Should UO be free? Poll.

[Penana Car]

Ultima Online is, in fact, one of the longest standing MMOs.

However a case should be made for the following:

* Poorly executed expansions leading to a poor game state
* Depleted subscriber base taking the "massive" out of MMO
* High frequency of developer turn over
* Lack of exciting new content in expansions
* Lack of in-game support
* There are better games and MMOs for cheaper (no need to name them)

A free UO would bring more players - Extra services such as character transfers and booster packs would generate more revenue with more players playing for free. This is at least a valid case to cut the UO subscription cost in half.

I've put thousands of dollars into subscriptions and expansions, you don't have to tell me about it.

There is no appeal for me to pay for this game. I haven't done so since 2010 after nearly 13 years of subscription. Moved on. And so I won't.

Constructive thoughts?

 

[weins201]

well since your idea is not very constructive i see no need to be constructive myself.

Go play one of the other games that give all the things oyu dont find in UO

 

[Penana Car]

well since your idea is not very constructive i see no need to be constructive myself.

Go play one of the other games that give all the things oyu dont find in UO

My idea is plenty constructive. Provide me a reason that I should pay nearly $15 / month to play this game? There is no activity on virtually 85% of the shards. There is no new content. The existing land expansions have been useless for nearly a decade. PvP is so broken and easy it's not even fun anymore. There is no mob mentality AI. There isn't one champion or boss in the game that is difficult. There is no in-game support. There is no interaction with the players. The community has been crippled to a ghost state. MyUO has been down for over a year. The present day developers will not listen to any veteran input on what made the game fun in the past. It has been declining since the departures of SunSword and Toad.

I've put nearly half as many years into UO as I've been alive.

What are you paying for? Not flaming I just want constructive input please.

 

[Uvtha]

I won't say bad things about the game, because I still think that content wise its still one of the best mmos around, but yes, I do think it should move to a free basic pay structure.?

I really think it would be good for the game over all, if done right.

 

[Arien]

UO should not be a Free Game, cause free means always many Cheaters. It should cost just lesser, like 10$ / 8 Euro per Month, since it has already an Item Shop. Perhaps it is even time to think about closing some Servers and putt some Servers together like Europa, Drachenfels & Atlantic. Great Lakes, Chesapake & Catskills. And so on. We don't need 28 Servers. 10 Would be enough. Just stretch the Landmass so that all Peoples can Place their Houses on a completly new Server and when it's done, close down 3 Old Servers. I know many Peoples will hate this but in my opinion, Peoples leaves Games when they have to less other Peoples to Play with. Right now 10 New Servers would be enough for all Players that UO has left and all could have a nice House ect.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Here's the problem I see with a "free" model for UO: In order to adopt the F2P model successfully, they'd have to charge for something. EA's not going to run UO as a charity. If I were in the position of deciding how to charge for UO, and it went F2P, yeah, I'd expand the in-game item store quite a bit with cutesy little knick-knacks, but those wouldn't be enough to keep the game going, I suspect.

The other issue is that with player housing actually occupying in-game space, the only way to prevent people from opening up 1,000s of accounts to occupy all of the space in the game would, in fact, to be to make obtaining and keeping a house the one thing you would have to charge for in the F2P market. Thus, truthfully, you wouldn't see much of a change, because housing is one of the primary reasons to play UO.

Now, with that caveat -- that housing would remain a monthly fee -- then sure, make UO F2P... and then allow people who pay for one house to pay for a second house on the same shard for another $2-$5 per month based on the size of the house looking to be placed. That model, being "free," would probably see subscription dollars go up, because I know I'd pay another $2-$5 for a range of 7x7 to 14x14 of additional housing, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. You might see some condensation of subscription dollars in that people might cancel one account to condense housing -- which is why you would never allow an 18x18 or 'max storage' house to be placed as the second house.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

...Perhaps it is even time to think about closing some Servers and putt some Servers together like ... Atlantic, Great Lakes, Chesapake & Catskills...

Um... to put it succinctly, no thanks. First and foremost, each of these shards (and in fact, ALL of the shards) has their own unique history... I can't imagine that combining these four shards together would work well from that standpoint. As it stands, aren't these four the busiest of the US servers? Truthfully, I couldn't even see merging Napa and Sonoma into one...

