O
Old Man of UO
Guest
That was the only thing you said that made any sense. You really don't know what you are talking about, and have no clue about how businesses are run. Good luck with flipping those burgers.
-
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!
Thieving in Trammel.
- Thread starter WhityJinn
- Start date
- Watchers 7
- Status
Gotta side with this, lol.
C
copycon
Guest
Can't take being wrong very well, huh?
You say this...and in the same thread you are quite sure of the exact motivation of Richard Garriot's comment about his surprise at the Player Killing in UO.
Rly? Srsly?
The fact that Old Man of UO brings to the table about the cost of attracting and retaining customers is just that...it is a known business fact. Known. Fact.
The other...Richard Garriot's exact motivation in his statement about Player Killing in UO...is not known. Not by you...not by really anyone but Richard Garriot, and anyone who actually knew what he was thinking when he said it.
Anything other than those sources are indeed speculation, and speculation of the purest form.
So...you do not want anyone quoting actual facts that you easily dismiss and discount...yet we are to believe that YOU know precisely or very close thereto as to what was in RG's mind, and what his motivation was, when he made his statement about PKs in UO?
Uh huh. OK. Alrighty Then.
C
copycon
Guest
Okay, the previous post is all over the map. Is it so hard to write in clear, concise sentences? I guess so...
Anyways, let me try to clear something up. I think my comments to Old Man of UO are being taken far too personally.
Secondly, I made a statement towards a comment that was left earlier towards a statement from Garriott. My comment applies to public opinion, not finite numbers. I think public opinion is a much easier nut to crack than the budgetary numbers involved for building infrastructure to support a UO shard.
Anyways, let me try to clear something up. I think my comments to Old Man of UO are being taken far too personally.
In my opinion, applying vague business knowledge to a precise problem will not produce an accurate result. That may be written in a business book somewhere, but that does not make it accurate or relevant to this issue given the variables involved. That is why I suggested avoiding it, rather than trying to gauge costs. It was not meant to be taken personally, but clearly it has hit a chord for some people.
Secondly, I made a statement towards a comment that was left earlier towards a statement from Garriott. My comment applies to public opinion, not finite numbers. I think public opinion is a much easier nut to crack than the budgetary numbers involved for building infrastructure to support a UO shard.
C
canary
Guest
A few things:
a) this is a game. stop projecting.
b) a leather jacket and doc martens make you neither cool nor hardcore. It simply makes you someone who likes looking like it is still 1996. Ministry called. They would like their clothes back.
c) yes, point taken. we are all going to die. if you choose to support something you love the most, perhaps you could, you know, support something that has an impact on the world instead of a computer game involving dragons and magical fairies.
d) i'm pretty sure no one in this thread is afraid of you or your 'tough guy' *coughs* 'friends'. i'm fairly certain my cat's friends are bigger.
to sum it up, I think there are larger issues at hand with you than merely 'thieving in trammel'. but hey, that's just my opinion.
Get real! NO NO NO (sorry for the tiraid but felt it had to get a bit of drama out on this)
Look when they made the trammel ruleset and cut out the thieving of items people were shall we say so happy the whole population of fel moved!!!! (well not all but a large # left)
I thought: wow how nice, I can go to a bloody bank and not loose my stuff or watch my back to the point of paranoia about thiefs.
Yes I am Feluccian and live in fel, but I know first hand why people went to tram to begin with. The relief of going to a place where they could sit and not worry about much more then what was going on guild wise.
No you may not put thieving in tram.
Reason: You do and whats left of players will leave game the first time they get lifted of a hard earned item! No Joke. I have seen it over the years. Change one thing the players depend on and players leave. Oh I know not much is stealable in your bag but your wrong alot you see cant be insured... and the idiots out there who like ot make hell for others to play the jerk will steal sending bags, runes, bags of regs, that new event item you have not insured just yet.....
Look when they made the trammel ruleset and cut out the thieving of items people were shall we say so happy the whole population of fel moved!!!! (well not all but a large # left)
I thought: wow how nice, I can go to a bloody bank and not loose my stuff or watch my back to the point of paranoia about thiefs.
Yes I am Feluccian and live in fel, but I know first hand why people went to tram to begin with. The relief of going to a place where they could sit and not worry about much more then what was going on guild wise.
No you may not put thieving in tram.
Reason: You do and whats left of players will leave game the first time they get lifted of a hard earned item! No Joke. I have seen it over the years. Change one thing the players depend on and players leave. Oh I know not much is stealable in your bag but your wrong alot you see cant be insured... and the idiots out there who like ot make hell for others to play the jerk will steal sending bags, runes, bags of regs, that new event item you have not insured just yet.....
C
copycon
Guest
This is exactly what I am trying to figure out. If everyone that is playing UO today wants to play a game that has no risk or challenge, why would they continue to play? Where is the motivation?
Is the motivation to have the prettiest colors? Or the most gold? Or the biggest house with the most "stuff"? If so, why would that person leave if they owned 23,943 of the same item that they just lost? What item is so unique and special that would cause them to suddenly cancel their account in rage? I would say that person is pretty fragile as it is, and they certainly shouldn't be playing a game that involves more than their "friends", and there are plenty of those.
I don't think there is motivation, and I think that people will continue to lose interest in what is left of UO and go elsewhere. Boats and special fish sure as heck aren't going to change that trend for very long. I bet WoW has some pretty boats and fish in 3D!...
