• 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!

Total UO monthly subscriptions

Paps

Journeyman
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
last i heard there were roughly 75-k of them.
however this was 2 years ago.
around half were asian shard players.
does anyone have current up to date info on this.
or is EA trying to hide the fact this game is pulling numbers comparable to
its first year in prodo.

any real info on this would be appreciated
[read opinions not welcome,just facts/figures please]
thank you.
 

Petra Fyde

Peerless Chatterbox
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
There is no 'real info' EA don't release it, and haven't for many years. All we have in the way of real info is a declaration from one of the devs some time ago that the site that produces the graphs (whose name escapes me atm) is totally wrong and working on sheer guesswork.
 

Lord Chaos

Always Present
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
We have no way of knowing whether the dev was right either, there's no way of knowing either way. UO could be heading for disaster, it might not be, we will never know until the day EA suddenly axes the game out of the blue.
 

ProZac

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
EA only says numbers when they are bragging. Otherwise, they keep quiet. They were loud about Warhammer subs until it started to decrease, then they became quiet as a mouse about it. Makes sense obviously. I think if UO players knew current active North American subs it would crush the game pretty quick.

If anything I'd say one of the biggest red flags is how long the game actually keeps dev staff over the past few years. They have seemed to have a deep passion for the game and left with almost no real explanation to work on new MMO projects/with new companies. Either EA is an awful company to work for or they have a good idea of the fate of UO. Or both.
 
B

Bullseye_of_Atl

Guest
Having player an EA online failed game before UO, I know the subs for that game were below 5000 before they pulled the plug. Even then, they gave us a 6 month notice to enjoy before it went bye bye. Also, they offered UO or the Simms........obviously, I chose UO.

So, I think it's safe to say, UO, with it's game time history, is fairly safe. As stated before, UO has a depth no other game can touch.
 

Llewen

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Campaign Supporter
I'll say this for what seems the thousandth time, both here and in regard to other MMO's. People start saying an MMO is dying, and ridiculous threads like this one keep getting posted, starting before the game is released, and continuing until the day the game actually dies.

What I see in game tells me UO might not be doing the best it has ever done, but it is doing just fine. Of course the doomsayers think it is fashionable to be doomsayers so they will spew a whole bunch of baseless "facts" and manufactured figures to support their fashionable prophecies of doom.

Suffice to say I'm just about 100% certain that I'll be a able to look up this thread in a year or two, assuming it hasn't been locked or deleted, and say, "I told you so..." ;)
 
T

Trebr Drab

Guest
There is no 'real info' EA don't release it, and haven't for many years. All we have in the way of real info is a declaration from one of the devs some time ago that the site that produces the graphs (whose name escapes me atm) is totally wrong and working on sheer guesswork.

http://www.mmogchart.com/
I believe the Dev simply said that they didn't know where they got their numbers from. I know they made no comment as to the accuracy of it, I was looking for that.

They show UO at around 75K. That's from late 2007.
They claim that they only use sources that are reliable, such as official postings, reports (stocks, etc.) and as a last resort insider info.
The 60K figure was speculation by poster before SA started drawing in people, which was before it was released due to anticipation.

Right now, UO has had 2 source bumps that I can think of.
1) SA
2) UO is talked about a lot outside of their circles. On message boards for gamers. And there's a lot of gamers who are tired of the old level grinds. I think there's some hits from that too.
But recent losses appear to be going on too. Less houses, less vendors, etc.

Hard to say right now where they are with the numbers.
 
T

Trebr Drab

Guest
By the way, they show RunScape with around 2,200,000 subs. UO's a better all around game than that, by far (IMO). This is why I have said that I think UO can draw big numbers if they go "worldly" and fix problems, get rid of AoS items and PS's and the Trammel/Fel split. They don't have to do away with Trammel so much as make the same rules for both servers. It'd just be better to start over with a "classic" shard, and not have the inflation problem as well.
 

BajaElladan

Certifiable
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
"IF," you are recommending the Trammel rules be added to replace the Felucca rules, I agree. Otherwise, your recommendation would surely end the existence of UO.

For any who desperately want to know such subscription information, I recommend you buy some EA stock which would likely allow you to obtain such info.