 

[Driven Insane]

Not even worried about UO going FTP. But I will add there's no such thing as free and that most FTP games actually end up costing you more than what you'd end up paying with a monthly subscription as the game starts nickel and diming you to death.

P.S. You don't play this game, which IMO means you don't have any right to open your trap about the current state of the game. So do as you claimed and "move on".

 

[Penana Car]

Not even worried about UO going FTP. But I will add there's no such thing as free and that most FTP games actually end up costing you more than what you'd end up paying with a monthly subscription as the game starts nickel and diming you to death.

P.S. You don't play this game, which IMO means you don't have any right to open your trap about the current state of the game. So do as you claimed and "move on".

Whoa cheap shot artist. I've played and dominated UO in virtually every era quite frankly. With subscription cost so high I have no desire to pay a subscription. Furthermore with a veteran account in my possession I have every right to comment. If the product quality was better, like any satisfied customer I would continue to pay the price. Lately I've been playing a different FTP game with better content and more entertainment value. I have moved on. UO has growth potential if the cost were less and it has a better chance of surviving with more growth. Additionally, without a better quality of product none of the veteran players are going to come back to what they left.

I agree if the game were not to go free, $5 sounds like a more reasonable monthly cost.

 

[legendsguy]

Of course UO should be free. Everything should be free! However, I'm not sure if UO would be able to survive without subscription fees. Therefore, I'm happy (enough) to pay for it. Still, I would like more expansions!

 

[Petra Fyde]

Nope.
1. because Driven Insane is right - f2p actually costs the player more
2. I have enjoyed every expansion we've had - perhaps not every tiny bit of it, but always a good portion of it.
3. We just got (I believe) the best darn producer we could have - someone who thorougly knows the game, can be found in it regularly and has frequently gone out of her way to help players with problems. I just hope she doesn't go and make herself ill trying to do to much! We need her.
4. One reason for the lower player base is just the sheer number of other games that are out there now compared to when UO started.
5. If you believe there are better games, go play them. Leave my UO alone, I like it just fine the way it is.

 

[Penana Car]

Nope.
1. because Driven Insane is right - f2p actually costs the player more
2. I have enjoyed every expansion we've had - perhaps not every tiny bit of it, but always a good portion of it.
3. We just got (I believe) the best darn producer we could have - someone who thorougly knows the game, can be found in it regularly and has frequently gone out of her way to help players with problems. I just hope she doesn't go and make herself ill trying to do to much! We need her.
4. One reason for the lower player base is just the sheer number of other games that are out there now compared to when UO started.
5. If you believe there are better games, go play them. Leave my UO alone, I like it just fine the way it is.

I do respect your feedback. Richard Garriot knows best though, this game has strayed too far from Ultima. I do wonder why EA hasn't pondered a second generation of UO (UO2) rather than milk the life out of this game. For a casual player it is still a unique game. For a hardcore Ultima player it is exhausted.

 

[Nimuaq]

* Poorly executed expansions leading to a poor game state

Stygian Abyss expansion and the High Seas booster pack are quite successful additions.

* High frequency of developer turn over

Here're some core member of the current UO team:
Bonnie "Mesanna" Armstrong, producer, since 1999 (13 years)
Mike "Phoenix" Moore, senior game systems designer, since 2000 (except 2005 - 2008) (9 years)
J.P. "TheGrimmOmen" Harrod, lead CG supervisor, since 2005 (7 years)

* Lack of exciting new content in expansions

This is not exciting? Heather Cerlan - Gallery: Ultima Online

* Lack of in-game support

We didn't have this 14 years ago either.

* There are better games and MMOs for cheaper (no need to name them)

No, you should name them, I've been searching for years. Seriously, please name them.

There is no appeal for me to pay for this game. I haven't done so since 2010 after nearly 13 years of subscription. Moved on.

With all do respect, I highly doubt that you moved on, especially after reading this post .

 

[Penana Car]

Stygian Abyss expansion and the High Seas booster pack are quite successful additions.


