Are the players the reason for lack of a modern UO?

[Ned888]

Yes I believe the players are at fault for holding back UO. The devs are trying to do a client upgrade over old code just isnt working for UO. Until people are ready to admit they have a current pixel addiction and let it all go for a new game with newer cooler pixels and a reason to play then the game will move forward.

/signed

The general feeling I get from reading around these boards is that there is a lot of concern about what updates or patches are going to do to an individual players stuff.

Not much concern about what it will do for the game as a whole, but more along the lines of "What's going to happen to my castle full of chests when you roll out the new <blah>?!?!?!"

The game as a whole is more important than the stuff you have accumulated. I think lots of people forget how much fun they had getting that stuff. Now that they got it, they look back at is as a grind, but that was where the adventure was: In the 'grind'. Out there in the woods with the PKs and your hatchet.

Feets Don't Fail me Now!

That was awesome! When I recently started I had nothing and I was having a great time. After a couple of months I have several million gold and a couple of GM crafting skills and I'm looking for stuff to do.... That's a problem.

There shouldn't be a single person who is more attached to their runebooks and castles than they are to finding adventure and exploring. Unfortunately there are a lot of people like that.... Kind of sad.

 

[Mirt]

To bring up an often mentioned point. Back in the pre trammel days the game started to hemorrhage players. Part of being an MMO means having players and that means some restrictions on pvp. Thats what the market has demonstrated. Until someone comes up with a plan that acknowledges that then its pretty much DOA because no company will get behind it.

 

[old gypsy]

There shouldn't be a single person who is more attached to their runebooks and castles than they are to finding adventure and exploring. Unfortunately there are a lot of people like that.... Kind of sad.

That's one perspective, and valid for those who share it. However, the most wonderful thing about UO is that it has room for every playstyle, whether one enjoys danger and adventure, collecting rares, crafting, or roleplaying a non-combat sort of character. I think UO is unique in that respect, and that is probably one of the reasons why it has lasted for so many years.

 

[Ned888]

That's one perspective, and valid for those who share it. However, the most wonderful thing about UO is that it has room for every playstyle, whether one enjoys danger and adventure, collecting rares, crafting, or roleplaying a non-combat sort of character. I think UO is unique in that respect, and that is probably one of the reasons why it has lasted for so many years.

I agree with you, all play styles are important.... The difference in our perspectives may come from my view of 'playing' and your view of 'playing'. All the things you mentioned are completely and totally awesome and what does make the game great. The problem as I see it is that people are not engaging in these to any real extent. Head over to any bank besides Luna, Haven or WBB and tell me how many folks there are around. There are a crap load of houses in the area, so there are players, but they are not out role playing or crafting. Most use thier rune library to hop from place to place and never even hit the road anymore. They target the spawns that have the best chance for the ultimate gear and not much else. To me that's not much of a fun time, but to each his own.

I just hope that these are not the folks that are holding up my next generation UO!

 

[Zosimus]

It's also time to update the quest system UO has. people get tired of doing the same quests over and over. Yes the devs did make quests random like the SA quests but over all its get 10 things of this or go kill 20 things of that.

The UO world was about exploring so make the land and quests be a living thing. Have random invasions of cities as an example. If players help then the invaders can be pushed back. If players dont want to do it then the city gets taken over and harder for the players to try to take it back. Make quests be levels of difficulty.

I still say UO should be totally rebult from the ground up. New graphics, new quest system, and UO could get the new players. Keep UO Lore intact and rich history but make it all new again. People can argue about rares and housing and ect but in the end if EA pulled the plug all pixels would become rare and fade away. Plus if less and less people stay then who would see these rare pixels if nobody is around to see it.

 

[old gypsy]

I agree with you, all play styles are important.... The difference in our perspectives may come from my view of 'playing' and your view of 'playing'. All the things you mentioned are completely and totally awesome and what does make the game great. The problem as I see it is that people are not engaging in these to any real extent. Head over to any bank besides Luna, Haven or WBB and tell me how many folks there are around. There are a crap load of houses in the area, so there are players, but they are not out role playing or crafting. Most use thier rune library to hop from place to place and never even hit the road anymore. They target the spawns that have the best chance for the ultimate gear and not much else. To me that's not much of a fun time, but to each his own.

I just hope that these are not the folks that are holding up my next generation UO!

