[vlog] UO => f2p ... Good or bad?

[Nexus]

That's not the point of a free to play model. The point of a free to play model is to give the game to a player and have microtransactions. It takes trust from a developer that players will pay for little courtesies that aren't necessary to play the game, but make it more fun or convenient.

What you're describing is a trial account.

Hopefully Broadsword follows a successful free to play model and not what you are describing.

They've even said it wasn't a F2P model, so you're right it is an unlimited Trail account. With that said.....

[hr][/hr]

My thoughts on the forthcoming of the Endless Journey.

Do I think it will be beneficial to UO? Maybe, it depends on perspective, and how you prioritize or quantify positive benefit. I think it will let Vets who've left the game check out the changed since they left and a small percentage will subscribe, but any genuine new players are going to continue to be rare enough we could consider them second cousins to Sasquatch, Champ, and Nessie. Why? Because if you haven't figured out if you like a game after 2 weeks, what would make you think extended time in game will change your point of view.

I also feel that if the rampant scripting in the game isn't addressed now, if multi-boxing isn't addressed now, then the impression given to anyone who ventures back into Sosaria will be one that confirms their choice to stop subscribing months or years ago. There is only one opportunity available to make a good impression on any returning individual, and it looks like they are going to in many ways blow it. I will say those script farming, gold, camping IDOCs etc will enjoy the Endless Journey, it means they don't need to re-roll characters every 2 weeks, and while multi-boxing is being declared bannable on sight for EJ accounts nothing has been said about script bots.

What would I do personally if I was making the decisions? Use this as a stepping stone or a milestone towards an actual F2P conversion. Provide Micro-transactions unlocks for everything that is being restricted. Just do it intelligently, if you want a house sure that's $4.99 worth of Sovereigns for a 30 house licence for home up to 12x12 size $7.99 for anything larger, or you want a Bank Box that's another $3.99 a month, a boat $3.99 per month please...etc make it so to unlock everything subscribers get would cost roughly 1.5x the cost of a subscription. Give subs a Sovereign allotment monthly to buy vanity items with or other store items to keep them from just piecemeal buying the aspects of the game they want.

 

[Lore]

I just want to see UO successful again and be able to do even simple things with people while chatting in game and not just over a discord.

 

[Thrakkar]

That's not the point of a free to play model. The point of a free to play model is to give the game to a player and have microtransactions. It takes trust from a developer that players will pay for little courtesies that aren't necessary to play the game, but make it more fun or convenient.

What you're describing is a trial account.

Hopefully Broadsword follows a successful free to play model and not what you are describing.

Go check Developer Meet And Greet, Catskills, Oct. 16th 2017

[Mesanna]: Remember this
[Mesanna]: the goal is to have people want to sub
[Mesanna]: to entice them back to the game
[Mesanna]: its not a complete free to play
[Mesanna]: its call endless journey not free to play

 

[Uvtha]

That's not the point of a free to play model. The point of a free to play model is to give the game to a player and have microtransactions. It takes trust from a developer that players will pay for little courtesies that aren't necessary to play the game, but make it more fun or convenient.

What you're describing is a trial account.

Hopefully Broadsword follows a successful free to play model and not what you are describing.

I mean... that is exactly what they are doing. An unlimited trial account. It IS f2p, it's just not the model of f2p you are expecting.

 

[The Craftsman]

An unlimited trial account. It IS f2p, it's just not the model of f2p you are expecting.

Its a model that will attract but not retain players. Nexus pretty much hit it on the head with his post .. they should use this as a stepping stone to a true F2P model.

 

[Lore]

I don't think there needs to be a stepping stone though. What's the purpose? Why not just go straight to F2P? It seems like it would be less likely to entice a player twice.

 

[Uvtha]

Its a model that will attract but not retain players. Nexus pretty much hit it on the head with his post .. they should use this as a stepping stone to a true F2P model.

I don't think that will ever happen. It would require a lot of work, and the team is just too small. This method is fairly simple, so it's easy to implement. Anyway, I think it's fine. Certainly better than nothing.

