Year End Approaching...No Classic Shard

[RaDian FlGith]

That is an awful lot of backpedaling you are doing

You stated pretty clearly that "people have been asking for a Classic Shard since Ren, and that Siege was birthed out of that request".

Morgana, please go re-reread both my original post, the post he quoted, the post you quoted, and point to me where the bloody hell you see the comma and the word "and" that you've just inserted into there.

It's NOT at all what I said, but then, from someone who can't keep track of what she's said, I'm not surprised you're having difficulty determining what other people have said.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

It's obvious Radian was wrong about Seige, he should admit it.

Look, revisionist history can spin it any way they want to. They were two different sentences both implying the same thing: People have been asking for a "classic shard" since almost the moment that they started patching in rules changes.

People wanted a shard where housing wasn't secure.
People wanted a shard where you couldn't lock stuff down in houses.
People wanted a shard where pre-casting existed (back after they'd "removed" it, but before Adrick and Evocare revealed that it had been possible for quite some time and were surprised no one knew about it).
People wanted a shard after UO:T2A was released.
People wanted a shard after UO:R was released.
People wanted a shard after UO:AoS was released.

But in each of these cases, it was a vocal minority.

As for Siege Perilous, I personally made no connection to Trammel and Siege Perilous, and have already clarified the meaning -- though apparently to some it makes no sense. Fact remains, Siege Perilous was, indeed, born of a request for a more classic play experience -- and while that's NOT what was provided, that doesn't change that the clamoring for it in the first place is what produced it.

Classic experience, for those lost on it, doesn't equate to "without Trammel." Trammel is one instance of classic play. A LOT of things have changed, and had already changed before Renaissance was even released.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

On to the other stuff...

Those are legit concerns. I feel UO is at the end of its life cycle. Anyone that can't see that is in denial. It doesn't mean it's a dead game, only that it can't draw new or returning customers faster then it loses subsciptions. This shouldn't come as a surprise for a 14 year old game, that has done a complete 180 from what it was originally. A classic shard could bring in some much needed subs. It could also be a failure. I don't have a crystal ball, but it doesn't take genius to read between the lines. This game needs subs.

Well, if that's truly the definition for end of life cycle we're using, UO's been at the end of it since about 2005. We can point at things like UO:KR, UO:ML, UO:SA, UO:HS, and the Enhanced Client and see that they've been trying to keep UO afloat, but that doesn't change that the games numbers have been dwindling for years, not increasing.

However, to me -- and we're welcome to debate it -- end of life cycle means the game goes on life support only, we get no new updates, no new content, and no one tries to bring anything more into the game. I don't think we're at that point, and I think it'll be a few more years before we are. I don't think we'll see UO's 25th anniversary, but I think we'll see beyond its 15th.

One thing I know for sure, UO can't compete anymore with new games and no amount of advertising will matter if they are going against WoW and try to clone it. WoW does non-con PvP and item based gaming better than anyone. UO will bleed subs until it dies of attrition.

I completely agree with you here, and it's been one of my biggest arguments against how they dressed up the EC. Cloning WoW's interface does nothing but dilute the UO gaming experience. I mean, there are things the EC does better, but when I go looking for a spear in my backpack and have to squint for a toothpick, it fails in so many others.

A few times I heard WoW players ask for a classic shard. The differnce is it was a much smaller minority then those who ask for a UO classic shard. WoW has 11 million subs to UO's 100,000. UO has .009% of the subs as WoW. Raidian you really should leave WoW out of your classic UO comparisions.

Percentage wise, which is far more significant than the number of people vs. the number of people compared directly, I think you'd see it's about the same percentage-base. Of course, neither of us has any concrete numbers for WoW or for UO, so it's all theoretical numbers anyway. The point I was making wasn't about the number of people that were asking for it, only on the wisdom of not trying to roll the clock back and support two completely incompatible rulesets. The reason WoW gets away with PvE and PvP servers is because the only difference between the two of them is whether or not the "contested zones" flag you as PvP+ or not. That's a pretty easy flag for them to program around.

When you start talking about rolling the clock back to whatever ruleset you're looking at, it does take development time, and a significant amount of it. Plus, people won't just want that one time rollback -- which again, is perfectly understandable.