Agreed. It's sad that our once busy shards seem almost deserted these days. I still like to explore sometimes, but it has become a rather solitary occupation. Once, you could travel any road in Britannia and run into players everywhere. My first charactar started out in Trinsic... the city was bustling with activity in those days, and Brit Bank looked like Grand Central Station! Ahhh... nostalgia...rolleyes:

 

[Ned888]

I was playing on a 200Mhz Pentium processor with 20 Meg of RAM and when I got by the bank the world stopped.... then the music would go.... then the spells would go off.... then I'd take a step... continues on and on.

Those were definitely the days! Keep an eye out for me in Trinsic if you are ever on LS! It's my bank!

 

[phantus]

Hate to admit it but Ned is right. We might get a new client and we might get new expansions but a new UO would mean that everything from the original would be gone. It would be the only way for them to go.

Yes. I would go in a second to a new UO. I would have my reservations about any game made by EA.

It boils down to one thing:
My loyalty is to Ultima not UO. After that I have seen the grass on the other side(other MMO's) and that is some soft and green grass....with a good tee off area to boot!

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

If they can make a true 3d client that's great. Just leave me a classic client to play.

I'm sure im not alone when i say i get physically ill, almost like a car sickness, when playing 3d games. In my case, and others like mine, it's truely 2d or nothing.

Nope. I know someone who gets the exact same feelings. You aren't alone!

-Grimm

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

Make a UO2 with the graphic quality (not graphic style, graphic quality) and isometric camera of Diablo 3, let me port my characters and items over, and I would keep on trucking in the new game, no questions asked.

The only problem I see with it would be that you would want to remove the tile-based nature of UO and replace it with free-range movement. If they did that, they'd have to spend a year just developing a house decoration system that didn't make aligning items a nightmare.

Well, there's that, and you haven't even began to cover server side stuff!

As for you keeping your stuff. An interesting point. Where would we draw the line as to what is portable and what is not?

-Grimm

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

The only problem I see with it would be that you would want to remove the tile-based nature of UO and replace it with free-range movement. If they did that, they'd have to spend a year just developing a house decoration system that didn't make aligning items a nightmare.

Actually, UO could swipe Second Life's method for item placement (for within UO houses at least).

Once an item is locked down, the house owner/co-owner is presented with an XYZ recticle system to move the item in 3D space. The developers would just have to decide to what extent players were allowed to ignore the physics engine.

I've used the system in Second Life and its awesome what can be done in regards to designing a space.

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

These are just a few of the obvious issues, but I have to say again. There is absolutely positively any possible way that a game company would allow a player to import 14 years worth of wealth and property into a new game. It is an instant game killer. Especially if hundreds or even thousands did it. They would rather you quit.

More than that, it's a development killer.

-Grimm

 

[Saunders]

When Origin was started as a shard, players there had to start characters from zero, with no wealth or possessions or skills imported from outside. It was something of a shame when character transfers were allowed there, I think.
Ther is a special pleasure in starting afresh, and a challenge. A rebuilt UO would be something like that.

 

[Hellstorm]

I think a fresh start is always good!

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

 

[phantus]

So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

You could have promised the moon before saying this and I would have said no. This type of thing has passed in the MMO world. I'm sure there are classic fiends that might draw into this without reservation however.

Although Grimm....there was a time in UO history where we might have come close to the year and a half without any updates of substance. The only thing that kept people here were houses(stuff) and the occasion thing thrown out the live team that is not talked about any more.

 

[Ludes]

Just speaking for myself Grimm, I'd be all over it.

So there's one vote thumbs up.

 

[Coldren]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

I would ABSOLUTELY support this. I'd pay double the price of admission. If you could make it run as smooth as something as Diablo III, with UO's STYLE, gameplay, and a modern interface, it'd be a home run. Although I don't think it could be done that quickly, unless you get the whole SW:TOR team to help! I'd even go so far as to do what Blizzard did, and buy an annual pass that requires me to keep paying in return for access to this versions beta.

- My biggest gripe with the KR client wasn't bugginess, or performance, or the attempt at high-resolution art. It was that the art STYLE was so DIFFERENT looking. The style, look, and feel of UO was gone. I'll parrot for the millionth time that Saphireena had the right idea. THAT was UO STYLE with high resolution, and it was glorious.

- I'd go so far as to say go back to the original skills and stat caps. The barrier of entry has gotten so high for new players, given all the AoS changes, it's quite daunting to take it all in. Especially knowing that you couldn't EVER be up to par with vets who get bonuses based on years played. Rewards should never EVER have put new players at a disadvantage compared to vets. New players have enough to catch up on without being handicapped forever. They should have been nice, pixcel-crack/fluff rewards, not game-changing stat enhancements.