By the way, they show RunScape with around 2,200,000 subs. UO's a better all around game than that, by far (IMO). This is why I have said that I think UO can draw big numbers if they go "worldly" and fix problems, get rid of AoS items and PS's and the Trammel/Fel split. They don't have to do away with Trammel so much as make the same rules for both servers. It'd just be better to start over with a "classic" shard, and not have the inflation problem as well.
 
C

Cloak&Dagger

Guest
EA only says numbers when they are bragging. Otherwise, they keep quiet. They were loud about Warhammer subs until it started to decrease, then they became quiet as a mouse about it. Makes sense obviously. I think if UO players knew current active North American subs it would crush the game pretty quick.

If anything I'd say one of the biggest red flags is how long the game actually keeps dev staff over the past few years. They have seemed to have a deep passion for the game and left with almost no real explanation to work on new MMO projects/with new companies. Either EA is an awful company to work for or they have a good idea of the fate of UO. Or both.
The majority of the dev changes were lay off, the people didn't quit, or the fact that they said either move from one ocean to another, or quit, might also be another reason. Developers leaving is never an indication of how good a game/company is doing. They could have simply been offered a better position elsewhere or even within the same company.
 
C

Cloak&Dagger

Guest
Otherwise, your recommendation would surely end the existence of UO.
I simply ask for proof. And before you come with the standard response, try to remember subs were not dropping before they released Tram. They were in fact posting numbers back then, subs did not drop until well after the release of trammel, basically meaning the game could have done fine if they left the game that way, they changed it for the same reasons they always change this game, another game did it. Follow the history of UO they only made changes like this when another game did it like that. What was it back then? EQ I think was the game that separated the pvp from pvm and so UO copied, then there was the massive surge of Item based games, we got aos. WoW did races we got elves.

I have to say tho, people are happy in their world now....But if they realized there is about a 4:1 (maybe even higher) ratio of pkers (keep in mind not all people who pvp are pkers) vs normal players perhaps they would realize the pkers don't have much chance in the world they are asking for.
 
B

Babble

Guest
Last you heard UO had 150k accounts and half of them in asia.
With the assumption that on average an UO player has 2 accounts you can get to the number of 40.000 western players and 40.000 Asian players.

That sounds pretty optimistic though reasonable enough. Guesses would be that UO has 25.000 western players so about 50.000 western accounts.

If you want to know though just visit the shards and count houses. Each house should be an account, with some error margin because of non decaying houses.
 

Viper09

Grand Poobah
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Suffice to say I'm just about 100% certain that I'll be a able to look up this thread in a year or two, assuming it hasn't been locked or deleted, and say, "I told you so..." ;)
:thumbup1:

I think even WoW has some doomsayers and that game is in no danger, lol.
 
B

Babble

Guest
Actually I am not even sure wow has peaked yet... they redo their whole game contentwise ... something UO should have done years ago
 
C

Cloak&Dagger

Guest
Last you heard UO had 150k accounts and half of them in asia.
With the assumption that on average an UO player has 2 accounts you can get to the number of 40.000 western players and 40.000 Asian players.

That sounds pretty optimistic though reasonable enough. Guesses would be that UO has 25.000 western players so about 50.000 western accounts.

If you want to know though just visit the shards and count houses. Each house should be an account, with some error margin because of non decaying houses.
Also some error magins for accounts with no houses. And that would be alot of work wouldn't it haha.
 
B

Babble

Guest
If I compare wow and UO .. then no .. wow wins
Better itemization, you know what rewards you get for what tasks so no insanely stupid RNG.
Quests that tell whole stories and actually it seems they introduced something which will be big in mmos soon. That when you complete some quests those Mosters or so are gone for you and personalizes gameplay.

Uo still wins for the roleplay possiblities, but wow is the better game for fun and achievements.
 
T

Trebr Drab

Guest
"IF," you are recommending the Trammel rules be added to replace the Felucca rules, I agree. Otherwise, your recommendation would surely end the existence of UO.

For any who desperately want to know such subscription information, I recommend you buy some EA stock which would likely allow you to obtain such info.


By the way, they show RunScape with around 2,200,000 subs. UO's a better all around game than that, by far (IMO). This is why I have said that I think UO can draw big numbers if they go "worldly" and fix problems, get rid of AoS items and PS's and the Trammel/Fel split. They don't have to do away with Trammel so much as make the same rules for both servers. It'd just be better to start over with a "classic" shard, and not have the inflation problem as well.
I'm afraid you are pretty far off. Lets suppose the 50K number for western servers is right. There's, what, 15 US and Euro servers? That'd be a little over 3K per server. Servers and all the internet costs are expensive. How close are we to having servers start to be closed and trying to condense players into what's left over? And how many accounts would simply close up if that happened?

