EC vs 2D

[HD2300]

New Ultima Online*
•A new 3D version of EA‟s“ UltimaOnline™”, in collaboration with EA‟s Mythic Entertainment
•Expected to be launched in 2012

where did they say it's not going to be 3D?

click on links on my sig for more info about the new 3D version of UO.

3D is going to be released before all the EC graphic updates ever get finished and crashes fixed that 70% still have regularly even after 4 years.

Conceptually KR/EC was a good idea 5 years ago, but 3D UO is the future.

 

[G.v.P]

I've been playing the EC for more than a year now and like it a lot, especially with Pinco's UI. However, once in a while I have to use 2d for things such as customizing a house and or decorating... I just can't figure out for the life of me why so many still use the old 2d... IMO it looks horrible and is like wearing hand cuffs, it has so many limits compared to the EC.

No offense, but I tried Pinco's UI and it didn't make me want to play the EC any more than I did previously. The worst part was the "Pinco" name within the client, with a clickable region. First thing I did was I went into the code to delete the clickable region, lol.

Anyway, moving on, the EC, modded or not, didn't do anything I found special. If you need a warning every time you get cursed or have low health, or you need help grabbing health bars, then it's probably because the EC has dull, muddy graphics and you can't tell what's going on otherwise. I never played the CC and thought, "Damn, I need someone to tell me I just got poisoned." The potential is nice, I'll give the EC that, but it's a Beta client and the graphics aren't ready for primetime.

The only thing I like about the EC is the gridded backpack option, which is great for crafting and totally gimp for t-map loot because the best stuff always comes first. UO:CC and UOA does everything else I need, and some things the EC can't, especially with interest to vendor interaction.

Anyway, I look forward to the true 3D client people have been talking about as of late. I liked Third Dawn better than KR and SA, and agree with Woodsman on that front (regarding when would have been the right time to "switch," except, people won't ever switch until a true 3D client and/or a new game is made).

 

[Woodsman]

I liked Third Dawn better than KR and SA, and agree with Woodsman on that front (regarding when would have been the right time to "switch," except, people won't ever switch until a true 3D client and/or a new game is made).

Yeah, it would be a lot easier if they had forced the switch a decade ago. Now we'll never see UO in 3D because 2D is so firmly entrenched. A shame - how many people would like to see their houses in 3D, etc. Hell, I've love to see castles in 3D, as well as Britain. Luna....

Really a shame when you look at what BioWare is doing with HeroEngine. As much fun as I make of Star Wars and question some decisions, from the actual gameplay I've seen, it's impressive, and I can see why BioWare thinks they'll get a decade out of SWTOR.

As I said in another thread, a sick part of me wants to see BioWare make a big announcement that they are moving UO and Camelot over to HeroEngine and that UO is going 3D, just to see the uproar that would result. But that will never happen.

 

[HD2300]

...they've already said this several times, the client updates are going to be using existing and KR artwork....

No they haven't told us that THE "graphic updates" are just a on/off feature to use previous KR artwork. Thanks for letting us know.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

The only thing stated about any art updates is that it is going to be done in phases starting with the terrain and structure walls and that "it's as if you had astigmatism, then put on glasses". There has been nothing stated by the dev team about the reissuance of KR artwork.

 

[HD2300]

...
The only thing stated about any art updates is that it is going to be done in phases starting with the terrain and structure walls and that "it's as if you had astigmatism, then put on glasses". There has been nothing stated by the dev team about the reissuance of KR artwork.

Yes but it is clear Woodsman seems to know a lot more than 99.99% of us about what is happening at EA

...How do you think it would be received if they mange the EC upgrade using existing and KR artwork...

So you read it here from Woodsman first.

 

[Woodsman]

They said they would assess what they already had and KR falls into that, plus KR assets are still included within the EC graphics, just not used.

I would be surprised if they had original high-resolution copies of the older graphics since that was supposedly lost when they moved from Austin to California.

 

[Woodsman]

Yes but it is clear Woodsman seems to know a lot more than 99.99% of us about what is happening at EA

From what was said, it sounded like they would look at everything they had, and KR falls into that category, especially given the EC's relationship to the KR client. I doubt they would seriously make new artwork if they have KR artwork available for those assets. They just don't have the staff.

So you read it here from Woodsman first.

Says the person who is telling everybody that EA will use NetDragon's supposed 3D UO in lieu of our UO or let NetDragon release a UO in areas where EA's UO already exists

As I said, a sick and twisted part of me wants to see a 3D UO released just to see the drama, but I know of too many people that would probably quit as a result, it's a very sick and twisted part of me.

It's also kind of sad that they are dumping 100s of millions into Star Wars, but won't hire a half a dozen people for UO. Even Camelot got a new hire or two.

 

[LadyNico]

Main reason I use EC has to be the very small resolution 2D offers, 800x600 on a 1920x1080 26 inch monitor is just ridiculous.

I edit videos and photos and I'm not going to adjust it every time to play a game, It's set perfectly how it should be.

For all the time & energy you've given to us on Europa, I'm grateful and I love you to bits as a player, Mapper. That said, ever since you went EC with your reports, I quit reading Europa news because I couldn't even recognise some of my own guild members in the EC screenshots.

