M
Medwin Lucrii
Guest
There are a couple of classic servers out there, they just aren't run by EA (added bonus?).
-
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!
Since I don't believe a retro shard will happen...
- Thread starter ChReuter
- Start date
- Watchers 4
double edged sword. Yes it's not ran by EA so they are more likely to stay true to the roots of UO. Bad because they can up and vanish in an instant, hard to put in so much time and effort into that.
M
Medwin Lucrii
Guest
Good point.
The two I know of are fairly established, but there are a lot of fly by night servers out there.
*shrugs*
I guess my view is I'd rather put my time in somewhere that I enjoy and somewhere that is true to what UO should be. Rather then keep throwing money at EA and having false hope. A lot of us are still hanging on to EA shards. It is hard to stop playing when you've put years and years into something.
Because development of such a shard would take away development time for the regular shards.
A choiice does exist it is called seige/mungen and they are both really empty wiht players compaired to "production shards"
I don't see how you get that players are threatened by it. No one's saying we're scared. That's just your perspective, remove the sightblinds sweetheart.
Fel. was a flop....as much success as Ford is having, why try and bring back the Edsel? As the seemingly ringleader of the self-knighted "classic vlassic" players, the demand, the "we deserve it damnit" attitude, and the delusion, that because you talk enough about, it will come..........it's getting old, old,....very fast.
You don't like what I have to say, well.....deal with it.
later
I haven't read the entire thread, this is a response to the OP.
In my opinion there is a very good chance that a classic shard is going to be created, and in fact it is my opinion that it is already being worked on, and may not be that far from completion. And in my opinion there is 0 chance that what has been suggested in the OP is going to happen. The only possibility for a shard being created with a distinct rules set at this time, in my opinion, is a classic shard.
In my opinion there is a very good chance that a classic shard is going to be created, and in fact it is my opinion that it is already being worked on, and may not be that far from completion. And in my opinion there is 0 chance that what has been suggested in the OP is going to happen. The only possibility for a shard being created with a distinct rules set at this time, in my opinion, is a classic shard.
This shard does not need to be Created, it exists already, simply pick up a LBR disk or a previous disk and load it up, no patching and you have the base code. It is a shame that all these folks do nto want to keep teh game progress. If you want nastalgia pick up a old atari system play pong and then see how long you play it until oyu get tired of it. same thing will happen here the Classic shard will remain stagnated and not keep teh interest of most players. then all the time used to put this shard to teh public will be wasted time, seriously who woudl want to play supermario Brothers 100% of the time whern you have a upgraded version of it? in the supermario version go to the negative neverending waterworld and you will have a classic shard in a nutshell it will be the same thing over and over again stagnated and festering on itself wiht 0% growth after teh initial nastalgia wears off, on top of thiose who run into teh templates that tehy hated before, then it snaps "Oh yea that is wht i disliked this game way back when, and the developers decided to change, now i remember, this shard sucks i want a new one wiht this added"
Yes. Different caps for PvP and PvM are already in game. e.g. SDI cap for PvM is unlimited, SDI itemp cap for PvP is 15.
Just expanding this you could have DCI cap for PvM at 45, DCI cap for PvP at 10 etc.
Or you could divide it, e.g. if someone's DCI for PvM is 45, their DCI for PvP = 45 / 5 = 9. etc. This way the more you have the better, but the advantage is only slight.
Pre-AOS you had vanquishing and invulnerability items as well, so it isnt like pre-AOS there were never item properties.
S
slaveone
Guest
This is a bit overstated the reality is no one wants the DEVS to WASTE their time on such a shard except a small minority of overly zealous stratics posters with multiple accounts that is FACT.
-Not only is no one going to force anyone to play it NO ONE IS GOING TO PLAY IT!!!
-There are enough dead shards already that "could" probably be deleted we don't need or want another one
- If you want a classic shard so bad create your own server based on an old UO install disc and relive your glory days that way don't expect the devs to waste their time on your fanciful whims..