No, I'm afraid UO is getting dangerously close to being in real trouble. If any game comes out that is similar to UO, things are going to start to get real dicey. And believe me, there are games on the way. One is in beta, full 3D, and has been described by other testers as a "sandbox" style of game that they enjoyed "more than I thought I would". As before, I won't post the name or link here, that's just not right. But a little looking around at MMORPG.com can lead you to it fairly quickly. But from looking at the site and posts, I'd say it's enough different from UO that a fixed up UO should do quite well competing. But changes need to be made, and time is most assuredly running out.
 

Guido_LS

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
This game was far more advanced than our great UO but failed as its just another mimic of everything else around http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard:_Saga_of_Heroes

UO is doing fine I bet.
Vanguard initially *failed* because SOE rushed it out the door, in an anything BUT ready for primetime mode, and had a set of system requirements that were out of reach for a lot of people. As of now, it actually has more subs than Everquest, but is still slightly behind EQ2. So no, I'd say failure is probably a very wrong choice of words.

As far as it being a mimic, pretty much everything out here today is a mimic, including UO. Too many people seem to think that UO was the first - it wasn't. It's not even the longest running MMO out there now - number 6, at best. And contrary to the former Lum the Mad's omission, Vanguard actually has the deepest crafting and housing out of any MMO currently on the market.

So that was probably a bad choice of examples...
 
B

Babble

Guest
UO is so old and cheap that I guess it is profitable down to 5000 accounts if you stop giving gm support.

And not one but I think up to 5 sandbox/UO style games are in development these days.

Mortal/Xsyon/Craft of Gods?/Earthrise/Dawntide and probably some others trying to fill the niche which none other game except eve has at the moment.

Darkfall went for the pvp crowd, though if they continue to enhance the game and one day use a skill limit it might be the real new UO.
 

Viper09

Grand Poobah
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UO is so old and cheap that I guess it is profitable down to 5000 accounts if you stop giving gm support.
Oh I don't know. A bit of an extreme measure. How many pages over real issues that cannot be solved by other players help for a simple look at the FAQ are actually sent?
 
B

Babble

Guest
Just meant that running the Uo servers should be pretty cheap.
You can host a decent freeshard for $100 a month... so UO for EA should not be that expensive. Damn GMs want extra pay though, so not sure how many accounts you need to cover it. They could hire some indian guys for that, or just let the warhammer GMs lose :p
 

Lord Chaos

Always Present
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Just meant that running the Uo servers should be pretty cheap.
You can host a decent freeshard for $100 a month... so UO for EA should not be that expensive. Damn GMs want extra pay though, so not sure how many accounts you need to cover it. They could hire some indian guys for that, or just let the warhammer GMs lose :p
You need a dedicated server, hardware updates, hardware location, admins, gm's, event managers, writers, web staff, dedicated fiber connection, etc. etc. It costs a heck of a lot more to have a real UO retail server. Not to mention cost to have a dev team.
 

Llewen

Grand Inquisitor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Campaign Supporter
What I see in game tells me UO might not be doing the best it has ever done, but it is doing just fine. Of course the doomsayers think it is fashionable to be doomsayers so they will spew a whole bunch of baseless "facts" and manufactured figures to support their fashionable prophecies of doom.

Suffice to say I'm just about 100% certain that I'll be a able to look up this thread in a year or two, assuming it hasn't been locked or deleted, and say, "I told you so..." ;)
No one has said that UO is about to die.
It is clearly between the lines in this post, and there has been more than one thread like this with more than one post like this recently. They are all hogwash and pure speculation...

If anything I'd say one of the biggest red flags is how long the game actually keeps dev staff over the past few years. They have seemed to have a deep passion for the game and left with almost no real explanation to work on new MMO projects/with new companies. Either EA is an awful company to work for or they have a good idea of the fate of UO. Or both.
 
A

AesSedai

Guest
Cloak‡1682482 said:
I simply ask for proof. And before you come with the standard response, try to remember subs were not dropping before they released Tram. They were in fact posting numbers back then, subs did not drop until well after the release of trammel, basically meaning the game could have done fine if they left the game that way, they changed it for the same reasons they always change this game, another game did it.
- Some of the proof you seek surely poofed with MyUO boards and/or the loss of posts on Stratics a few years ago. It might still exist in the uo.com archives.

The proof was stated several times by the development team and the reality truly seemed to solidly back their reason up (imo & from what I remember reading from others during that time). Yes, subscriptions did seem to rise until after Trammel. The reason for that is what they claimed and was noticed all along:
churn

See, UO kept losing a good amount of subscriptions pre-Trammel (many of which gave an exact reason on their exit survey as to why they left... something that was also shared by Devs. to be a reason why a significant change was necessary).
However UO kept gaining more than it was losing,
which is the simple explanation for why a line graph of subscriptions does not give a true recount
of what was going on and why Pre-Trammel had to be swiftly changed (sure other games might have had something to do with it, but UO had the facts in front of them prior to EQ that proved they had better make a change if they wanted to see subscriptions continue to rise... at least they stated as much many times over the years, as I know many besides me can clearly recall).

Call up an old developer and ask them, if you will consider that to be sufficient proof. Otherwise perhaps search around with at least one keyword being: churn. I bet it is still out there if you really want to find that proof. My proof is in my head because I spent a lot of time reading and chatting with the Devs. about this subject at that time.
 

Tek

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Cloak‡1682530 said:
Also some error magins for accounts with no houses. And that would be alot of work wouldn't it haha.
Not that hard - most Idoc hunters could do a house count on a shard or more fairly easy
 

Basara

UO Forum Moderator
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
Campaign Supporter
Cloak‡1682482 said:
I simply ask for proof. And before you come with the standard response, try to remember subs were not dropping before they released Tram. They were in fact posting numbers back then, subs did not drop until well after the release of trammel, basically meaning the game could have done fine if they left the game that way, they changed it for the same reasons they always change this game, another game did it.
- Some of the proof you seek surely poofed with MyUO boards and/or the loss of posts on Stratics a few years ago. It might still exist in the uo.com archives.

The proof was stated several times by the development team and the reality truly seemed to solidly back their reason up (imo & from what I remember reading from others during that time). Yes, subscriptions did seem to rise until after Trammel. The reason for that is what they claimed and was noticed all along:
churn

See, UO kept losing a good amount of subscriptions pre-Trammel (many of which gave an exact reason on their exit survey as to why they left... something that was also shared by Devs. to be a reason why a significant change was necessary).
However UO kept gaining more than it was losing,
which is the simple explanation for why a line graph of subscriptions does not give a true recount
of what was going on and why Pre-Trammel had to be swiftly changed (sure other games might have had something to do with it, but UO had the facts in front of them prior to EQ that proved they had better make a change if they wanted to see subscriptions continue to rise... at least they stated as much many times over the years, as I know many besides me can clearly recall).

Call up an old developer and ask them, if you will consider that to be sufficient proof. Otherwise perhaps search around with at least one keyword being: churn. I bet it is still out there if you really want to find that proof. My proof is in my head because I spent a lot of time reading and chatting with the Devs. about this subject at that time.
Also, if you look at all the dips in that MMO site's charts for UO, compared to a timeline of other MMOs (not their chart numbers), you will see that all of the pre-2005 dips coincide exactly with the Open Betas and Releases of major MMO competitors.
 

J.B.

Journeyman
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Having player an EA online failed game before UO, I know the subs for that game were below 5000 before they pulled the plug. Even then, they gave us a 6 month notice to enjoy before it went bye bye. Also, they offered UO or the Simms........obviously, I chose UO.

So, I think it's safe to say, UO, with it's game time history, is fairly safe. As stated before, UO has a depth no other game can touch.
Agreed But Money talks.
 
T

Trebr Drab

Guest
any idea if there is a site that does what mmogchart did? its been outdated for years, I was looking last week for some up to date mmo subscript numbers.
In the news on the front page of that site, they mention a site that watches sales of all sorts of businesses that said they were going to start updating games too.
You have to sign up for access, which I haven't done yet. I have my doubts, because the game companies are guarding this info because it doesn't look too good for most. (And some, primarily the FTP with optional subs, might well be misleading. That would make actual hard info bad for their tactics.)
 

Guido_LS

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Ultima Online R.I.P.