- Personally, I don't think Elves ever belonged in the mythos of UO. Or ninjas. I know some will argue that and more outlandish things were in the UO canon, but I'd argue UO is it's OWN universe, BASED off of the existing canon - Not a direct progression of it. It didn't feel right to have them in the world. Gargoyles, Paladins, and Necromancers.. Those made sense, IMO.

- I'd like to see a more faction-based world, in lieu of a PvP toggle. Each person can join a city-based faction, and within the areas, there is no PvP. But there is an area of the world where PvP is faction-based, no FFA, and there are things for cities to control and fight for for those who CHOOSE to PvP. Think DAoC frontiers with more factions. Say 3 or 4 based off the major cities. No instancing or isolation, just a "war zone" as it were. Can you imagine a Darkness Falls dungeon that only one faction can access at a time? Even strict PvE'ers would lend a hand to get control, just as they did in DAoC.

- You'll also need to be sure there's SOME form of housing, weather it's customizable or not.. Personally, I'd favor not. Make some new design options that are cohesive to the world, but their internals could be more personalized.

If I had 100 million dollars, I'd spend every penny on it to make what you offer happen. Buying lotto tickets as we speak.

 

[NuSair]

As long as we got AT LEAST weekly updates about the progress of said development, with feedback/interaction with the devs, ect- then yes, I am all for it.

If it would be like the silence that we normally have to endure (except after a patch, which is nice for a time til it goes away again), then no.

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

I would ABSOLUTELY support this. I'd pay double the price of admission. If you could make it run as smooth as something as Diablo III, with UO's STYLE, gameplay, and a modern interface, it'd be a home run. Although I don't think it could be done that quickly, unless you get the whole SW:TOR team to help! I'd even go so far as to do what Blizzard did, and buy an annual pass that requires me to keep paying in return for access to this versions beta.

Well we did UOKR in in about that amount of time, and that was updating everything in UO up to that point AND make everything backwards compatible with the existing client. So I don't think we need SWTORs power to accomplish that -- but I'd definitely take some of it! ;-)

My biggest gripe with the KR client wasn't bugginess, or performance, or the attempt at high-resolution art. It was that the art STYLE was so DIFFERENT looking.

Agreed.

If I had 100 million dollars, I'd spend every penny on it to make what you offer happen. Buying lotto tickets as we speak.

<Makes a note in case Coldren ever hits the lotto>

Cheers,
Grim

 

[Coldren]

Well we did UOKR in in about that amount of time, and that was updating everything in UO up to that point AND make everything backwards compatible with the existing client. So I don't think we need SWTORs power to accomplish that -- but I'd definitely take some of it! ;-)

Fair enough. However, I think you'd have to do a bunch of cleanup on the server side that may take a bit more effort. If it's not going to be backwards compatible (and it shouldn't), take the time to bring the code standard up to the modern age, with as much anti-hack as you can squeeze in. Future-proof as much as you can. Besides, I'd rather you weren't pressed for time. If you don't have big resources, don't rush it. Your hair will thank you for it!

<Makes a note in case Coldren ever hits the lotto>

I'd sign a legal document saying that if I ever had it, I'd give it all.. Well.. Let me pay my bills first, and get the wife something nice. She'd need it after the divorce when I tell her what I plan to do with the money.

 

[sh1nji]

first i'd like apologize for my bad english, english is not my first language.

Well i started playing uo 1 month ago, and this game is amazing, i played a lot of mmorpgs and ultima online is most complete game, maybe the reason about its lifetime, but years ago i played with kr with trial, and i love all arts that was used in this client, when I knew that client was closed my feeling was great sadness and disappointment.

i like arts from ec, but when compared with kr, i feeling that new arts is lower compared with kr, but i'd like to congratulate the entire team of uo, the effort to revitalize this aspect of the game

and another thing I would say, grim've had several opportunities to read forums about mmorpgs and I can say I never saw a person like you that I see always keep communication with the players so congratulations, and of course I would like to again congratulate you for the effort to revitalize the graphical aspects of the game, believe it should be extremely complicated.

 

[Orgional Farimir]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

The top part I don't even care about, but the bottom part I would be OK with. I wouldn't be crazy about having to start from scratch, but with a good group of people it could be fun.

