Interesting UO quote

[Sargon]

I stumbled upon a Gamasutra article from 1997, regarding Dark Sun Online development and containing the following reference to UO.

LESSON FOUR. Don't hype the product until it's ready. We purposely kept quiet about the title until very late in the project and were thus mostly able to handle peoples' expectations. (I say "mostly" because there are some people you'll never be able to satisfy.) We wince now when we see the hype that's been built around ULTIMA ONLINE. Although UO is likely to be an impressive and groundbreaking product once it's finished, it's also unlikely to ever satisfy the heightened expectations that have been built up around it.

I find it funny that this developer would criticize the high expectations of UO, while praising his own game that was plagued by serious bugs and lasted a very short time. UO obviously had a rough release, but I fail to see how lesser expectations would have benefitted the game. Here we are 11 years later though and, hype or no hype, UO lives on. Maybe they should add a footnote to lesson four that a quality game is a quality game and its success is relatively independent of hype and players' expectations.

 

[Cear Dallben Dragon]

dude? UO had the greatest release of any game ive ever played. some of the greatest years of a lot of peoples lives.

that science pretaines to everything. If you tell me Napoleon Dynomite is effing hilarious one more time, it wont be.


i like your last sentance. word.

 

[Maplestone]

Dark Sun setting would have been very interesting fodder for a MMORPG. I'd all but forgotten they'd actually attempted it - I don't remember it ever hitting the market, but then again I was distracted by other things in life at the time and missed UO's launch too.

( as for hype, I think all that matters is that its honest hype, not something that leads people to imagine something that isn't there )

 

[galefan2004]

Sorry but I would HARDLY call UO a success. It was over in 2002 (peeked at 250k players when they released AoS). It has managed to somehow limp along for 6 years after that, but if you want to see success then plain and simply look at World of Warcraft.

Lets look at the money scale (ill assume UO had 250k players and WoW had 9 million players).

Game: $29.95 ($74,875)
Expansions:
TD $29.95 ($74, 875)
LBR $29.95 ($74, 875)
AoS $29.95 ($74, 875)
SE $29.95 ($74, 875)
ML $29.95 ($74, 875)

Collections:
7th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
8th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
9th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
Gold $9.95 ($23,975)

Subscriptions: $3,885,000 (figured as $12.95 x 250,000 x 12 x 10)

Total: $4,582,850

World of Warcraft

Game $49.95 ($449,550,000)
Expansion $49.95 ($449,550,000)

Subscriptions: $6,458,400,000

Total: $7,357,500,000

In short WoW has made enough money to buy a country since it was released and made the money to buy EA a long time ago. They also made the money to buy UO while they were still selling the original boxes. One is a success the other is far from it.

 

[Maplestone]

You're off by a couple of decimal points:

$12.95 x 250,000 x 12 x 10 = $388 million not 3.88 million

Yes, WoW has gone further, but UO has not exactly chump change.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

What has Dark Sun done though. Might as well keep the debate within the original parameters of from whom the quote came and the competitor game they reference.

 

[Azazel of LA]

Sorry but I would HARDLY call UO a success. It was over in 2002 (peeked at 250k players when they released AoS). It has managed to somehow limp along for 6 years after that, but if you want to see success then plain and simply look at World of Warcraft.

Lets look at the money scale (ill assume UO had 250k players and WoW had 9 million players).

Game: $29.95 ($74,875)
Expansions:
TD $29.95 ($74, 875)
LBR $29.95 ($74, 875)
AoS $29.95 ($74, 875)
SE $29.95 ($74, 875)
ML $29.95 ($74, 875)

Collections:
7th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
8th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
9th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
Gold $9.95 ($23,975)

Subscriptions: $3,885,000 (figured as $12.95 x 250,000 x 12 x 10)

Total: $4,582,850

World of Warcraft

Game $49.95 ($449,550,000)
Expansion $49.95 ($449,550,000)

Subscriptions: $6,458,400,000

Total: $7,357,500,000

In short WoW has made enough money to buy a country since it was released and made the money to buy EA a long time ago. They also made the money to buy UO while they were still selling the original boxes. One is a success the other is far from it.

lol but we will see where WoW is after 10 years , you can NOT compare the 2 , doing so is just stupid , also WoW includes the free 15 day trial accounts in those numbers too I believe

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I'm not ready to bet against WoW on the 10 year span. Blizzard has a LOT of fanboys and knows how to extend their marketing over that length of time (look how long people have been asking for certain Blizzard sequels without acting like Blizzard is the biggest POS company on the planet compared to, well, how several posters on here act regarding expansions and additions to UO).

 

[Sargon]

Sorry but I would HARDLY call UO a success.

That is a ridiculous statement. I'm not going to get into a UO vs. WoW debate, but there are clearly varying degrees of success. Looking at UO independently, it wouldn't still be running if it wasn't a success. Relative to Dark Sun Online, UO has been a huge success.

 

[Sarphus]

Sorry but I would HARDLY call UO a success.

That is a ridiculous statement. I'm not going to get into a UO vs. WoW debate, but there are clearly varying degrees of success. Looking at UO independently, it wouldn't still be running if it wasn't a success. Relative to Dark Sun Online, UO has been a huge success.

