P
Phosphor
Guest
Would this combination be possible, technically?
-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
Could UO (Classic Client) become browser based and free-too-play?
- Thread starter Phosphor
- Start date
- Watchers 3
Don't see why not. They were planning on it a few years ago.
How much extra money would we have to pay to use more than the
?free?-to-play part of the game? Some game was posted about recently that went ?free?-to-play and makes three times as much money now.
It would really be more accurate to call those games fees-to-play since you have to pay money to do more than minimal game play.
?free?-to-play part of the game? Some game was posted about recently that went ?free?-to-play and makes three times as much money now.
It would really be more accurate to call those games fees-to-play since you have to pay money to do more than minimal game play.
P
Phosphor
Guest
I'm not sure what the cost would be. I think free-to-play has been rejected for UO in the past?
What interests me more is could the Classic Client be adapted to run in browser?
I expect not but if it could it might draw thousands of new, casual players!
"The original MMO - free-to-play and on your browser!"
Just imagine it!
What interests me more is could the Classic Client be adapted to run in browser?
I expect not but if it could it might draw thousands of new, casual players!
"The original MMO - free-to-play and on your browser!"
Just imagine it!
Technically, sure...
Feasible?
Probably not.
Someone above commented that another game went F2P and earned 3 times the amount of money it had previously... these games are DDO and LotRO, and that enhanced amount of money was a temporary increase that according to industry insiders trailed off. Which makes sense. The F2P model brought in curious people who then bought some of the extras because they wanted to see more of the game -- but the game didn't have lasting appeal to those people and so the revenue trickled off. What we don't know is whether or not the revenue coming into either/both of those games now is more or less than what it was prior to the F2P model... what we do know is that the 3x level was not sustained.
Would UO see a similar increase? That would depend largely on the boundaries of the F2P model... Consider that under the F2P model there would have to be restrictions on content that would then have to be paid for. The most common misconception have about F2P is that the game is "free to play." What it should be called is "free for limited play," but marketing departments would find that difficult to, you know, market. But think of it this way... the one feature that UO would absolutely have to charge for -- housing -- is also the one thing that draw the definitive line between stay or go.
So the real question is: Would anyone who joined UO as an F2P game still want to play when they discovered that player housing was not included in the "free" model?
Which then begs the question, "Is UO strong enough as a game to convince an F2P subscriber to subscribe to a paid model on the basis of housing alone?" And, as much as I love UO, the answer to that question is clearly, "No."
So, while feasible, IMO, it's nothing more than feasible.
Probably not. The language that UO's client was written in is unlikely to be web-friendly for any of the web-based platforms that would deliver it. It would end up being a new client project, and... well... let's be honest: OSI/EA Austin/EARS/Mythic's not good at new client projects.
P
Phosphor
Guest
For the record, I wouldn't advocate free-to-play unless it was bundled with browser compatability.
Explain to me why a game cannot go FTP and allow someone to still buy "all content" for 10 dollars a month, as we have already?
E.g. let you chose between a subscription, with no micro-transaction woes and FTP?
Explain to me why a game cannot go FTP and allow someone to still buy "all content" for 10 dollars a month, as we have already?
E.g. let you chose between a subscription, with no micro-transaction woes and FTP?
See Home | Roozz.com
Will EA do it? No, because Ultima4Ever and also NetDragon's 3D UO are coming soon. They are banking on these instead of UO. The development $$$ is going into Ultima4Ever and SWTOR, evidenced by the fact UO only has a bare bones team of couple of part-time devs currently.
Will EA do it? No, because Ultima4Ever and also NetDragon's 3D UO are coming soon. They are banking on these instead of UO. The development $$$ is going into Ultima4Ever and SWTOR, evidenced by the fact UO only has a bare bones team of couple of part-time devs currently.
If you are willing to spend unlimited money there are very few limits upon you.
This would probably include making UO browser-based and free to play.
EA is not going to spend unlimited, or even limited, money on UO.
Then there is the issue of return on investment. Would UO work as a free to play game?
I don't think so. Too complex and too old. Imagine thousands of people rolling into UO to check it out. Imagine them building a 50s character on New Haven.
Now they want to go someplace else.
Moongate? What's Felucca, Malas, Ilshenar, Tokuno, Trammel, Ter Mur?
Recall? What's the difference between Sacred Journey, Recall with reagents or LRC, Recall in wraith form, recall with scrolls?
Why do people keep calling me a stupid Trammie in Global Chat?
Screw this, I'm going to WoW.
UO is simply not a good free to play game, and from the other posts I've been reading it appears as though the entire business model itself is being questioned; let alone specifically as it applies to a game this old, this complicated, this built up by historical accumulation rather than pursuant to a plan.
-Galen's player
This would probably include making UO browser-based and free to play.
