UO has been Greenlit on Steam.

[G.v.P]

Almost everyone agreed that EA needed to advertize UO... now that Broadsword is in charge, they did. What better, cost effective way than to use Steam?

For those who did oppose Steam, I'll never understand why people are so afraid of social media. Unfortunately, if you are alive, you're going to be on the Internet whether you like it or not. Anyone who owns a house, or a telephone, is going to have their information online. I think it's better to have some form of control so you can carve out your identity, to an extent. I'm not one to use Facebook as a login for every place you go, I think that's pretty creepy and I make new accounts instead, but meh.

Anyway, rant aside, Broadsword stepped up. I'm a fan.

 

[Monomaxos]

I think it will be! I hope anyway and plan on doing a guide for it as soon as I have my hands on it!

I play like a month or less, tried on the classic client cause it gives a more immersive fantasy look but went back to enhanced cause I dont know to do several things there. Sure a guide would be awesome

Since I use steam for years, and saw many games directly through steam account(instead creating a new account on site) I wonder if new players will be able to do that here as well. I am almost sure steam will start bringing people once the game is placed there

 

[Thrakkar]

So, what's next? How long will it take, until it will show up in the actual shop? Will we able to buy game time there as well?

 

[lucitus]

Also my question Greenlight is accepted when will it released to the store?

 

[Ender]

From what I understand, once games are Greenlit it's up to the developer/publisher to put it on Steam, not Valve. I could be wrong, though.

 

[Kattasrophe]

I am crossing my fingers this will bring some new guys to the game. And even more hopeful to Siege Perilous. We need new blood!

 

[Flagg]

My wild guess is they'll add it as Virtue VS Vice is going to hit. They will call VsvV an expansion if they can get away with it.

 

[a slave girl]

Make UO free to play on Steam (and off) with severe restrictions.

Fel only.

No house.

No extra storage. You can pay for storage upgrades, expansions etc like High Seas that give extra storage, but on unpaid accounts it won't work. This is to discourage duper/scripter storage.

I'm sure others can think of some needed restrictions to prevent free account abuse.

If you do this make absolutely sure the free account players know what they are getting in to, and what they are missing by not paying a monthly sub fee.

Edit:

Free accounts are NOT allowed to possess any UO item sold by the Origin store, such as tokens. They and the giver are given a message they aren't allowed to have the item if the trade goes through anyway the item is destroyed.

Edit 2: Thanks Ender! F2P Fel only players are initially limited to shards where they will see other players, so Atlantic and whatever shard for the other coast. The program could be expanded to other shards later if UO's population regenerates.

 

[Ender]

Oh yes, put F2P players in Fel. That's obviously a brilliant idea that will make them stick around.

Of course there's nobody playing most shards anymore anyway so they probably won't run into any murderers, so...

 

[Flagg]

^ Hehe, it'd be awesome idea if it didn't result in such massively unfair setting for the F2P crowd.

 

[a slave girl]

^ Hehe, it'd be awesome idea if it didn't result in such massively unfair setting for the F2P crowd.

Explain.

It's my understanding that every F2P game has restrictions for those who do not wish to pay?

 

[Winter]

Make UO free to play on Steam (and off) with severe restrictions...

NO...

Oh yes, put F2P players in Fel. That's obviously a brilliant idea that will make them stick around....

and NO!

Free to Play isn't free, and costs more than subscription. Lots of reasons, but to restate it... NO!

 

[Flagg]

Explain.

It's my understanding that every F2P game has restrictions for those who do not wish to pay?

Sure. Though there is a great deal of very (financially) successful F2P games that don't restrict the core experience much at all. Even if we assume UO's hypothetical F2P would come with it's set of restictions, it'd be essential to have the core F2P experience as fun as possible. Idea is to make sure these people enjoy themselves; you can't annoy and restrict anyone into subbing or liking the game. It is dangerous waters and thin ice if anything competitive ( Not only PvP but the entire ruleset for PvP as a whole!) differs greatly between sub and F2P. I can just imagine the scope of field day for reds and some oddball anti-F2P crusaders that would follow. People on F2P need to feel like players, not like cannon fodder punished by unfair, draconian ruleset of 90's. God knows coming to UO as new player/new account is depressing enough as it is.


All that said, I really love idea of having F2P in UO. I also like the thought behind 'forcing' F2P in Fel. There'd just have to be a mechanic out there to ensure it wouldn't be ridiculously unfair and hopeless. Game and community would benefit from some fast, easy road to semi-decent PvP gear.

