LOL this guy........
-
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!
Its time for a much needed change to the facets
- Thread starter Sneaky Que
- Start date
- Watchers 14
1) They are called free shards cause there is no subscription fee. The initial allure is ERA of the game and that EA isn't running it. The popular shards still make great moola though lol
2) Some people pay for one account, others pay for 10+ accounts. UO isn't open because of the one account guy... In the free shard community it is much the same. Some guys have spent literally thousands on donations to maximize their fun. Some players donate some every month or two while others don't donate but just farm and buy donation coins. The end result is the shards are busy, the shards are making money, the shards are investing the money into more content, the players are happy
3) Get rid of the crappy UO store and just sell some form of currency. Then have UO vendors that sell the tokens, ethies, pigments.. In the end you create a market for this currency. You make it easier for players to purchase items they want or need. You put a crimp into the gold sellers stores and money actually into EA's pocket. Maybe you have lotto's using this currency and toss up prime spots from banned players ect ect
What we really need is not a new server.... it is a central dungeon that is it's own facet. One that is connected to EVERY shard except of course Siege and Mugen. Which would allow anyone to go there... it would have a town in the center where there is a small guard zone...... but the rest of the land would be 100% PvP.... it would have areas to "defend" like VvV but not in the town... They could have a few of them. You would just have to find them and take them over. Special point system for this land... roving mobs with decent loot... area's for fishing, mining, lumberjacking, dread mares could spawn around there... and it could have it's own champ spawn area as well that drops 5.0 Pinks instead of PS... people that port to the shard can only do so from the star room... But when they go there they are randomly dropped into the new facet at random locations .... could be safe in town but most likely it's not.... NO rune marking, no recall, no gating, and no other means of travel there. Insurance will be trippled on this facet and you can't wear blessed items there. There would be some stealables there as well for thieves as well as locked chests that randomly spawn throughout the dungeon. This dungeon would be like an island about the size of one of the Tokuno Islands... surrounded by waters it'd have pirate ships on the water as well as a dock no where near the town... With the ability to get the pirate quest... As well getting MIB's for here would be special MIB's that have lvl 5 chest loot in them.
Killing a Red here for Justice put's the Red in the local jail... where he can either "pay" to escape or he has to sit for 15 min. The Red also loses 1 murder count per jail time. Special titles can be awarded for Blues who kill Reds... and anyone who kills someone can claim a deed which when used turns into a bone container with the corpse name of the person you killed colored to represent what they were normal gray for grays, red for reds or blue for blues. The deed should cost 100k... You can claim your "deeds" in town at the bank. Like Fel Reds can go in town but they have a separate bank they have to use. There is also no inn or place to safely log out. If you "lose connection" you are teleported to the town near the stables. This will keep folk from the log in log out thing to get their pet and keep fighting.... they will have to walk to return to the fight... Your pet however will NOT follow you there if it isn't bonded. So you can't tame the Dreads hide them and run to the stable log in log out to get it safely there you will have to ride it into town. Also the Stablemaster there will NOT rez your pet. You'll have to either buy a potion which is 10x the cost or get a Tamer with Vet to rez your pet.
Sure you could trade stuff between shards this way with others but it would be VERY risky. The only way to "return" to your shard is from the town and you can only return to YOUR shard.
If they could build something like that... would you all be happy?
Killing a Red here for Justice put's the Red in the local jail... where he can either "pay" to escape or he has to sit for 15 min. The Red also loses 1 murder count per jail time. Special titles can be awarded for Blues who kill Reds... and anyone who kills someone can claim a deed which when used turns into a bone container with the corpse name of the person you killed colored to represent what they were normal gray for grays, red for reds or blue for blues. The deed should cost 100k... You can claim your "deeds" in town at the bank. Like Fel Reds can go in town but they have a separate bank they have to use. There is also no inn or place to safely log out. If you "lose connection" you are teleported to the town near the stables. This will keep folk from the log in log out thing to get their pet and keep fighting.... they will have to walk to return to the fight... Your pet however will NOT follow you there if it isn't bonded. So you can't tame the Dreads hide them and run to the stable log in log out to get it safely there you will have to ride it into town. Also the Stablemaster there will NOT rez your pet. You'll have to either buy a potion which is 10x the cost or get a Tamer with Vet to rez your pet.
Sure you could trade stuff between shards this way with others but it would be VERY risky. The only way to "return" to your shard is from the town and you can only return to YOUR shard.
If they could build something like that... would you all be happy?
I'd be speechless.
Its about 15 years too late for this idea. We don't need another dead facet, 27 Fels is bad enough.
