Graphics still matter...

[Dermott of LS]

...

Whether people want to admit it or not, graphics, even in UO, MATTER. If this were not true, then we NEVER would have had threads of debates and arguments over which client is graphically superior, there would never have been troll replies to screencaps from clients other than the 2d Client. If graphics did not matter then the "it doesn't look/feel like UO" argument wouldn't be used in regards to non-2d clients.

Whether it's a matter of art style, resolution, or familiarity; whether it's Classic Client, Third Dawn, Kingdom Reborn, or Enhanced Client, everyone has a preferred look to the game... in other words, a peferred set of graphics.

If graphics don't matter, then the Classic Client should have been shut down when Third Dawn released and Third Dawn shut down when KR released, and KR when EC released (or continued with KR if the issues were worked out) and noone would have been bothered by it because UO in terms of gameplay has always been UO REGARDLESS of client used. I've played every client from Pre-T2A forward including T2A beta, 3D beta, KR, and EC and the game has ALWAYS been UO. Never once did it change into WoW or any other game. Sure the way I set up macros have changed, this has happened even in the process of playing a single client over time as well.

If you prefer the CC's graphics, that's fine, but don't say that "graphics don't matter" then post that "it isn't UO unless it's the CC". What you really want to say is simply that you prefer the look and feel of the CC and do not want to change. Instead of admitting this, the attempt to deflect to the "graphics don't matter" argument occurs and utterly fails.

I'm not amazingly particular about UO's art style so long as it's not overly cartoony the way UX:O was going to be, what I want out of UO's artwork is simple. I want a gameplay window that I can use on a 23in widescreen monitor that doesn't require constant squinting or becomes all distorted and pixelated because I go outside of the single resolution setting the artwork is made in. Yes, there were many aspects of KR artwork that I thought were a LOT better (if not outright amazing) in comparison to the Classic versions, and there were PLENTY of artwork mistakes made as well. There are aspects of the EC artwork that I like and a LOT that need to be improved IMO. In fact I have a 2+ year old post in my sig that I plan on looking over and doing a "Revisited" post on either here or in the EC forum. Oddly enough, my first and main issue then and now remains the ridiculous drop in resolution quality when the devs changed from KR to EC.

Yes, I have my more detailed opinions of what style of graphics I would like to see where, but that's been posted before and not pertinent to the discussion at hand, really.

But the key point is this, whether you are willing to admit it or not, there is SOMETHING about the graphics of a game that help attract and keep you in that game. Graphics are as much a part of a game as the gameplay itself. While you may not put it at the top of your list of importance, to claim that it isn't on the list at all removes the argument about the look, feel, or identity of the game.

 

[Tanivar]

But the key point is this, whether you are willing to admit it or not, there is SOMETHING about the graphics of a game that help attract and keep you in that game. Graphics are as much a part of a game as the gameplay itself. While you may not put it at the top of your list of importance, to claim that it isn't on the list at all removes the argument about the look, feel, or identity of the game.

My viewpoint on graphics is that they just have to be clean. Whether their 1960's quality cartoon drawings or modern artistic images where it's difficult to tell that their not photographs. The CC has what I consider clean graphics, the EC currently doesn't, there is a distinct difference between the two clients graphics.If I had ran into the graphics appearance of the EC back in the fall of 2000 I never would have played long enough to realize how great a game UO can be. The particular lack of quality would have been a showstopper. The clean quality of the CC's graphics got noticed, and then faded into the background behind the game content. There wasn't any noticeable flaw in quality that stood out to distract from game play and so I'm still playing all these years later.

 

[Krinkle]

They may matter to the people that currently play UO, but there are people that play games that could care less about graphics. Otherwise, games like Minecraft wouldn't exist. Price is more than likely a more important factor than graphics.

 

[Zosimus]

No matter the graphics, they are important.


If not then mudd be the number one game out there

 

[Ashlynn_L]

Good graphics, weather effects and all that can add a lot to the immersiveness of a game which is very important I think. And you don't need to sacrifice gameplay or anything else to get that either.

It's not just graphics though, it's animation and such too. A lot of people point out modern games with "retro" graphics as examples things don't need to look good (especially when UO's graphics come up). Sure, if well presented that is true. But they need to play well too. All those popular games with retro graphics selling well on steam? They are running on slick modern engines and the animation is very polished and smooth. Something like UO CC or U7 by comparison runs incredibly clunky even with Exult and the various filters you can use. It's not just the graphics that are old, more importantly it is the underlying technology.

 

[Basara]

As I stated in another thread, the problem with completely overhauling UO's Graphics is that the underlying architecture is so old, that one would have to create an ENTIRELY NEW GAME that APPROXIMATES UO, with all the costs of creating a new game.

The end result would have to be able to import all the existing UO data, but barring an act of God, Satan, Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (take your pick, and if you're Atheist you're SOL), you'd still only end up with an APPROXIMATION. Game systems will not be 100% identical, no matter how hard you try. Many beloved graphics tricks from UO just won't transfer over (remember all the uproar over KR's ruining carefully constructed CC fishtanks, Pianos, etc.?).

I'd love to see new graphics - but the problem is that it would be too much work, unless one of you wins the lottery and offers to pay EA the development costs - and the end result will still piss off as many people as like it.

 

[Gospel]

As I stated in another thread, the problem with completely overhauling UO's Graphics is that the underlying architecture is so old, that one would have to create an ENTIRELY NEW GAME that APPROXIMATES UO, with all the costs of creating a new game.

The end result would have to be able to import all the existing UO data, but barring an act of God, Satan, Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (take your pick, and if you're Atheist you're SOL), you'd still only end up with an APPROXIMATION. Game systems will not be 100% identical, no matter how hard you try. Many beloved graphics tricks from UO just won't transfer over (remember all the uproar over KR's ruining carefully constructed CC fishtanks, Pianos, etc.?).

I'd love to see new graphics - but the problem is that it would be too much work, unless one of you wins the lottery and offers to pay EA the development costs - and the end result will still piss off as many people as like it.

This isn't true at all. There have been 3 clients made that shared the same "underlying architecture." The graphics can in fact be improved by a great deal without any of what you have described. There's no data transfers necessary, no importing, I don't understand where you're even getting any of this from.

 

[Uvtha]

My viewpoint on graphics is that they just have to be clean. Whether their 1960's quality cartoon drawings or modern artistic images where it's difficult to tell that their not photographs. The CC has what I consider clean graphics, the EC currently doesn't, there is a distinct difference between the two clients graphics.If I had ran into the graphics appearance of the EC back in the fall of 2000 I never would have played long enough to realize how great a game UO can be. The particular lack of quality would have been a showstopper. The clean quality of the CC's graphics got noticed, and then faded into the background behind the game content. There wasn't any noticeable flaw in quality that stood out to distract from game play and so I'm still playing all these years later.

