Re: Cal_Mythic & Llewen on Classic Shard Halo

[mmorpg.com]

There's something that those agitating for a classic shard don't seem to get, and it is becoming clear in this thread. At no point in it's lifetime was UO ever perfect. There was no point in UO's lifetime, not even way back in whatever mythical time you happen to think was UO's zenith, where there weren't plenty of complaints about all kinds of issues. If a classic shard is created that reverts to a particular time period all the issues that were present in game, all the imbalances and bugs, all the exploits that have been fixed since then will either have to be fixed, or they will be recreated.

There is something in psychology called "the halo effect". It happens when we tend to think of a subject as all good, or all bad, and in doing so ignore or forget all the evidence that contradicts that general impression. This applies perfectly to the views of many who are asking for a classic shard. They seem to think that at some point in UO's history there was a time when the game was as perfect as it will ever be, and forget that there was never a time when UO wasn't plagued by bugs, imbalances, exploits, cheats, haves and have-nots, anti-social pricks, and the list is endless.

I don't have a problem with a "classic shard" if it replaces Siege and Mugen, but I don't want to see a third rules set being supported that pulls development bandwidth away from the core game as it exists now. Because if a "classic" shard is created the devs aren't going to be able to simply set it up and let it run. There are going to be bugs that will need to be fixed, exploits that will need to be fixed, imbalances that will need to be addressed, and development decisions that will have to be made.

Well-crafted

The truth doesn't need to be crafted

"The halo effect," or the more often used "nostalgia" are common fallacies used to argue against classic UO. While nostalgia is a part of the reason people want a classic shard, years of debate have shown that the main reasons people want a classic shard are;

1) Freedom
2) Community
3) Simplicity

These are the things that Ultima Online originally offered unlike any other MMO. These are the things UO no longer offers. In fact, people are "nostalgic" about classic UO because it was a good game. However, unlike nostalgia in real life, games CAN return to their exact former state - it's merely a matter of restoring the rules, or coding.

As for paragraphs one and two, on a classic server these are irrelevant past the initial setup, because people that want a classic shard don't want expansions and constant changes, they want stability and a fun competitive game that they know how to play.

That is what UO has lost, and that is why UO has lost many players.

 

[phantus]

However, unlike nostalgia in real life, games CAN return to their exact former state - it's merely a matter of restoring the rules, or coding.

If time was stopped and technology was not allowed to proceed then you would be correct. The fact is you are not. The people who played back then are not the same people anymore. If you are the same person you were a decade ago then you have more problems than nostalgia.

I hope you people get your shard. Just don't be suprised when it's not exactly the same as you remember it. Expect exactly but settle for close enough.

 

[mmorpg.com]

Phantus, there are a couple of things you may have not considered.

Good games are everlasting and people have always wanted good games. This is why we have classic games like chess and checkers. Why not have a classic MMO? The one that began it all.

The latest technology is not needed, and often not wanted for a good game. The very existence of UO proves it.

 

[Petra Fyde]

Unless you can give me a compelling reason why you have re-hashed a 5 week old post out of a locked thread to create this spin-off of an active and ongoing thread, this one is locked.
oki, opened - but with severe misgivings.

 

[mmorpg.com]

Unless you can give me a compelling reason why you have re-hashed a 5 week old post out of a locked thread to create this spin-off of an active and ongoing thread, this one is locked.
oki, opened - but with severe misgivings.

I appreciate it. These seem to be the recurring arguments over the years against and for a classic shard - "moving forward," or nostalgia is against, and gameplay is for.

It would be nice to see where Cal stands with both sides clearly presented.

 

[RavenWinterHawk]

Oh lock this.
Classic cant be defined.
Classic really mean "back in my day when I was something"

How about this?
Just make the game more about random exploration and adventure.

Make the future of the game better then the Classic.

 

[Heimi]

If time was stopped and technology was not allowed to proceed then you would be correct. The fact is you are not. The people who played back then are not the same people anymore. If you are the same person you were a decade ago then you have more problems than nostalgia.

I hope you people get your shard. Just don't be suprised when it's not exactly the same as you remember it. Expect exactly but settle for close enough.

Bravo

 

[Lord Chaos]

We are in love with a dream, like being in love with those old 80's and 90's computer games because they were so awesome back then.

But honestly, going back to most of those games today, we'd get bored and they will never live up to the magic of how things were back then now that we've moved on to newer and better things.

Private servers get popular because well, they're free. But paying for nostalgia puts things in a whole new ball game.

 

[HD2300]

It would be nice to see where Cal stands with both sides clearly presented.

They have said they will get back to us with a decision by the end of the year.

In the meantime they by would getting feedback such as Stratics sent out an email to all its members, and 6 people posted yes I got the email and I am posting here in the Classic thread to say they want it. Also is the interest still strong in 3 months time, or are people more interested in a Pirate or Dwarves expansion.

 

[hawkeye_pike]

[...]the main reasons people want a classic shard are;

1) Freedom
2) Community
3) Simplicity

I would instantly sign 1 and 2. However, simplicity... I think it is a matter of taste, of course. I think that simplicity quickly leads to boredom, and I personally prefer complex MMORPGs, because they offer me the possibility to do many different things. Complexity is one of the most important factors for individualism.

