Classic Client love

[Lord Chaos]

Many people still really like the CC and as such, if there's ever going to be a Classic Shard, then the CC must persist.

So isn't it high time that the CC got a little loving, instead of just getting the occasional updates needed to function. Like getting some of the functionality of the EC, like counting total mods, showing imbuing score of items, showing intensity of mods, etc.

Heck, also improve the macro system to something more akin to the EC.

Its really time to show the CC some loving and stop its crippled functionality compared to the EC.

 

[Uvtha]

Old client is more limited, and harder to work with. Thats why the new client exists.

I think we'll just have to take what comes.

 

[MalagAste]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

 

[canary]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

I'll take it one step further, call both client trash and state they need to actually do ANOTHER one ground up.

Will never happen, but it is the truth. Maybe NetDragon will be a step in that right direction if the team can get access to that in Europe and the USA. Maybe.

 

[Mapper]

More chance of the EC client getting 2d animations and landscape before you see an EC style macro system in the 2d client imo.

 

[Tanivar]

Hopefully they keep in mind that the User interface is a big part of whether a game is fun to play or not. The EC is in no way as good as the CC. Particularly in graphics. The EC may have 'newer style graphics', but they are very poorly done graphics.

If I had to play this game through the EC User Interface I wouldn't be playing it for long. For all it's wonders in a sandbox environment, and the big bonus of not being level based, it would not be enjoyable.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

The EC is in no way as good as the CC. Particularly in graphics. The EC may have 'newer style graphics', but they are very poorly done graphics.

Aside from the terrain textures and the VERY DOWNGRADED (down to 2d level really) character models, the EC graphics ARE the CC graphics.

The one thing that keeps UO from real solid technological progress IS the CC plain and simple.

Also, the animation system IS the 2d animation system just with more frames of animation which is why graphic patches to the animation files are so damned huge... instead of smaller, more efficient polygonal models and textures that could also scale to individual system specs, they chose the inefficient stop-motion style, and when it was seen as an issue in KR, during the closed EC beta, they dumped the graphical quality out the window.

So we never got to see what UO would have been without the CC anchor on the client/server interactions in the first place, and then after the first attempt, they DOWNGRADED everything else in the process.

Only a few aspects of the UI got any real upgrade (notably in the macro system), and even then much of the current upgrades in the EC UI are coming more from the modders than the devs.

 

[HongKongCavalier]

Let the classic client stay classic.

They put just enough "classic" in the enhanced client (low-res graphics) to disappoint the new client supporters, so why risk enhancing the classic client and having that same effect?

Here's a quote the devs can learn from: "I can't give you a sure-fire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."

Watering down Kingdom Reborn wasn't the answer, and surely dressing up the classic client isn't the answer either.

 

[Uvtha]

The answer would to me have been to shoot whoever was doing item art for KR. Because they were grade A morons. The menu/icon art wasnt that great either, but it was passable.

On the other hand I thought all of the monsters were very nice, and would have been even nicer if they had a proper functionality for rehuing.

 

[chuckoatl]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

You retire CC you will retire more than 90% of your PvPers. Not that any of you care, but thats exactly what you will do.

 

[Snakeman]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

You retire CC you will retire more than 90% of your PvPers. Not that any of you care, but thats exactly what you will do.

Personally, all 5 of my accounts would be dropped, & I know 4 others with multiple accounts that I think would cx theirs too, an we are not PvP'rs. If I had to guess, I would dare bet there is not 10-15 % of all UO database using the new Enhanced Client. I've tried it many times, it's just off somehow. You bounce off everything you hit, you look like your gliding/floating over everything, half of the art for deco is bla in it, some doesn't even show up. But the one drawback many have, is it makes you literally dizzy playing it. The motion can honestly make many sick. I know it has me from playing it & a cpl others made mention of the same. You shouldn't have to "relearn" a whole new way to play a game, be it macro's or simple movement/actions. So go ahead & cut the CC & watch UO be history & nothing but a memory in 2 to 4 months time.
There are more people playing it (CC) then you realize.
I don't have an answer, but what you have now isn't it..

 

[Lord Chaos]

Considering how many play the CC, then it should really be upgraded and the devs understand that players WANT that. Develop both if you must, but upgrade the CC to the capabilities of the EC.

That would cut away a lot of cheating too, as some cheating has to be done for the CC to get to the level of the EC for some.