EA is not going to spend unlimited, or even limited, money on UO.
Then there is the issue of return on investment. Would UO work as a free to play game?
I don't think so. Too complex and too old. Imagine thousands of people rolling into UO to check it out. Imagine them building a 50s character on New Haven.
Now they want to go someplace else.
Moongate? What's Felucca, Malas, Ilshenar, Tokuno, Trammel, Ter Mur?
Recall? What's the difference between Sacred Journey, Recall with reagents or LRC, Recall in wraith form, recall with scrolls?
Why do people keep calling me a stupid Trammie in Global Chat?
Screw this, I'm going to WoW.
UO is simply not a good free to play game, and from the other posts I've been reading it appears as though the entire business model itself is being questioned; let alone specifically as it applies to a game this old, this complicated, this built up by historical accumulation rather than pursuant to a plan.
-Galen's player
Hehe UO is longer free to play than any other games. Think of the other "grey" shards out there.
W
Woodsman
Guest
We also don't know if they turned a profit in doing so. Turbine is owned by a publicly traded company and yet they aren't out there bragging to the stockholders that these moves have helped make them profitable and LOTRO went "free to play" well after the acquisition by Warner Brothers. I'm actually surprised the stock holders didn't grill them over it, but then again, Warner Brothers stockholders care more about how the movies are doing. Two Harry Potter movies within 8 months making nearly a billion a piece can make people ignore a lot of other things.
LOTRO shouldn't even be considered in the model though. Even though they don't have a hand in the movies themselves, Warner Brothers is very interested in keeping LOTRO going up through at least the release of both Hobbit movies and are more than willing to keep an unprofitable IP going up through the release of those two movies since it will be a huge amount of free advertising.
Agreed. It is a huge misconception that these games are free.
I think the trial restrictions for UO's trial could fit an f2p model that didn't require existing subscribers to lose anything or pay more than they currently are, and it would not require much development resources - just toggle the timer to a much longer time period or even take the timer off.
All that would be required is to rename the UO trial account to "UO Free to Play", and use the existing restrictions:
Well here's the trial restrictions that somebody dug up:
One thing I wouldn't support is people turning their existing accounts into f2p accounts. That would require a lot of development resources, whereas taking the timer off of the trial accounts wouldn't.
W
Woodsman
Guest
Given how many thousands and thousands of items are within UO, I shudder to think what it would be like through a web-browser unless you could download all of the assets and have them locally available. Of course, then you're right back to a client download
W
Woodsman
Guest
This is the second or third thread I've asked you in. Can you show us where EA is going to allow "NetDragon's 3D UO" to replace EA's UO and can you show us where NetDragon's 3D UO is "coming soon"?
You seem incredibly confident that it's "coming soon" so please point us to where you read this. Don't point us to an incredibly brief press release from two years ago either.
I agree with you on SWTOR taking up too many resources, but as for Ultima4Ever, I believe it's not nearly as much money as you think it is, and I know for a fact that it's not what you think it is - you're way off, but I can't say anything beyond that, other than Ultima4Ever is not going to compete head-to-head with UO and it's foolish to believe otherwise - people who have been following just what's released publicly have a good idea of what it will be.
S
Sevin0oo0
Guest
currently in NetDragon's faq, "expected 2011"
I think it will be Asian markets ONLY, IF it indeed ever happens at all.
Code:
http://ir.netdragon.com/investor/faq.shtmlI really dont think you understand the consept of "free to play" the other games have gone to. Yes you get the game free.... but the over all use of things and content are on a pay as you go basis. I bet some are paying way more then the original cost of the game use to be. Could you see UO in this kind of market?
Let's hyposisese this out.... ok you get the basic package free...
Basic package is Tram only the limits of your travel through gates and recalls will be limited to 1 facit. to go to T2A, and other facits is a charge.
To own a home is now charged...
Do you get my drift? you might end up paying more for UO and more sooner than later the way UO players are mind set wise the game would go the way of the dodo very quickly.
Let's admit it the average UO player is a penny pincher at heart. We want more an want to pay less for services. This thread is prime example... You want a free UO. Only it would cost way more then the average UO player wants to spend for all they can do now for the basic account cost. Why do you think those other games are reporting more profet?? Yes the player base has gotten bigger, but its the nickle an dimeing thats making the game $$. Do you really want to end up paying that much for what you get now for a nominal fee??
Let's hyposisese this out.... ok you get the basic package free...
Basic package is Tram only the limits of your travel through gates and recalls will be limited to 1 facit. to go to T2A, and other facits is a charge.
To own a home is now charged...
Do you get my drift? you might end up paying more for UO and more sooner than later the way UO players are mind set wise the game would go the way of the dodo very quickly.
