The Accurate Classic Server Poll

[Longest Journey]

Given either the bias or ineptitude of the previous classic server polls, heres one that makes sense.

 

[Warsong of LS]

Except you left out the Age of Shadows

 

[Longest Journey]

Except you left out the Age of Shadows

Funny....

 

[Kiminality]

Maybe we should have a poll to decide which classic server poll's the best

 

[BajaElladan]

except in your bias, you left off "None of the Above!"

 

[Farsight]

My answer: Polls are stupid.

 

[Taylor]

Maybe we should have a poll to decide which classic server poll's the best

 

[Schuyler Bain]

Maybe we should have a poll to decide which classic server poll's the best

 

[Vexxed]

Classic Server = Waste of time & resources for a smaller % of player base.


I'm a 150+ month account & played through all the "Classics" etc.. & I can honestly say that without the current diversity in the game you'd quickly get borred.. In the days of Naked mages & halberds etc you only had to get a stockpike of Regs / GM armor / Vanqs / or Tribal spears and you were set.... Imagine if that was all that was available ??? sounds fun eh? lol. Actually that's just a PvP perspective... if your not in FEL so much then imagine non-customizable houses or whatever else those that don't PvP do with their time...

Anyway..

 

[Viper09]

Maybe we should have a poll to decide which classic server poll's the best

Nominated for best reply of the year

 

[MissEcho]

Without the option of

"I do NOT want a classic shard"

then NONE of the polls have been accurate.

That is the only option I would vote for.

 

[G.v.P]

Maybe we should have a poll to decide which classic server poll's the best

ROFL yes! DO this.

Seriously, what was wrong with the last poll? Did it get locked? lol

 

[Evlar]

...or one of the moderators could simply merge the repeat "classic" shard threads into one. As a mod on the "official" forum for a popular football *cough* soccer game (for those across the pond ), that's what I usually do with the tiresome repeated threads.

Although I'm in favour of the concept of a "classic" shard, I would think those in favour would prefer to have one location for such discussion to take place, surely?

 

[Heartseeker]

Given either the bias or ineptitude of the previous classic server polls, heres one that makes sense.

You can't ask for a Classic Shard and include Trammel.

Doesn't make any sense.

The idea is to bring people together to the original world.

Trammel shattered the world in two.

Besides, most Stratics posters are addicted to their pixel crack of items; and won't play the Classic version.

: Miss Echo you don't have to play. You can stick to your Shard of half a dozen players.

 

[Kiminality]

Miss Echo you don't have to play.

The same would technically go for anyone that disagrees with your ideas of what a Classic Shard should be.
A poll needs to take all opinions into account, if it's going to attamept to be representative. So discounting the views of people who don't want one would create an unrepresentative cross-section, ultimately ignoring the fact that some mightn't want one.
If the Classic Shard ended up with Trammel, you wouldn't like it, but "you don't have to play".

Personally, I'm of the opinion that it would be wasting resources on entertaining the nostalgia of old players, and the curiosity of current ones.
There's no solid evidence that a subscription-based classic shard would have lasting appeal in the current MMO climate, and some pretty persuasive evidence that niche rulesets aren't exactly popular.
So, yeah, it's an interesting idea. But, I'd rather the devs put 10 minutes into some interesting content that I mightn't ever see, than the weeks that would go into the flash-in-the-pan Classic Shard.

Disagreeing with a Classic Shard at all is hardly different than disagreeing with the era people are proposing, ultimately.

 

[Widow Maker]

The classic shard that everyone craves for is simple: Pre Pub 16.

No more...no less.

 

[Heartseeker]

Miss Echo you don't have to play.

The same would technically go for anyone that disagrees with your ideas of what a Classic Shard should be.
A poll needs to take all opinions into account, if it's going to attamept to be representative. So discounting the views of people who don't want one would create an unrepresentative cross-section, ultimately ignoring the fact that some mightn't want one.
If the Classic Shard ended up with Trammel, you wouldn't like it, but "you don't have to play".

Personally, I'm of the opinion that it would be wasting resources on entertaining the nostalgia of old players, and the curiosity of current ones.
There's no solid evidence that a subscription-based classic shard would have lasting appeal in the current MMO climate, and some pretty persuasive evidence that niche rulesets aren't exactly popular.
So, yeah, it's an interesting idea. But, I'd rather the devs put 10 minutes into some interesting content that I mightn't ever see, than the weeks that would go into the flash-in-the-pan Classic Shard.

Disagreeing with a Classic Shard at all is hardly different than disagreeing with the era people are proposing, ultimately.

I don't think it is any of your business what the devs do.

As far as wasting resources, don't make me laugh.

I also play on a free shard that is maintained by one person in their spare time.

As far as this idea goes, I say stay out of it since it doesn't affect you.

I don't spam the boards like the rest of you here everytime I don't like a idea.

This game has nothing but wasted resources on stupid things like stuffies and such holiday crap.

Some people would like the game to have a working economy and some excitement again.

Remember that this game was played adults who were looking for adventure, not just some bored people that like decorating and bank sitting.

This game has turned in a Cosmo meets the Simms.