 

[Pinco]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

Well this is clearly a new game and as new game without races and equipment reduced to the minimum amount, could start as an "outdated" game if compared to the others mmorpg.
Also speaking about a 3D game with fixed camera is always a bad idea

Basically if you have to spend money in an Ultima Online remake full 3D, you have to make something that really worth it, and obviously 1 year is not enough to make a tough game.
So if EA will pay for a new UO has to breaks the piggy-bank and pay a team for 2-3 years to make something able to throw the big parts of others mmo in the trash

But this is not a project for the current times, since will requires a lot of efforts... for now we could be happy if finally we get a new UO Game Codes site that looks like a real shop and modern payment methods like paypal, google checkout, etc...

 

[Mirt]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

I would probably try it but my experience has not been positive with MMO's in 3d. I am not fond of them and their look. I would try but I am not sure that I would stay. I also can't imagine that many would stay with UO after it was decided that there would be no updates and no new content. I guess I would just have to spend more time on other things. But I would try it and hope for the best.

 

[Saphireena]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective

-Grimm

I fully agree with Pinco, that isometric and 3d don't mix. At least not in an item based game like UO. Don't get me wrong, I love the style! I think there are plenty of awesome isometric 3d games out there, one of my favorites being Starcraft II which is friggin gorgeous, but again, that game is not about building, decorating and collecting items, it's only about battle and tactics and controlling miniature armies in an efficient way! If UO were to (yet again) be made into a 3d client, I think it should be a fully fledged 3d world with the same perspective we see in other MMOs such as WoW or Lotro. I would love to adventure in Sosaria from that perspective and be able to finally look around! I loved the Ultima Underworld games (3d) just as much as I did the Ultimas (2d). They were just a completely different game play experience. In fact, what would be a dream come true is if EA made Ultima Underworld Online with the "Wow view", having the game focus on adventure, questing, exploration, dungeons and monster bashing, whilst keeping the Classic Ultima Online the way it is for now, allowing the crafters, decorators, architects and item hoarders to keep on enjoying what they do. Personally I love both game experiences and would probably bay subscriptions to both games at the same time. Once Ultima Underworld Online started to rake in the cash (and it would), it'd get enough credibility within EA, for them to fund a new engine and PIXEL hi-res version of our classic client.

Ultima Underworld - 1992
This is what a new 3d client should be based on:
(Imagine if Ultima Underworld Online was released in 2012, 20 year anniversary? One can dream...)

Ultima VIII - The Pagan - 1994
This is what our 2d classic client should be based on (which it already is):
(Imagine if Ultima Online "hi-res" clíent was released in 2014, 20 year anniversary? One can dream...)

 

[Kayne]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. Updated visual FX
2. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
3. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

Just the items listed in the cut down quote would be nice. Sod the new client nonsense just give us the 3 points above.

 

[kelmo]

That is just not enough to compete in today's market share. Fixing little things for current players will not grow the "brand".

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

Yeah you guys replies feel like you are talking about a single player game...

this is a hypothetical situation...

Yes Grim... I'd do it.

 

[Ned888]

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client
3. Updated visual FX
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
6. Same core gameplay system
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

That's all I can think of at the moment. So would you still be willing to start fresh under this (I cannot stress how hypothetical this is ) scenario? Would you continue playing for a year and a half with no patches or updates? "Tawk amongst yaselves"

-Grimm

If you added skill level of GM max, recruited some councilors to support the player base and add rentable housing in cities along with smaller footprints for existing houses, then I'd be all for it.

Of course after a year and a half we would be very interested in seeing some updates start rolling out.....

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

Ok, so it sounds like Pinco and Saph are in the "no" category?

The point of my question is to add a layer of reality to the question of a "new" client. Most importantly, the twist that during this time of development, there's no way to also provide live support. So would that be an acceptable trade off? The question about wanting a new client is easy when you just assume that everything is going to be the same in regards to publishes and bug fixing. But the reality would be closer to the scenario I described. My guess was that most folks would not want to go without any updates for over a year on the off chance that would actually like the new 3D client.

So don't look look at this as any kind of proposal to "build" on the license or making a game that's competitive in an already heavily saturated market. Those are different conversations from the question posed.

*Edit*
Oh. And speaking of answering questions, to answer the question if players are holding back UO from getting a "Modern" client. My answer is "No."

-Grimm

 

[Ned888]

And i agree as well, I would start with nothing... but getting some points or a little boost toward the new game is not a totally unreasonable request. I think vet players deserve a little something. Just nothing that would make them OP compared to newer players.

How about a free copy of the new game and a 'veteran' title of some sort? Why would it have to be something that has an in-game effect?