Let's admit it the average UO player is a penny pincher at heart. We want more an want to pay less for services. This thread is prime example... You want a free UO. Only it would cost way more then the average UO player wants to spend for all they can do now for the basic account cost. Why do you think those other games are reporting more profet?? Yes the player base has gotten bigger, but its the nickle an dimeing thats making the game $$. Do you really want to end up paying that much for what you get now for a nominal fee??
NetDragon Websoft Inc. Enhances Its Overseas Expansion by Launching Turkish Version of Conquer Online | AsiaToday Asia News Portal & News Distribution Service
"Our online games currently in development include World of Dungeon Keeper, TRANSFORMERS Online, icombo (previously named as Cross Gate), and a new version of Ultima Online."
Jun 30, 2011 - SOURCE NetDragon Websoft Inc.
NetDragon's Real 3D UO client will most probably use the same engine as Dungeon Keeper
[youtube]xHFCcCnnKKI[/youtube]
I 100% believe that it will "come sooner" than the final EC graphic upgrade, which at the present rate of progress with 1 artist, wont be finished until 2023.
NetDragon's Real 3D UO client will make the EC irrelevant.
UO will finally get a Real 3D client that does the game justice.
fyi on that other EA game that NetDragon is working on...
Dungeon Keeper Online confirmed for US market ~ MMO ☆ Culture
"Thanks to an alert OnRPG member, it has been confirmed that Dungeon Keeper World is getting ready for a US release sometime in the future, under the game title Dungeon Keeper Online"
Enjoy some real videos and screenshots of the same engine that NetDragon's 3D UO will use
[ChinaJoy 2011] Preview - Dungeon Keeper Online ~ MMO ☆ Culture
Dungeon Keeper Online - Evil is good! ~ MMO ☆ Culture
Dungeon Keeper Online confirmed for US market ~ MMO ☆ Culture
"Thanks to an alert OnRPG member, it has been confirmed that Dungeon Keeper World is getting ready for a US release sometime in the future, under the game title Dungeon Keeper Online"
Enjoy some real videos and screenshots of the same engine that NetDragon's 3D UO will use
[ChinaJoy 2011] Preview - Dungeon Keeper Online ~ MMO ☆ Culture
Dungeon Keeper Online - Evil is good! ~ MMO ☆ Culture
W
Woodsman
Guest
I asked you to cite something other than PR stuff from 2009 and what do you do?
You cite the same tagline that has turned up in PR stuff since late 2009.
Here's from September of 2009:
NetDragon Websoft Inc.--NetDragon Debuts Instance Feature in Eudemons Online EP: ?Demon Rising? --ir.netdragon.com
"...and a new version of Ultima Online."
You've posted in threads where people have pointed out that this tagline about a "new version of Ultima Online" has been in all of the financial reports and press releases the past two years, so it's not like your ignorant on the matter.
I'm going to ask you this again for the fourth time or something: Where has it ever been said that any UO game or client made by NetDragon would go head-to-head with EA's UO in Japan, North America, or Europe or would replace EA's UO or clients?NetDragon's Real 3D UO client will make the EC irrelevant.
UO will finally get a Real 3D client that does the game justice.
C
Cloak&Dagger
Guest
Doesn't the agreement with EA only qualify a China based client allowance? Because of China's laws and such games are only released there if modified to fit with in those laws. I see no evidence of how Netdragons supposed "development" of a new UO will matter to us anyhow, unless EA has a sneaky "steal" clause in there, but I doubt it. I also do not believe it is being "Developed" I see it as them showing they have the rights to things and thus it could happen. No evidence of such a client, no evidence that it has even been worked on in the slightest. Not even screen shots.
I asked you to cite something other than PR stuff from 2009 and what do you do?
You cite the same tagline that has turned up in PR stuff since late 2009.
Here's from September of 2009:
NetDragon Websoft Inc.--NetDragon Debuts Instance Feature in Eudemons Online EP: ?Demon Rising? --ir.netdragon.com
"...and a new version of Ultima Online."
You've posted in threads where people have pointed out that this tagline about a "new version of Ultima Online" has been in all of the financial reports and press releases the past two years, so it's not like your ignorant on the matter.
I'm going to ask you this again for the fourth time or something: Where has it ever been said that any UO game or client made by NetDragon would go head-to-head with EA's UO in Japan, North America, or Europe or would replace EA's UO or clients?
If you compare the 2009 post to the 2011 post you will see that 3 of the 5 mentioned in 2009 have already been released, 1 has a release date, screenshots, and videos, and the only one still with 0 evidence of actual work being put in is the UO mention, also in the 2011 post you see that they have 4 mentions there, and the only one with no information is still yet UO. In 2 years they managed to add multiple new games to their list of developments but UO is the only one that is still in the same place it was back in 09.