What an expected non-reply reply. You've been debunked in your historical revisionism of the playerbase wanted. You've been debunked in your claim about the graph. You've been debunked in simple business and economics. What's next, your "A PK's History of Ultima Online" littered with graphs you don't understand, and such wonderfully literate things like "LOL" and "damn i pkd those n00bs"?LOL this guy........
In other words, they are officially...free to play. Do you really think that if they charged $10 per month that they'd have the same "initial allure," regardless of what UO features they present?
And that's why I said that they have a free rider problem, for which I ask you again: what would happen to their population if they started charging the same as EA to play? Do you really think the product would be that far superior to EA's shards that the population would stay the same?2) Some people pay for one account, others pay for 10+ accounts. UO isn't open because of the one account guy... In the free shard community it is much the same. Some guys have spent literally thousands on donations to maximize their fun. Some players donate some every month or two while others don't donate but just farm and buy donation coins. The end result is the shards are busy, the shards are making money, the shards are investing the money into more content, the players are happy
A few of us have already explained why EA selling gold is an incredibly bad idea. It's not even "pay to win." It's simply hyper-inflationary. Do you understand the phrase "too much money chasing too few goods"? Do you understand the difference between UO and F2P games that sell game currency? In the latter, the money is almost as quickly removed from the economy because it's used to buy from the game developer, not from other players.
But, Dot, it's kind of crappy for people to argue about the problems for this many pages, and then shoot down any good solution which comes along. And whether we want to admit it or not, production shards are locked in competition with freeshards who in many ways innovate right past Broadsword. As long as we still have a studio, we would be irresponsible not to make the requests and demands of an invested player base.
Unlike my solution regarding customizable control zones (which some of you praised in this thread, thank you), MalagAste's solution could actually be implemented using mostly extant code, a tiny fraction of the work my solution would require. Here in 2015, its feasibility alone makes it ten times better than mine.
This community has built a graveyard of baggage on top of a game that is still running after almost eighteen years. Everquest still launches expansions. I stuck with UO when that game came out, but maybe I shouldn't have. I've never played EQ, but I admire the way their community admits that their decade-and-a-half-old game is still alive. They celebrate that, sometimes with praise, sometimes with demands. It shows, and they're rewarded for it. Meanwhile, I think our community has long helped perpetuate its own worst fears. UO's various studios have made some mistakes and face(d) some problems (such as freeshards), which were not up for discussion for a very long time; and while those problems grew larger, we've grown resentful. Thus, we've been terrible for PR, which has resulted in EA distancing itself from us even more, which has resulted in our being even worse for PR.
Part of the problem, of course, was the Stratics staff over the years. Solutions can't be given for problems which can't be mentioned, and we couldn't have had this conversation before a year or two ago, without the discussion quickly being disappeared or locked. Over the years, UO's worst shortcomings would have required some real honesty and courage in order to solve. Right now, in this thread, you're looking at what would have been our biggest solution. Threads this open and honest were already long overdue several years ago, which is why you can practically smell the resentment here (or its rotted byproduct, apathy).
Echo chambers are the enemy of innovation. And yet still, how many here would lock the problem up and sweep it under the rug if they still had the moderation rights to do so? For years, Stratics staff tried, for whatever reason we may truly never know, to build an echo chamber here on EA's behalf, on the game's most visible forum. Rather than moderate single individuals, single individuals were nearly 100% of the time cited as cause for entire discussions being locked and made off-limits---a tactic used by moderators to control a bottleneck in front of discourse. Over the years I've had the chance to moderate truly productive discussions, and I can assure you, that's not moderation. It's irresponsible. And we paid the price.
Unlike my solution regarding customizable control zones (which some of you praised in this thread, thank you), MalagAste's solution could actually be implemented using mostly extant code, a tiny fraction of the work my solution would require. Here in 2015, its feasibility alone makes it ten times better than mine.
This community has built a graveyard of baggage on top of a game that is still running after almost eighteen years. Everquest still launches expansions. I stuck with UO when that game came out, but maybe I shouldn't have. I've never played EQ, but I admire the way their community admits that their decade-and-a-half-old game is still alive. They celebrate that, sometimes with praise, sometimes with demands. It shows, and they're rewarded for it. Meanwhile, I think our community has long helped perpetuate its own worst fears. UO's various studios have made some mistakes and face(d) some problems (such as freeshards), which were not up for discussion for a very long time; and while those problems grew larger, we've grown resentful. Thus, we've been terrible for PR, which has resulted in EA distancing itself from us even more, which has resulted in our being even worse for PR.