I agree. A clear and cohesive aesthetic is FAR more important than the "quality" of the art. There are some really kick ass 16x16 pixel tile graphics out there for example.
The EC (which much more functional than the CC) is a huge violator of the UO aesthetic. It looks just like what it is, an unplanned hodgepodge. As well, pretty much 100% of all the new graphics were clearly not designed to fit into the original game. I for one don't even make an effort to get items with the new art, as when they are on display they stand out like a sore thumb against the rest of my homes decor, almost all of which is from the original art assets.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I agree. A clear and cohesive aesthetic is FAR more important than the "quality" of the art. There are some really kick ass 16x16 pixel tile graphics out there for example.
The EC (which much more functional than the CC) is a huge violator of the UO aesthetic. It looks just like what it is, an unplanned hodgepodge. As well, pretty much 100% of all the new graphics were clearly not designed to fit into the original game. I for one don't even make an effort to get items with the new art, as when they are on display they stand out like a sore thumb against the rest of my homes decor, almost all of which is from the original art assets.

The ONLY graphical differences between the EC and CC are the terrain and models. ALL item, plant, and building art are all the exact same as the CC. Any new items are made the same for both clients.

Had you stated the KR artwork, in aesthetic terms I would agree. Even though I prefer certain KR artwork over CC artwork in terms of aesthetics, I can agree that they definitely did NOT match.

The biggest jarring effect to me with the EC is having the lower resolution items sitting ion top of the higher resolution terrain. One pixelates all to hell and the other stays detailed. The other thing I notice is that the newer items (again, in both clients) are made at a higher depth of color than the original UO/T2A era items... that tends to make them look a bit odd as well. Case in point, compare the Fruit Basket

to the Cornucopia

.

 

[Uvtha]

...



The ONLY graphical differences between the EC and CC are the terrain and models. ALL item, plant, and building art are all the exact same as the CC. Any new items are made the same for both clients.

Had you stated the KR artwork, in aesthetic terms I would agree. Even though I prefer certain KR artwork over CC artwork in terms of aesthetics, I can agree that they definitely did NOT match.

The biggest jarring effect to me with the EC is having the lower resolution items sitting ion top of the higher resolution terrain. One pixelates all to hell and the other stays detailed. The other thing I notice is that the newer items (again, in both clients) are made at a higher depth of color than the original UO/T2A era items... that tends to make them look a bit odd as well. Case in point, compare the Fruit Basket

to the Cornucopia

.

That's it exactly. The mix of KR models/terrain and original buildings and items. It couldn't be more clear that those two sets of assets were from two completed different sources. I know that all new items are the same for both, but clearly the new items as well were not created with the questions "how will this look in game?" Or if they were they failed to accomplish the look they are going for time and time again.
I don't really fault the artists, as its probably hard as hell to emulate someone else's style that was developed with a long lost set of tools. Regardless it just looks like a mess to me. Not quality, just cohesiveness.
That example you give is perfect. It's quite clear the non shrunk resolutions are waaay off.

I also agree, the art in KR was very mismatched. The items looked like complete garbage, and the models looks pretty good.

 

[G.v.P]

Whether people want to admit it or not, graphics, even in UO, MATTER.

tldr;

We've had two clients for UO since 2001. Ain't nothin' gonna change as far as debate threads are concerned. Was someone going to tag this thread as [NEWS]?

I tell ya, I was running a friend through Yew forest for the Goose, you know how I felt playing UO? Like it was a glorified SkiFree. I ran through that damn forest so many times I begged for something remotely steam punk to pop out and eat me. But LB is dead with over $1.1 million in his bank, ready to resurrect the tired old debate. That third, unofficial, client, with overhead view and town/battle view. That pre-alpha-beta soup.

The CC has its place with its sharp, crisp graphics. LB can complain from his grave all he wants, because you know what? Modern artists for UO have failed time after time to match the (dark stroked edge) beauty of the original "2D" artwork. Third Dawn has its place, with its rest in peace post-EverQuest dance animations and swaying trees. I never did see swaying trees in SkiFree. Kingdom Reborn and its Stygian Abyss facelift has its place, with its grid view backpacks and its flexible user interface. Who knew an instant dress macro and an auto SkiFree collision detection could help that necro cross trader in the cross dresser skirt get a Goose he'll never use on a seldom used shard with no market until October?

Bottom line is we pay about two-thirds of a modern MMO cost for a team that does twice the engineer work. As long as the cost of a sub doesn't go up I think we'll all be sated in the end.

 

[Goldberg-Chessy]

"there is SOMETHING about the graphics of a game that help attract and keep you in that game"

100% correct.
I love the CC graphics and they are one of the main reasons I still play UO quite regularly.

No offense but imo the EC is a train wreck and no amount of tinkering will fix it so I have to wonder about your motives as you have "FINISH the EC!" in your sig.

This kind of leads me to believe that you dont care what the graphics are as long as they are shiny and new.

Shiny and new is a philosophy that I dont embrace. It reeks of latest and greatest and that means less about gameplay and more about bells and whistles.

No thanks.

 

[Cyrah]

Dermott... help. I am sneaking in here to ask. The background of the forums has reverted to that evil black. I had set it somehow to classic. It is still classic if I log in, black if I do not. How do I make it go back?

I loved KR, I did. Some was odd in scale but it was peaceful to me. I have not given EC a proper chance. This I admit.

 

[old gypsy]

Well, I've never said graphics aren't important. I agree with Tanivar in that they "have to be clean" (as they are in the CC). I'd also add that I detest the look of the compartment backpack in the EC and neither need nor want the many expanded functions. There are just too many bells and whistles for my taste. In fact, if they discarded the CC and left the EC as the only remaining option, Madrid might see his wish come true as some of us reluctantly decide to finally depart from UO.

 

[Lady Storm]

You dont need to change the CC users to EC to upgrade the graphics.... infact I would love them to upgrade the CC graphics.
EC is the Dev's attempt at 3d after KR failed. So if you who are soo confused of what CC and EC are.
People who are not tech savy in todays software boon of every thing is possible... all it takes is EA's willingness to spend the dime and time on it.
If you havent noticed over the last few years.... the UO Dev has shrunk to a handfull of people. Who btw are doing the jobs of what took 3x's that number before to do.
I am not making for them excuses but EA has nibbled UO crew down so far that what should take a few weeks takes alot longer. Hence Mesanna saying months between publishes.
The Proof in what i say is in our christmas gifts... compare the list of the Dev & GM's of past to now...
So a graphics upgrade might be a pipe dream... and an expantion of the EC or fixes might take alot longer then many want to hear.. not that they dont want to do it but it might be alot of work for a smaller crew.
Basicly its time and money is UO's nemisis... besides the EA sticky fingers.

