Hardcore players may be right that Trammel took part of the soul out of the game, but that soul came with a cost: hardcore PvPers, before being forced to prey on themselves, ran off most of the game's playerbase. That's according to the producer who was tasked with trying to figure out how to get them to stay. Don't argue with me, argue with him. He had the actual data. Read the article.
You may think this is a defense of Trammel. It's not.
I was there. Yes, it was the wild west, but we had fun making the most of it. We roleplayed, crafted, hunted, and yeah, I saw people come together to create player-made villages for mutually assured protection---which went on to foster communities, friendships, even real-life marriages. Then, Trammel came, which made the game world safer...and simultaneously rendered almost every player-created city into obsolescence. It seemed there was no winning for UO: after Trammel, those communities---now inherently protected by game mechanics rather than human beings---seemed to wither and die, fallen victim to another of UO's pioneering social experiments.
Funnily, I've never seen anyone suggest the one solution that would have kept those communities necessary: putting the game's mechanics into their hands, like any sandbox should: Dynamic, guard-protected or PvP-consensual zones of control that would appear and correspond in size to player cities being built in any build-able spot (i.e. number and size of structures, and probably a special structure(s) that would need to be purchased, such as barracks and guard post).
These same dynamic zones could also have theoretically been applied to roads, by players willing to spend time and resources to maintain the cost of building guard posts. In return for their efforts, the game map would reward them with large swaths of Trammel-like territory.
I suggested the above many, many times throughout the years, as it could have ensured protected play in large areas ala Trammel, and the game's tight-knit communities would have remained relevant.
I wish at least one producer or designer during the last seventeen years would have given my suggestion five minutes consideration. The great thing about using a building(s)/monument(s) to erect control zones would be that the structures could have had their own customizable options (Consensual PvP? Neutral hive of scum and villainy? Town guards bought and paid for?).
This would have made the feature great for PvPers and peaceful communities alike, all on the same world map, as they would be free to express their community's character through the lay of the land.
Meanwhile, the devs would be able to set limitations on speed and size of growth by putting hard and soft restrictions on the structures themselves. (How many guard posts per barracks? How big can a city get? How many members/materials/gold/magic wards does a bigger version cost?)
I swear to you, there is a parallel Earth out there somewhere where a dev team was brave enough to let the players keep their sandbox, and in that universe, I bet the last seventeen years of UO have been simply phenomenal, both for its players and for its profits.
You may think this is a defense of Trammel. It's not.
I was there. Yes, it was the wild west, but we had fun making the most of it. We roleplayed, crafted, hunted, and yeah, I saw people come together to create player-made villages for mutually assured protection---which went on to foster communities, friendships, even real-life marriages. Then, Trammel came, which made the game world safer...and simultaneously rendered almost every player-created city into obsolescence. It seemed there was no winning for UO: after Trammel, those communities---now inherently protected by game mechanics rather than human beings---seemed to wither and die, fallen victim to another of UO's pioneering social experiments.
Funnily, I've never seen anyone suggest the one solution that would have kept those communities necessary: putting the game's mechanics into their hands, like any sandbox should: Dynamic, guard-protected or PvP-consensual zones of control that would appear and correspond in size to player cities being built in any build-able spot (i.e. number and size of structures, and probably a special structure(s) that would need to be purchased, such as barracks and guard post).
These same dynamic zones could also have theoretically been applied to roads, by players willing to spend time and resources to maintain the cost of building guard posts. In return for their efforts, the game map would reward them with large swaths of Trammel-like territory.
I suggested the above many, many times throughout the years, as it could have ensured protected play in large areas ala Trammel, and the game's tight-knit communities would have remained relevant.
I wish at least one producer or designer during the last seventeen years would have given my suggestion five minutes consideration. The great thing about using a building(s)/monument(s) to erect control zones would be that the structures could have had their own customizable options (Consensual PvP? Neutral hive of scum and villainy? Town guards bought and paid for?).
This would have made the feature great for PvPers and peaceful communities alike, all on the same world map, as they would be free to express their community's character through the lay of the land.
Meanwhile, the devs would be able to set limitations on speed and size of growth by putting hard and soft restrictions on the structures themselves. (How many guard posts per barracks? How big can a city get? How many members/materials/gold/magic wards does a bigger version cost?)
I swear to you, there is a parallel Earth out there somewhere where a dev team was brave enough to let the players keep their sandbox, and in that universe, I bet the last seventeen years of UO have been simply phenomenal, both for its players and for its profits.
Last edited:
