-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
EC functionality and CC play window size discussion pulled out of publish 92 thread
So basically what you are advocating is new modern art. Good luck with that. That of course is ignoring the fact that no matter how good the art is, the game is built on an antiquated framework, and the world will always feel outdated... because it is. You can't just keep updating the same thing ad infinitum. Eventually it has to end or move on to an actual new version, in other words a sequel.
UO is not a modern game. Nothing will make it a modern game. Accept that.
Last edited:
I think because it's more involved than you may assume.
Nail on head.
Something this arguing numpty HoneythornGrump obviously can't get his head round.
Its living in the past because it was made in the past, enjoy it for what it is, with the other people who are still passionate about it enough to carry on playing it. Instead of putting it down and moaning, go find another game, you cretin.
The EC isn't the popular client for a reason. You know that. So why bother? ANYWAY instead of this being an EC vs CC issue I think both users of the CC and EC should focus on the real problem together. United as one. I think we all know what seems to be the real problem with UO for the last few years and it isn't which client you use. More options is always a good thing.
...we do?
I do, perhaps "what" was the wrong word
Enhanced Client uses Gamebryo engine which is plenty modern enough. No new version is required.
What needed to is stop making UO look and feel like a 20 year old game.
UO should be like Titan Quest that's behaves like 2.5 perspective. You can zoom out to retain the Isometric view or you can zoom in and you get the close up 3D effect.
It's the CC client that holding the game back and has for a long time now.
As a self admited jurassic I don't expect you do understand this.
or "we".I do, perhaps "what" was the wrong word
So not only do you want new graphics.
You want a new game world with completely different mechanics.
In other words what you want...
Is UO2.
Because alterig the current game into the game you are describing would be 100x harder than just making a new game.
I think that's a great idea, but no one would pay for it.
I would also like to add, the notion that the CC or any client is "holding UO back" is your opinon, based completely on supposition, not a fact.
Lastly, though yes, I do only play CC, you may have missed the like... 10 posts I made today that were in favor of the EC, and against the CC getting any dev time.
I know, I know, it's just too much fun typing one sentence paragraphs and repeatedly hucking that gem of a epithet "jurrassic" at people.
Who is on the dev team these days? Most of the people we hear from were EMs or such 4 or 5 years ago. How do you go from being an EM or some job that has nothing to do with coding to producer or programmer? It's not really surprising they encounter difficulties lol. Phoenix was the only person with any real experience coding UO I'm aware of and he's long gone. So we're just kinda hosed lol. I'm sure they all work very hard and all, but one really needs to know what one is doing to be effective. I'm rather surprised they accomplish what they do get done. Just look over who the dev team is now and their experience and it honestly is amazing they're even able to do a publish. I guess at this point we should be happy to see them pull anything off lol
What I'm saying that that firstly you are suggesting there is a specific problem and that we all feel that way, and then secondly that we all agree on what that problem is.
Again, I think you are speaking objectively out of turn.
It's not I enjoy calling people out. But with the make up, experience and size of the dev team.... well I think we should be happy with everyday the servers come back up one more time
Point being the CC code, the CC being old, etc I don't see as the actual problem of why it's ignored. Okay maybe "we" don't know what the problem is, but "I" do. Good enough?
Good enough that you are speaking for yourself. As to your assertions...
The facts are the facts... cold hard facts. I'm not going to try and force you to accept anything
We all speak from our perspective, that's a given. Here let me fix it. "I think we all know what the problem is except Uvtha. He doesn't know what the problem is.". Just messing with ya Key phrase since the original post is *I think* which sets the tone of the statement.
I mean why not just speak for yourself, and let we all speak for ourselves, because I would bet a billion dollars there are many many people who's opinion on the "facts" differ from the ones that you have.The facts are the facts... cold hard facts. I'm not going to try and force you to accept anything
Your debating semantics. Naturally I'm speaking for myself, that's a given. Everyone knows that. OMG I said *EVERYONE*, there goes another 30 posts! Although I'll stand by the intent of my statements. There's just not much experience on the dev team. Probably the best we're gonna get. Not much point to even discuss it. I just get annoyed by the discussion of working on the CC is something humanly impossible lol. Of course it's not, the problem is *not* the client. Just getting that off my chest. I get tired of people making excuses and not making an effort. It gets old.
I mean when you say "we all know" it's hard to take someone at fault for assuming you were speaking for someone other than just yourself. Mainly I was saying I disagree with your contention, and I am sure many others do as well.