Dan Hunter

[Ed: Posted for Petrus]

Ultima Online is dying?

I believe that there is evidence to suggest that it could be.
Admittedly when something is very large, its demise often takes a
considerable period of time...The Titanic took something like four
hours to sink after initially striking the iceberg. But there are a
couple of reasons why I believe that from a long term market share
perspective, the game could be in trouble:-

a) From what I've read, virtually everyone involved with the game's
inception has left.

b) The game's live team seems to be attempting to change it into a
large-scale clone of Diablo 2. By that I mean that the dungeon Doom
has become the primary focus of the game, and gameplay has become
primarily item-based as opposed to skill-based. If you don't believe
me, look at tradespot, check out the demand for LRC armour (as one
example), and also read about the "relic" phenomenon. Relics aren't
much more than clones of the exact type of items that were present in
Diablo 2.

c) EA's "Return to Britannia," campaign last year did not instill
confidence in me, and I'm sure possibly did not in some other users as
well. It implied that the game was not as successful as it had been in
the past. Logically, why else would they be giving away free game
time, and offering free downloads of Age of Shadows, an expansion
which previously cost in the neighbourhood of $40 US? They seemed to
be attempting to regain an older portion of the player base who had
apparently stopped playing. I'm assuming the previous point may have
had something to do with this.

d) UO's current population is approximately 165,000 according to
mmogchart.com. The game's peak population level of 240,000 was
reached in April 2001. The current numbers indicate however that the
game's population level has fallen by 32.25% in the last 28 months,
which also means that the population level is dropping consistently at
an average rate of around 1.5% per month. While this is not
necessarily meteoric, it does indicate a steady population haemorrhage
rate.

e) EA are no longer directly selling UO CDs or any new expansion packs
in Australia (as one example), which is the main reason why I myself
am sadly no longer able to play the game. EA also seem to be
attempting to gradually force all subscribers of their MMOGs to adopt
credit card usage as a primary means of payment. Since I do not have a
credit card, this means I am unable to play UO, and it also means I am
unable to play The Sims Online, which is another game I wished to
play. I have long suspected that the insistence on credit card
payments is the reason why The Sims Online has not met projected
subscription targets.

f) There is some evidence to suggest that the game's current
programmers are frustrated with the age/possible obsolescence in some
respects of the game's codebase. Although attempts at creating a
sequel have generally failed or been cancelled, work on the 3D client
has been incremental at best.

In summary, I do believe that Ultima Online is in serious, long term
trouble, at least as far as market share is concerned. I am also
inclined to believe that there are three key ways in which EA could
possibly reverse this trend, if they were interested...although most
evidence would tend to suggest that they are not.

a) Reverse the trend towards credit card only payments, and take steps
to make at least some UO CDs available in countries which natively
host shards. Australia has a shard in Sydney...and I assume the only
people playing there are credit card holders.

b) Move *part* of the game's emphasis back towards crafting and
skill-based elements, rather than Doom and its items being the central
focus. Yes, crafting is still there, but when I last played the game
it was starting to feel almost vestigial. Doom was most people's
focus, even for economic reasons.

c) Create at least one more region of the same size as Malas, (ideally
2 or 3) in order to deal with problems associated with overcrowding in
certain areas. Also create a more extensive local moongate system
within said regions, in order to aid navigation.

d) There is a project on SourceForge called Ultima Iris, which is an
attempt to produce a genuinely three dimensional Ultima Online client,
using the existing engine/map system. Although this software is
primarily intended for use on pirate shards, and obviously does not
have EA's sanction or blessing, it does *represent* compelling
evidence that UO's existing engine could be made contemporary in some
areas without having to scrap or rebuild it completely.

I do not believe that the use of tradespot/ebay are in themselves
adversely affecting this game, at least from what I have seen.
However, I also believe that crafting needs to resume some importance
as a means of revenue generation, rather than being primarily
loot/combat based. I also think that this game is extremely valuable;
that the trend I've outlined here can be reversed, and that it should
be. I am not intending to generate negative publicity for the game
with this article. Rather what I am attempting to do is merely draw
attention to some issues which I feel need to be corrected in order to
ensure the game's long term wellbeing.
A compelling read. And it looks like Ms. Cleo wasn't all that accurate 6 years ago, either... yep - this essay was from 04...