PKing would be a problem from day one thats exactly why Trammel was created because when people are allowed to run wild and grief anyone and everyone guess what happens??? THE 14 YEAR OLD IN THEM COMES OUT AND THEY DO JUST THAT!
I disagree and you don't seem to have a problem telling everyone else that we NEED to waste dev resources on a classic shard no one will play on. Not to mention it's EA's game and they can do WTF ever they want
S
slaveone
Guest
You greatly underestimate the potential a classic server has. I firmly believe there is adequate demand for 2 such servers. My only concern would be retention.
As for wasting resources...well, they have wasted resources on far worse endeavors. Anyone remember UOSE. 7 days of content followed by years of unbalance.
Classic servers would be good for UO so long as they have the resources to continue the current shards with new content. Content has always been the evil that has plagued UO.
E
Evlar
Guest
If there's one thing the vast majority of "classic" discussion is in agreement with, it tends to be that it be pre-AoS.
AoS forever changed the game, for all play styles, in a direction that most of those after a classic shard, didn't like.
I do appreciate the OP's input and interest in a "retro" shard being as easy to implement as possible though.
The problem is though, that when you have something that the majority of interested people are agreed on, if that aspect is not implemented, the shard would either be pointless making, or not encourage people to want to play it.
E
Evlar
Guest
I made >this< post in another thread.
I might be making something out of nothing, but there do seem to be a lot of coincidentals that are worthy of consideration, by comparing the direction UO might be heading to the direction Dungeons & Dragons online has headed.
Namely, a combination of free-to-play and subscription based players. Players have the option to choose which content they have access to, by means of a standard subscription, purchase from the game store of "items", or to play for free.
To see the impact this has had on that game, for subscriptions, numbers of actual players and revenue, simply google for a few MMO forums, news and review sites, then read into the reports what you will.
Now my immediate thoughts, would lead me to assume that, *if* UO headed down the same path, the production shards would be paid for by a combination of subscriptions and game store revenue. Any classic servers would be paid for by subscriptions only, providing AoS item-centric gameplay is not included, as per the desire of those generally in favour of the classic concept.
Dungeons and Dragons online seems to indicate that such an approach has been a resounding success for their game. Given the huge rise of free-to-play games, funded by micro-transaction revenue, it may be the direction that UO and many other (apart from Wow perhaps) MMO's are considering.
I might be making something out of nothing, but there do seem to be a lot of coincidentals that are worthy of consideration, by comparing the direction UO might be heading to the direction Dungeons & Dragons online has headed.
Namely, a combination of free-to-play and subscription based players. Players have the option to choose which content they have access to, by means of a standard subscription, purchase from the game store of "items", or to play for free.
To see the impact this has had on that game, for subscriptions, numbers of actual players and revenue, simply google for a few MMO forums, news and review sites, then read into the reports what you will.
Now my immediate thoughts, would lead me to assume that, *if* UO headed down the same path, the production shards would be paid for by a combination of subscriptions and game store revenue. Any classic servers would be paid for by subscriptions only, providing AoS item-centric gameplay is not included, as per the desire of those generally in favour of the classic concept.
Dungeons and Dragons online seems to indicate that such an approach has been a resounding success for their game. Given the huge rise of free-to-play games, funded by micro-transaction revenue, it may be the direction that UO and many other (apart from Wow perhaps) MMO's are considering.
C
ChReuter
Guest
Funny how post just seem to keep popping back up... Geez...
L
Lore Master
Guest
As for me I have no want or need to have a classic shard I like UO the way it is more then I ever did in the past. I would not mind a classic shard as long as players will stop trying to ruin this great game by asking to remove insurance, powder of fortification, remove tram, revert back before AOS etc. etc.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
Translation:
"I don't want a Classic Shard to exist because I am afraid of PvP".
Got it.
E
Evlar
Guest
Well, I've certainly no desire to spoil the game how you like it. That's entirely why people are asking for a classic shard.
You have your preferences and they're fully catered for. Nothing wrong with that at all. We would just like our preferences to be catered for as well.
