Resources - is 2 clients truly worth it?

[Woodsman]

You EC folks seem to be incapable of realizing that the EC's basic problem is it's not a good UI!

The UI can be changed. That's the whole point of supporting Lua scripting - if UO had a larger playerbase, there would be more contributors and we'd have more UIs. UO still has an impressive number of players who have worked on making their own graphics sets for the UI. As a matter of fact, somebody could do a UI for the EC that looks like the CC.

In modern MMORPGs, people expect customizable UIs - World of Warcraft has literally thousands of little add-ons/scripts for its UI that extend the functionality all over the place.

Your minds seem only able to think 'graphics... graphics... graphics... yes... yes... graphics....' filtering out everything else that is said concerning why many stay with the CC instead of changing to the EC. Gods, you people have gotten really spooky.

We think that because we know that the EC's UI can be modified. A lot of CC users don't understand the point of UI customization, or don't realize that the EC can be made to look like many things.

A player could make the EC's UI look WOW's, look like RIFTs, look like the UO Classic Client.

The graphics are important to UO's longevity, that's why a lot of us worry about it. As I said, if something major isn't done to bring in new players, we won't be discussing one client or the other, we'll be discussing which freeshard to play after UO closes.

And those graphics have been cast into doubt with Grimm's leaving.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

EC's basic problem is it's not a good UI!

First of all define "not a good UI" because if it's in terms of UI functionality, the EC UI runs rings, circles, and laps around the CC's UI before the CC's UI can even get off the starting line. Even without player modification the EC UI is easier to set up than the CC, has more options than the CC including many you don;t get in the CC without external hack programs (legal or not), and I could give you PLENTY of hotbar and macro setups that the CC's UI simply CANNOT match.

Does the bad graphic display of the EC do something to your minds like some displays are reported to cause epileptic seizures and behavior problems in people who view them?

Wait... What? Epileptic seizures and behavioural problems from the UI? Seriously... what?

Your minds seem only able to think 'graphics... graphics... graphics... yes... yes... graphics....' filtering out everything else that is said concerning why many stay with the CC instead of changing to the EC. Gods, you people have gotten really spooky.

If this is your reaction then you haven't been following the EC board very closely or even what created the KR/EC Modding community in the first place.

 

[MalagAste]

You EC folks seem to be incapable of realizing that the EC's basic problem is it's not a good UI! Does the bad graphic display of the EC do something to your minds like some displays are reported to cause epileptic seizures and behavior problems in people who view them? Your minds seem only able to think 'graphics... graphics... graphics... yes... yes... graphics....' filtering out everything else that is said concerning why many stay with the CC instead of changing to the EC. Gods, you people have gotten really spooky.

I'll say this..... I use Pinco's UI. And I have ZERO problem with that.. there are but a FEW rather annoying things in the EC. Stairs for one and their inability to vanish either with the wall toggle to make walls vanish or with the circle of Trans. Very annoying.

If they fix health bars to update properly all the time it would be pretty good. Those two changes and I'd never use the CC again.

And I have to say this.... the CC runs like Frell on my PC. Slower than hades and choppy as heck. And with the window being either so out of focus or tiny I can't see what the frell is going on I don't care to play it anymore and have a FIT whenever I have to go back to it.

 

[the 4th man]

The majority of players presently play the original (2D) client. Whereas the enhanced client is used by some, mostly for casualties such as bank sitting and stocking vendor houses. In my opinion it is simply too ugly to enjoy full time. I was a Third Dawn beta tester (wrote a well published article about it at the time, in fact) and I've had my fair share of experience on the "enhanced client". The graphics in the 2D client are quite simply better, more fluent, and avatars/creatures don't simply look like sliders that run on the spot. In 2D everything from wearables to the trees look like they belong. The EC was just a poor overhaul of what already existed, when they could've enhanced the classic experience.

What is the benefit of maintaining two clients? If one had to go I'm presuming the classic client would stick around. When EA will not lower the subscription cost, why not axe one client or the other, to put out better quality patches etc. What is the worth without the subscriber base of running two clients? Tell me how this is a smart business decision, to run 2 clients for a game on life support.

Axe a client and give the game itself those extra resources!

No Ultima Worlds Online: Origin, then no Enhanced anything for me please.

Honest opinions only please, nothing personal. Just trying to help build the community by reviving a once great game.

First and foremost, you provide no evidence of how many play which client,....a poll on stratics proves nothing. Hard facts and source of such facts proves something.

Your post is not much more than a disgruntled opinion. Disgruntled because you seem believe the old time client is be neglected. "NEWS ALERT" UO has been neglected for a long time. This comes from a vet who has logged on almost every single day since before the Age of Shadows. My accounts have never been shelved.......I am not a deadbeat player.