I firmly believe that any reward would have to have no effect other than cosmetic to a new game if there was a restart. I know everyone worked hard for what they have, but it's the only way to keep things balance enough to draw in new players.

It stinks, but it's necessary for the whole game.

 

[Ned888]

Ok, so it sounds like Pinco and Saph are in the "no" category?

The point of my question is to add a layer of reality to the question of a "new" client. Most importantly, the twist that during this time of development, there's no way to also provide live support. So would that be an acceptable trade off? The question about wanting a new client is easy when you just assume that everything is going to be the same in regards to publishes and bug fixing. But the reality would be closer to the scenario I described. My guess was that most folks would not want to go without any updates for over a year on the off chance that would actually like the new 3D client.

So don't look look at this as any kind of proposal to "build" on the license or making a game that's competitive in an already heavily saturated market. Those are different conversations from the question posed.

-Grimm

Someone said it before, and I agree. No updates to the existing game are fine with me as long as there is not silence from the dev team. I don't mind waiting programming updates, I just want verbal ones.

I'd stick around forever just out of loyalty.

 

[TheGrimmOmen]

first i'd like apologize for my bad english, english is not my first language.

Well i started playing uo 1 month ago, and this game is amazing, i played a lot of mmorpgs and ultima online is most complete game, maybe the reason about its lifetime, but years ago i played with kr with trial, and i love all arts that was used in this client, when I knew that client was closed my feeling was great sadness and disappointment.

i like arts from ec, but when compared with kr, i feeling that new arts is lower compared with kr, but i'd like to congratulate the entire team of uo, the effort to revitalize this aspect of the game

and another thing I would say, grim've had several opportunities to read forums about mmorpgs and I can say I never saw a person like you that I see always keep communication with the players so congratulations, and of course I would like to again congratulate you for the effort to revitalize the graphical aspects of the game, believe it should be extremely complicated.

Thank you very much for such kind words, Shinji. I hope that we can deliver an equally satisfying experience with these new high res art pieces.

And your English is very good!!

Regards,

Grimm

 

[Lord Frodo]

[*]Same art style as the Legacy client (fixed it for you)
-Grimm

Just give me this in the EC and I might give it a try.

As to the rest HE11 NO

2D UO CC with the EC UI is the only way to go.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

Why reinvent the wheel.

Fix the EC.

Make it as close as possible in appearance to the CC.

Fix the targeting in the EC that all the PvPrs complain about.

Fix the item graphics in the backpack.

Oh, and lower the subscription cost. Someone mentioned it in another thread. Why is it that a 14 year old game has one of the highest monthly subscription rates?

 

[Coldren]

Ok, so it sounds like Pinco and Saph are in the "no" category?

The point of my question is to add a layer of reality to the question of a "new" client. Most importantly, the twist that during this time of development, there's no way to also provide live support. So would that be an acceptable trade off? The question about wanting a new client is easy when you just assume that everything is going to be the same in regards to publishes and bug fixing. But the reality would be closer to the scenario I described. My guess was that most folks would not want to go without any updates for over a year on the off chance that would actually like the new 3D client.

So don't look look at this as any kind of proposal to "build" on the license or making a game that's competitive in an already heavily saturated market. Those are different conversations from the question posed.

*Edit*
Oh. And speaking of answering questions, to answer the question if players are holding back UO from getting a "Modern" client. My answer is "No."

-Grimm

And this was a key point in my first response.

Your proposition would have been based on using ONLY the existing team, which given it's size, would strain it too far to do both. While I personally wouldn't miss updates, a lot of playing players would, even if they are... infrequent?

Hence, why I would think you would need an increase in your resource pool. Heck, I think you guys could use it now. EC seems to be moving at a snails pace, if you don't mind my saying so. But perhaps when we see what you've been cooking up in the graphics department (Hint, hint, MORE SPOILERS), it'll fit the bill just fine.

I think Pinco and Saph are against the idea not just due to constraints of resources, but rather the overarching idea of remaking the engine as a whole, weather they think it would be beneficial to UO to upgrade or start a whole new game.

My interpretation of course.

 

[Ned888]

Why reinvent the wheel.
*snip*
Oh, and lower the subscription cost. Someone mentioned it in another thread. Why is it that a 14 year old game has one of the highest monthly subscription rates?

I guess I don't understand.... The wheel is 14 years old as you state. It's not a bad thing to want it improved or replaced.

As for the sub fee, I pay 12.99/month right now. It's 2.00 less than my other games. My question is this though: Would lowering the sub fee give the company the resources to continue or would it drain their already difficult financial situation?