Here're some core member of the current UO team:
Bonnie "Mesanna" Armstrong, producer, since 1999 (13 years)

Not producer since 1999, lol. I can't honestly look at Stygian Abyss and call it a successful addition. It was an overhaul and brought new content, but successful? Look at the state of the game now. Empty. Speaks for itself.

I'm not going to sit here and make remarks back and forward. I'm interested in people's feedback on the original matter. I appreciate your reply.

 

[Uvtha]

Here's the problem I see with a "free" model for UO: In order to adopt the F2P model successfully, they'd have to charge for something. EA's not going to run UO as a charity. If I were in the position of deciding how to charge for UO, and it went F2P, yeah, I'd expand the in-game item store quite a bit with cutesy little knick-knacks, but those wouldn't be enough to keep the game going, I suspect.

The other issue is that with player housing actually occupying in-game space, the only way to prevent people from opening up 1,000s of accounts to occupy all of the space in the game would, in fact, to be to make obtaining and keeping a house the one thing you would have to charge for in the F2P market. Thus, truthfully, you wouldn't see much of a change, because housing is one of the primary reasons to play UO.

Now, with that caveat -- that housing would remain a monthly fee -- then sure, make UO F2P... and then allow people who pay for one house to pay for a second house on the same shard for another $2-$5 per month based on the size of the house looking to be placed. That model, being "free," would probably see subscription dollars go up, because I know I'd pay another $2-$5 for a range of 7x7 to 14x14 of additional housing, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. You might see some condensation of subscription dollars in that people might cancel one account to condense housing -- which is why you would never allow an 18x18 or 'max storage' house to be placed as the second house.

Many f2p games ARE simply predatory, but not all of them, and it doesn't HAVE to be that way. As with any idea its only good if its implemented well.

I think the basics of any f2p set up would come with an optional subscription that would leave the game exactly like it is now to subscribers. From there you have a free client with restrictions to the good stuff like housing, access to the coolest areas and skills etc.

The only big problem UO has is playerbase. The simple fact of the matter is that no matter what happens if UO costs 13 bucks a month the playerbase will not grow substantially if at all. As we all know UO has the goods content wise (especially to someone whos never played) but if no one ever gives it a try, then it just goes to waste. When there is no introductory barrier many people will come and check it out, and many will get hooked and spend money.

I really think UO is a PERFECT example of a game that should be free to play for these reasons.

I think that there would need to be some things done before you would start making changes like that like a REAL in game wiki type of thing to help newbs etc, but I think with the right people working it out it could be great, and it would really help the game enter a new high period.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I guess the easiest way to go would be to make the trial period open ended, keeping all the restrictions it currently has.

 

[Gilmour]

Stygian Abyss was one the best expansions ever!

 

[FrejaSP]

Nope.
1. because Driven Insane is right - f2p actually costs the player more
2. I have enjoyed every expansion we've had - perhaps not every tiny bit of it, but always a good portion of it.
3. We just got (I believe) the best darn producer we could have - someone who thorougly knows the game, can be found in it regularly and has frequently gone out of her way to help players with problems. I just hope she doesn't go and make herself ill trying to do to much! We need her.
4. One reason for the lower player base is just the sheer number of other games that are out there now compared to when UO started.
5. If you believe there are better games, go play them. Leave my UO alone, I like it just fine the way it is.

I agreee but maybe it would be possible to make 2 levels of subscribers.
1. The one we have now to the price we have now but where you could choose to use your vet rewards to activate new boost packs. You should also have a second house at 7x7. The price we pay now would be fine.
2. A light subscribtion, maybe $5 a month. Max one house 7x7, only access too Trammel, Felucca and Malas, Crafting/skills/resources only from this 3 facets. Access too Ilshenar, Tukano, Ter Mur/Abuss and too crafting/skills/resources that comes with this facets, should cost +$4 a month for each extra activated facet. The limet to house size will increase with +3 so with one more facet activated, it will be 10x10.

This would also tell EA what facets to use their money on

 

[old gypsy]

The last time I played a "free" game -- a long time ago -- I ended up spending more money on it than I spend on UO.