Part of the problem, of course, was the Stratics staff over the years. Solutions can't be given for problems which can't be mentioned, and we couldn't have had this conversation before a year or two ago, without the discussion quickly being disappeared or locked. Over the years, UO's worst shortcomings would have required some real honesty and courage in order to solve. Right now, in this thread, you're looking at what would have been our biggest solution. Threads this open and honest were already long overdue several years ago, which is why you can practically smell the resentment here (or its rotted byproduct, apathy).
Echo chambers are the enemy of innovation. And yet still, how many here would lock the problem up and sweep it under the rug if they still had the moderation rights to do so? For years, Stratics staff tried, for whatever reason we may truly never know, to build an echo chamber here on EA's behalf, on the game's most visible forum. Rather than moderate single individuals, single individuals were nearly 100% of the time cited as cause for entire discussions being locked and made off-limits---a tactic used by moderators to control a bottleneck in front of discourse. Over the years I've had the chance to moderate truly productive discussions, and I can assure you, that's not moderation. It's irresponsible. And we paid the price.
Last edited:
LOL this guy........
He's probably fed up to the back teeth of listening to you drone on and on and on and repeating the same things in long rambling posts over and over and over again like you are the worlds leading authority on, well, everything actually.
He's spot on with his facepalm. When you meet people in life who have such a self important opinion of themselves, who think they cannot be wrong about anything, who ram their opinions and interpretations of the truth down people's throats in an obnoxious, arrogant and frankly boring fashion, its like talking to a brick wall.
So yes ...
Im done with you in this thread ... youve sucessfully bored me to death with your obnoxious opinion. In fact im putting you on ignore so I dont have to stomach anymore of you
Last edited:
Isnt that the truth! Stratics is a much better place for open discussion (still within acceptable parameters) than it was before. Best thing they ever did was show that unhealthy closed shop that were the old mods the door. They still lurk here for the most part but dont post so much now that they cant bully the majority and favour the few.
I think the current Mods (although they get a little tetchy now and again) are for the most part doing a decent job and have the balance about right. They let the conversation flow as much as they can. The fact that we dont see them post too often is a good thing .... they do their jobs and only step in when needed. With the old mob it was all about them and their ego's.
So hats off to the new regime. Good riddance to the old.
I thought it was a good solution as it would offer a place to go for EVERYONE who enjoys PvP... along with offering incentive to go there ie bringing the lambs to the slaughter so to speak if the lambs were wanting to go there... offers a much broader solution to the idea behind VvV while allowing folk to really get back to fun... hard core... making insurance costly as well as giving MANY ways to actually purge gold from the game in ways of get out of jail cards for reds.... as well as rez pets for tamers who run without vet... solves that issue... as well as many arguments currently about people using the log in and out thing as a crutch in PvP while fighting as a tamer... Offers ways to get cool items like the bones of someone you killed by offering a deed which you can purchase of a recent kill that would allow you to have the victims "bones"..... or heck I'd be happy if they allowed us to buy a deed for their named head. You could perhaps get a deed as well when you kill reds that you could turn in to get "points" towards a bounty item like some plaque you could put on your wall saying you are a Knight of Justice for retiring "X" number of Murderers or whatever... Something that says you are a Dread Lord of Murder for the murder of "Y" number of blues. Something you could potentially take home to your home shard and hang proudly on the wall. I think it would be cool if they also offered purchasable titles with the points you gain. It could be fun and it's a solution that I think would make most folk happy. Those that don't want to go there don't have to go there. Like I said the "entrance" to this shard should be in Fel already and only accessible from the Star Room. Perhaps you should have to sacrifice a Skull or something to get there.
At any rate I doubt it would ever come to pass but it is a good thought that would I think solve a lot of issues with no one being around... Though the DEV time needed for such a thing might be a bit too extensive. Tokuno though is one of the smallest facets hence my suggestion that it be more of a template to use as such a place rather than somewhere like Malas or the Lost Lands or anything... Tokuno and it's islands are fairly small... but it already has quite a bit built into it... So if you "mirrored" that facet with one like I described took out the gates and forced folk to walk or sail to other islands it might be rather interesting.
You've only "bored" yourself. You can facepalm all you want. The fact is that he and you are still quite consistently wrong, and your only "comeback" is a cute little picture. You want to quit the thread? That's up to you. Or you want to challenge what I've said? You want me to continue tearing apart your ridiculous cluelessness? Keep going, please. It takes hardly any time for me to flip back to a Stratics window and debunk your latest nonsense. You call me "obnoxious, arrogant and frankly boring" when you should be saying that while looking in a mirror.He's probably fed up to the back teeth of listening to you drone on and on and on and repeating the same things in long rambling posts over and over and over again like you are the worlds leading authority on, well, everything actually.