At this stage, let's hope that there's some resolution or closure to the matter, one way or the other, sooner rather than later.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
One person's opinion of what makes the game great will differ from the next person's.
That's one of the reasons some of us want a Classic Shard...so that people like you can have what you want, and we can have what we want.
Difference is, we are all willing to uproot and move to a brand new shard that may or may not provide a decent ping to get away from things that were added to the game that we never wanted in the first place...meanwhile, you and others like you, get to keep everything that you have amassed in game over the last 13 years.
I started on Atlantic on the first day it was up, and still play there. But because the devs of the time decided that things that you call great (insurance, Trammel, AoS, etc.) were needed, I will lose my home.
Again, I don't think we are asking for too much here. We are all willing to settle for a single shard (maybe one east, one west, one Europe, if the demand is there), and we are willing to give up everything that we have in the game to go there...and many of us are even willing to pay for a code or an expansion in order to access it.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
OMG that kitten is the cutest!This thread needs a cat!!!
E
Evlar
Guest
Sorry, but I'm gonna have to trump this...
[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PINxfouNQFw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PINxfouNQFw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]
and this...This thread needs a cat!!!
With this...
[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PINxfouNQFw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PINxfouNQFw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]
M
Medwin Lucrii
Guest
Until people start canceling subscriptions because of this bastardization which is now UO EA won't listen.
When the lack of a classic UO shard hits them in the pocket books is when they will listen.
When the lack of a classic UO shard hits them in the pocket books is when they will listen.
Considering there hasn't been anything remotely close to the classic shard being asked for now for at least 8 years, I don't think EA really pays any attention to rather empty promises/threats.
No, you really don't. But feel free to continue with the cheap shots, and let the folks at EA see just who is asking for what, and how. Does absolute WONDERS for the cause.Morgana LeFay (PoV) said:
I would argue if you open any shard, even a production shard with no xsharding, it would be popular too, and would have better subscriber retention.
Content is the key. Unfortunately if the Classic shard goes ahead there will be less new content on production shards, which means less subscribers, and I doubt that this loss of production shard subscribers can be offset by the new subscribers that the Classic shard will retain.
If EA really wants subscribers they should make a real 3D client. Imagine UO with Warhammer graphics. Both Warhammer and the EC use the same engine and the WAR graphic artists are sitting next door.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
No, I actually do get it.
In today's UO, if the posters on UHALL can be considered an accurate cross-sample, you have basically 5 types of players:
- Trammel players that are perfectly content with the current game, and see no need to change anything. These particular players either didn't play UO when there was no Trammel, or did play and did not enjoy the experience of open PvP.
- Felucca players that are perfectly content with the current game, and see little need to change anything. These particular players either didn't play UO when there was no Trammel, or did play back then but did not generally play as PKs. Most of the real PKs left shortly after Trammel was introduced.
- Siege players that are perfectly content with the current game, and see little or no need to change anything. These particular players likely started UO before Trammel was created, and moved to Siege because they wanted a more challenging experience before Trammel...or went there because of Trammel.
- Players that pay their money, but are not really happy with the current game at all. They believe that Trammel and AoS have ruined the game they loved. Almost all of these players started playing before Trammel existed.
- Players that pay their money, but are not really happy with the current game. They believe that AoS ruined the game they loved. Almost all of these players started after Trammel existed, or played before Trammel, but did not enjoy the experience of open PvP.
The first two of these 5 are generally against the creation of a Classic Shard, or generally don't care because they wouldn't play on it anyway.
The Siege players have drank the Siege Kool-Aid, and they make sure everyone knows it. These "come to Siege" players don't get nearly the crap for "spamming" threads as do the later two groups btw.
The last two groups want a Classic Shard, but the point of contention between them is to have open PvP, or not to have open PvP.
Did I leave anyone out?
One of your favorite targets of cheap shots.
[sarcasm]....And obviously sub-human because they didn't enjoy ONE aspect of a game that you and a few others think is/was the most important part of the game. Yep yep - obviously a bunch of idiots.