 

[FrejaSP]

The last time I played a "free" game -- a long time ago -- I ended up spending more money on it than I spend on UO.

Yep, but let them get a light subscription if they think it will be cheaper. I too is happy with paying for my 4 accounts and knowing what I don't have to pay alot extra except the boost packs.

 

[lit2fly]

instead of FTP, I propose a progressive charging model... the older your account is, the cheaper you need to pay.... say a discount of $1 for each year, meaning 12.99 for all new accounts, after you've subscribed for a year, you only need to pay 11.99... so by the end of 13 years... you are basically free to play... OR.. cap at 0.99 after year 13... anyway it make veteran players stay... and got incentive for ppl to keep subscribing.... how about that

 

[old gypsy]

instead of FTP, I propose a progressive charging model... the older your account is, the cheaper you need to pay.... say a discount of $1 for each year, meaning 12.99 for all new accounts, after you've subscribed for a year, you only need to pay 11.99... so by the end of 13 years... you are basically free to play... OR.. cap at 0.99 after year 13... anyway it make veteran players stay... and got incentive for ppl to keep subscribing.... how about that

I'd be content if they'd return to the original subscription price ($9.99?). If they did that, I'd probably reactivate a second account I haven't played in ages.

 

[Selurnoraa]

If you want more players to play this game it needs to be Free 2 Play. Quite simply if you look at all the small market servers if a player starts up there they will have 0 player interaction and in an online game thats just not acceptable. The land masses are just so massive and without proper knowledge of where to go and how to do it the player will get frustrated and quit. Only a few shards have people a population high enough that a new player might accidentally bump into another, and thats just unexceptable, this is afterall an ONLINE game.

No matter how much you want it as a player new players will simply not come to an almost 15 year old game while it has a subscription fee. Veteran players might come back for a month every so often to check it out but will quickly leave once they see how unpopulated all the zones are.


Here is a question for all you die hard's out there, if not Free 2 Play now then when? It has to come sooner or later and why not for its 15th anniversary? EverQuest is now f2p, so honestly what are we waiting for?

 

[FrejaSP]

F2P only mean you have to pay in an other way, and that mean, the ones who can affort to pay for stuff will have a mega advance ingame.
Or it mean, we won't get any update and support

 

[virtualhabitat]

Ultima Online is, in fact, one of the longest standing MMOs.

However a case should be made for the following:

* Poorly executed expansions leading to a poor game state

-I disagree. I find the expansions adequately executed. Certainly in comparison to the majority of other game out there.

* Depleted subscriber base taking the "massive" out of MMO

-Subscribers come and go. Right now there are already players returning from D3.

* High frequency of developer turn over

-Developer turnover has nothing to do with the state of any game. In fact, I would say that any developer who holds the same position for more than 2 or three years is a developer no one really wants to hire.

* Lack of exciting new content in expansions

-I find the content fresh and exciting -you don't. So what.

* Lack of in-game support

-I have seen reports of this and I have also seen reports of in-game support going the extra mile for players. Stacked up against all of the other games out there I'd say UO is somewhere in the middle.

* There are better games and MMOs for cheaper (no need to name them)

-"Better" is subjective, at best. I have no doubt other games might do some things better than this game. I also believe this game does some things better than others.
-I happen to like the things this game does better than the rest.

A free UO would bring more players - Extra services such as character transfers and booster packs would generate more revenue with more players playing for free. This is at least a valid case to cut the UO subscription cost in half.

-You have no idea if a free uo would bring more players or not. I believe you believe that it would bring more players.
-UO already has extra services like character transfers and booster packs. Last time I checked, transfer token were holding their in-game gold to dollar value quite nicely. (that means they are selling quite well on the UO store)

-These points do not make a valid case for anything. Ea is already making money from these services AND subscriptions. You are smoking crack or some equivalent.

I've put thousands of dollars into subscriptions and expansions, you don't have to tell me about it.

-This sentence is utterly meaningless. Why did you put it here?

There is no appeal for me to pay for this game. I haven't done so since 2010 after nearly 13 years of subscription. Moved on. And so I won't.

Constructive thoughts?