 

[old gypsy]

You dont need to change the CC users to EC to upgrade the graphics....

It's a complex issue. As long as we have two different clients, any graphics upgrades would have to be significantly better than what exists now (and equally applicable to both clients). Considering the potential costs of such a project, the size of our current dev team, and the estimated number of present subscribers, I don't imagine EA would view the required investment as justified from a purely business perspective.

 

[Hera - Siege]

If UO EC Client graphics looked similar to Neverwinter Nights, I bet everyone would be playing on it and there wouldn't be a debate, or a much smaller debate team; but fact of the matter is, some people find the EC Models ugly... when I'm sitting on my horse I don't want to look like a beached whale. The EC has some nice features and I use it from time to time. [Treasure hunting it's AWESOME.] I just don't like some of the models in the EC.

 

[Lord Frodo]

You might lose that bet.

 

[Gospel]

I have a feeling that even if the EC graphics were identical to the CC graphics, some of these people would still not play it out of sheer stubbornness.

How about this guys; leave the CC the way it is forever, and improve the EC for those that prefer it. New players should theoretically be starting with the EC anyways, so the CC is fine to carry on for those that would prefer to play it. Problem solved.

The CC can't really be improved anyway, so the thread is really about the EC to begin with. Funny that the same old faces show up to make it an EC vs CC war.

Goldberg, sigh, wrong again. You don't know anything about what potential the EC may have, and nobody will force you to play it, so why not just find another thread to post misinformation in? You obviously have not seen the engine's other applications, so you don't have anything to add. Go complain about pet logout timers or something you actually understand, for everyone's sake.

I don't understand why some of you guys insist on being so narrow minded. Look what one man (Pinco) can do to improve the client all on his own without any help from the devs. Our small dev team does not limit us to the same clients for life, that's a really ridiculous mentality.

Graphics are important. Gameplay is important. We have one nailed down, and not the other. That's something that can be improved. Very simple concepts here. Tarnivar calls for crisp looking graphics. Which of us is asking for blurry crap ones? Of course they should be crisp, 100% correct. They should also keep the same aesthetics as the 2D client. Another obvious point. So what in the blue hell are you guys so bent on arguing about?

 

[Lord Frodo]

I have a feeling that even if the EC graphics were identical to the CC graphics, some of these people would still not play it out of sheer stubbornness.

Wrong again, this has been asked for many times. Graphics switch CC/EC/KR

How about this guys; leave the CC the way it is forever, and improve the EC for those that prefer it. New players should theoretically be starting with the EC anyways, so the CC is fine to carry on for those that would prefer to play it. Problem solved.

That is fine s long as the graphics that are added when new stuff is added stays in line with the CC.

The CC can't really be improved anyway, so the thread is really about the EC to begin with. Funny that the same old faces show up to make it an EC vs CC war.

Goldberg, sigh, wrong again. You don't know anything about what potential the EC may have, and nobody will force you to play it, so why not just find another thread to post misinformation in? You obviously have not seen the engine's other applications, so you don't have anything to add. Go complain about pet logout timers or something you actually understand, for everyone's sake.

I don't understand why some of you guys insist on being so narrow minded. Look what one man (Pinco) can do to improve the client all on his own without any help from the devs. Our small dev team does not limit us to the same clients for life, that's a really ridiculous mentality.

Graphics are important. Gameplay is important. We have one nailed down, and not the other. That's something that can be improved. Very simple concepts here. Tarnivar calls for crisp looking graphics. Which of us is asking for blurry crap ones? Of course they should be crisp, 100% correct. They should also keep the same aesthetics as the 2D client. Another obvious point. So what in the blue hell are you guys so bent on arguing about?

It is funny how people can come on here and state that the CC should be shut down to improve UO and you expect no replies to that, get real.

Narrow minded just because we do not like something that is being shuved down out throats and why are you bring the UI into this. This is not about the UI it is about the Graphics. And if you want a great example of how much better the CC Graphics work with each other then look at the difference between the CC and EC when a player is mounter on a horse. What is that in the EC, a pony on steriods or something. I hope that is not your idea of GOOD GRAPHICS.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Some good replies, so I'll handle those and a few other items all at once:

No offense but imo the EC is a train wreck and no amount of tinkering will fix it so I have to wonder about your motives as you have "FINISH the EC!" in your sig.
This kind of leads me to believe that you dont care what the graphics are as long as they are shiny and new.

Have you read through the post in my sig. It was and still remains some of the biggest issues both visible and not so visible with the EC. Yes, I think the EC is better than the CC, but I IN NO WAY think that it is in any way near perfect. My "motive" for this thread is simply to address a faulty position in reasoning that I have read constantly, and that is the statement that "Graphics don't matter" when they actually DO matter or at least play a more significant role than the person is willing to admit. This in an editorial thread.

Shiny and new is a philosophy that I dont embrace. It reeks of latest and greatest and that means less about gameplay and more about bells and whistles.

No thanks.

Tell me again how a new client somehow LESSENS the gameplay UO already has. Does it take away skills? Does it take away items to loot? UO ALREADY HAS the gameplay. UO has always been UO to me regardless of client (again, I have used them ALL). Personally, I don't see the need for UO to remain in what can now be called the Dark Ages of Technology. It's not a standalone console game, it's an online persistent game which means things CHANGE both in the game itself and as a part of the game's technological infrastructure. If you're playing an MMOG (any title) never expecting it to change, you're in the WRONG genre of games.

I agree with Tanivar in that they "have to be clean"

You know what... I agree with this statement too which is why I support and WANT the team to put together a GOOD High Resolution update. In the current EC, the graphics are NOT clean for the sheer fact that they ARE the CC graphics and the CC is so low res that the gameplay window strains my eyes and the containers are so tiny that they are almost unusable. But you'll get no argument from me about the "have to be clean" aspect, it's the FIRST THING on my EC List in the sig linked post.

I'd also add that I detest the look of the compartment backpack in the EC and neither need nor want the many expanded functions. There are just too many bells and whistles for my taste.