He's spot on with his facepalm. When you meet people in life who have such a self important opinion of themselves, who think they cannot be wrong about anything, who ram their opinions and interpretations of the truth down people's throats in an obnoxious, arrogant and frankly boring fashion, its like talking to a brick wall.
So yes ...
Im done with you in this thread ... youve sucessfully bored me to death with your obnoxious opinion. In fact im putting you on ignore so I dont have to stomach anymore of you
Your words only apply to yourselves: people who likely in real life know nothing of what they're talking about, get schooled by people like me who do, then can only duck out with pithy remarks and forum-stock pngs. There are simple facts here, and you can't even answer damned simple questions like the free rider problem of free shards. You say , so fine: put the price at $5 per month per account, or $10, or $20, and let's see if you have enough of a clue to tell us what will happen to the populations. Why do you think they aren't called "donation shards," pray tell?
If you want to have an intelligent, thoughful discussion, if you'd like to, you know, actually answer my simple questions that illustrate a point, then maybe I could regard your opinions as having any worth.
1) Yes...people want to play pre AOS so a good shard would have little problem signing people up.
2) That is the whole purpace of a F2P environment...get more people logging in. You have the hardcore players, the casual players and once in awhile players. Keep the shard busy and people keep playing. In the end maybe just the once in awhile players don't contribute financially but most players do. You get rewarded for contributing with deco or clothing items ( maybe an extra char slot) The key thing is the shard is busy, people are having fun playing and the shard is prospering. It also keeps the owners honest ensuring they keep adding more content. If people get bored, they stop contributing or logging in. The shard becomes slow. Then even the hard core gamer leaves.
3) Did you even read the part where I said selling in game items on the vendors in game? At no time I mention selling gold. The EA store is notorious for being bad. Simplify it and just issue in game currency and have people buy the tokens or items that ARE currently available in the UO store. If people need gold, maybe they would buy the EA currency and sell it instead of spending money on the many, many gold farmer sites available to them. Contrary to your opinion, the economy is balanced as hell on the shards I have played. They don't sell gold. Things don't cost billions...there is no duping problems. There are in fact great gold sink vendors and shard wide IDOC events for those players caught scripting or speed hacking.
Regardless, I too will not be discussing it with you any further. We all are entitled to an opinion including yourself. I guess with me playing on EA for 12 years and also checking out some of the "non subscription" shards for years I have a means to compare and base my opinion on.
You are doing a good enough job at bolstering your own disposition.
I`m just sittin back and gettin a good chuckle at you now. Thanks!
You ignore something simple: if there were enough demand, EA would have put in their own efforts. Or do you think Trammel was created because it was contrary to overwhelming player demand?
Actually, the principal "purpace" of true F2P, I've repeatedly pointed out, is to introduce new content and new levels that necessitate buying game currency to continue playing, on top of offering easy ways to buy currency to buy equipment and blaze through initial levels, until the game's new version is released and everyone starts over again.
I read that part and asked, quite politely as a matter of fact, for you to clarify. Whether you're talking about existing gold or a new currency, you still fail to realize the inflation it will create. If it's an actual game item, dupers will flock to it.
I never said the economies of any shards, UO or non, weren't "balanced," nor did I talk about any economic problems like duping or gold sinks. You're the only one bringing those up. Now with nothing else to do, you go to step 4 and start putting words into my mouth?
You are not entitled to your own facts, however, which I am continuing to debunk. So you want to use a form of the logical fallacy "appeal to authority"? So what if you're played "on EA" for 12 years? I've played UO alone for over 18, and if you want to go back really far, Archon. I still have my second Spectravideo joystick.
Yes, on your astroturfing account, we can tell. You should be laughing at yourself, at the least, though ideally you should spend a few moments for introspection as to why you can make only non-reply repleis.
You just can`t help yourself can you? Its like watching my lil 6 year old niece arguing with her brother. She always has to have the last word too. I think you guys are on the same level.
Everyone stopped listening to your BS a long time ago,yet you keep running off at the mouth. I think its clear who looks stupid here. With every non-reply you fire off, I get even more amused and so does everyone else. Heres another non-reply to the eloquent troll.Keep on trollin,your gettin better at it!
I`m just sitting on the edge of my seat here waiting for the next string of nonsense sentences you can put together. Keep em commin chief!
Nothing goes better with my coffee than a troll who thinks he`s not a troll.
Denial much?
You're the only one making non-reply replies, but sticking your head in the sand while flailing your arms and screaming to your mommy that you're still right.