CC for for as long as it exists.

 

[DenAlton036]

I started playing in 1999 and have only stopped playing regularly for 1 year to travel, but maintained all my accounts. When I first tried the EC, I hated it--but, I gave it another try and now I could never go back to the CC as it feels like I am playing with a stripped down version of the game. I used to run the CC and the EC, but do not even do that now because Pinco's UI covers anything I needed to do in the CC, like organize vendors.
I will not go on to list and explain all the great things about the EC as those that use it already know and those that claim they do not want to lose the "Classic Feel" will probably not change, and anyone that is new can go to the EC boards or visit Pinco's site: Pinco's UI.

Change is Good....mostly!

This discribes me and several others as well.
Thank you all so much for contributing to what I feel is a very important and interesting debate. The fact is, ALL of us that visit this forum, and still support UO, should stick together in some form of a "community" so that UO will be there for us in the future. Everybody here made great points and I hope the devs can take something from it and find away to bring us back to a more common ground in the future. We all want the same thing.

As far as someone mentioning that we should expect a totally new 3d game in 2012, my wife points out to me that we are also told to expect the world to end in 2012. Coincidence....?

 

[HD2300]

...

The only thing stated about any art updates ... "it's as if you had astigmatism, then put on glasses". There has been nothing stated by the dev team about the reissuance of KR artwork.

...they've already said this several times, the client updates are going to be using existing and KR artwork....

...How do you think it would be received if they mange the EC upgrade using existing and KR artwork...

From what was said, it sounded like they would look at everything they had, and KR falls into that category, especially given the EC's relationship to the KR client. I doubt they would seriously make new artwork if they have KR artwork available for those assets. They just don't have the staff....

4 Dermott, from the above it is extremely clear re the art update what is happening given the source. You read it here first.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Woodsman is right in that the KR artwork still resides in the EC files (I can attest to this personally)... but there are also a LOT of other things in it as well that are not active or may never even BE active.

From my viewpoint I'm seeing two people use rumour and conjecture then point fingers at each other for being wrong.

Meanwhile I'm taking the stance that we should only rely on public statements from the Devs themselves. If they decide to use KR assets or a new 3d client, then so be it, but I'll believe either one when we have an official announcement.

I've seen too many things happen in the MMOG world to take internal statements, leaked memos, subsidiary pamphlets and whatnot as gospel.

When we see Publish/Patch notes and hear it from Cal, Mesanna, or whomever may be in charge of UO at the time, THEN it's official.

 

[Woodsman]

You're right Dermott, we should only refer to what was said by the devs and so I won't mention the KR stuff anymore - I was wrong to assume that it would be using KR graphics.

The good news is that, going by what Cal said last month, we'll see the first graphics update in the next major publish or two, which might even hit TC within the month or next month. Being that I'm pretty happy with the last major publish, I am looking forward to Publish 72 or whatever they are going to call it. I'll be especially happy if they continue the trend of more and more bug fixes.

 

[Clog|Mordain]

I use 2d and EC pretty evenly. Really depends on the character I am playing at the time. When I am playing a caster type character I use 2d, due to the fact, I just cant get my head around the EC targeting properly, it seems to bug out for me and always hits myself... And use EC on my dexxers. Whoever plays 2d with a dexxer needs to be shot. Instant weap swaps, better movement.. the client is a dexxers dream!


On another note, I really think UO will not grow as a game until they put a complete 3d engine in. People now-a-days are looking at games with graphics like WoW or Darkfall, with engines similar to that type of game. I know none of us want to see UO go in that direction(including me), I just think until UO does, its not going to grow.

But I am looking forward to the graphics update coming 'soon'

 

[Omnius]

EC reminds me of those old 1980s big screen tvs you occasionally see in someone's grandparent's home. The screen is so blurry and old, you're never quite sure whether you're watching football or golf. All you know is, you'd rather have a clear picture.

 

[HD2300]

On another note, I really think UO will not grow as a game until they put a complete 3d engine in. People now-a-days are looking at games with graphics like WoW or Darkfall, with engines similar to that type of game. I know none of us want to see UO go in that direction(including me), I just think until UO does, its not going to grow.

2D is just 3D in an overhead view which you cannot rotate. So if the graphics are not cartoonish like WoW and more realistic like Age of Conan, then it should be fine.

Age of Conan has gone free to play. [Update] Age of Conan's Free-To-Play Era Begins Now - News - www.GameInformer.com
World of Warcraft, will be free to play until level 20 http://mashable.com/2011/06/29/world-of-warcraft-free/

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

EC reminds me of those old 1980s big screen tvs you occasionally see in someone's grandparent's home. The screen is so blurry and old, you're never quite sure whether you're watching football or golf. All you know is, you'd rather have a clear picture.

Why? Are you playing it on one of those types of TVs? Or is it one of those $10 special no-name CRTs from the early 90s?

EC's biggest graphical problem is trying to use the 2d graphic assets outside of their miniscule native resolutions (they simply do NOT scale well. They didn't in 3d, they didn't in KR and they don't in EC).