EA and NetDragon to make a new Ultima Online for China | Massively Just to point out the concept of no world wide release. Also note the ""based on" Ultima Online".
W
Woodsman
Guest
I agree that there is no evidence that a new UO will matter to North American, European, or Japanese UO players, but HD2300 is convinced, and I'd like to know what convinced him other than a two year old tagline from PR and financial reports.Cloak‡1992580 said:
Exactly. Given the speed at which they've pumped out screenshots and videos of some of those games, it seems like as quickly as they can, they rush to get screenshots and videos out.
Yet nothing with UO.
The way I see it, if there was a UO built upon a completely new engine, 3D from the ground up, it's not going to be UO as we know it or even close to it. Even when the EC graphics stuff is finished, the EC will still be recognizable to UO fans, even if they mutter curses under their breathe about it. This stuff that HD2300 is touting as a replacement UO, it will not be recognizable to UO fans, and therefore probably not be very attractive to them. And there is no indication that EA is going to allow them to compete with EA's UO.
L
Longforge
Guest
Technically possible - absolutely.
Financially? Hell no.
UO would commit subscription suicide doing it.
W
Woodsman
Guest
It would be a support nightmare given how many browsers and versions of browsers there are, not to mention the necessary plugins and all of the versions of those, plus the underlying OSes.
Telling people that only certain browsers, with certain versions, and certain plugins, with certain versions are required would be fun, given the issues people run into with things like video players (Netflix, Hulu, etc.) which are simpler than a full browser-based game.
If Mac users didn't have VMWare or Parallels, or Wine/CrossOver, it'd be appealing to them, but they can easily play UO, so it's not an issue anymore.
F
Fayled Dhreams
Guest
Technically, yes ... as was said before, above ...
I'll add that I recall an image of Speedy (Speedman) standing, with cellphone in hand, and a background presence of a chalk board,
with such a clever idea as UO on a cellphone sketched out thereupon ... Could have been a spoof ... but the thread was friendly, open, and honest. Not one prone to such a cruel joke.
With the technical aspects a given possibility, The dark and hidden motivations of EA doing so ... ahhhh theres the rub
{By the way, cloak-n-dagger ... the ECbeta client is ALSO ""based on" Ultima Online"(cc). Loosely some say ...
}The "rub" being: Why UO has NOT migrated to the other available platform's as a "native App" ... AppleMacs, Linux, Android ...
UO on a cellphone ... doable ... 'Playable'? yeah ...right until it crashes *crack* there goes the cellphone ... out the window into traffic the lawn the repair depot ...
tablet's of the kindle size ... yeah ... there ya go ... tilt steering/navigating, scrolling hotspots for macro triggers ... might be preferable re "clunky text input", preferable in that PvPers wouldn't "talk so much"... but they'll be on skype or a conference blutooth call anyway ...
One consideration not mentioned about "China" as a hosting playground ... They are lightyears ahead of the rest of the world in recognizing >and treating< online gamer addiction ... oops! not to mention they also have no qualms about heavily monitoring and regulating the USE of their bandwidth channels ... can ya say: Google? anyone?
I dimly recall some article about the "online violence" being an issue of somesort or variation(re: china) ... like the corpse jerky/named heads consideration was from Europe iirc ... anyways
IF they get a UO version running ...>highly Likely< The crafting PvM aspects will be "recognizable" and easy to pickup, but the PvP and group warfare? not so much ...
not so much , yet quite familiar.
Again, not so much "recognizable" as it WILL actually work ... we've already supplied the groundwork FOR that ...change this about factions, limit chaos/order to this, guild structure recruiting needs this widget and that capability, alliances should run such and so, if a char is playing a rogue toon these limitations and abilities and debuffs will apply ...
you know what I'm talking about ... a "Functioning" PvP tier system ... we ain't never seen one on a UO screen ... barbarism(the other one), banditry, anarchy and chaos, sneak thieves and cutthroats and self appointed assassinations ... yeah ... just never >evolved< outta that ...
Whuat? think the chinese don't know about Armies? ...
okay Personally, I eagerly await a chinese version ... cause I'm >very sure< that there will be a STRONG GM presence available ...
DOH !!
W
Woodsman
Guest
If UO and Camelot were bigger, they'd probably have at least native OS X ports, since the engine the EC is based upon is cross-platform and EA has been churning out OS X ports.
Then again, there might have been a lot of custom work to get the engine to work properly with UO, and EA's biggest game of 2011 or 2012, Star Wars, is Windows-only.
...except that a 3D MMORPG version of EA's Dungeon Keeper which is being developed by NetDragon is being released in the US. see Dungeon Keeper Online confirmed for US market ~ MMO ☆ Culture
See the engine for NetDragon's Real 3D UO
[youtube]c6xVpfXwEM0[/youtube]
vs
^^ one will bring in a mass influx of new players, one has done the opposite in the last 4 years.