For example, new skills and equipment. In Early UO, most players had a very similar skill template and very similar equipment (plate wearing archer mages in PvP - does that ring a bell?) Today, no player looks like another, and there are hundreds of different skill combinations that can be successful in PvP. I like that!

The one thing I dislike, is that UO is currently too much centered about valuable and rare items. While items can be an important factor to bind players to a game, this is a double-edged sword. To my opinion this indirectly harms the community, as the rare-item-addiction pulls players into the item hunting treadmill and makes them neglect the community spirit.

 

[Guido_LS]

Phantus, there are a couple of things you may have not considered.

Good games are everlasting and people have always wanted good games. This is why we have classic games like chess and checkers. Why not have a classic MMO? The one that began it all.

The latest technology is not needed, and often not wanted for a good game. The very existence of UO proves it.

I'm going to politely put this on the other shoe - yours. As someone that registered with the name of a rather busy site dealing with MMO's, show me just 1 that has returned to it's initial coding and is successful. Just 1.

Of course, the problem is, you can't. There are none. They either stayed the same as they were, and are muddling along in relative obscurity, they improved and are muddling along in relative obscurity, they outright shut down after muddling along in relative obscurity, they created sequels, which even Guild Wars is doing at this point, or they are WoW.

Nostalgia is a great thing, no argument there. There are times I absolutely love listening to Big Brother and the Holding Company, or The Experience, or the Airplane. There are times I like to play Pac-Man, or Sonic. For that matter, a lot of us play UO for the nostalgia factor. And when you really stop and think about it, nostalgia within nostalgia is silly... kind of like getting your panties in a wad for calling Guzuta Clyde instead..

 

[G.v.P]

Eh, I stopped reading when I realized this had nothing to do with Halo.

I'd like to open up a Classic Shard thread next time and have it tell me how to make a casserole, tired of the same thing being said fifty ways .

 

[Llewen]

Eh, I stopped reading when I realized this had nothing to do with Halo.

I'd like to open up a Classic Shard thread next time and have it tell me how to make a casserole, tired of the same thing being said fifty ways .

Ah the internet, every chef's dream and nightmare come true. I've got a thing for oysters...

 

[Tom_Builder]

After all the threads on a classic shard, I think what everyone wants, is not any set time. We just want a skill based game, not items. We all love UO, we just miss how it was before AoS.

People say what about all the items we have now? When we got AoS all the best items in the game (my blessed silver vanq katana) became worthless. A gm made katana was better, and that was about the lowest wep in the game, mongbats were dropping better loot.

Smiths and tailors were dead on day one, vendor houses disappered with Luna. There are so many things that we lost. It was a sad day when we got AoS.

Even then, we stayed. We just love UO no matter what happens. But the uo we have today, isnt the game that is was, it's not the game we fell in love with, but once it finds a way in to your heart it stays.

Oh well, I have to log in and see what new items I can get, I still have a few free lockdowns.

Tom

 

[Coldren]

I'm going to politely put this on the other shoe - yours. As someone that registered with the name of a rather busy site dealing with MMO's, show me just 1 that has returned to it's initial coding and is successful. Just 1.

Good thing their is never a first, huh? First times never happen.

Second, name one MMO that has survived over a decade that has more player run servers (morality of their existence aside) than official ones with populations approaching or exceeding 1000 concurrent players based on a previous ruleset?

Just 1.

 

[Llewen]

After all the threads on a classic shard, I think what everyone wants, is not any set time. We just want a skill based game, not items. We all love UO, we just miss how it was before AoS.

As with so many things that have been written on this topic, it has all been said before. UO has always been item based. Maybe not as much as it is now, but it still has. If you think your supremely accurate silver katana of vanquishing didn't give you a huge advantage over my exceptional kryss, your memory is flawed. And that katana was just as hard to get then as so many of the arties are now.

There is no question that the game was simpler back then, that's about all that can be said for it. And I realize that is what some are looking for, and that is ok. It's not my cup of tea. I love complexity, and having to figure things out, and multiple paths to achieve an objective. But to each their own.

But what is true, and this has been said many times before, in many different threads, is that that was a different era then. The internet was brand new. MMO's were brand new. There weren't a hundred different options for people who wanted to play MMO's.

Gamers that played MMO's were different back then. Most of use were geeks and nerds, and AD&D refugees. Now MMO's are mainstream, and the crowd playing them is mainstream. The "jocks" have discovered all kinds of computer games, including MMO's, with a vengeance.

There truly is no going back. The devs can create a classic shard, and I hope they do, but no matter what they do, it will never be the same as it was back then. There will hopefully be a strong community, because the community that is lobbying for a classic shard appears to be strong, but it won't be the same as it was back then.

Is a classic shard a good idea? I think so, and I think it will be something special, but it won't be the UO you remember, nothing ever will be. The only question is when all the classic shard supporters come to that realization, will they blame the devs, and find some excuse, or some way they figure the devs screwed it up? Sadly the answer to that question will probably be yes.

The truth is that some people will always live in the past, and will never be happy, no matter what is done to make them happy. And the truth is the UO we have today is also special. There is no other game out there like it, and trust me, I have done some searching. Is it perfect? For the millionth time, of course not. But it is damned good, and a hell of a lot of fun, just the way it is, today, right now.