 

[DenAlton036]

Whoever plays 2d with a dexxer needs to be shot. Instant weap swaps, better movement.. the client is a dexxers dream!


On another note, I really think UO will not grow as a game until they put a complete 3d engine in. People now-a-days are looking at games with graphics like WoW or Darkfall, with engines similar to that type of game. I know none of us want to see UO go in that direction(including me), I just think until UO does, its not going to grow.

But I am looking forward to the graphics update coming 'soon'

Great points!
wow I couldn't imagine not having my instant wepn/armr swaps etc etc...

And your so right about the 3d... Being "game engine" illiterate... All I know is that when I play a game such as the latest Age of Empires, which is top down perspective like UO, I think to myself, WOW if only UO looked like this.

Im not understanding the big screen tv comment, I have the EC up on my other monitor right now and it is sooo much clearer, brighter, and crisper than 2d. So maybe thats a vid card, systm thing?

And please don't turn this into a f2p debate

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

UO is and has always been a "3d world", just in a fixed semi-isometric perspective.

In terms of technical statements, consider it more pixel(2d) vs polygon(3d). And while a mixture of the two would be best, they still need to upgrade the pixel(2d) graphics to scale better to higher resolutions and use the zoom feature more smoothly.

A "3d client" does not have to mean "WoW". Remember that Gamebryo, the engine that the EC uses is used for quite a number of 3d perspective games.

Theoretically, the best combination for UO would be to use the 3d engine for terrain (ditching tile-based or minimizing it at the very least), character models (the hybrid version we have now gives the EC a HUGE footprint only mitigated by the patch system developed for the EC), and particle effects (but they have to resolve larger effects that are built via separate/multiple instances of a smaller effect) and retaining the pixel(2d) graphic system for items, flora, buildings, etc. but making sure that the resolution is raised to better suit current resolution standards.

 

[Triberius]

Focusing on strictly the EC won't help anything in the long run as far as declining player base

If they want to attract new players, and consider that 18-25 year olds were either not alive or not aware of say Ultima VII, then the EC and a graphics update is a major part of that. Younger players expect high resolution graphics and expect user interfaces that they can customize to fit their style.

What I'm saying is they can't fully utilize the EC's potential with the server side coding they have now, it simply wasn't designed for it. I've heard a past Dev state that they used a modified proprietary version of Wombat as their scripting engine.. Which is all fine and dandy until you realize what exactly Wombat is... Heck Wombat's language reference documentation is only 16 pages, and includes this little phrase

Currently, Wombat requires an entire “program” to reside in a single file. Particularly,
there are currently no mechanisms to call functions that are defined in a different file.

Which means there is tons of bloat by today's standards since it lacks an efficient method to inherit code from other files. If you know nothing about programming, that might not make much sense to you, but to some of us it might make more sense. But basically you have to repeat much of the same information over and over when in more flexible languages it's not necessary. This would decrease work load, increase production, and reduce discrepancies by a ton. Good example, Smith Hammers and Tongs.. Excepting Runics they do the exact same thing, they just have different art. Same deal with the scorp, plane, Dovetail Saw etc for carpentry. Instead of having to completely code each one, with a system allowing for better inheritance, I could create one file that defines what Carpentry or Smith tool does, then use it as a basis for all the various appropriate tools by calling that file in their code, then defining just the art value... Instead of coding the entire thing multiple times, basically do it once then have a short cut for the future... The same thing would work with Monsters, I define the common attributes to all monsters as variables, then just define those variables in their individual scripts after calling the "stock" file, and add any "special" properties like special attacks that are unique to them.

, cheating, and improving the game play experience by a large factor etc...

I agree completely that those are serious problems. I haven't seen anything done to stop the scripters, unfortunately.

Which is why I'd like to see a server side overhaul, so that the clients could be updated with much stronger data encryption as a result. As it stands now, you can break the encryption and access the data stream about 30 seconds after they update the client. It's security methods are well known and documented by the emulation community and used by those that develop cheats.

To really do something about overhauling UO and modernizing it they need to focus on the server side, and rebuild it from the ground up first then look at modernizing the client side of things.

They did rebuild it when they moved from Solaris/Suns to Intel, but are you talking about an actual move to 3D? I don't see that happening at all, as much as I think it would help. Short of a move to 3D, there's not a lot that can be done on the server side to help with the player experience.[/QUOTE]

You missed what I'm saying the Server Operating system is not a problem it's the Game Server software, which is a totally different thing that is my point, Solaris is a server operating system, not the Game server, there may have been some issues that needed to be addressed but the bulk of it remained pretty much the same. What I was saying is that by completely rebuilding the entire game server software from scratch they could take in mind the potential of the Gamebryo Engine used by the EC and actually create a real 3D client if they wanted, and at the same time be a bit creative and still keep the CC working. It would be difficult to be sure, but not nearly as difficult as modifying their existing server software to do so since they would have full control over everything and not have to worry about bits of code, so old they don't even know what it does anymore causing conflicts... It would allow them to purge old code no longer used or needed that has simply been "Turned Off" and create a more flexible environment for future modification.

 

[Triberius]

Whoever plays 2d with a dexxer needs to be shot. Instant weap swaps, better movement.. the client is a dexxers dream!


