M
Morgana LeFay (PoV)
Guest
I agree...that is why I am *not* saying they are the same. I *am* saying that AoS, or something similar to it, was a natural progression after Trammel took away the challenge, the risk, of open PvP. Could AoS have been introduced without Trammel? Most likely...but I think it would have caused even more players to quit than it did. Look at Siege. I see a lot of anti-classic shard posters using Siege and its struggling population as an example of why a classic shard would fail...but it is a far better example of what the game would have been like without Trammel but with AoS.
Which has what to do with AoS?
AoS is what changed UO from "sandbox" to "theme park" ... not Trammel. Trammel just made the sandbox sterile and boring...devoid of risk.
I am fully aware that there are people out there that really liked the ease of play that Trammel brought, but really didn't like where it led ... AoS. But the fact remains, both Trammel *and* AoS were implemented into the current shards. I personally do not believe that UO would have survived very long if they had not gone "theme park" once Trammel was in place for a while. For a game to be entertaining, it has to have some element of challenge...at least a little. AoS added the challenge (so called) of farming, hoarding, and one-hit-kill monsters, which took the place of the "bully in the sandbox". For some people, that is perfectly fine...again, it is a matter of personal preference.
Personally, I didn't mind the "bully in the sandbox", because I knew how to deal with him...but I got really bored of all the theme park attractions pretty quickly, because honestly, you can put a fresh coat of paint on the tea cups, and some flames on them...and call them "the Abyss", but in the end, they're just tea cups.