 

[Tom_Builder]

As with so many things that have been written on this topic, it has all been said before. UO has always been item based. Maybe not as much as it is now, but it still has. If you think your supremely accurate silver katana of vanquishing didn't give you a huge advantage over my exceptional kryss, your memory is flawed. And that katana was just as hard to get then as so many of the arties are now.

I remember the day I got that katana. I killed an ogre. Can you tell me when was the last time you even checked the loot on an ogre? I dont even check loot on a dragon, as a matter of fact I never check loot anymore. As things are now loot is worthless, BEFORE AoS it wasnt. I may have a flawed memory, but Before AoS I could kill you with my gm made katana naked. Would you fight me naked today? Would you fight a mongbat naked today, maybe, but you would more then likely die. Things were skill based, which was better. I have over 9000 items now, 9000!!!! That is what UO is today.

Tom

 

[Tay M'real]

I like the example that a person used of a simple game like chess or checkers. We have variances of those games - more advanced types - but we still have those core original versions.

For those that would like to see a classic shard - we want our chess/checkers. While the game today offers more than ever - there are things that I miss with the old/original game:

[1] neon weapons
[2] spending too much time worrying about what gear I have versus being well stocked and having weapons/armor I like
[3] the game today is more complicated then ever
[4] lack of interaction due to being more widespread then ever

And following an initial launch of the shard - while yes, bug fixes would be required - there was a level of imbalance that was widely accepted by those that enjoyed the game for what it was...it would be created to a specific level and be allowed to run from there - no further development required...

 

[Llewen]

I remember the day I got that katana. I killed an ogre. Can you tell me when was the last time you even checked the loot on an ogre? I dont even check loot on a dragon, as a matter of fact I never check loot anymore. As things are now loot is worthless, BEFORE AoS it wasnt. I may have a flawed memory, but Before AoS I could kill you with my gm made katana naked. Would you fight me naked today? Would you fight a mongbat naked today, maybe, but you would more then likely die. Things were skill based, which was better. I have over 9000 items now, 9000!!!! That is what UO is today.

Tom

Sure you check loot if you are like a normal UO player, you just don't check loot on as many things, or in the same circumstances. You'd be stupid not to check the loot when you kill Travesty, or the Harbinger, or any one of many other special mobs in the game.

And as for the business of it being more skill based. The truth is it is just as skill based as it ever was, and I think even more skill based than it used to be, there are just more skills required to be successful.

There are all kinds of skills, there are skills involved in logistics, and managing resources, there are social skills, there are math skills, there are research skills. There is far more to being successful in UO today than simple button mashing, or "click and stick".

I love putting together suits, and if you don't think that there are all kinds of skills involved in putting together an effective suit, your definition of skill is far too narrow.

And even when it comes to pvp combat. There are far more choices that can be made, and tactics that can be more or less successful, and strategies that can be employed than there were in the "classic" days.

There are two true basic statements you can make about "the good old days" in UO. The game was newer, and the game was simpler. Just about everything else falls under the aegis of the "halo effect".

 

[Guido_LS]

Good thing their is never a first, huh? First times never happen.

Second, name one MMO that has survived over a decade that has more player run servers (morality of their existence aside) than official ones with populations approaching or exceeding 1000 concurrent players based on a previous ruleset?

Just 1.

I'd like to, but you see, other companies actually enforce their ToS, AUP and intellectual rights - EA doesn't give a crap about UO, so...

Let's see them let a Sims emu or Warhammer Emu stand for more than a day without a cease and desist, though. Even SOE still enforces their ban on player run EQ servers...

 

[Coldren]

I'd like to, but you see, other companies actually enforce their ToS, AUP and intellectual rights - EA doesn't give a crap about UO, so... .

An interesting point.

People would just as soon break the law and risk their livelihoods to play a previous version of UO than the existing one.

You're right.. That does somehow seem important.

Must be the "Halo Effect".

 

[Llewen]

An interesting point.

People would just as soon break the law and risk their livelihoods to play a previous version of UO than the existing one.

You're right.. That does somehow seem important.

Must be the "Halo Effect".

There's a specious argument if I ever saw one. I think you will find that free shards with "classic" rules sets are in the distinct minority as compared to free shards with rules sets based in AoS and later. And people "break the law and risk their livelihoods" to play them as well.

Typical of the horse manure that continually gets piled up around this issue...

 

[Coldren]

There's a specious argument if I ever saw one. I think you will find that free shards with "classic" rules sets are in the distinct minority as compared to free shards with rules sets based in AoS and later. And people "break the law and risk their livelihoods" to play them as well.

Typical of the horse manure that continually gets piled up around this issue...

Please provide a quote where I indicated that other versions did not exist, or "Classic" versions were more populated or numerous than said variations.

I stated that:

1) There were more free shards than official ones,
2) That freeshard populations are not unsubstantial, some at or approaching 1000 concurrent users.
3) Some of them were based on the "Classic" era.

In reading it, you could also derive some of these "Classic" ones have populations approaching or exceeding 1000 concurrent users. Which is true.

Second, name one MMO that has survived over a decade that has more player run servers (morality of their existence aside) than official ones with populations approaching or exceeding 1000 concurrent players based on a previous ruleset?