You've been debunked, so all you can do is bring this thread down to your level of ad hominem. It's only you who is making non-reply replies, which in fact makes it all the easier for me because I need only repeat myself.
You're the only troll here, you're the only one in denial, and it's in fact you who serious readers of this thread (if any are bothering to continue) are getting tired of.
It's now Wednesday. For five days you have completely ignored simple facts and logic that show you to be utterly wrong, but go stick your head back in the sand and enjoy your "free" shards as part of the free rider problem.
You're spewing nonsense after nonsense. If the content is so superior, then why do any players still pay for official UO subscriptions? And why are you complaining on a forum for EA's UO shards, when you should be sticking to forums for a free shard you cherish so much?
As I wrote in my previous reply, enough of us are still willing to pay a premium for a product that we, so far, still prefer to alternatives. Others like you are so cheap that you'll complain about UO instead of paying for subscriptions that, in aggregate, could have given the game more development funding.
You may claim to have paid $20 to a non-EA shard, but how many do that regularly? They have a huge problem called the free rider. You should look that up.
Actually, you're the one invalidating anything you could possibly know about simple business and economics, because you don't realize that if free shards charged what EA did, there would be far fewer people playing. Go ahead, tell us what the populations would be at $5 or $10 or $20 per month. Is the content really so superior, or is the major factor that of price?
Free shard operators have a love of the game I could never have, making what wouldn't be much money for what it takes, but creating UO in their vision and the satisfaction of a playerbase seems to be worth it. In a way it's similar to large-scale development of major open source software.
But I and others have routinely debunked any F2P models as ultimately bringing in less revenue than present. It would be a scripter's dream to pay just $5 per account that don't need houses. Meanwhile, other players would cut back on their accounts.
And what "3rd part programs" are you talking about? Scripting? The UOA equivalents that are illegal for a reason?
I have in fact played a lot of F2P and paid a lot. I know what I'm talking about, but you don't since you think it's something applicable to UO. F2P is about getting players to pay to win based on the human tendency for gratification sooner rather than later, coming out with minor new content that requires additional purchases of game currency for RL money, then coming out with an entirely new game (and non-transferable game currency). It does not lend itself at all to a game of UO's longevity.
Now why would "current vets" be given a price break unless your F2P model will be significantly more expensive than a flat rate? And why would people return to UO or newcomers try the game if it's going to cost more than current players? What would happen is that the game would never see anyone new at all, thus revenues could only continue declining as long-timers quit for whatever reasons. With your reasoning, you'd better not try to open your own business.
It's been fifteen years and counting. The part where anyone in the industry was influenced or gave a crap about how many people are supposedly on your PVP freeshard NEVER HAPPENED.
What I remember is that the decline in subs after AOS was because people were leaving to play Everquest, WoW, and they hated UO becoming an item based game.Gosh, why don't we look at that graph just one more time! Except... someone seems to have made a few notes on it!
Isn't it always amusing to notice when people are trying to flannel you with analytical skills they don't actually have...?
So let's see; "Numbers fall for the first time in history". Marked the rough points in red there; Technically true, although only a single drop, after which it holds higher numbers than before Trammel. And the gain remains consistent until rather a bit more than "8-12 months" after Trammel, the time period our friend poster tried to limit it too, but extend out to late 2002, or to put it another way, more than 2 years later the gains are still being held. But oh, wait a moment, what does the cut off point we were given coincide with? Why that's a third competitor coming onto the market, Dark Age of Camelot. Which doesn't seem to reduce the UO numbers.
"Numbers continue to fall until 2003"; Good job he said "until" isn't it? They don't continue to fall at all. This is a direct lie. Their second only fall up until that point comes in 2003. Until then they've stayed flat, see? It's the bit between the blue lines. The bit which now stretches 3.5 years after Trammel. And after which they immediately rise again. Because first quarter 2003 also includes the highest peak of subs for UO... after Star Wars Galaxies also launches. In that time Final Fantasy XI has also come onto the market, surpassing UO subs 3/4 of a year later.
It's only after Age Of Shadows, a famously disasterous redesign UO starts to actually and consistently shed users. But you need to wait for 5 years after Trammel, mid 2005 sometime, before numbers roughly sink below it's launch.
But there's other lines on the graph too, did you notice? What happens to Star Wars Galaxies, Dark Age of Camelot, Everquest 1, even Everquest 2 in late November 2004? They all drop users. Final Fantasy XI flatlines. Only EvE Online, City of Heroes and Second Life, all MMOs with no direct competition (Full on PvP in space, the only Superhero MMO on the market at that time, and completely unique "invade events with penises" lifestyle game) gain from that point onwards ... My goodness, Trammel must have such a wide ranging effect that... oh wait, I've marked the missing graph's historical start point on there for you.