On another note, I really think UO will not grow as a game until they put a complete 3d engine in. People now-a-days are looking at games with graphics like WoW or Darkfall, with engines similar to that type of game. I know none of us want to see UO go in that direction(including me), I just think until UO does, its not going to grow.

But I am looking forward to the graphics update coming 'soon'

Great points!
wow I couldn't imagine not having my instant wepn/armr swaps etc etc...

And your so right about the 3d... Being "game engine" illiterate... All I know is that when I play a game such as the latest Age of Empires, which is top down perspective like UO, I think to myself, WOW if only UO looked like this.

Im not understanding the big screen tv comment, I have the EC up on my other monitor right now and it is sooo much clearer, brighter, and crisper than 2d. So maybe thats a vid card, systm thing?

And please don't turn this into a f2p debate

It's honestly great for thieves as well, people can't "Stack" items in a grid view pack...

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

What I'm saying is they can't fully utilize the EC's potential with the server side coding they have now, it simply wasn't designed for it. I've heard a past Dev state that they used a modified proprietary version of Wombat as their scripting engine.. Which is all fine and dandy until you realize what exactly Wombat is... Heck Wombat's language reference documentation is only 16 pages, and includes this little phrase



Which means there is tons of bloat by today's standards since it lacks an efficient method to inherit code from other files. If you know nothing about programming, that might not make much sense to you, but to some of us it might make more sense. But basically you have to repeat much of the same information over and over when in more flexible languages it's not necessary. This would decrease work load, increase production, and reduce discrepancies by a ton. Good example, Smith Hammers and Tongs.. Excepting Runics they do the exact same thing, they just have different art. Same deal with the scorp, plane, Dovetail Saw etc for carpentry. Instead of having to completely code each one, with a system allowing for better inheritance, I could create one file that defines what Carpentry or Smith tool does, then use it as a basis for all the various appropriate tools by calling that file in their code, then defining just the art value... Instead of coding the entire thing multiple times, basically do it once then have a short cut for the future... The same thing would work with Monsters, I define the common attributes to all monsters as variables, then just define those variables in their individual scripts after calling the "stock" file, and add any "special" properties like special attacks that are unique to them.



Which is why I'd like to see a server side overhaul, so that the clients could be updated with much stronger data encryption as a result. As it stands now, you can break the encryption and access the data stream about 30 seconds after they update the client. It's security methods are well known and documented by the emulation community and used by those that develop cheats.

They did rebuild it when they moved from Solaris/Suns to Intel, but are you talking about an actual move to 3D? I don't see that happening at all, as much as I think it would help. Short of a move to 3D, there's not a lot that can be done on the server side to help with the player experience.

You missed what I'm saying the Server Operating system is not a problem it's the Game Server software, which is a totally different thing that is my point, Solaris is a server operating system, not the Game server, there may have been some issues that needed to be addressed but the bulk of it remained pretty much the same. What I was saying is that by completely rebuilding the entire game server software from scratch they could take in mind the potential of the Gamebryo Engine used by the EC and actually create a real 3D client if they wanted, and at the same time be a bit creative and still keep the CC working. It would be difficult to be sure, but not nearly as difficult as modifying their existing server software to do so since they would have full control over everything and not have to worry about bits of code, so old they don't even know what it does anymore causing conflicts... It would allow them to purge old code no longer used or needed that has simply been "Turned Off" and create a more flexible environment for future modification.[/quote]

Are you suggesting they rewrite the server code and then rewrite the EC client code to work with it? I am not against this idea, but I think with the team we have now that would be a stretch. They can improve the game with out actually rewriting the server code entirely, But I also have felt that they need to begin work on the server code as well. If they have to accomplish 5 things in a set amount of time, make Part of the server code included in those 5 things each period.

So It would be something like, Bug Fixes, Client enhancement, Server Code, Content, Extra. If they kept to a format for each time period instead of random "this or that" Things would go more smoothly, Sure we might not get loads of content each publish, but we would get a consistent amount of content and fixes and things that are needed for this game to progress/maintain.

I do take a liberty of assuming that you are saying to rewrite the server code and then the EC code (and assuming to drop the original client as I doubt they could keep it and actually make the other two items work the way they should. The old client does prevent more things than most will admit/realize.) If my assumptions are wrong then I apologize, but I still put forth my opinion.

On the EC vs 2D topic, I have to say I have used the EC exclusively since its release. I also miss some things from 2D (being able to mount from a hotkey for instance.) I also agree that playing a mage on EC is very difficult for me even still (well in PvP anyhow, PvM I can handle just fine).

 

[Ender]

So yeah, looking through UO Reader... Some of the stuff in there is pretty nice. I hope that's what the graphics overhaul looks like.

 

[Triberius]

I do take a liberty of assuming that you are saying to rewrite the server code and then the EC code (and assuming to drop the original client as I doubt they could keep it and actually make the other two items work the way they should. The old client does prevent more things than most will admit/realize.) If my assumptions are wrong then I apologize, but I still put forth my opinion.