 

[Splup]

If CC could have bigger play screen and instant armor/weapon switching like EC that would do it rolleyes:

 

[Beer_Cayse]

The EC UI is a hindrance to me ... difficult and non-intuitive in many instances. Establishing macros in either client is a pain but the CC is faster and more intuitive IMO than the EC.

I'm with the poster who stated "dump them both and do one RIGHT from the ground up."

 

[Fink]

Enhanced should be enhanced. Classic should stay classic.

EC is basically KR's function with a CC look. What you're asking for is basically the same thing; CC's look with KR's advancements.

 

[Taylor]

The EC UI is a hindrance to me ... difficult and non-intuitive in many instances. Establishing macros in either client is a pain but the CC is faster and more intuitive IMO than the EC.

Interesting. As much as I prefer the look/feel of the CC, I am envious of the EC macroing system. I find drag/drop faster than scrolling through a bazillion spells to macro a mysticism spell.

 

[Coldren]

EC is basically KR's function with a CC look. What you're asking for is basically the same thing; CC's look with KR's advancements.

No, no, no, no.. The graphics in EC are actually of an inferior quality to CC - They are NOT the same. They are fuzzy, blurred, and there are modifications. I am not wearing a garbage can on my head when I wear a plate helm in the CC.

They need to do what Saphireena did - Take the existing 2D pixel art, upscale it, clean it up, and throw it in the pipeline to ensure it plays well with EC's engine.

Anything else is a waste of time because they've shown that NOT pursuing this option can only result in one of two things:

1) It will look like KR, which with few exceptions, was a complete remodel of the world that the immune system that is the player base provably rejected, despite outspoken critics who enjoyed the graphical revamp.

2) It will look like EC, which is actually WORSE that what previously existed because they attempted to use existing assets rather than recreate them properly. And when you apply assets developed in the previous century to a modern engine it was never designed for, at resolutions that weren't even possible back then, what you get in the end is just terrible.

Stop wasting time and effort trying to do anything else, Devs. If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. Saphireena showed you EXACTLY what you need to do. The community showed that even USERS can do it (If they have the right tools). There are no more excuses. I know it takes a lot of manual work - There's no algorithm you can generate for this (The more I think about it, the more it seems like you just put the assets from CC through Photoshop, did a resize and applied a Gaussian Blur), but if you're not going to do the work the hard way, just stop.

Or better yet, make tools for users to do the work for you - Give the community a way to submit individual assets that we clean up, you approve, then put them in as you see fit. Crowd source it.

 

[Old Man of UO]

... Stop wasting time and effort trying to do anything else, Devs. ...

I disagree. It's time to let a 13 year old 2D client politely die, so that the Developers can work on a modern game engine. The CC is ugly in my opinion, looks too much like a cartoon... but to each their own.

The Enhanced Client is now more stable than the CC, faster, can do more without add-on programs, looks better (IMHO) and fills my entire 22" monitor screen at max resolution.

Let the Classic Client die and waste no more Developers' time on it.

 

[Coldren]

I disagree. It's time to let a 13 year old 2D client politely die, so that the Developers can work on a modern game engine. The CC is ugly in my opinion, looks too much like a cartoon... but to each their own.

The Enhanced Client is now more stable than the CC, faster, can do more without add-on programs, looks better (IMHO) and fills my entire 22" monitor screen at max resolution.

Let the Classic Client die and waste no more Developers' time on it.

Then say goodbye to UO, because I guarantee the vast majority do not use EC.

I've never crashed with CC, never had items "disappear".. I don't know how you get it's more stable. It may now be AS stable as CC, but it's not MORE stable.

I'll agree that the UI is much better, and a higher resolution is always welcome.

But the fact of the matter is, you are in the minority of people who like the graphics of EC (Or KR for that matter) - If they don't like how it looks, they simply won't play it.

Saphireena showed how UO can look better, more modern, and still retain the style that everyone who is still playing is accustomed to. Do that in EC, and I'll agree that CC can die.

 

[lucitus]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

True words! But iam for they should now seriously focusing the Enhanced Client in getting finished ready, really ready, good animations, good sound, nice new effects, good graphics, clear graphics, then we all can consider about what we like to play more, what we are able to play.

UO has a wonderfull 2d rendering system but it should be avalaible on more platforms for mates who are not at home.