Look, long story short, EA should -- if they're serious about it at all -- do what they did with that silly UO:Kingdoms web game. Hand that particular branch of the IP off to another team and say, "Here, find a way to please that demographic." But as I've said elsewhere, EA has a historically bad track record with its MMOs. I'm not sure they have the wherewithal, much less the ability, to handle it properly. Even if they handed it to a new team, I suspect what would be put out would be a distinct disappointment to those looking forward to it partly because EA never understood UO's success, and partly because everyone's ideal about "classic" is just a bit different, and I don't think anything would ever come close enough.

 

[Uriah Heep]

If I may interrupt the OT argument about semantics...

I want to throw a few items and thought out there for yall to flame at

While I am mostly neutral on the idea of a classic shard, or started off that way, I've kinda swayed to the pro classic side. I mean, why not? A shard devoted to one playstyle, and a playstyle loved by those who play it.
But, I fear it will just be like the Fel facet is on most shards right now, mostly empty, and no one there except the pvp'ers running around looking for each other, with no "fresh blood" or innocent bystanders to play with.

Classic shard, probably wont do a lot, I don't think. See, the reason it worked in the old days, was because everyone was on one ruleset...there was good, and there was evil. The good aligned and neutral *had* to be on the same shard with the "bad guys". So the interplay might have been forced, but it existed.
You get pk'd. you run to brit bank and holler about it, peeps would take off hunting
And when I played, about the only places that were really off limits were the crossroads, yew gate area (especially behind Empath, and the dungeon of the day>. Seems they always randomly just picked a dungeon to hang out in LOL.
But the interplay was still there, blue vs red, good vs evil, there were large pk hunting guilds that we helped outfit from time to time, it was a playstyle =)

But what I see happening now, with a classic shard, is that it will end up being the same as Fel is today. See, if its a new shard, only peeps that are gonna go to it are the pvp'ers themselves. The interplay we are looking for won't exist nor occur...there will be no sheep, only wolves. And I say that with no animosity, it's just what I personally foresee. And so, if thats to be the case, might as well just keep what we have and give the pvp'ers all a free shard xfer token, so they can all play together on one shard's version of fel. Be a lot cheaper, and take a lot less dev time

To capture what was, and to have what most of you are truly envisioning a "classic shard" to be, you will have, I repeat, Have to remove the trammel facet to from the shards, and force the interplay to happen, and happen spontaneously again.

Would I personally go? I'd probably create a char to just watch and see what happens. But to play fulltime? nah. In the end, it will be the same as Fel is on >shardname here< right now.
All reds, feeding on each other, and growing bored cause there is no one new coming along to play with.

Just my rambling thoughts...

 

[AesSedai]

Would I personally go? I'd probably create a char to just watch and see what happens. But to play fulltime? nah. In the end, it will be the same as Fel is on >shardname here< right now.
All reds, feeding on each other, and growing bored cause there is no one new coming along to play with...

- I do and have completely agreed with this; aye, I have applied this exact logical deduction multiple times over the years when I've tried to honestly determine whether this would be of benefit to UO's overall wellbeing.

So, why again was it that you would be for UO's already limited resources being spread thinner.. why would you be for adding a 'Classic Shard'?

I get that it would be fun for some for awhile; that is a foregone conclusion.. but by following your logic, logic I have used/shared myself, it just does not make sense to me that this would benefit UO (without significant changes -like an addition that was considered too resource intensive at the time that some solution had to be implemented, and Trammel was created, which was at a time when UO's resources were noticably more significant..).

 

[Babble]

Why is a classic shard a pvp shard?

i mean I understand the freeshards which alo remove statloss and end in fulltime pvp, but why would a proper programmed classic shard just be a pvp shard?

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It's NOT at all what I said, but then, from someone who can't keep track of what she's said, I'm not surprised you're having difficulty determining what other people have said.

Hehehe...that's it...deflect! Deflect! Maybe if you insult me, people will forget your blunder.

Not likely.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

But what I see happening now, with a classic shard, is that it will end up being the same as Fel is today. See, if its a new shard, only peeps that are gonna go to it are the pvp'ers themselves. The interplay we are looking for won't exist nor occur...there will be no sheep, only wolves.

That is a distinct possibility. I think the actual outcome of it would depend on a few things...primarily, how many people in UO are fed up with AoS. That is the reason I have been so against a Trammel based Classic Shard in addition to a real Classic Shard. If both are offered, it will certainly mean the failure of the pure Classic Shard.

