Any chance we will be able to Cut up peoples Bodies again for Body Parts?

[Ron Silverbeard]

I did little Publish research - and txs to uoguide i found it - it was NOT 1999

August 10, 2000:

Publish 6:
You will no longer be able to cut up player corpses on the Trammel facet

Now i didnt find anything concerning FEL cut up but i guess it was turned of the same time than...

With Publish 16, July 12-22 2002 i found the following:

The bounty system will be removed.

So thats all i found...

For me, this could be brought back - including a bounty system were you can turn in the Red's Head - i think i would go out and try my luck killing Red's

 

[Mirt]

I think it was Germany, though my memory's a little fuzzy.

My memory was German. It was in responce to laws that would have basically banned the game. Its why most Europeans can't get the full game for many things. They demand that things be taken out.

 

[Raptor85]

unfortunately there are children who do play this game and, the teens rating is what will get us. If you want to watch someones head get cut off go find the video of the man beheaded years ago buy Alquieda. It is NOT something that ANYONE should think is OK to do and in today's day and age a game can be and is at times acted out in real life. Your desire to hack someones head off in a game for the bounty that is noble, but that would require bounties to be offered. Just hacking off a head for a prize or for any other means is wrong.

As a part of the gmae it was nice but I am sorry it should not be allowed anymore, times have changed

and cutting off elf ears and killing protestors isn't..It's a video game, not real life, this isn't a difficult concept....

 

[LordDrago]

and cutting off elf ears and killing protestors isn't..It's a video game, not real life, this isn't a difficult concept....

I am surprised that the killing of gypsies wasn't an issue brought up by Germany...

 

[Madrid]

I don't remember being able to cook human body parts but I never tried to create "human Jerky"..the thought or idea never entered my mind. I can understand lawmakers in countries who've had multiple issues with human cannabilism not allowing such content in their country.

Cutting up the corpses should be okay to do in Felucca but the cooking should of parts shouldn't be allowed anywhere. That never should have been allowed if there was such a thing a 'Human Jerky. That's a little over the top I must say. You should get a message "You come to your senses and realize this wouldn't taste very good!".

Don't we still pull of torso's, a head, and body parts from fishing and the belly of monsters which we can then turn around and feed to our carnivores pets?

Seems quite odd that there are body parts of different creatures throughout UO and this unique feature was taken out.

The turning in of heads for bounty/reward was also a great system that added to the game.

 

[Tina Small]

Yeah, I'd rather not see it come back either. One of my daughters friends got in with the wrong crowd after high school and she's scheduled to be sentenced in July for helping her boyfriend cut up and hide the body of a teenager he killed. Makes me ill just thinking about it. The house where it happened is only a few blocks from ours and I think about the poor girl that died every time I drive by it.

 

[hen]

I believe there was a specific case in Germany that caused their government to become opposed to cannibalism. A man advertised for someone to volunteer to be killed and eaten by him and someone came forward and the grisly incident took place. This is why the German legislators are so against any form of chopping people up and eating them.
I think it was a bit of a knee jerky reaction though.

 

[Viper09]

and cutting off elf ears and killing protestors isn't..It's a video game, not real life, this isn't a difficult concept....

Elf ears aren't "cut off," they just appear on the body. Just because it's a video game doesn't make it anymore acceptable either. While I did enjoy the feature when it was in I don't think it's something the younger players need.

 

[Lord Nabin]

Not for this in anyway what so ever.

Now that being said. I would be interested in the following.

I can buy a Vendor Rental Contract or s Contract of Employment etc.

I could see a great gold sink

"Assassin's Contract"

You would buy the contract and it goes into you back back. When you get near someone you would like to have taken out (keeping it G here) you double click the contract and then target the person and handed it to whoever you would like to get the job done.

The Hired Assassin Makes the Kill. They Double click the contract and target the dead Body. The contract then reads like a Completed treasure Map. Contract to Kill XXXXX completed by YYYYY.

I could see the ability to set the fee just like a vendor contract and when it is set up it pulls the gold from the Employers account and when completed places the Gold into the the Assassin's account.

I could see some pretty serious Role play Games down the road with this type of system.

Or the old Assassins game where you have 10 or so people set up contracts and when you killed someone you took the contract in their back pack and went after the next till you were the last one.


Ok I outlined the Vision now you guys just need to get it done somehow. Have Fun!

 

[Petra Fyde]

Not for this in anyway what so ever.

Now that being said. I would be interested in the following.

I can buy a Vendor Rental Contract or s Contract of Employment etc.