 

[Mapper]

I've never crashed with CC, never had items "disappear".. I don't know how you get it's more stable. It may now be AS stable as CC, but it's not MORE stable.

EC is far more stable on both my ATI Windows 7 PCs. On my XP PC I can't run the EC client to test that.

 

[Lord Chaos]

Enhanced should be enhanced. Classic should stay classic.

Enhancements should be cosmetic, not functionalitywise, thats just stupid. All it does is encouraging cheating to try and keep up with the ECs capabilities.

 

[Coldren]

EC is far more stable on both my ATI Windows 7 PCs. On my XP PC I can't run the EC client to test that.

I've never, ever, had items disappear for any reason in CC. Nor can I ever recall it ever even crashing (Different from disconnecting - actual crashing). My framerate is smooth in CC, and no matter what FPS I set EC to, it doesn't feel like it's flowing right, and I sometimes get frame skips. I've maxed every option possible.

Mind you, I'm not on an old machine. I built it last year - My graphics are nVidida 260 PCI Express.. Can't recall the memory or speed.. Not top of the line now, but certainly not outdated. Runs SC2, Dragon Age, WoW, and a host of other newer games at near max settings, smooth as silk.

And I format every few months for this reason or that, and there's nothing really on my machine but games at this point.

So I don't know what you did to yours that makes a new game run faster, more stable, or smoother than a decade old one, but it's beyond me. I don't understand how something can run better than perfectly (Which for me, EC doesn't), but YMMV.

 

[Mapper]

So I don't know what you did to yours that makes a new game run faster, more stable, or smoother than a decade old one, but it's beyond me.

I like how you think it's my fault I don't know why the 2d client runs so poorly but I don't think it's me.

 

[Coldren]

I like how you think it's my fault I don't know why the 2d client runs so poorly but I don't think it's me.

Not saying it's your fault.

But for me, and many others, classic runs perfectly, looks like UO should, and we're happy with it.

Why would we switch to something that's buggy, doesn't look or feel like UO (TRASHCAN HELMET! - Yeah, it's a big issue for me for some reason), and isn't as stable? You're kind of the odd man out on this one in that somehow, for you, CC must have issues (Read: Less stable than EC, which you state is MORE stable).

New isn't always better. If they improve EC, yes, by all means, get rid of CC. But its' a ways off from that point. It doesn't look, feel, or function as good to some of us as CC does.

 

[Raina]

They need to just make the EC so that it can look/feel/run exactly as the Classic Client does... then allow people to make changes to how they prefer to play. Only way it stands a chance.

~Rai

 

[Old Man of UO]

They need to just make the EC so that it can look/feel/run exactly as the Classic Client does... then allow people to make changes to how they prefer to play. Only way it stands a chance.

~Rai

I don't really care that much about the EC graphics, although I do think it looks better than the CC cartoons. What I really care about is that it runs smoother, more stable, fills my whole screen, and makes great macros all by itself rather than using a program that has been abandoned and won't be upgraded.

Now, if we could just get EA/Mythic to upgrade their map system to work as well as UOCartographer.

 

[Harlequin]

If CC could have bigger play screen and instant armor/weapon switching like EC that would do it rolleyes:

/signed

For the naysayers, they added the new targeting system and new crafting options to the CC as well. So it's not out of the question.

The devs have said time and again that they have no intention to stop supporting the CC.

 

[Fink]

Enhancements should be cosmetic, not functionalitywise, thats just stupid. All it does is encouraging cheating to try and keep up with the ECs capabilities.

So.. now we want only cosmetic changes to the EC.. new graphics being the part to which CC players object.. we want CC to work like the EC.. because we don't want Enhanced to be enhanced.. but we don't want Classic to remain classic either.. so we want CC to change for the better.. but not so much that it looks or behaves differently in any way.. we want to attract new players with our sense of nostalgia.. and not scare off veterans with innovation.. we don't want a powerful, flexible advanced new client because that would somehow encourage people to use the old client plus cheats to keep up with the freely available new client.. we want hand-drawn high resolution 2D sprites that look just like the low res 3D-rendered Classic sprites.. yet we need to support 1990's computers so we'll have to downgrade the sprites to normal size.. but somehow, something has to be done to draw in new players while we're running in circles trying to please the existing customer base instead.

