of our other pixel crack that we have accumulated over many years.

Be nice if UO followed the footsteps of EQ. Make UO free to play then begin work on a new 3D client. It's not going to happen, but EQ seems to have the right idea in mind.

If you're tied to your house in 2D then you really don't need new content, so it might as well be free to play. If the only reason not to move on is because of a house, you know...eh. Any new game will have a much better looking house.

 

[G.v.P]

I would prefer not to.

You must strongly dislike Melville to make a separate post.

...la

 

[R Traveler]

See the link in my sig.

Make a guide for this problem http://vboards.stratics.com/uo-enhanced-client-discussion/210069-ec-client-misaligned-tiles.html please

 

[LiquidSolidity]

I'll buy that there are graphics updates coming for the EC when I stop reading about the myriad things they are working on. New Magincia, spring cleaning, booster packs, loading game world, etc. What that tells me is that the graphics update is being halfassed like everything else.

I agree, I simply can't understand why they do all these other things and put improving the blurry graphics on the back-burner.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

I'll buy that there are graphics updates coming for the EC when I stop reading about the myriad things they are working on. New Magincia, spring cleaning, booster packs, loading game world, etc. What that tells me is that the graphics update is being halfassed like everything else.

I agree, I simply can't understand why they do all these other things and put improving the blurry graphics on the back-burner.

I have to say I feel the same way. I'd like to see a good solid year, or more, of NO new content whatsoever. Fix what's broken in the game and FOCUS on the artwork and for god sakes fix the freaking crashing to desktop issue.

 

[Woodsman]

I agree, I simply can't understand why they do all these other things and put improving the blurry graphics on the back-burner.

Imagine how many CC users would get upset if they announced they were spending the better part of this year working on improving the graphics and EC, and so other things within the game were going to have to wait.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

Imagine how many CC users would get upset if they announced they were spending the better part of this year working on improving the graphics and EC, and so other things within the game were going to have to wait.

Besides the graphics, most other things in the game affect the EC & CC equally. Both clients benefit from bug fixes and changes to flawed and/or broken game mechanics & systems.

 

[Woodsman]

Besides the graphics, most other things in the game affect the EC & CC equally. Both clients benefit from bug fixes and changes to flawed and/or broken game mechanics & systems.

You'll get no argument from me on that - bug fixes, fixed mechanics and systems, are good for players regardless of which client they use. In addition, those things (and the graphics update) will probably bring in new players or more returning players, which again, is a good for all players.

However, I think some would get upset if they felt that EA was spending a lot more time on the EC or graphics. I wish that weren't the case.

 

[Neutron Bomb]

Is there a purpose to all the bashing going on about CC users?

Come on people. It is pointless to ridicule the majority players of UO

And in the name of Lox...

HIGH FIVE!