 

[Uvtha]

I don't think there needs to be a stepping stone though. What's the purpose? Why not just go straight to F2P? It seems like it would be less likely to entice a player twice.

Too much work.

 

[Nexus]

I don't think there needs to be a stepping stone though. What's the purpose? Why not just go straight to F2P? It seems like it would be less likely to entice a player twice.

The reason I said a stepping stone is because the team is small, and it would be impractical for them to do it all at once with the balancing and adjustment passes etc. it will require. However once they have the EJ in place, it's a simpler matter to create unlocks for features.

 

[Swordsman]

I already knew two paid players planning to stop subscribing and go EJ.

1. One Vet player subscribed for 3 accounts, he will stop subscription for one of them and let this one join EJ.
2. One casual player just plays two or three hours a week, he will stop subscription and join EJ.

We just cross fingers and hope the EJ will attract sufficient unpaid players to subscribe again.

 

[Uvtha]

I already knew two paid players planning to stop subscribing and go EJ.

1. One Vet player subscribed for 3 accounts, he will stop subscription for one of them and let this one join EJ.
2. One casual player just plays two or three hours a week, he will stop subscription and join EJ.

We just cross fingers and hope the EJ will attract sufficient unpaid players to subscribe again.

I doubt many current players will go to EJ, as most would not be willing to lose their house. Even though the account I play 90% of the time will probably end up being EJ (unless the restrictions are more harsh than imagined) because I don't need a house to play on it, I will still do the 90 day thing to keep my house up on my old account.

 

[cazador]

I still think that there should of been a custom Endless Journey share created. New Economy no XFers to only off of. Give paid subscriber a one week play advantage. Full access no restrictions. They can still play current production servers as a fully restricted trial. But can play the Endless Journey shard with 0 restrictions and can only Xfer off after being subscribed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Archnight]

They've even said it wasn't a F2P model, so you're right it is an unlimited Trail account. With that said.....

[hr][/hr]

My thoughts on the forthcoming of the Endless Journey.

Do I think it will be beneficial to UO? Maybe, it depends on perspective, and how you prioritize or quantify positive benefit. I think it will let Vets who've left the game check out the changed since they left and a small percentage will subscribe, but any genuine new players are going to continue to be rare enough we could consider them second cousins to Sasquatch, Champ, and Nessie. Why? Because if you haven't figured out if you like a game after 2 weeks, what would make you think extended time in game will change your point of view.

I also feel that if the rampant scripting in the game isn't addressed now, if multi-boxing isn't addressed now, then the impression given to anyone who ventures back into Sosaria will be one that confirms their choice to stop subscribing months or years ago. There is only one opportunity available to make a good impression on any returning individual, and it looks like they are going to in many ways blow it. I will say those script farming, gold, camping IDOCs etc will enjoy the Endless Journey, it means they don't need to re-roll characters every 2 weeks, and while multi-boxing is being declared bannable on sight for EJ accounts nothing has been said about script bots.

What would I do personally if I was making the decisions? Use this as a stepping stone or a milestone towards an actual F2P conversion. Provide Micro-transactions unlocks for everything that is being restricted. Just do it intelligently, if you want a house sure that's $4.99 worth of Sovereigns for a 30 house licence for home up to 12x12 size $7.99 for anything larger, or you want a Bank Box that's another $3.99 a month, a boat $3.99 per month please...etc make it so to unlock everything subscribers get would cost roughly 1.5x the cost of a subscription. Give subs a Sovereign allotment monthly to buy vanity items with or other store items to keep them from just piecemeal buying the aspects of the game they want.

I think it will be VERY beneficial if done right, there needs to be restrictions to avoid abuse but I like your ideas about being able to purchase a small house (7x7 with no 90 day cycle) and additional bank storage for a monthly fee. I see a big amount of vets returning and it's going to be important to keep them (most did return during the Return To Britannia campaign but only lasted the free month), but do I think the current cheating will make them want to leave? maybe... I personally think they left because they got bored (lack of new content/switched games) and didn't want to keep paying for only a few hours a week (left for a UO freeshard)

There's an interesting post here (Something for those who claim EA and other gaming companies can't prevent cheating) from a studio developer that ran some statistics on gamers, the results for the majority of the complaints were:

1. Less than 1% of the daily active players are cheating.
2. Less than 1% of the community is actually making fuss about it.
3. 75% of the players want new content as a priority (3 months of in-game polls).