I could see a great gold sink

"Assassin's Contract"

You would buy the contract and it goes into you back back. When you get near someone you would like to have taken out (keeping it G here) you double click the contract and then target the person and handed it to whoever you would like to get the job done.

The Hired Assassin Makes the Kill. They Double click the contract and target the dead Body. The contract then reads like a Completed treasure Map. Contract to Kill XXXXX completed by YYYYY.

I could see the ability to set the fee just like a vendor contract and when it is set up it pulls the gold from the Employers account and when completed places the Gold into the the Assassin's account.

I could see some pretty serious Role play Games down the road with this type of system.

Or the old Assassins game where you have 10 or so people set up contracts and when you killed someone you took the contract in their back pack and went after the next till you were the last one.


Ok I outlined the Vision now you guys just need to get it done somehow. Have Fun!

Interesting - but needs work I think?

How about you buy the contract and can select the victim via either clicking on their paper doll, or their chat id, either from chat or from your ignore list? Put the contract on a vendor - an assassin can buy the contract for 10% of the offered reward. On completion he gets his 'deposit' plus the other 90% in his bank.

 

[Raptor85]

Elf ears aren't "cut off," they just appear on the body. Just because it's a video game doesn't make it anymore acceptable either. While I did enjoy the feature when it was in I don't think it's something the younger players need.

You don't "need" to play this game at all then. If what you're looking for in a game is "Mr Rogers Christian Family values: Online" please go play that and let the rest of us enjoy playing a fantasy game.

 

[Viper09]

You don't "need" to play this game at all then. If what you're looking for in a game is "Mr Rogers Christian Family values: Online" please go play that and let the rest of us enjoy playing a fantasy game.

Your over exaggeration and attack is unnecessary raptor.

 

[weins201]

Easy Raptor, he didn't say anything that would lead to your attack, it was even stated the act was liked in the begining.

Just because it is a fantasy game doesnt make it right to allow children to think its ok to kill somone.

 

[Mirt]

Just because it is a fantasy game doesnt make it right to allow children to think its ok to kill somone.

If thats what we are going for then UO fails in all regard. We have monster killing, brigand killing, other human NPC killing and pvp killing. Its hard to say that killing in a game is wrong when we are in a game where one of the primary things to do is kill things. Not that I have a strong opinion one way or the other but UO should probably be rated for adults and the content should be geared that way anyway.

 

[Redxpanda]

I blew myself up recently playing around with the Armageddon spell (Yes it still kind of works). Reminded me of those days...

 

[Dan123The123Man]

Easy Raptor, he didn't say anything that would lead to your attack, it was even stated the act was liked in the begining.

Just because it is a fantasy game doesnt make it right to allow children to think its ok to kill somone.

Partially correct, but then one must wonder why so many "parents" allow their so called "children" to play games such as Call of Duty. It's the way our society is, stop trying to make it sound like other games out there that chidlren play aren't as brutal or full of gore. It doesn't make it any better but what i'm trying to say is basically, just because you remove this from Ultima Online (a 2d 15 year old dying computer game) doesn't mean that it's going to prevent parents from allowing their kids to play such games. Seriously, this is the 20th century people. Blood, gore, all that **** happens all the time in "VIDEO GAMES". And, regardless of whether you prefer to "Home school" your children and shield them from the real world... They will eventually figure things out one way or another and if they are truly deranged pathologically psychopaths then they will kill someone whether they play Ultima Online or not!

As to your " allow children to think its ok to kill somone" comment. Cutting up body parts is like after the dude is already dead... People kill one another all the time in "FELLUCA", so based on what you're saying it sounds like you are against that as well? Cutting up an ALREADY DEAD player in a VIDEO GAME doesn't say "hey children, now this is what we do in real life so go and kill your neighbor and chop him up ok?" No it doesnt say that.

 

[Tina Small]

Do you think it's possible that EA decided that the "Teen" rating from the ESRB would translate into more sales for UO than continuing on with a "Mature" rating? I believe it is standard and voluntary practice for retailers to not sell "Mature" rated games to anyone under 17 without the consent of their parents. According to information on the ESRB website, UO:Second Age had a "Mature" rating, but they gave UO:Renaissance and every other edition after that a "Teen" rating. [ http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?title=ultima online&fromHome=fromHome ]

I'm sure we've all read the many very public postings people have made over the years that say they started playing UO when they were just a teenager. Could it be that EA, as a publicly held company, was concerned during the development stage for UO:Renaissance that some of its investors, which include many large mutual funds, retirement systems/plans, and trust funds, would get wind of these many, many postings and pressure EA to somehow prevent teenagers from playing a "Mature" rated game? Or perhaps some of those investors became aware of the situation and even suggested that EA should tone down some of the content.