Truthfully, I think people are fooling themselves by admiring their character's hat and spreading rose petals through the land, and that is not what UO was meant for in my opinion.
I'm looking for an honest answer here...
want to add more thieving goodness to your trammel lifestyle, join the thieves guild. You will be freely lootable on all facets all the time! You can even stone off stealing and retain your membership.
I'll try to give you an honest answer here. However, you'll probably ignore it because I'm going to tell you right up front that (1) I didn't start playing UO until not quite six years ago, and (2) I no longer play. (Well, I did make an exception yesterday and logged in for a while to try to help with a sad situation on Baja.) Even when I did play regularly, I had absolutely zip interest in rares, event items, etc. Yes, I enjoyed building houses and decorating them, but never cared a fig about having unique items other than items like furniture and clothing crafted by my friends and given to me as gifts.
So, with that disclaimer given, here's what I think would be most upsetting to me about thievery in Trammel: The loss of time represented by the theft. If you only play for an hour or two every day or so, the time you put into acquiring items becomes very valuable and is not replaceable. You also can't replace or bring back old friends who've left the game. To lose to a thieving jerk something an old friend made and gave you that has little to no value in gold could be quite upsetting for some folks.
I think for some people there's also the possibility that they play UO to relax and kick back from the stresses of every day life, which often includes just plain old being tolerant of people because you can't avoid it (e.g., being in a crowded elevator, sitting on a crowded bus, driving home or to work on crowded streets, etc.). Most of us use our manners and get through the day and just grin and bear it when someone steps on our foot or cuts us off.
However, when it comes time to sit down and relax in the evening with an hour or two of playing UO, the last thing you might want to do is laugh off yet another encounter with someone who's deliberately being a jerk. You kinda hope to minimize that stuff and therefore choose what you're gonna do for the night. Some thief coming along and stealing something you need but just don't have the time right now to easily replace could be, for some people, the straw that breaks the camel's back and makes them log out, turn off the computer, kick the dog, and go to bed early grumbling about all the asshats in the world.
Maybe the thief gets his jollies that night, but his victim took it personally and decided that unexpected encounter was the last time he was going to be stupid enough to look to a game for relaxation and fun because it's become too full of jerks and psychopaths.
'Nuff said. I'm off my soap box. If you don't get it by now that many people don't play UO to be unwillingly antagonized by other people, I guess you never will.
Sure there is risk, and plenty of motivation. There are all kinds of places to go where you can find challenging pvm encounters. You may not lose the items you have insured, but you risk losing gold, and more importantly the time it takes to go get rezzed, or find your corpse again, which may or may not have something important to your playstyle looted from it.
And then there is that greatest motivator, pride. No one likes to die, even if they don't lose anything at all in the process. Dying is embarrassing. Oddly enough that's the same motivator involved in a lot of pvp.
There is risk, adventure, and fun beyond the Fel rules set. You may not "get it" but plenty do, and it isn't all about who has the most bling, although that is clearly part of the fun, as it is in the Fel rules set as well. UO is a sand box and it there are all kinds of things to do, and challenges to face, both big and small - in game terms.
And do you really think the risk involved in a full loot wide open pvp *game* is all that much greater than it is under the Trammel rules set? Either way, no one is going to really die, or really be injured, or really lose anything of value beyond time. It's all virtual, it all boils down to pixels and math.
This is just a rehash of the "the game is dying, the skying is falling" nonsense we've all been reading for the last thirteen years. You know when UO's true golden age was, when it had the highest number of active subscriptions it has ever had? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't in 1997, 1998, or 1999. It was the years from 2000 to 2002, after the Renaissance expansion, you know, the one that involved creating Trammel...
Yes, that is your opinion. Your opinion, and nothing more. And there is your "honest answer"...
And this is coming from someone who loves pvp and virtual danger, and played UO for most of the months between 1997 and 2000, and loved it, and who has deliberately gone out of his way to find other wide open pvp, and full loot mmo's.
OK
1st Those are your views on risk and challenge and because everybody may disagree with your definition does not make them wrong. You discount all other opinions because they do not match yours. What motivates you is different then what motivates me. We may share some views and differ on others but that does not make either one of us wrong.
A lot of people play UO for many different reasons. IMHO I think most people play UO to relax and unwind. There is enough stress in todays world without demanding it in a game that we play for fun. I was there (pre Tram) and what a joy it was for a crafter/miner dealing with all the PKers (not PvPers) and if you got lucky enough not to get killed and looted, then you had to worry about the thieves at the banks. Without Tram UO would not be here because the majority of the player base was getting tired of UO very fast. Ask yourself this “If Fel was so great and everybody wanted to play your game then why did the vast majority of the player base leave it so fast for Tram?” “If Fel is so great today then why is it so empty?” And if you must know, yes I do own a Keep in Fel and all but one house around me are gone.
C
copycon
Guest
Thank you for that. I understand and appreciate the honesty.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if it is a sentimental item that was crafted for you by a friend who may or may not have left, why would you be carrying it around on your character for risk of theft (if it were possible)? Same goes for furniture or anything else. Lock it down in your house or put it in your bank box so you can look at it and know that your friend made that item for you.
Also, UO is supposed to be immersive. A casual gamer can play an immersive game just as much as a "hardcore" player can. The same rule applies for any game. I am neither a casual or hardcore player by the way, I am something in between, but I appreciated the fact that UO was constantly "popping" with activity and excitement. Now that activity and excitement is gone in my opinion and it has become flat and monotonous.