And no one said or even suggested it was impossible to work on the CC... just foolishly redundant as all of those functions and more already exist on the EC.
But the EC isn't an option for a majority of the players. The phrase your grasping for is "I think we all know" which doesn't mean what you think it means. It doesn't mean "we all know", it means I think we all know. Naturally many many people don't want to deal with reality or facts given any situation. If I were to jump around taking things outta context I could have a riot. Doesn't mean I'd be posting accurate or fair statements.
I can accept that you were not meaning to speak for others, but your initial comment was not did not include an "I think", so I think my conclusion was perfectly reasonable, even if it was not what you intended.
The EC is an option for pretty much everyone. I know there are a handful of people who get motion sickeness or whatever, but I have heard very few complaints of that nature.
Oh for Christ's sake.
My original comment DID say "I think" lol. It's right up there at the top of the page. It's not an option for CC users cause we can't deal with the art, blurriness, etc. I *feel* most CC users would quit over playing the EC. I would, many others would. But it's a pointless debate. CC will never die. Been said many times officially.
I would prefer they hired people with enough experience they could work on the CC. I guess we all have different dreams.
Listen, this is Stratics, I've been pulled into some really silly ass debates here. But this one is going for the gold medal. I said what I said. Like it , hate it, agree, disagree, cry, rend flesh, send me flowers, take my words out of context, just call yourself Capt. Lucky and post for me, do whatever ya wanna do. But I'm done with this, it's becoming absurd.
Well if it's for christ's sake, then ok.
Whoops, my mistake.
That's just a preference, not an inability to use the client. The preference comes with a cost, that's all.
I see no reason they should get rid of it. On the other hand, I don't think they should work on it. Supporting two clients is dumb even with a proper staff, but with like 2 programmers, it seems exceptionally silly. They should update the client that has the most function, and is the easiest to update.
I'm sure they have enough experience to do it.
Before you go, can I get that medal?
The main takeaway (andone thing I hate) is that in the EC the pack art is so small ya cant tell what is what. Easy to see in the CC.I did it a much simpler way lol
Instead of taking screenshots, I took actual pictures of my monitor with both the CC and EC running in the same location.
I haven't messed with resolution or anything in the EC as I really don't use it, this is just downloaded and logged in, I have a 18 inch monitor.
Now I am not arguing one way or the other. I am a strictly CC user, I use the EC for 2 things..Hue ID and to save my journal for reporting purposes.
First lets take a look at the log-in screens. Remember these are actual pictures, not screen grabs so no altering has been done lol.
my setup in the CC
Same thing in the EC
Just so those of you who either do not use the EC or do not use the CC can compare at least a portion of what is being discussed.
There are pro's and con's to each client and everyone has their own reasons as to why they chose to play in one or the other.
Larisa
Publishing Manager, Stratics Leadership
Editor
Reporter
Moderator
Professional
Editor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
UNLEASHED
Actually you can fix that in the EC by selecting the legacy container view:
http://i67.***********/2u5848x.png
And look how much more screen you had to use to do that...the EC on left is 3 times bigger than the CC pack. Not all of us have the space to give up for that
I'm not under the impression you actually do.
Yeah, "might", because it is a completely subjective matter which cannot be judged objectively. But that's most probably not the reason, why you used the word "might"...
If you can't see the pixels with the human eye, then it is NOT PIXELATED. That's what the definition says. Go check wikipedia, if you don't believe me. I quoted the paragraph and posted the link...
Duh. Nope, it is pixelated when fullscreen, it is sharp when viewed in the monitors native resolution (a.k.a. right in the browser). If I go full screen with it, one pixel of this image is a perfect square with a side length of almost 1 millimeter on my screen. At the normal viewing distance those are perfectly visible with the naked eye. Hence, pixelated. But only fullscreen. (remember the "pixelation is subjective"-part?)
If you use the print key & MS paint, then you get exactly, what your monitor is displaying. 1:1. No change in color or anything...
Since you used JPG, you might have lost something there because it is a lossy compression...
?
She's saying to use the legacy containers option. Which is on the right, not the left.
With Pincos UI You can scale EVERYTHING to you liking..... including making the backpack tiny just like it is in the CC.
Or you can have it big... I personally love the grid.... I NEVER have to stop and search for crap in my backpack.... takes me just an instant to look and see what I got.. takes the click of one button to completely redress.... the click of one button to swap out my bow/quiver and talisman... etc...
The features outweigh the ugly.... as a tamer with Pinco's UI I can tell you in an instant if something is worth taming or not. I don't have to stop plug all that information into a website and decide. I know instantly.