Is that about right or am I oversimplifying it?

 

[Lord Chaos]

So.. now we want only cosmetic changes to the EC.. new graphics being the part to which CC players object..

Yes, the graphics is what represents the game we fell in love with. The UI has changed numerous times over the years, so it changing is not as big a biggie as look and feel.

we want CC to work like the EC

More like we have to want it or we'll racing cars with moped engines against ferrari engines.

because we don't want Enhanced to be enhanced

Its supposedly enhanced in graphics. So there you go. Making it advanced in functionality is stupid as it simply forces people.

but we don't want Classic to remain classic either

UI-wise the CC isn't true classic, it has changed more than once. But graphicswise its the game we fell in love with and love.

so we want CC to change for the better.. but not so much that it looks or behaves differently in any way

No, you got it total wrong. We want the two clients to be EQUAL in capabilities.

Its like someone being allowed to bring a gun to a sword fight, then soon people will have to switch to guns to keep up, even if they love swords.

we want to attract new players with our sense of nostalgia.. and not scare off veterans with innovation

The UI isn't about nostaligia, it has changed often.

we don't want a powerful, flexible advanced new client because

BECAUSE ITS HORRIBLY UGLY AND NOT THE UO WE FELL IN LOVE WITH

Jeez, not the sharpest crayon in the box.

that would somehow encourage people to use the old client plus cheats to keep up with the freely available new client

somehow? Again, like bringing a gun to a sword fight, eventually it will encourage other people to bring guns too or lose.

we want hand-drawn high resolution 2D sprites that look just like the low res ones.. yet we need to support 1990's computers so we'll have to downgrade the sprites to normal size.. but somehow, something has to be done.

What are you on about, the issue with sprites is not one of 1990s computers, but one of EA/Mythic not wanting to devote any time or resources to it.

Is that about right or am I oversimplifying it?

No, you're simply plain off the mark by miles and miles.

 

[Coldren]

Is that about right or am I oversimplifying it?

In my opinion, You're doing more than simplifying, you're perverting the stance like a politician.

I want a client, LIKE EC, that has the modern amenities like the macro system, hotbars, re-sizable bags, and LUA customization options - Features games developed this century have. EC has this potential, if they make it a bit less buggy. Stability is a key issue, and for many who try EC, it's just not there.

But what I DON'T want is the game to look the way KR did - That world looked nothing like UO. It completely lost the sense and feel of the UO world. The resolution was there, the style wasn't.

Repeating myself, put Saphireena's graphics in the EC client, and you will have a MUCH higher adoption rate. It's higher resolution, looks like UO, and looks like something you can market.

Now if they can only get the one or two things that UOAssist has into the UI (Like bag sorting and the ability to export a list of items, and while they KINDA have it, but don't exactly, Use Item Type), I'd be golden.

 

[Harlequin]

Enhancements should be cosmetic, not functionalitywise, thats just stupid. All it does is encouraging cheating to try and keep up with the ECs capabilities.

So.. now we want only cosmetic changes to the EC.. new graphics being the part to which CC players object.. we want CC to work like the EC.. because we don't want Enhanced to be enhanced.. but we don't want Classic to remain classic either.. so we want CC to change for the better.. but not so much that it looks or behaves differently in any way.. we want to attract new players with our sense of nostalgia.. and not scare off veterans with innovation.. we don't want a powerful, flexible advanced new client because that would somehow encourage people to use the old client plus cheats to keep up with the freely available new client.. we want hand-drawn high resolution 2D sprites that look just like the low res 3D-rendered Classic sprites.. yet we need to support 1990's computers so we'll have to downgrade the sprites to normal size.. but somehow, something has to be done to draw in new players while we're running in circles trying to please the existing customer base instead.

Is that about right or am I oversimplifying it?

Seems like a reasonable thing to expect



LC got me confused in a different thread too. However for this, I think he means improved functionality should be applied to both clients. But only the EC should have cosmetic enhancements like the nifty spell effects plus 3D graphics.

While some of the things are not possible, like mods that allow players to show item intensities, other things like fast weapon/armour switching might be possible, since they really did add in weapon switching (via the equip last macro).

They were others like the targeting systems and crafting menu that were added to CC as I mentioned earlier.