I'm not trying to be a jerk or ignore anything you said, I'm just trying to analyze the thought process.
C
copycon
Guest
I don't understand how any of this is different after factoring in PvP content.
I don't think this proves much either...
See: http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html
The decline in population has been sharp and steady after 2002 according to the chart while the rise in population peaked at the release of UO:R which is largely due to press releases and other publicity. I don't see how that translates to "UO:R was a success!" because it certainly doesn't seem that way to me.
Then why are you arguing against it?
B
Babble
Guest
FARMVILLE
It's the way trammies have been and always will be. It's a surprise to me that Kleenex hasn't tried to sponsor an ad here on Uhall...la
I knew this would come up, i.e., why not insure what's valuable to you?
Well, let's just analyze the situation a bit, shall we? Take me, for instance. I packed away some sentimental items in my characters' bank boxes just in case I decide to return some day and really play again. Are those items insured? Nope. Why would they be? Under today's rules, as long as I didn't do something stupid like go to a bank in a city under some kind of invasion or use a character in a guild that knowingly includes thieves and announce what I was up to, I was perfectly safe to stick those items (books, furniture, clothing) in my backpack and take them to a bank in Trammel and stuff them in a bank box for safe keeping.
However, let's say I take a break from UO for two years or so and while I'm gone, some EA producer decides to bring back that old wild West feeling and change the rules in Trammel by allowing thieves to steal from other characters who are not guild or alliance mates. Meantime, I've walked away from UO and haven't bothered to keep up with all the publish notes. Finally, a friend twists my arm hard enough to come back to UO. Happy day, right?
Wrong.
As I'm standing at a bank in Trammel, going through my bank box and selecting items to take to my freshly placed house, I slip a book of stories written long ago by someone who no longer plays into my backpack. I also unpack into my backpack a table and chairs made by a guildmate who passed away a few years ago.
Next thing I know, some of those treasured items are gone from my backpack because one or more opportunistic griefers were watching and decided to wreck my day. What's worse, recognizing the items as ones that were likely to hold great sentimental value, the griefers made things far worse by dumping them into a trash bin. *Poof* The book is gone for good and, well, the table and/or chairs might as well be gone for good since I'm unlikely to be ready and able at that moment to go chasing off to the Cavern of the Discarded and sit around hoping they just might appear.
Do you think after something like this happens, and I guarantee it WOULD happen if you and Jinn get your way, that I would stick around to play UO again?
No. I would not.
The big problem with what you are suggesting is that it would unfairly make every returning player who put uninsured items in their bankbox against their eventual return a target for thieves. Those returning players would have to choose between forever leaving the items in their bank box or risk losing them to an opportunistic jerk just waiting for them to move the items to their backpack to insure them, since you can't insure items unless they are in your backpack (or on your paperdoll, but last I checked you can't equip furniture and player-written books).
Yes, I understand people SHOULD educate themselves about changes to the game before they come back. But how many do? How many people have left the game, believing that thievery in Trammel is a very isolated and rare occurrence? Change the rules now and let that change become buried in publish notes just like every other change that happens in the game and I guarantee you will keep very few returnees for long if they are guaranteed prey for griefers as soon as they make their first trip to the bank and unwittingly place an uninsured non-blessed item in their character's backpack in Trammel.
So you are trying to make sure the rules don't change, just on the chance that a returning player "may" come back and "may" be stolen from? ROFL. That argument doesn't hold water...la
Easy fix. Hide yourself before you start loading up your items. Then run away and gate out.
Or have detect hidden. Make sure your area is clear!!!
Make some cool skills useful again. Detect hidden/Forensic Eval and the likes.
Put a real detector type character as a viable template.
Or have detect hidden. Make sure your area is clear!!!
Make some cool skills useful again. Detect hidden/Forensic Eval and the likes.
Put a real detector type character as a viable template.
B
Babble
Guest
Get the developers to change the definition of Trammel. Everything else is just babbling about.
C
copycon
Guest
Okay, I get that. I also understand the mentality now, thank you.
However, I can assure you, what you are describing is a LONG shot. I'll explain what I mean:
Thieving before Trammel was not as rampant as what you and others may think. You may have seen 1 or 2 thieves in town on a "busy" day, and most often it would be readily apparent, as in, the thief would be naked, or otherwise look completely ridiculous and stand beside you in town. They were not hard to spot...
Thieves also could not remain hidden while snooping, and if the player were to take a step in any direction, the thief would have to start again, hence becoming extremely cumbersome. Keep in mind, thieving in town was extremely difficult and risky for the thief. Most often it was being done as a prank, and the thief knew full well that his/her chances were extremely slim of actually getting away with the item, especially if that item were more than 1 stone, and less if the player was standing in the vicinity of an NPC (insta-whack) or if the player were in an unreachable area (bank roof for example). It almost became another game in itself to try and "reverse prank" the thieves...
There were SO many ways of hindering a thief that it really wasn't lucrative at all to try to steal in town, but it was being done because it was an option. Now, it isn't, and that element of the game has been lost, which is sad.
What I am trying to make clear is that what you are describing is a 1 in 1,000,000 shot. Not only would the thief have to pass in-game checks (equations) to actually get away with the item, but the thief would also have to be snooping you or targeting you at that exact moment which would be pretty evident in itself. So, unless you were moving 300+ books, tables and chairs that were all made by different friends and all carried sentimental value at the same time, I doubt the window of time that you would need to transport those items would be very generous for a thief to actually manage to steal one of them from you and get away with it.