-I don't believe you. I think you are telling us a lie so you can better believe it yourself. If UO had lost its appeal you wouldn't be here defending these ridiculous assertions about how great free to play would be for UO. You want to play it. I know it. You know it. Everyone reading this knows it.
Don't play the coy boy here. That only works with little girls still in high school.

 

[NBG]

Most FTP games is based on an end game and most game's end game is PvP with the condition that to compete in the end game, players would have to pay to purchase perishable items from store. That is how they make money.

With UO, there is no such thing as an end game and the sandbox is so wide that if game is made FTP,not all new player attracted would not have that incentive to spend cash at the store. It would depend on that player's play style when encountering a sandbox game which does not translate to sale and the online store since the players are that ones that define their own end game condition and not EA.

In short, making UO FTP might actually kill the game. Just something to think about.

 

[Lord Frodo]

My idea is plenty constructive. Provide me a reason that I should pay nearly $15 / month to play this game?

I've put nearly half as many years into UO as I've been alive.

I guess with age comes wisdom because I only pay $10/month to play this game. Yes, I am a whole lot older than you. You paid 15 and want it for 5 so split the diff and buy 6 month time codes and pay 10. Problem solved.

And as far as Free-To-Play, a big HE dbl LL NO.
And as far as shard mergers, a big HE dbl LL NO.

 

[Serafi]

-I don't believe you. I think you are telling us a lie so you can better believe it yourself. If UO had lost its appeal you wouldn't be here defending these ridiculous assertions about how great free to play would be for UO. You want to play it. I know it. You know it. Everyone reading this knows it.
Don't play the coy boy here. That only works with little girls still in high school.

This. Was about to comment on the same thing until I saw someone else beat me to it

OP: Theres no shame in moving on, in realizing that new adventures awaits in other worlds. Your post comes out as someone that has a huge problem letting go. Cut your ties and move on. You`ll survive.

Then come back when you feel the urge again, and accept that you want what UO offers. By then you will understand what it is, for you.

 

[Lord Frodo]

If you want more players to play this game it needs to be Free 2 Play. Quite simply if you look at all the small market servers if a player starts up there they will have 0 player interaction and in an online game thats just not acceptable. The land masses are just so massive and without proper knowledge of where to go and how to do it the player will get frustrated and quit. Only a few shards have people a population high enough that a new player might accidentally bump into another, and thats just unexceptable, this is afterall an ONLINE game.

No matter how much you want it as a player new players will simply not come to an almost 15 year old game while it has a subscription fee. Veteran players might come back for a month every so often to check it out but will quickly leave once they see how unpopulated all the zones are.


Here is a question for all you die hard's out there, if not Free 2 Play now then when? It has to come sooner or later and why not for its 15th anniversary? EverQuest is now f2p, so honestly what are we waiting for?

You really think EverQuest is F2P than you really need to look at this page EverQuest - Free To Play. Just an extended trial account. Way to many restrictions for FREE.

 

[Driven Insane]

I guess with age comes wisdom because I only pay $10/month to play this game. Yes, I am a whole lot older than you. You paid 15 and want it for 5 so split the diff and buy 6 month time codes and pay 10. Problem solved.

You know, whether it's 10, 13 or 15 dollars I always have to laugh when someone starts pancakes about the cost. Name one other item you can pay such a piddly amount for and get the many hours of entertainment from??

Seriously just going to a movie which is 2 hours of entertainment at the most is going to run you 20+ dollars.

 

[Woodsman]

OP: Theres no shame in moving on, in realizing that new adventures awaits in other worlds. Your post comes out as someone that has a huge problem letting go. Cut your ties and move on. You`ll survive.

Then come back when you feel the urge again, and accept that you want what UO offers. By then you will understand what it is, for you.

Yeah, it's not really hard to move on if you actually feel the way the OP does. You do get an appreciation for UO when you play the other MMORPGs. And having done that and having played other MMORPGs, there is no such thing as truly free-to-play out there in the world of MMORPGs.

Companies do not go free-to-play unless they think they can make more money than they were under the subscription model. No company has ever said "Gee, I want to take this game f2p so we can make less money!" The intent is to always raise more money.