Yeah, it's like saying that 30+ yr old german gymnast is barely a success because she only got silver (if memory serves). She medaled in a sport where people her age TEACH.

Most gymnasts are 16-20... unless they're chineese... then they're 11

UO is a smashing success.

To the comments of WoW's longevity... I think WoW will be around for a long time. The addiction engine aspects of their game are very similar to EQ, and EQ is almost as old as UO. I really don't think WoW is going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Jhym]

You seem to have this intense urge to continue to compare UO to WoW in silly ways. I have no idea why. Two completely different experiences.

As for actual $$$, do you, or anyone else on these boards EVER think EA would keep a game running for 11 years and NOT make any money on it? If you do, you are insane and really should see a doctor. EA is a huge company, that requires each of its titles to make hard cash to continue them.

Cry and whine all you like that WoW is just so much better because it makes so much more money, but it's not.

I, like many around here, don't follow herds. I hunt them.

 

[wee papa smurf]

UO started it all, dont forget yor roots *Shakes fist* lol

 

[Farsight]

And don't forget that when UO came out, an audience of 10k would have been considered massive. In fact, if I recall correctly, the UO release was somewhat hampered because the number of people who actually started playing UO dwarfed the number of people that they expected to play.

So they had a fabulous start, considering the time. They opened the door for all these other games. They've made millions of dollars in the process. And they're about to have an 11 year anniversary, which is unprecedented in the GUI based MMORPG as far as I know.

I fail to see how that could be considered "fail" by any definition.

 

[Basara]

And don't forget that when UO came out, an audience of 10k would have been considered massive. In fact, if I recall correctly, the UO release was somewhat hampered because the number of people who actually started playing UO dwarfed the number of people that they expected to play.

So they had a fabulous start, considering the time. They opened the door for all these other games. They've made millions of dollars in the process. And they're about to have an 11 year anniversary, which is unprecedented in the GUI based MMORPG as far as I know.

I fail to see how that could be considered "fail" by any definition.

An apt analogy would be like trying to claim that the Ford Model T was an abject failure because there were only 10,000 made in the years 1908-1910 (and only 11 in the first month), because the most successful modern car models typically sell 100,000 or more a year (compared to 10k in 3 years). It's apples and oranges, with the simple caveat that without the older vehicle, the newer ones would have never existed in the number that they do (by ca. 1920 9 out of every 10 cars was a Model T, and they ended up making 15 million of them over 19 years).

 

[Emil Ispep]

Your math is flawed. The "9 million" number for WoW takes into count all the trial accounts..

If your gonna count those, count the hundreds of thousands of trial UO accounts people used.

And of course lets not forget that without UO, there would be no WoW, EQ, SWG... and so on...

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Sorry but I would HARDLY call UO a success.

Yes, because clearly anything that breaches 100,000 paying users is a failure.

Just because it doesn't have the success of WoW does not mean UO was a failure.

Has UO lived up to its expectations? No. But it's not because the game lacks the potential to do so. It's because EA, and now Mythic, lacked the vision to more fullly realize it.

Sunsword did irrepairable harm to the game with Trammel. AoS did breath some life into it, but it's been on life support since as the DevTeam integrates more and more incomplete designs into the game without even completing the incomplete ones they've already got.

UO's biggest problem: most things are left unfinished.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Your math is flawed. The "9 million" number for WoW takes into count all the trial accounts.

Actually, no, it doesn't. It not only does not include trial accounts, it doesn't include free accounts, employee accounts, or any other unpaid account.

10 million subscribers... pay careful attention to the definition of a subscriber way down in that release.

And of course lets not forget that without UO, there would be no WoW, EQ, SWG... and so on...

This is true... UO led to EQ. EQ and UO were the parents of SWG, and EQ the sole parent of WoW (there's very little in WoW that resembles UO). As for the rest, they're mostly ******* children. hehe

 

[Emil Ispep]

=( Link no work for me..

******* children.. thats great, lol.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

Game: $29.95 ($74,875)
Expansions:
TD $29.95 ($74, 875)
LBR $29.95 ($74, 875)
AoS $29.95 ($74, 875)
SE $29.95 ($74, 875)
ML $29.95 ($74, 875)

Collections:
7th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
8th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
9th Edition $29.95 ($74, 875)
Gold $9.95 ($23,975)

Subscriptions: $3,885,000 (figured as $12.95 x 250,000 x 12 x 10)

Total: $4,582,850

Hold on a minute... let's fix your math here, because you make no sense.

Let's reduce this to 150,000 subscribers, as I bet that's a better average over 11 years.

UO = $39.99 * 150,000 = $5,998,500
T2A = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500
3D = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500
LBR = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500
AoS = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500
SE = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500
ML = $29.99 * 150,000 = $4,498,500

GAME/EXPANSIONS TOTAL = $32,989,500

7E = $19.99 * 150,000 = $2,998,500
8E = $19.99 * 150,000 = $2,998,500
9E = $19.99 * 150,000 = $2,998,500

COLLECTIONS TOTAL = $8,995,500

SUBS = $12.99 * 150,000 * 12 months * 11 years = $257,202,000

$ 32,989,500
$ 8,995,500
$257,202,000
============
$299,187,000

That's round about $300 million dollars in 11 years. This doesn't count ANY of the extra purchases such as name changes, character transfers, special items, et cetera.