Bullcrap. Anyone that actually played and wasn't a thief knows you couldn't swing a dead mongbat without hitting 4 leg humpers at any bank back then. I used to sell runea to the inside of bank walls for 100k a pop. Why would people pay for such a thing when there was only 1 or 2? Rubbish...
C
copycon
Guest
What is runea? Either you were standing in bucs den asking for it, or you made a fortune by selling to some pretty gullable people.
Typo. Runes. Played on GL, Chessy and Pacific. All the same. Moonglow. Fact. Now, history.
C
copycon
Guest
I think we know who is BSing here.
No one ever paid 100k for a rune back then. 100k was almost unheard of except for the some of the most elite players, and I can assure you that anyone with 100k knew how to mark a rune AND evade thieves.
B
Babble
Guest
Yes but with a locked chest (which was an exploit) thieves were not that much of a problem. Making the items stay on the thieves body after getting guardwhacked was worse.
thieves took a few items.... When you got pked you lost all .. so why nerf thieves the same as pks?
Trammel was an overreaction of non innovative thinking developers.
Added: Thing is UO had a bigger learning curve then and after some time your losses were not so bad. For developers that lurning curve means less gamers .. is how wow got so big
Still no reason to implement Trammel so amateurish.
They fixed the locked chest. Hiding things with black cloaks could be overcome and so could all the other fixes they put in for thieves.Yes but with a locked chest (which was an exploit) thieves were not that much of a problem. Making the items stay on the thieves body after getting guardwhacked was worse.
thieves took a few items.... When you got pked you lost all .. so why nerf thieves the same as pks?
Trammel was an overreaction of non innovative thinking developers.
Added: Thing is UO had a bigger learning curve then and after some time your losses were not so bad. For developers that lurning curve means less gamers .. is how wow got so big
Trammel was garbage. No argument there. There were plenty of better ways to do it but I blame EA and their inability to understand the MMO market. Not that anything has changed since then unfortunately.
C
copycon
Guest
Exactly.
Black cloaks (or anything else placed over top of a container) were a lot harder to overcome than you make them out to be.
Another example: magic trap a pouch, and if it pops, theres your thief...
As I said, there were SO many ways to get around thieves.. it wasn't even an issue for anyone with half a brain.
And you don't think that would have happened if Trammel hadn't been created? We really don't know, but my guess is if Trammel hadn't been created you wouldn't have seen the initial increase in subscriptions that came with the creation of Trammel, and you would still have seen the same steady decline in subscription numbers. There are only two MMO's that I know of that have bucked that particular trend in the long term, WoW, and EvE (which ironically enough are polar opposites when it comes to their player interaction mechanics and both fine examples that each can be highly successful).
I'm not arguing against it. I'm against the proposal in the OP, because it isn't a fit for the game that UO has become, a game that is still the most fun MMO I have ever played, even in it's current state. But what I am really against is the undercurrent of elitism, half truths, and baseless assumptions that form the bulk of so many threads like this one.Then why are you arguing against it?
"Trammelites" aren't automatically idiots and cowards. They are gamers just like you and I who enjoy UO the way it is now. They don't deserve the scorn and derision that is often heaped upon them. A full loot wide open pvp MMO might well be more fun for some gamers, but it isn't any more worthy of respect than any other form of MMO.
Different strokes for different folks - and the sooner we all wrap our heads around the concept that differing opinions, tastes, and even world views aren't necessarily better or worse, the happier we will all be...
Yes, I understand it's a long shot that a thief would be able to successfully harrass a newly returned player. But I guess after working in the insurance industry for over 30 years, I have a strong tendency to focus on possibilities with "dire consequences" that others seemingly dismiss without a second thought. Where you see "no risk at all," I see a small risk that could have big consequences depending on just who gets caught up in the risk, what becomes lost or stolen, who the victim complains to, who they have influence with, etc.
I've always been a fan of the movie/concept, "Pay It Forward." I think we have the potential as humans to do incredible good through small daily actions. At the same time, though, I think we can also do untold and unmeasured damage when we do things that may not seem so evil on the surface or even when we just look the other way and say nothing when someone else does something that just isn't right. I know UO is just a game, but to me, stealing from another living human is and always will be wrong. Causing non-consensual "grief" to other players just because you can and because EA won't do anything to stop you, also seems wrong.
I'll leave my arguments at that though. Been down this road already with people telling me UO's just a game and don't take it so seriously and I'm not going there again. It would just be a waste of everyone's time. I presented my thoughts and you think they're BS. Fine and dandy. No point dragging it out any further. I have no desire to force my ideas down your throat.
Talk at you all another time, perhaps.
I may be wrong, but I think he is referring to an exploit which allowed you to recall inside the walls in a certain location where thieves couldn't bother you.I think we know who is BSing here.
No one ever paid 100k for a rune back then. 100k was almost unheard of except for the some of the most elite players, and I can assure you that anyone with 100k knew how to mark a rune AND evade thieves.
C
copycon
Guest
Thank you for the honesty Tina. I appreciate it. The reason I responded the way I did was because I wanted to give you a different perspective, not because I don't appreciate your thoughts on the subject.