There are smaller games where you can do everything for free. That is, if you don't value your time, because they will deliberately turn the game into one huge timewasting grind in an effort to get you to spend money to bypass that stuff.

 

[Woodsman]

If you want more players to play this game it needs to be Free 2 Play. Quite simply if you look at all the small market servers if a player starts up there they will have 0 player interaction and in an online game thats just not acceptable.

People aren't quitting UO because they can't pay $10 a month. Look at why people quit and look at comments former UO players make on websites. It always boils down to: Not happy with the direction of the game, not happy with the graphics, there are other games that have more of an appeal, and plenty of other reasons that have nothing to do with how UO is paid for.

Here is a question for all you die hard's out there, if not Free 2 Play now then when? It has to come sooner or later and why not for its 15th anniversary?

UO has bigger problems than how the money is collected. You can't just flip a switch and break UO out into a micro-transaction model, especially if you don't want to piss off current players since there is a good chance we'll end up paying more under such a system.

UO needs a lot of bug fixes and the graphics update.

 

[Woodsman]

I guess the easiest way to go would be to make the trial period open ended, keeping all the restrictions it currently has.

This. If you were to remove the time limit on the trial period, the trial accounts resemble a lot of f2p games. It's uncanny how much the trial account resembles a lot of these f2p games.

The only problem is making it easier for the scripters with the trials.

 

[Haddy G]

F2P is the way to go for them to make more money. I read few articles about EA COO discussing his belief that f2p is inevitable. Once their Star Wars game goes f2p there may be consideration for UO as well. Yes there have been no announcements, but any company that looses 40% of it's stock value will consider anything to make cash. Turbine has proven the f2p model works. While I believe it can be done with UO I just don't know if it would be worth the effort to convert to a f2p model for UO.

 

[Luvmylace]

Ultima Online is, in fact, one of the longest standing MMOs.

However a case should be made for the following:

* Poorly executed expansions leading to a poor game state
* Depleted subscriber base taking the "massive" out of MMO
* High frequency of developer turn over
* Lack of exciting new content in expansions
* Lack of in-game support
* There are better games and MMOs for cheaper (no need to name them)

A free UO would bring more players - Extra services such as character transfers and booster packs would generate more revenue with more players playing for free. This is at least a valid case to cut the UO subscription cost in half.

I've put thousands of dollars into subscriptions and expansions, you don't have to tell me about it.

There is no appeal for me to pay for this game. I haven't done so since 2010 after nearly 13 years of subscription. Moved on. And so I won't.

Constructive thoughts?

nothing constructive about your post 'self serving and taking up space

"Don't let the door hit you on the a$$ on the way out"

 

[outcry]

Nope.
1. because Driven Insane is right - f2p actually costs the player more
2. I have enjoyed every expansion we've had - perhaps not every tiny bit of it, but always a good portion of it.
3. We just got (I believe) the best darn producer we could have - someone who thorougly knows the game, can be found in it regularly and has frequently gone out of her way to help players with problems. I just hope she doesn't go and make herself ill trying to do to much! We need her.
4. One reason for the lower player base is just the sheer number of other games that are out there now compared to when UO started.
5. If you believe there are better games, go play them. Leave my UO alone, I like it just fine the way it is.

I agree 100% with all of this.. I mean seriously you said your self its one of the longest running MMO's out there so many have crashed and burned.. and sorry I do not think the price of the game is all that bad compared to any others out there.

 

[Galad]

I'd return if it went FTP. Otherwise, it's no where close to being worth $15/month for me.

 

[Kylie Kinslayer]

Short answer.....

Not only no... but H*LL no!

 

[Reth]

Voted no. My experience with F2P games (Mabinogi, Vindictus, RuneScape) have always been bad.

 

[Lord Frodo]

The only reason UO is $15 a month is because people are buying the wrong game code or from the wrong sites.
Ultima Online 1 Month Game Time Code $12.99


Ultima Online 1 Month Game Time Code


Ultima Online™ 3 Month Game Time Code $38.99


Ultima Online™ 3 Month Game Time Code

Ultima Online™ 6 Month Game Time Code $59.99


Ultima Online™ 6 Month Game Time Code

 

[cazador]

To the OP...free to play is not the answer..yet maybe one day but hopefully not in the near future..I don't enjoy spending $ but My son plays these FTP games and honestly he spends more $ a month then I do sometimes a week more then I pay a month..and also unfortunately for you this is the only semi active UO site to post on..just know in the future 90% of replies here will be flamed no matter what


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jaraxlebaenrae]

It is free if you know where to look.....

