Classic Shard #2

[Kaleb]

Players with a Crafter Template can't win against a Template with all 700 points put to combat skills. With even less chance vs. a gank squad of 700 points to combat characters.

Your not supposed to load 1 character up with all crafter skills on a shard you can get attacked by a player on silly, if you want to do that then be prepared for OoOoOoOo all the time. Back before it was viable to put all crafting skills on a character, my mage was my scribe, my swords man was my LJ, My miner/ smith was also GM swords, anat, tactics, heal, magery( he was fun could mine and get rolled up on and next thing you know I have a new suit or 2). My tamer was my item Id'er In fact I still run some of those templates today just not on EA for now.

So its 99% PvPers & PKers, 1% sheep for the PKers to get their jollies with. How long will that 1% consider running around in black & white after getting PKed over & over fun? How long will PKers stay with so few to gank?

"Dang! Another ghost! Ghost! Ghost! Ghost! EA needs to force more players to play this Classic Shard! This dumb game is no fun like this! I can't have any fun since thiers no one to gank! I'm gonna quit this stupid game like I did 10 years ago! No one's fun to ruin! < whine, pout, moan, etc, etc>

Funny you say that being on the shard Im on that I cant mention here there is nothing trammel. I PvM 90% of the time with my guild who also PvM you know hunts, t-maps, fishing?, we dont go out looking for PvP there, there is no real need to. We play UO how UO was intended to be played, If PvP comes to us, awesome but no real need to go out and search for it. PvMers out number Pks no real problem. Reds are my sheep, If one happens onto my screen I go after them like a hopped up redneck.

You had the same decade. Fel facets tainted with AoS just like we had Tram facets tainted with AoS.

Fel Facets are the ghost towns they are because going to fel gets you ganked. Not even all the bait features EA has added to fel to try and draw victims to fel for the PKers to get their jollies on have worked because we know the result of going to fel. OOOoooOOOooo.

We had a decade? Dude I want what your smoking? When was the last Fel based expansion? How much content besides PS has been added VS trammie stuff? You have zero clue to what your talking about, this Thread is for those who want a classic shard with the Classic ruleset, UO is what we want, This is not a make another trammel, Bash the Felucian playstyle while im at it thread.

Take a look at every shards fel facet where PKers roam. Any more evidence needed?

Todays UO is Killing UO!!
What most of you "sheep"(though I dont see PLAYERS that way) Fail to understand is the way UO is now is that Fel is just for PvP its not about Ultima Online its just counterstrike with different graphics. You either go there to PvP, some muleing, or to your house if you live there. The old T2A rule set was Ultima Online, You set your own path, you learn, you make mistakes, you die, create a community band together for a common goal, player towns come to mind. and again let me state that a majority of the people polled want the t2a core ruleset with no AOS changes, what is not decided is the little things. Most people who have posted here that are not current players but are willing to come back if it was under the t2a core ruleset and no aos.

And since this whole classic shard thread started I have always been for a trammel version they just need to make the real UO one first,. back in 2k I was for trammel just not how they ruined UO for me and many of my friends by splitting our server vs. having separate servers with the trammel rulesets going as far as even duping the dungeons. I would have not played those servers but felt that they were needed at the time.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

The old T2A rule set was Ultima Online, You set your own path, you learn, you make mistakes, you die, create a community band together for a common goal

This! Exactly this!

Everything that has been since Trammel is not Ultima Online...but rather a cheap, easy, plastic copy with no risk and no challenge.

 

[Archie]

This! Exactly this!

Everything that has been since Trammel is not Ultima Online...but rather a cheap, easy, plastic copy with no risk and no challenge.

I totally disagree. There were always players who wanted as little risk as possible, and little challenge, so they cheated, duped and used exploits.

Others would scam newbies and gank newbies and recall away from the first fair fight they encountered. They were looking for something easy, and not challenging, to maximize their odds of success.

Or even better, they'd come on forums and trash talk about what a bunch of wimps other players were for not being willing victims, when many of the worst offenders had characters that were some of the game's biggest cowards that hid in the shadows waiting for a moment to be opportunists. What was especially delicious, and I saw this happen more than a few times, is when they'd trash talk some real life combat vet and call them "trammie", or "wimp", etc., as if that person didn't understand a thing or two about "pvp." (Some people play games to have fun and not ruin other people's fun, and not pretend that they are adding something to the entire experience by being a jerk.)

Nope, the worst offenders had characters who were some of the game's biggest cowards, cheaters, exploiters and all around jerks. They just wanted their own cheap, easy, plastic rules, and screamed just as loud and long as a group when they got their nerfs. Why? Because heaven forbid the game should be hard and challenging for them, when there are game mechanics to hide behind.

Recall away from fights they started.

while (1){steal;die;res;}

block/loot/recall

etc.

I say put real player justice in the game and make it a virtual world, like it was in the very beginning, so the weaker griefers get griefed right off the shard!

And what's probably the most incredulous to me is that some people who clamor for the old ways manage to pretend that it was the "complainers" who brought about the restrictions and ridiculousness of things like push through monsters, and easier and easier soloing of some of the game's hardest creatures. Nope, sorry. It was the jerks who broke UO.

 

[zombiekitty13]

I played UO since T2A back in 98 on Catskills. Once Age of Shadows came my friends and I quit because we couldn't stand what they had done with the game. I can honestly say we would all return if EA introduced a classic shard though.

We have tried those free shards and none of them ever manage to get things right.

I would prefer a UO:R ruleset without Trammel myself. Simply because UO:R opened up a lot of options for char templates which T2A didn't really have.

Whatever they do I hope they do things right:

nothing neon, no Trammel, stat-loss for PKs and magic items should be rare.

 

[Kain_LoD]

If you honestly believe that you are sorely mistaken. PvPers may be fighting in groups having fun, but the PK's will always seek out the easy prey...Sadly there will be more PK's than there are PvPers on a classic shard.


Huh? What world were you living in where Fel was full of people? Once Trammel was introduced in Publish 5 Fel became a barren wasteland with very few people. Even the introduction of extra resources, Factions and Power Scrolls couldn't entice people to Fel. If Fel was as popular as you say then there never would have been the need to introduce those enticements.

Face it, the basically penalty free PKing is what forced trammel and ultimately AoS on us. If the PK's aren't willing to accept some form of different punishment then the classic shard will be doomed to failure. Stat Loss didn't work. And while I like Archies suggestions for Murderer guilds etc... I still think public humiliation upon death for the duration of their murder counts to decay until 4 counts would be the best solution. It would be no different than back in the day when they would UM counts off to rezz without stat loss but instead of being able to macro away in their house, they would be forced to be in a place where everyone could see them and make fun of them. Maybe even place barrels of rotten vegetables to throw at them.