I'll admit that I LOVE the list and grid views (and in Pinco's UI, you can get the best of both worlds... list or grid view on a classic container UI gump) because of the additional functionality. I do a LOT of resource gathering. Being able to see how much of each resource without having to pick up a stack, and being able to have a single secure chest with EVERY resource all organized by type means a lot to me. As for more bells and whistles, the power of the macro system allows me to do things that the earlier clients simply CANNOT DO (even using the default system without any modding). The additional enhancements allow me to ENJOY the game more and click or search a LOT less.

Lady Storm, I agree 100% with your post above. It does bug me that UO has become a Lost Child of sorts because of the actions of EA, and I do have fears that that means that UO will never see the updates and upgrades it REALLY needs.

It is funny how people can come on here and state that the CC should be shut down to improve UO

Emphasis added

And where is this stated in this thread? I wish I had screen capped the "Shut down 3D/KR/EC" posts to toss them right back at you (let's just say my Ignore List grew heavily during KR because of that inanity).

This thread isn't about shutting down one client or another, it's about admitting the fact that graphics DO matter. Which version you like or dislike and why is your personal opinion which is NOT what I am attacking here. If you understand the argument I'm putting forward, then we can move forward with what we want out of the game and why, those that don't understand the argument being made will simply turn it (yet again) into a client war.

 

[Gospel]

Wrong again, this has been asked for many times. Graphics switch CC/EC/KR
That is fine s long as the graphics that are added when new stuff is added stays in line with the CC.
It is funny how people can come on here and state that the CC should be shut down to improve UO and you expect no replies to that, get real.

Narrow minded just because we do not like something that is being shuved down out throats and why are you bring the UI into this. This is not about the UI it is about the Graphics. And if you want a great example of how much better the CC Graphics work with each other then look at the difference between the CC and EC when a player is mounter on a horse. What is that in the EC, a pony on steriods or something. I hope that is not your idea of GOOD GRAPHICS.

Frodo you are hopeless man.

 

[Tanivar]

...

Personally, I don't see the need for UO to remain in what can now be called the Dark Ages of Technology. It's not a standalone console game, it's an online persistent game which means things CHANGE both in the game itself and as a part of the game's technological infrastructure. If you're playing an MMOG (any title) never expecting it to change, you're in the WRONG genre of games.

Changes are usually in the game content, some minor, some major, some popular, some unpopular. Changing the UI appearance wise or function wise can affect the game seriously, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The EC's UI has many feeling it's a vast improvement, many others feel it's a mutilation of the game. The graphics of the EC are bad from my own viewpoint. They don't work well or look good, they distract from game play because the faults just stand out, not letting the graphics just be there, the faults distract me from the game as I played using the EC to the point the game wasn't enjoyable. I couldn't get into the game very much because the EC graphics just kept being wrong somehow or another.

The CC already has it's own good set of graphics with decent animation so the CC will not require any graphic repairs. The Dev Team needs to concentrate on giving the EC a consistent set of graphics that look good and work well together with the EC's graphics code, and they need to fix the animation so characters move in a normal looking fashion. That would leave any new item graphics requiring being done for each client, but as keeps getting pointed out, the CC's graphics are so old and basic, they should wind up taking a fraction of the Dev's man-hours in comparison to the high resolution EC graphics. Let's leave this thread a discussion on game client graphics.

 

[Lady Storm]

Gospel............
Let me make this perfectly clear.
IF UO looses the CC all together... they can kiss $6,360 of my hard earned dollars good bye. and that does not include what id be buying from the Origin store in upgrades, tokns, and toys for my accounts.
If you think I am joking... then let them turn off CC... and watch me delete every stinking thing i own and character i have off it and distroy the stuff i have. and worst off I will not be the only one to go.
This is not a joking matter. EC is fine forthose who like and use it .. i would never ask for its removal...
I simply cant use it... The pain just running in it for a few hours is so bad after it that I get violently ill from the headache..I have to go in a dark room, no sound or the throbing in my head is so hard its beyond pain.
Now I cant say it does this to all who dotn like it.... most likly not. But is it worth the argument?
EA will do what it likes and no matter what we do or say outside of buying up all the EA stock...none of this is gunna matter one iota.
There is one day I expect to wake up and go to my computer and see when I try to log in a Notice from EA...... Telling me thank you for my years of being a Ultima Online customer The game is no longer being supported and that if I contact the customer service a discount on any of its other games will be applied at purchase.
Please dont rush that day for me.........

 

[Basara]

This isn't true at all. There have been 3 clients made that shared the same "underlying architecture." The graphics can in fact be improved by a great deal without any of what you have described. There's no data transfers necessary, no importing, I don't understand where you're even getting any of this from.

Thank you for proving me right - you really DO have no clue about what I was saying....

The 3D client always had issues, because it wasn't written contemporaneously with the sever side. However, the tech base was still fairly close and some of the underlying design was the same. It still had memory leaks and other issues that 2D/CC didn't. Hell, it was partly due to 3D that we had certain monster graphics replaced in the CC for 5+ years (giant spiders, ghost-type undead, Daemons, etc.)

KR was a much later development, and fell far short because it was designed for computers well in advance of what the server side was developed for. It required a number of MAJOR revisions to the server side, that screwed up a number of graphics and such for the CC (one of the most notable was with roads), and ran with extreme lag and client crashes that could never be resolved in its short life (due to the dual tasks of trying to fix the client while keeping the working parts up to date with content).

SA was created by starting with what was working right from KR, and rebuilding that concept from the ground up, but using CC client assets and other means to reduce the load. It (like KR) requires a lot of player tinkering (settings, adding a custom UI) to be tweaked into a usable client, and STILL has issues from having to interface with 1990s-era server code on the back end, no matter HOW well developed the client is.

Even emulator clients that some freeshards use have to use programming techniques that are antiquated by comparison to modern games.


To get a modern tech 2D client to work properly and a better-than-SA "modern" client, you'd have to reprogram the clients AND server software from the ground up, to eliminate the THOUSANDS of lines of uncommented code from the last 15 years (prior to AoS, if not SE, comments and in-code notes were rare in the software, according to the UO programmers of the time). So many aspects of what we know of 2D/CC UO are from layers of code that 1997 programmers could never have predicted, with both intended and unintended interaction. And, the results of such a rewrite would most certainly cause many accepted norms from the game that resulted from those bugs, patches and code interactions in the current game to not occur, and have to be recoded from scratch - once the programmers actually figure out how they were caused in the first place!

Frankly, the EC/SA client running off the current server software is like trying to put a 1960s carb engine into a modified 2007 gas-powered vehicle that used to have an EFI engine running off unleaded and with California pollution controls. It can be done, but you have to make so many changes that performance is hurt in many ways. Trying to go a step farther with a contemporary client compared to other games, is like trying to convert a Chevy Volt to be powered by a Model T engine and transmission (and no battery).