 

[Speedy Orkit]

T2A was my favorite....but I don't see this ever happening without Tram coming along with it, so I voted for that. I truly believe if this happened, EA would make money from it.

 

[Heartseeker]

T2A was my favorite....but I don't see this ever happening without Tram coming along with it, so I voted for that. I truly believe if this happened, EA would make money from it.

No point.

There is plenty of Tram Shards now.

A Classic is just that, no Tram.

One Shard minus Tram is not to bad.

Let adults have a Shard too.

Oh, and calling it Classic sounds to much like a Coke ad.

From now on let's just call it UO.

While present UO is UO lite.

 

[AesSedai]

Miss Echo you don't have to play.

The same would technically go for anyone that disagrees with your ideas of what a Classic Shard should be.
A poll needs to take all opinions into account, if it's going to attamept to be representative. So discounting the views of people who don't want one would create an unrepresentative cross-section, ultimately ignoring the fact that some mightn't want one.
If the Classic Shard ended up with Trammel, you wouldn't like it, but "you don't have to play".

Personally, I'm of the opinion that it would be wasting resources on entertaining the nostalgia of old players, and the curiosity of current ones.
There's no solid evidence that a subscription-based classic shard would have lasting appeal in the current MMO climate, and some pretty persuasive evidence that niche rulesets aren't exactly popular.
So, yeah, it's an interesting idea. But, I'd rather the devs put 10 minutes into some interesting content that I mightn't ever see, than the weeks that would go into the flash-in-the-pan Classic Shard.

Disagreeing with a Classic Shard at all is hardly different than disagreeing with the era people are proposing, ultimately.

I don't think it is any of your business what the devs do.

As far as wasting resources, don't make me laugh.

I also play on a free shard that is maintained by one person in their spare time.

As far as this idea goes I say stay out of it since it doesn't affect you.

I don't spam the boards like the rest of you here everytime I don't like a idea.

This game has nothing but wasted resources on stupid things like stuffies and such holiday crap.

Some people would like the game to have a working economy and some excitement again.

Remember that this game was played adults who were looking for adventure, not just some bored people that like decorating and bank sitting.

- And you said, "As far as wasting resources, don't make me laugh."
Please *pause for the uber dramas*, I've laughed too much already

As far as this idea goes I say stay out of it since it doesn't affect you.

- Oops, your shallow threats and misconceptions have made me laugh, again.

- Please do not try to bully; for the reality is.. more realistic
So pls 4 2 njoy 2 ! happy yay

 

[Heartseeker]

- And you said, "As far as wasting resources, don't make me laugh."
Please *pause for the uber dramas*, I've laughed too much already

- Oops, your shallow threats and misconceptions have made me laugh, again.

- Please do not try to bully; for the reality is.. more realistic
So pls 4 2 njoy 2 ! happy yay

You're just a Drama Queen aren't you.

Something that doesn't affect you at all, but can't resist to chime in.

There was no threats, or intention of them.

Read into it what you want.

I was just stating facts to all the paranoia going on these boards about wasted resources.

You can do your homework on this yourself.

Again this is for a Shard that one person or two can maintain.

And considering how much resources have been wasted on new Clients that are left unfinished; I would imo say that this is little in the way of that.

 

[AesSedai]

- My apologies for I would like to preempt any further dialogue by suggesting something an advocate of this thread once said:

Do you enjoy making stupid posts?

- I hope the originator of this question might consider his own statements.

(I have noticed a friendly seeker leering at my post from the moment I replied; I apologize for interjecting but sometimes.. reality must be checked; and I hope to keep everything betwixt all of us peaceful)

Pls consider the resources necessary to attempt to and continue to make something like this work, within the red tape that EA necessitates & also within the margins that you deem necessary in order to make such a venture succeed. Pls question [all] statements. And since I'm sure you have already; please reconsider all statements & make what -IS- better, rather than keep yearning for what -WAS- and cannot be, ever again (unless all you really want is a mere shadow of what was... for at times I too wish for the past, but honestly that can never be redone.. in all reality).

 

[Kiminality]

You can call them facts all you want, but it doesn't change what they are - opinions and relative observations.

So, a freeshard is run by one person.
That one person is accountable to the players, which counts for little.
The EA devs are accountable to paying customers, and a whole lot of other people, up to stockholders. They can't just say "Oh well" if they screw something up.
So, basically, there's a world of difference between EA running a classic shard, and a freeshard.
Far from paranoia, belief that a classic shard won't impact development elsewhere is plain delusion.

Lastly, all this crap about "played by adults" and "UO lite"... You could at least try to look like you're not trolling.

 

[Heartseeker]

You can call them facts all you want, but it doesn't change what they are - opinions and relative observations.

So, a freeshard is run by one person.
That one person is accountable to the players, which counts for little.
The EA devs are accountable to paying customers, and a whole lot of other people, up to stockholders. They can't just say "Oh well" if they screw something up.
So, basically, there's a world of difference between EA running a classic shard, and a freeshard.
Far from paranoia, belief that a classic shard won't impact development elsewhere is plain delusion.

Lastly, all this crap about "played by adults" and "UO lite"... You could at least try to look like you're not trolling.

Give me a break.

EA has paying customers....lol

I see quite clearly the product they put out.

Let's take KR for an example.

They dropped it and replaced it with the EC.

EC was worked on for like 2 years and this is the best they can come up with?

It has more bugs than KR and runs worse in a lot cases; even with graphics turned way down.

I actually play other Shards not only EA's so please don't tell me what it is like or not,unless you do the same.

I am not trolling this debate, but supporting alternate playing styles while you only support this game as is.... A dysfunctional item based game with no future, that has to have new pixels monthly or the player base on Stratics has a fit.

And Aes Sedai, please don't talk down to people; you sound a lot like Fayled Dreams when you do that.

ps. I didn't start this thread, while the other thread was ridiculous judging by other comments.

 

[Konge]

Give me a break.

EA has paying customers....lol

I see quite clearly the product they put out.

Let's take KR for an example.

They dropped it and replaced it with the EC.

EC was worked on for like 2 years and this is the best they can come up with?

It has more bugs than KR and runs worse in a lot cases; even with graphics turned way down.

I actually play other Shards not only EA's so please don't tell me what it is like or not,unless you do the same.

I am not trolling this debate, but supporting alternate playing styles while you only support this game as is.... A dysfunctional item based game with no future, that has to have new pixels monthly or the player base on Stratics has a fit.

And Aes Sedai, please don't talk down to people; you sound a lot like Fayled Dreams when you do that.

ps. I didn't start this thread, while the other thread was ridiculous judging by other comments.

EA isn't exactly known for being nice about giving developers time.

That being said, one person running a shard has more freedom than Devs who get paid to do what the boss man says. If the boss is unrealistic with programing deadlines, rushed products are pushed out, they're sub-par and not finished. Hence KR.

The one person doesn't have a boss breathing down their neck saying they have to do something in a week.

With the current state of UO, a classic shard WOULD take a lot of resources to make. For one, they need to find one that most of the "Classic shard FTW" player base wants as well as give an incentive for you to pay to play it when there are countless free ones up. They then have to remove patches, expansions, ect or rebuild it from the ground up, despite the fact none of the devs are from the original team, if I'm not mistaken.

Going back to Kiminality's point on what you said to Lady Echo,

If I asked for a full Tram shard, under your own words, you couldn't say no to it because you don't have to play it? Also, you do realize that your idea of a classic shard isn't everyone's idea, yes? You're not correct because you say you are. Some people may like a Trammel aspect to it, but just want less itemization. Why do you even want an EA classic shard since you already admitted you play a Free Shard version? Do you some how think it's going to bring UO back to an insane amount of subscribers? Or just become a niche shard like Siege where you go on Uhall all day saying "Classic shard doesn't have that!
."

In summary, you only want a classic shard for nastalgia, which you already get somewhere else. So what's the point in wasting resources getting what you already have for free?

 

[Unsatisfied]

Again theres too many of these bloody polls/discussions on the classic shard, I want it im all for it but keep it to one post... Its freaking rediculous trying to keep up with 5 different pages arguing the same goddamn topics.

 

[Petra Fyde]

I could try merging them, but I'm not sure what would happen to the options. Or I could lock two. But which two? If I hear from the OPs of the polls saying 'you can lock mine' I'll do that.

 

[Kiminality]

Give me a break.

EA has paying customers....lol

I see quite clearly the product they put out.

Let's take KR for an example.

They dropped it and replaced it with the EC.

EC was worked on for like 2 years and this is the best they can come up with?

It has more bugs than KR and runs worse in a lot cases; even with graphics turned way down.

I actually play other Shards not only EA's so please don't tell me what it is like or not,unless you do the same.

I am not trolling this debate, but supporting alternate playing styles while you only support this game as is.... A dysfunctional item based game with no future, that has to have new pixels monthly or the player base on Stratics has a fit.

I was going to pretend I didn't see any of your answers coming, but I went to sleep secure in the knowledge that santa would come.
And lo! I wake up to find some perfectly predictable stockings at the foot of my bed.

I see you falling into two blunders:
1.) The assumption that the way you play the game is the best way. This is a relative point, and all this "UO lite" and "no future" stuff is just twaddle. The classic shard style of play was marginalised years ago, so it there were no future to the direction the game has taken, it wouldn't be here now.
2.) The assumption that, just because you play a free-shard, you somehow have a profound understanding that is clearly right, while all others are wrong or worse.
Ultimately, you could boil it down to Hubris.

 

[Longest Journey]

Without the option of

"I do NOT want a classic shard"

then NONE of the polls have been accurate.

That is the only option I would vote for.

The polls do not apply to those who do not wish to play a classic server. If you have no interest in it, dont bother even looking at the thread.

 

[Kiminality]

The polls do not apply to those who do not wish to play a classic server. If you have no interest in it, dont bother even looking at the thread.

So, you made your poll biased in favour of classic shard.

Bring on the fourth poll!

 

[Heartseeker]

The polls do not apply to those who do not wish to play a classic server. If you have no interest in it, dont bother even looking at the thread.

So, you made your poll biased in favour of classic shard.

Bring on the fourth poll!

Do you actually read the posts and the "polls"?

He didn't make a biased poll.