The shard that frenchtoast plays on now, which is relatively classic, actually has more pvpers then pk's...usually by a fair amount. As the other guy mentioned, the average player now is infinitely better then the average player of old... pks aren't really that big of a deal anymore. They will be policed for the most part.

As for fel being a wasteland? Shards still had TONS of people on fel...I could log onto my shard (chesapeake) and finds fights all day long... sometimes way too many !

 

[frenchtoast]

If you honestly believe that you are sorely mistaken. PvPers may be fighting in groups having fun, but the PK's will always seek out the easy prey...Sadly there will be more PK's than there are PvPers on a classic shard.


Huh? What world were you living in where Fel was full of people? Once Trammel was introduced in Publish 5 Fel became a barren wasteland with very few people. Even the introduction of extra resources, Factions and Power Scrolls couldn't entice people to Fel. If Fel was as popular as you say then there never would have been the need to introduce those enticements.

Face it, the basically penalty free PKing is what forced trammel and ultimately AoS on us. If the PK's aren't willing to accept some form of different punishment then the classic shard will be doomed to failure. Stat Loss didn't work. And while I like Archies suggestions for Murderer guilds etc... I still think public humiliation upon death for the duration of their murder counts to decay until 4 counts would be the best solution. It would be no different than back in the day when they would UM counts off to rezz without stat loss but instead of being able to macro away in their house, they would be forced to be in a place where everyone could see them and make fun of them. Maybe even place barrels of rotten vegetables to throw at them.

I don't know what you are talking about because back when I played, TONS of people pvped in fel.

You would have like 50v50 faction raid fights, tons of people pvping at yew gate. You're delusional if you think fel was dead.

 

[frenchtoast]

Some people want it easy on a classic shard.

Not acceptable.

The latest, greatest classic shard must have meaningful player justice, or it will fail.

No recalling or gating as an aggressor.

A character class (detective) that can track down and somehow DISRUPT the play style of criminals. (Put them out of commission for a while.)

A penalty for choosing the path of murderer, like the thieves' guild puts penalties on thief characters.

There are ways to add game mechanics that will increase the odds that the general population can police their world without overlaying restrictive mechanics like those that brought about Trammel.

Trammel is fine for people who want to play a more solo style, or relaxed style, or hopefully a more cordial style, but a true virtual world needs freedom and CONSEQUENCES! It needs law and order, and the ability to be an outlaw. But the old ways didn't work well enough for the virtual community and thus old UO was far too anarchistic outside of town to be an acceptable alternative to today's gaming opportunities.

It can be fixed. It's not that hard. But Rule 1 should be, IMO, that it is AT LEAST as dangerous and potentially disruptive of one's play style to play a criminal character as it is just minding your own business and doing other players no harm. Period, end of story.

If you want CSI, go to CBS, they play it all the time there.

As far as UO goes, that sir is not CSI nor needs to be turned into CSI.

 

[Kain_LoD]

The people not into Pvp are not going to play a PKfest Classic Shard. PKers need to accept they will never have the pre-Tram gankfest world they had before UO:Ren. Until that sinks in and there are some effective restraints on PKing installed, the Classic Shard would just be another fel ghost town.

Pretty sure many pvp'ers will be around to fight one another, and also kill many of the pk'ers you worry about. Also, if it is not a pre-tram gankfest...then why are you worried about the pk'ers? With no food, they will starve no? Then people can mine in peace as the pvp'ers faction/guild/o/c fight all around them... or they can get in the mix and not be 7xcrafters and helpless? Or they can stay on any of the current uo-style servers that already exist?

 

[Aragon100]

It concerns me, as I said, because:

A.) I am a paying customer
B.) Unless a Dev corrects me, it seems common sense that developing a classic shard will take time, energy and resources away from the current shards. Issues such as fixing bugs, final touches on the EC, the Faction revamping, new content, etc.
C.) there were 567 voters in the poll about what a classic shard should entail. Among those voters were many puppet accounts and ex-players that you in no way can guarantee will becoming paying customers again even if they get what they voted for. I don't see why the Devs should pander to a partially artificial minority.
D.) If EA/Mythic is going to lure in new players or ex-players, the only proven way to do that is to advertise and put a product on store shelves. A classic shard would be nice for some, but if the choice is between that and spending some cash to remind people UO is still alive and unique among MMORPGs, I'd rather they do the later. It makes sense that would be better for the longevity of UO.

How does this thread not concern me and how are my opinions trolling? And please leave the profane insults out of it if you respond. (yeah, i saw that. )

A. I'm not a paying customer anymore but i would be if my old UO returned.

B. A old setting UO shard would give the old players that stopped playing UO altogether february 2003 when AoS arrived a chance to pick up the game again, same for the ones that left with the implementation of trammel. And these potential subscribers is not just some artificial minority. UO never had as many subscribers as just before AoS were released. After AoS the number of subscribers dropped. Many left the game because their old game were nowhere to be seen. The oldtimers felt leftout. To be honest, AoS is most likely the sequal that had the most negative impact to any MMO ever, (specifically to the UO veterans that loved their old UO-game and still does). AoS had a negative impact to the number of subscribers and changed the gameplay to something the oldtimers just didnt recognize anymore and they left the game. These players have continued to play old setting UO and if they had a chance to play old UO by subscribing, they would. They would play on the most crowded UO-server and deliver good subscription income to developers. These fresh new income will of course regenerate new fresh developers that will solely work on this old setting shard (shards). I dont mention trammel here cause i never felt that trammel changed felucca as negatively as AoS did.

C. Im in a guild that could easily bring +30 new subscribers to a new shard with old settings. 29 of those havent voted in this poll but we had a discussion on our website and the interest is over the rooftop.

D. Many potential old UO subscribers isnt paying subscribers cause their beloved UO dont exist anymore, it died with either the introduction of trammel or most likely with the introduction of AoS. Not wanting these new subscription money is to me very strange. If you have a potentially successful product people want, why not sell it?

I dont understand why you feel threatened by us old UO veterans wanting to become paying subscribers again? To me that is being selfish. Our UO is gone and we want it back, if that isnt a shard for you then continue playing the one you prefer.

Edit: Sorry for my english, not my native language.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

Fel was full of people, you would find twice maybe three times as many people in fel then you would in tram. That problem isn't the case right now because people don't enjoy pvping in post-aos UO. Therefore Fel is probably nearly empty.

I don't know what you are talking about because back when I played, TONS of people pvped in fel.
You would have like 50v50 faction raid fights, tons of people pvping at yew gate. You're delusional if you think fel was dead.

