Can UO reinvent itself or is it stalemated?

[kennykilleduo]

Was wondering what everyones thought are on the future of UO , 10 years later its still here , 100's of other MMO's are out there now ,some claiming millions of subs , some holding on by there devoted community.

Uo has the team and the tools to not only rise from the ashes , but it should have been in that spot the game we call WOW is in right now , we have content , depth , GREAT community , EA ( yea I know , but there huge and have lots of money) , Dev team members who seem to really care (although we lost a few good ones in the last few years).

So my question to you is what has UO lost or what does it really need to be number 1 ?



My opinions ,

I think UO has tried to much to be like other games and has grown out of it's so called past life , UO in itself was unique , had a great community , all the right ideas were in place (on paper) , but never really made it into play. We have heard many times about we the community have to get people into this game , I have tried and failed ( see bottom link) , many players have said they do not like what AOS did to the game , can we change that , probably no , But the team at EA mythic hopefully can , because UO has ALOT to offer and one of the best communites to support and promote this game.

We need 4 things to bring UO back:

1. A solid expansion ( if we have to wait a year , then so be it)
2. Marketing , beyond word of mouth.
3. UO's image of being all cheaters/ hacks/ dupes , wiped for good..
4. A fair pricing structure for the age of the game.






Look over a few posts here and see what non stratics people think:

http://mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/forum/355

 

[imported_dukarlo]

Not with EA running it. They dont even put enough into the game to keep its playerbase from cheating and exploiting it like mad and you want them to reinvent UO with creativity?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


"So my question to you is what has UO lost or what does it really need to be number 1 ? "

It has lost the basics of the game. It used to be that you could log in and easily understand the basics of the game. You would start a char, raise it's skills to their maximus and use or buy resources to improve your char. And it was very easy to understand how to get these resources. Basically the game was MUCH more realistic IMO. Now we have a situation where the learing cure is absolutley incredible and the game itself can no longer be related to on a simple human experience kind of fashion.

"1. A solid expansion ( if we have to wait a year , then so be it)"

Definately needed

"2. Marketing , beyond word of mouth."

They don't have the resources, but a couple great expansions would bring the online gaming community here from word of mouth.

"3. UO's image of being all cheaters/ hacks/ dupes , wiped for good."

Yes, needs to be addressed.

"4. A fair pricing structure for the age of the game."

Disagree, $10 a month is an incredible steal IMO for this much entertainment and I'm likely one of the poorest (currency wise) players in the game.

I additionally feel that many players would return for a pre-LBR shard, or even pre-AOS. UO had the best PVP of any online game at this time and there is still not an online game that can match those days. And PVP, regardless of what many people will say, is a MAJOR component to online gaming.




[/ QUOTE ]

 

[DrMcguilicudy]

Anytime someone mentions that AOS ruined UO, I want to puke. If it wasn't for AOS, there would be tons, and tons of content that wouldn't be available.

UO is an item game. Always has been. The more items we have the better off the game is.

Content is key. Changing things up is key.

The last month the devs have done an excellent job of fixing stuff, and adding stuff. As long as they keep doing that UO will be fine.

 

[imported_Sarphus]

Does UO need to reinvent itself?

With those 2 choices (responding to the subject title), I pick choice 3.

UO remains the same deep, dynamic, amazing game it has always been.

 

[Dean478]

It's trying to be like everyone else so badly it even costs as much as games less than half its age...


someone needs to open the Origin fault, pull out all the Ultima Online 2 material and finish it.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


someone needs to open the Origin fault, pull out all the Ultima Online 2 material and finish it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, the UO2 that was canceled would be to old now IMO, back then it would of been awesome, would of been the WoW before WoW, except it would of been a good game too...

They could remake UO2 though, OR release UXO (Ultima 10), it is much newer than UO2.


As far as UO goes, it will be round for as long as EA decides, going on the past 10 years, that could mean a very long time.

 

[Guest]

The net is littered with the wreckage of failed "new" MMORPGs. They're hard - creative and technically. UO's most powerful feature is its immortality, it's ability to walk the fine line between nostalgia and innovation (um ... ok, give or take a few fumbles along the way). Of course it's going to pick up features from successful games - the core philosophy of fantasy game design online or off (and root cause for its wild success in my humble opinion) is "if it works, steal it!"

Ultima didn't invent orcs ... it will pick up other things it didn't invent; yes it's good to be your own world, but not at the expense of losing touch with the communal gamer consciousness (*stops before I start defending elves*)

 

[Korso]

<blockquote><hr>

Anytime someone mentions that AOS ruined UO, I want to puke. If it wasn't for AOS, there would be tons, and tons of content that wouldn't be available.

UO is an item game. Always has been. The more items we have the better off the game is.

Content is key. Changing things up is key.