Otherwise, argue the fact, which was the point of the post you quoted:

EA cares so little about UO that it doesn't even protect it's own IP, and people care so greatly about the IP, that they will risk jail time to play it the way they want.

And rather than attempting profit from at least some small segment of the freeshard base, they'd rather combat it (We think.. Never heard of a freeshard taken down but EA, but it could have happened) and continue to bleed out players rather than add any more resources to make it better, or develop a true sequel.

This is no more horse manure than insinuating that the vast majority of users suffer form of psychological dysfunction simply because they support a "Classic" shard.

You chose to believe they don't remember or recognize the reality of the era because it nicely fits your description. Others have stated, time and again, they recall exactly what the experience was like for them, and even still, want a "Classic" shard.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find those who said the time was "Perfect".. You would not, however, be hard pressed to find those who said the time was "Preferable".

 

[Llewen]

People would just as soon break the law and risk their livelihoods to play a previous version of UO than the existing one.

I think you will find that free shards with "classic" rules sets are in the distinct minority as compared to free shards with rules sets based in AoS and later. And people "break the law and risk their livelihoods" to play them as well.

This is no more horse manure than insinuating that the vast majority of users suffer form of psychological dysfunction simply because they support a "Classic" shard.

I read into your statement an implied comparison, that somehow the "classic era" was special because people were willing to "break the law and risk their livelihoods" to play that era. While I think that statement is more than just a little extreme - I certainly don't know of anyone who has gone to jail or even faced a lawsuit because they played a free shard, let alone a "classic" free shard, the point I was making was that if you can say that about the "classic" rules set, you could say the same thing about the post AoS UO rules set, so that hardly makes the "classic" era rules set something special.

You chose to believe they don't remember or recognize the reality of the era because it nicely fits your description. Others have stated, time and again, they recall exactly what the experience was like for them, and even still, want a "Classic" shard.

Everyone, including myself, suffers from selective memory, it's part of being human. Very few recall "exactly" anything that happened to them ten minutes ago, let alone something that they did ten years ago. Even extremely traumatic events that cause nightmares and PTSD are rarely remembered "exactly", the human memory is highly selective, it needs to be, and not terribly reliable.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find those who said the time was "Perfect".. You would not, however, be hard pressed to find those who said the time was "Preferable".

I have no problem with people that say they prefer the classic era rules set, and I've said many times that I support the creation of a classic rules set shard. And I'm repeating myself here, but what I do have a problem with is people who mythologize the "classic" era, and in the process denigrate the game as it exists today.

I loved the UO experience back then, it was one of my seminal moments in gaming, but I also enjoy UO as it exists today, and in my opinion it is a better game today than it was back then. Is the "UO experience" better today? That's a hard question to answer. The UO experience back then was something special, and there is no question that it is different today.

But the "UO experience" today is also special, in my opinion, and I get annoyed when people start going on about how it sucks and everything the devs have done since LBR has sucked and yada yada yada. I'm glad they enjoyed the UO experience back then, and they are entitled to their opinion, but they had better have their facts straight, and their ducks in a row if they are going to try to tread on my roses...

 

[Lord Chaos]

Second, name one MMO that has survived over a decade that has more player run servers (morality of their existence aside) than official ones with populations approaching or exceeding 1000 concurrent players based on a previous ruleset?

Just 1.

Ok, just how many MMOs are even 10 years old or older? Very few.

But anyway, if I were to name one, there's Lineage 1 and in more recent years Lineage 2.

Both funny enough are open PvP games like UO was.

 

[Derium of ls]

The people who played back then are not the same people anymore. If you are the same person you were a decade ago then you have more problems than nostalgia.

Sorry, but if you're always changing into someone else, you have MAJOR problems. I'm pretty much the same person I have been my entire life. My morals, treatment of other people, likes/dislikes ect. Small things may change time to time, but I'd never consider myself 'different'.

Some people spend ten, twenty, or more years at a psychologist (or something else) trying to change, but can't easily. For one to change who they are, it's normally due to a life changing experience, trauma, mental illness, or a crap ton of hard work.

Plus I think if I changed who I was every 10 years even, I'd go crazy. And I most likely wouldn't have any friends for longer than ten years ha.

 

[Derium of ls]

After all the threads on a classic shard, I think what everyone wants, is not any set time. We just want a skill based game, not items. We all love UO, we just miss how it was before AoS.

Sums it all up in my mind

 

[Lord Chaos]

I have over 9000 items now, 9000!!!!

 

[Lord Chaos]

I'd like to, but you see, other companies actually enforce their ToS, AUP and intellectual rights - EA doesn't give a crap about UO, so...

Thats not really an EA problem. Many MMO companies doesn't enforce these things or only enforce them to a minimal degree. The only one that somewhat enforces it is Blizzard, but they have the clientbase to be able to afford doing it. And no, that client base did not come because of anti-cheating or enforcing rules, it was already redicilously large before they started doing that more and more.

 

[Derium of ls]

As with so many things that have been written on this topic, it has all been said before. UO has always been item based. Maybe not as much as it is now, but it still has. If you think your supremely accurate silver katana of vanquishing didn't give you a huge advantage over my exceptional kryss, your memory is flawed. And that katana was just as hard to get then as so many of the arties are now.