You said Fell had 2-3 times to population of Trammel. I called BS on it. You respond with this. So in your view Tram only had at most 50 people in it while Fell had 150? Hmm...Kind of hard to swallow that when you'd have 150+ on screen at WBB bank in Tram. You're looking at things through a pair of rose colored glasses worse than most of us.

As for that certain gamers shard you play on, I will agree that there is a lot of PvP that goes on, but you can't say that there is little PKing on either of those servers. While I enjoy both of those servers I know from experience that there is a PK problem when it comes to newer toons.

The old rules didn't work. If they had we wouldn't have been a need for trammel. Many who push for a classic shard realize this, so we dream up ways to Hybridize the punishments in order to properly regulate the PK problem. Nothing done to address murderers will affect real PvPers because PvPers play for the challenge right? They don't kill defenseless crafters or characters who are working their skills up because there is no challenge in it. Their are plenty of outlets for Consensual PvP within the game which should be included in a hybrid-classic shard. Factions, Guild Wars, Order/Chaos.

Murderer penalties will only affect those who prey on the weak. Without a strong system in place the classic server will die.

 

[o2bavr6]

Maybe the should implement the original notoriety system. If you did anything that was negative karma you would lose karma points and eventually turn red. I remember being Dastardly and was red yet I had killed no player.

To help curb pking you should also go red for 5 murders and be perma red upon your 6th count.

Stat loss can be implemented but it should only be for a limited amount of time... like 5 days or something. this would also make people think twice about arbitrary pking without completely destroying someones template. As an example, the pker ruins someones time and effort the put in at say mining. So the miner just spent 5 hours mining and the pker kills him and takes all his hard work. So at least as a penalty for pking, if the pkers dies, he has his fun for a time as well , but for a longer period since they started it.

Someone mentioned that pkers would prey on the helpless crafters. that was the case, but those type of pkers were the minority. it also helped build community because you could get friends or noto-pks to come guard you while you worked. nothing was funnier or more satisfying than to see one of those pks get killed.

Yes it was frustrating to work hard collecting resources to only lose them to some pker, but it was also the most fun i've ever had in the game. you would get sweaty palms and all nervous, something that the game no longer provides to players.

 

[Archie]

o2bavr6, my first character went red by mistake because I had a crappy dialup connection, a slow computer, a horrible ball mouse, and newbie clumsy fingers, so I mistakenly attacked hunting partners enough times to turn red. (This was before the rep patch during the dread lord days.)

That poor red newbie was pretty much tormented by everyone, except these dread lords east of Brit who protected him so he could work off his redness while they went about their dread lord business.

That was back when other players could kill my gray packie in guard zones. Their char would stay blue, my packie would die, and my char would go gray trying to defend his packie and get ganked. (Nice game mechanics...not!)

But I liked pre-t2a. It was a hoot! I agree with the person above who mentioned that UO:R brought about more diverse templates. I wouldn't mind seeing a UO:R shard with Fel rules, and a UO:R shard with Tram rules. Keep the servers separate.

 

[Kaleb]

UO:R brought about more diverse templates. I wouldn't mind seeing a UO:R shard with Fel rules, and a UO:R shard with Tram rules. Keep the servers separate.

This

 

[Aragon100]

UO:R brought about more diverse templates. I wouldn't mind seeing a UO:R shard with Fel rules, and a UO:R shard with Tram rules. Keep the servers separate.

Agree.

 

[Tanivar]

UO:R brought about more diverse templates. I wouldn't mind seeing a UO:R shard with Fel rules, and a UO:R shard with Tram rules. Keep the servers separate.

/Agree

 

[Evlar]

*sigh*

Just gimme anything that's single facet, pre-AoS... and that's coming from someone that doesn't spend much time on PvP.

I really don't believe that rampant PK'ers will be a problem on a "classic" shard. Those playing there, will know what they are signing up to, so they'll likely be able to look after themselves.

If... and that's a big "if"... they prove to be troublesome enough to cause problems for the shard(s) as a whole, then maybe implement one of the solutions that have been discussed at length in the two detailed threads here on Stratics.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I say put real player justice in the game and make it a virtual world, like it was in the very beginning, so the weaker griefers get griefed right off the shard!

And what's probably the most incredulous to me is that some people who clamor for the old ways manage to pretend that it was the "complainers" who brought about the restrictions and ridiculousness of things like push through monsters, and easier and easier soloing of some of the game's hardest creatures. Nope, sorry. It was the jerks who broke UO.

You will get no argument from me on that last part. I have often said that PKers pushed things too far, and therefore the devs had to take action. Without going back through everything I have posted on this thread, the other thread, and other places, suffice it to say that one can only fish from the same pond for so long before the pond can no longer sustain a population. I have been preaching that since 1997.

Still...if you ask current players (and I have), most of them will tell you that they do not want any part of PvP. Their reasons are varied, and often wrapped deeply in layers upon layers of rationalization...but the truth is, most of the current playerbase will not embrace open PvP because it is too difficult and too risky. Many will cite reasons such as slow computers, disabilities, etc...and these are valid reasons, but underneath that lies another layer. If you analyze what is being said, it really boils down to 'I don't like open PvP because of __________, which makes the game too difficult for me to enjoy."

If OSI had done what they should have done, no one would have felt that way. No one would have felt helpless in the face of rampant PKing. Therefore, the game would not have been bleeding subscriptions...and it was. You will get widely varied responses here...ranging from 'I never even heard of a PK, much less ever saw one' to 'I could literally not leave town without 2000-3000 reds immediately descending upon me and killing instantly'. Both are ridiculous exaggerations throw out to try and sway the position of people reading the posts they are contained in. The actual truth lies in the middle. There were plenty of PKs on most shards, some where less prolific than others, but almost everyone that played the game back then was PKed at some time or another. Anyone claiming otherwise is lying. On the flip side of that, it was not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be. Even on Atlantic, there were days...even weeks...where one would not die to a PK. Sure, you might see a bunch of red names (3-5) and recall away if you were alone or in a small group, but it was not the 24/7 slaughter that some people make it out to be.

Player justice, as you put it, was ineffective because it had no real consequence to PKs. If they died, they lost their stuff...but "stuff" was really not a big deal back then. Sure, they would enter stat loss if they rez'ed right away, but most of them simply macroed off their counts while they were asleep or at work or whatever. It was not an effective deterrent. Somethine else needed to be put into place that would give player justice "teeth". Now, you will see people here saying things like "there should NEVER be a system that prevents players from playing their characters in a game that they paid to play". Perhaps those people are right, but the thing they do not take into consideration is that for each and every unwilling victim they killed, it cost that victim a certain amount of time to get rez'ed, re-equip, etc. If you added all of that time together, for some PKs, it would add up to quite a bit of time. Where is the outcry against that person taking away all of that gaming time from all of those people??