Two perspectives on that. If it was sy 5.99 a month, maybe more people would like; just like Runescape or Ashen Empires. UO definitely has better graphics than Runscape/AE so we might poach a bunch of people there.

On the flip side, lowering the sub fee might not bring in any more players; it might also reduce the staff due to lost revenue and close down the game completely.

From my perspective, it would be better to untangle the code; document it and get a new client that works specifically with the updated code. EC has it's advantages, but it's also got a lot of drawbacks that force me to flip between the two clients depending on what I'm doing at the time.

I'd prefer a single fully supported client that was the exclusive focus of the development team; even if it meant that they had to put updates on hold for an extended period of time to produce it. Even if it meant a restart.

Just my thoughts.

P.S. - I used to be one of the advocates of lowering the sub cost, but I have changed my mind over the last several months. Just thought I'd mention my flip flop!

 

[Ahuaeyjnkxs]

Ned my dear friend !

How logical... but how naive of you to think that UO subs pay for UO development.

I'm not accusing the CURRENT dev team, but if we have learned anything over the years here is that even when UO made millions, only 1% would go back to the game.

And even then, the RMT market for UO reached multi-million when the actual subs went down.

You think EA would have paid 22 millions to RG just to buy rights to a game they would soon neglect ?

Please don't be so gullible, you've been highly manipulated in your viewpoint.

That 22 millions, does not come from EA my friend... do the maths, follow the money.

You have read the thread where RG says he was "kicked off" EA by some people, right ?

think think think...

 

[Ned888]

*snip* think think think...

I do try, but sometimes my optimism gets in the way!

My basic perspective is the same whether the money comes from subs or the company. Time for an udate and I, personally would accept all other development going on hold for 12-18 months for a good finished product.

Either way, I appreciate what's being done now; I'm just concerned that it is a bandage being put into place over a compound fracture. As I always say: Focus! Focus on a single client, either the EC; CC or a whole new and awesome 4th Age Client! Just decide on one and focus. It would be better for everyone and cut some of the development time substantially because everything wouldn't have to be tested on both.

Just my thoughts, but I'm still optimistic... crying about Tina, but optimistic....

 

[Kayne]

As for the sub fee, I pay 12.99/month right now. It's 2.00 less than my other games. My question is this though: Would lowering the sub fee give the company the resources to continue or would it drain their already difficult financial situation?

Last time I paid and played WoW its subscription was cheaper than UO (8.99 per month as opposed to 9.99 GBP)

 

[Ned888]

Last time I paid and played WoW its subscription was cheaper than UO (8.99 per month as opposed to 9.99 GBP)

WoW was 14.99/Mo for me, and so was City of Heroes (still subscribe to that) and Everquest 2. I have a lifetime sub to Champions Online, so I never have to pay for that, but it would have been 14.99 as well I think.... UO is cheaper for me.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

As for the sub fee, I pay 12.99/month right now. It's 2.00 less than my other games. My question is this though: Would lowering the sub fee give the company the resources to continue or would it drain their already difficult financial situation?

Last time I paid and played WoW its subscription was cheaper than UO (8.99 per month as opposed to 9.99 GBP)

Thing is, I recall being promised quite a lot of overall improvement to UO when they raised the sub price to $12.99/month. Specifically, in-game support and Customer Service were supposed to be vastly improved. In my opinion that NEVER happened. We've suffered through the exact same developer and producer turn-over that we did before the increase. Communication continued to be and still is hit & miss. We still experience the same long droughts of feedback from the dev team followed by encouraging weeks or a few months of increased communication, only to eventually, get right back to near silence.

The main thing is though that the playerbase has continued to decline over the years despite every effort to retain players, entice them to return or to encourage new players to try UO. Where is that going to lead? It inevitably must, at some point, lead to not enough paying players to support the game.

Would lowering the sub price back to $9.99 cost some revenue? Maybe? I would imagine that a majority of long-time players pay 6 months at a time already.

It all boils down to the fact that, I DON'T believe that EA held up their end of the deal when the monthly sub was increased $3.00/month.

 

[Ned888]

*snip*It all boils down to the fact that, I DON'T believe that EA held up their end of the deal when the monthly sub was increased $3.00/month.

Now this ^ I can understand being a frustration. Raising sub fees really does need to be justified, although, by the same token costs rise too.... Inflation and all that.

I guess I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Saphireena]

Hey I never said I was against it! *stomps foot* I was at work and only had time to comment on the first of Grimm's points. Now I'm at home and will comment on the others. But before I do...