Now on this same thread but the next page (Something for those who claim EA and other gaming companies can't prevent cheating) @King Greg posted some Steam testimonials from previous UO players and as you can see cheating isn't the reason they left or won't play anymore...

"Im an old school UO player and agree with what people are saying. Regardless,if UO was on Steam, I would play it. I think the biggest problem with the game now is it just doesn't have a player base, which Steam would definitely bring to it."

"have a killer account that i have left behind but im not worried about it... its time to just move on..."

"Actually I don't expect UO to be a F2P game, but it's too expensive. Many UO players now don't have time to play everyday. However, we still have to pay for it everyday. Now we have a lot of choice. I myself have PS4. Most of my PS4 games only have to pay once. Of course, PSN Plus is not free, but it's relatively cheep. Therefore, I think uo need to change its strategy.."

"Two years and no interaction with the community. What a great company"

"Current servers are unplayable from any new players (except if you join immediately a guild and they will give you all you need)..because over-itemization and inflated economy (due wrong design decisions in the past years) killed this balance. A world where everyone will start from scratch, new players can craft and trade low-level things and enjoy all dungeons, will be a blasting experience. Nowdays all dungeons are empty on official servers now except the high levels - and it's pointless to farm on lower ones, the loot you get is totally trash and doesn't worth a thing to existing players."

"In Turkey, this game left its place to private servers because of the monthly subscription. "

"Its still a fun game but compared to all those others out there it is NOT worth the monthly fee."

"Hope fully Ultima Online maybe change subscription model to 1 paid time price. It sure Ultima online have a great for ever time, if game remove subscription I dare to pay 69-89$ for great game like this !"

"I wish I could play this again with my friends, but not going for a subscription model!"

"Pre-Tram this game was awesome. It's on life support now and is neglected."

"This game doesn't need to be "resurect"ed as it's still going. It's just been turned into crap that has no reseblance of the eras people remember, and "BS Games" is just a downsized downsized EA "

"If this game went F2P then I think it would see a big revival and a return of many of its previous players while also attracting the next generation of MMO lovers."

 

[Thrakkar]

I still think that there should of been a custom Endless Journey share created. New Economy no XFers to only off of. Give paid subscriber a one week play advantage. Full access no restrictions. They can still play current production servers as a fully restricted trial. But can play the Endless Journey shard with 0 restrictions and can only Xfer off after being subscribed.

What would be their incentive to sub and leave that EJ shard?
1. It would be the shard with the second most players. Maybe it would even surpass Atl head count.
2. You don't have to pay a cent, but have full access...

Sounds like a lots of players would cancel their sub and move to that shard. At least I would do it. I usually don't play on ATl because of ping, but if I get free access to such a shard, I could live with a higher ping...

 

[The Craftsman]

the biggest problem with the game now is it just doesn't have a player base

Completely wrong. The playerbase isnt the problem, the low playerbase is the result of a whole host of other problems.

 

[cazador]

What would be their incentive to sub and leave that EJ shard?
1. It would be the shard with the second most players. Maybe it would even surpass Atl head count.
2. You don't have to pay a cent, but have full access...

Sounds like a lots of players would cancel their sub and move to that shard. At least I would do it. I usually don't play on ATl because of ping, but if I get free access to such a shard, I could live with a higher ping...

Wait..I thought anyone cared about was their Shards history and lore? Or was it keeping housing? Listen...every single shard in UO is completely and utterly dead minus ATL. Bringing 1000 players to a dead game with them scattering around. Won’t even make a dent and then they will just quit..no change. Except now VPN multi accounts are farming UO with no worries of bans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thrakkar]

Wait..I thought anyone cared about was their Shards history and lore? Or was it keeping housing? Listen...every single shard in UO is completely and utterly dead minus ATL. Bringing 1000 players to a dead game with them scattering around. Won’t even make a dent and then they will just quit..no change. Except now VPN multi accounts are farming UO with no worries of bans.