So, for shiggles, I thought I would check out the enhanced client.....That was 2 years ago, I haven't looked back. I had to once or twice, and was repulsed by the blunt nature of what I was looking at......Hanna-Barbara put out better graphics. That's my opinion.

Before UO, I played Motor City Online, ....MCO died....we had like 4000 players, no lie. I saw the sunset. I knew a year before it was scrapped, the end was near.........that's not the case here.

Don't like the enhanced client, don't play.....Pincos user interface though.....Hell, I won't play UO without it.
UOAssist to me, is like 2D, it's dead.

That's my 3 cents worth......later.

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

Those two changes and I'd never use the CC again.

Books! Don't forget about books! They need to fix them so they can actually be used!

 

[Triberius]

You EC folks seem to be incapable of realizing that the EC's basic problem is it's not a good UI!

Graphics and the UI are two separate issues. Most EC users will tell you they aren't exactly happy with the graphics, but the graphics aren't what we're talking about when we talk about the UI.

Everything that isn't in that greyed out area, meaning the Hotbars, pack, Map window, even the Character sheet on the Paperdoll, those things are light years beyond what the CC provides. The complexity of Macros you can create is even past what the CC provides without using UO Assist, and in many cases it's beyond what UOAssist provides.

Now if you want to talk Graphics, sure the EC isn't really head and shoulders beyond what the CC provides, when you look at and compare it to what other games have out there. We'll be more than happy to admit that, but as long as we are limited to having to keep things in a position to sync with a 15 year old client framework I don't think that will every have the possibility of changing.

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

Now show the same layout using Pinco's UI!

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Since I just did a reinstall of Windows last night on a new SSD (yay upgrade!), I've gotten EC reinstalled and patched but haven't yet added in the UIs. However people can look at several UI options in this thread.

 

[Triberius]

Now show the same layout using Pinco's UI!

Sure

​

Yes Pinco's adds some elements, but that's the thing, the point of having a User Modable UI is so users can add those additions. Pinco created a Mod, and it's a good mod, he simplified and brought to the front functions that were already present in the stock UI that everyone can use regardless of play style, in addition to adding a few functions to his Skin such as Unraveling property calculations that are done separate from the client all together. Often with Mods in other games you see them targeted towards a specific play style or they are purely aesthetic. But that does not mean he created an entirely new UI, he built on what the Developers laid down as a framework as they intended for Modders to do. If he hadn't reached so broadly and only created a Mod that highlights things useful to a Mage, then you'd see more Mods, same holds true if it only targeted information important to Dexxers, Smiths, Tailors, or Imbuers etc. The fact he reached so broadly in scope and created such a well rounded Mod is why you don't see so many popping up, but even that doesn't change the fact that the Stock UI is perfectly capable of used and has more flexibility built into it than anything the CC or the Third Dawn client ever did, and in the case of the CC probably ever will simply because it is not designed to be built on by users. The EC UI is only limited by what A) The Developers will allow, and B) The creativity and talent of the Modder, and that is the entire point of what those who prefer the EC's UI are trying to get across. It's simply better because it is so much more flexible and adaptable.

But the long and short of it is, what Pinco did is no different than what Modders for LotRO, WoW, and EQ have been doing, building on what is already there to enhance the over all UI to highlight specific bits of Data, and add some purely aesthetic alterations.

Now as I said before I'm in favor of the EC with a CC graphics toggle. Keep the UI, but let people decide which style of graphics they prefer the UI to allow them to interact with. It would be a leap forward for CC users, in terms of being able to take advantage of many of the UI advancements, while letting them keep the nostalgic look of the game play graphics.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

 

[Madrid]

Now someone toss up a KR screenshot!

 

[Penana Car]

(photograph)

I just don't see how these graphics are "enhanced" from 2D. The screenshot sort of aligns with my disgruntled opinion.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

It dose not matter what the Graphics are as long as they are better then the 2d. I was was trying to show the UI. Alot of KR had better detail like the sails.

 

[Penana Car]

Right but they are honestly not better than 2D. I honestly mean this as my personal opinion. They are rather embarassing. I understand if your opinion differs.

 

[Woodsman]

Right but they are honestly not better than 2D. I honestly mean this as my personal opinion. They are rather embarassing. I understand if your opinion differs.

The graphics in both clients are embarrassing when you show them to people who have never played UO.

That goes back to my point earlier - even if CC users don't like the EC, they should be pushing for the graphics upgrade, because we're in the same boat, we play the same game, and if more people don't come in, the game will die. EA is not a charity. The fact that they laid off the one member of the dev team who communicated to us on a regular basis shows you that EA is not warm and fuzzy.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

I do not have one, I am saying there is more detail. I hope that what ever they use in the enhanced is better.. That is all I was saying.