The last month the devs have done an excellent job of fixing stuff, and adding stuff. As long as they keep doing that UO will be fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

What hole did you crawl out of? When I see posts like this it makes me want to puke as well. UO wasn't always an "ITEM" game. Sure it was nice to get some armor that had a few magical powers on them but it wasn't needed!

GM armor is item based? GM hatchet (red axer) item based? Come one, stop posting these rediculouse comments. Its sickening.

 

[kennykilleduo]

<blockquote><hr>

Anytime someone mentions that AOS ruined UO, I want to puke. <font color="red"> If it wasn't for AOS, there would be tons, and tons of content that wouldn't be available.
</font>
<font color="red"> UO is an item game. Always has been. </font> The more items we have the better off the game is.


[/ QUOTE ]

Have to laugh at these 2 highlighted , We could have done without AOS , as for item based , I came 1 or 2 years before AOS and dont remember UO being item based before AOS...

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

2. Marketing , beyond word of mouth.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oddly, out of the blue on Friday, a coworker of mine was telling me he was going to be trying a free trial of UO because of an ad he'd seen on a message board he haunts. I was so startled that I forgot to mention I play.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

We could have done without AOS , as for item based , I came 1 or 2 years before AOS and dont remember UO being item based before AOS...

[/ QUOTE ]

It was item based to a degree, it just wasn't so important. I assure you though, if you had a valorite hammer crafted long spear back then, you would most assuredly see a difference.

I don't think AOS was the real problem. I think a change like that was going to come sooner or later, as more games appeared with more and more options, it was just done very poorly.
I enjoy the new types of items, they add spice, and customization, but the fact that they were totally out of balance for years, and even more damaging the fact that they came along with insurance (allowing the imbalances to pile up and never disappear) ruined the whole thing. Oh and basing them so heavily on diablo was a stupid idea as well.

 

[Guest]

UO has always been about items,

it just was not as intrusive as the AoS changes made it out to be.

I remember looking for that perfect katana which would have been something like: a silver, supreme accurate katana of vanquishing

which would now be labelled as: undead slayer, ssi 30(somewhere around this #), DI 35%

Armors and shields were labled in like fashion. And you needed either to know someone (ususally a blacksmith) with item id skill (so they could tell how badly it need to be repaired since nothing showed durabilities) or you need a wand/staff of item identification.

A more elegant weapon for a more elegant time.

 

[imported_GalenKnighthawke]

Random points.

-UO will never be #1 again. It only was #1 because there was no competition. It's never been an eye candy kinda game.

-UO does not need to be #1 to thrive.

-UO striving consciously to be #1 would suck, because it could only fail and would damage itself in the process, either becoming too mainstream or striving for too much difference.....Either would alienate too large a proportion of its player base.

-UO as a game is certainly capable of drawing and keeping new subscribers. Exactly how to go about drawing them I have no idea, as I suck at marketing.

-Galen's player

 

[imported_GalenKnighthawke]

ps: To say "stalemated" usually has a negative implication.

On LS at least, it doesn't appear to be stalemated, but thriving. Way down from its peak of course, no one questions that, but better than average over, say, the past year.

-Galen's player

 

[Guest]

I agree with your points.

I think the way to draw in and maintain more people is to build UO on its own strengths, not try to draw people away from other games by aping them.

What are the strengths of UO? Freedom of choice and customization are big ones if you ask me. Crafting used to be one, but insurance took care of that for us. Community another big one.

So I would build tools and features and expansion around this kind of thing, do things well and think them out properly and the game will improve, and will draw in more people with little work at advertising.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

On LS at least, it doesn't appear to be stalemated, but thriving. Way down from its peak of course, no one questions that, but better than average over, say, the past year.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that kind of thing probably goes up and down. I know it picks up a lot in the summer months.

 

[Guest]

Uo has left alot from the past who make it even more diffrent from other games. But i do belive that old thought was better. We do need to go back to the thought where all was needed and depended on each other.

 

[Guest]

Actually its most powerful feature is that it understands how to milk the few it has left.

Lets see:

We pay subscription
We pay for many needed services
We pay for all expansions
We pay for anniversary editions

= Money.

 

[Stigmatas]

pssssst. GM crafter armor are items. Hatchet's are items. Weapons are items. Spellbooks are items. Halberds? Items.


Or did you run around in your underwear for over 3 years?

 

[Babble]

From your definition there are hardly any non item based games.
Stone, paper, scissor is not so itembased, though you use your hands ...

Maybe Stadt, Land Fluß online is not itembased?

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

Content is key. Changing things up is key.

The last month the devs have done an excellent job of fixing stuff, and adding stuff. As long as they keep doing that UO will be fine.



[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that we are in big time need of change and content. And not once every two to three years, either.

Foundation is important, to build on, and we need to shut down cheaters, exploiters, and hacks in as many ways as are humanly possible, while maintaining enough resources and playerbase, to keep the game growing.