What I'm saying is instead of trying to optimize the clients to the server, re-write the server to optimize to the clients and fix/upgrade a lot of other features to benefit the Devs in the future. But yea a total re-write of the server would be a best case if EA ever decides to actually try and do something with UO. Give them 3-4 Devs to do nothing but that while the existing team works on what we have now until the overhaul is ready, then start migrating over, it might take a few years but it is doable considering they have something to base their work on. It would have multiple benefits, if don't right including better maintainability, easier troubleshooting, a lot less bloat through better techniques that have come with advancements in object oriented programming etc. It would even make it rather simple for them to adjust skills etc to effect only PvP or PvM as they felt was needed if they did it right, the current structure of the game I believe simply doesn't allow that to be done efficiently or you wouldn't see such across the board changes done to target only type of game play or the other.

The EC has a lot of stability issues because of a couple of factors, one Gamebryo was designed with 3d Textures in mind, not sprites, and newer Video Cards don't handle sprites nearly as well as they used to either. This accounts for a big part of the huge footprint UO puts on system resources among other things.

UO being one of the first of it's kind (not the first as Meridian 59 was Dec 1995 and The Realm Online was March 1996), honestly made a few choices that today seem not quite as wise as it did then. I don't blame anyone for how things happened it was uncharted territory, I mean seriously the World Wide Web was only just over 6 years old (August 6th, 1991) when UO was released, and was only 2 years away from a time when the internet was broken down into multiple generally regional networks (NSFNET migration to today's architecture in April of 1995 ended this). I just feel that after 14 years it might be time to look at really taking a step to modernize the game, to take advantage of all the advancements in programming techniques, and hardware not to mention shifts in the target market expectations that have changed and evolved since 1997, and I just don't think the existing foundation UO is built on isn't capable of doing that, which means a re-write would be necessary.


Heck they could call it UO2 for all I care and allow players who wished to, to migrate over their characters. But our current UO has simply been pushed beyond it's ability to be competitive, and while the current EC is a step in the right direction, it still falls way short of the mark, meaning in my honest opinion debating EC vs 2D is pointless since neither one as it stands now has any more than a snowballs chance of making a positive change in the direction the game is heading in terms of long term survivability.

To sum it all up.. Debating on if they should nix the CC and focus on the EC while not addressing core issues that are holding both clients back does nothing to better the game. The thoughts processes and time the Devs spend on both these clients could be better spent elsewhere actually putting UO in a position to draw new players, and make their own work easier in the future.

Like I said that's my opinion, no one has to like or agree with it, but there it is.

 

[HD2300]

What I'm saying is instead of trying to optimize the clients to the server, re-write the server to optimize to the clients and fix/upgrade a lot of other features to benefit the Devs in the future. But yea a total re-write of the server would be a best case if EA ever decides to actually try and do something with UO. Give them 3-4 Devs to do nothing but that while the existing team works on what we have now until the overhaul is ready, then start migrating over, it might take a few years but it is doable considering they have something to base their work on. It would have multiple benefits, if don't right including better maintainability, easier troubleshooting, a lot less bloat through better techniques that have come with advancements in object oriented programming etc. It would even make it rather simple for them to adjust skills etc to effect only PvP or PvM as they felt was needed if they did it right, the current structure of the game I believe simply doesn't allow that to be done efficiently or you wouldn't see such across the board changes done to target only type of game play or the other.

The EC has a lot of stability issues because of a couple of factors, one Gamebryo was designed with 3d Textures in mind, not sprites, and newer Video Cards don't handle sprites nearly as well as they used to either. This accounts for a big part of the huge footprint UO puts on system resources among other things.

...

Heck they could call it UO2 for all I care and allow players who wished to, to migrate over their characters. But our current UO has simply been pushed beyond it's ability to be competitive, and while the current EC is a step in the right direction, it still falls way short of the mark, meaning in my honest opinion debating EC vs 2D is pointless since neither one as it stands now has any more than a snowballs chance of making a positive change in the direction the game is heading in terms of long term survivability.

To sum it all up.. Debating on if they should nix the CC and focus on the EC while not addressing core issues that are holding both clients back does nothing to better the game. The thoughts processes and time the Devs spend on both these clients could be better spent elsewhere actually putting UO in a position to draw new players, and make their own work easier in the future.

Like I said that's my opinion, no one has to like or agree with it, but there it is.

This is what they (EA & NetDragon) are doing now with UO 3D. Note that UO has now what could be considered a skeleton crew.

 

[Cirno]

This is what they (EA & NetDragon) are doing now with UO 3D. Note that UO has now what could be considered a skeleton crew.
[/SIZE]

All they have committed to doing is creating a game under the name "Ultima Online".
They have not committed to any other details.

Triberius was talking about taking the existing game and improving the software behind it.
Netdragon are creating a new game with nothing more than a shared name confirmed.

At this time, we don't know if it's going to be a sandbox, playground or theme park. We don't know if it's have player housing, ships, crafting, resource gathering, or anything else that UO has (unique to it or otherwise).
Putting too much stock in it before there's anything to go on is the surest road to disappointment.

 

[Triberius]

This is what they (EA & NetDragon) are doing now with UO 3D. Note that UO has now what could be considered a skeleton crew.