I understand what you mean, but I don't feel the same. To me that's like saying Counter Strike is an item based game when no one will ever tell you that it is. True if someone has an AWP they have an edge against you, but skill plays a major role still. If you know how to avoid certain situations you could gain the edge on the AWPer. Same as if you have duilies and the other person has an M4A1. It becomes skill vs skill with maybe small variables.

On my mage all I ever wore was a green kilt, I used my skills to fight. Even on my dexxer I used GM weps, and it didn't mean I lost against someone with a vanq weapon. Just needed to try harder.

But now, if I wear a kilt only and go PvP I lose 100% of the time.

to me an item based games means you MUST have the items to win (how it is now) but a skill based game means the items are optional (UO back then).

 

[Derium of ls]

Thats not really an EA problem. Many MMO companies doesn't enforce these things or only enforce them to a minimal degree. The only one that somewhat enforces it is Blizzard, but they have the clientbase to be able to afford doing it. And no, that client base did not come because of anti-cheating or enforcing rules, it was already redicilously large before they started doing that more and more.

Blizzard didn't care about gold selling in beta, it sold on ebay for $10 per one gold coin. The day before it went live they made it against the ToS. And that was when Blizzard had NO idea how big they were going to be. As much as I love the secondary MMO markets, I must give Blizzard a lot of props for spending so much effort enforcing their ToS since day one. Even though I hate what they are enforcing, it at least shows how much pride they take in their game.

 

[Guido_LS]

Thats not really an EA problem. Many MMO companies doesn't enforce these things or only enforce them to a minimal degree. The only one that somewhat enforces it is Blizzard, but they have the clientbase to be able to afford doing it. And no, that client base did not come because of anti-cheating or enforcing rules, it was already redicilously large before they started doing that more and more.

Actually, SOE is rather rabid about it. Then again, they've always cared more about their IP than EA - it was SOE that was the primary instigator in shutting down virtual item auctions on ebay.

EA has never cared one way or the other. It used to be a point of pride for the old dev team that there were accounts selling on ebay in the $3kUS range.

And Blizzard has long been notorious for mass banning, well before WoW came out. Battlenet has seen it more than just a few times, for games like D1, D2, etc. Which, of course, has nothing to do with emulators or protecting IP. Just radically strange enforcement of their rules.

 

[Coldren]

I read into your statement an implied comparison, that somehow the "classic era" was special because people were willing to "break the law and risk their livelihoods" to play that era. While I think that statement is more than just a little extreme - I certainly don't know of anyone who has gone to jail or even faced a lawsuit because they played a free shard, let alone a "classic" free shard, the point I was making was that if you can say that about the "classic" rules set, you could say the same thing about the post AoS UO rules set, so that hardly makes the "classic" era rules set something special.

The point of that discussion with Guido_LS was that UO was and is that special. I know of 1 DAoC shard. Never head of EQ player run shard. Even heard of a WoW one. I suppose they are out there, but I don't care to look. I have seen a top 200 free shard listing for UO though.

I cited the previous ruleset in the text because it is, in fact, breaking the law to set one up, as UO is an IP of EA. Again, takedown notices would not be implausible for those who host it, but you are right, that those that play it would likely not be treated the same. And they do play previous versions of the game, as well as new ones as you suggest.

Everyone, including myself, suffers from selective memory, it's part of being human. Very few recall "exactly" anything that happened to them ten minutes ago, let alone something that they did ten years ago. Even extremely traumatic events that cause nightmares and PTSD are rarely remembered "exactly", the human memory is highly selective, it needs to be, and not terribly reliable.

It's either a false logical argument or a literal interpretation of "Exactly" that is at fault here.

I remember a good portion of my childhood. I remember what happened ten minutes ago. I can describe elements of both in very vivid, exact detail, which can then be verified by others.

Do I remember everything EXACTLY, minute to minute, day to day, as a literal interpretation would imply? Of course not.

But to say that not remembering EXACTLY in prefect detail implies a fault that eclipses any or all beliefs or recollections or other facts about an experience is just plain wrong.

I don't HAVE to remember every detail of my childhood to remember I was happy. I don't HAVE to remember every minute I ever played of UO pre-Tram to say that I enjoyed it. Not remembering everything does not imply I'm wrong or incorrect, or that I'm selectively or unwillingly ignoring reality.

Truth is not fact, and the truth is, we liked that era. The fact is that then, just as now, there are problems. We know the player base is different now than it was then. I don't think anyone sane would suggest otherwise.

I, and many others, repeat ourselves by stating that we are aware that "Classic" era UO was not perfect, and it would not be exactly the same - but we would most likely prefer it anyway.

I have no problem with people that say they prefer the classic era rules set, and I've said many times that I support the creation of a classic rules set shard. And I'm repeating myself here..

I realize you have stated you have no problem with a "Classic" shard, as I'm sure most do.

... but what I do have a problem with is people who mythologize the "classic" era, and in the process denigrate the game as it exists today.

Perhaps they "denigrate" the game as it exists today because they feel it isn't as good a product? Or is this a personal sense of patriotism towards UO, and you somehow take personal offense that not everyone agrees with you when they say "This UO is the greatest UO ever"?