We will probably never know for sure. However, I think this particular archived article from 1998 regarding EA's quick cancellation of "Thrill Kill" after they acquired many of the assets from Virgin Interactive Entertainment might give some insight into what reputation EA's board wanted the company to have at that particular point in time: EA kills 'Thrill Kill' game before release | Tech News on ZDNet .

Out of curiosity, I did a search on the Origin.com website to find out how many game titles there have an ESRB "Mature" rating. These are the titles that the site lists as definitely having that rating: Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, Dead Space, The Saboteur, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age II, Shank, Alice: Madness Returns, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings, Counter Strike: Source.

The following titles also came up in the site's "Mature" category, but indicated in the rating description that the titles had not yet been rated by the ESRB: Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Left 4 Dead, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3, Dead Space 2, Medal of Honor, Bulletstorm, Mass Effect 3, Syndicate, Saints Row: The Third, Dead Rising 2: Off The Record, Warp, Shank 2, Lord of the Rings: War In The North, Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City, TERA, Two Worlds II, Binary Domain, and The Orange Box. (I've checked quite a few of these on the ESRB web site and they all had a Mature rating, so it looks like EA's been slow to update their own website to accurately reflect some games' ESRB ratings.)

Note: Most of the Kingdoms of Amalur and Lord of the Rings editions listed on the ESRB website have Teen or Everyone ratings.

EDITED TO ADD: Sorry, this makes my post even more choppy. However, take a quick look at this timeline on the ESRB site: Entertainment Software Rating Board . I think it is plausible that EA was concerned about the effect on future sales of UO at that time if they didn't do something to change the game's rating to something less restrictive than "Mature." I'm just guessing though. Maybe someone who was actually playing at the time has a better grasp on other issues that might have factored into this situation.

 

[Lord Nabin]

Have we heard of the Madison Avenue Cult of Youth. Those Teens, Gen X, Second Generation Players are exactly who we want to be logging in and paying for their game time.

Consider this.

Ultima Launched in 1980 the series it was the Basis for Ultima Online. Those of us, Me included, who engaged the theme and spirit of Ultima back in the early 80's now have children of their own at an age who play. Hence the second generation of the game. My Value set does not allow for PVP. Nor do I allow my Children several of who are involved in Ultima to run along the lines of Fel.

That being said.

I do consider it a valued game style. There are so many types of Game play in Ultima. That is one of the things that attracts the vast community what appeals to one does not have to appeal to another. I have never like the dismembered parts in game nor will I support it.

I do believe that there are other avenues to take this as I proposed previously.

If all you are really looking to do is Chop up a corpse then maybe you are taking a much to narrow view of Ultima Online and you have no engagement with the larger community nor the Values and purpose of the Eight Virtues.

The Eight Virtues are what the Avatar Strives for and the purpose of him being here is Sosaria.

A quick kill, Gut, and dismemberment truely is the smallest and most limited aspect of Ultima Online.

 

[Tina Small]

This Wikipedia article regarding one of Germany's federal agencies might also be of some interest to folks: Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .

 

[Dan123The123Man]

It's not necessarily all people may be looking to do in UO is to cut bodies up. It's kind of the fact that have you ever taken a moment to consider the era that this game is supposed to take place in? I guess it would be to much anymore to expect there be something re-introduced to the game that did in fact happen during the say era that this game is supposed to be based on. After all, back in those days i'm pretty sure the only "dragons" and giant dogs (cu sidhes) that people were seeing were the ones people saw at the back of their eye lids or after a long day of drinking wine and ale. Having said that I don't think Ultima Online Rennaisance was ever meant to be based on a "King Arthur and the Knights of The Round Table" concept. However, i could be wrong but it also wasn't based on all blood and guts either. Those are the things though that should have never been removed, not only because of how our society is today but because it just makes sense seeing as how it wouldn't be too far fetched to find out that someone back then had cut up a body. I've never ran an official poll but I would guess that the majority of the younger generation today prefer violent video games vs the minority (or vs the older generation of gamers).