 

[Eric Ravenwind]

The devs would do well by checking out the new free-to-play game from Cryptic Studios, Neverwinter! Even though it's still in beta, most people i've spoken with say it has addictive, polished game play. And from what ive seen, it has great graphics too.

 

[Gospel]

Gospel............
Let me make this perfectly clear.
IF UO looses the CC all together... they can kiss $6,360 of my hard earned dollars good bye. and that does not include what id be buying from the Origin store in upgrades, tokns, and toys for my accounts.
If you think I am joking... then let them turn off CC... and watch me delete every stinking thing i own and character i have off it and distroy the stuff i have. and worst off I will not be the only one to go.
This is not a joking matter. EC is fine forthose who like and use it .. i would never ask for its removal...
I simply cant use it... The pain just running in it for a few hours is so bad after it that I get violently ill from the headache..I have to go in a dark room, no sound or the throbing in my head is so hard its beyond pain.
Now I cant say it does this to all who dotn like it.... most likly not. But is it worth the argument?
EA will do what it likes and no matter what we do or say outside of buying up all the EA stock...none of this is gunna matter one iota.
There is one day I expect to wake up and go to my computer and see when I try to log in a Notice from EA...... Telling me thank you for my years of being a Ultima Online customer The game is no longer being supported and that if I contact the customer service a discount on any of its other games will be applied at purchase.
Please dont rush that day for me.........

Storm, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have never, not one, suggested that the CC be shut down. It is apparent you have either failed to read my posts or failed to comprehend them. I did however read your nigh-unintelligible single paragraph rant in its entirety and see one single point worth arguing:

Your claim that EA will do what it wants and none of these conversations will make one iota of difference is very true. Unfortunately this also covers a great deal if not a majority of the threads in UHall as well. Would you suggest everyone else is just spinning their wheels and wasting their time talking about things that matter to them? Or does it only apply to people you disagree with?

Thank you though for the reply, even if it was to an imagined post.

 

[Gospel]

Thank you for proving me right - you really DO have no clue about what I was saying....

The 3D client always had issues, because it wasn't written contemporaneously with the sever side. However, the tech base was still fairly close and some of the underlying design was the same. It still had memory leaks and other issues that 2D/CC didn't. Hell, it was partly due to 3D that we had certain monster graphics replaced in the CC for 5+ years (giant spiders, ghost-type undead, Daemons, etc.)

KR was a much later development, and fell far short because it was designed for computers well in advance of what the server side was developed for. It required a number of MAJOR revisions to the server side, that screwed up a number of graphics and such for the CC (one of the most notable was with roads), and ran with extreme lag and client crashes that could never be resolved in its short life (due to the dual tasks of trying to fix the client while keeping the working parts up to date with content).

SA was created by starting with what was working right from KR, and rebuilding that concept from the ground up, but using CC client assets and other means to reduce the load. It (like KR) requires a lot of player tinkering (settings, adding a custom UI) to be tweaked into a usable client, and STILL has issues from having to interface with 1990s-era server code on the back end, no matter HOW well developed the client is.

Even emulator clients that some freeshards use have to use programming techniques that are antiquated by comparison to modern games.


To get a modern tech 2D client to work properly and a better-than-SA "modern" client, you'd have to reprogram the clients AND server software from the ground up, to eliminate the THOUSANDS of lines of uncommented code from the last 15 years (prior to AoS, if not SE, comments and in-code notes were rare in the software, according to the UO programmers of the time). So many aspects of what we know of 2D/CC UO are from layers of code that 1997 programmers could never have predicted, with both intended and unintended interaction. And, the results of such a rewrite would most certainly cause many accepted norms from the game that resulted from those bugs, patches and code interactions in the current game to not occur, and have to be recoded from scratch - once the programmers actually figure out how they were caused in the first place!

Frankly, the EC/SA client running off the current server software is like trying to put a 1960s carb engine into a modified 2007 gas-powered vehicle that used to have an EFI engine running off unleaded and with California pollution controls. It can be done, but you have to make so many changes that performance is hurt in many ways. Trying to go a step farther with a contemporary client compared to other games, is like trying to convert a Chevy Volt to be powered by a Model T engine and transmission (and no battery).

Hi, thank you for the in-depth analysis of each client and your sideline impressions of what was wrong with them. Here (again) is my point; it has been done 3 times already, it can be done again. That's it. Simple, concise, and 100% accurate, that's how posts should be.

Regardless of the technical aspects of it, of which I know very little beyond common sense, there have been 3 new clients made for UO in what, the past 10 years? I believe the EC's graphics could be considerably improved upon without any of the technical troubles you describe. If you'd like to explain why it can't be done I'd be interested to hear it. From what I understand, high-res artwork has been under construction for quite some time. I'm interested to know why they'd be wasting their time with that if they'd have to rebuild their servers from the ground up to use them.

 

[Lord Frodo]

Hi, thank you for the in-depth analysis of each client and your sideline impressions of what was wrong with them. Here (again) is my point; it has been done 3 times already, it can be done again. That's it. Simple, concise, and 100% accurate, that's how posts should be.

Regardless of the technical aspects of it, of which I know very little beyond common sense, there have been 3 new clients made for UO in what, the past 10 years? I believe the EC's graphics could be considerably improved upon without any of the technical troubles you describe. If you'd like to explain why it can't be done I'd be interested to hear it. From what I understand, high-res artwork has been under construction for quite some time. I'm interested to know why they'd be wasting their time with that if they'd have to rebuild their servers from the ground up to use them.

There were 3 attempts to making a new client. UO3D was prob. the best that worked well with the old data. KR I am not sure, but EC seams to work better than KR for the simple fact that it is a dumped down version of KR. The DEVs were given to much freedom on the Graphics and if they would have just gone in and enhanced the old Graphics in the firt place then we wouldn't have these threads.

 

[Tanivar]

If you'd like to explain why it can't be done I'd be interested to hear it.

Try actually reading the post you quoted. He did explain it. You've really got to stop tuning out info you don't want to hear.

