UOHerald Playguide - still no progress?

[Aurelius]

Just checked again today, and many sections are still missing, resulting in messages like this (I bolded the bits that really are getting annoying) :

Ultima Online : Playguide

Greetings,

We have just recently completed a major overhaul to the Herald's back end content management system. Due to this we're busily working to re-populate all of the content within the play guides, until that time we apologize for this brief interruption and check back soon - thank you!

Last Updated: 30 Sep 2010 17:18:08 EST

Skills, factions, history, miscellaneous (and probably more 'links') - all get you back to that message. Nine months isn't a 'brief interruption', has work on this been abandoned?

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Their web guy is too busy working on DAoC because their subscription base is twice as large as UO's.

Okay, I don't really know that, but hey, there's got to be a logical reason for leaving the UO site in its usual state of disarray.

Ah, hell, who'm I kidding? They haven't done regular updates to that thing since about 2002. Why is anyone shocked?

 

[Kellgory]

They should just change the message to say "Go look on Stratics or UOGuide, the people there actually play the game and know it better than we do."

 

[Lord Frodo]

They should just change the message to say "Go look on Stratics or UOGuide, the people there actually play the game and know it better than we do."

 

[Petra Fyde]

History is np, we have the archives. UO Herald archive! - Ultima Online Stratics TGN.TV - Get more views!

You can find the link under 'official uo info' at the top of the right hand menu on UO Stratics - News - Main

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Their web guy is too busy working on DAoC because their subscription base is twice as large as UO's.

Okay, I don't really know that, but hey, there's got to be a logical reason for leaving the UO site in its usual state of disarray.

Ah, hell, who'm I kidding? They haven't done regular updates to that thing since about 2002. Why is anyone shocked?

Not the focus of your post, but a quick aside/tangent.

The last information we have puts UO and DAoC roughly even, about 50,000 each.

The information is sketchy at best. It was responses to a blog post about WHO, wherein a disgruntled WHO employee talked about the problems and said something like "I bet UO and DAoC have more subscriptions than we do."

Another, not as disgruntled WHO person popped on to say WHO had about 100k, and DAoC and UO 50k each.

To me at least, this all felt at least plausible.

We'll never, ever know for sure.

As a quick aside to the aside....For games like UO and DAoC, older and not up to modern standards? 50k to me sounds like 'doing well.' Whereas for WHO, EA's first serious attempt at a WoW-killer, 100k sounds like abject failure.

-Galen's player

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

My guess has always been that UO's so complicated and has been accumulated rather than planned to such a degree that the teams keep saying "**** it" and giving up plans for the Playguide.

While understandable, I think this is a strategic error on their part.

I have long-argued that UO needs a new player strategy that is focused not on great numbers of new players but rather on retaining the few new players we get.

A key part of that, to my mind, is an official Playguide on the official site that at least can be a good starting point for information. Links out to the UO Guide and Stratics are fine but the official site should be a good starting point.

And it hasn't even been that in....What, 5 years? 7 years? 8 years?

-Galen's player

 

[Aurelius]

History is np

Thanks, Petra, that solves part of it - it's pretty embarassing though, I've run into a couple of totally new players in the last weeks, and both were wanting to know where to read up, particularly on skills. Of course I told them about Stratics, and UOGuide, but there's no good answer when someone asks why doesn't the section on the games own webpage actually work

 

[Aurelius]

My guess has always been that UO's so complicated and has been accumulated rather than planned to such a degree that the teams keep saying "**** it" and giving up plans for the Playguide.

Perfectly possible Galen - but in that case, it's wrong to leave links on the website that effectively tell the readers 'we're still unable to post this information nine months after we said it'll be here soon'...

If they can't do it, fine - admit it's complex and point people at the forums and sites that can explain it. Leaving it half done with no reasons and a date stamp nine months old saying 'coming soon' is, to be polite, not a sign of a competent or capable company.

 

[Aurelius]

Ah, hell, who'm I kidding? They haven't done regular updates to that thing since about 2002. Why is anyone shocked?

Not shocked, just tired of the inefficiency and 'half-done is good enough' approach. Still I suppose it could be worse, the other guide to players EA do is in the Classic Client default settings - hit F1 and learn all about Power Hour and Youthful Treasuremaps...

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Perfectly possible Galen - but in that case, it's wrong to leave links on the website that effectively tell the readers 'we're still unable to post this information nine months after we said it'll be here soon'...

If they can't do it, fine - admit it's complex and point people at the forums and sites that can explain it. Leaving it half done with no reasons and a date stamp nine months old saying 'coming soon' is, to be polite, not a sign of a competent or capable company.

I'd rather them post something very basic, if only for the sake of pretense.

In business, pretense counts.

-Galen's player

 

[StaticOnAtlantic]

UOGUIDE.COM​

UO'S #1 SPOT FOR GUIDES.​

Sorry I too have looked for updates etc on uo.com with no avail for years, just tiring same sh** day in and day out.

 

[Petra Fyde]

erm, I don't mind you promoting uoguide, I consider that they and Stratics complement each other quite well, but please don't ignore the fact that we have quite a comprehensive range of guides on http://uo.stratics.com too

 

[Woodsman]

I'd rather them post something very basic, if only for the sake of pretense.

In business, pretense counts.

Especially when it comes to new customers. Earlier this year, BioWare made it a point to say that they were ordering all of their new titles to have a better experience for new players within the first few hours - the head of BioWare was not happy with reports of new players getting frustrated or bored and not playing some of their games beyond the first few hours. Not long after, UO announces a new, new player experience, and then a few months later Camelot does the same. A website is a part of that experience - if a player gets stuck or confused, and the in-game guide doesn't help, they are naturally going to turn to the web, and naturally will look at the official game website first. Short of making prominent links that say "GO TO UOGUIDE.COM OR UO.STRATICS.COM", they need to do something.

 

[Tinsil]

They should just change the message to say "Go look on Stratics or UOGuide, the people there actually play the game and know it better than we do."

They really should. Both sites have much more, and way more accurate information.

I'd rather EA focus their efforts on things we the players want, not updating their guides, when the correct information is already done and easily accessible through other means.