The poll actually asks which era of Classic do you prefer.

But you seem to be more concerned with making smart ass comments then actually giving good intel.

 

[Taylor]

Do you actually read the posts and the "polls"?

He didn't make a biased poll.

The poll actually asks which era of Classic do you prefer.

But you seem to be more concerned with making smart ass comments then actually giving good intel.

| These are jokes. You see, they aren't really true.
V

So, you made your poll biased in favour of classic shard.

Bring on the fourth poll!

 

[Longest Journey]

The same would technically go for anyone that disagrees with your ideas of what a Classic Shard should be.
A poll needs to take all opinions into account, if it's going to attamept to be representative. So discounting the views of people who don't want one would create an unrepresentative cross-section, ultimately ignoring the fact that some mightn't want one.
If the Classic Shard ended up with Trammel, you wouldn't like it, but "you don't have to play".

The polls arent made for the opinions of those who dont want a classic server. Thats why there is no option for "I dont want a classic server". A classic server isnt being made for those players, therefore, their views are moot to the discussion. If you dont want a classic server and have no intention on playing one, why would you even bother with the discussion in the first place?

Another reason I made this poll is that many anti-classic server advocates keep saying that there can be no majority consensus amongst pro-classic server advocates on what era the classic server(s) should take place in. Seeing as how a classic server is beind made for those who are truly interested in a classic server, a poll with options such as this would give the best representation without the added confustion of the OP's personal tastes, as was demonstrated in the classic server poll listed in the link below:

New Classic Server Poll

The poll I made is based purely on what eras were available before the massive game changes that came with AOS. No hybrid servers, no mixing of eras.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that it would be wasting resources on entertaining the nostalgia of old players, and the curiosity of current ones.

It would only be a waste of resources if the classic server(s) would somehow end up causing players to quit from the current player base. Since that is not a risk, no time would be wasted.

If the server succeeds, then the game will gain more subscriptions and UO will be the better for it.

If the server fails, then nothing is truly lost as the post AOS servers will still be there for pre-existing playerbase to continue with and things will stay they way they have been for the past 8 years.

There's no solid evidence that a subscription-based classic shard would have lasting appeal in the current MMO climate, and some pretty persuasive evidence that niche rulesets aren't exactly popular.

You must first provide an example of a niche game that has been properly put together.

Darkfail is not a good example. The game was released not even a quarter of the way finished and had little to do other than fight with other players. The PvM was and still is horribly incomplete, the crafting was and still is shoddily done, they offered little to no content outside of PvPing, and they are going through new developers for Darkfall like paper cups at a water cooler. It was made by a horribly inexperienced company with no true grasp on MMOs. Darkfall would have failed even if it followed the mainstream WoW model due to shear developer incompetance.

So, yeah, it's an interesting idea. But, I'd rather the devs put 10 minutes into some interesting content that I mightn't ever see, than the weeks that would go into the flash-in-the-pan Classic Shard.

So, youd rather them waste time on ideas that will never come to fruition rather than take a shot on a no risk venture such as a classic server? I find your view disappointing and sad.

For them to spend the companies time and money "theorizing" on content shows a lack of confidence on the developers part. It would be a sign of not only skill, but belief in their talents and game if they were to take a shot with classic servers.

Disagreeing with a Classic Shard at all is hardly different than disagreeing with the era people are proposing, ultimately.

The two are different.

Debating whether or they should make a classic server is pointless, because its a no risk venture with its worst case scenario being things stay the same as they have been

Debating on what era a classic server should take place in lays to rest the accusations that there can be no majority consensus on the most desired era.

And, by looking at this poll, its clear that a consensus can be reached among those who desire a classic server.

 

[the 4th man]

My answer: Polls are stupid.

 

[Longest Journey]

So, you made your poll biased in favour of classic shard.

Bring on the fourth poll!

Your attitude and comment are both ignorant and counter productive. If you have nothing of relevance to say, please do no polute the poll with your negativity and overall beligerance.

This poll is for those who want and have an active interest in a classic shard and was made to show a consensus could be reached among those who desire one as to what era the shard should take place in. If you have no interest in a classic server, you have no point in posting in this thread.

With you, your interests seem to be nothing more than antagonistic cheap shots and trolling.

 

[Konge]

The polls arent made for the opinions of those who dont want a classic server. Thats why there is no option for "I dont want a classic server". A classic server isnt being made for those players, therefore, their views are moot to the discussion. If you dont want a classic server and have no intention on playing one, why would you even bother with the discussion in the first place?

Another reason I made this poll is that many anti-classic server advocates keep saying that there can be no majority consensus amongst pro-classic server advocates on what era the classic server(s) should take place in. Seeing as how a classic server is beind made for those who are truly interested in a classic server, a poll with options such as this would give the best representation without the added confustion of the OP's personal tastes, as was demonstrated in the classic server poll listed in the link below:

New Classic Server Poll

The poll I made is based purely on what eras were available before the massive game changes that came with AOS. No hybrid servers, no mixing of eras.



It would only be a waste of resources if the classic server(s) would somehow end up causing players to quit from the current player base. Since that is not a risk, no time would be wasted.