 

[Lady Storm]

The thoughts of the Dev making the desission to stop the CC client would put an end to UO.
Plain and simple is then this would not be the original game of UO.
KR was an attempt to bring the early stages of 3d to the game.... it was a major flop... not that it didnt have its good points but the bad super out weighed the good. It was put out of its misery.
Then the next gen of the Dev gave it their shot at 3d.... EC.
Not perfect and clearly in need of more work it was delivered to the UO players in a semi soft state of gelling. It clearly was not finished to even the most untech player.
But this was promised to become more............
Pinco and others have adapted to it many great things... improving on a consept that was a good idea.
Is it UO? Not in the sence of the original game.
Had Richard Garrott had this software at hand would he have used it? Yes.
We sit here yipping about changes in the game that has taken 16+ years in the making to get here. UO ran just fine and had a large population way before KR was a thought or a talking point on some drawing boead.
When it came in, and in my humble opinion I beleave it was not from player rants but a Dev team of that era that wanted to play GOD of UO and make their mark on the gaming world. We who have been here from day 1 know the changes over the las 16 years of the game, and who did what.
Dev teams have come and gone... history has them clumped together but we should remember each as part of the games breakdown to what it is today. OH and dont count out the heavy hand of that ever so power called EA board of directors. For of which has cut the budget and personel of UO to the bare bones it is today.
I am not yellig for the dev to change to better graphics, for one reason. They cant. No money, no power, no crew.
The past teams mishandling has caught up to the present UO Dev. Squandering of power and resources in the past has left the present Dev team in the shape its sitting in today.

Gospel if you didnt suguest the dropping of CC forgive me but I clearly read that in the posts above and it bothers me.
It's clearly not your area of expertese, programming what you are askng for is not a simple walk in the park. It would take months of work by a full team of designers with nothing else but the redesign of UO on their plates. The testing and configuring of it to the old code and again testing.. could take a long time to acomplish. The funds for this EA would never part with. EC repair will take dediction of the Dev team and I know the work load we ask of them would be put on hold for a long time to do just this "fix" . No bugs repaired, no hollidays, no real content of the game. you cant just stop and start the workonce its begun.

I aplaud the forward changes of the game our present Dev are doing, if it keeps the doors open and EA fingers off us.
CC removal would kill the last bits of this game for me and I know I for one am not alone.
I would like to see EC repaired and enhanced for the players who love it and use it. Pinco deserves a medal for his meshinations to the EC world.
Do the Dev have the time, money and crew to do it? IDK
One would hope so...

 

[Madrid]

I'm the guy Lady Storm advocating putting the CC client where it belongs...in the garbage. UO has no future as long it continues to support that client.

Squandering of power and resources in the past has left the present Dev team in the shape its sitting in today.

Continuing to support the CC client which can't attract new players is why the Dev Team is in the shape it's in.

 

[Petra Fyde]

Has anyone ever wondered which client the devs use?
Have you ever looked, really looked, at the pictures they post when new items are coming into game?
I strongly suspect that if you asked the devs, and they chose to answer, you would find that the answer is 'both'.
So lets not start another 'us and them' clients thread that we poor mods have got to try to keep civil hmm?

 

[Tanivar]

So lets not start another 'us and them' clients thread that we poor mods have got to try to keep civil hmm?

Give a motherly swat upside the head with this to anyone who advocates dropping either client in this thread after your post. We've already done that scene just this week in the poll thread.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

if they would have just gone in and enhanced the old Graphics in the first place then we wouldn't have these threads.

I kind of disagree with this. There are still some who would still say how much they hated "the new client" (regardless of what it is) simply because SOMETHING would be different from the CC, and there are those on the Upgrade side who would still believe that the CC is holding UO back technologically.

 

[Tanivar]

...



I kind of disagree with this. There are still some who would still say how much they hated "the new client" (regardless of what it is) simply because SOMETHING would be different from the CC, and there are those on the Upgrade side who would still believe that the CC is holding UO back technologically.

You will always find some who are so set on some idea that anything contrary to that idea doesn't seem to register with them. The invitation to Basara above, to explain something that is already explained in the included quoted post is a fine example of this. It's just the way things are.

The CC has the better working graphics set and animation, the EC has a much better macro system and a wide selection of nice bells & whistles, the best features of both could produce a new client that could manage what no new client has done yet, get most of the player base to use it. If most moved to this new client, the Dev's could work on a more modern looking graphics set for it.

 

[wanderer1origin]

...

Whether people want to admit it or not, graphics, even in UO, MATTER. If this were not true, then we NEVER would have had threads of debates and arguments over which client is graphically superior, there would never have been troll replies to screencaps from clients other than the 2d Client. If graphics did not matter then the "it doesn't look/feel like UO" argument wouldn't be used in regards to non-2d clients.

Whether it's a matter of art style, resolution, or familiarity; whether it's Classic Client, Third Dawn, Kingdom Reborn, or Enhanced Client, everyone has a preferred look to the game... in other words, a peferred set of graphics.

If graphics don't matter, then the Classic Client should have been shut down when Third Dawn released and Third Dawn shut down when KR released, and KR when EC released (or continued with KR if the issues were worked out) and noone would have been bothered by it because UO in terms of gameplay has always been UO REGARDLESS of client used. I've played every client from Pre-T2A forward including T2A beta, 3D beta, KR, and EC and the game has ALWAYS been UO. Never once did it change into WoW or any other game. Sure the way I set up macros have changed, this has happened even in the process of playing a single client over time as well.

If you prefer the CC's graphics, that's fine, but don't say that "graphics don't matter" then post that "it isn't UO unless it's the CC". What you really want to say is simply that you prefer the look and feel of the CC and do not want to change. Instead of admitting this, the attempt to deflect to the "graphics don't matter" argument occurs and utterly fails.

I'm not amazingly particular about UO's art style so long as it's not overly cartoony the way UX:O was going to be, what I want out of UO's artwork is simple. I want a gameplay window that I can use on a 23in widescreen monitor that doesn't require constant squinting or becomes all distorted and pixelated because I go outside of the single resolution setting the artwork is made in. Yes, there were many aspects of KR artwork that I thought were a LOT better (if not outright amazing) in comparison to the Classic versions, and there were PLENTY of artwork mistakes made as well. There are aspects of the EC artwork that I like and a LOT that need to be improved IMO. In fact I have a 2+ year old post in my sig that I plan on looking over and doing a "Revisited" post on either here or in the EC forum. Oddly enough, my first and main issue then and now remains the ridiculous drop in resolution quality when the devs changed from KR to EC.

Yes, I have my more detailed opinions of what style of graphics I would like to see where, but that's been posted before and not pertinent to the discussion at hand, really.

But the key point is this, whether you are willing to admit it or not, there is SOMETHING about the graphics of a game that help attract and keep you in that game. Graphics are as much a part of a game as the gameplay itself. While you may not put it at the top of your list of importance, to claim that it isn't on the list at all removes the argument about the look, feel, or identity of the game.

have you looked at mine craft with more subs than uo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and sub snes graphics game play matters way more, sandbox games have more draw and also more give on looks i hated wow as i was an adult not wishing to play cartoon toons lol!!!!!!!