Note there has been zero confirmation of NetDragon's UO build being released outside of China, Hong Kong, Macau, and India. Now if you live in one of these areas find and well, but for all of us UO players anywhere else in the world NetDragon's work is completely irrelevant to our interests at this point in time.

 

[Siteswap]

@ Triberius

Thanks for those posts ... I found them informative, interesting and a great read. You should do a blog!

 

[Triberius]

@ Triberius

Thanks for those posts ... I found them informative, interesting and a great read. You should do a blog!

Like this one? Triberius' Gaming Journal and if you look sorry for all the adsense stuff, I'z poor so a penny here and a penny there adds up

 

[molinaro]

I returned two weeks ago after a 5 year break. I started with the classic client, not even realizing their was a new one.

After a few hours of play, I did install the new client and Pinco's UI.

It's all I use and uninstalled the CC. I can't imagine any reason to use that old client.

 

[Elric_Soban]

EC is far superior from both an aesthetic and technical standpoint. Some people feel that it lost the 'UO' feel on the UI with all the colorless black square container windows and such... get Pinco's UI! It puts the UO back into the EC. It really does.

Even for PvP, there's no way i'd go back to 2d. Some of the macros ive got setup, i dont even know if they'd be possible in 2d.

The new targeting system makes treasure hunting ALOT easier, the improved map functionality makes fishing up MIBs alot more efficient.

I could go on all day, but the simple fact is:

EC > 2D

 

[Woodsman]

To sum it all up.. Debating on if they should nix the CC and focus on the EC while not addressing core issues that are holding both clients back does nothing to better the game. The thoughts processes and time the Devs spend on both these clients could be better spent elsewhere actually putting UO in a position to draw new players, and make their own work easier in the future.

Like I said that's my opinion, no one has to like or agree with it, but there it is.

I agree that the two-client scheme probably sets the game back. Gone are the days when there were enough devs that it wasn't that much of an issue. It's also not helped by the fact that we've had a couple of new clients where some of the developers left after the clients were released and a new batch of developers came in and had to pick up where they left off. Then again, there's been a lot of missteps by EA regarding UO.

In a perfect world, after Star Wars launches, BioWare would move Camelot and UO over to HeroEngine and share their artists and developers from Star Wars. BioWare is not going to have the 4,000 or so employees for Star Wars that Blizzard has for WoW, not even a quarter of that, but they will still have enough that they could help UO and Camelot if everybody was using the same development and art tools. Of course that goes back to 3D and a lot of players wouldn't make the move.

 

[Shiznit Bo'Bourbon]

EC lags and chops in places CC does not, on a machine that runs WoW trivially. EC is hysterically badly optimized for something that looks like Baldur's Gate.

 

[DenAlton036]

I returned two weeks ago after a 5 year break. I started with the classic client, not even realizing their was a new one.

After a few hours of play, I did install the new client and Pinco's UI.

It's all I use and uninstalled the CC. I can't imagine any reason to use that old client.

That was me as well.... Someone mentioned MIBs, which in the EC you can open the map, set waypoints for as many as youd like and fish them up as you go.. very nice! And T maps too, no way we could do those in CC. When I first returned my wife and I did some with our guild and we couldnt figure out why it took them so long to look through the chest, and why were they emptying the whole dang thing?? Then we realized they were in CC ....

EC lags and chops in places CC does not, on a machine that runs WoW trivially. EC is hysterically badly optimized for something that looks like Baldur's Gate.
I have no argument for comments like these.. thats why Im hoping for more EC support from the devs...

Thank you Triberious, Woodsman, Dermott and everyone for making this thread a great read! I feel these discussions are important for UOs future.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

Pinco's UI and the EC is almost the EC complete. The only thing missing is better detailed graphics, maybe some sound affects.

I'm sure there are still some problems with the code being so old but i'm sure they will figure out a solution for things like lag or built up memory.

I just couldn't go back to playing 2D and with the improvements that Pinco's UI has made the enhanced is everything and more than 2D could ever be.

There's alot of things that people just don't get, like trying to make there interface set up the same as it was in 2D.

The Enhanced Client is like a new tool and people are still trying to use it in old ways, like one of those bead counters compared to a computer.

It makes a huge difference and creates an awesome feeling of everything UO is. It almost puts you in there again, like the first time you played UO.

2D is like listening to music without sound or watching the sun set and not being able to see. There's a huge difference and once you've experienced it, that's when you begin to understand it.

So, I could never go back because I would feel I was losing to much of the experience I know, plus my hopes now, of all that could be done with the Enhanced Client.

 

[Siteswap]

EC is far superior from both an aesthetic and technical standpoint.

Technically perhaps, but aesthetically that is simply your opinion and certainly not fact.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Again, the aesthetics comes from trying to scale Legacy graphics to modern resolutions... the system being used simply does NOT work, thus the need for higher resolution artwork resources. And while the KR artwork was polarizing (to say the least) in terms of aesthetics, it at least handled higher resolutions better than the original 2d artwork.

But then it ALWAYS amused me listening to the "graphics don't matter" crowd use graphics as their argument against 3d, KR, EC, or, well, anything that's NOT the 2d client.