 

[Driven Insane]

I'd return if it went FTP.

And I'd quit if it went FTP.

Gee.. I wonder which one of us EA cares about pleasing. The player that currently hands them money every month, or some random person on a forum asking to play their game for free.

 

[Raptor85]

...

they don't accept all cards there, and the $15 a month is basicly what it costs if you pay for your sub through the account management (which is way silly that it costs more in there than buying a game code from their own store)

Anyways, i play a few other games (including "other" UO which OSI could very well copy what worked from) that are F2P and NOT pay 2 win, completely without the microtransactions and such. What they do is a hybrid model where subscribing accounts get certain perks, like more bank room, player housing, accounts don't get deleted with inactivity. They could even still do expansions and such that need to be paid to be accessable (only characters deleted for inactiviy, account status stays)...so basicly a free account with no paid expansions would essentially be like an infniite length trial account we have now but with the ability to go in dungeons and chat to people. for "sandbox" type games this model seems to work best, you might think "but wait, won't most people just play for free then?" and while true that's entirely besides the point, the point of pulling in more players even if they're not paying is to gain and keep actual subscribers which WILL grow so long as there's a healthy playerbase, paid or not. Think of it this way too, the vets quit now under this model while they would have stopped paying, dropped house, etc now don't have a big "enter credit card" barrier to logging on now and then to check things out, maybe hang out with friends. Most people even in that state with it free wouldn't "fully" quit..so that keeps more people at least somewhat in the game for those still subscribing, where otherwise when people quit it tends to be a chain reaction these days, one person leaves and others follow because their friends now no longer play.

I mean, lets face it right now, even on ATL, the most populated of shards, the population is downright pathetic right now, I have 20+ year old MUD's and some lesser known MMO's from the mid 2000's most people havent even heard of, and a few MMO's pre UO that have higher server populations than it, as dead as the game was even in 2009-2010 the state of the game now makes me miss how "crowded" it was then...not even getting to how the game was pre-ren where there would easily be 40-50 people around each bank area to the point where the game lagged and you had login troubles during prime time.

 

[Emil Ispep]

No.

Ive been saying it for years now. Put a $%@&ing box back on the store shelves EA. Thats where your player base comes from. Hell, it took me an hour to try and update my billing status because of all this account/master account buhlcake.. what do you think a new player to this game would be going through?

Never free to play, but with lacking content lately, lower monthly price for sure.

 

[Woodsman]

Ive been saying it for years now. Put a $%@&ing box back on the store shelves EA.

If EA gets their way, within 5 years you won't be able to buy a Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Star Wars the Old Republic, Battlefield, FIFA, NFL, etc. game in a physical box, it'll all be driven through Origin.com. They are spending millions to make this happen, and they don't hide the fact that they believe the future is all online.

The reason of course is that if everything is through Origin.com, then EA gets 100% of the revenue instead of the 35% - 70% they get with retail stores. Even if that excludes some customers, 100% of the revenue for everything will quickly eclipse those customers who won't buy digital.

And what EA isn't saying, or at least explicitly, is if that if everything is driven through online sales such as Origin.com, there will be no more used game sales, since everything is attached to your account. Ubisoft is already doing this, although they were experimenting with letting people transfer their accounts to another person for a hefty fee. No more used game sales will definitely eclipse those customers who won't buy digital.

 

[Penana Car]

Some of you are bashing me for the thread and that is fine, others providing constructive opinion. But can I say one thing? This is great. Diversity of opinion (which is what a forum is about!) I appreciate & do read everyone's thoughts.

Certain systems would need to be overhauled to accomodate free to play. Housing being a great example. Why couldn't housing be a resource sinking commodity? Let's be real for a second, is this a collecting game or a PSW/MMO?