I've noticed that people who started playing during or after the introduction of Trammel have a mindset about Felucca and the way UO "used to be" that is far from accurate, so I've been trying to dismiss that.
I've noticed that people who started playing during or after the introduction of Trammel have a mindset about Felucca and the way UO "used to be" that is far from accurate, so I've been trying to dismiss that.
C
copycon
Guest
Well that's not exactly moral either, is it? LOL
Exactly!!!
Well said Tina
W
WhityJinn
Guest
I would.Because that`s what I LOVE to do.Not doing it because it`s easy and in the end you chop the head off their corpse and say "OLOL PWNT L2P".
Does it sound so strange?
p.s.
well...
say whatever you want, but in the end it all comes down to two basic things..they are most basic and therefore True:
1)R.Garriot used great ideas to create his game, and those ideas were there before he ever created his first game, I believe.I guess it all began when naked hairy people bashed each other with clubs several thousand years ago (well, I was actually reffering to all the MMOS and pen and paper games that were there before UO).
So, Garriot knew, how to create a live, believable game world where players could do ANYTHING.They could freakin` LIVE there, do whatever they wanted.That`s the ideal MMO.All other MMOS are nerfed and castrated versions of UO, therefore are good only for people who are too busy and tired to use their imagination and their competitive spirit.Like those 40 year old moms who play UO nowadays and show off their neon hats at WBB, because they can`t possibly imagine, that there is more about this game than the few things they do every day.
So, those people actually insult the spirit of Ultima Online.They shouldn`t be here, but they are.All those people who can`t be bothered to use their imagination and breathe life into those pixels, making it a REAL adventure, using ALL the possibilities this game used to grant you.
Most of those people don`t really think of UO as a fantasy game.To them it`s a chat room where they can dress and move their avatar, and go kill monsters for more neon crap.
I repeat, it`s kind of insulting for a real Role Player to interact with all those people.
It`s like..I dunno, inviting a fat f***er who laughs all the time and mocks the game to a DnD game.Ya know what most DnD players do when they gather in the basement?
Sure as hell they don`t run around in blazing neon robes screaming "pwnt".
UO WAS the kind of game that actually was much like those DnD n` stuff games.
UO was great.With infinite possibilities.
What`s funny, I sometimes read trammies posting something like "UO is a game with infinite possibilites".Same people whom I see "lol"-ing in game and wearing neon colors and feeding apples to their neon-pink cusidhe.Most curious.
2.UO should have remained the same as it was in the beginning.Under the care of smart developers, who would REALLY know and appreciate the spirit of the game Garriot created, this game could have become something even bigger (if that`s possible).
Truth is, things really went wrong.It`s not just "oops we f***ed up a few things", the whole concept of the game was ruined.
And I`m sure, there would be alot more players if the game had retained it`s original concept.
Oh, you don`t believe that?Well, there are a lot of free shards out there...with so many people playing on these shards.
And there are other MMO games, that allow griefing and uncontrolled rampaging killing.But NO ONE EVER complains.
p.p.s.
"DM, pls rez and remove spawn".
..?Am I doing it right?
p.p.p.s.
http://megaswf.com/serve/50875/
Orly?I didnt know that!So interesting!
E
Evlar
Guest
Fantastic!
Hail Folks,
I read the entire Thread and debated with myself if there was any point in responding with my own views.
Obviously, the reply side won my self debate.
I began playing Ultima Online very shortly after it was released in September of 1997. I was on dial up. Experienced the lag, the time warps/reverts, the PvPers, Pkillers, thieves, gankers, griefers, and all the rest. Some players banded together, Guilded and unguilded, in anti-griefer groups. Many however, found ways to play without ever leaving guard zones. They prevented being stolen from best they could.
Far more "endured" those early days than "enjoyed" them. I did my best and endured. I had ZERO interest in combat with other player characters. I had ZERO interest in having things stolen from my character.
The situation became increasingly more frustrating. More and more players experienced "the straw that broke the camel's back." Those players quit. Many, to this day never returned. Garriott and the Dev Team were quickly aware of the problems. However changes took time, then as now. I have no idea how many different ways were discussed to address the "problems" and the accelerating departure of players. Clearly the number of departures and its quickening pace alarmed the "suits" in control of UO.
Pre-Trammel days were NOT the "golden age" of Sosaria. They were its launch, and very nearly its demise. The creation of Trammel ENDED the mass exodus. New players were still discovering UO, and some who had quit, returned.
UO still had many "problems." However, its demise was AVOIDED.
Some players enjoy Player v Player combat. Some enjoy initiating combat, others enjoy opposing the "bad guys." Some enjoy playing a Thief, though many define what a thief is differently. I don't know if anyone enjoys being stolen from. Clearly some did, and do enjoy catching and punishing thieves.
Every indicator measurable shows that a clear majority of players prefer life in Trammel to life in Felucca. Despite numerous "benefits" designed and added to "lure" players back to Felucca, a clear majority of players prefer every other facet to Felucca.
Despite all of these FACTS, those who preferred and only seemed to enjoy griefing and ganking other players, insist those were "the good old days." Numbers of subscibers, hard facts, always fail to impress or persuade those folks.
Despite all of this UO has endured for 13 years. An amazing accomplishment. I believe most, like myself, hope and want UO to endure for at least 13 more years. However, EA and those in control of UO MUST find ways to make UO fun to play for a clear majority of our subscribers, at costs to each Payer they deem affordable and reasonable, and that will provide enough income to cover all costs and return a profit deemed by the "suits" as enough to justify the continuation of the service.