[/sarcasm]
Hypocrisy? That's one of those things you've been screaming about the most loudly in the classic server threads - controls on PK's, because ultimately, their actions led to what ruined the game for you.
And your own words have indicated that it wouldn't bother you in the least if a classic server caused the closing of what makes those people happy.
And these are the two groups that confuse me the most - if McDonalds consistently served me cruddy burgers, I'd stop buying there. If Kroger/Safeway/Food Lion/Harris Teeter were to consistently sell me crappy produce, or milk that was constantly tainted, I'd stop spending my money there.
Paying a bill for 8 plus years for something you don't like doesn't make you a hero. In the interest of not getting a warning for personal attacks, I won't say what (IMO) it makes someone, but it isn't intelligent.
Yeah, you did - those of us that play in just about any manner we choose, and while we may not be (and probably aren't) completely satisfied with the way things are, we aren't stupid enough to believe that a return to a time that nearly destroyed this game is the solution now - there are simply too many examples of other games that have come AND GONE since then to prove otherwise.
Oh, and one other group - those that think they are qualified to generalize where people fall into groupings, without knowing jack nor crap about any of them, beyond saying they fear PvP... I know at least one person in that group.
How's the Kool-Aid? Oh Yeah?
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
I would say this falls into the following:
You and I disagree on the issue of open PvP. That is no secret. However, I think on many other issues, we agree. Somehow, I think you have associated the Tram/Fel issue with some kind of personal attack on your manhood or something. That's not true. We just want two different things.
You claim I do not "get it"...so help me to understand it. I have started a new thread specifically for that purpose. So take the chip off your shoulder, and just discuss the issue. In my eyes, there is no right or wrong here. I am trying really hard to understand players that have a strong dislike of PvP. It doesn't mean that I have any solution to offer them, or that I necessarily agree, but it does mean that perhaps if I can gain a better understanding of that mindset, that I can discuss things in a more constructive way with people that feel that way.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
No need to frown.
I have respect for Siege players. I think the community there is stronger than on any other shard, even if it is smaller.
I think that by default, Siege players have better "buy in" (drank the Kool-Aid) than any of the other shards, because they knew that the shard was more challenging, but played their anyway.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
I don't speak for anyone besides myself...but I do respect the community that Siege players have built.
Perhaps the term 'drank the Kool-Aid' was a poor choice of words. 'Bought into the Siege community' might have been better.
Either way, you also know my stance on the matter...I have no desire to see Siege shut down, despite the fact that some people might incorrectly assign that motivation to me. I just believe that the players, as a whole, deserve to be able to make the choice to play current or classic UO.
You want understanding? Let me see if I can shed some light on parts of the topic you seem to be unaware of.
1) Not everyone that plays MMO's does so to reach the top of the food chain, as it were.
Some just play for something as simple as to have access to an avatar based chat program. I've known many like that over the years - even when there was no Trammel. Folks that were in the military, and found that it was cheaper to communicate in UO than it was to pay international phone costs. Folks in college. Families separated by a continents worth of land. Something as simple as a wife playing to spend time with her husband in his hobby (or vice-versa).
2) Not everyone that plays MMO's are physically capable of PvP.
I've had 3 carpal tunnel operations, and have arthritis in the right hand. I know someone here locally that plays, and has played, since day one - other than the 18 months he was in Iraq, and the 9 months he was in re-hab, learning to use the hook he has to have now since he had his left hand blown off just below the elbow.
3) Some people just don't like PvP - for whatever their reason may be.
And for those that want to spout off that they should go play somewhere else, they shouldn't have to.
WoW is like playing some bad Japanimation 3DO game. EQ is nothing but a grind - if you're not in a top raiding guild, too many things are virtually impossible to accomplish, with a group of friends or otherwise. EQ2 is a fail of 1. Vanguard requires a system that's out of reach for many, and is actually fairly complicated for even the experienced MMO player. The majority of the remaining MMOFRPG's are pretty much PvP oriented, or just aren't user friendly.