While it's not World of Warcraft, it's hardly a failure.

And, not to put too fine a point on it, Blizzard may have made enough to purchase Ultima Online (though why they'd do that given its current state is beyond me), but they certainly have NOT made enough to buy EA. Unless I've missed something, Blizzard doesn't produce console games, which is the mainstay of EA's current monetary gain. And UO is far from EA's only computer product.

While I've many complaints about the state of UO today, calling it anything other than a success is just plain idiocy.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

=( Link no work for me..

******* children.. thats great, lol.

Fixed. Somehow an extra HTTP:// ended up in there... hehe

 

[MalagAste]

WoW is played by folk with Zero imagination of their own.... mostly children.... and folk too WoWed by the graphics to realize the game lacks true content... It's those of us who do have an active imagination that are not swayed by fancy graphics and would rather have Content over fancy art..... You need to remember that WoW has tons of children playing..... And many of the people playing WoW have never played a game like UO and therefore have nothing to base a real MMORPG on..... So they honestly have NO idea what they are missing.... Think on that before you compare an apple to a watermellon.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

WoW is played by folk with Zero imagination of their own.... mostly children.... and folk too WoWed by the graphics to realize the game lacks true content...

Actually, that's not at all true. WoW handles the play experience a lot better than UO does -- what UO offers that WoW doesn't is roleplay, pure and simple. WoW does a lot better job introducing the new player to the game, providing a decent quest system, and having challenges that you can meet as a solo player without catering to the idea that everything in the game should be soloable.

UO's attempt at ALL of this has fallen short of even being good. UO's quest system, though implemented after pretty much every game's quest system, is by far the clunkiest of them all (mostly because they crammed it into the confines of crappy, ancient code instead of updating it to work as one would expect it to). UO's attempt at "instances" -- well, we know how those turned out. And pretty much every other game under the sun has a better answer to consentual PvP than UO.

However, only UO (and at one time SWG) has the high level of customization to character, clothing, armor, weaponry, skill, and housing -- it's this that both is UO's blessing and curse. EA/Mythic does a lousy job of introducing the playerbase to these concepts, and so there's a high learning curve. EA/Mythic's solution -- to create a new interface -- does nothing to address the real learning curve of the game.

It's those of us who do have an active imagination that are not swayed by fancy graphics and would rather have Content over fancy art..... You need to remember that WoW has tons of children playing..... And many of the people playing WoW have never played a game like UO and therefore have nothing to base a real MMORPG on..... So they honestly have NO idea what they are missing.... Think on that before you compare an apple to a watermellon.

Just remember... most people playing UO don't understand what the RPG portion of MMORPG means.

All of this aside, I wouldn't trade my Tauren druid for any other gaming experience currently. It's not so much that I roleplay him, because I don't, but like any game I play, I do get into the character of him, and wow, the diversity and ability that the character provides me to interact -- and PvP with -- others is nothing short of amazing. I'm no fan of the leveling system, but I am a huge fan of how they have handled many aspects of WoW.

 

[Azazel of LA]

I just think its funny that the WoW people who claim it is so much better then UO spend so much time in the UO Forums. I myself have never gone to any other games forums that I dont play (or like). If WoW is so great then go play it and stop trying to compare apples and oranges.

 

[Maplestone]

WoW is played by folk with Zero imagination of their own.... mostly children.... and folk too WoWed by the graphics to realize the game lacks true content... It's those of us who do have an active imagination that are not swayed by fancy graphics and would rather have Content over fancy art.....

To be fair, I would point out that those are almost the exact words that my text-MUD friends used to use to describe UO. It will be said about the eventual WoW-killer too some day (personally I think Spore is going to be the catalyst for the next big wave in RPGs, although it may take another decade to get to the point where someone successfully implements it)

 

[Garaba]

My God, Dark Sun Online... Now that brings back some memories.

UO was supposed to be a killer app. Games like DSO where very limited in what they could do. DSO was even a DOS based app, built up off the old Dark Sun 2: Wake of the Ravager.

Think of UO verses WoW. That was the difference between UO and DSO. Now these games where in there infancy, and little known outside the RPG community. DSO just appealed to RPG players. Ultima got this almost cult status hype around it and allot of things were mentioned that never saw the light of day. And I guess that's the point of the quote.

Here is the full article; http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3235/postmortem_ssis_dark_sun_online_.php?page=1


High Templar Kefka of Tyr, now known as Garaba the banmaster.

 

[Anakena]

lol but we will see where WoW is after 10 years , you can NOT compare the 2 , doing so is just stupid , also WoW includes the free 15 day trial accounts in those numbers too I believe

I second you in that, especially considering their repective release periods. UO was designed for 1997's computers and for dial-up connections.

In 1997, the number of people having an internet connection was probably a lot lower. The market was simply not the same.