To me I think I see more detail.. That might not make it better but it shows what can be done. Think of it this way if you had a pic that was 20 years old and you redid the art you could add alot more detail that might not be better but it would have more.

That is what enhanced is .. Not better just more. It dose not mean they can not add more to what they have. It might mean they can only add so much .. Think of it if the sails took anther step where they are able to move and then add wind.. That might not be better but it is more detailed and then you might beable to walk around it and see it at from all sides. there is so much you do not see like maybe they could add sound to the movement so it depends how the wind hits the sail.. I do not know if you could do that with the old sets but I do know it can be done. So it might not be better but maybe it is.

I would not stop there I would always up date and add to things. If you can not add to the 2d art then you have what you can get. It is what it is. I do not care if it is better I care that it works and can do more.

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

You EC folks seem to be incapable of realizing that the EC's basic problem is it's not a good UI! Does the bad graphic display of the EC do something to your minds like some displays are reported to cause epileptic seizures and behavior problems in people who view them? Your minds seem only able to think 'graphics... graphics... graphics... yes... yes... graphics....' filtering out everything else that is said concerning why many stay with the CC instead of changing to the EC. Gods, you people have gotten really spooky.

Tanivar I appreciate and respect your opinion of the EC as I do others who don't like it. But it's exactly that, your opinion.

I happen to think that the EC is an excellent UI. Honestly I can barely play the Classic Client anymore after playing the Enhanced Client for so long. I do think the devs really need to research and poll the playerbase and determine some improved DEFAULT settings. Once you've installed a UI mod though, like Pinco's, the Enhanced Client UI is a giant leap forward compared to the Classic Client. However, I fully realize that that is my opinion.

Everyone needs to just stop complaining and play UO with whatever client you prefer. The devs have stated over and over that there is no intention to kill either client. Stop worrying about development resources. The devs themselves don't seem to be worried about it so why is the playerbase?

 

[Penana Car]

I do think the devs really need to research and poll the playerbase and determine some improved DEFAULT settings.

Now you're on the right track. We need devs to show a pulse. Maybe some sort of UO HoC format as in the past, on a more ongoing basis to share ideas, solicit feedback and derive solutions. Maybe a better showing dev participation on the Stratics forums since EA cheaped out and shut down the UO.com forums once upon a time ago. Communication between both sides.

Having 2 clients is just foolish one way or the other. They may as well take the risk and sway one way or the other and make everyone adapt.

There needs to be more pressure from the players - higher expectations. I'm saying this because you're all paying customers. They're the ones that need to work to enhance this product - to be sustainable - to adapt to the times to give UO the best shot at having a solid future.

There needs to be a broader link between the vendor and the customer. The high subscription cost needs to stand for something.

It's time for UO to re-establish its identity as a single client. This is better for game balance, as well.

 

[Petra Fyde]

Did we read the same post? I read Ezekiel Kane's post as:

Everyone needs to just stop complaining and play UO with whatever client you prefer. The devs have stated over and over that there is no intention to kill either client. Stop worrying about development resources. The devs themselves don't seem to be worried about it so why is the playerbase?

Stop trying to force people to make a choice the Devs aren't willing to push onto us.
Scrap CC and you lose those players who can't upgrade their pc's to play the newer, higher spec needing, EC - that's quite aside from those who simply don't like it.
Scrap EC and you lose those players who can't see the post-card sized play window that is the result of more modern monitor resolutions.

 

[lucitus]

Another Thing iam intrested in is which resources you are talking about? UO has no resources!

 

[MalagAste]

The graphics in both clients are embarrassing when you show them to people who have never played UO.

That goes back to my point earlier - even if CC users don't like the EC, they should be pushing for the graphics upgrade, because we're in the same boat, we play the same game, and if more people don't come in, the game will die. EA is not a charity. The fact that they laid off the one member of the dev team who communicated to us on a regular basis shows you that EA is not warm and fuzzy.

THAT! It's embarrassing. Anyone that comes to my room it's like:
"Mom... What are you playing? Oh..... that old game. Wow you are still playing that? Man that makes me think of old school Nintendo."

*sigh* "Yes I'm still playing that... because it's still the best game."

"Well Mom you should try XXXX"

"Can I own land in XXX? Can I build my own town in XXX?"

"Um no."

"Then what good is it?"

"Well it's got YYYY and the graphics are not out of the stone age. LOL"

"All the pretty pictures do not make a good game. Now beat it before I ....."


You get the picture. Now sometimes I talk about my game and I get this:

"Maybe my Mom would like that game."

"If your Mom likes content over pixels yes. If they like RP absolutely."

But I've yet to get anyone past the graphics. And sadly because of games like Wow most can only think in Levels and what the game tells them to do... UO's best feature is that it lets your imagination set your goals NOT the game tell you where to go and what to do. The only limits are your own imagination. But because of WoW and all the others that pretty much tell you what to do when and what to wear no one can seem to think for themselves.