Edit: Late again

 

[Tanivar]

The old client needs to be retired and the new EC needs to be taken out of Beta and actually "finished". Far more work needs done with the EC and they need to quit wasting all the time and resource updating 2 clients and just focus on one client and put some serious effort into it.

Then they should focus on the CC. I suspect the reason they are not finishing the EC and are putting time into the apparently harder to modify CC is because their system reports have told them most players still access the game system via the Classic Client.

I use both clients when I want both my accounts characters in the game. One using the CC, the other the EC. Outside of a mess like Luna they run about the same other than with a flying gargoyle. The CC wins without a shadow of doubt. I've sized them to run side by side on my new LCD monitor and seeing them side by side and using one, then the other, as the active window, the EC is a joke in comparison. If you have a wide screen monitor & two accounts, try it. Side by side, it's no contest.

 

[Beer_Cayse]

I use the "make 'n' items" lots of times in the CC. It's damn-all handy to have and I've done away with my macros for 'n' make last.

 

[Sergul'zan_SP]

Personally, all 5 of my accounts would be dropped, & I know 4 others with multiple accounts that I think would cx theirs too, an we are not PvP'rs. If I had to guess, I would dare bet there is not 10-15 % of all UO database using the new Enhanced Client. I've tried it many times, it's just off somehow. You bounce off everything you hit, you look like your gliding/floating over everything, half of the art for deco is bla in it, some doesn't even show up. But the one drawback many have, is it makes you literally dizzy playing it. The motion can honestly make many sick. I know it has me from playing it & a cpl others made mention of the same. You shouldn't have to "relearn" a whole new way to play a game, be it macro's or simple movement/actions. So go ahead & cut the CC & watch UO be history & nothing but a memory in 2 to 4 months time.
There are more people playing it (CC) then you realize.
I don't have an answer, but what you have now isn't it..

Yeah, the glide movement is incredibly annoying. At least the classic client has a sense of movement when you take a step. IMO the people the new client might appeal to are the people coming from other games...but how are the many broken game systems going to attract new players? how about the horrible experience of logging in as a new player and realizing you have at least 6 months before you can do anything worthwhile in game (especially if you're a casual player).

While clients get a lot of attention, the underlying game needs far more before graphics will do anything for it.

 

[lucitus]

Then they should focus on the CC. I suspect the reason they are not finishing the EC and are putting time into the apparently harder to modify CC is because their system reports have told them most players still access the game system via the Classic Client.

I use both clients when I want both my accounts characters in the game. One using the CC, the other the EC. Outside of a mess like Luna they run about the same other than with a flying gargoyle. The CC wins without a shadow of doubt. I've sized them to run side by side on my new LCD monitor and seeing them side by side and using one, then the other, as the active window, the EC is a joke in comparison. If you have a wide screen monitor & two accounts, try it. Side by side, it's no contest.

Yeah but what kind of players? Are this the players of the future? No, has the classic client a future no! Everything comes to an end also the classic client. There are no new players, who really want to playing with it! Of course there are also no players want to play with the same ugly Enhanced Client yes!

So i dont know what you want? If you want enhanced gameplay play the Enhanced Client, if you want classic UO play the 2d client? What do you want? An Enhanced Client Interface in the 2d client? Not possible how?

You want a 2d Enhanced client, but for what? The same playerbase as before? stupid!

No you need a good looking client, stable, enhanced with overall new graphics and you need it finished, like Star Craft and Star Craft 2, exactly the same, but we know how much dollars this cost. So i see no chance here, that anything is going to be changed in the near future.

 

[Evlar]

*raises hand*

erm... I like "classic" (pre-AoS) game play, but I've always preferred the UI improvements of the newer clients over the years.

Is that wrong?

The client is more of a means to an end as far as I'm concerned. If the UI improves, then I like it. Graphically I'm not too worried, so long as the game play remains of a sufficient quality and major game play mechanics aren't drastically altered.

Personally, I think that it's fair to say the CC has held this game back from reaching anything like its true potential.

It seems like the majority of subscribers prefer the classic client. It's a comfort zone that none of the three (or two-and-a-half) newer clients have been able to sufficiently replace.

From the perspective of the developers though, try to imagine the time it takes to manage and maintain two clients, for one game. Especially one they neither created and obviously struggle to understand certain intricacies of. It's likely too late in the day to drop the CC completely, at the risk of losing so many who prefer it. The CC is never going to carry the game forward though. Never. It's a very large ball and chain for any of the development teams to work with.