I have never had a problem finding treasure chests while treasure hunting (unless of course I'm trying to dig up a map I wasn't looking at hehe).....
There are a few bugs that if they ever do fix will keep me playing UO. However if they don't fix them I have a feeling my irritation will rise above the "fun" factor and I'll give it up finally. But I keep having hope that they are fixing it.....
And on that note I have to say one more time @Kyronix that I challenge you. PM will be sent.
The "simple" answer, or as simple as you're going to find it stated anywhere publicly, is here.
The client and server were both a motley hodge-podge of C and C++.
Also,
Two scripting languages. The main one was called Wombat, homegrown. An event-driven C-syntax language with its philosophy derived architecturally from MUD scripting languages in DikuMUDs, specifically Worlds of Carnage and LegendMUD.
The original database architecture was eventually updated from a "Game static DB from flat text files (creature & item definitions)" to something proper. (Interestingly, the first emulators also used definition files and some simpler emulators still do.)
The less simple problem is that much of the code written for the first mainstream MMORPG would have had little in the way of standards or guidelines to work from. Eighteen years later, you should easily be able to expect lots and lots of poorly coded hotfixes (hacks), and poorly documented source, or lost documentation between studio moves and staff restructuring. It was the Wild West of the MMO industry, there wouldn't have been a lot of organizational policies. Which means there will inevitably be portions of the code base for the client and server, including portions of code responsible for passing data between the two, that cannot be touched because of an unknowable number of dependencies laced throughout other parts of the source.
But, really, who cares about technical discussions? MY CLIENT PREFERENCE COULD KICK YOUR CLIENT PREFERENCE'S ASS AND LIKE YOU SUCK AND LOL TALKING ABOUT RESOLUTION IS HARD CAN WE GO BACK TO PERSONAL ATTACKS?
Another former programmer described the experience lovingly as,
The emboldened is my emphasis.
Remember that the publisher, EA, also had no reference points for running a AAA game for years on end. Executives expressed only bewilderment a couple of years after launch, when OSI pushed back at their suggestions that it was getting to be time to shut down the game and pump out a sequel (cause that's what had always been normal at the time).
And games had always been pushed out with rushed code; the people pushing the deadlines had no expectation about the need to future-proof UO against the challenges of two decades worth of additional development. In hindsight, sure, it sucks, this is why we can't have nice things. But only in hindsight.
"Getting a server up and running required a spider web of filesystem links and a delicate matrix of configuration files and scripts (of several different formats). Still, I loved the proprietary script language known as Wombat and the badly-written C++ code."
The emboldened is my emphasis.
Remember that the publisher, EA, also had no reference points for running a AAA game for years on end. Executives expressed only bewilderment a couple of years after launch, when OSI pushed back at their suggestions that it was getting to be time to shut down the game and pump out a sequel (cause that's what had always been normal at the time).
And games had always been pushed out with rushed code; the people pushing the deadlines had no expectation about the need to future-proof UO against the challenges of two decades worth of additional development. In hindsight, sure, it sucks, this is why we can't have nice things. But only in hindsight.
I think there's something wrong with your monitor. You have many incorrect statements here but it's not my problem. Anyone that cares can try my method and see for themselves.I'm not under the impression you actually do.
Yeah, "might", because it is a completely subjective matter which cannot be judged objectively. But that's most probably not the reason, why you used the word "might"...
If you can't see the pixels with the human eye, then it is NOT PIXELATED. That's what the definition says. Go check wikipedia, if you don't believe me. I quoted the paragraph and posted the link...
Duh. Nope, it is pixelated when fullscreen, it is sharp when viewed in the monitors native resolution (a.k.a. right in the browser). If I go full screen with it, one pixel of this image is a perfect square with a side length of almost 1 millimeter on my screen. At the normal viewing distance those are perfectly visible with the naked eye. Hence, pixelated. But only fullscreen. (remember the "pixelation is subjective"-part?)
If you use the print key & MS paint, then you get exactly, what your monitor is displaying. 1:1. No change in color or anything...
Since you used JPG, you might have lost something there because it is a lossy compression...
Quitters always have excuses. Winners don't need excuses.
For optimal screen space I usually have all stuff in hotbars (runebooks, consumables, gear switch macros, etc.) and my pack completely closed. Not trying to teach on hotbars here, but that's also where you can assign default target selection (self, selected target, cursor, fixed target) and hotkeys. It's pretty cool what you can do with this things but I think unfortunately most people don't utilise it much.