So there we go; when you look at the graph honestly, and not selectively in order to make complete weasel mouthed claims, it tells rather a different story doesn't it?
But I'll bet you were tempted to say you actually liked being PK'd until then, weren't you? You don't actually know what you like, and if they just lie to you and bully you enough, millions of you will change your minds, I'm sure of it!
You all know that graph is bogus right? EA hasn't released UO subscription numbers, even to shareholders, in over a decade. It was debunked the last time it was trotted out and used to make idiotic claims during the "classic shard" debacle.
Ah, how expected, that someone wants to "get in the last word" by sending me a profanity-ridden PM. Without naming that sock puppet account, I'll merely observe he has some "disposition."
I find this laughable because its like 2 of the musicians on the Titanic arguing while water rushes under their feet.
Those that played initially from 97 accepted what was given them... a world with no boundaries... and no guarantees. You made of it what you could. Did I enjoy being run down by plate archers while mining? Of course not! But I learned to survive, and make alliances, and friends. It all worked out in the end.
The biggest tragedy in UO was that it got overtaken by lots of other games trying to make a name for itself. Some are self explanatory, EQ, SWG (which to date to me is the most sandboxy beside UO, but failed alas and was NGed). Then along came the Juggernaut WoW. The MMO world has stagnated since then.
I feel that someone, it should be UO or Richard Garriott, or somebody that actually played these IMMERSIVE games, needs to get their act together and make a REAL MMO again for the post WoW era that is coming soon. This game has seen its heyday and will forever be remembered, but something new needs to rise from the ashes.
I'm done with WoW. Thats why I'm back after a decade of treadmilling....I want a WORLD. A home. A city. A house. A community where I belong.
Unfortunately..Every company in the universe wants to copy Blizzards success, and I don't see myself ever playing a crappy treadmilling game ever again.
Those that played initially from 97 accepted what was given them... a world with no boundaries... and no guarantees. You made of it what you could. Did I enjoy being run down by plate archers while mining? Of course not! But I learned to survive, and make alliances, and friends. It all worked out in the end.
The biggest tragedy in UO was that it got overtaken by lots of other games trying to make a name for itself. Some are self explanatory, EQ, SWG (which to date to me is the most sandboxy beside UO, but failed alas and was NGed). Then along came the Juggernaut WoW. The MMO world has stagnated since then.
I feel that someone, it should be UO or Richard Garriott, or somebody that actually played these IMMERSIVE games, needs to get their act together and make a REAL MMO again for the post WoW era that is coming soon. This game has seen its heyday and will forever be remembered, but something new needs to rise from the ashes.
I'm done with WoW. Thats why I'm back after a decade of treadmilling....I want a WORLD. A home. A city. A house. A community where I belong.
Unfortunately..Every company in the universe wants to copy Blizzards success, and I don't see myself ever playing a crappy treadmilling game ever again.
Many tried, though, to make of it what they could. It still wasn't fun enough. Didn't you ever read the forums and/or rec.games.computer.ultima.online and see how many posted frustrations and even goodbyes, because they couldn't do so much as kill harpies in Covetous or ettins and ogres in Wrong? Not everyone could get a big group together, and you may have missed what I pointed out, that MMO does not mean multiplayer is always required. There was so much churn through all of 1998 that if the Devs didn't cave in to PK-free zones, with EQ on the horizon, hardly any would have held on to their accounts through 1999. If by "overtaken" you mean UO copied good things from other games, so be it. There's nothing wrong with a competing product to show the flaws in something already around a while.
Time and time again, I still come back to UO. I wasn't much of a "maker" before, but that changed with AoS (the expansion that interested me enough to start again). There's so much more to do, even if the game is in its twilight, than all the level-based games that eventually bore me. I gave up on EQ after six weeks. Diablo II kept me entertained for a few months. I didn't bother with WoW or Diablo III because I knew they would be the same old predetermined paths, like F2P games I've tried over the years.
I hear you.
UO has always been the jewel in the crown as far as MMOs go for me because it offered so much diversity. No game has come close (SWG in the beginning was close) to live up to what was made here. The lawlessness was just a fun bonus....and I understand that you and others didn't like it. But I think if they had taken time to think about it, they could have found a solution that everyone could have benefited from. Lets be honest here...graphical MMOs progressed from 97(UO) to EQ/SWG(98-2003) and then all progress has been halted since WoW rolled on the scene in 04. Nothing has been able to take off regardless how innovative or original it is..there just isn't a money model that works because of Blizzard.