 

[Evlar]

On another note, can anyone tell me why the Third Dawn client was eventually dropped?

I thought it was a step in the right direction at the time. Was it (again) preference for the classic client, or something else? I don't recall ever having any issues whatsoever with the Third Dawn client, no crashes or performance issues. I may have read some of the reasons many moons ago, but at the moment any reasons escape me.

Any links to old dev or player comments would provide me with some interesting reading

 

[Picus at the office]

I was one of the people that Beta tested the EC and I just plain like the CC better. It's old, tested, proven and well worn just like I am.

There are few players in the game who are of the age where brightlights are better than good content but I sometimes wonder if the Dev team is of the same mixture.

 

[Lord Chaos]

If I wanted new and "shiny", then I would have gone to other games.

I like UO for the old feel of the world, the familiarity.

 

[Tanivar]

how about the horrible experience of logging in as a new player and realizing you have at least 6 months before you can do anything worthwhile in game (especially if you're a casual player).

Do you mean UO?! <laugh> Come on! You can go out with zero skills and find worthwhile (for a new player or an old player making a new character) things to do. The game is adventuring. For a new player thats mongbats to trolls & ettins. That's going out and exploring a world you've never seen before or haven't seen in years. It's learning how to survive in a new land and doing so.

I've been training up a near complete Healing character, a Rogue, a Gargoyle, and just recently, a Thunter turned full bard. None of them has failed to be fun. There is a world out there set up for players to have things to do whether they have zero skill or 120 skill. You can have fun at any skill level, unless you only consider worthwhile play to be fullbore PvP, or hunting Peerless monsters.

UO is a sandbox game not hampered by being level-based.

Grab a new character and go out and play in the sand. It can be fun.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I like UO for the old feel of the world, the familiarity.

You're in the WRONG genre of games if you want "familiarity" at all costs.

Persistent worlds and MMOGs by their very nature CONSTANTLY CHANGE which includes updating the client to take advantage of new technology and interface ideals.

Ideally, new client and server structure should be in place about every 5 years to take advantage of new technology and interface improvements, and really it should have simply been patched in and older clients automatically RETIRED.

It's really a shame to think of what the SA expansion COULD have been in it's original vision, also how about the pirate expansion that was ditched... both due to the ball and chain known as the 2d client.

 

[Lady CaT]

The day the classic client ends is coincidentally the same day I dump years worth of pixels into the nearest trash box, cancel all my accounts, and send the Electronic Arts folder to the recycle bin. So I vote to keep the classic client.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I have to admit I prefer the classic client, and the reason is 'clarity'. I'm with Coldren. It would be nice to have updates that were still recogniseable and crisp. My '14yr old tomboy' char just doesn't look right.

 

[Sneaky Que]

I think it is nothing short of disgraceful that we (2d users) have to pay extra money to a 3rd party company in order to get the same level of functionality that KR/SA client users get for free.

UO Assist abilities such as binding specific items to macros (pot macros etc) that are included free in the SA client should be made available free as part of the 2d client as well. We should not have to pay extra money to another company just because EA is too lazy to provide equality for all it's subscribers.

 

[Fat Lip]

I've been giving the EC a fair shake since I came back, but I don't like it; I prefer the classic client. The classic client has been neglected for a while now and it would be cool if it got some more attention.

For the Classic Client:

- Add a Macro System similar to EC.

- Mounted Combat Animations for 2-handed weapons: instead of the wrestling punch that is currently how someone attacks with 99% of the 2-handed weapons while sitting on a mount.

- Terrain Textures: fix the block marks on the terrain. If you can't find them all, ask the players to walk around with a sextant and find the things, just be willing to fix them please.

- Option for real spell names vs. words of power w/o using uoassist.

There are a few more in my head, but these are all I've got time for right now.

 

[Lord Chaos]

You're in the WRONG genre of games if you want "familiarity" at all costs.

Persistent worlds and MMOGs by their very nature CONSTANTLY CHANGE which includes updating the client to take advantage of new technology and interface ideals.

Those are some graphics upgrades and UI upgrades, no sweeping changes. WoW still looks like WoW, Lineage 2 still looks like Lineage 2, Lineage 1 still looks like Lineage 1.

If I wanted a completely different game, then I'd play a completely different game.