Ive been saying it for years now. Put a box back on the store shelves EA. Thats where your player base comes from.

This is one of the most constructive opinions yet.

Also to clarify the following:

-You have no idea if a free uo would bring more players or not. I believe you believe that it would bring more players.

I believe there is evidence somewhere that free (official) UO would bring more players.

I don't believe you. I think you are telling us a lie so you can better believe it yourself. If UO had lost its appeal you wouldn't be here defending these ridiculous assertions about how great free to play would be for UO. You want to play it. I know it. You know it. Everyone reading this knows it.
Don't play the coy boy here. That only works with little girls still in high school.

I honestly haven't played since January, 2010. I'll always admire the best days of UO but that doesn't say I play this version or want to pay for it. Not being coy at all.

Name one other item you can pay such a piddly amount for and get the many hours of entertainment from??

There is actually a game out now that is more entertaining, free to play, and you can legally auction off unique items for real life money. I've played it already.

Come on people, keep it clean.

 

[Woodsman]

Certain systems would need to be overhauled to accomodate free to play. Housing being a great example. Why couldn't housing be a resource sinking commodity? Let's be real for a second, is this a collecting game or a PSW/MMO?

Housing would be at the top of the list of things that EA would charge for. EA knows that many of us have second, third, fifth accounts for housing. Right now, if I'm spending $50 a month on 5 separate accounts just for housing, there is no way EA is going to let somebody like me pay less than that under an f2p system.

Just go ahead and plan on housing being included in a subscription option that is the normal $10 - $13 we pay right now, because that's how f2p works. Gullible people may think f2p = free, but the companies deliberately throw something into the subscriptions to get you in there. If it's not something like housing, it's limited characters, no in-game support, limits on gold owned, limits on banks (or no bank if you're f2p in EverQuest 2), restrictions on areas, etc. Oh and EverQuest even features "frequent upgrade reminders" that are literally in-game pop-up ads telling you to subscribe.

F2p is not about getting more players, it's about getting more revenue and driving people into a subscription. If slapping an f2p label on a trial account brings in more players, great, but these companies only care if it's going to bring in more money. It's a huge con job the industry is running.

I believe there is evidence somewhere that free (official) UO would bring more players.

Where is this evidence?

And what makes you honestly think that people who are playing the free shards are going to bolt for an official f2p UO? You may think that most of those people are playing free shards because they can't afford official UO, but most of those free shards are deliberately designed to differ from the official shards. It may mean a pre-T2A, pre-UO:R, pre-AOS, pre-Pub 16, pre-Mondain's Legacy shard. It may mean a shard where there are more races. It may mean a shard with a different geography or that is focused only on roleplaying or that has nothing to do with Ultima. It maybe a shard focused on CTF or crafting.

Not to mention those folks are not going to give up their communities just because UO went f2p. A lot of people carefully pick the free shards they want, because EA did not offer a certain ruleset or a certain era. They could care less about what goes on with production shards and how EA charges for those shards.

There is actually a game out now that is more entertaining, free to play, and you can legally auction off unique items for real life money. I've played it already.

If that game is more entertaining than UO right now, then UO changing their payment model isn't going to magically make UO more entertaining for you than that game you are talking about.

 

[Woodsman]

Petra Fyde had it right - take UO's trial account, remove the time limit, slap the "free to play" label on it, and let the gullible people flock in, only to discover that if they want to truly play UO, they are going to have to subscribe.

 

[Penana Car]

Petra Fyde had it right - take UO's trial account, remove the time limit, slap the "free to play" label on it, and let the gullible people flock in, only to discover that if they want to truly play UO, they are going to have to subscribe.

Attracting old players back would bring far more players.

If that game is more entertaining than UO right now, then UO changing their payment model isn't going to magically make UO more entertaining for you than that game you are talking about.

No but if I have two games to pay for, take UO or a better MMO for example. I'd pay for the better MMO and drop UO. If UO were free I'd have incentive to play both. EA is a billion dollar corporation beating a dead drum, they could afford to provide free to play UO.

Where are the resources going anyway? I don't see MyUO and empty servers can't cost that much bandwidth. Logical question.