Someday I hope for a balanced PvE/PvP MMO where its not a struggle for players to interact, unfortunately we only have the models before us that have succeeded, and it doesn't tell us very much
The first few years of UO will never come back, even if you make a game exactly like the first couple years of UO. Nobody was going to pay money to be PK fodder, not once there was a choice. Not in numbers big enough to matter to a commercial MMO. If they didn't leave for Tram, they'd have left for EverQuest or whatever. It was always going to boil down to five guys yelling at Yew Gate.
Awhile back I wrote a very lengthy letter to the CEO's of EA telling them exactly what I felt... How they had abused UO and mistreated it.... not knowing they held a diamond in the rough... and that if they would only give it the care and polish it deserved it would shine once again. Told them they had no idea what they had. Explained to them how most of us who love UO do it because there is honestly NOTHING like it... After all this time... after all these years nothing has even come close to what UO had and still has.I hear you.
UO has always been the jewel in the crown as far as MMOs go for me because it offered so much diversity. No game has come close (SWG in the beginning was close) to live up to what was made here. The lawlessness was just a fun bonus....and I understand that you and others didn't like it. But I think if they had taken time to think about it, they could have found a solution that everyone could have benefited from. Lets be honest here...graphical MMOs progressed from 97(UO) to EQ/SWG(98-2003) and then all progress has been halted since WoW rolled on the scene in 04. Nothing has been able to take off regardless how innovative or original it is..there just isn't a money model that works because of Blizzard.
Someday I hope for a balanced PvE/PvP MMO where its not a struggle for players to interact, unfortunately we only have the models before us that have succeeded, and it doesn't tell us very much
I agree I don't want to play a treadmill, I don't want them holding my hand telling me what I should do, what I should wear and when I should wear it. I don't need no stinking quest leading me around by a nosering to play a game... I want to make my mark on it... I want to use my imagination to immerse myself in the game and forget RL and all the stress and worries that it holds and enjoy the life of whatever character I happen to chose to be. Be it an Archer/Knight, a Governess, a simple peasant, a farmers daughter, a tavern owner/bard... or the woman who would rather spend her days with the animals than speak to another elf or human.
I like to think of how my character can aid the King... or even how I can plot his ruin... invade a town, kill a guard, steal some wonderous object, dig up treasure!, fish the high seas, capture a pirate, kidnap some random citizen... torture them... discover a map... explore a dungeon... Tame a Dragon!...
Build a Theatre, a Temple, a craft hall, a Consulate, a Tavern, an Auction House, a garden, McDonalds, a Palace, whatever my imagination desires or my characters need.
So many games fall short of what UO has to offer.
You cannot compare shadowbane to UO simply on non-con PvP vs all pvp . The games were not even remotely the same, from the graphics to the playstyle to the objectives.
all i can say is, about 1/3 of wow is full pvp servers. so thats like, millions of people. Obviously there are many people who choose and enjoy full pvp. of course that is not full loot, but this thread was also not about full loot, just open pvp.
That's not true anymore. The average age of UO players back when it was first released compared to now is night and day. Maybe it was cool to a 12 year old to just pk all the time but players have changed (and gotten older). Other shards that have non-consentual pvp certainly have pk's...just not the same frequency as before.
There's the saying misattributed to Einstein, and put as a statement of fact, repeating the same experiment should yield the same results. Sociopathy comes out all too well with online anonymity and consequential ability to dismiss someone else's loss of time, and predators will flourish when there's little or no penalty to preying on the weak. If PKs really wanted PvP, guilds (with wars) were introduced not too long after UO's debut, then Order/Chaos. But ah, then the odds become a bit more even.Someday I hope for a balanced PvE/PvP MMO where its not a struggle for players to interact, unfortunately we only have the models before us that have succeeded, and it doesn't tell us very much
PvP ≠ PKing. The very fact that someone can play on a PvP server, or avoid it, just like UO players are never required to set foot in Felucca, shows a consensual nature.
If anything, the old-timers I've known since the first couple of years, who still play whether they've recently returned or played all these years, have yet to grow up.
i dont see what the difference has to do with the arguement. i suppose in wow, a top level killing a level 1 could be considered pking, or a geared player of equal level killing players in greens?
again thats not the point.
point is, there are millions of players who choose non-consensual pvp servers so there is a demand for it in games.
In my opinion, the devs should have programmed an option (selectable by character) to specify whether or not the character participated in PVP. This would have enabled players to live in Fel, farm resources, etc. and eliminate the risk of being PK'ed unless they wanted to fight.