 

[Gospel]

Try actually reading the post you quoted. He did explain it. You've really got to stop tuning out info you don't want to hear.

View attachment 13409

I'm starting to wonder if you just copy/paste the same response to anything I post without even reading it. That's a cool image though, and it really makes you look edgy and totally replaces the need to put an actual thought-out argument.

Again, ill repeat myself. I keep simplifying this and nobody seems to get it, maybe I use too many "big words."

In 15 years, 3 new clients have been made. It is not impossible. It is not so hard it can't be done. Basara obviously understands the technical side more than I do, but also falls short in logical thinking. If they can make 3 additional clients, they could make a 4th. Do you understand that?

And before you guys repeat yourselves yet again with the "it'll never happen" line; no kidding. It's hypothetical. I doubt many would've thought KR was coming after 3D died though.

 

[Gospel]

You will always find some who are so set on some idea that anything contrary to that idea doesn't seem to register with them. The invitation to Basara above, to explain something that is already explained in the included quoted post is a fine example of this. It's just the way things are.

The CC has the better working graphics set and animation, the EC has a much better macro system and a wide selection of nice bells & whistles, the best features of both could produce a new client that could manage what no new client has done yet, get most of the player base to use it. If most moved to this new client, the Dev's could work on a more modern looking graphics set for it.

This is exactly what I am saying. I don't understand why you feel the need to argue with every post I make when we are both speaking for the same goal. Facepalm indeed dude.

 

[Gospel]

The thoughts of the Dev making the desission to stop the CC client would put an end to UO.
Plain and simple is then this would not be the original game of UO.
KR was an attempt to bring the early stages of 3d to the game.... it was a major flop... not that it didnt have its good points but the bad super out weighed the good. It was put out of its misery.
Then the next gen of the Dev gave it their shot at 3d.... EC.
Not perfect and clearly in need of more work it was delivered to the UO players in a semi soft state of gelling. It clearly was not finished to even the most untech player.
But this was promised to become more............
Pinco and others have adapted to it many great things... improving on a consept that was a good idea.
Is it UO? Not in the sence of the original game.
Had Richard Garrott had this software at hand would he have used it? Yes.
We sit here yipping about changes in the game that has taken 16+ years in the making to get here. UO ran just fine and had a large population way before KR was a thought or a talking point on some drawing boead.
When it came in, and in my humble opinion I beleave it was not from player rants but a Dev team of that era that wanted to play GOD of UO and make their mark on the gaming world. We who have been here from day 1 know the changes over the las 16 years of the game, and who did what.
Dev teams have come and gone... history has them clumped together but we should remember each as part of the games breakdown to what it is today. OH and dont count out the heavy hand of that ever so power called EA board of directors. For of which has cut the budget and personel of UO to the bare bones it is today.
I am not yellig for the dev to change to better graphics, for one reason. They cant. No money, no power, no crew.
The past teams mishandling has caught up to the present UO Dev. Squandering of power and resources in the past has left the present Dev team in the shape its sitting in today.

Gospel if you didnt suguest the dropping of CC forgive me but I clearly read that in the posts above and it bothers me.
It's clearly not your area of expertese, programming what you are askng for is not a simple walk in the park. It would take months of work by a full team of designers with nothing else but the redesign of UO on their plates. The testing and configuring of it to the old code and again testing.. could take a long time to acomplish. The funds for this EA would never part with. EC repair will take dediction of the Dev team and I know the work load we ask of them would be put on hold for a long time to do just this "fix" . No bugs repaired, no hollidays, no real content of the game. you cant just stop and start the workonce its begun.

I aplaud the forward changes of the game our present Dev are doing, if it keeps the doors open and EA fingers off us.
CC removal would kill the last bits of this game for me and I know I for one am not alone.
I would like to see EC repaired and enhanced for the players who love it and use it. Pinco deserves a medal for his meshinations to the EC world.
Do the Dev have the time, money and crew to do it? IDK
One would hope so...

Yes Storm, programming is not my area of expertise. I would wager it's not yours either, so I'm not sure why you'd think I need you to tell me what designing a new client would require. No, I don't think the CC should go away, I never even insinuated that. All that would do is piss off a huge portion of the subscribers and probably kill the game. And no, I don't think the devs should put the game on hold and develop a new client. Where are you even getting this stuff?

I'm not trying to rob anyone of their enjoyment of the game. Stop being so ridiculously defensive, folks. I read everyone's posts and I'm not unwilling to agree with people I don't particularly like, so maybe you all should try doing the same.

 

[Gospel]

There were 3 attempts to making a new client. UO3D was prob. the best that worked well with the old data. KR I am not sure, but EC seams to work better than KR for the simple fact that it is a dumped down version of KR. The DEVs were given to much freedom on the Graphics and if they would have just gone in and enhanced the old Graphics in the firt place then we wouldn't have these threads.

You're stating the problem that every one of us is aware of. Indeed, the thread exists because of it. I'm not sure where you're going with this though..? I do agree with you that the devs went overboard trying to make the game so radically different though. I'd be happy just having the 2D graphics in the ECs interface personally, but I doubt that's going to bring any new subs in.

 

[Tanivar]

I'd be happy just having the 2D graphics in the ECs interface personally, but I doubt that's going to bring any new subs in.

Going the other way and linking the EC's extra features so the CC has access to them might be the better route to go. The EC's animation doesn't work well like the CC's does and would still mess up the game screen as we play. Things just don't move right with the EC.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Going the other way and linking the EC's extra features so the CC has access to them might be the better route to go.

In my opinion... no. The CC is simply too low resolution as a client. There are things that the EC can handle functionally that the CC cannot.

The EC's animation doesn't work well like the CC's does and would still mess up the game screen as we play. Things just don't move right with the EC.

If you're going for quality of animation, the Third Dawn client beats every other client hands down as it used polygons with skins that were smoothly animated AND took up less disk space for the animated images. The "hybrid" version used for KR/EC of going back to the 2d style of animation (except with more frames in the EC for smoother motion) was something I thought was a mistake as it creates a LOT more work on the artwork team to make new equip-able items as they have to make separate images for EVERY frame in EVERY direction. That alone slows down the HD conversion CONSIDERABLY.