-----
PvP is a PART of the game - it isn't all there is to the game, nor should it be the most important part of the game. Those that do not want to participate should not be forced to (in the case of the Ricardo event - I don't care to discuss this thoroughly beaten to death topic any further - the Devs made a mistake here.) or, if the dream/fantasies of some here come true, if UO were to completely revert to a *classic* state.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
kelmo
Old and in the way
Professional
Alumni
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Dread Lord
It was defiantly a poor choice of words in my opinion. Some on Siege might go for a "classic" shard. Likely the same percentage as any other shard. Just guessing.
If you have never really played and committed to Siege, don't say you understand. We are a proud folk.
If you have never really played and committed to Siege, don't say you understand. We are a proud folk.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
Which is what I was essentially saying, even if I didn't do it the right way.
Morgana,
This was an extremely cheap shot. Your attitude seems to be that if you can't convince people with valid and logical argument to support your idea of a classic shard, that you resort to these cheap shots.
Got it.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
You are right, that was a cheap shot...but I don't see any valid or logical arguments in this post:
First of all, I think that anyone saying that creating a Classic Shard is a "waste of resources" is essentially saying "your money and patronage don't matter as much as mine does". I find that offensive...and so do others.
Secondly, I think that claiming that "no one is going to play a classic shard" is a complete and utter lie. Poll results, and the populations of free shards, show beyond all doubt that there is an interest.
Third, telling someone that if they want something added to the game, a game that they have paid for and supported for 13 years to "just quit and make your own shard" is beyond insulting.
And finally, saying that anyone that wants a Classic Shard "wants to grief people and act like 14 year olds" is equally offensive, and a cheap shot.
So if you are going to complain about someone taking cheap shots, it might be better to find out why that person is taking cheap shots in the first place.
I am sick and tired of the double standard shown here. I posted that the EC was a waste of resources, and I got an infraction for it...yet this poster, not once...but TWICE, called a Classic Shard a waste of resources, and it is all peachy keen?
And then someone wants to complain about me taking "cheap shots"???
Un-fraking-believable. rolleyes:
NOW
http://vboards.stratics.com/showpost.php?p=1651623&postcount=496
BEFORE
http://vboards.stratics.com/showpost.php?p=1651623&postcount=496
So the master plan to make Siege a 2nd Classic shard has now changed? Kool-Aid?
Soooooooo. Someone takes a cheap shot, you reply with a cheap shot? And then the thread gets locked and people can complain about that. Sounds like a plan to me.
The best tactic to take when someone makes a poor argument along with cheap shots is to counter them with logic. Taking yourself down to their level ruins your argument, loses you allies (If you remember, I was initially against a classic shard, but you had persuaded me to change my mind. Unfortunately, some of the behavior on these boards is making me think again about how a classic shard would be played, and how it owuld survive), and is a net loss for your point of view.
That being said, I think you would agree that, at least initially, a classic shard would have to pull resources away from the current ruleset. EA/Mythic is not likely to hire a bunch of new help for the classic server until it "proves" itself.
However, if a classic server works, and brings in new players and returning players, overall, it would be a net gain, and additional resources could be hired. This would be good. Good for the classic server, and good for the game as a whole.
However, what happens if the classic shard is not a success? Is the plug pulled? If the shard does not meet specific paid subscription accounts logging in each month? What would be considered the minimum?
I believe that one of the big reasons current players, satisfied (or nearly so) with the current ruleset, do not support a classic shard is that they do not want to see resources pulled away from the servers they play on.
In a perfect world, maybe.
Time has proven, again and again, that often times logic has absolutely no impact on most people's arguments. When people argue, it tends to be emotionally driven, and emotions have no rational basis.
Now were this a official debate venue, I'd agree. However, here, ad hominem attacks and other logical fallacies are the format of the day.
I do have to agree with Morgana's sentiments, though, for virtually the same reasons.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
You are probably right...and I freely admit, I let anger get the better of me.