Yeah, there are some challenges to this idea. The only one that I can't think of a solution to is scripting. But truthfully I don't care if someone is script mining or lumberjacking. Nowadays I don't have hours on end to mine or cut trees. I'd rather buy the resources from a vendor and don't much care how the materials were acquired.
Yeah, there are some challenges to this idea. The only one that I can't think of a solution to is scripting. But truthfully I don't care if someone is script mining or lumberjacking. Nowadays I don't have hours on end to mine or cut trees. I'd rather buy the resources from a vendor and don't much care how the materials were acquired.
Wrong. If someone plays on a PvP server but has the option of at least one server where attacks cannot be initiated by other players, then that is in fact consensual PvP. The "difference" is that pre-Trammel UO was nothing consensual. Even sitting at the bank was risky because of thieves. The "point" is that there was no choice if someone wanted to do the 95% of the game that was beyond the guard zone.
your missing my point zog. by your logic, your saying that any pvp in a game is consensual since your choose to play the game.
has nothing to do with what is or is not consenual pvp. i think most gamers know what the def is.
i will say for a third time, the point is millions of players play non-consensual pvp servers in games, so people cant just blow it off and say theres no demand for it.
I fully understand your point. You simply don't understand mine. If people wanted to play UO, there was no choice but to risk PKs if they went outside town. To call that "consensual" since they're playing the game, or leaving town, then by your non-logic logic, you might as well say that "Taxes are voluntary since you can choose not to pay them." Lots of PKs used to say, "Then don't leave town if you don't want to be PKd." Then what were people supposed to do, not adventure in the advertised dungeons? Run up and down Britain mining spots to find one vein that hadn't yet been mined out?
You are still talking about consensual PvP, because those people can play the same game, but without being open to attack. Any "point" you have about WoW is complete nonsense for the fact that there are similar servers that do not allow open attacks, and by your own admission, a majority of players stick to them.
You claim that "most gamers know" what consensual PvP is, but it's clear you do not. It is defined quite simply by available options.
Were you around when Trammel debuted and Shadowbane was in pre-release hype mode? "Shadowbane is going to kill UO!" was pretty much THE thing for bitter disenfranchised PK types to spew on the forums ad nauseum. Funny how that worked out.
Yeah, uh huh, I'm sure that if they put noncon PVP back in UO our sensible and mature PVP community TOTALLY wouldn't start running the game into the ground again.
Whatever, have fun trying to refight the MMO game design battles of the nineties. Nobody but us dozen or so people on a tiny fansite forum even give a **** anymore. It's been fifteen years, most people don't even remember that this game exists anymore, history has long since been written, and the part where anyone regretted throwing the PKs under the bus just plain never happened.
im not, im not going to argue definitions tho, you can google that for yourself. the general accepted definition of "non-consensual pvp" is having characters attackable without having consent to a battleground, arena, or duel setting. thats just how it is. like i said, maybe ask around or google it.
Last edited:
Resorting to search engines does not give a correct answer in and of itself. Shall I show you a vandalized wiki page?
Your definition is too simplistic, precluding the availability of other rule sets. UO in its original state was non-consensual, because, you're correct to point out, anyone was open to attack. However, Felucca and WoW servers are in fact consensual, because you can still play the same game without having to be in open-PvP areas.
thats not how most people define it, whatever tho. if you refuse to know the accepted meaning of a word, i dunno what to tell you and realize why not much of what you post makes any sense.
Then the "most people" you claim would be wrong. Do "most people" think that paying taxes are voluntary? Or that by residing in a jurisdiction you "consent" to any new laws that come out? Just because something is accepted by a majority does not make it right. Would you like me to point out certain countries where the majority religion makes it acceptable to do all manner of unspeakble things?
If you can't understand the simple things I'm explaining to you, then you are welcome to discontinue the dialogue. If you can't understand that someone is clearly consenting to open PvP by playing on particular WoW servers and not the others forbidding open PvP, or if you can't understand that the "millions" you cite are still a minority of a playerbase whose majority does not want to be open to attack, it does explain why so many simple concepts elude you.
im not talking about taxes or anything else in real life, im talking about video games terms. If you dont use common video game terminology, i don't see how anyone could have a logical conversation with you about video games.
Give it up man,dense is dense and a troll is a troll.
Slap em on ignore like a few others have in this thread and be done with all his full page, multi quote reply gibberish. He`s more concerned with him being right (even when he`s not) than anything you or anyone else has to say and he`ll keep rambling on to prove it.
Watch!
Oh god, are you guys trying to compare PVP WoW servers, with their faction split and complete lack of death penalty or looting, to oldschool UO? There's a market for the sort of toothless PVP WoW provides, but oldschool full-loot UO gankage is dead, buried, and largely forgotten.