... I also enjoy UO as it exists today, and in my opinion it is a better game today than it was back then. Is the "UO experience" better today? That's a hard question to answer. The UO experience back then was something special, and there is no question that it is different today.

But the "UO experience" today is also special, in my opinion, and I get annoyed when people start going on about how it sucks and everything the devs have done since LBR has sucked and yada yada yada. I'm glad they enjoyed the UO experience back then, and they are entitled to their opinion, but they had better have their facts straight, and their ducks in a row if they are going to try to tread on my roses...

In YOUR opinion - Nothing wrong with that, but it is not an opinion shared by all.

And it doesn't matter how good or bad something is.. Someone somewhere is going to say it sucks. That's human nature. You can't please everyone.

But your shards aren't going away. Nothing is changing for you. I assure you, if EA doesn't think they can implement a classic shard without impact (or negligible impact) on it's current cash cow, they simply aren't going to allow it. UO has too small a team with too few resources behind it, likely making just enough to not be shut down - They aren't going to gamble a profitable game away.. Again...

No one is treading on your roses. You have participated in expressly Classic Shard discussions. I can't say I've noticed other people going to threads about current issues saying "CLASSIC SHARD FTW! NEW UO SUXXORS!" completely at random, but maybe I just haven't been reading enough.

You are in our rose bed, stamping your feet and making sure we all know that you think what's there now is just fine and we all mental dysfunction for thinking otherwise, and shame on us for wanting something different that might not be what you like, or worse yet, claiming that WE don't know what we'd like.

How about you stop treading on our roses? How about you let us have our discussions without reminding us that UO is the way it is now, and that's not going to change any time soon?

 

[Lord Chaos]

Actually, SOE is rather rabid about it. Then again, they've always cared more about their IP than EA - it was SOE that was the primary instigator in shutting down virtual item auctions on ebay.

Very few had the capabilities to make private servers for EQ and by the time it could be done, the game was more or less starting to be obsolete in so many ways.

Lots of cheats in EQ, not all that enforced.

EA has never cared one way or the other. It used to be a point of pride for the old dev team that there were accounts selling on ebay in the $3kUS range.

Uhm, because selling ingame things is ok by their rules, why would they be against it? Other games also pride themselves when they sell for large prizes, like Second Life and others.

And Blizzard has long been notorious for mass banning, well before WoW came out. Battlenet has seen it more than just a few times, for games like D1, D2, etc. Which, of course, has nothing to do with emulators or protecting IP. Just radically strange enforcement of their rules.

Uhm...hello? Did you just seriously try to make that an argument?

You did not pay subscription for D1, D2, Starcraft, etc. So for them to ban left and right cost them nothing, in fact it made them MORE money as many of those banned had to rebuy the game = more money. Not to mention Blizzard always threw out all kinds of unverifiable numbers (which are oddly enough always round, so cheater #50.001 apparently gets a free pass), not to mention as I proved in a previous thread, there's no way that Blizzard could fairly check whether their bans were legit or not. They just banned and banned.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Blizzard didn't care about gold selling in beta, it sold on ebay for $10 per one gold coin. The day before it went live they made it against the ToS. And that was when Blizzard had NO idea how big they were going to be. As much as I love the secondary MMO markets, I must give Blizzard a lot of props for spending so much effort enforcing their ToS since day one. Even though I hate what they are enforcing, it at least shows how much pride they take in their game.

First, they were simply following suit of just about every other MMO out there, nothing extraordinary.

Their extraordinary effort to enforce their rules came along with their popularity rising and their popularity rose because it was a fun game, a diverse game, a good looking game, a well made game, a well advertised game.

 

[Derium of ls]

To remark on the 'halo effect' though.

I know what it is, and I know it does play an effect on people, but this is how I see it...

When I was a kid we went to St. Pete beach Florida twice a year. My Father passed away when I was 14 and we stopped going for a while. I always held high and great memories for that place. Of course every time I go back it's "not the same" as it use to be. But let me tell you, Damn is it nice to go there. Not only is it a nice place but it's full of great memories. I feel anyone who would tell me to not ever go there again because it's just a silly 'halo effect' is a Damn fool. Yes it's not as wonderous and magical as it once was, but that's not to say it still isn't to a very high degree. Making it more than worth it to visit.

 

[Guido_LS]

Very few had the capabilities to make private servers for EQ and by the time it could be done, the game was more or less starting to be obsolete in so many ways.

Lots of cheats in EQ, not all that enforced.

This is incorrect on many levels. There have been emulators for EQ just as long as there has been for UO - in many ways, it's just as easy.

I won't bother commenting on the cheating aspect - you're fine with cheating, and we all know it. How you would have knowledge of such things is what's astounding here.

Uhm, because selling ingame things is ok by their rules, why would they be against it? Other games also pride themselves when they sell for large prizes, like Second Life and others.

Second Life is an entirely different business model than UO, or any other pay for play MMO. That comparison is poor, at best, and ignorant, at worst.

Uhm...hello? Did you just seriously try to make that an argument?

You did not pay subscription for D1, D2, Starcraft, etc. So for them to ban left and right cost them nothing, in fact it made them MORE money as many of those banned had to rebuy the game = more money. Not to mention Blizzard always threw out all kinds of unverifiable numbers (which are oddly enough always round, so cheater #50.001 apparently gets a free pass), not to mention as I proved in a previous thread, there's no way that Blizzard could fairly check whether their bans were legit or not. They just banned and banned.