 

[old gypsy]

...

If the UI of the Classic Client is the "one good UI", then why does (nearly) everyone who uses the CC use external programs such as UOA and UOAM/Carto/etc?

I guess I'm just weird then... started playing in '98, still love the CC, and I've never used any external program of any kind to play UO. *shrugs*

 

[Penana Car]

Did we read the same post? I read Ezekiel Kane's post as:


Stop trying to force people to make a choice the Devs aren't willing to push onto us.
Scrap CC and you lose those players who can't upgrade their pc's to play the newer, higher spec needing, EC - that's quite aside from those who simply don't like it.
Scrap EC and you lose those players who can't see the post-card sized play window that is the result of more modern monitor resolutions.

Hold on, wait one minute here. I'm not trying to push anything on anybody. This thread has been about sharing, open opinion and expression from post #1.

I don't think any PC purchased in the last 10 years cannot run the enhanced client even on integrated graphics. So I don't exactly know how to respond to that point.

What you're basically saying is that they are holding onto players by a thread by giving them the option of what client to run. Let's sort of treat it as one client being preferential for the casual player (EC), the other client preferential for a more elitist veteran player (2D). That is the read I personally get. So right off the bat there is a standard of balance that is not being met by either client. How can that be a good thing?

I doubt they'll lose many players over the whole client issue if orchestrated properly. The huge massively multiplayer subscriberbase of UO will have to embrace chance and adapt. If they lose a few players on the way, it's not an issue, they never cared about that from day one so why would they start caring now?

Lastly I'm not forcing people to do anything. There are two sides of the poll. I'm offering my thanks to those that post their opinion one way or the other. This isn't a tug-a-war; it is about finding a consensus because quite frankly the people being paid to be ambassadors of the community (Mythic) aren't doing a whole lot of that. I've said before and after there needs to be higher expectations from the people playing to pay. Customer relations are how massively multiplayer games thrive in this market. We've seen the fate of games that do not embrace opinions to stay relevant.

Petra, I thank you for your opinion and I know it is a valid concern that they'll lose a few more subscribers and the game will shut down. Nothing about forcing anybody here. You made your points to support both clients.

 

[Penana Car]

But I've yet to get anyone past the graphics. And sadly because of games like Wow most can only think in Levels and what the game tells them to do... UO's best feature is that it lets your imagination set your goals NOT the game tell you where to go and what to do. The only limits are your own imagination. But because of WoW and all the others that pretty much tell you what to do when and what to wear no one can seem to think for themselves.

Great post but WoW has more races, classes and options than UO and you can actually transmogrify your gear to look how you want it to look and you can void store transmog gear from lower levels and/or for future use so I don't see what you're trying to say. You can set better goals in WoW because there are actual milestones to achieve. In UO your self-proclaimed "achievements" really stand for nothing because there is no milestone to achieve. The gear seasons in and out in phases so it forces its players to stay relevant all of the time or to stay on the same content until you reach new leveling milestones. You're not constantly fighting the same things, the difficulty does not stay the same like it is linearly in UO. In fact at higher levels you can choose the difficulty you want to play at. In UO when you talk about flying your gargoyle animation is just elevated off of the ground, in WoW you can literally fly at altitude without restrictions, and then work your way toward achieving new mounts and faster speeds.

If you're a trammel player you can choose an entire trammel realm so you have no risk of having to defend yourself against other players while questing. You don't have to physically stay in trammel to safeguard yourself. If you're a pvp player you can play a pvp realm. There is more world PvP than UO presently has. There is are fully functional dueling, arena and battleground systems. Taming classes are not disgustingly overpowered and you can't run away like a coward when you engage combat or house hide.

WoW has a far broader span of content and options and places to go. Every class has its advantages and disadvantages. The customer service is so live you could post an issue about your account on the forums and they'll fix it before you need to call.

I'm not trying to beat the WoW drum here at all but I'm getting a bit bored of people comparing UO to WoW in this thread, or calling WoW easy based on the character creation process and levelling to 20. These are two different games and that is a whole separate issue from this thread. Let's stay on topic about the two UO clients please. WoW talk is for another thread, honestly.

I do appreciate your ideas and expressed input though. I even respect your opinion I just don't feel that this thread is the place. You can even private message me if you want to talk WoW further I will tell you all about it so you know for next time.

 

[Martyna Zmuir]

Let's sort of treat it as one client being preferential for the casual player (EC), the other client preferential for a more elitist veteran player (2D). That is the read I personally get. So right off the bat there is a standard of balance that is not being met by either client. How can that be a good thing?

If you're going to pretend to want opinions regarding the clients, do not base your prose in fantasy. Calling the EC for "casual players" and the CC for "elitist veteran players" is divisively hyperbolic.