It doesn't change the fact that what the poster said was meant as an insult. I only responded in kind. I am not one to not defend myself.
No, actually, I don't agree with that statement at all. Ultima Online is a community of players, and I think that anything the developers and producers decided to do for that community...or any part of it...should not be considered a "waste" of resources.
The reason that I posted that the EC was a "waste" of resources was to try to make a point. The majority of UO players use the 2d client, so by the thought process that calls a Classic Shard a "waste" of resources...anything that does not directly benefit the 50.01% majority of the community is by default a "waste" of resources. I don't personally subscribe to that point of view, but I will present it as evidence of hypocrisy.
This part of your post is 100% correct. The same can be said for new expansions, the new client(s), and anything else that adds a broader appeal.
Was there a minimum number of log-ins attached to the new client(s)?
Was there a minimum number of units sold attached to the new expansions?
If a Classic Shard is created, and it does not draw as many players as anticipated, then the devs have 2 options...change it so that it does draw more players, or close it down. But these are the exact same options they have for every single other thing that has been done to the game since they launched it.
And my point is that those people are being incredibly selfish. There are many of us that didn't want to see resources pulled away from things like stopping cheating to produce yet another failed client...or another landmass that will eventually end up empty.
There is no such thing as wasting resources on something that will add appeal to more players...whether it is a Classic Shard, another new Client, new music, whatever.
That's why I resorted to "cheap shots"...because I feel that the poster I was responding to "cheap shotted" me in the first place.
Re:
@Morgana LeFay
Yet another text-brick follows, and at points it may somewhat go off-topic on the grounds that this thread almost begged me to. It's been an interesting discussion so far. So anyway, if you will, bear with me;
I am not a Trammel player. However I did not leave when Trammel was introduced. I am not content, I feel that cheating along with certain game mechanics do need to be changed. I have been playing Ultima Online since it was out of Beta. I play solely for the PVP experience although as it happens with every new game I get I spent time exploring all possibilities.
I consider my self, due to all that I've experienced in terms of PVP combat in Ultima and the way I have always been playing, a true PK. I loved being hunted, I loved looting, I loved returning to my house with the key on to drop excessive loot(and getting ambushed occasionally).
People I've shared those experiences with and whose opinions I value, acknowledge me as having a true PK spirit and I feel honoured, as silly as this sounds since this is merely a game. From the moment I first entered Diablo 1's Battle.Net and managed to get a legit kill from another player I knew what I would be doing in all and any online games I would play!
I am not a Siege player and never had the required mentality for it- For the better or worse of me, I cannot say. I love challenge in fighting other players, I find it in my home shard and feel no need to move to another neither to handicap myself, which is how I see Siege. I want all that the game has to offer to me to be available readily. I see normal shards as "Free-Style" whereas Siege I consider "Hard-Core" and limited. A Classic shard would leave me just as uninterested but that's not say I would be opposed to one.
I do not believe AOS and Trammel ruined it all per se now that it has had its time to sink in, just that the whole concept was badly executed in some areas, in particular in the form of certain PVP and PVM mechanics changes or additions. The ideas behind AOS and Trammel and all these things is something I find fully acceptable.
Lastly I occasionally feel I have had enough of the particular issues I deem obstruct me from getting my money's worth but I do not blame the game itself. So whenever I have left I have always come back so far. Ultima Online is based upon a great idea and "when it works", I love it. Other games give me very small, constant doses of fun. Ultima can be "out of order" for weeks and yet one good day makes me feel fullfilled. This is the reason I come back, I have hopes that at a point in the near future Ultima will be giving me my money's worth 24/7(except server-down times ;P).. If EA/M keeps certain recent promises. Maybe I'm too much of an idealist or actually I'm being overly romantic towards this game.
I suppose then, if you feel it is necessary to use labels, you did leave plenty of categories out. We're all distinct cases.