I don't see where I argued with your point at all, other than to say that, with Blizzard, it's nothing new. So congratulations... you've just managed to troll yourself. That's got to be a new high point....

 

[sablestorm]

Let me try and put myself in Cal's shoes and argue where he might be coming from. The Dev Team has this game that many of us have been intensely loyal to for 13 years, but more often then not they get bashed rather than credited for it. Now here's this idea of a classic shard but they have to determine how to allocate resources in bringing this about. It would be a total waste of these resources if they released a classic shard and nobody was pleased. That is why the halo effect was brought up. Cal is pretty much in a damned if you do position because in my opinion, Classic Shard could just as easily be substituted with "My Personal Dream Shard." Let's face a reality here in that everyone has to share the classic shard idea and come together and build what it should be. This requires compromise on everyone's part because EA is not going to build everyone's dream shard. You're going to have to reconcile yourself with the fact that some of the things you wanted in the classic shard won't be there and some of the things you didn't want will be there due to popular demand. Can you live with this? If so, can you work with everyone else here to give Cal a clear picture of what should be implemented?

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

Hahaha I never tought there would be people trolling each other back and forth on UHALL without any mod doing anything...

Llewen is even saying people are horse manure...

For any historian such as myself, this is obvious signs of tyrrany.

So thats what it is, and thats why I skimmed over half the posts, because I exactly know the argument that is being pounded over an over in hopes that the tyrrany will take roots.

It reminded me of this :

[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Im3S8PRWjeg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Im3S8PRWjeg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Coldren]

Let me try and put myself in Cal's shoes and argue where he might be coming from. The Dev Team has this game that many of us have been intensely loyal to for 13 years, but more often then not they get bashed rather than credited for it. Now here's this idea of a classic shard but they have to determine how to allocate resources in bringing this about. It would be a total waste of these resources if they released a classic shard and nobody was pleased. That is why the halo effect was brought up. Cal is pretty much in a damned if you do position because in my opinion, Classic Shard could just as easily be substituted with "My Personal Dream Shard." Let's face a reality here in that everyone has to share the classic shard idea and come together and build what it should be. This requires compromise on everyone's part because EA is not going to build everyone's dream shard. You're going to have to reconcile yourself with the fact that some of the things you wanted in the classic shard won't be there and some of the things you didn't want will be there due to popular demand. Can you live with this? If so, can you work with everyone else here to give Cal a clear picture of what should be implemented?

Points of fact:

1)A pre-Tram era shard is not a new request unique to Cal and the new team.

2)Not so much of a fact, but an observation... Think of all the time they spend doing new clients - For whatever reason, agree with them, like them, or not - and ask yourself: Do you really think they have a problem allocating resources to ideas that achieve less than optimal results?

3) By your logic, every dev is in a "Damned if you, damned if you don't" situation, because no game ever meets everyone's criteria.

I think the general consent among proponents is pre-AoS/pre-Trammel era, and that would likely be enough to meet most criteria. Although I'm sure, many would be hopeful that improvements would eventually be made to fix bugs and address balance issues, but not re-implement post-AoS content in some new way.

I'd bet here's a great willingness to compromise from those in favor of a Classic shard. We have nothing now that we like, so getting something would likely be well received. At least an attempt would be appreciated by those who ever appreciate anything.

And if all else fails, do what they do with clients and just pull the plug. They don't seem to have problems doing that.

 

[Derium of ls]

Let me try and put myself in Cal's shoes and argue where he might be coming from. The Dev Team has this game that many of us have been intensely loyal to for 13 years, but more often then not they get bashed rather than credited for it. Now here's this idea of a classic shard but they have to determine how to allocate resources in bringing this about. It would be a total waste of these resources if they released a classic shard and nobody was pleased. That is why the halo effect was brought up. Cal is pretty much in a damned if you do position because in my opinion, Classic Shard could just as easily be substituted with "My Personal Dream Shard." Let's face a reality here in that everyone has to share the classic shard idea and come together and build what it should be. This requires compromise on everyone's part because EA is not going to build everyone's dream shard. You're going to have to reconcile yourself with the fact that some of the things you wanted in the classic shard won't be there and some of the things you didn't want will be there due to popular demand. Can you live with this? If so, can you work with everyone else here to give Cal a clear picture of what should be implemented?

I feel they should have us vote on the time era we want, make a copy of that time and add in the balances/bug fixes they have done. And go from there. Maybe collect player data AFTER that and see if it's doing good or not. I think that's rather simple and also gets right to the crux of the issue at hand.

I know we all want that "dream shard" you speak of, I myself want one. I want server births and monthly spawning items. but I know they have since "fixed" their coding to block all of that. And I figure it would be a pain for them to go back and "unfix" the code. Would I be happy about no rares? Hell no, BUT if that's something I need to give up, then by all means it's worth it to me.

 

[Derium of ls]

I'd bet here's a great willingness to compromise from those in favor of a Classic shard. We have nothing now that we like, so getting something would likely be well received. At least an attempt would be appreciated by those who ever appreciate anything.