Hopefully, the recent successes will be built upon, and we will see a solid foundation of a non-cheating culture laid.

I also feel strongly that we have GOT to get new content, finish up old storylines, and make sure that we have a sustainable way of keeping new content flowing. Both for PvMers, and for PvPers.

Then, we should be able to attract, and retain, new players, and hopefully not lose current ones.

At least, one would think...my .69 cents worth, anyway.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

Have to laugh at these 2 highlighted , We could have done without AOS , as for item based , I came 1 or 2 years before AOS and dont remember UO being item based before AOS...

[/ QUOTE ]

Think back...think about "A Magical Viking Sword", in a corpse of a newly slain MoB.

Think about "Item ID" Wands. Think about "Arms Lore"...

Guess what Item ID Wands did?

They told you about that "Magical Item"'s "Properties"...the kind that made it "Valuable"...like sometimes...in the millions of GP, back when millions of GP meant something.

"Of Invulnerability"..."Of Fortification"..."Silver Slayer"..."Of Vanquishing"..."Of Power"..."Etc Etc Etc

UO was a much SIMPLER "Item Based" game, but it WAS item based...and the items sometimnes had very significant value, as well.

AoS just added a hell of a lot of variables to the "Items", is all. And in many ways, detroyed the value of some of the very valuable "Items" that had come before, indeed.

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

pssssst. GM crafter armor are items. Hatchet's are items. Weapons are items. Spellbooks are items. Halberds? Items.


Or did you run around in your underwear for over 3 years?

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed...and GM wasn't nearly as good as "Of Hardening"..."Of Invulnerability", etc. Only the groups could really afford to wear "Teh Good Stuff", because otherwise a group would come along, gank the single player wearing it, and then THEY would be wearing it...hehe

Spot on...

 

[Surgeries]

<blockquote><hr>

From your definition there are hardly any non item based games.


[/ QUOTE ]

As long as items are obtainable, and can be used...and when used, give an advantage to the user...the game is item based, IMO.

So I guess you actually got one right.

 

[Guest]

In my opinion UO reinventing itself is not about "image" but about gameplay.

UO needs the following:

1) Pvp/faction system that needs something.

2) Item system in which items break/decay but are replaceable by crafters.

3) A gold-less monster drop system based on many, many resources needed for crafters to custom-create items. (yes, you could still sell many items to NPCs to generate some gold but this would be at the expense of trading to other players).

4) An excellent new UPDATE (not expansion) that would modernize the content of the game: NPC AI, dynamic mini-quests, ingame lore/fiction (using town criers/taverns?), new tools for EMs to create/handle events.

5) a guild update in conjunction with the faction update that would reinforce the value of guilds.

Before anyone cries: yes these things are all possible and not too difficult to design, all it would take would be someone with vision to do it and to stop being afraid of fixing the game's disease instead of its symptoms.

 

[Stigmatas]

<blockquote><hr>

AoS just added a hell of a lot of variables to the "Items", is all. And in many ways, detroyed the value of some of the very valuable "Items" that had come before, indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yessir. Exactly my point. It was all just expanded upon. Now whether or not someone likes it or not is up to them. But where would UO be if it didn't build upon existing sytems? This is exactly the content that people want on a regular basis.

I go crazy sometimes building a suit, as you know , but I really believe that UO would be very boring if it were not for a lot of the item properties. Once you have a nice suit built, it gives that sense of accomplishment.

 

[kennykilleduo]

If there truly is a future for UO ,why hide it or keep it so secret , we all know we got a smaller group working on UO , with the recent delay of Warhammer , that would Probably mean our game will not get to much help on a expansion , unless there is another team that works on DOAC stuff ( do they have expansion coming soon also?) We need one of those great State of UO articles or a higher up to come here and say :

This is coming soon , we are doing this and that , not the old excuses..


Look here : Why cant this be done for UO , Mark Jacobs spent hours here:

http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?p=738067

 

[Belmarduk]

<blockquote><hr>


We need 4 things to bring UO back:

1. A solid expansion ( if we have to wait a year , then so be it)
2. Marketing , beyond word of mouth.
3. UO's image of being all cheaters/ hacks/ dupes , wiped for good..
4. A fair pricing structure for the age of the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree totally with you exept for Nr.:4
I am willing to pay the normal MMORPG fee if the game stands up to it.(Atm hm well...Things are being done though..)

<font color="red"> 5. A modern client which attracts new players </font>
Either get KR to that status - Still FAR from it ! or scrap KR and make another one <font color="red"> proberly from the start </font> eg. Highend 3D

1 - 3 is VERY important but will only keep the current playerbase ! (and would of course keep the new playerbase if there was .. a really state of the art client available)

Sidenote: HELL talk about not loyal to UO.... I wonder if certain 2D people would still have an active subscribtion <font color="red"> after one year </font> if "their" client was gone and there was NO alternative for them.... - Just a thought...