Lord Gareth
UO Content Editor | UO Chesapeake & Rares News
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Wiki Moderator
I think the picture explains it.

sea gates !I think the picture explains it.
![]()
If this is correct, I'd rather leave the seas as they are than remove my 2D client!!!...
Only problem with a sea expansion (beyond serpent pillars) is the 2d client. The method the 2d client uses to do boating limits what they can do ingame. If we were able to move past the 2d client, they could revamp the way boats in general work and in the process add a LOT more to the seas.
My god you are a Johnny One-Note....
Only problem with a sea expansion (beyond serpent pillars) is the 2d client. The method the 2d client uses to do boating limits what they can do ingame. If we were able to move past the 2d client, they could revamp the way boats in general work and in the process add a LOT more to the seas.
This.If this is correct, I'd rather leave the seas as they are than remove my 2D client!!!
Or we could consider how much more awesome the 2D client and game would be if the Dev Teams over the years hadn't wasted UNBELIEVABLY LARGE resources on not one, not two, but THREE FAILED clients....
Don't blame me... I'm just stating what the devs have already stated repeatedly. Just because you don't like the news won't make things any different.
This!Or we could consider how much more awesome the 2D client and game would be if the Dev Teams over the years hadn't wasted UNBELIEVABLY LARGE resources on not one, not two, but THREE FAILED clients....
Don't blame me... I'm just stating what the devs have already stated repeatedly. Just because you don't like the news won't make things any different.
And how the TINY MINORITY of users/supporters of these alternate clients waste dev time by asking for their alternate client to be worked on, instead of the client that 95% of the users use.
ThatOr we could consider how much more awesome the 2D client and game would be if the Dev Teams over the years hadn't wasted UNBELIEVABLY LARGE resources on not one, not two, but THREE FAILED clients.
And how the TINY MINORITY of users/supporters of these alternate clients waste dev time by asking for their alternate client to be worked on, instead of the client that 95% of the users use.
So there are ten people in your guild, and four use the EC. Big deal.Oh, great! this has turned into yet another EC flame fest. *rolls eyes*
First off all, not as much people as the typical UHaller wants to believe are using the Classic Client. A lot of returning or new player test out the EC and some are quite happy with it. For example, in my guild we have around 40% EC users now. It's just that most of these people don't post on UHall (or even know about).
Also Dermott is right, the devs HAVE stated that boats are really difficult to handle with the classic client. that's simply a fact.
But if the dedicate enough time and work to it as it would be adequate for a new expansion, maybe they can come up with at least an improvement?
Also, I think it would be possible to do a sea based expansion even without changing boats.
Riiiiight....So there are ten people in your guild, and four use the EC. Big deal.
Hm..Riiiiight....So there are ten people in your guild, and four use the EC. Big deal.
Looky here: http://my.uo.com/cgi-bin/guilds.pl?g=633361860a05826a:25 one of the ten larges guilds on Drachenfels.
A lot of people who are serious about PVP and not cheating are using the EC - it's giving quite some advantages due to the new interface and macros.
Also on a completely unrelated note:
Are there even Mods on this board to keep thread from getting completely off-topic.
Do you ever stop?...
Don't blame me... I'm just stating what the devs have already stated repeatedly. Just because you don't like the news won't make things any different.
"UNBELIEVABLY LARGE "....no, I seriously doubt that, "TINY MINORITY"....that minority is much larger than those making a congressional seen over a classic shard.Or we could consider how much more awesome the 2D client and game would be if the Dev Teams over the years hadn't wasted UNBELIEVABLY LARGE resources on not one, not two, but THREE FAILED clients.
And how the TINY MINORITY of users/supporters of these alternate clients waste dev time by asking for their alternate client to be worked on, instead of the client that 95% of the users use.
If you want something shiny and flashy and "modern" play something else. If you want UO, play 2D."UNBELIEVABLY LARGE "....no, I seriously doubt that, "TINY MINORITY"....that minority is much larger than those making a congressional seen over a classic shard.Or we could consider how much more awesome the 2D client and game would be if the Dev Teams over the years hadn't wasted UNBELIEVABLY LARGE resources on not one, not two, but THREE FAILED clients.
And how the TINY MINORITY of users/supporters of these alternate clients waste dev time by asking for their alternate client to be worked on, instead of the client that 95% of the users use.
2D is dead, has been, and is pretty much the wall that keeps UO from being advertised. If you can't see that, then I pity you. Players hang onto 2D because it's what they know. In turn, this shows you the average age of UO's players........
The sea needs love, 2D needs to go to Davey Jones locker!!
Yarrrr, later matey.
That guy NEEDS to be hired by EA to oversee 100% of all UO projects... NOWhttp://www.aschulze.net/ultima/blog/blog_20090220.htm
Took me a while to find this.. THIS is the expansion that we EXACTLY NEED! This was put together by a fellow role-player from Catskills known as Hawkeye Pike..