If the server succeeds, then the game will gain more subscriptions and UO will be the better for it.

If the server fails, then nothing is truly lost as the post AOS servers will still be there for pre-existing playerbase to continue with and things will stay they way they have been for the past 8 years.



You must first provide an example of a niche game that has been properly put together.

Darkfail is not a good example. The game was released not even a quarter of the way finished and had little to do other than fight with other players. The PvM was and still is horribly incomplete, the crafting was and still is shoddily done, they offered little to no content outside of PvPing, and they are going through new developers for Darkfall like paper cups at a water cooler. It was made by a horribly inexperienced company with no true grasp on MMOs. Darkfall would have failed even if it followed the mainstream WoW model due to shear developer incompetance.



So, youd rather them waste time on ideas that will never come to fruition rather than take a shot on a no risk venture such as a classic server? I find your view disappointing and sad.

For them to spend the companies time and money "theorizing" on content shows a lack of confidence on the developers part. It would be a sign of not only skill, but belief in their talents and game if they were to take a shot with classic servers.



The two are different.

Debating whether or they should make a classic server is pointless, because its a no risk venture with its worst case scenario being things stay the same as they have been

Debating on what era a classic server should take place in lays to rest the accusations that there can be no majority consensus on the most desired era.

And, by looking at this poll, its clear that a consensus can be reached among those who desire a classic server.

Le sigh.

Cal mentioned the idea came up, not that they were actually going to do it. You assume they are, many things have been mentioned and not happened, UO2, UOX.

What you don't understand is your poll is somewhat biased. Without any "I don't want a classic server" it implies that, unless the devs take the time to read posts within it, the majority want it, while that is not the case.

And as I've stated before, why want a classic shard you pay for when there are already free options? What do you think and EA branded version will accomplish? Not more people, maybe in the short term, but after the "Ooo shiney" people who don't like it will leave. Why have Dev time wasted in the pursuit of something you can already attain through a download and a google search?

 

[Longest Journey]

Le sigh.

Cal mentioned the idea came up, not that they were actually going to do it. You assume they are, many things have been mentioned and not happened, UO2, UOX.

Those were entirely different games that had to be built from the ground up. A classic server would not require the amount of time or money as a whole new game would.

What you don't understand is your poll is somewhat biased. Without any "I don't want a classic server" it implies that, unless the devs take the time to read posts within it, the majority want it, while that is not the case.

The majority of the playerbase arent even playing in reality. Most of them are asian gold farmer accounts. Those who are left never even played before AOS, so they dont really know what a classic server would be about.

Secondly, classic servers have been what old players have been begging for since Trammel was released. If you'll recall, UO had a great many players back then. If they were to make a classic server and manage to bring back even a moderate number of those players, it would mean more subs for the game, which in the long run is good for everyone.

And as I've stated before, why want a classic shard you pay for when there are already free options? What do you think and EA branded version will accomplish? Not more people, maybe in the short term, but after the "Ooo shiney" people who don't like it will leave. Why have Dev time wasted in the pursuit of something you can already attain through a download and a google search?

For several reasons:

#1.) Free shards are not secure. They are hacker traps for them to get into your account and computer.

#2.) Free shards are innacurate. They provide the experience the person who made the shard wanted and often include elements from AOS.

#3.) They are poorly ran and maintained. They are run by one or two people who do server maintainence during their free time. This leaves the servers laggy and unreliable.

#4.) Those servers are dens of nepotism. The ones who run the servers pull strings for their friends and they ban anyone who they just dont like, or just for kicks.

Those are just a few examples of why free servers dont work. The only reason that anyone plays them is out of desperation for some of the old UO experience, even if it is altered. With EA production servers, there is atleast a chance of the classic servers coming out accurate.

Now, if players are desperate enough to play those half baked free shards, then they would be more than willing to come back to a properly put together production server.

 

[Taylor]

So, you made your poll biased in favour of classic shard.

Bring on the fourth poll!

Your attitude and comment are both ignorant and counter productive. If you have nothing of relevance to say, please do no polute the poll with your negativity and overall beligerance.

This poll is for those who want and have an active interest in a classic shard and was made to show a consensus could be reached among those who desire one as to what era the shard should take place in. If you have no interest in a classic server, you have no point in posting in this thread.

With you, your interests seem to be nothing more than antagonistic cheap shots and trolling.

See post #32 above.

 

[Konge]

Those were entirely different games that had to be built from the ground up. A classic server would not require the amount of time or money as a whole new game would.

The point is, it will take some time, they either remove all the patches "You" don't want, or build it from scratch. These aren't the same devs who originally built the game "you" want so it may take even more time for that.

The majority of the playerbase arent even playing in reality. Most of them are asian gold farmer accounts. Those who are left never even played before AOS, so they dont really know what a classic server would be about.

WTF? Who the hell mentioned asian gold farmers? And who said they were apart of the player base? This has nothing to do with anything unless you think everyone who votes no is an asian gold farmer which implies that you probably shouldn't even be posting on stratics in the first place.

Secondly, classic servers have been what old players have been begging for since Trammel was released. If you'll recall, UO had a great many players back then. If they were to make a classic server and manage to bring back even a moderate number of those players, it would mean more subs for the game, which in the long run is good for everyone.