If you have been keeping up with my rants on the subject, you will likely know that probably a year or more ago, I reached the same conclusion: That UO as it was back then cannot exist as long as there are other options. However, after reading the posts and PMs and emails of former and current players that all share the same desire, UO without AoS, I started to realize that if a Classic Shard was created, and it was only one shard...and that shard had only the Fel (original) ruleset, that the players that are tired of AoS, the borked up economy, ever escalating monsters/gear, neon colors, ridable dogs, robots, ninjas, sunglasses, guns...all things non-Ultima...might actually be willing to deal with open PvP in order to get away from these things.

That, to me, really is the big question mark as to whether a Classic Shard would survive long term. For a Classic Shard to retain, not attract, players...it will have to have a mixed population of sheep, wolves, crafters, rp'ers, etc. So it really does come down to which we malcontents hate worse...AoS, or Trammel. If EA offers the shard with a lose one, lose the other approach, and the populace decides that dealing with difficulty and risk is not worth seeing UO without AoS, then the shard is shunk...it will be exactly as several of the more vocal anti-classic shard posters have said. It will be empty, a tank full of sharks, just like Fel or Siege as far as population goes. But, as I said, I changed my mind...I think that there are enough players out there that would want a fresh start away from all the ridiculousness and itemization that a shard like this could exist and thrive in the long term.

 

[Uriah Heep]

- I do and have completely agreed with this; aye, I have applied this exact logical deduction multiple times over the years when I've tried to honestly determine whether this would be of benefit to UO's overall wellbeing.

So, why again was it that you would be for UO's already limited resources being spread thinner.. why would you be for adding a 'Classic Shard'?

I get that it would be fun for some for awhile; that is a foregone conclusion.. but by following your logic, logic I have used/shared myself, it just does not make sense to me that this would benefit UO (without significant changes -like an addition that was considered too resource intensive at the time that some solution had to be implemented, and Trammel was created, which was at a time when UO's resources were noticably more significant..).

No logic in my mind AesSedai *grins*
But honestly, it's a grab at straws to bring some back, and to keep some that are not at all happy with today's UO. Fun for a while? maybe. Fun for a long time? Possibly. No AoS, none of the jacked up arties today, and none of the mobs with 10kazillion hitpoints...that does sound nice indeed. My char would be a crafter, an honest crafter working at the forge in NW Brit, and take it from there.
Depends on how many good aligned players go, and stay, as to the success of the shard, if it happens. It would be a good experiment anyway, to say the least.
As for resources, I don't know what they have, that's always kept so secretive who knows for sure? The problem I fear is they might just say yes to it, then half bake it, like they did the Enhanced Client, and most everything else over the last few years. And then when it fails, holler "We told ya so!" This idea was a bust!and we knew it wouldnt work!
*shakes head*

And the other point, I didnt mean to make it sound like onlly PvP'ers would go. But that will be one of the predominant playstyles there, I believe. And it seems that so many people are worried about maybe dying that they won't even give4 it a try. I'll be straight up here, I'm no pvp'er, said that numbers of times. But I don't mind dying *shrugs*
LOL I get killed in fel by people I call friend...it's their thing, it's what they do.
People take it way too personally when they get attacked, it's actually no different than an ogre or AW targetting you, it's just what they do.

But imagine a setting where there was player justice, where, like in the old days, you set up a player run town...and if griefers showed up, the towns guild could actuallly run em out?!?! The RP possibilities are fantastic! Land claims, wars, trade caravans that actually work.
Unbonded pets, when you kill the tamer, and work on his pets, they are gone. He can't just log out somewhere and back in, and have a host of ghosts pets waiting on him to lay a bandage on em and get right back into battle. He has to work for em again. I'd settle for the tradeoff being no slots. Most can't control many anyway. No slots for mages, your mana determines how many summoned followers you have
And there's no artificial MR like now.

Ahh I rant and digress, All of you have a Merry Christmas, or Happy Festivus, or whatever each of you recognizes. *waves*
Enjoy the holidays!

 

[hen]

If we get a classic shard that mirrors a certain time-period of UO, won't people get bored of it pretty quickly if it has no new content or expansions to look forward to?

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Hehehe...that's it...deflect! Deflect! Maybe if you insult me, people will forget your blunder.