F
Fayled Dhreams
Guest
*throws an elbow*
I believe you mean UO to work properly with "some engine once"
or properly on ANY
or ...
*sneaks past ref*
W
Woodsman
Guest
Does EA have a Dungeon Keeper Online, profitable or not, in the US market or any market?
No.
Does EA have an Ultima Online, profitable or not, in the US market or any market?
Yes, and yes it's profitable.
Do you see the difference between those two IPs?
That video you linked to says Dungeon Keeper Online.
Can you point to any kind of "3D UO" from NetDragon without relying on an incredibly brief and unchanging tagline from press releases and financial reports that's about to turn two years old that is still being used in 2011?
Also, can you point to anything that says that EA modified their agreement to now allow a supposed "3D UO" from NetDragon to be released in markets where EA already has a UO.
Again, it's hilarious that you bag on the developers because the first part of the EC graphics update is a month or two late, but you are pinning your hopes on a brief, unchanging, two year old tagline from press releases and financial reports.
The really sad thing is that I agree with you to an extent - I think a properly done 3D UO could see a huge influx of new and old players. UO has a much richer and more interesting world than other MMOs with more players. It's a moot point though, because in Japan, North America, and Europe, EA has decided to do a high resolution graphics update for the EC rather than a total 3D conversion.
I would totally support a full 3D conversion for our UO, but it's not going to happen, and any UO from NetDragon that is built on a completely different server architecture with a completely different client is simply not going to be our UO. For better or for worse, our course was laid out in the 1990s and our UO is going to retain it's current perspective for years to come.
^^ EA UO's track record for priority projects in recent times is 80% failure rate. Classic Shard, anti cheating, PvP factions revamp, and PvP arenas all failures with only the Magincia rebuild a success.
NetDragon's track record in recent times is a 100% success rate on many projects. A Real 3D UO client is coming and you should rejoice in this fact.
There is no dispute that a decent Real 3D UO would bring in a mass influx of players and make UO even more profitable. EA runs a business. If EA can make 10 times more profit even after giving a cut to NetDragon, you bet this will happen.
So just like with Dungeon Keeper, expect NetDragon's Real 3D UO to be released worldwide.
[youtube]BR4qjpHYn-4[/youtube] <- the same game engine that NetDragon will use to develop 3D UO :bowdown:
NetDragon's track record in recent times is a 100% success rate on many projects. A Real 3D UO client is coming and you should rejoice in this fact.
There is no dispute that a decent Real 3D UO would bring in a mass influx of players and make UO even more profitable. EA runs a business. If EA can make 10 times more profit even after giving a cut to NetDragon, you bet this will happen.
So just like with Dungeon Keeper, expect NetDragon's Real 3D UO to be released worldwide.
[youtube]BR4qjpHYn-4[/youtube] <- the same game engine that NetDragon will use to develop 3D UO :bowdown:
C
Cloak&Dagger
Guest
you know you only further prove my points, 2 years and almost 8 games have an engine they work on, a release or release date, screen shots and videos, but yet UO which was announced before most of those other Ips (minus Dungeon keeper) has nothing.
You also speculate that they will use that engine to build UO, no where does it say what engine they will use, it says nothing about UO. If you wish to continue in your dream land for now is fine. Also keep in mind EA did not give them any rights to a game in the countries it releases in, so it would still be in the EAs "80% failure rate". Learn PR and development process and business, then come back. With out any real evidence you are ignored from here out, worse than a damn sales agent I swear. Should Hire you as their new PR rep.
Except Dungeon Keeper Online was originally announced for release in Asian countries only... and now it is being released in the US. And don't most of the UO gold farmers come from China?
Say UO makes 3 million dollars/yr currently. The accountants crunch the numbers and estimate that if NetDragon's 3D UO client is released in Western countries EA will make a profit of 30 million dollars a year, even after they pay off NetDragon 5 million/yr. You think EA is going to say no to the 30 million dollars/yr. With this strategy EA assumes zero risk and resources, as opposed to investing in a team in recent years that has failed to deliver two (KR and EC) stable 2D clients. This is business, not investing in teams that have a track record of failure, evidenced by the FACT the current team is bare bones and part-time atm.
But if you think good pr/development/business is consistently making announcements that fail to be fully developed and losing 1/2 your customers in 2-3 years, then keep waving the pom poms.
This is UO not WOW ......
W
Woodsman
Guest
You have no proof whatsoever and you have consistently failed to provide any proof, even after being repeatedly asked.
All you can point to is a very brief tagline from press releases and financial reports that go back two years. You do this while claiming that the EC graphics update isn't going to happen, even though the UO devs have said more in two sentences about it this month than NetDragon has said about their version of UO in two years.