This is your third point...

Yeah... until people realize why the "classic" had to go in the first place or the nastalgia runs off. That's if people want to pay a min of 120 a year to play a 12 year old game they have fond memories of that wont get new content. IF a classic shard gets new content, guess what? It's no longer a classic shard.

For several reasons:

#1.) Free shards are not secure. They are hacker traps for them to get into your account and computer.

#2.) Free shards are innacurate. They provide the experience the person who made the shard wanted and often include elements from AOS.

#3.) They are poorly ran and maintained. They are run by one or two people who do server maintainence during their free time. This leaves the servers laggy and unreliable.

#4.) Those servers are dens of nepotism. The ones who run the servers pull strings for their friends and they ban anyone who they just dont like, or just for kicks.

Have you ever even played a freeshard? I've never had laggy or unreliable servers when I did play them while back. Apparently you played one or two and assumed everyone of them was like this. Or just paranoia judging by #1...

Those are just a few examples of why free servers dont work. The only reason that anyone plays them is out of desperation for some of the old UO experience, even if it is altered. With EA production servers, there is atleast a chance of the classic servers coming out accurate.

Now, if players are desperate enough to play those half baked free shards, then they would be more than willing to come back to a properly put together production server.

They're free, doesn't mean they'll come back if you can get a "better" experience by paying. People could also play them because.

They're free.

They like the community.

They bring back fond memories.

And they're free.

See what I did there?

 

[Kiminality]

For them to spend the companies time and money "theorizing" on content shows a lack of confidence on the developers part. It would be a sign of not only skill, but belief in their talents and game if they were to take a shot with classic servers.

You're half right... It is a lack of confidence, but not in the way you imply.
If they're going to put the development time into it, they have to be sure that it would actually be a success. I'd say they're lacking your confidence in the idea, if anything, because they know a lot of the important stuff - like how much work it'd take (hint: a lot).
Looking only at the server side, all skills have to be reworked, economy systems, AI systems, the maps, new systems have to be taken out.
Regardless of whether they start from scratch, or modify their existing code, it would take a lot of development bandwidth.

Debating whether or they should make a classic server is pointless, because its a no risk venture with its worst case scenario being things stay the same as they have been

Dedicating a load of resources to something a even the people who want it can't agree on isn't even remotely risky, is it?

Your attitude and comment are both ignorant and counter productive. If you have nothing of relevance to say, please do no polute the poll with your negativity and overall beligerance.

...

With you, your interests seem to be nothing more than antagonistic cheap shots and trolling.

You said please, which gives you a little credit, but calling comments that don't agree with you ignorant just lost you that.
If you're going to try and take the high road, you actually need to walk it.

Do you actually read the posts and the "polls"?

I did, as it happens.
Sadly, I wasn't able to ignore the inconvenient points that contradict me, as you seem to be adept at doing.

But you seem to be more concerned with making smart ass comments then actually giving good intel.

Pots are black, too.

But, if you want a good reason why it won't work? Here goes:
One of the things that set the "classic" eras aside, aside from fewer items/properties, was that it wasn't necessary to have 7xGM skills.
Training skills was time-consuming, and difficult, but because of that, there wasn't such a need to run with fully trained skills.
Now, look at Siege. with the prevalence of powergaming in modern MMO culture, Siege has ROT - you can't powergame up your character in a couple of days.
What's the primary reason people don't play siege?

 

[Viper09]

I really don't see what makes this poll so unbiased when compared to the other ones...the options are practically the same.

 

[MissEcho]

The polls do not apply to those who do not wish to play a classic server. If you have no interest in it, dont bother even looking at the thread.

Firstly, your thread was titled "The Accurate Classic Server Poll". It was not titled "IF YOU WANT TO PLAY a classic shard then this is the Accurate Classic Server Poll"

However, despite the above

Given either the bias or ineptitude of the previous classic server polls, heres one that makes sense.

your poll includes just as much bias and inteptitude you accuse others of.


To create an accurate, reliable and credible poll you need at least ONE selection to be 'OTHER' so people can respond if NONE of your preselected options are suitable for them.
I notice that you did NOT include this option, therefore bias is instantly introduced as your expectation of what constitutes a 'classic shard' is based on your predefined selections and makes no allowance for alternate options to what answers you believe are 'correct'.


By not having this option in a poll then you end up with either:

Non-Responsive Bias: where people fail to poll as there is no option that suits them. (In my case, no ones version of a 'classic shard' would be something I would play, therefore the answer to your POLL question - "Which Era would you like a classic server(s) to take place in?" would be NONE. However it could just as easily be some 'other' option of what is determined to be 'classic' that is not listed in your poll. There could be a LOT of players who think that 'classic' is anything prior to the introduction of Elves in ML or for that matter prior to the intro of 'gargoyles' with SA.)

This then creates the situation where the poll results are not a true representation of the 'target' population ie UO players who read Stratics. Thus you create a Coverage Bias, where a percentage of the population are totally excluded due to lack of a basic poll option.

or

Responsive Bias: where people respond by selecting the 'next best' option to what they would actually prefer, so in other words respondents do not reflect their true beliefs.