Housing? Me? Once I sub, it takes me roughly 15 mins to set up my house. Before my sub ends, it takes roughly 30-45 mins to sift through the items, discard the junk & store the valuables in the bank again. I only need a house for easily shuffling around items between my chars. If there would be a lower sub fee without housing, I'd gladly prefer that one.
And for history and lore, that's something for books. Or in case of an MMO, forum posts, screenshots and videos on youtube. I'd be the first, who would do a shard merge...

Yeah, you're right, 1k new players spread over almost 30 shards won't make a dent. But opening a shard, which you can play completely for free without any restrictions would be the final nail in the coffin.

 

[Thrakkar]

Completely wrong. The playerbase isnt the problem, the low playerbase is the result of a whole host of other problems.

Really? I don't belive that. Sure, UO has lots of issues, which drove away players.
But it's a 20 year old game, which had a peak playerbase of roughly 250k in a time, before WoW made MMOs mainstream. Sure, UO could be healthier, but probably not by much given the circumstances.

The playerbase by itself isn't that much of a problem. Rather the ratio between playerbase and shard count. Now, I won't advocate a server merge, because first, it has been stated often enough that it won't ever happen and second, it usually means opening a can of worms.

 

[Lore]

Why don't the players do a server merge? I've always wondered why like Drach doesn't go to Europa and find a house spot and then move. Tell all Europeans to do the same until Europa fills... Then do the other shards. Broadsword can phase out shards as they empty and add a warning against creating characters are shards that are emptying. Maybe even provide free transfers.

I'd rather have an 18x18 and people to play with than a castle.

 

[The Craftsman]

Really?

Really.

 

[Thrakkar]

Really.

Just curious, so let's to a hypothetical scenario:

If they would have nailed every single decision (in your opinion) over the last two decades (you can't do everyone justice, so every decision would have alienated some players, but let's say it was the decision with the least negative impact possible), how many subscribers would have UO retained from that all time high of 250k until today? Or would it have grown? What's your take on that?

I think it wouldn't have made any difference. We would roughly be, where we are today. Maybe a little bit more, but not by much.

 

[The Craftsman]

Just curious, so let's to a hypothetical scenario:

If they would have nailed every single decision (in your opinion) over the last two decades (you can't do everyone justice, so every decision would have alienated some players, but let's say it was the decision with the least negative impact possible), how many subscribers would have UO retained from that all time high of 250k until today? Or would it have grown? What's your take on that?

I think it wouldn't have made any difference. We would roughly be, where we are today. Maybe a little bit more, but not by much.

That’s a really interesting question.

Let’s say that they had eliminated pretty much all of the bugs, cracked down on cheating (scripting, hacking, duping, multiboxing), invested in a new client that was actually worthy of the name (ie looked great, kept the aesthetics of what UO is, had superb functionality meaning it was a single client game) spent money to advertise and promote the game, released it on steam in a fit state to play, shaped the new player experience, developed the rule set in a different way than they did in the trammel split, priced the game more competitively, possibly created a true F2P set of shards and they had done all this 8-10 years ago when we had a population then yes .... I absolutely think the numbers would be significantly higher than we have today.

 

[Thrakkar]

Let’s say that they had eliminated pretty much all of the bugs, cracked down on cheating (scripting, hacking, duping, multiboxing), invested in a new client that was actually worthy of the name (ie looked great, kept the aesthetics of what UO is, had superb functionality meaning it was a single client game) spent money to advertise and promote the game, released it on steam in a fit state to play, shaped the new player experience, developed the rule set in a different way than they did in the trammel split, priced the game more competitively, possibly created a true F2P set of shards and they had done all this 8-10 years ago when we had a population then yes

I'd even add "taking legal action against emulators" to those (after all you have to use the official client for those, even when modded).

I absolutely think the numbers would be significantly higher than we have today.

Higher? For sure...
Significantly higher? Maybe, I could tend to a yes...
High enough to support that amount of shards? Maybe, but definitely leaning towards a no...