Many here probably assume that I'm against anything new happening for UO and that I just endlessly dwell on the old and familiar, But that's simply not true. I'm all for change as long as it is a considerable improvement compared to the old. I just feel like all of the remakes so far have not been such, nor enough to give up the classic client for. Sure there were a lot of good things about them, but when all aspects were considered, they just didn't compare as a whole.

I remember actually being hugely excited when we saw the very first marketing screenshots of the Kingdom Reborn client. They were gorgeous! But then the game was released and it was not all what the shots were promising. The paperdolls were disappointing, a lot of the creatures were unrecognisable and lacked the charm of the classic, my house and decos looked like crap, the user interface was clunky and everything looked much worse than in the marketing shots. (perhaps the marketing shots were pimped up with Photoshop?)

We've seen time and time again isometric 3d client attempts that failed, so the thought of the team starting on yet another one baffles me. Unless Grimm meant something else by "fixed camera view"? Could you explain what you meant by that Grimm?

But if yet another 3d client were made to work alongside the (non-updated) EC and CC, then it might as well be the full 3d shabang with a first/third person view and with gorgeous modern graphics. Perhaps it could work so that when you zoom out far enough it snaps to the isometric camera like we see the EC now, but zooming back in would put you back in third person (aka WoW) view. Zooming in again, first person like most games have. None of this fixed camera business. I want to SEE the world and feel immersed!

So summarized, yeah I'm up for a new client and with your conditions Grimm, as long as it's not a fixed camera.

Now onto the other points:

Ok, so this has been a very interesting read. Lemme pose the same question again with a slightly altered scenario (just a reminder that this is strictly hypothetical):

If you got the following:

1. A new 3D client client with fixed perspective > Not fixed please
2. Similar art style to the Legacy client > If it's a new game, I don't feel it needs to look like the legacy artwork, all it needs to look is a) like a game from the Ultima series b) Superb
3. Updated visual FX > YES!
4. Larger animation set for player characters and monsters > YES!
5. Ability to mount creatures such as dragons > YES!
6. Same core gameplay system > Hmmm not necessarilly, again if it's a new game with a fresh start, I don't think the game play should get hung up on the old. Take a little here, take a little there from all the Ultima's and UU's collectively.
7. Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking. > Who would say no to that?

But had to agree to the following:

1. No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff) > No problemo although it would be nice if an effort was made to fix the worst bugs first before this happened.
2. No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)> Never did like the split, so sounds good!
3. Landmasses are reduced to 1. > So ya mean no islands to adventure to? I would feel fine if it didn't have the new land masses brought by new expansions over the years, however sailing to undiscovered islands in the original UO was always such a thrill! Would hate to see that go.
4. Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with > Yes please, I can't stand the current weapon system and all those stats. Bring me a silver Katana of Vanquishing any day!
5. Elves and Gargoyles are removed > Never liked them being added to UO, so good riddance!
6. All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with > Fine by me!
7. Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available > Fine by me!
8. After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates > As long as they continue, sure - no problem. I feel that already now the game has become overly saturated with things to do, items, places to go. It's overwhelming sometimes.
9. Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with > Fine!
10. You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus > Would this mean that the EC and CC still continue as they are now? With all our stuff and history intact? And that only this new client started fresh? Then sure, no problem.
11. Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client. > Sounds like a good idea! Would feel more populated. Then expand shards later if necessary.

-Grimm

 

[Pinco]

Ok, so it sounds like Pinco and Saph are in the "no" category?

The point of my question is to add a layer of reality to the question of a "new" client. Most importantly, the twist that during this time of development, there's no way to also provide live support. So would that be an acceptable trade off? The question about wanting a new client is easy when you just assume that everything is going to be the same in regards to publishes and bug fixing. But the reality would be closer to the scenario I described. My guess was that most folks would not want to go without any updates for over a year on the off chance that would actually like the new 3D client.

So don't look look at this as any kind of proposal to "build" on the license or making a game that's competitive in an already heavily saturated market. Those are different conversations from the question posed.

*Edit*
Oh. And speaking of answering questions, to answer the question if players are holding back UO from getting a "Modern" client. My answer is "No."

-Grimm

I'm in favor of a new client only if is something that worth it...
I mean if you have to make a client with low resources, to work on it at light speed because you have only the time for basic things and by cutting down all the contents, the results will be a bugged game and the cost will be losing the whole player base...