I don't think anybody would dispute that.
We're talking about EA, who does incredibly illogical things.
You still haven't addressed what would happen to our UO, and next to citing a two year old tagline as evidence of your dreams, this is the biggest hole in your argument. A fully 3D UO client is simply not going to work with our UO. It's just not possible.
Your lack of technical knowledge is shining through. . You can insert 3D monsters and avatars, but going 100% 3D would also mean terrain, housing, etc. and it's just not technically possible for a fully 3D client to work with our UO, not without ditching the CC and completely rewriting the original UO server code which is a task that would make no financial sense, given the expense and the loss of the hardcore CC fans. They would be better off making Ultima Online 2.
Maybe the third biggest hole in your argument is that BioWare is intent on reviving the Ultima franchise, and they wouldn't be dumping money into reviving the Ultima franchise while allowing a third party to compete head-to-head with the existing UO in Japan, North America, and Europe (and Australia).
The fourth biggest hole in your argument is about Dungeon Keeper Online coming to North America. The hole in your argument is that there is no existing Dungeon Keeper Online in Japan, North America, Europe, and Australia. There have been fan attempts, but there is no actual Dungeon Keeper Online in existence, so you can't compare a game that does not exist right now with an EA game that does exist in Japan, North America, Europe, and Australia.
EA is not going to allow a third party to compete with an existing profitable title. Hell, EA would not allow an in-house product to compete with UO. Two in-house products if you count Ultima X, even though it was not an MMO.
I remember you getting angry about the lack of a classic shard and accusing people of astroturfing, but given how you are relentlessly citing a brief, two year old tagline from press releases and financial reports as evidence of a shiny new third party UO, you're the one who seems to be astroturfing.
C
Cloak&Dagger
Guest
Announcement has nothing to do with agreement, also you just made huge speculations about money. For one no accountant would be crunching numbers and assuming how much a game will make. Secondly, the team has changed 3 or 4 times over those 2 client alone, Mistakes are EA's not the Developers, but you can think what you want there I don't care about it. You also must not realize that the team has been bare-bone for a long time now, the entire EC client was made by a team not much bigger than we have now (what did it have like 4 more people than we do now?) I think you are including the people who do not work on UO exclusively in your counts, such as the artists which are not a part of the UO team, and have never been. We have not had a dedicated art team since it became a Mythic product.Except Dungeon Keeper Online was originally announced for release in Asian countries only... and now it is being released in the US. And don't most of the UO gold farmers come from China?
Say UO makes 3 million dollars/yr currently. The accountants crunch the numbers and estimate that if NetDragon's 3D UO client is released in Western countries EA will make a profit of 30 million dollars a year, even after they pay off NetDragon 5 million/yr. You think EA is going to say no to the 30 million dollars/yr. With this strategy EA assumes zero risk and resources, as opposed to investing in a team in recent years that has failed to deliver two (KR and EC) stable 2D clients. This is business, not investing in teams that have a track record of failure, evidenced by the FACT the current team is bare bones and part-time atm.
But if you think good pr/development/business is consistently making announcements that fail to be fully developed and losing 1/2 your customers in 2-3 years, then keep waving the pom poms.
EA has not invested in UO enough to make a difference. Want to see what EA does to teams that are profitable? Take a look at that precious Dungeon Keepers game of yours, look at the history behind it, 2 successful games and then they were finished as a brand name, lay-offs, and finally put on other projects. 8 years later EA strikes a deal with another company to allow them to Develop a game. Sure that is not definitive of the argument of proof for or against UO actually going 3d, but again I point to the fact that 1 game was announced before UO and 8 total have release dates or have been released., UO? Not even a screen shot or an idea. So what, is your argument that they are going to try and develop and finish 90 games before starting work on UO and it might come out sometime in 2045?
So I post for 1-2 days some youtube videos of the game engine that the new 3D version of UO will use and certain posters are getting upset. I would think that all Ultima fans would be rejoicing that there is finally going to be a Real 3D version of UO.
This isnt astroturfing. Astroturfing involves a payment. For example if Blizzard paid people to pretend to be players to repeatedly spam pro Blizzard PR on the internet, that is astroturfing. Or if WAR EMs posted on Blizzard forums and didnt identify that they were EMs, paid by Blizzard, that is astroturfing.
So for real Ultima fans, be happy...
[youtube]FEpkfnOYYSk[/youtube] <- this is the game engine that NetDragon's 3D version of UO will use !!!!!
This isnt astroturfing. Astroturfing involves a payment. For example if Blizzard paid people to pretend to be players to repeatedly spam pro Blizzard PR on the internet, that is astroturfing. Or if WAR EMs posted on Blizzard forums and didnt identify that they were EMs, paid by Blizzard, that is astroturfing.