Many vets I know play the EC for the superior UI elements that would require buying UOA to use in the CC. Then they use Pinco's UI for the multitudinous number of cool things that have been added in, pet/mobiles bars, imbuing/unravel calculator, slayer support, etc. Most of the returning vets I know have also chosen the EC. I'm sure there are plenty of "casual players" that use the CC as well.

 

[Penana Car]

If you're going to pretend to want opinions regarding the clients, do not base your prose in fantasy. Calling the EC for "casual players" and the CC for "elitist veteran players" is divisively hyperbolic.

Many vets I know play the EC for the superior UI elements that would require buying UOA to use in the CC. Then they use Pinco's UI for the multitudinous number of cool things that have been added in, pet/mobiles bars, imbuing/unravel calculator, slayer support, etc. Most of the returning vets I know have also chosen the EC. I'm sure there are plenty of "casual players" that use the CC as well.

Not pretending at all. I don't necessarily require your opinion, but you voiced your opinion and I appreciate that. What we have here is a thread of ideas. A forum by definition is a medium for open discussion. Without "open" discussion in its truest form, it is a blog. I'm really glad to have had this opportunity to share different outlooks and opinions, with no tolerance of personal attacks etc. I greatly appreciate your participation in this thread and - thank you for your input on the two clients. I've expressed my opinion and you've expressed yours, now we have a forum.

There are always two sides that do not meet - a speaker and an opposition. Through life it is important to accept both of these things without unruly interference. Once again, thank you for expressing yourself. I cannot thank you enough.

I'm inviting others to use the poll and share their opinions.

 

[kelmo]

Your poll, while amusing, means little. A few dozen folks on Stratics vote. What is it now, 70 some odd folk? Bioware/EA already knows the exact numbers of who plays what and when.

Just my opinion. I realize opinions are not a requirement in the thread. So I just went the extra mile and provided it anyway. *tips hat*

 

[Tanivar]

Since we CC fans are not in the habit of starting threads to get the EC trashed, but you EC fans start threads fairly regularly to get the CC trashed, why don't you just show us the same curtesy we show you and stop making threads trying to get the CC trashed. Do that and these arguements can stop.

Neither side works to force players to use what they consider a bad UI.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Link me the last few threads started by EC players specifically to trash the CC. I'd like to see them. (Which is funny if you consider that this was a thread started to say that the OP would rather see the EC shut down)

 

[Penana Car]

Well, 70 people voted. I heard of Lake Austin and a few other shards recently and about 2 players per shard during peak hours seems consistent across the board. But you're right, I would love to see the actual numbers released by them-the statistics of who is using which client. This could help depict their reasoning for both clients to start with. I just think of the resources spent in maintaining and patching both clients and it is an annoyance when other aspects of the game are failing and not getting certain attention that could help generate subscriptions.

Since we CC fans are not in the habit of starting threads to get the EC trashed, but you EC fans start threads fairly regularly to get the CC trashed, why don't you just show us the same curtesy we show you and stop making threads trying to get the CC trashed. Do that and these arguements can stop.

Neither side works to force players to use what they consider a bad UI.

Hey, this isn't a grudge thread. This isn't about one side or the other it is about community and sharing ideas. I'm glad both clients have supporters but really it does come down to an issue of personal preference right now. There needs to be a vision for the future. Thank you for your input.

 

[Felonious Monk]

Since we CC fans are not in the habit of starting threads to get the EC trashed, but you EC fans start threads fairly regularly to get the CC trashed,
This is how you get threads locked.
I don't feel that that is any where near an objective view point.
Your passion for your play style is duly noted.
Take a breath and let it go............

 

[Ludes]

According to the poll the OP threw up, the EC wins.. so lets kill the CC to save resources.

Just kidding... I think it's a waste of time to worry about what client other people are playing on...

But I bet that gets some feathers ruffled...

 

[Lady Silverbrook]

According to the poll the OP threw up, the EC wins.. so lets kill the CC to save resources.

Just kidding... I think it's a waste of time to worry about what client other people are playing on...

But I bet that gets some feathers ruffled...

Actually your reading comprehension is a bit off. The question is what client would you axe, and the EC has more votes. So it would be the one to go.

That said, I think both look and handle poorly (as stated before). I personally use the CC but am by no means saying it is a superior client. I have tried the EC and it does not feel up to standards in what I would expect in a professional company like EA. This irritates me given that the actual engine used is capable of remarkable things. The EC feels 'indie' and cheap compared to other, smaller online games. The CC, however, feels archaic and leaves me feeling less than immersed in my game world. It does not look good on a 17 inch laptop. It looked decent in 1997. This is no longer 1997.

Again, I am not stating the CC is any better... merely saying it is what I use.

To me it seems like pointless arguing.