Given I do know it's difficult to please everyone when creating polls or offering suggestions, in your ..Quest, shall I say, towards understanding fellow players, you may want to view us as unique.. Each and every one. No amount of categories will ever be enough, you don't need to be in a hurry when trying to understand other people.
Instead if you simply discuss openly with as many people as possible, you will eventually have a fair amount of knowledge about them. Perhaps then, separating the player-base in categories will also become easier and less flawed in its descriptions of those categories.
Perhaps this all doesn't sound right but I personally feel it all to be true, I never believed in the term "Average People" nor in any variation of it.
@Morgana LeFay
Yet another text-brick follows, and at points it may somewhat go off-topic on the grounds that this thread almost begged me to. It's been an interesting discussion so far. So anyway, if you will, bear with me;
I am not a Trammel player. However I did not leave when Trammel was introduced. I am not content, I feel that cheating along with certain game mechanics do need to be changed. I have been playing Ultima Online since it was out of Beta. I play solely for the PVP experience although as it happens with every new game I get I spent time exploring all possibilities.
I consider my self, due to all that I've experienced in terms of PVP combat in Ultima and the way I have always been playing, a true PK. I loved being hunted, I loved looting, I loved returning to my house with the key on to drop excessive loot(and getting ambushed occasionally).
People I've shared those experiences with and whose opinions I value, acknowledge me as having a true PK spirit and I feel honoured, as silly as this sounds since this is merely a game. From the moment I first entered Diablo 1's Battle.Net and managed to get a legit kill from another player I knew what I would be doing in all and any online games I would play!
I am not a Siege player and never had the required mentality for it- For the better or worse of me, I cannot say. I love challenge in fighting other players, I find it in my home shard and feel no need to move to another neither to handicap myself, which is how I see Siege. I want all that the game has to offer to me to be available readily. I see normal shards as "Free-Style" whereas Siege I consider "Hard-Core" and limited. A Classic shard would leave me just as uninterested but that's not say I would be opposed to one.
I do not believe AOS and Trammel ruined it all per se now that it has had its time to sink in, just that the whole concept was badly executed in some areas, in particular in the form of certain PVP and PVM mechanics changes or additions. The ideas behind AOS and Trammel and all these things is something I find fully acceptable.
Lastly I occasionally feel I have had enough of the particular issues I deem obstruct me from getting my money's worth but I do not blame the game itself. So whenever I have left I have always come back so far. Ultima Online is based upon a great idea and "when it works", I love it. Other games give me very small, constant doses of fun. Ultima can be "out of order" for weeks and yet one good day makes me feel fullfilled. This is the reason I come back, I have hopes that at a point in the near future Ultima will be giving me my money's worth 24/7(except server-down times ;P).. If EA/M keeps certain recent promises. Maybe I'm too much of an idealist or actually I'm being overly romantic towards this game.
I suppose then, if you feel it is necessary to use labels, you did leave plenty of categories out. We're all distinct cases.
Given I do know it's difficult to please everyone when creating polls or offering suggestions, in your ..Quest, shall I say, towards understanding fellow players, you may want to view us as unique.. Each and every one. No amount of categories will ever be enough, you don't need to be in a hurry when trying to understand other people.
Instead if you simply discuss openly with as many people as possible, you will eventually have a fair amount of knowledge about them. Perhaps then, separating the player-base in categories will also become easier and less flawed in its descriptions of those categories.
Perhaps this all doesn't sound right but I personally feel it all to be true, I never believed in the term "Average People" nor in any variation of it.
M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
I understand your points S!ckLoveR, and when I posted those 5 categories, it actually got me thinking about what exactly the playerbase does think, and feel, and what drives them to do the things they do, and what causes aversion to things they don't do.
When I said "all true PKs" left the game...I suppose that is somewhat inaccurate because you still have them on Siege/Mugen, but on prodo shards, a true PK is a thing of the past. Not because the people that are playing the characters want it to be, but because the game itself was changed so that there can no longer be a truly unwilling victim. To be "PK'ed" now requires a certain degree (a large degree) of consent. When a player crosses into Fel, they are essentially hanging a sign above their character that says "I wish to fight someone". Maybe that's not fair, maybe that's not how it was intended, but that is the end result of it.