So for real Ultima fans, be happy...
[youtube]FEpkfnOYYSk[/youtube] <- this is the game engine that NetDragon's 3D version of UO will use !!!!!
W
Woodsman
Guest
It's because you and NetDragon have provided no proof whatsoever that there is a new UO in development or that it will be available outside of Asian countries - no screenshots, no press releases, no developer interviews, no videos, nothing.
Pardon us for not getting excited about six little words from two years ago.
I actually like that you are excited that a properly done 3D UO could snag many players and agree with you fully on that aspect, but a properly done 3D UO would not be compatible with our UO, and there is no sign of such a UO being developed.
S
Sevin0oo0
Guest
Thru a LOTRO portal (f2p):
"It it entirely possible to earn enough points to gain access to all the games features, but I have to say it will be a huge grind fest to do this. "
Kinda like killing 35,000 hit point mobs(or many of them)?? - except you get expansions pacs/items instead - or do Quests to get the same. It was said you can play a loooong time and never spend a dime; Once you get the xpac, it's there for good. Yeah you can do the automatic monthly thing and get it all instantly plus other perks, but This is the F2P concept to me
So NetDragon releasing official press releases, annual reports, and corporate fact sheets saying they are working on a new 3D version of UO, is proof that they arent.
http://file.download.91.com/down/ir_e_20110615_3.pdf - June 2011
"Game Pipeline -> New UltimaOnline - A new 3D version of EA‟s“UltimaOnline™”, in collaborationwith EA‟s Mythic Entertainment - Expected to be launched in 2012"
C
Cloak&Dagger
Guest
Yea but if anyone else does what you are doing you accuse them of Astroturfing is what he was getting at, don't be a hypocrite and take it. Also, no one is upset at all about you posting videos of another game. But take it how it is, ANOTHER game, not UO in any fashion, also you keep assuming they will use that engine, which is hilarious, who is to say they wont use a different engine? Do you honestly even understand why they use any engine? Also when you post a video, the engine is not really on display unless it actually shows off a specific thing that engine can do that no other can, so really the video just shows off the game?
If they do ever decide to actual work on a "UO" game, I will find it amusing if it is just based on the Ultima lore, and has nothing to do with the UO game mechanics, so it would just be "more of the same". But even then, I do not expect them to actually work on it since there has been 0 progress on it in 2 years, but other games that have only gotten a mention this year look half done.
C
Cloak&Dagger
Guest
So NetDragon releasing official press releases, annual reports, and corporate fact sheets saying they are working on a new 3D version of UO, is proof that they arent.
http://file.download.91.com/down/ir_e_20110615_3.pdf - June 2011
"Game Pipeline -> New UltimaOnline - A new 3D version of EA‟s“UltimaOnline™”, in collaborationwith EA‟s Mythic Entertainment - Expected to be launched in 2012"
No its not proof they aren't, it just isn't proof they are. While that is not the first report I have read for netdragon, it is the first to have any inkling of a release time line for UO, which is more than anything else you have posted, which leads me to believe you just found that out yourself as well.
You do know that things in a fact sheet can change right? Just saying....although I will admit that I have more confidence that china will finally get UO, other than that it has nothing to do with us still. =\
Have I been spamming pro EA PR in every 2nd post for the last 6 months? No because I am not paid by EA.Cloak‡1993067 said:
In case you missed http://file.download.91.com/down/ir_e_20110615_3.pdf - A new 3D version of EA's UltimaOnline, in collaboration with EA's Mythic Entertainment, Expected to be launched in 2012.
W
Woodsman
Guest
Where is a press release focused on UO or that is not just a brief mention of UO? Where are the screenshots and videos and developer comments? Why have they bought EA licenses after they bought the UO license and then put those games into development and released screenshots and videos, while not saying anything more about UO other than a new version is being worked on?
Could it be that since they signed that agreement with EA, that Mythic was gutted a few months later in the wake of the Warhammer fiasco and that some key figures were laid off?
NetDragon had the perfect opportunity to pick up a bunch of ex-UO devs to work on their version of UO, including Tim Cotten, and they didn't. That should tell you a lot right there.
You mean the same six little words tacked onto the bottom of those reports and press releases for the past two years?
Look, even if they release a truly 3D game they call UO, it's not going to affect us, because it won't be compatible with our UO, and you still won't address that fact.
And if you think EA is going to force the CC users to dump their clients and is going to rewrite the whole UO backend to be compatible with a 3D UO client developed by NetDragon, you have not been paying attention. EA is doing everything on the cheap when it comes to MMOs except for Star Wars.
EA will not dump the CC in order to facilitate any kind of 3D UO client from NetDragon or anybody else.
Although a part of me, a very sick and twisted part of me, would like to see the ****storm that would errupt if they did.