I hope the Suits are up to these challenges. Players desperately want to aid the Suits in improving and saving the game.
My personal view is that the Suits MUST focus on providing the greatest majority of players FUN at affordable prices. Focusing only on revenue and costs will NOT lead to the best business model for today's player base. Lastly, unless the SUITS intend to bring in new players, and succeed in that attempt, UO's days are clearly numbered and like the sands in the hour glass, running out.
Looking back for FACTS is fine, for to forget history is to repeat errors and miss opportunities. However, the Suits must plan forward with a goal of saving and continuing UO, or it will END!
Aggravating and frustrating paying customers is NEVER a good business model, even when payers dont quit over such treatment.
Hopefully the Suits will learn that lesson, and will want to see UO continue. For me, the Jury is still out on those questions.
I read the entire Thread and debated with myself if there was any point in responding with my own views.
Obviously, the reply side won my self debate.
I began playing Ultima Online very shortly after it was released in September of 1997. I was on dial up. Experienced the lag, the time warps/reverts, the PvPers, Pkillers, thieves, gankers, griefers, and all the rest. Some players banded together, Guilded and unguilded, in anti-griefer groups. Many however, found ways to play without ever leaving guard zones. They prevented being stolen from best they could.
Far more "endured" those early days than "enjoyed" them. I did my best and endured. I had ZERO interest in combat with other player characters. I had ZERO interest in having things stolen from my character.
The situation became increasingly more frustrating. More and more players experienced "the straw that broke the camel's back." Those players quit. Many, to this day never returned. Garriott and the Dev Team were quickly aware of the problems. However changes took time, then as now. I have no idea how many different ways were discussed to address the "problems" and the accelerating departure of players. Clearly the number of departures and its quickening pace alarmed the "suits" in control of UO.
Pre-Trammel days were NOT the "golden age" of Sosaria. They were its launch, and very nearly its demise. The creation of Trammel ENDED the mass exodus. New players were still discovering UO, and some who had quit, returned.
UO still had many "problems." However, its demise was AVOIDED.
Some players enjoy Player v Player combat. Some enjoy initiating combat, others enjoy opposing the "bad guys." Some enjoy playing a Thief, though many define what a thief is differently. I don't know if anyone enjoys being stolen from. Clearly some did, and do enjoy catching and punishing thieves.
Every indicator measurable shows that a clear majority of players prefer life in Trammel to life in Felucca. Despite numerous "benefits" designed and added to "lure" players back to Felucca, a clear majority of players prefer every other facet to Felucca.
Despite all of these FACTS, those who preferred and only seemed to enjoy griefing and ganking other players, insist those were "the good old days." Numbers of subscibers, hard facts, always fail to impress or persuade those folks.
Despite all of this UO has endured for 13 years. An amazing accomplishment. I believe most, like myself, hope and want UO to endure for at least 13 more years. However, EA and those in control of UO MUST find ways to make UO fun to play for a clear majority of our subscribers, at costs to each Payer they deem affordable and reasonable, and that will provide enough income to cover all costs and return a profit deemed by the "suits" as enough to justify the continuation of the service.
I hope the Suits are up to these challenges. Players desperately want to aid the Suits in improving and saving the game.
My personal view is that the Suits MUST focus on providing the greatest majority of players FUN at affordable prices. Focusing only on revenue and costs will NOT lead to the best business model for today's player base. Lastly, unless the SUITS intend to bring in new players, and succeed in that attempt, UO's days are clearly numbered and like the sands in the hour glass, running out.
Looking back for FACTS is fine, for to forget history is to repeat errors and miss opportunities. However, the Suits must plan forward with a goal of saving and continuing UO, or it will END!
Aggravating and frustrating paying customers is NEVER a good business model, even when payers dont quit over such treatment.
Hopefully the Suits will learn that lesson, and will want to see UO continue. For me, the Jury is still out on those questions.
C
copycon
Guest
I will say this again...
Please do your research. People are delusional about UO:R "saving UO".
And people are equally delusional about UO:R "destroying UO". Almost every single MMO on that chart follows the same basic arc in subscription numbers. But something tells me the MMO market has changed in the two years since that chart was last updated. We've had a world wide recession, and I think there has been a revival of interest in older games. It would be interesting to see how the numbers have been since then. Unfortunately it is pretty hard to get reliable subscription numbers these days, as most MMO developers guard that kind of information pretty carefully.
Since you pointed out your own post again, I actually think we should look at the chart you linked for. The peak UO numbers on the chart you linked to are actually 2003/2004.
Since UO:R was May 4, 2000, I see an increase in numbers reported. These do seem to plateau roughtly between 2001 and 2004. Hmn, what game was released November 23, 2004 that also seemed to cause a decline in EverQuest and other games? (World of Warcraft) Heck, these numbers seem to indicate that AoS (February 11, 2003) didn't "kill" UO alone.
Now I could argue that UO's decline hasn't been as sharp as EverQuest since Everquest had a slope of negative 19,000 customers per month compared with UO's losses of ~3,000 per month, but considering EverQuest had more to lose, it isn't exactly good news. There has been a trend of loss since 2004 sadly. These are steady.