I think that, and this is my opinion... I think that if a parent wants their child to play Ultime Online then they are asking a bit much if they think that their child won't be subject to foul language or violence. Violence happens in Ultima Online and without literally changing the entire name of the game and game itself I don't think it's a suitable game for every person. What i'm trying to say is if this game is so violent that a parent needs to restrict their child to specific "zones" in the game, then maybe they need to re-consider an alternative game for their child. Violence and foul language all happen in Ultima Online and it's always been like that for as far as I can remember (even if cutting up bodies had been removed). Not to mention it's a bit unrealistic to think that a child won't witness violence and any of the innapropriate name calling sometime during their game play. If a parent can agree to that then I honestly don't see the point in creating boundaries for playing the game. Players can attack one another in trammel and violence is just a part of the game. The players would obviously need to be in a guild, alliance, or waring guild but I think you can understand what i'm trying to say.

 

[Tina Small]

Dan, did you read anything I posted?

 

[Dan123The123Man]

yes Tina. The reply post above was mainly replying to Nabins post.

 

[Mervyn]

I agree with Germany, they never make mistakes.

 

[Hell's Ironworks]

The gov'ment dont want yer teen to see cartoon gore but you can still let em watch mtv so they can learn to be proper *****s or suicidal emos!

 

[Tina Small]

Another potentially interesting link for you, Dan: Raph's Website » UO’s resource system, part 2 . Read the last paragraph right before the "Applications for AI" heading.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

if u need body parts u can always just take a piece of blackrock in your pack an go to fel and repeat the magic word used to activate the blackrock it will blow u up and leave the body parts all around just have a buddy there to rez u and snag the body parts off the ground

 

[Kylie Kinslayer]

if u need body parts u can always just take a piece of blackrock in your pack an go to fel and repeat the magic word used to activate the blackrock

Sadly they took this out. Atleast I have not been able to get it to work in a long time.

 

[Mirt]

Do you think it's possible that EA decided that the "Teen" rating from the ESRB would translate into more sales for UO than continuing on with a "Mature" rating? I believe it is standard and voluntary practice for retailers to not sell "Mature" rated games to anyone under 17 without the consent of their parents. According to information on the ESRB website, UO:Second Age had a "Mature" rating, but they gave UO:Renaissance and every other edition after that a "Teen" rating. [ http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?title=ultima online&fromHome=fromHome ]

I'm sure we've all read the many very public postings people have made over the years that say they started playing UO when they were just a teenager. Could it be that EA, as a publicly held company, was concerned during the development stage for UO:Renaissance that some of its investors, which include many large mutual funds, retirement systems/plans, and trust funds, would get wind of these many, many postings and pressure EA to somehow prevent teenagers from playing a "Mature" rated game? Or perhaps some of those investors became aware of the situation and even suggested that EA should tone down some of the content.

We will probably never know for sure. However, I think this particular archived article from 1998 regarding EA's quick cancellation of "Thrill Kill" after they acquired many of the assets from Virgin Interactive Entertainment might give some insight into what reputation EA's board wanted the company to have at that particular point in time: EA kills 'Thrill Kill' game before release | Tech News on ZDNet .

Out of curiosity, I did a search on the Origin.com website to find out how many game titles there have an ESRB "Mature" rating. These are the titles that the site lists as definitely having that rating: Mass Effect, Mass Effect 2, Dead Space, The Saboteur, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age II, Shank, Alice: Madness Returns, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings, Counter Strike: Source.

The following titles also came up in the site's "Mature" category, but indicated in the rating description that the titles had not yet been rated by the ESRB: Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis 2, Left 4 Dead, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3, Dead Space 2, Medal of Honor, Bulletstorm, Mass Effect 3, Syndicate, Saints Row: The Third, Dead Rising 2: Off The Record, Warp, Shank 2, Lord of the Rings: War In The North, Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City, TERA, Two Worlds II, Binary Domain, and The Orange Box. (I've checked quite a few of these on the ESRB web site and they all had a Mature rating, so it looks like EA's been slow to update their own website to accurately reflect some games' ESRB ratings.)

Note: Most of the Kingdoms of Amalur and Lord of the Rings editions listed on the ESRB website have Teen or Everyone ratings.

EDITED TO ADD: Sorry, this makes my post even more choppy. However, take a quick look at this timeline on the ESRB site: Entertainment Software Rating Board . I think it is plausible that EA was concerned about the effect on future sales of UO at that time if they didn't do something to change the game's rating to something less restrictive than "Mature." I'm just guessing though. Maybe someone who was actually playing at the time has a better grasp on other issues that might have factored into this situation.

That move to teen was largely done to be able to keep it in large box retail locations. Since thats gone its rating isn't all that relevant. Skyrim is rated M as were the Fallouts. As is call of Duty 3. At this point I would say that while many MMOs try and cater to that teen rating it really doesn't make all that much sense. The more interactive the world the less it can really be a teen rating. Also if they want back to the Mature rating they could get rid of quite a bit of the language filters on runes and houses for example. Its not really worth GM time at this point. While truely offensive names could still be worth a GM we live in a grown up world with other people that are grown up. Since UO doesn't even have a retail presence there is no point in holding back on things for that. It might be worth looking into a world that is set more for adults then kids. I know that those games that I listed sure did very well doing that.