The issue was a complex one, and it would have taken some time to solve it, and to achieve a balance that provided realism, risk, challenge, and a game play environment that was fair to everyone.

Instead...we got Trammel, a cheap, plastic copy of the actual game Ultima Online.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I would prefer a UO:R ruleset without Trammel myself. Simply because UO:R opened up a lot of options for char templates which T2A didn't really have.

Whatever they do I hope they do things right:

nothing neon, no Trammel, stat-loss for PKs and magic items should be rare.

I agree with pretty much all of this.

As I have stated before, if a Classic Shard has:

- No Trammel
- No AoS
- No sprawling landmasses (Tokuno, Malas, etc)
- No neon colored crap
- No elves, no gargoyles
- No insurance
- No PvP switch of any kind
- and No Todd McFarlane robot crap

I'd be pretty happy with it. Almost everything else for me is details.

Oh...

and absolutely, positively, NO SHARD TRANSFERS!

 

[Metalstorm]

I'll second that.

I'll third it even

 

[Tanivar]

If you analyze what is being said, it really boils down to 'I don't like open PvP because of __________, which makes the game too difficult for me to enjoy.(highlight mine)"

"for me to enjoy" the key quality that pre-Ren UO apparently didn't have.

PKers killed the joy of so many other players, so often, so obsessively, that those players were leaving UO for some other game that they could enjoy. EA had to stop that flood of paying customers leaving , and so Trammel was born.

If OSI had done what they should have done, no one would have felt that way. No one would have felt helpless in the face of rampant PKing. Therefore, the game would not have been bleeding subscriptions...and it was. You will get widely varied responses here...ranging from 'I never even heard of a PK, much less ever saw one' to 'I could literally not leave town without 2000-3000 reds immediately descending upon me and killing instantly'. Both are ridiculous exaggerations throw out to try and sway the position of people reading the posts they are contained in. The actual truth lies in the middle. There were plenty of PKs on most shards, some where less prolific than others, but almost everyone that played the game back then was PKed at some time or another. Anyone claiming otherwise is lying. On the flip side of that, it was not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be. Even on Atlantic, there were days...even weeks...where one would not die to a PK. Sure, you might see a bunch of red names (3-5) and recall away if you were alone or in a small group, but it was not the 24/7 slaughter that some people make it out to be.

Player justice, as you put it, was ineffective because it had no real consequence to PKs. If they died, they lost their stuff...but "stuff" was really not a big deal back then. Sure, they would enter stat loss if they rez'ed right away, but most of them simply macroed off their counts while they were asleep or at work or whatever. It was not an effective deterrent. Somethine else needed to be put into place that would give player justice "teeth". Now, you will see people here saying things like "there should NEVER be a system that prevents players from playing their characters in a game that they paid to play". Perhaps those people are right, but the thing they do not take into consideration is that for each and every unwilling victim they killed, it cost that victim a certain amount of time to get rez'ed, re-equip, etc. If you added all of that time together, for some PKs, it would add up to quite a bit of time. Where is the outcry against that person taking away all of that gaming time from all of those people??

The issue was a complex one, and it would have taken some time to solve it, and to achieve a balance that provided realism, risk, challenge, and a game play environment that was fair to everyone.

Instead...we got Trammel, a cheap, plastic copy of the actual game Ultima Online.

The issue is indeed a complex one Lass. This may well be why it's taking a long time to hear more from the Devs about it. The big advantage this time around is that EA has the time to figure out a good solution. Their not bleeding customers right now.

Just hopefully they get rid of AoS as well when they do.

 

[Tanivar]

Now, you will see people here saying things like "there should NEVER be a system that prevents players from playing their characters in a game that they paid to play". Perhaps those people are right, but the thing they do not take into consideration is that for each and every unwilling victim they killed, it cost that victim a certain amount of time to get rez'ed, re-equip, etc. If you added all of that time together, for some PKs, it would add up to quite a bit of time. Where is the outcry against that person taking away all of that gaming time from all of those people??

It's there, in every post wanting PKing limited, brought under control, restrained, stopped, or made a banning offense. It's there in every post the PKers rant against because it mentions penalties that would ruin their fun. It's there for anyone who cares to take note of it.

It's actually hard to miss.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

PKers killed the joy of so many other players, so often, so obsessively, that those players were leaving UO for some other game that they could enjoy. EA had to stop that flood of paying customers leaving , and so Trammel was born.

Wrong!

Trammel was born out of a desire to see a quick and easy fix. It was totally overkill and unnecessary.

Something could have been, and SHOULD HAVE BEEN, done sooner...but the devs of that day wanted to keep the game as close to the original concept as possible.

I hate it when people say "well, Trammel was necessary because the game was losing subscribers"...that is false. It is a false dichotomy set up by those that simply wanted an easier experience.

Trammel was but one of many solutions to a complex problem. Unfortunately, it was the WRONG solution to the problem. It led to a no-risk style of gameplay that bread nothing but excess and boredom...thus giving birth to AoS...and forever transforming Ultima Online into 'Diablo 2 Online'.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

It's there, in every post wanting PKing limited, brought under control, restrained, stopped, or made a banning offense. It's there in every post the PKers rant against because it mentions penalties that would ruin their fun. It's there for anyone who cares to take note of it.

It's actually hard to miss.

When I said that, I was referring to the outcry from people that lament the idea of a PK not being able to play his or her character for a period of time.

It's all about context.

 

[Tanivar]

Wrong!

Trammel was born out of a desire to see a quick and easy fix. It was totally overkill and unnecessary.

I imagine there was a desire for a quick, easy, and near certain to work fix. EA was a business receiving complaints from it's customers with a lot of them closing their accounts. Their profit per month was dropping due to those closing accounts.

I hate it when people say "well, Trammel was necessary because the game was losing subscribers"...that is false. It is a false dichotomy set up by those that simply wanted an easier experience.

By those who wanted a more fun for them experience, not one more fun for the PKers. That point seems to be one you won't accept.

Life in PvM can be what you want it to be, safe & easy, or hard & difficult. It's just that your character isn't the one being hunted.

Trammel was but one of many solutions to a complex problem. Unfortunately, it was the WRONG solution to the problem. It led to a no-risk style of gameplay that bread nothing but excess and boredom... (underline mine)

Only boredom for the PKers.