In both cases the poll is then inaccurate.

I really don't see what makes this poll so unbiased when compared to the other ones...the options are practically the same.

The fact that NONE of the polls on this issue contain the above option makes them all inaccurate, you are correct, this one is no more 'unbiased or accurate' than the other two.

To the OP, if you are going to belittle others by calling their efforts at poll creation bias and/or inept while claiming you have the only 'accurate' poll then at least try and be accurate in your poll creation.

 

[Heartseeker]

The polls do not apply to those who do not wish to play a classic server. If you have no interest in it, dont bother even looking at the thread.

Firstly, your thread was titled "The Accurate Classic Server Poll". It was not titled "IF YOU WANT TO PLAY a classic shard then this is the Accurate Classic Server Poll"

However, despite the above

Given either the bias or ineptitude of the previous classic server polls, heres one that makes sense.

your poll includes just as much bias and inteptitude you accuse others of.


To create an accurate, reliable and credible poll you need at least ONE selection to be 'OTHER' so people can respond if NONE of your preselected options are suitable for them.
I notice that you did NOT include this option, therefore bias is instantly introduced as your expectation of what constitutes a 'classic shard' is based on your predefined selections and makes no allowance for alternate options to what answers you believe are 'correct'.


By not having this option in a poll then you end up with either:

Non-Responsive Bias: where people fail to poll as there is no option that suits them. (In my case, no ones version of a 'classic shard' would be something I would play, therefore the answer to your POLL question - "Which Era would you like a classic server(s) to take place in?" would be NONE. However it could just as easily be some 'other' option of what is determined to be 'classic' that is not listed in your poll. There could be a LOT of players who think that 'classic' is anything prior to the introduction of Elves in ML or for that matter prior to the intro of 'gargoyles' with SA.)

This then creates the situation where the poll results are not a true representation of the 'target' population ie UO players who read Stratics. Thus you create a Coverage Bias, where a percentage of the population are totally excluded due to lack of a basic poll option.

or

Responsive Bias: where people respond by selecting the 'next best' option to what they would actually prefer, so in other words respondents do not reflect their true beliefs.

In both cases the poll is then inaccurate.

I really don't see what makes this poll so unbiased when compared to the other ones...the options are practically the same.

The fact that NONE of the polls on this issue contain the above option makes them all inaccurate, you are correct, this one is no more 'unbiased or accurate' than the other two.

To the OP, if you are going to belittle others by calling their efforts at poll creation bias and/or inept while claiming you have the only 'accurate' poll then at least try and be accurate in your poll creation.

Judging by all the mumbo jumbo you just wrote, I would have to say that you were a lawyer.

You obviously didn't play the game when it first came out to even suggest half of what you wrote there.

 

[Longest Journey]

Firstly, your thread was titled "The Accurate Classic Server Poll". It was not titled "IF YOU WANT TO PLAY a classic shard then this is the Accurate Classic Server Poll"

However, despite the above

your poll includes just as much bias and inteptitude you accuse others of.


To create an accurate, reliable and credible poll you need at least ONE selection to be 'OTHER' so people can respond if NONE of your preselected options are suitable for them.
I notice that you did NOT include this option, therefore bias is instantly introduced as your expectation of what constitutes a 'classic shard' is based on your predefined selections and makes no allowance for alternate options to what answers you believe are 'correct'.


By not having this option in a poll then you end up with either:

Non-Responsive Bias: where people fail to poll as there is no option that suits them. (In my case, no ones version of a 'classic shard' would be something I would play, therefore the answer to your POLL question - "Which Era would you like a classic server(s) to take place in?" would be NONE. However it could just as easily be some 'other' option of what is determined to be 'classic' that is not listed in your poll. There could be a LOT of players who think that 'classic' is anything prior to the introduction of Elves in ML or for that matter prior to the intro of 'gargoyles' with SA.)

This then creates the situation where the poll results are not a true representation of the 'target' population ie UO players who read Stratics. Thus you create a Coverage Bias, where a percentage of the population are totally excluded due to lack of a basic poll option.

or

Responsive Bias: where people respond by selecting the 'next best' option to what they would actually prefer, so in other words respondents do not reflect their true beliefs.

In both cases the poll is then inaccurate.



The fact that NONE of the polls on this issue contain the above option makes them all inaccurate, you are correct, this one is no more 'unbiased or accurate' than the other two.

To the OP, if you are going to belittle others by calling their efforts at poll creation bias and/or inept while claiming you have the only 'accurate' poll then at least try and be accurate in your poll creation.

The polls options include the era that can be considered classic for a classic server. Anything after AOS is not considered to be classic, as its rules are still being used.

Your posts have been nothing more than rants attempting to discredit this poll simply because it doesnt have the options YOU want to see. This poll was created to settle the debate of which era a classic server would be the most preferable to take place in.

It was NOT created for those who do not wish to have a classic server, as you have no real interest in the topic, save to down play it, belittle those who do support it, or otherwise cause trouble in those threads, much like you have done with all of your posts in this thread.