 

[Tina Small]

That move to teen was largely done to be able to keep it in large box retail locations. Since thats gone its rating isn't all that relevant. Skyrim is rated M as were the Fallouts. As is call of Duty 3. At this point I would say that while many MMOs try and cater to that teen rating it really doesn't make all that much sense. The more interactive the world the less it can really be a teen rating. Also if they want back to the Mature rating they could get rid of quite a bit of the language filters on runes and houses for example. Its not really worth GM time at this point. While truely offensive names could still be worth a GM we live in a grown up world with other people that are grown up. Since UO doesn't even have a retail presence there is no point in holding back on things for that. It might be worth looking into a world that is set more for adults then kids. I know that those games that I listed sure did very well doing that.

Yeah, but I think putting some of that stuff back in the game, or putting in other elements that reinforce a "Mature" rating, then would put UO in jeopardy of no longer being available in places like Germany. Can EA afford to do that with UO at this point?

 

[Mirt]

Yeah, but I think putting some of that stuff back in the game, or putting in other elements that reinforce a "Mature" rating, then would put UO in jeopardy of no longer being available in places like Germany. Can EA afford to do that with UO at this point?

I suspect that Germany would not really be able to do that much about it. As the server is no longer in Germany. While they could sue EA for releasing a game they would lose. Lose badly for the record and end up having to pay EAs legal fees. Since the game itself is now downloaded from a server not in Germany all they could really do is arrest and fine their citizens. For some odd reason I suspect this would go over about as well as a wet fart in a sauna.

 

[Ron Silverbeard]

I agree with Germany, they never make mistakes.

nonono, you mean France

 

[Ron Silverbeard]

Yeah, but I think putting some of that stuff back in the game, or putting in other elements that reinforce a "Mature" rating, then would put UO in jeopardy of no longer being available in places like Germany. Can EA afford to do that with UO at this point?

Tina, you realy think it would matter in ANY WAY? Come on, turn the "realistic thinking" switch on!

 

[The Soldats]

I would love to see this come back
To me one of the biggest let downs in UO has been it's attempt to be a "Teen" game, when I think alot of us know that the majoriy of us still around
Have been around AWHILE

There are so many cool things we could do with the system, Reactivate the Bounty system, use it for evil decorm
And I always thought using player body parts in Necromancy would be a cool addation.

And repeating what alot of ppl have said more or less. If you are worried about Kids playing this game, then just look at all the violent examples we have thus far (brains, ears ect)
this game should be rated M and should be PROUD of that rating. I don't wanna be playing with some 9 year olds. If anything else let us Fel players have a chance of some old-school fun.
If the Tammy kids can't handle it... just let them stay in Tam and hunt monsters all day

and Germany? really?... how disappointing

 

[Tina Small]

Tina, you realy think it would matter in ANY WAY? Come on, turn the "realistic thinking" switch on!

So you think that if EA allowed cannibalism in UO and UO ended up being banned in Europe as a result, that would have no effect on UO's budget or future?

 

[Mirt]

So you think that if EA allowed cannibalism in UO and UO ended up being banned in Europe as a result, that would have no effect on UO's budget or future?

One nobody said anything about cannibalism we said about cutting off heads. Two only German seems to have this law. Three you can't really ban content unless your looking at cutting yourself off from the web. While France toyed with the idea once and Iran seems to want to do it I doubt any government in Europe can do it. As far as my memory serves there was never any way for a player to eat another player. As for showing no respect to the dead we have an open emotes system. There would be no way for one European country to ban UO. Also they did not ban Skyrim or any of the other games that I listed. The thing is that these laws are from another time period and no country wants to be lecturing Turkey or Iran on human rights and free speech and at the same time trying to sue EA in a US court. For one they would lose in the US and the best they could do in the UK is try and shut down two servers. I also firmly believe that they would lose there. German had a knee jerk reaction to someone eating someone. While that is terrible (and quite honestly completely insane) it has subsequently joked about in the rest of Europe. The last time I saw was the Thames show The IT Crowd. It was a funny episode for the record.

 

[Ron Silverbeard]

So you think that if EA allowed cannibalism in UO and UO ended up being banned in Europe as a result, that would have no effect on UO's budget or future?