Ideally, new client and server structure should be in place about every 5 years to take advantage of new technology and interface improvements, and really it should have simply been patched in and older clients automatically RETIRED.

Those kind of changes usually = a sequel, like Guild Wars 2, Lineage 2, etc.

It's really a shame to think of what the SA expansion COULD have been in it's original vision, also how about the pirate expansion that was ditched... both due to the ball and chain known as the 2d client.

Neither is because of the CC, especially not the pirate changes, its a limitation of the game itself, not the clients.

 

[Coldren]

You're in the WRONG genre of games if you want "familiarity" at all costs.

I'd like to see a game that has completely altered it's look and feel while running. I don't me UPGRADED, like EVE did, or WoW did by adding shadow and lighting effects.. I don't mean improved player character models like DAoC did (And they were DEFINITE improvements). I mean COMPLETELY CHANGED the way EVERYTHING looked. Every monster, tile, texture, and effect.

Actually, didn't EQ2 offer some kind of anime pack, or style thing? It was completely optional, if I recall - gave the characters a different look. But as far as I know, they're the only ones who did, and they made it optional.

Look, I know you and a few others were totally in love with the KR style, and I feel for you. I've always been in favor of them giving you a KR art option, and I'll always empathize with the fact that they took away something you liked (Like the UO3D users). But the fact of the matter is, bugs or client/server architecture aside, it was such a drastic, jarring difference in style and appearance that the player base actively rejected it, and it did NOTHING to bring in new players.

Persistent worlds and MMOGs by their very nature CONSTANTLY CHANGE which includes updating the client to take advantage of new technology and interface ideals.

Ideally, new client and server structure should be in place about every 5 years to take advantage of new technology and interface improvements, and really it should have simply been patched in and older clients automatically RETIRED.

Id like to know one game that changed it's sever and client technology the way you described and lived. Again, I'm not talking about incremental improvements, I mean a complete rewrite. From flat file to relational database, like Oracle. From one server architecture to another, like Windows to Linux. From one client rendering engine to an other, like Gamebryo to Unreal.

DAoC was the closest thing that I'm aware of. It eventually phased out older clients, but it only could do this because they looked and felt almost IDENTICAL, improved, not different. And even then, every time, it used Gamebryo if I recall correctly. I also think AC was going to attempt this at some point, but I don't think that ever got completed.

UO is the first to really attempt this. And this isn't an argument saying improvements shouldn't be made - They absolutely should, especially on the server/networking side, and especially with a game over a decade old. And that, in and of it self, is a major, major undertaking. Stuff behind the scenes, people only notice if it performs worse or brings about new bugs.

But when it comes to the CLIENT, the way the USER interacts with the game world, you have to tread very, very carefully. Improvements like the maps, hotbars, macros, backpacks, targeting, LUA mods, these are all very welcome things. And a better resolution is great!

But man, KR looked like NOTHING like UO, and THAT, more than anything is what prevented it's adoption. EC has already enjoyed better success because it looks so similar to the classic style. Even I find myself using it far more than I did KR (Which, by the way, is partly due to your Copper Enhanced mod.. That's just awesome looking, and so very useful). If they clean it up, add the crispness and clarity we all look for that keep in the classic style (Saphireena), change the god-awful paper dolls, and work out some bugs, you probably could eventually kill the classic. Eventually. But not yet.

AND FIX MY DAMN TRASH-CAN HEAD!

 

[Lord Frodo]

I've been giving the EC a fair shake since I came back, but I don't like it; I prefer the classic client. The classic client has been neglected for a while now and it would be cool if it got some more attention.

For the Classic Client:

- Add a Macro System similar to EC.

- Mounted Combat Animations for 2-handed weapons: instead of the wrestling punch that is currently how someone attacks with 99% of the 2-handed weapons while sitting on a mount.

- Terrain Textures: fix the block marks on the terrain. If you can't find them all, ask the players to walk around with a sextant and find the things, just be willing to fix them please.

- Option for real spell names vs. words of power w/o using uoassist.

There are a few more in my head, but these are all I've got time for right now.

Or for the EC let us pick the graphics we want to use CC/EC/KR might be a better way to go. Functionality of the new client with CC/EC/KR graphics.

 

[Lord Chaos]

They should simply have made UO2 if they wanted to make a better client and better graphics.