Not likely.

The irony, of course, is that I'm deflecting nothing, simply pointing out that two sentences, separated by a period, are not the same thing as two sentences combined with a comma and a conjunction.

Oh, and the other irony: You're waving your hands saying, "Look at him, look at him, he said this and pay attention, he's back-pedaling about having said something that anyone with half a microbe of a brain can see that he didn't actually say in the manner that I've quoted him as having said it in," while, in fact, you, yourself have done a fantastic job of trying to obfuscate the fact that you said one thing and now completely and totally say you meant something else.

*shrug*

Nice try, but then, that's the kind of half-hearted debate we've come to love you for.

 

[Skrag]

I hate to crap on the doomsayers, but the fact that UO still has content being actively developed and an actual Live Events staff is pretty staggering for a game this old.

Dark Age of Camelot hasn't had an expansion/booster/anything since 2006. Star Wars Galaxies hasn't had an expansion since 2005 and has closed half it's servers. Asheron's Call hasn't had one since 2005 either and has dwindled to 10k players or less.

Everquest is still doing okay with regular downloadable expansions. Anarchy Online released a booster in 2009.

Among it's contemporaries in the MMO old folks home, UO is in good health. All of these games I mentioned, even the ones with few players, closed shards, and no new content, are still going.

World of Warcraft with their billions of dollars have been telling "classic server" people to STFU for years. It has nothing to do with anything.

Who am I kidding though? UO could close in 2050 and some elderly ex-PK would stagger up with a cane and go "Ha, it's all because they added Trammel half a century ago!"

 

[Naisikras]

If we get a classic shard that mirrors a certain time-period of UO, won't people get bored of it pretty quickly if it has no new content or expansions to look forward to?

No, and that's the beauty of the classic shard. Community was so important there was enough to do as is. I'm a medicore PvPer and do so occasionally, and my first character on a classic shard would be a miner/smith with no intentions to pvp at first at all.

 

[canary]

All I'm seeing is four pages of people playing 'Feed The Troll' with Morgana.

STOP FEEDING HER. Her appetite for trolling obviously rivals that of Godzilla's for Tokyo.

You cannot argue logic with her because she doesn't understand it. You can't throw facts at her because she knows none to base solid arguments against. Just. Not. Worth. It.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

All I'm seeing is four pages of people playing 'Feed The Troll' with Morgana.

STOP FEEDING HER. Her appetite for trolling obviously rivals that of Godzilla's for Tokyo.

You cannot argue logic with her because she doesn't understand it. You can't throw facts at her because she knows none to base solid arguments against. Just. Not. Worth. It.

Thanks for the thread bump! I appreciate the support

...and have a wonderful holiday!

 

[Hanokh1967]

All I'm seeing is four pages of people playing 'Feed The Troll' with Morgana.

STOP FEEDING HER. Her appetite for trolling obviously rivals that of Godzilla's for Tokyo.

You cannot argue logic with her because she doesn't understand it. You can't throw facts at her because she knows none to base solid arguments against. Just. Not. Worth. It.

Canary, in the past 15 days you have felt the need to personally attack Morgana 3 times on these forums. Perhaps you're the one with the problem?

It is understood that you have a difference opinion with those of us that support a classic shard. You have made your point. Move on. Leave her alone. It is kind of creepy.

 

[canary]

Canary, in the past 15 days you have felt the need to personally attack Morgana 3 times on these forums. Perhaps you're the one with the problem?

It is understood that you have a difference opinion with those of us that support a classic shard. You have made your point. Move on. Leave her alone. It is kind of creepy.

No, creepy is when multiple posters use logic and facts to base concrete notions and the responses from posters like Morgana are 'You are deflecting things!', 'You live in your mother's basement!' and 'That's not what I said!'.

I am not for or against a classic shard. I am against posters that have arguments they cannot back up and resort to obtuse tactics to prove a point they can't.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

No, creepy is when multiple posters use logic and facts to base concrete notions and the responses from posters like Morgana are 'You are deflecting things!', 'You live in your mother's basement!' and 'That's not what I said!'.

I am not for or against a classic shard. I am against posters that have arguments they cannot back up and resort to obtuse tactics to prove a point they can't.

Aww you are so sweet. Thanks again for the thread bump!

 

[Petra Fyde]

Locked pending further input from Cal.