Certainly not everyone falls into the categories I created, but I think they do a good job of representing the various, and common, stand points of current UO players that I have conversed with, or exchanged posts with here on Stratics and elsewhere.
There will always be people that fall outside of norms, that's why I try to never make statements like "all of the players want _____ " or "no one will want ______ ". Those kinds of statements, almost always, are inaccurate.
When I said "all true PKs" left the game...I suppose that is somewhat inaccurate because you still have them on Siege/Mugen, but on prodo shards, a true PK is a thing of the past. Not because the people that are playing the characters want it to be, but because the game itself was changed so that there can no longer be a truly unwilling victim. To be "PK'ed" now requires a certain degree (a large degree) of consent. When a player crosses into Fel, they are essentially hanging a sign above their character that says "I wish to fight someone". Maybe that's not fair, maybe that's not how it was intended, but that is the end result of it.
Certainly not everyone falls into the categories I created, but I think they do a good job of representing the various, and common, stand points of current UO players that I have conversed with, or exchanged posts with here on Stratics and elsewhere.
There will always be people that fall outside of norms, that's why I try to never make statements like "all of the players want _____ " or "no one will want ______ ". Those kinds of statements, almost always, are inaccurate.
True. This is not an offcial debate venue, however, i think for the most part, you will never a lot of the people on these boards. They argue, often with no logic, with vast errors and/or assumptions, provide no evidence to backup their claims, etc.
Therefore, arguing with these people is useless.
Morgana, the targets of your arguements should be people who can think objectively regarding the subject. To these people, "cheap shots", illogical arguements, statements without evidence, etc. will not work, and may make them "tune out" some valid points you are making. I think you should try very hard to stay on this side of arguing your points regarding the classic shard. Doing so, you will find much better success.
Keep on point and keep debating
LordDrago said:That being said, I think you would agree that, at least initially, a classic shard would have to pull resources away from the current ruleset. EA/Mythic is not likely to hire a bunch of new help for the classic server until it "proves" itself.
Please note, i did not say that dev time spent working on a classic shard was a waste. Never had, and never will (unless the devs do something foolish like release it and drop it without giving it a better than decent chance of surviving).Morgana LeFay (PoV); [B said:
My point was that EA/Mythic will not hire anyone new to create a classic shard. I just do not believe that they will make that kind of leap.
That being said, if there are X number of hours EA/Mythic spends working on the current shards and their rulesets, events, fixes, etc. In all probability, at least some of the development hours spent on the classic shard will have to come from development time that would have been allocated to the current shards. Thus, the developer time allocated to the current shards/rulesets would be X-Y (X being the original amount of dev time spent on current shards/rulesets and Y being the amount of these developers time spent working on the classic shard)
Perhaps, after the classic shard "proves" itself viable to EA/Mythic, they would hire additional personnel so that the current ruleset shards would have their same X amount of dev time, and the classic shard would have the appropriate level of support as well.
Let's face it. We are all "selfish" . Some of us because we want a classic shard, some of us because we don't want to lose any dev time to the current ruleset shards, some of us because we have A and B and C issues with UO that we want the devs to allocate their time to (PvP, PvM, Roleplay, EM capabilities, events, bugs, fixes, some really great ideas, some not so great ideas, etc.
And please don't get upset because I used the word selfish. i know you will say that it is not selfish to want a classic shard, that it is fair because you and others pay your fees, and thus should get something you want for your money. however, if every UO player has "equal say and claim" to dev time, then each dev would be able to allocate about 1 minute per day (ok, might not be that short a time, but I don't know how many players vs. devs there are) to each of us, and nothing would get done.
PS: just so you understand, there is nothing wrong with being selfish. We all are for what we feel are important aspects of UO.
OK peeps, back to our regularly scheduled debate.
C
Connor_Graham
Guest
*shakes head*
Only if you take your chip off first.