Tram allowed those that left fel a place they could find entertaining play, since they hadn't found being PKed entertaining. It let them escape the boredom of, being PKed, again, having to get rezzed, again, re-equip, again, and go try to do the same thing they had been trying to do until the PKer got his jollies, again.

Clear enough?

Can't put it much simplier than this.

thus giving birth to AoS...

Forgetting the Tod Mcfarlane guy who it's been said wanted a job with WoW?

You really need to stop blaming everything you don't like about UO on those who don't agree with your viewpoint of what UO should be. It has gotten very old & tiresome.

and forever transforming Ultima Online into 'Diablo 2 Online'.

That is indeed what UO has become. Thanks to Tod Mcfarlane and his desired job. Not because the ones tired of PKing got given a way to start having fun as customers of EA.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

I have to side with Tanivar on the reason's why Trammel came about. Trammel was a quick and easy fix that saved EA money and accounts. I hate to admit it but Trammel saved Ultima Online from an untimely death. That being said I think that Trammel was implemented poorly and that in order to curtail non-con pvp and stealing that other systems should have been tried before just throwing in a PvP switch, but as Tanivar points out in his posts it all came down to the mighty bottom line.

Only boredom for the PKers.

Tram allowed those that left fel a place they could find entertaining play, since they hadn't found being PKed entertaining. It let them escape the boredom of, being PKed, again, having to get rezzed, again, re-equip, again, and go try to do the same thing they had been trying to do until the PKer got his jollies, again.

This part I take issue with because I just recently had an epiphany as to how the steaming pile of code called Age of Shadows came about.

No risk lead to people venturing out with their Silver Kats of Vanq and wearing full Invul suits. This lead to high end mobs being ridiculously easy. The players complained that the game was no fun because it was too easy and they needed stronger mobs. The devs caved and gave them stronger mobs. The players complained that now the high end gear they had wasn't good enough to kill the mobs and they needed better gear. Thus the cycle of ruin began and we eventually had AoS.

You can even see it today, each expansion introduced stronger mobs and stronger items thus obsoleting the previous content.

Age of Shadows is a direct result of the culling of risk from the game by the implementation of Trammel. As is the bloated economy of the game in it's current form. PK's and no item insurance ensured that people exercised caution with their high end gear, thus keeping the economic value of crafters as well as limiting inflation.

 

[Kaleb]

"for me to enjoy" the key quality that pre-Ren UO apparently didn't have.

PKers killed the joy of so many other players, so often, so obsessively, that those players were leaving UO for some other game that they could enjoy. EA had to stop that flood of paying customers leaving , and so Trammel was born.

Yah Im sure a New cutting edge at the time 3d rival to Ultima Online had nothing to Do with the migration? every one I knew back then that went to EQ used that as their reason, "Graphics were better" Not a single person said it was about PK's in my guild that was 99% blue.

 

[Llewen]

"for me to enjoy" the key quality that pre-Ren UO apparently didn't have.

PKers killed the joy of so many other players, so often, so obsessively, that those players were leaving UO for some other game that they could enjoy. EA had to stop that flood of paying customers leaving , and so Trammel was born.

Yah Im sure a New cutting edge at the time 3d rival to Ultima Online had nothing to Do with the migration? every one I knew back then that went to EQ used that as their reason, "Graphics were better" Not a single person said it was about PK's in my guild that was 99% blue.

The real reason for Trammel was the number of complaints EA was getting about pk's. At least some of those complaints were due to rampant cheating, or perceived rampant cheating, and likely many of them were due to issues related to cheating. Now whether the devs equated the complaints to lost subs, I'm not sure, although it is likely that some of the subs that were lost were due to pk'ing.

However, even if they weren't losing subs due to pk'ing, they would still very likely have felt compelled to make some changes simply due to the volume of complaints they were receiving. However, as has often been the case in UO's history, the devs dealt with the symptoms, not the cause. Instead of dealing with the cheating problem directly, they destroyed the fundamentals of the game's interaction mechanics (ie. full loot and ffa pvp).

Having said that, no matter what they did UO was going to lose subs. They were no longer the only show in town, and EQ was the new fotm. The quest driven, level based format of EQ was also new and different then, and UO didn't have anything to compete with that, and a lot of more casual players loved the instant gratification of a constant stream of small quests, and it remains a commercially successful formula that was copied by Blizzard with WoW.

Which leads us to today. What's past is past, and there really is no going back, and no point in arguing about what should have been done. It appears that a significant number of people want a classic shard. I think they should get it, and I hope they will, although the continued cuts at the Mythic studios have me worried. At one point I was pretty certain that we would see a classic shard, but I no longer am.

The real issue here now is UO's survival. And I think a classic shard would be a good idea in that regard, but what needs to happen even more than that is marketing. EA needs to get boxes back on store shelves, and they need to do some advertising. And I think a classic shard, or shards, could be an important part of a marketing drive. But the US economy is still very weak and the clock is ticking. This needs to happen soon, in my opinion.

One thing that people need to be reminded of in times like these is how much value you get for your money in a game like UO. For the price of a movie ticket once a month, you get as many hours of entertainment as you can fit in the day. It's hard to beat that, but people need to be made aware of that, and it needs to be a part of an active marketing campaign.

 

[Evlar]

Llewen - I would love to see UO back on store shelves. I've always preferred a product in a box, over the current trend for downloading digital media.

You've pretty much answered the "why don't they..." question yourself. Mythic have endured cutbacks. They likely have an annual budget they work to, based upon the subscription figures. That's never going to be sufficient enough include a boxed product these days, without losses somewhere else.

Likewise, I remain hopeful we'll eventually see a "classic" option from EA/Mythic, but as time passes and more cuts happen, the bunching together of Mythic with BioWare, plus the sale of rights to produce a "new" Ultima Online, to NetDragon... things really don't bode well. For what we're asking for in this thread, or the game as a whole.

Frankly, I'm entirely sceptical - and with good reason as I see things. I'm actually waiting for the inevitable announcement that UO will be wound down and what's left of Mythic, absorbed fully into BioWare's activities. Especially if the latter happens, I think the end of UO as we know it, will be a certainty.

There are options though, for the game to survive. I wouldn't be at all surprised if UO follows the example set by DDO. It's estimated only around 20% of revenue for DDO comes from subscription based accounts. The remaining 80% or so, comes from "free-to-play" accounts, who purchase expansions, area unlocks and items from their game store.

The signals are all there. Increased number of purchaseable items from the UO Gamecodes, availability of Stygian Abyss as a download only option... these are just a case of them dipping their toes in the water.

I could be entirely wide of the mark. I really do hope I am. I would love nothing more than in five years time, to have been sat playing the "classic" UO option from EA/Mythic, for a few years.