Graphics DO matter, they are NOT mutually exclusive to gameplay and UO needs and has needed a true graphics upgrade for years now. KR at least was an attempt... now it's time to get the job done and NOT try to compromise with the uncompromising.

 

[Cyanide_Mage]

2D will never be taken away because it will be the death of UO. EA knows that if they do away with the CC there will be a 25-35% dropage in accounts right off the bat due to the fact there is such a large group of people, with multiple accounts, who refuse to play in the EC. EC Client, compared to new games, its hideous. You really think people are going to say, "Hey! Look at that EC UO client... Thats right up there with the WoWs, Aions, Darkfalls, etc etc. I'ma try that out because it looks amazing!"? Lets face it, what keeps people playing uo isnt graphics, its content. UO hands down has had, and will always have some of the most amazing content for a game on the market. People stay cause of the content, not because of EC, however, people WILL quit and close mass accounts if you do away with the CC.

 

[Storm]

And the same can be said for doing away with EC so we are all stuck with each other it appears

 

[Cyanide_Mage]

And the same can be said for doing away with EC so we are all stuck with each other it appears

Yup but typically these *EC vs 2D* threads are started by someone on EC trying to have more attention focused on their client and leads into *Dismantle CC* conclusion

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

EC Client, compared to new games, its hideous. You really think people are going to say, "Hey! Look at that EC UO client... Thats right up there with the WoWs, Aions, Darkfalls, etc etc. I'ma try that out because it looks amazing!"? Lets face it, what keeps people playing uo isnt graphics, its content.

And the very next post spells out the contradiction I'm talking about. If it isn't graphics, then why the need for this statement?

UO already has the content regardless of client, so if graphics don't matter why is the argument brought up?

 

[Cyanide_Mage]

...

EC Client, compared to new games, its hideous. You really think people are going to say, "Hey! Look at that EC UO client... Thats right up there with the WoWs, Aions, Darkfalls, etc etc. I'ma try that out because it looks amazing!"? Lets face it, what keeps people playing uo isnt graphics, its content.

And the very next post spells out the contradiction I'm talking about. If it isn't graphics, then why the need for this statement?

UO already has the content regardless of client, so if graphics don't matter why is the argument brought up?

I'm not sure which side of the fence your on... I'm simply saying that people play uo for content not graphics. UO could never compete with the new generation of games unless they completely scrap the entire game and start over. People play uo for content, not graphics, however, there is a HUGE segment of people who feel the EC is HIDEOUS and refuse to play it. EA wont switch too one client because they know they will lose a good third of their clients regardless. What people dont realize is unless you do away with em both and make a new next gen graphic UO, closing down one client means the death of uo which means the death of the other client...

 

[Woodsman]

Yup but typically these *EC vs 2D* threads are started by someone on EC trying to have more attention focused on their client and leads into *Dismantle CC* conclusion

EC users should be happy - we are seeing more work being done on it, we should be seeing the first graphics update in the next major publish. It's not as fast as we'd like, but it's happening. It's also going to be the focal point of the new player experience as well. Also Pinco has been doing amazing things with his UI and the various books and icons.

CC users should be happy as well - BioWare/Cal has stated that no longer will the CC be put on a timer, such that the CC will be discontinued once the EC reaches a threshold. In the past that made a lot of CC users very defensive. Now the decision has been made to keep both clients for the time being.

Both EC and CC users should be happy that there are a lot more bugfixes being done on both clients and the game in general.

I just wish things were progressing faster.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I'm not sure which side of the fence your on

Then I'm doing things right.

Seriously though, as much as a personally hate, despise, loathe and wish the term would be nuked from orbit as a political term, you can call me a UO "Progressive" in that I think that UO needs to move FORWARD technologically.

I think UO would be ultimately better served to ditch any old client(s) any time a new one is released. I think that the team should NEVER have tried to compromise with the "2d or die" crowd when they turned the KR client into the Enhanced Client. At the very least they should have retained the KR graphics as a toggle (just reversed from KR in that Legacy would be the default and KR the option) in the EC for those who wanted the newer graphic set.

I think keeping the 2d client around has hampered the possible growth of UO in terms of technology and immersion. I would have LOVED to see what the original vision for SA would have been when it was going to be KR only and non-tile based. But in moderation of that, I do see the purpose of having the 2d client for travel sized technology such as netbooks and tablet PCs (at least until they can handle the tech requirements for the EC), so I'm willing to lose some of the vision of the Gamebryo based client.

However I think mistakes have been made with KR and the EC not the least of which was releasing KR WAAAY too early. I think the drastic change in SOME of the KR artwork was a mistake (i.e. equipment (armor/weapons) looking so different that they were easily confused) and that other portions of the artwork needed to be tweaked further. I think going back to the sprite-based animation instead of smoothing out the 3d animation was a mistake even if they did it in a "hybrid" manner, it causes the client "footprint" for the EC to be HUGE compared to a 3d client. And I think it was a mistake to compromise as much as they did when they moved from KR to the EC (see above about the artwork toggle).

When it comes to these debates, I will call out people on BOTH sides when they bring forth what I think is bad information or blind conjecture because I think the EC stands on its own merits both in what we have now and what it is potentially capable of and get annoyed at outright bad information from either side.