 

[Spiritless]

I'm not trying to beat the WoW drum here at all but I'm getting a bit bored of people comparing UO to WoW in this thread, or calling WoW easy based on the character creation process and levelling to 20. These are two different games and that is a whole separate issue from this thread.

I don't think it's an entirely separate issue. A lot of people here are focusing on the graphics and proclaiming that sticking with the CC will "kill" UO. On the other hand, many have said that graphics are not everything. Yes, that is true indeed but you overvalue UO's current gameplay compared with the competition. PvM is still basically tuned for dial-up and isn't particularly diverse. Monster AI was designed in 1997 and hasn't progressed much since. Even with shiny graphics, I'm afraid the end-game content doesn't even match up with the expectations of MMO gamers these days. UO's issues are much more deep rooted than the mere client, graphics or UI. This is why I have been a proponent for an entire sequel game, UO2, for a long time now.

There's no one thing that can magically fix UO's appeal, it's a whole host of things and starting a new game with a clean slate is the only viable route at this point in my opinion.

 

[Penana Car]

I don't think it's an entirely separate issue. A lot of people here are focusing on the graphics and proclaiming that sticking with the CC will "kill" UO. On the other hand, many have said that graphics are not everything. Yes, that is true indeed but you overvalue UO's current gameplay compared with the competition. PvM is still basically tuned for dial-up and isn't particularly diverse. Monster AI was designed in 1997 and hasn't progressed much since. Even with shiny graphics, I'm afraid the end-game content doesn't even match up with the expectations of MMO gamers these days. UO's issues are much more deep rooted than the mere client, graphics or UI. This is why I have been a proponent for an entire sequel game, UO2, for a long time now.

There's no one thing that can magically fix UO's appeal, it's a whole host of things and starting a new game with a clean slate is the only viable route at this point in my opinion.

This is the most truthful, well written reply on the thread to date. Thank you for your insight. I was also an advocate of Ultima Worlds Online: Origin. But an EA version of Ultima? No thank you. I have seen where they have driven this game. It would not work.

There is only one man that can re-create Ultima and see it go forward for a future generation. They would need to let the franchise name fall back into his hands, otherwise there is no future as bright. This team is not capable of creating his vision. It would fail badly and tarnish the Ultima name even further.

May sound harsh but just as certain sports teams are not capable of achieving championships, this team is not capable of scripting an authentic Ultima game.

Not intended as an insult. Nobody can duplicate Tolkien or Shakespeare either.

 

[kelmo]

OK... I get it now. *moves on* Y'all stay nice in here.

 

[Woodsman]

There is only one man that can re-create Ultima and see it go forward for a future generation. They would need to let the franchise name fall back into his hands, otherwise there is no future as bright. This team is not capable of creating his vision. It would fail badly and tarnish the Ultima name even further.

Not intended as an insult. Nobody can duplicate Tolkien or Shakespeare either.

If Richard Garriott had his way, he would turn UO into a web-based Facebook game you can play on your phone. He's spent the last two years giving speeches about how web and phone games are the future.

That's not a vision I'm particularly fond of for an MMORPG.

 

[Woodsman]

But you're right, I would love to see the actual numbers released by them-the statistics of who is using which client. This could help depict their reasoning for both clients to start with.

EA stopped releasing numbers officially when UO started dropping. The only way you'll see them ever release any numbers again would be if UO magically climbed well above 100,000. EA is not adverse to numbers, they pump out all kinds of numbers about their other games, but it's only when it's positive numbers.

I just think of the resources spent in maintaining and patching both clients and it is an annoyance when other aspects of the game are failing and not getting certain attention that could help generate subscriptions.

I agree with you to an extent that EA needs more subscriptions, but you're kind of tilting it your way.

Quite frankly, you, me, and everybody who advocates for supporting only one client misses out on something very, very crucial: Ultimately, working on two clients is not what's holding UO back, it's EA that is holding UO back.

The UO team could be doubled or tripled, and both clients could receive better support, and UO would still be profitable here in July of 2012. Last year, one of the top 4-5 people in EA publicly said UO was widely profitable, and yet here a year later, and UO has a much smaller team.

If you want new subscriptions, neither client is going to help with that right now, because you have to do something to get people to look at UO in the first place.

More content? UO has more content than most any other game out there, and a housing system that is unbeatean. If people haven't looked at UO before now, it's not because they didn't think UO was lacking in content. Mention UO on an MMORPG website, and housing and the non-leveling system are usually the things mentioned that would most help UO. But people still aren't flocking here.

More bugfixes? While helpful to existing players, people who have never played UO in the last 15 years are not going to look at numbers of bugs as an indicator of whether to play or not. Most will look at screenshots and video to determine if they will even try a game, and just about every MMORPG out there has it's share of bugs, and as a whole gamers accept that bugs are a part of the experience.