I point out Shadowbane (Current Subscriptions: 0) as an example that a PvP focus doesn't guarantee success. PvP does have a role to play in MMOs, but I'm still don't believe UO would be larger now had it stayed as it was before Trammel. Of course such discussions are matters of opinion like playing "what if" with history. What if the USSR had won the Cold War? What if Nixon hadn't been told about Watergate? Etc. etc.
C
copycon
Guest
First, let me say that I agree with most of what you said. The chart does show a significant drop in subscribers upon the release of WoW. That makes total sense and it is true, because WoW did change the landscape dramatically by appealing to a very large audience of existing gamers (MMO or otherwise).
Secondly, comparing 1 game to another does not necessarily make it a 1:1 comparison. One thing that you are ignoring is the fact that a large part of the UO community (past and present) are still passionate about UO and are still clamoring for a "classic shard" while other gamers/games likely do not share the same motivators. I can name at least 1 other game that has a similar following, namely Star Wars Galaxies (SWG). When Sony changed the rules of SWG at a certain point to "simplify" the game to appeal to "more subscribers", those changes were met with outrage by the community. Fast forward a few years, and now SWG has nearly gone the way of the dodo bird. The paths of changes as a result of poor decision making between UO and SWG have been very similar in my opinion while being very different games, and I don't think that the outcome will change much for UO.
Again though, comparing 1 game to another does not make it a 1:1 comparison.
What the chart does show is fact based on research, and one thing I do know is how to tell fact from fiction. It seems to me that some other people ignore fact and rely exclusively on what others have said, which is far from accurate.
W
WhityJinn
Guest
As far as I know, Shadowbane died more than two years ago, and not because there werent enough players.It was an awesome game, and it was free.I guess the team responsible for the game just closed the servers for some reason.
J
[JD]
Guest
frankly this is not a good idea. you can steal just fine in fel. your problem is there are no players IN fel to support your lifestyle, so you want to alter the game mechanics for everyone else just for you. this is very thoughtless of you.
the real solution is to have the dev's put more reasons in for people to go to fel so you have people to fight and steal from.
double resource farming is a good start... due to that, i go to fel, and i can be found, attacked, or stolen from. but it's not enough - even with larger karma gains, double resources, power scrolls, most trammies will not go to fel.
they are completely scared of it, and i've heard some refer to fel as some moral violation.
keep pushing for devs to put content to draw players to fel - i can't think of anyone who would disagree with more reasons to go to fel.
in the interim, you could sponsor FUN fel events to begin drawing trammies there and hopefully make some converts.
the real solution is to have the dev's put more reasons in for people to go to fel so you have people to fight and steal from.
double resource farming is a good start... due to that, i go to fel, and i can be found, attacked, or stolen from. but it's not enough - even with larger karma gains, double resources, power scrolls, most trammies will not go to fel.
they are completely scared of it, and i've heard some refer to fel as some moral violation.
keep pushing for devs to put content to draw players to fel - i can't think of anyone who would disagree with more reasons to go to fel.
in the interim, you could sponsor FUN fel events to begin drawing trammies there and hopefully make some converts.
"Some reason" was very likely a money reason. While no official reason was given, my web search seemed to indicate that despite the change to free subscription, the game didn't become wildly popular and profitable. I am not attacking the PvP niche game, just the argument that "PvP = profit."
C
copycon
Guest
Good idea, but it didn't work the first time and it won't work the second time.
If people are afraid of Felucca it is for a reason outside of any of those things you mentioned. If EA puts a carrot on a stick and dangles it in front of them it will not entice them any more than it does now, and if it did it certainly wouldn't be for long. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "Trammies" are static and predictable by definition. They want to play a game that involves no risk or challenge and has little to do with being immersive beyond ogling their character's clothing/bling/whatever and basically being in a glorified chat room with neon colors. All of those things could have been added in a much more productive manner without Trammel being part of it.
It boils down to EA making a mistake by adding 2 facets. The addition of Trammel condemned Felucca the moment it was introduced, if not simply for the fact that Felucca was made to "look unfriendly" at that moment.
So you are basing your FACTS on a chart that no FACTS were ever used, only assumptions.
Here is a FACT. EA HAS NEVER RELEASED ITS SUBS FOR UO.
Here is another FACT. If in FACT you were there you would have noticed a decline in the number of people you saw while in-game prior to the creation on Tram and an increase in the number of people you saw in-game after Tram was created. We still had game time on our accounts and when Tram came in we started to play again.
Was Tram the right answer, who knows. Noncon PKers, Grifers, Gankers and 12 year old Sh*t talkers were not and it was killing UO.
Fel is still there and the OP is just crying because nobody wants to come play with him and a lot of what was wrong with Fel preTram is still there. Sorry your sheep have left the pen and no longer want to be fleeced by you.
C
copycon
Guest
Oh please...
Do I have to point out to you that the information shown on the mmorpgchart.com website is based off of factual data? Read from #2 on: MMOGCHART.COM » FAQ
Where are you getting your information from? Oh, right... the people you saw in-game. Lets think about this for a minute. Okay, done.
Anyways, I wasn't even referring to the OP, I was responding to the post that was quoted in the reply.
Please, if you are going to respond, think first.
One of the things I love about games, and it is true of any art form, is it allows you to isolate danger and examine it in a non-threatening context. That my friends is what prejudice looks like. It labels a group of people and condemns them as a group with generalizations and assumptions, that are almost always erroneous on more than one level. Both the labelling and the generalizations will tend to be full of inconsistencies and errors.