Only time will tell though I suppose.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Forgetting the Tod Mcfarlane guy who it's been said wanted a job with WoW?

That is indeed what UO has become. Thanks to Tod Mcfarlane and his desired job. Not because the ones tired of PKing got given a way to start having fun as customers of EA.

You are confusing Todd McFarlane (creator of Spawn, contributed art for Lord Blackthorne's Revenge ... the robot stuff) with Tom Chilton.

http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,42812/

You really need to stop blaming everything you don't like about UO on those who don't agree with your viewpoint of what UO should be. It has gotten very old & tiresome.

And you need to get your facts straight.

My point of view of "what UO should be" is pretty irrelevant here. What I am discussing is what the game was vs. what it became...and why.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Age of Shadows is a direct result of the culling of risk from the game by the implementation of Trammel. As is the bloated economy of the game in it's current form. PK's and no item insurance ensured that people exercised caution with their high end gear, thus keeping the economic value of crafters as well as limiting inflation.

Exactly!!

Once UO essentially became a risk-free environment, hording began en masse. Look at the insane inflation that you see on the shards now. This is due, directly, to AoS and item insurance...which were both directly the result of the removal of risk from the game.

Before Trammel, you would never dream of leaving town in a full Valorite suit carrying a Vanq weapon...and if you did, you stood a good chance of losing them!

It was that chance of losing your items that made players value what they had, and the consistent need to re-equip, again and again (as Tanivar sad) made sure that there was a constant drain upon players assets.

Once Trammel was introduced, the game went into perpetual Easy Mode, and now we have players with hundreds of billions of gold horded up in their banks and houses.

Surely you must see the correlation here Tanivar.

 

[Evlar]

"Classic" Ultima Online...

[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rs08gj0R0DI&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rs08gj0R0DI&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

Versus "Modern" Ultima Online...

[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RJsaujSs7Fw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RJsaujSs7Fw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

What's past is past, and there really is no going back, and no point in arguing about what should have been done. It appears that a significant number of people want a classic shard.

The reason we are discussing what happened in the past is because we don't want to see it happen again on a Classic Shard. The people that enjoy the current game have no vested interest in seeing anything that departs from the route that UO took over the last 10 years...but those of us that would prefer a Classic environment do.

There are a few, and I mean very few, people that post here about Classic Shard topics that want to see the shard include Trammel. The majority of Classic Shard supporters would rather see it as it originally was...no Trammel. The difference is, some of us (myself very much included) would like to see it implemented with different, if not tougher, restrictions on PKing. Not because we don't want there to be PKs, but because we know based on what happened in the past what the outcome of total lawlessness was. Will the same thing happen in this day and age? Or will people embrace an open PvP environment? It's impossible to predict. That's why I, for one, suggest that these penalties should be introduced incrementally...meaning, if the original penalties are not enough, more can be added until balance is achieved. I would not want to start out with penalties that were too restrictive, because most...or at least a large portion...of the players that would be returning to play on a Classic Shard would be doing so because they missed open PvP.

EA needs to get boxes back on store shelves, and they need to do some advertising. And I think a classic shard, or shards, could be an important part of a marketing drive.

Advertising...yes, to an extent. Retail channel box...no.

Here's why:

There is no reason for a retail box. It is expensive to produce, expensive to ship, expensive to RA if it doesn't sell, etc.

Perhaps a limited edition box could be released with a Classic Shard as part of a promotional effort, but there is no need for a contiuned shelf presence for Ultima Online.

For one thing, when you put a game like UO on the shelves in discount retailers, like Wal-Mart, you don't get that much sell through anyway. If you put it in game stores, like Gamestop, it get's buried in a 'Nice Price' bin or stuck on the bottom of a shelf collecting dust. Eventually, the retailer will have to discount the product, or EA will have to RA it. That's the problem with live product inventories. Not to mention the fact that when placed on the shelf next to games like Aion, WoW, and Star Wars Old Republic, the screenshots on the back can actually serve as a deterrent to purchase.

If UO was a new game, at least within the last 5 years, you'd still see it on store shelves, but EA has...and rightly so...realized that a shelf presence is not worth the costs associated with it.

 

[Tanivar]

You are confusing Todd McFarlane (creator of Spawn, contributed art for Lord Blackthorne's Revenge ... the robot stuff) with Tom Chilton.

KK.

And you need to get your facts straight.

My point of view of "what UO should be" is pretty irrelevant here. What I am discussing is what the game was vs. what it became...and why.

What it was I've read about in these Classic Shard threads. What it became I've seen for myself.

From what I've read in the two Classic Shard threads, which is basically the PKers viewpoint, with some PvPers & Pvmers tossed in, that "why" you keep stating as obvious fact is what I question.

I didn't play UO pre-Ren, but I have played it since.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

From what I've read in the two Classic Shard threads, which is basically the PKers viewpoint, with some PvPers & Pvmers tossed in, that "why" you keep stating as obvious fact is what I question.

I didn't play UO pre-Ren, but I have played it since.

"The PKers viewpoint"??

I think you are confused here. Many of us from back then didn't play PKs. I have never played a PK. Quite the opposite in fact. I spent a great deal of my time in UO hunting down PKs. Does this qualify me as a PK? Not in my book...but it does qualify me as a PvPer (or it did ... I don't PvP much now).

Not everyone that was not a PK wanted to see open PvP removed from the game. PvP...open, non-con PvP...was a part of the game up until UO:R was released. That is how the game was intended...by the original creators of the game...to be. There were problems with that model, because the original creators of the game did not take into account that players playing "evil" characters would show no restraint whatsoever. This is not a matter of opinion...this is a matter of recorded fact. You may question that all you like...but it does not change anything. You can also question the existance of the Roman Empire...it is a matter of recorded history...but hey, do what leads you to bliss.

 

[Beleg Megil]

.
Advertising...yes, to an extent. Retail channel box...no.

Here's why:

There is no reason for a retail box. It is expensive to produce, expensive to ship, expensive to RA if it doesn't sell, etc.

Perhaps a limited edition box could be released with a Classic Shard as part of a promotional effort, but there is no need for a contiuned shelf presence for Ultima Online.

For one thing, when you put a game like UO on the shelves in discount retailers, like Wal-Mart, you don't get that much sell through anyway. If you put it in game stores, like Gamestop, it get's buried in a 'Nice Price' bin or stuck on the bottom of a shelf collecting dust. Eventually, the retailer will have to discount the product, or EA will have to RA it. That's the problem with live product inventories. Not to mention the fact that when placed on the shelf next to games like Aion, WoW, and Star Wars Old Republic, the screenshots on the back can actually serve as a deterrent to purchase.