Dungeon Upgrades? While helpful to existing players, people who have never played UO are not going to hear that Covetous was upgraded and flock to UO.

Focusing on one client or skipping the graphics update? The CC's graphics and interface are instantly recognizable to anybody who played UO 15 years ago, and if people aren't flocking to UO for the CC after 15 years, they aren't going to flock to UO for the CC in the next year or 5 years from now.

There needs to be a vision for the future. Thank you for your input.

There needs to b a vision for actually growing UO, and that vision must be backed by EA. When was the last time you heard an EA executive (outside of Mythic) come out and praise UO on its own, and not as just a tool to help prop up Star Wars? Eugene Evans, the head of Mythic, last year said he was proud to be a part of the studio that ran UO, but guess what? It was in response to rumors of Warhammer being shut down and was not something he spontaneously said out of nowhere.

EA could easily support both clients to make all of us happy, add in the high resolution graphics upgrade, and do quite a few other positive things for UO and still have UO be profitable right now.

At the end of the day, supporting two clients only holds UO back because EA holds UO back by refusing to give us more developers.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

I think I voted Wrong but it dose not matter in time more ppl will use the EC and learn how much more it can do and they will end up not being able to go back.. Its just that much better. I am talking about the UI in the EC. So you will see in time about 90% of players use the EC AND 10% will not ever let go..

It is not easy but I would ax them both if it would help. I think the CC is the basic building blue print and the EC is the leader in what can be done to make UO more fun and expand. If CC can not grow and change then we have to move it out and if no one likes the way EC looks then we have to add something to it that is nice with a lot of detail. You can look at things and see what they need, you know what has to be done. Its just EA is unwilling to do it.

It is easy to fix the systems and finish it all off .. The ideals are all there. The problems are to me the maps if you are going to fix some things you need to change the land and move houses. The world needs to be made and then they can add to it and build it up.

That is true with alot of things they need something that is not easy to do and will cost to much and take to much time. They can do alot with what they have now if they wanted to they could dump tons of money into UO and build up systems. Then just get to the point they know what they have and can redo things like maps. We have so many ideals of how taming could work plants, what towns could be like if players lived in them and farming. Making chars more real with mastery alot of the basic ideal is there. Some things could be tested and then put in.

The thing is that UO can grow in all of the places and it can be made better. If some things can NOT be made better we have to change it. That is why 3d is good, its a place to start at that can keep growing you can add 4d to it. That is the point, to be able to keep building and adding so you can always change and bring in the best anything can offer at that time.

Alot of it is basic we can learn from nature and mimic alot of things to add to the world .. Systems like weather hi tides all the stuff we already know birds bugs bears fish. Some things take something more like spawns where they live sleep how they age and what they eat. UO has all the basics and needs to have a place or a way to expand systems so again you can not just add some things with out alot of changes.

They could just round UO off and stick it in a box and forget about it also. I guess its about having that drive to be the best and have all the things in a game that you can. When you build a world it is not something that a closed minded set can do the ones who work on it have to see it as endless and need to be able to see what the next step would be so as not to close systems off. Living and breathing world with many things to do in it.That is what UO is and what it needs to add to.

If they make it better everyone will be happy and if they make it good more will play , If they just try the could make the best game ever.

 

[Tanivar]

...

Link me the last few threads started by EC players specifically to trash the CC. I'd like to see them. (Which is funny if you consider that this was a thread started to say that the OP would rather see the EC shut down)

Went back through the thread history for one full year. Didn't find one. Apparently the dump the CC scene has only occured during another discussion topic. I'm going to have to start noting threads I see it turn up in.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

This is what the EC feels like for me.

 

[Lady Michelle]

Both need to stay
2d for players who like the classic look.
EC for players who like the enhanced look.
with all the fixing of bugs etc it will still be years and years if there was only one client. meaning there will be no difference if theres 1 or 2 clients

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Went back through the thread history for one full year. Didn't find one.

I expected that would be the outcome. Kind of negates where you said "EC fans start threads fairly regularly to get the CC trashed" doesn't it?

Apparently the dump the CC scene has only occured during another discussion topic. I'm going to have to start noting threads I see it turn up in.

Make sure to note if it's out of the blue or in reaction to statements from people who want to axe the EC outright because I believe you'll find that anti-CC sentiment happens in reaction to anti-EC sentiment (again such as in this thread).

 

[Tanivar]

...

Make sure to note if it's out of the blue or in reaction to statements from people who want to axe the EC outright because I believe you'll find that anti-CC sentiment happens in reaction to anti-EC sentiment (again such as in this thread).