Tina i dont speak about the cannibalism factor - i speak about the violence currently in game anyway AND possible new violence if you are able again to cut up a corpse to turn in a head or skull of a fallen computer generated figure for bounty - nobody would be able to stop ME as a European living next to germany playing UO because of this and wouldnt cause any damage to EA's current reputation as a game manufacture - you realy think THIS would cause any uproar in the gameing industry or community or any European countries government or the EU? We realy have other things to do than watching produced games on their mature or not content - we do this anyway since 1980...

 

[Tina Small]

I guess I just don't see EA wanting to monkey with UO's rating at this point in time by adding violent content in hopes that it might bring back a few people who would play the game for what, a week or a month maybe, just out of curiosity and then leave again. Seems to me that changing a rating that might interfere with being able to sell UO, making it available for play in an Internet cafe, and/or requiring parents to make sure that juveniles can't see it while they play it, just wouldn't be worth it for EA right now. And how many current players who wouldn't even necessarily be affected by such a change in the rating (i.e., wouldn't be blocked from playing or wouldn't suffer fines/penalties if they do and expose a minor to the game) would decide to quit playing if they thought the limited resources allocated by EA for UO's development and maintenance were being spent on trying to add more violent elements to the game?

If UO weren't so old and had such a sparse population as it currently does, then maybe EA would be willing to take a gamble and do as you all are suggesting. I just don't think that everything else about UO, however, would be attractive enough to retain for long anyone that might be drawn back to UO just because you could once again do things like cut off heads, cut human meat into filets, or no longer have to worry about filters censoring the names you put on runes, signs, books, containers, etc.

Also, another article that might be of interest because it discusses game rating systems in the US, the EU, Germany, and Australia: Gamasutra - Features - Rated and Willing: Where Game Rating Boards Differ . I think Brazil may be another country that has a strong game rating system, but haven't been able to check it out yet.

Another link that may be of interest: Ratings | GamePolitics .

And an article specifically about EA and Germany: Dr. Hoyer Goes to Redwood Shores | GamePolitics .

 

[Tina Small]

An article about Brazil and the games industry from October 2011: Gamasutra - Features - The Battle For Brazil's Game Future .

 

[Mirt]

Tina you did see that list of mature games I listed. If being rated Mature would the biggest titles of the past few years be Mature? How about the new Diablo III? Because that is a Mature game. It doesn't matter it was done due to Wallmart saying that they would not carry Mature games in thier store. With no store copies there is no reason for it. FYI because its an online world with other players by default all MMOs should be rated Mature in my eyes.

 

[Ron Silverbeard]

Tina, NOBODY other than the current player base AND the developers care about UO anymore...i want to thank the dev's for fighting for UO still alive month over month what i guess they HAVE to do since years - to think new content that would rate the game 14+ or 16+ something would change anything on subscribers come and go is totaly unrealistic...and i dont care if this game can or cannot sell at wallmart whatsoon or into food-channels at Metro etc.. It wouldnt attract to much people anyway - there is NO marketing EA is doing anywere for UO and wont do in the future - the game will live on as long its break even and it seems like it is...its a nice tax depreciation for EA..thats all...

 

[Tina Small]

Tina, NOBODY other than the current player base AND the developers care about UO anymore...i want to thank the dev's for fighting for UO still alive month over month what i guess they HAVE to do since years - to think new content that would rate the game 14+ or 16+ something would change anything on subscribers come and go is totaly unrealistic...and i dont care if this game can or cannot sell at wallmart whatsoon or into food-channels at Metro etc.. It wouldnt attract to much people anyway - there is NO marketing EA is doing anywere for UO and wont do in the future - the game will live on as long its break even and it seems like it is...its a nice tax depreciation for EA..thats all...

So because you want to be able to see the return of the bounty system, EA should accommodate you and at the same time tell all of the current players in Germany, possibly the rest of Europe, Australia, and maybe even in some other countries that unfortunately they can now no longer buy updates to the game because the game's rating was changed? Brilliant.

 

[Mirt]

So because you want to be able to see the return of the bounty system, EA should accommodate you and at the same time tell all of the current players in Germany, possibly the rest of Europe, Australia, and maybe even in some other countries that unfortunately they can now no longer buy updates to the game because the game's rating was changed? Brilliant.

There is no way for those countrys to actually do that. You see EA has been accomidating in how they set up their pay options but there is no requirment to do that. Also none of those countrys are banning those other games that I listed so they would be unable to do the same for UO without banning those as well. Which I doubt that they would do. One it would take a legislative act and it would look bad for them. Also in Europes case it would run hard against what they are telling both Turkey and Iran. It would change nothing in the long run. Heck even Germany had to back off of those laws after they banned a movie and took all kinds of flak on it. Right now Germany isn't in much of a position to do it even if some legislators wanted to. It was something done for a short term reason whos time has passed.