Which side I am on should be pretty obvious considering I have been working as part of the UI modding community since the days of KR. As of right now, my contributions include the Copper and Third Dawn theme packs for Pinco's UI (well Copper for now, I still need to update Third Dawn).

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

What I'm saying is instead of trying to optimize the clients to the server, re-write the server to optimize to the clients and fix/upgrade a lot of other features to benefit the Devs in the future. But yea a total re-write of the server would be a best case if EA ever decides to actually try and do something with UO. Give them 3-4 Devs to do nothing but that while the existing team works on what we have now until the overhaul is ready, then start migrating over, it might take a few years but it is doable considering they have something to base their work on. It would have multiple benefits, if don't right including better maintainability, easier troubleshooting, a lot less bloat through better techniques that have come with advancements in object oriented programming etc. It would even make it rather simple for them to adjust skills etc to effect only PvP or PvM as they felt was needed if they did it right, the current structure of the game I believe simply doesn't allow that to be done efficiently or you wouldn't see such across the board changes done to target only type of game play or the other.

The EC has a lot of stability issues because of a couple of factors, one Gamebryo was designed with 3d Textures in mind, not sprites, and newer Video Cards don't handle sprites nearly as well as they used to either. This accounts for a big part of the huge footprint UO puts on system resources among other things.

UO being one of the first of it's kind (not the first as Meridian 59 was Dec 1995 and The Realm Online was March 1996), honestly made a few choices that today seem not quite as wise as it did then. I don't blame anyone for how things happened it was uncharted territory, I mean seriously the World Wide Web was only just over 6 years old (August 6th, 1991) when UO was released, and was only 2 years away from a time when the internet was broken down into multiple generally regional networks (NSFNET migration to today's architecture in April of 1995 ended this). I just feel that after 14 years it might be time to look at really taking a step to modernize the game, to take advantage of all the advancements in programming techniques, and hardware not to mention shifts in the target market expectations that have changed and evolved since 1997, and I just don't think the existing foundation UO is built on isn't capable of doing that, which means a re-write would be necessary.


Heck they could call it UO2 for all I care and allow players who wished to, to migrate over their characters. But our current UO has simply been pushed beyond it's ability to be competitive, and while the current EC is a step in the right direction, it still falls way short of the mark, meaning in my honest opinion debating EC vs 2D is pointless since neither one as it stands now has any more than a snowballs chance of making a positive change in the direction the game is heading in terms of long term survivability.

To sum it all up.. Debating on if they should nix the CC and focus on the EC while not addressing core issues that are holding both clients back does nothing to better the game. The thoughts processes and time the Devs spend on both these clients could be better spent elsewhere actually putting UO in a position to draw new players, and make their own work easier in the future.

Like I said that's my opinion, no one has to like or agree with it, but there it is.

I agree with your opinion, I do not believe, however, that EA will dedicate 4-5 Developers to rewriting the Server code for UO, and I know our own Dev team is to small to handle that task plus all the normal day to day things, which is why I gave my opinion on how they could handle all of it given their current situation.

It is sad when the players give solid examples of what needs to be done but the Company behind the game does nothing to take the steps needed to get there.

 

[Woodsman]

It is sad when the players give solid examples of what needs to be done but the Company behind the game does nothing to take the steps needed to get there.

Now that BioWare is its own label as of this week, maybe things will change. UO's best days were arguably when Origin had a lot more leeway and less interference from EA. BioWare has now gotten that kind of independence.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Now that BioWare is its own label as of this week, maybe things will change. UO's best days were arguably when Origin had a lot more leeway and less interference from EA. BioWare has now gotten that kind of independence.

I can agree with this, but Bioware's success rides on Star Wars. Remember what EA does when a subsidiary fails once. But I might be pessimistic about it right now...who knows, I do have a Bias as do most of us.

 

[Mervyn]

I like 2d because i play a mage, and i like to win

 

[HD2300]

The real debate should be 2D vs 3D. What would bring in more p(l)ayers?

However the decision has already been made. UO is now down to a part-time skeleton crew and EA has been working with NetDragon on 3D UO.

Any arguments that CC players wont accept 3D are absurd. 2D is just 3D at a fixed overhead angle. P(l)ayers wont accept substandard amateurish graphics. They wont accept frequent crashing. That is why KR and the EC have been rejected by the overwhelming majority.

3D is the future and it will be released in 2012.

 

[Pinco]

The real debate should be 2D vs 3D. What would bring in more p(l)ayers?

However the decision has already been made. UO is now down to a part-time skeleton crew and EA has been working with NetDragon on 3D UO.

Any arguments that CC players wont accept 3D are absurd. 2D is just 3D at a fixed overhead angle. P(l)ayers wont accept substandard amateurish graphics. They wont accept frequent crashing. That is why KR and the EC have been rejected by the overwhelming majority.

3D is the future and it will be released in 2012.

Actually EC uses the oblivion engine... a really good 3D engine but the guys who made KR though that using 2d graphics could make the client light when in fact is the opposite. So probably this "UO 3D" is just a switch from 2D to real 3D using the full power of the current engine...