No one in an MMO is "static and predictable". Everyone has there own individual likes and dislikes, their own fantasies, and their own reasons for participating in an MMO. Everyone views the concepts of risk and reward in different ways, and different people have differing ideas of what risk and adventure are.
It has nothing to do with being boring, predictable, soft, lazy, undisciplined, or better or worse in any way. If someone enjoys playing house and dressing up their characters in bright or rare colours, who the hell are you to say that is more or less exciting that what you enjoy doing? Who the hell are you to say one is better or worse in any way?
Some people enjoy pvp, some people enjoy pvm, and your "freedom" ends where someone else's begins. So you may enjoy playing a thief, but if it causes grief to someone else then they have every right to let their money do the talking and go play some other game that doesn't allow that kind of behaviour, and that action in no way implies that they are weak, or cowardly, or boring in any way.
If you want to play a free for all thief, you need to find a game that allows that behaviour, where everyone that plays the game understands that that behaviour is part of what they signed up for when they chose to play that game. UO is no longer that game. Thievery is part of the game, but in an effort to keep clients and appeal to a wider audience, strict limits have been placed on that kind of activity.
It doesn't mean that UO is a worse game as a result. It may be worse for you if that is the kind of activity you enjoy, but it may well be far better as a result of the limitations for far more people. And again, that in no way means that they are weak, or cowardly, or boring in any way.
If you want to prove your manliness and bravery, go join the armed forces of your country, or the police, or become a fire fighter. That's real danger, and from what I understand 99% discipline, boredom and drudgery. Stealing from someone in an MMO doesn't make you braver than anyone else, it involves no real danger to you or anyone else, so stop pretending that it does, and stop labelling and belittling other people that don't enjoy that play style.
OMG those are speculations not FACTS. EA has NEVER and I repeat NEVER released any subs and NEVER will release any subs for UO.
If you missed it the first time.
OMG those are speculations not FACTS. EA has NEVER and I repeat NEVER released any subs and NEVER will release any subs for UO.
I guess because he wrote it makes it a FACT and what people were seeing at that time means nothing. Were you even there or are you basing all your assumptions off of a chart that is based on no FACTS.
C
copycon
Guest
Did you even read the information? I'm going to assume not if you replied so quickly.OMG those are speculations not FACTS. EA has NEVER and I repeat NEVER released any subs and NEVER will release any subs for UO.
If you missed it the first time.
OMG those are speculations not FACTS. EA has NEVER and I repeat NEVER released any subs and NEVER will release any subs for UO.
I guess because he wrote it makes it a FACT and what people were seeing at that time means nothing. Were you even there or are you basing all your assumptions off of a chart that is based on no FACTS.
Here, maybe this will help:
My numbers come from a variety of sources, and some games have more than one source. These sources include the following:
a) Official Corporate Data - As my research has grown in popularity and importance, more and more game companies are now providing me with subscriber data directly. You’ll probably be able to spot which ones simply by the fact that they tend to have more data points than other games. My ultimate goal is to have ALL companies in this market providing data in the same way, either through me or directly to everyone in the market, for the benefit of the industry as a whole.
b) Corporate Press Releases - From time to time, particularly whenever a game reaches a particular subscriber milestone, companies will release a press release trumpeting the success of their game. This was much more common in the early years than it is today; Origin/EA, Verant/Sony, and Mythic used to announce their numbers regularly. These days, it’s usually Blizzard.
c) Corporate Documents - Generally speaking, these are public documents for the purposes of financial disclosure and/or investor relations. Many people outside of the financial industry never see these documents, so they may be unaware of their existence. NCSoft is the best example of this; they regularly release quarterly reports that break down their numbers at a far more detailed level than what I provide here. Not all MMOG developers are public, though, and many that are do not routinely disclose numbers down to the subscriber level. Sometimes a number does slip out, though, and if I find it, I’ll use it. Other times these are disclosed in bankruptcy documents or other court records.
d) News Articles - From time to time, reporters for both online and offline publications are able to get a hold of numbers that I have not. Care has to be taken, though, as sometimes a reporter can confuse total sales with subscribers, or may simply regurgitate a number that is many months old. Still, if I find a number that appears to be credible, I will generally use it.
e) Public Comments - Game developers and publishers will sometimes make public comments about their subscriber numbers, even if there’s no official announcement. Rarely, these comments are places like developer mailing lists or message boards; more often, they are related at gaming conferences or press events. Still, if they are not widely reported in a news article, these can be even harder to find out about.
f) Anonymous Sources - More and more of my data is now coming from inside sources: people within the industry who give me numbers on the condition of anonymity. So far most of these have been pretty reliable - if their numbers are not exact, they are usually in the ballpark. As always, I have to use my best judgment in deciding whether or not a source is credible.
g) Educated Guesses - Very rarely, a number will appear on the chat that’s non-sourced and simply my educated guess based on known information. An example might be, “Well, we know they have at least 200K subscribers, and they’ve sold 600K copies, and their revenues are such-n-such, so I’m going to say they have at least 350K subscribers for the purposes of the chart.” I do not do this very often, and if I do, I’ll duly note it in the Analysis section by giving the data an appropriate Accuracy Rating.
In a few cases where numbers seemed to conflict, I have picked the one that seemed the most reliable and which seemed to fit with other data. The upshot of all this is that these numbers should not be taken as gospel. They represent the best research to date.
You are no longer just doubting me, you are doubting the author. Care to follow through?
- Status