I have no idea if the net dragon game will ever see a US release, that being said I prefer KR style graphics to the cartoonish wow look, it's one of the reasons I could never get into WoW.
It is irrelevant. Whether NetDragon's 3D UO, which will be released in 2012, is compatible with UO or not, it doesnt matter. If EA believe they can make more money, whether it runs independent to or integrated with UO, they will do it.
If it releases and it is even half decent, and with NetDragon's track record of successful projects this is almost certain, it is a no brainer it will be released in the US. Any decent 3D version of UO will pull in massive numbers, which means massive profits, far greater than current UO profits. EA will release it in the US, just like with World of Dungeon Keeper which was for Asia only when announced, but is now going to be released in the US.
Fyi, the people you want at senior levels are people with a track record of successfully growing a business, not a track record of losing customers.
W
Woodsman
Guest
Your whole scenario is based on NetDragon releasing Dungeon Keeper in North America when you have failed to address the fact that EA doesn't have an existing Dungeon Keeper game in production nor does it have a Dungeon Keeper game in development.
With Ultima on the other hand, EA has an existing Ultima game in production (UO) and is sinking money and resources into a new Ultima project (Ultima Forever).
I also don't believe that you comprehend that Mythic was gutted after the agreement with NetDragon and that the gutting of Mythic drastically changed the courses of UO and Camelot, which affected Mythic's ability to work with NetDragon. On top of that, as you yourself have pointed out and as the devs have confirmed, the Star Wars MMO has taken up a lot of resources directly from UO at times.
With Ultima on the other hand, EA has an existing Ultima game in production (UO) and is sinking money and resources into a new Ultima project (Ultima Forever).
If EA believed that a UO from NetDragon would make more money by being released in North America/Japan/Europe, EA would put UO into full maintenance mode instead of devoting resources to actions intended to grow UO's playerbase and EA would not be sinking money into Ultima Forever since another Ultima title from a third party might steal it's thunder.
A fully 3D UO client can't integrate with the UO that we currently play without a complete rewrite of the server code and ditching of the classic clients, and you don't seem to understand that.
I also don't believe that you comprehend that Mythic was gutted after the agreement with NetDragon and that the gutting of Mythic drastically changed the courses of UO and Camelot, which affected Mythic's ability to work with NetDragon. On top of that, as you yourself have pointed out and as the devs have confirmed, the Star Wars MMO has taken up a lot of resources directly from UO at times.
So instead of blaming numerous corporate missteps caused by EA executives who either didn't understand or didn't care about UO after 2004, you're going to blame members of the Stygian Abyss team from 2009. Nice.
Why are there 50 types of Crest, not just one? If releasing 50 products that are similarish, or even the same with different packaging results in more profit then that is what a business will do. So you have the current UO for the 2D fans, NetDragon's UO 3D for the 3D fans, and Ultima4Ever for the Facebook fans. If you only have the current UO, then EA misses out on profit from 3D and Facebook customers.
F
Fayled Dhreams
Guest
wow ... Which one is Lemmon and which one Matthau ?
Get a room or take it to PM
From the PDF link above:
New UltimaOnline*
•A new 3D version of EA‟s“UltimaOnline™”, in collaborationwith EA‟s Mythic Entertainment
•Expected to be launched in 2012
*working titles. Several pipeline projects are not displayed.
NUFF SAID !!!
points to one: LRNTOQUOTE
points tother : READDALINKS
It don't matter diddly damn WHAT frigging engine its done on ... NOW DOES IT ???
it is NOT likely to be done on the DeNA's Ngcore engine
UNLESS they are thinking about going towards Tablets ...
If you really really REALLY want to WIN your stupid slap fight
... CONTACT THEM !!!
from the link ... AGAIN:
Maggie Zhou
+86 591 8754 3120
[email protected]
don't Make Me Pull This Thread over
^^ well? how was my Meredith? i thought i nailed it ...
Get a room or take it to PM
From the PDF link above:
New UltimaOnline*
•A new 3D version of EA‟s“UltimaOnline™”, in collaborationwith EA‟s Mythic Entertainment
•Expected to be launched in 2012
*working titles. Several pipeline projects are not displayed.
NUFF SAID !!!
points to one: LRNTOQUOTE
points tother : READDALINKS
It don't matter diddly damn WHAT frigging engine its done on ... NOW DOES IT ???
it is NOT likely to be done on the DeNA's Ngcore engine
UNLESS they are thinking about going towards Tablets ...
If you really really REALLY want to WIN your stupid slap fight
... CONTACT THEM !!!
from the link ... AGAIN:
Maggie Zhou
+86 591 8754 3120
[email protected]
don't Make Me Pull This Thread over
^^ well? how was my Meredith? i thought i nailed it ...