All things eventually come to an end. UO will as well. I don't want it to be tomorrow, or next week, or next year, or even in the next 10 years. But I won't be shocked nor amazed when it does happen. The game is already OLD. And it won't be long before someone makes a game that has the UO feel, but doesn't have graphics that would make an NES snicker. And when that finally does happen, then people can start droning about the end of the world... but for of us that are here on Stratics, complaining about AoS (of which I am one) or lack of a classic style server, there are 10 more actually in game, playing... and having some level of fun, or they wouldn't be playing.
 
C

Cloak&Dagger

Guest
The proof was stated several times by the development team and the reality truly seemed to solidly back their reason up (imo & from what I remember reading from others during that time). Yes, subscriptions did seem to rise until after Trammel. The reason for that is what they claimed and was noticed all along:
It did gain more than it lost, but the same happened after trammels release. This is what I am saying. The proof of the devs that you speak of was a few of many posts of how they spoke about how they thought the players would police themselves? Or who was it, that said UO was a social Experiment gone wrong? But that is not proof that the game would not have succeeded in the state it was, there are many games out there that do not offer areas of "protections" none of them are better than UO, so the fact that other games do fine for longer periods of time than UO did, is not proof in itself that a game like that could do just fine? The point is the introduction of tram did not stop the churn, it continued just the same until just before aos I believe? I forget when they stopped allowing the numbers to be seen, but I think it was either right before aos or sometime after LBR?
 

Tek

Seasoned Veteran
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Geeeze -

Currently defending the realms:
1,904 North America
0 GOA Europe
1,904 Worldwide
Last Updated: 4/13/10 01:07 AM
 

Paps

Journeyman
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
contrary to those of you that think this was an
"OMG UO IZZ GUNNA DIE TODAY,,THE END IS NEAR" thread,,,
it isn't.However i am concerned about `the beans`
TY to the person whom postedabout the other EA MMO that got its plug pulled,,,you posted a real and accurate number.That number being 5,000.
so basically if UO < 5,ooo monthly = no more UO in 6 months
2 years ago UO = 75,000 roughly
even if today is but half of that its still got a long way down before they pull the plug.
But i still would like a way to see just how close or not so close to that 5-k limit the game really is.
 

Lord Frodo

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Your worried about 5,000 subs. If 5,000 is the magic number then why has EA pulled the plug on DAoC. Worldwide 1574 Last Updated: 4/13/10 02:23 AM. In 2 hours 500 people have logged off and you are worried about UO. I don't think I have ever seen 5,000 on DAoC. So how is it, according to you, 5000 is the magic number and yet DAoC is still here.
 

Lord Frodo

Stratics Legend
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
And lets not forget about Warhammer Online http://www.warhammeronline.com/faq/index.php?section=11

What are the restrictions on the Endless Trial?
Endless Trial accounts are restricted to Tier 1 of the Empire versus Chaos pairing. This includes Tier 1 scenarios but does not include access to the Capital Cities or the other racial pairings within the game.
Endless Trial users are unable to send mail to other players or use the Auction House and Bank; however, they can receive mail as well as trade with any player face-to-face.
Endless Trial accounts are limited to designated servers. If you'd like to play with friends on other servers, you will need to purchase a retail copy of the game and transfer your character to their server (or create a new character on their server). All characters Rank 11 and under on purchased accounts have access to unlimited transfers, with a max of one transfer per day. Please note that you can only transfer characters to the same server type as the server you created your characters on (Core, Open RvR, and Roleplay). Please see the full server list here for details about each server, including server type. Alternatively, if you have a friend who is currently playing WAR, you can ask them for a Recruit-a-Friend code that will allow you to create a Recruit-a-Friend trial account which has access to all servers. Please see the Recruit-a-Friend section for more information.

I would think that of the 3 games Mythic is taking care of UO is doing the best. When the other 2 shut down then I might, and I say might, worry.
 

UODJ

Adventurer
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
I think UO is doing just fine. Just throw out some basic numbers:

Say 75K current subscribers @ 12 bucks a month. That's 900 grand per month. That's just under 11 million dollars per year that UO brings to EA.

Anyone really think the server cost and people to run the game flip EA upside down from that nearly 11 million dollars a year?


That's not even factoring all the in-game items (transfer tokens, ect) that are purchased each and every single day from the Code store. How much does that add in a year? Few hundred grand? Few million?
 
Top