 

[Lord Nabin]

I may not be interested in chopped up body parts but, I do like the idea I put out above regarding Assassin Contracts I could see that being fun

 

[Mirt]

I may not be interested in chopped up body parts but, I do like the idea I put out above regarding Assassin Contracts I could see that being fun

That would probably get us a Mature rating too. Although the ratings system is different in different parts of the world. Assassins Creed two was essentially rated Mature while three is still pending ratings I would say its safe to say it will be the same.

This too might help to remind folks what the ratings mean
ESRB ratings guide and definitions
Broken down its as such
TEENTitles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.
MATURETitles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

Personally I think for MMO's where you cannot control the actions of all the players by default they should be rated M. Adding in the head cutting off could probably still be done with a teen rating but it would be up to the ESRB to determine that. That being said as there is no retail presence for UO anymore the old rules to keep Wallmart carrying the game hardly matter. The biggest titles of the year have all been rated Mature and that has not hurt their sales one bit. I suspect it would actually do the opposite and set UO apart as a more mature MMO as opposed to model more for the kids. The game play itself would also support this model and just an fyi the outfits and ability to run around almost nude would as well. Subicci as well count as sexual content if you ask me.

 

[Tina Small]

There is no way for those countrys to actually do that. You see EA has been accomidating in how they set up their pay options but there is no requirment to do that. Also none of those countrys are banning those other games that I listed so they would be unable to do the same for UO without banning those as well. Which I doubt that they would do. One it would take a legislative act and it would look bad for them. Also in Europes case it would run hard against what they are telling both Turkey and Iran. It would change nothing in the long run. Heck even Germany had to back off of those laws after they banned a movie and took all kinds of flak on it. Right now Germany isn't in much of a position to do it even if some legislators wanted to. It was something done for a short term reason whos time has passed.

The point I'm trying to make is that if UO's rating changes because of the content has changed, in certain countries that might make it more difficult for current players to continue to play at all or to upgrade their game, and for prospective players to even obtain UO and I just don't see EA thinking that it's worthwhile to allocate funding to UO to make the changes in how you buy the game or upgrades in those countries and/or connect to the servers.

Here's an example of what Steam tells its customers about content locks on some of the games it sells and is one example of the type of obstacle I think EA would have to navigate in some countries if UO's content rating was changed to be more restrictive. I just honestly can't see them pouring the funding into UO at this point to deal with stuff like this and at the same time potentially lose customers just to put in more "mature" content. I think they'd lose more money than they would gain, in the long run.

Resetting Content Lock - Gold Source (PC) - Knowledge Base - Steam Support

 

[Mirt]

The point I'm trying to make is that if UO's rating changes because of the content has changed, in certain countries that might make it more difficult for current players to continue to play at all or to upgrade their game, and for prospective players to even obtain UO and I just don't see EA thinking that it's worthwhile to allocate funding to UO to make the changes in how you buy the game or upgrades in those countries and/or connect to the servers.

Here's an example of what Steam tells its customers about content locks on some of the games it sells and is one example of the type of obstacle I think EA would have to navigate in some countries if UO's content rating was changed to be more restrictive. I just honestly can't see them pouring the funding into UO at this point to deal with stuff like this and at the same time potentially lose customers just to put in more "mature" content. I think they'd lose more money than they would gain, in the long run.

Resetting Content Lock - Gold Source (PC) - Knowledge Base - Steam Support

Yes it is illegal. That being said has anyone ever been arrested for it? No. Is there anyway for Germany to enforce it? No. Are you actually changing the violence settings? No its the same blood and the same graphics that are already used with a different name. So not only would it not do that but Germany making an issue of it would cause them international headaches with both Turkey and probably France. Since there are no servers that Germany could shut down it would leave them looking foolish and smacking of censorship. Additionally take a quick google search for all the games that have patches to bypass the European restrictions (which are mostly on children something that isn't in UO anyway). After doing that imgaine the trouble Germany would have trying to get the laws changed in other counyties to suit their desires. Also at this point bringing up cannablism will simply bring back up the whole issue in the first place a man placing an add to kill and eat someone and someone actually going.

 

[Tina Small]

Okay, I'll try making my point again. Changing UO's rating would cost EA money, which would affect the amount of money that would be available for doing anything else for developing or maintaining UO.