Will do. Since the attempts to get the CC eliminated are a major button with me I'll certainly not ignore any that I come across.That has to be obvious from past experience. I'll make sure to note which side makes the first 'get rid of the other' post first, and for what reason. Wonder how long a signature can be.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I won't deny that there is a sentiment in the EC crowd that the game would be better off if we got rid of the CC. I believe that and have even said it, but I've only said it in a thread like this one where the clients were the issue at hand.

And yeah I'm a bit touchy on the other side of the coin as you are because of the vast amount of trolling that was occurring when KR was active as a client. It has declined a LOT since that time though, but as you see with this very thread it still pops its head up from time to time, just in "nicer" terms.

I had no doubt you wouldn't find a thread started by EC players wanting to get rid of the CC because I know that KR/EC proponents have been on the defensive end of that stick for five years now. So you can't really fault the pro-EC side of the client argument for being quick on the defense. We've had a lot of practice.

 

[cazador]

There is a simple solution to this argument...make something only attainable in the EC like a dungeon or special mods..something ..I personally do not enjoy EC I'm a CC guy but only because I mainly pvp and pvp is near impossible to compete on the EC..u cannot cycle as fast with mages you can run as fast on dexxers..it's a complete sham..do why would anyone who is mainly pvp even remotely think its a good idea to play EC..unless everybody did..and even then I think we'd lose 40% of the pvp community to freeshards..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Ilshenar used to be 3d client only until the (non)expansion LBR. All new artwork was going to go into the 3d client with only placeholders when necessary in the 2d client.

SA was going to be KR only (and NOT use the tile-based system that 2d uses) in the original plans for that expansion.

So that's a method that was already tried before. Both cases failed because the clients were released far before they should have been and caused an uproar in the community. 3d was released long before 3d technology was at the quality to look and run decently and KR was rushed out the door due to Japan pressure while it was still really only in an early beta state. Then of course team moves and shakeups, etc etc etc and here we are now.

I believe the answer is as stated earlier in the thread. New technology client with two settings: 1. CC setting which emulates the CC completely, UI and ingame graphics/effects at low resolution. 2. EC setting with scalable resolution graphics/effects and EC moddable UI.

Of course this would require finishing the high res upgrades, then working the two clients into one, neither of which seem to be on the radar at the moment.

 

[Raptor85]

third dawn came out in 2001, well after games like half-life, unreal, and deus ex, and halo came out around the same time as third dawn. there was nothing wrong with 3d at the time, but much like the EC the client graphics were subpar for it's time, games (including mmos) 5+ years older than it looked significantly BETTER from the day of release and on top of that it was never finished, TONS of its art was uncolored or placeholder on release.

 

[Woodsman]

There is a simple solution to this argument...make something only attainable in the EC like a dungeon or special mods..something ..

It doesn't address the fact that EA won't support UO like it should.

If they were to move to just one client, I get the feeling they'd take the opportunity to lay somebody off, and even if they didn't, the UO team would still be just as small as it is now. The team appears to be so small at this point that reducing things down to one client wouldn't actually accomplish much.

 

[Penana Car]

If Richard Garriott had his way, he would turn UO into a web-based Facebook game you can play on your phone. He's spent the last two years giving speeches about how web and phone games are the future.

That's not a vision I'm particularly fond of for an MMORPG.

If you want my honest opinion I think that Richard Garriott is an extremely smart man. He knows this market well and is aware that this is not a transitional period in time to go out and produce a new MMO title (as he already attempted to do with Tabula Rasa). Facebook games are a venture to stay busy, and his ideas with Portalarium will generate interest but as a business man he will look at Blizzard, other companies and even his former UO model and understand full well that it is not the big show in terms of PC/MMO gaming. He is not going to go out and publicly look like an idiot by saying "I shouldn't have sold Ultima" because frankly, he did and he thought that was the best choice at the time. It help give him the freedom to move forward into space travel and achieve greater things in life.

An Ultima game would take 5-8 years to create and roll out if done properly. By this time it would be a game for the next generation. With Richard Garriott's name on the box it would draw huge interest off the bat and if done properly in a 3D model would retain more subscriptions than UO ever had. He would be able to incorporate all of the aspects that made UO great at one point in time, with his own vision of what the virtue systems should really entail in a revolutionary aspect. And yes, MMO's have limitless opportunities for expansion.

A social media gaming model is a brilliant idea because it'll likely be a free-to-play model and there is total guarantee people are going to try it, and a lot of people will become addicted like they have to Mafia Wars, Farmville, etc. He is playing all of the right cards because he is a smart man and he knows what he is doing for today. Tomorrow is a different story.

I know he'd have the sufficient skill in magery left to "An Corp" the Ultima franchise. The man hasn't spoken out of turn because he is worth more than UO as is and they'd find ways to sue the socks off of him.

Of course this thread should not drift too far off topic. This is more about the two clients and what the future capabilities are for EA's UO title.