If UO was a new game, at least within the last 5 years, you'd still see it on store shelves, but EA has...and rightly so...realized that a shelf presence is not worth the costs associated with it.

I sincerely hope you are not in marketting. Or sales. If you are, I doubt you will be long.

Advertising if done correctly ALWAYS equals a boost in sales.

A product on the shelves DOES equal new players.

A jewel case (like UO Gold which did great on shelves as a WalMart exclusive) or a sleeve is NOT that expensive to produce.

UO Gold sold out because not only did NEW players buy it, CURRENT players bought it because it contained a goodie code at a cheap price, and OLD players who had quit and didn't know it existed still bought it for nostalgia purposes.

Graphics are art. Art will always be a matter of taste. The artwork they choose to show on the back, whether they choose EC or 2D, won't matter as much as the text accompanying it.

I also see that despite you being against a shelf presence, you are for it so long as it contains a classic shard. There is a word for that, but it escapes me at the moment...

 

[Tanivar]

Once UO essentially became a risk-free environment(highlight mine), hording began en masse. Look at the insane inflation that you see on the shards now. This is due, directly, to AoS and item insurance...which were both directly the result of the removal of risk (highlight mine) from the game.

Eliminate Insurance and the game is no longer risk free, just PKer free.

if they chuck Insurance, most of the risk is still there. Just the risk of being PKed has been removed, unless you chose to go to fel.

Before Trammel, you would never dream of leaving town in a full Valorite suit carrying a Vanq weapon...and if you did, you stood a good chance of losing them!

And if they would remove Insurance, you still could. It just wouldn't be as likely. You wouldn't be what was being hunted.

It was that chance of losing your items that made players value what they had, and the consistent need to re-equip, again and again (as Tanivar sad) made sure that there was a constant drain upon players assets.

Remove Insurance and that need would return.

Once Trammel was introduced, the game went into perpetual Easy Mode,

rolleyes:

and now we have players with hundreds of billions of gold horded up in their banks and houses.

Ten years of price gouging by players with good merchant skills can do that, when you don't have to worry about your house being robbed or stolen outright.

The fortunes some have piled up are a bit ridiculous. Heck, thier seriously ludicrous. But if the players are having fun, what the heck.

Surely you must see the correlation here Tanivar.

After allowing for your bias against Trammel and the players who play there, no, actually I don't.

People play games to enjoy themselves. In Tram, they enjoy themselves.

That's all thats important for a game, it's players enjoy themselves.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Advertising if done correctly ALWAYS equals a boost in sales.

It's a pretty simple equation really.

Cost of advertising vs. projected revenue increase. Obvioulsy, someone at EA feels that the cost of advertising is not going to be recouped by it.

A product on the shelves DOES equal new players.

I sincerely doubt you have any numbers to back this up at all.

A jewel case (like UO Gold which did great on shelves as a WalMart exclusive) or a sleeve is NOT that expensive to produce.

Again, I sincerely doubt that you have any sell through (not wholesale) numbers to back this up.

I also see that despite you being against a shelf presence, you are for it so long as it contains a classic shard. There is a word for that, but it escapes me at the moment...

It doesn't even have to be a Classic Shard...any kind of ONE TIME marketing promo is fine...but keeping a perpetual live stock of boxed, or jewel cased, product simply commits capital to something that is going to sit and devalue. Meanwhile, that capital could be spent on something that would actually benefit the game...like the next expansion, or perhaps a Classic Shard.

I hope you are not in accounting, or business administration...because you won't be for very long.

 

[Tanivar]

"The PKers viewpoint"??

I think you are confused here. Many of us from back then didn't play PKs. I have never played a PK. Quite the opposite in fact. I spent a great deal of my time in UO hunting down PKs. Does this qualify me as a PK? Not in my book...but it does qualify me as a PvPer (or it did ... I don't PvP much now).

Not everyone that was not a PK wanted to see open PvP removed from the game. PvP...open, non-con PvP...was a part of the game up until UO:R was released. That is how the game was intended...by the original creators of the game...to be. There were problems with that model, because the original creators of the game did not take into account that players playing "evil" characters would show no restraint whatsoever. This is not a matter of opinion...this is a matter of recorded fact. You may question that all you like...but it does not change anything. You can also question the existance of the Roman Empire...it is a matter of recorded history...but hey, do what leads you to bliss.

rolleyes:

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Eliminate Insurance and the game is no longer risk free, just PKer free.

What risk is there without insurance in a Trammel ruleset?? No one else can loot your corpse, so if your items stay on it, it is a simple matter of just going back to where you died and picking up your stuff.

However...if you want to shorten the decay time...A LOT, then you might have some risk. But people will whine about that just as much as they did PKs...because in the end, it was never about the objection to PKs...it was about the objection to risk.

The fortunes some have piled up are a bit ridiculous. Heck, thier seriously ludicrous. But if the players are having fun, what the heck.

Because it creates a massive barrier to entry for new players.

After allowing for your bias against Trammel and the players who play there, no, actually I don't.

Of course you don't...and you call me "biased"

People play games to enjoy themselves. In Tram, they enjoy themselves.

So stay in Trammel...and out of a Classic Shard. Problem solved. Why are you in this thread again??

That's all thats important for a game, it's players enjoy themselves.

And right now, you have one group of players that are free to enjoy themselves, in one single ruleset. A Classic Shard is meant to allow people that enjoy something different to also enjoy themselves. But those people don't count because they disagree with you...right?

 

[Beleg Megil]

It's a pretty simple equation really.

Cost of advertising vs. projected revenue increase. Obvioulsy, someone at EA feels that the cost of advertising is not going to be recouped by it.

There is no such "equation". Stop pretending to know what you are talking about.

I sincerely doubt you have any numbers to back this up at all.

No, just as you have no "numbers" to prove me wrong. But I was playing. It was pretty easy to notice unless you were a moron, that there were more people around.

Again, I sincerely doubt that you have any sell through (not wholesale) numbers to back this up.

Wah,wah. Look it up yourself. UO Gold sold out all units.

It doesn't even have to be a Classic Shard...any kind of ONE TIME marketing promo is fine...but keeping a perpetual live stock of boxed, or jewel cased, product simply commits capital to something that is going to sit and devalue.

Where did I say anything about " a perpetual live stock of boxed.."? As always with you, 2 words. Reading Comprehension. Obviously, as I was using UO: Gold as an example, i meant a promotional item.

Meanwhile, that capital could be spent on something that would actually benefit the game...like the next expansion, or perhaps a Classic Shard.