Is there anyone still reading this forum who thinks EA is currently allocating a lot of money to UO's development? If yes, I think there are a few people who would probably like to share some of what you're smoking.

One more link that perhaps will make the point better than I can that getting a rating or changing a rating COSTS MONEY: Under Development Law » The Game Rating System .

 

[Mirt]

Okay, I'll try making my point again. Changing UO's rating would cost EA money, which would affect the amount of money that would be available for doing anything else for developing or maintaining UO.

Is there anyone still reading this forum who thinks EA is currently allocating a lot of money to UO's development? If yes, I think there are a few people who would probably like to share some of what you're smoking.

One more link that perhaps will make the point better than I can that getting a rating or changing a rating COSTS MONEY: Under Development Law » The Game Rating System .

Your own link disagrees with you. Games are no longer sold in store but online. As of right now UO is a download only with items going through an EA owned store. Asking for your game to go one level up and not adding in any new graphics only allowing an action would not make any changes that would require new licensing issues. Its clear that you don't like this but the art is already there. While Germany might make noise (which they did before) any attempt at a legal challenge would have to be done against where the servers are. In the US and the UK as well as Asia the suit would have to be filled asking for an injuction to shut down the server. Assuming this case was taken up EA brings up how no new art is in the system and how they decided that attempting to determine the language that players used was to difficult to enforce and that they therefore felt safer informing parents that this was a game that actually per the TOS you should be 18 to play (which is the age at which the ERSB suggest that mature games are). If German decides to spend money on this and they lose (which in all the countrys we are talking about they would with Germany having to pay EA's legal fees in the US and likely in the UK as well). At this point Germany can either attempt to go after its own citizens which they have never attempted to do in the past 20 years for this, or they could attempt to block access to the content by removing the ability of German IPS to access that. If they attempted to block that access they would stir up such a firestorm that it would likely lead to a new government. Additionally there is no way of knowing what else is on those servers so I would bet they would lose other access to things as well. At this point German probably wouldn't do anything at all because they don't care. Now if there were detailed graphics of dismemberment then your right that could create an issue. But thats not what this is. You hit the corpse with a bladed item and you get the graphics for legs (already exist), a torso (already exists), a set of arms (already exists) and a head (also already exists) that is named. There is a bit of blood that is already used in the animations for both hitting and skinning animals and monsters. The ERSB would not change the rating if that were added in at all. The ratings change would be an intelligent response to not having to use the GMs to act as profanity police. One they don't do a good job at it and two unless it rises to the level of harrassment its not going to get reported in the first place. I believe that UO should request that change in recognition of what the real rating of the game should be and be honest about it. Just so you know in the US its essentially an industry board. That being said when I named the three biggest titles of the year all were rated M. It does not effect sales. It would not affect the legality of sales. When there was a server in Germany EA decided to mollycoddle them. That sever is now in the UK which is far more tolerant of anything that does not have killing children in it. Therefore unless UO were planning on adding children there is no need to worry. Its a simple case of admitting that an old decision for retail no longer applys and the fiction that was put in to lower the rating was just that fiction all along.

 

[Tina Small]

You're completely ignoring the rest of that article. The game would have to go through another rating process in several countries and that costs money.

 

[Mirt]

You're completely ignoring the rest of that article. The game would have to go through another rating process in several countries and that costs money.

No it wouldn't. You see they are not rereleasing a game they are simply asking one ratings agency to change it. As they are not adding in any new art of animations there would be no need for a rerating. If you thought they had to do that then with this new patch as there will be some change in the game it will require a re rating. But it doesn't. This is saying that for the US one its not really a teen game. It actually admits to that in its own TOS. Overseas ratings are different but its already been rated this one change would not make a difference unless someone complained. I already told you the difficulty of proving that anything changed because the art is already in and used. Check some corpses of bloodworms and undead. Do some SOSs you will find this stuff all over. Its just making it player generated again. The real reason that the game went T in the ERSB was so that it could be sold in Wallmart. Since they are no longer doing that it might be time to request a change. The other ratings agencys do things differently and their ratings are less language based but with no new content asking for a stronger rating is easy and always granted. If I made a movie and they wanted to rate it PG13 and I told them listen there are some very mature themes in there I would prefer it to be a R for that reason they would say fine and smack an R on it. The international community wouldn't have to do anything because there is no functional change to the game no new art and animation which is what its designed to cover. Tina your worried about something but its not something that has to be worried about as there is no new art. Now if they made a movie sequence when you did it that would pop up then your right that would all have to be rated but this is simply placing old art in a new area (well old area to be honest). It would not require a ratings change.