However, I also think your idea of "don't move right" and "doesn't work well" is just basically your way of saying "the animations are different therefore I don't like them". As with anything of that nature, extended playing times would make this a non-issue as the new animation would become more normal in your mind. It's much the same way that people who played 3D, KR and EC have a hard time going back to the 2d client in terms of animation. The lower number of frames used makes the animation in comparison look a LOT more jerky than the other clients. After an extended playtime in the CC instead of the newer clients, this feeling fades as our brain gets accustomed to it.

 

[Lady Storm]

Thank you Madrid for owning up ...
I know you might think that the CC is garbage when you so enjoy the EC and all the wonders of Pinco's add ons.
But I agree with Petra..
This bickering has to stop.
It is going no where fast and gettng alot of players upset over something that will never happen.
Mesanna has stated in the past as have many of the upper Dev that CC and EC will continue to be supported.
Gospel I was once a programmer.. long long ago... and I do know what it takes to design something this big ... and I thank you for understanding I was not pinning the death of the CC on you persay.
Its time to end this Petra or one of your other capable Mod's... the anger and fustration is going in circles and is making for bad feelings twards others that is not productive.
Sufice it to say We have CC and EC. Work is needed on both.
Thank you.

 

[Tanivar]

...
If you're going for quality of animation, the Third Dawn client beats every other client hands down as it used polygons with skins that were smoothly animated AND took up less disk space for the animated images.

Wonder if they still have the 3rd Dawn code somewhere and could put it on test center after this latest publish is done and get player opinions on it's pro's & con's. If it doesn't go over with today's players to badly, perhaps they can link the 3rd Dawns graphic system into the EC well enough that it works smoothly, and be faster and easier to update graphics-wise. Might be something for them to discuss over a couple beers off and on and see if it's worth officially discussing at a Dev meeting. They deal with the server, client, and game code.

However, I also think your idea of "don't move right" and "doesn't work well" is just basically your way of saying "the animations are different therefore I don't like them".

What I'm saying is that the EC graphics don't move right and don't work well. I worked quality control most of my career. I wouldn't have signed off on something like the EC. That flaw in the EC's animation could be gotten used to given enough sheer stubbornness and a lot of time so you could play without considering changing clients, but it would still be noticeably there and a paying customer shouldn't have to tolerate it until he eventually got 'used' to it. It shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

[Ender]

...

However, I also think your idea of "don't move right" and "doesn't work well" is just basically your way of saying "the animations are different therefore I don't like them". As with anything of that nature, extended playing times would make this a non-issue as the new animation would become more normal in your mind. It's much the same way that people who played 3D, KR and EC have a hard time going back to the 2d client in terms of animation. The lower number of frames used makes the animation in comparison look a LOT more jerky than the other clients. After an extended playtime in the CC instead of the newer clients, this feeling fades as our brain gets accustomed to it.

Truth

Whenever I go back to the CC it looks like there isn't any animation and running is just 2 or 3 frames, swinging a sword maybe 5, casting somewhere in between. Not very smooth at all.

Some people say the EC seems like you're gliding but the CC makes it seem like my computer is struggling to run it when in reality that's just how it's made to look.

 

[Lord Frodo]

have you looked at mine craft with more subs than uo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and sub snes graphics game play matters way more, sandbox games have more draw and also more give on looks i hated wow as i was an adult not wishing to play cartoon toons lol!!!!!!!

Please show us a link to all these subs or are you talking about that counter on the pain page that says how many people bought such and such and yesterday is was above 9,000,000, give me a break. If you watched that counter you would have seen the pattern and it is nothing more than a counter counting nothing. And if you truelly believe what web sites post as total numbers then I have some swamp land to sell you.

 

[Gospel]

Thank you Madrid for owning up ...
I know you might think that the CC is garbage when you so enjoy the EC and all the wonders of Pinco's add ons.
But I agree with Petra..
This bickering has to stop.
It is going no where fast and gettng alot of players upset over something that will never happen.
Mesanna has stated in the past as have many of the upper Dev that CC and EC will continue to be supported.
Gospel I was once a programmer.. long long ago... and I do know what it takes to design something this big ... and I thank you for understanding I was not pinning the death of the CC on you persay.
Its time to end this Petra or one of your other capable Mod's... the anger and fustration is going in circles and is making for bad feelings twards others that is not productive.
Sufice it to say We have CC and EC. Work is needed on both.
Thank you.

Actually we're starting to agree with each other it looks like. No offense, but maybe let the mods do their job and you stick to yours.

As for your programming experience, unless you were a game developer in the last 15 years I doubt it applies. If you don't want to take part in the discussion, not one of us is asking you to.

 

[Gospel]

Going the other way and linking the EC's extra features so the CC has access to them might be the better route to go. The EC's animation doesn't work well like the CC's does and would still mess up the game screen as we play. Things just don't move right with the EC.

Right, I can see this being awesome if they did it right. I guess that goes for all the client design failures though, they would've been great if they were done right, but they never were.

I personally don't care too much if the sword swing animation is 5 frames. I play NES games far more than I play PS3 games. It's just a matter of interface, stability, and graphics that don't look like I'm viewing them through the wrong prescription glasses. However that goal is reached, ill be happy.

 

[Lord Frodo]

The EC's animation doesn't work well like the CC's does and would still mess up the game screen as we play.

However, I also think your idea of "don't move right" and "doesn't work well" is just basically your way of saying "the animations are different therefore I don't like them".

Truth

Lets just look at two animations that a new player to UO will see if they use the EC as thier client. As a new player one of the first things you get is a horse to get around on faster. Now lets look at both clients and how well the Char and the Horse work with each other. Please go to this link to see pictures of both. http://stratics.com/community/threads/which-client-do-you-use.296773/page-2#post-2254850 Please tell me that you think the EC works well together. This is a basic quality that a new player will see that IMHO should have never been allowed. UO3D work well because we had a lot of DEVs that played UO and would see the quality of thier work everyday. Why they went away from the UO3D Client I really do not know. Today I do not feal that we have that same thing going on because in the interview with our Lead Artist he never mentioned that he even plays UO so he would never see this stuff and how many other DEVs have said this same thing.

I will state this flat out that YES the ECs UI is BETTER than the CCs UI. But as far as the graphics are concerened I am sorry to say that the EC leaves a lot, I mean a lot, to desire. This has been asked for many, many times that is they could some how give us the ability with the EC of how it looked on our screen (IE CC/EC/KR) and when you selected which you wanted, lets just say CC your screen would look just like the CC, graphics and all. Now everybody would have the grahics they want and we would all have the ECs UI. I do not know if this is even possible. But as many have said, including UO, both clients are here to stay so just be happy that people are still playing.