IMHO to remake UO you need a good team with tough people and at least 2-3 years of hard work only to build the client, if you want also to rebuild the server, the project will be much more expensive and we could also reach 4-5 years.
Btw those are the minimum amount of years required to make a client that will makes cry WoW and all the others mmorpg

Unfortunately nowdays there are no game company that can spend up to 5 years to release a game :/

 

[Kayne]

Thing is, I recall being promised quite a lot of overall improvement to UO when they raised the sub price to $12.99/month. Specifically, in-game support and Customer Service were supposed to be vastly improved. In my opinion that NEVER happened. We've suffered through the exact same developer and producer turn-over that we did before the increase. Communication continued to be and still is hit & miss. We still experience the same long droughts of feedback from the dev team followed by encouraging weeks or a few months of increased communication, only to eventually, get right back to near silence.

The main thing is though that the playerbase has continued to decline over the years despite every effort to retain players, entice them to return or to encourage new players to try UO. Where is that going to lead? It inevitably must, at some point, lead to not enough paying players to support the game.

Would lowering the sub price back to $9.99 cost some revenue? Maybe? I would imagine that a majority of long-time players pay 6 months at a time already.

It all boils down to the fact that, I DON'T believe that EA held up their end of the deal when the monthly sub was increased $3.00/month.

Cant disagree with this at all. These were the reasons for the increase and the customer service definitely didn't improve

 

[Woodsman]

I'm in favor of anything that would bring in new players and make it easier to add content.

As long as it doesn't kill the unique feel of UO, that sandbox-style, the housing and crafting systems that are pretty much unrivaled in any other game, because if you start killing off the things that make the UO world more interesting than other MMOs, might as well just go to other MMOs.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

If you got the following:

A new 3D client client with fixed perspective
Similar art style to the Legacy client
Updated visual FX
Larger animation set for player characters and monsters
Ability to mount creatures such as dragons
Same core gameplay system
Improved method of item tracking to help identify and ban item dupers and hacking.

Ok to all of that though the "style" of artwork I'm open on and can go in any direction so long as it looks decent. There were aspects of the KR style I liked better than Legacy and some of Legacy I liked better (KR I loved the plants/trees as well as the terrain, building tilesets, and many additional items, Legacy much of the item artwork is simply more familiar and easier to work with than KR was, especially equipment). Players riding dragons I'm not big on, but I'm not a tamer-style player, so it's not a big draw for me.

But had to agree to the following:

Ok, here I'll go point by point:

No EC or Legacy updates for a year and a half (including vet rewards, and Holiday stuff)

This could be doable, but would it work better to have that much content ready to roll out and just schedule it out the door at the time, or is it feasible to give the EMs the power to help drive player interest?

No more Fel / Trammel split (PvP is a toggle)

I'd be more in favor of consent and non-consent shards instead of an in-shard toggle. With just a toggle, you might as well ditch non-con completely and put all PvP within specific gameplay systems (guilds, factions, arenas)

Landmasses are reduced to 1.

I assume this means just Britannia, or would it be like the old original map with the newer facets reworked into the same map? If just Britannia, would newer landmasses be added and how would they differ from the original?

Items and equipment are reduced to what UO originally launched with

Ok, but also I hope with rebalanced systems to create a more balanced economy.

Elves and Gargoyles are removed

Fine with me, I always though player races in UO should have been cosmetic only (i.e. the body sculptor in KR/EC)

All creatures removed with the exception of the ones that UO started with

Ok, hopefully reasonably balanced as well.

Ships removed- only the small ones that UO originally had would be available

Ok

After 6 months, the Legacy and EC clients would continue, but would no longer receive updates

Agreed, at this point, let old clients die by attrition and migration to the new version.

Equipment slots reduced to what UO originally launched with

Ok, really the only new "slot" is the Talisman, and the original magic system did use rings bracelets and clothing, though the paperdoll will have to make all slots easily accessible (as contrasted with pre-Third Dawn).

You would start completely fresh, although vets of X number of years and up would get some kind of bonus

Cool.

Completely new and reduced set of shards (with obviously no transfers between current shards and shards for this new client.

Fine with this... I've never been a fan with shard x-fers the way they've been done anyway. With the new system I would advise strict limitations on how x-fers are handled (no items, maybe a certain amount of gold, and then it re-rolls your starting items based on your skills, however skills and stats transfer)

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Actually, let me amend something on the artwork style. I'm not a fan of the cartoony style that was a big part of Ultima X:Odyssey's creature models, I'd be more along the lines of the more realistic side of art styling.