And if all else fails, do what they do with clients and just pull the plug. They don't seem to have problems doing that.

VERY well said. I think most of us now need to start getting that notion in peoples heads here. WAY too much fighting is happening now, and nit-picking every little thing. If i was a Dev and I read all the 100+ pages on the classic server, my head would explode.

 

[gunneroforgin]

Ahh, a classic shrard, How wonderful. I dream of the old days, the complaining about the lack of new content and how dull the current content is. The lack of new players to kill. The reverse complaining of being greifed at every turn. The complaining about losing all your stuff. If you want a classic shard please think about it real hard, because the reason our game has evolved to where it is today is because players asked for all this new content.

If you get a classic shard I don't want to see any posts here on Stratics complaining about it. You got what you asked for. I will have no sympathy for it.
While it is possible to have a classic shard I believe it to be a misdirected endever and it shouldn't be attemped.

 

[Evlar]

...can you work with everyone else here to give Cal a clear picture of what should be implemented?

Entirely valid comment and will likely be the most important issue. Where to start and what to start with.

There's been a lot of debate, a lot of disagreement and a lot of agreement within the classic shard threads.

Biggest single bone of contention, appears to revolve around PK's and if penalties should remain the same as they were pre-Trammel, or be harsher. Getting a general consensus is always going to be difficult with that issue, because there are so many ways to view it.

Pretty much everyone in favour of classic shards, minus the odd one or two people in the discussions, seem to be agreed on though, is that they prefer a single facet, no Tram/Fel division and pre-AoS item system.

So essentially, it's the PK issue that's splitting consensus mainly. Not so much that it's possible to play as a PK, but the abuse of "freedom" to grief other players that was always the problem for many players. I must add that thieves have been tagged into the same debates, if only in a smaller way.

The stumbling block at the moment, is how to allow PK'ing and thievery to remain valid playable options, without them being easy to abuse as simply ways to cause grief to other players, without repeating the Tram/Fel split.

Some of us, are aware that the Tram/Fel split, wasn't the favoured option for all the members of the development team at the time. Other alternatives were possible, available and apparently, discussed in detail.

Perhaps we'll never know what those alternative options were, but wouldn't it be nice to explore those options, should they be required, within a classic server setting?

 

[Evlar]

Ahh, a classic shrard, How wonderful. I dream of the old days, the complaining about the lack of new content and how dull the current content is. The lack of new players to kill. The reverse complaining of being greifed at every turn. The complaining about losing all your stuff. If you want a classic shard please think about it real hard, because the reason our game has evolved to where it is today is because players asked for all this new content.

If you get a classic shard I don't want to see any posts here on Stratics complaining about it. You got what you asked for. I will have no sympathy for it.
While it is possible to have a classic shard I believe it to be a misdirected endever and it shouldn't be attemped.

Congratulations...

For making the exact same post in in two different threads, you are hereby awarded...

The Monty Python "Cut & Paste" Award!

[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cFrtpT1mKy8&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cFrtpT1mKy8&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

Enjoy!

 

[G.v.P]

Ah the internet, every chef's dream and nightmare come true. I've got a thing for oysters...

lol thanks

 

[sablestorm]

I personally like the new UO shards myself, but I've talked with people like Derium of LS and others about implementing a classic shard. Perhaps the folks here at Stratics can make a classic shard forum. You guys could sticky server builds and let people vote on them to see what the consensus is. Then as you refine the idea, you clear the votes and see how well the refinements are received.

 

[HD2300]

(A) Consentual PvP Shard Proposal

Features: "Fel" exists but uses a Trammel ruleset. Consentual PvP in Guild wars, Factions, intra-guild.

At the Tram-Fel split there were 260 000 subscribers. Estimates put the number of non-PvPers at 90-95%. 100 000 subscribers left pre Tram-Fel split due to griefing. The number of vet non-PvPers is say 100 000 + (0.9 x 260 000) = 334 000

The new shard will target 334 000 vet non-PvPers. Interest is only in additional profit, that is, new subscribers to UO.

Say 8% interest. That is ~26 720 new subscribers. Assuming there will be a 50% bleed rate after 12 months, this means 13 360 ongoing new subscribers, or EA gets $2 000 000 extra in subscriptions each year.

Time to develop: Not as long as a Classic shard
ROI: Within first month



(B) Non-Consentual PvP Shard Proposal

Features: All facets uses Fell ruleset. Insurance. Red penalties same as Production shards.

The new shard will target former vet PvPers.

Time to develop: Not as long as a Classic shard
ROI: Within first quarter



(A) + (B) would make both PvPers and non-PvPers happy

 

[Llewen]

Typical of the horse manure that continually gets piled up around this issue...

Llewen is even saying people are horse manure...

In case it isn't clear, I was referring to what was being posted, not to the people themselves. I may think you are spreading horse manure, that doesn't mean I think you personally are horse manure.

And you are spreading horse manure, you do it with great regularity, but at least your horse manure tends to be imaginative, interesting, and often quite hilarious...

 

[Llewen]

Perhaps the folks here at Stratics can make a classic shard forum. You guys could sticky server builds and let people vote on them to see what the consensus is. Then as you refine the idea, you clear the votes and see how well the refinements are received.

This is actually an excellent idea in my opinion. Give all these classic shard threads a home.