Next expansion, yes. New content and tweaking the EC, yes. Classic Shard? Counterintuitive that a 12 year regression will be good for the longevity of UO. For you to say that a Classic Shard would be good for the game, there is nothing you could possibly base that on but your personal tastes and the tastes of the hundred or so users and their puppet accounts created between 03/07/10 and 05/07/10 when the poll was up. I do have the numbers there, as anyone can.

I hope you are not in accounting, or business administration...because you won't be for very long.

No, I just have common sense.

 

[Dakkon Blackblade]

Alright everybody stop your astroturfing!

 

[GarthGrey]

IBMGATL

In before Morgana gets another thread locked

 

[Tanivar]

...because in the end, it was never about the objection to PKs...it was about the objection to risk.

Because in the end, it was never about the objection to risk... it was about the objection to PKs.

So stay in Trammel...and out of a Classic Shard. Problem solved. Why are you in this thread again?

Because I want an AoS-free game shard thats fun to play, for non-PKers.

And right now, you have one group of players that are free to enjoy themselves, in one single ruleset.

Your overlooking that second ruleset we have. The fel ruleset. rolleyes:

...A Classic Shard is meant to allow people that enjoy something different to also enjoy themselves. But those people don't count because they disagree with you...right?

rolleyes:

The Classic Shard, which would be pre-AoS, would be a good thing, as I've said in the past. Provided it wasn't the PKfest that pre-UO:Ren has been described as being.

And actually, people who disagree with me do count because they have viewpoints that may show problems or aspects I and others have missed. The only requirement I place on such opposition is that it makes sense in relation to the information we have. Browse the Classic Shard threads again.

 

[Tanivar]

IBMGATL

In before Morgana gets another thread locked

Yeah, I imagine with the tone of some of the posts, this discussion needs a timeout.

I'll go putter about the house for a while.

 

[Renyard Foxenwyle]

Tanivar, I understand you don't like to be PK'd. No one does. How about instead of just saying that the classic server needs Trammel (which is what I get from your posts) why don't you suggest some ideas to limit and or punish PK's who prey on those who do not wish to or can not PvP to protect themselves from PK's?

You say you hate AoS but you have to see how Trammel was the root cause of AoS. Seriously man, think about it. No risk from PK's and no insurance on a Trammel facet means no one losing gear other than maybe some bandages or a random piece of loot when they die to a mob. This means more people are easily killing what used to be high end mobs and begin to demand tougher mobs (content). When the tougher mobs arrive the people complain that their gear wasn't good enough for the mobs so the devs throw in new, better, stronger gear to use to defeat the new mobs. That's how the cycle that led to AoS began. Surely you can see this?

For a while I argued for the possible need of Tram in a classic shard to mollify players who wish no non-con PvP but in the end it will kill a classic shard.

 

[Archie]

My preference is one classic shard that has meaningful and effective game mechanics to seek and deliver player justice. That is optimal, IMO, in a virtual world setting.

My fall back position is two UO:R classic shards, one with old Fel rules and one with old Tram rules, with no transfer of items or characters between them.

My guess is the Tram shard will be the more populated of the two, but I'd be playing on the Fel shard.

The "two shard" route would also give EA/Mythic an opportunity to save on costs, with some changes, but I'm not going to mention that...yet.

 

[Llewen]

Advertising...yes, to an extent. Retail channel box...no.

Here's why:

There is no reason for a retail box. It is expensive to produce, expensive to ship, expensive to RA if it doesn't sell, etc.

Perhaps a limited edition box could be released with a Classic Shard as part of a promotional effort, but there is no need for a contiuned shelf presence for Ultima Online.

For one thing, when you put a game like UO on the shelves in discount retailers, like Wal-Mart, you don't get that much sell through anyway. If you put it in game stores, like Gamestop, it get's buried in a 'Nice Price' bin or stuck on the bottom of a shelf collecting dust. Eventually, the retailer will have to discount the product, or EA will have to RA it. That's the problem with live product inventories. Not to mention the fact that when placed on the shelf next to games like Aion, WoW, and Star Wars Old Republic, the screenshots on the back can actually serve as a deterrent to purchase.

If UO was a new game, at least within the last 5 years, you'd still see it on store shelves, but EA has...and rightly so...realized that a shelf presence is not worth the costs associated with it.

Having a shelf presence is another form of advertising, and if it is done properly, it is very effective. In fact, I would say that you could lose money on the sales of the actual boxes, and it would still be worth it, because it gives the product visibility. A kind of visibility that you don't get even from targeted web advertising.

 

[zombiekitty13]

I played on Catskills back during T2A and we never had rampant PKing. People often confuse DL days for T2A era. Yes, there was PKing during T2A and UO:R but nothing which ever got really bad. There is absolutely no need for a Trammel ruleset on a classic shard. If you keep stat-loss / noto system as it was during T2A / UO:R era PKs should be kept in check by the anti-PKs.

As a new player you learned really quickly which areas you should probably try and avoid and most any skill could be leveled / resource gathered in a safe enough area if you wanted.

 

[o2bavr6]

The Classic Shard, which would be pre-AoS, would be a good thing, as I've said in the past. Provided it wasn't the PKfest that pre-UO:Ren has been described as being.

Ummm so your telling me that you are providing your opinion on something that you were not even present at?

I was there and each shard was different in the amount of PKs that were around.

On Chessy PK's were the minority by far. And there wasn't rampant pking going on or as yu said a "PKfest". Yes there were pkers and yes they did kill anyone they could but they were still the minority by far.

I understand you not wanting to participate in a game that allows people to kill you and take all your stuff you worked hard for. That is fine and I can completely relate to it. But the game we have today or after I should say that came after UO-Ren is totally different than the game before it.

You seem to have this skewed point of view that the pkers were un-kill able when in fact they were quite easy to kill. in fact they were easier to kill than today's PvPers/PKers.

Most "smart" resource gatherers had weapon skills or magery to defend themselves so its not like they were totally defenseless. The sad thing is a some people were just so against pvping that they didn't take the time to even see that they might win if they fought back.

In the end you are entitled to your opinion but if you were not there to know for a fact, you may want to defer your opinion to people who were actually there like me.

You make it out to seem like it was infinitely worse than it actually was.

 

[o2bavr6]

I played on Catskills back during T2A and we never had rampant PKing. People often confuse DL days for T2A era. Yes, there was PKing during T2A and UO:R but nothing which ever got really bad. There is absolutely no need for a Trammel ruleset on a classic shard. If you keep stat-loss / noto system as it was during T2A / UO:R era PKs should be kept in check by the anti-PKs.

As a new player you learned really quickly which areas you should probably try and avoid and most any skill could be leveled / resource gathered in a safe enough area if you wanted.

EXACTLY!!