Your posts, much like all of those who oppose classic servers, have been nothing more than attempts to discredit or otherwise hinder the poll. This poll IS accurate as it is the ONLY one to have listed the actual eras that predated AOS, and thus could be the only eras considered to be even remotely classic, not malarky about hybrid servers or one persons idea of what they think a server should be like. The other polls were all over the place. This one is more focused.

No, your whole problem is that you dont like this poll because it deals with the topic of classic servers. Thats all it is. You dont like the idea and therefore will attack any and all threads that mention it.

If you have such a problem with this poll, then please feel free to stop posting in it and/or looking at it and leave those of us who desire classic servers alone.

 

[Longest Journey]

The point is, it will take some time, they either remove all the patches "You" don't want, or build it from scratch. These aren't the same devs who originally built the game "you" want so it may take even more time for that.

It will take far less time than you think. All they need to do is get their hands on a copy of the old server codes (which cant be all that hard if people who run free shards can get it), clean it up, apply necessary patches and fixes to the major bugs and glitches, which was done for them a long time ago. They just need to repeat what the original developers did to fix them. Bascially, the HARD work is done for them, all they need to do is copy and paste.

WTF? Who the hell mentioned asian gold farmers? And who said they were apart of the player base? This has nothing to do with anything unless you think everyone who votes no is an asian gold farmer which implies that you probably shouldn't even be posting on stratics in the first place.

You mentioned the majority of the UO playerbase. Remember?

What you don't understand is your poll is somewhat biased. Without any "I don't want a classic server" it implies that, unless the devs take the time to read posts within it, the majority want it, while that is not the case.

What youre saying here is that the majority of the UO playerbase doesnt want a classic server.

My point was: What playerbase? Your 70,000 asian server accounts? Thats where the gold farmers come into play.

And if by chance you were refering to the posters here on stratics, it seems you all spend more time here on the forums attacking classic server supporters than you do playing the game.

Bored much?

This is your third point...

Yeah... until people realize why the "classic" had to go in the first place or the nastalgia runs off. That's if people want to pay a min of 120 a year to play a 12 year old game they have fond memories of that wont get new content. IF a classic shard gets new content, guess what? It's no longer a classic shard.

You seem to forget, people have already played the "New" content with the AOS servers. Guess what? They quit because of it.

No, its not nostalgia. And its insulting that you and all who think like you keep down playing it as such. The people who want a classic server know what it will imply. By simply asking for a classic server people have been saying "We dont want the new crap anymore!".

You just dont get it. CLASSIC SERVER SUPPORTERS DONT WANT THE NEW STUFF!!! What part of that dont you understand?

We WANT the old ways back. We WANT the stability of the old days. We WANT to have to make our own events and wars and storylines to follow. Bascially, we are looking for the OPPOSITE of what the post AOS servers offer.

THE NEW CONTENT YOU PRAISE SO MUCH ISNT WHAT WE WANT!! WE PLAYED IT!! WE DIDNT LIKE IT!! ITS WHY SO MANY OF US QUIT!! THATS WHY WE WANT A CLASSIC SERVER THAT TOOK PLACE BEFORE ALL OF THE CHANGES!!!

How much clearer must I make things?

You anti-classic server people keep talking about our rose colored glasses? Yeah, well, you people need to take off your blinders and take out your earplugs and actually listen to what those of us who support the classic servers are saying.

Have you ever even played a freeshard? I've never had laggy or unreliable servers when I did play them while back. Apparently you played one or two and assumed everyone of them was like this. Or just paranoia judging by #1...

As a matter of fact, I did play free shards, several of them. It was either the sickening level of nepotism that drove me away, the lag, or the fact that my previous computer picked up a particularly nasty trojan virus when I downloaded the client for a free shard and it completely wrecked my hard drive.

So, no, Im not speaking from paranoia, Im speaking from experience. Free shards are no good.

They're free, doesn't mean they'll come back if you can get a "better" experience by paying. People could also play them because.

They're free.

They like the community.

They bring back fond memories.

And they're free.

See what I did there?

Yes, I see what you did.

You mentioned free twice (weak)

Insulted yourself and the current UO community.

Then fell back on that pitiful argument for nostalgia again.

Quality of game play is very important. If it wasnt, UO would have never lost a single subscription after AOS. But, oh wait, it did.

As for community, if a free shard community, one that invites every form of creaton from all over the globe, is more appealing than the current EA UO community, no wonder people left.

 

[Connor_Graham]

My point was: What playerbase? Your 70,000 asian server accounts? Thats where the gold farmers come into play.

This is incorrect. It's been stated several times that the Asian shards do not make up the majority of the UO subs. I believe once it was stated at somewhere around 25%, which would hardly be 70k accounts.

 

[Unsatisfied]

What you don't understand is your poll is somewhat biased. Without any "I don't want a classic server" it implies that, unless the devs take the time to read posts within it, the majority want it, while that is not the case.

I think what you dont understand by saying this is that a Classic shard wont really be directed at the people who are currently playing UO and voting "I dont want/care for a classic shard" A classic shards goal will be to bring back all the players that quit saying "This game has become a joke, I miss real uo" THAT is who this classic shard will be aimed at.

If they wanted to do something to impress the subscriber base they already had, they would improve what they have, not go back.