I think housing could be the only "hard" restriction separating subs and F2P.

 

[Rhiannon]

Important part on that news is: I welcome any new players to UO, wherever they will come from! =)

And sometimes they come from unexpected places. For example, my "tween" grandson came over this weekend and we've never talked about gaming much. I haven't lived in the area for a long time (just moved back earlier this month) and haven't spent much time with him. In our conversations, I learned that he is not a hack-n-slash type player as most of his friends appear to be. He likes living in a world, exploring, crafting and hates player killers which seems senseless to him. The more I talked about UO, the more interested he got. I then talked to his folks and explained what it was like and that I would hook him up with a responsible guild to show him the ropes. I think we'll get a new UO player out of it.

 

[Smoot]

is UO f2p yet?

 

[kelmo]

Not going to happen.

 

[Ender]

If it ever did I would hope they put them in Tram, and only Tram to start before buying access to other lands.

Restricting them to Fel would be a great way to kill any desire they would have to play this ancient desolate game.

 

[Captn Norrington]

Personally I would have no issues with UO being F2P IF subscriptions are still allowed. make it so UO can be free to play, but it costs a very high amount, like $300 or something to unlock everything a subscriber gets, that way Broadsword will not lose much money in subscriptions because anyone who is active would either pay them to unlock each facet, and for the expansions. If people choose to not unlock anything and stay a 100% free account, let them only play in fel, it works out for everyone, pvp'ers have fresh targets, and if the free players don't like being killed a thousand times they can switch to a dead shard and play in fel there, (which helps dead shards get new people) or pay to unlock trammel/malas

 

[Aran]

Yeah man "getting killed a thousand times every login by people who mock them for being newbies/free players" will totally get and keep them around.

 

[Thrakkar]

F2P is the most stupid, deceptive and simply wrong phrase I heard in the last ten years.
To keep a game running, it has to create revenue. "F2P" ensures, that it does.
If every single player of a F2P-title would decide, not to use microtransactions or any other form of revenue creating things for that title, the game would be shut down within a blink of an eye.

 

[Caelyr]

Personally I would have no issues with UO being F2P IF subscriptions are still allowed. make it so UO can be free to play, but it costs a very high amount, like $300 or something to unlock everything a subscriber gets, that way Broadsword will not lose much money in subscriptions because anyone who is active would either pay them to unlock each facet, and for the expansions. If people choose to not unlock anything and stay a 100% free account, let them only play in fel, it works out for everyone, pvp'ers have fresh targets, and if the free players don't like being killed a thousand times they can switch to a dead shard and play in fel there, (which helps dead shards get new people) or pay to unlock trammel/malas

Is a paywall almost as steep as the associated learning curve really what UO needs?

 

[Smoot]

F2P is the most stupid, deceptive and simply wrong phrase I heard in the last ten years.
To keep a game running, it has to create revenue. "F2P" ensures, that it does.
If every single player of a F2P-title would decide, not to use microtransactions or any other form of revenue creating things for that title, the game would be shut down within a blink of an eye.

thats the point tho, UO as it is is a perfect game for free to play. Theres so much crap we have to buy anyway WITH subscriptions. im sure a free to play model could outperform a sub model profit-wise, while providing a free bare bones option for those who just want to log on an hour a month to mess around or pvp or something.

 

[Aran]

thats the point tho, UO as it is is a perfect game for free to play. Theres so much crap we have to buy anyway WITH subscriptions. im sure a free to play model could outperform a sub model profit-wise, while providing a free bare bones option for those who just want to log on an hour a month to mess around or pvp or something.

HAVE to buy? I haven't paid a penny for anything outside of expansions and the game is remarkably still playable!

 

[Viper09]

HAVE to buy? I haven't paid a penny for anything outside of expansions and the game is remarkably still playable!

The context of his post was about if UO were F2P. If UO were F2P, a lot of the stuff we take for granted would cost us money.

 

[Aran]

The context of his post was about if UO were F2P. If UO were F2P, a lot of the stuff we take for granted would cost us money.

Uh, no it isn't, go ahead and re-read what he said.

Theres so much crap we have to buy anyway WITH subscriptions.

 

[popps]

I am crossing my fingers this will bring some new guys to the game. And even more hopeful to Siege Perilous. We need new blood!

Please, remember that they will be NEW players so, no pkilling and such !!

There is no need to scare away new players just as UO starts increasing the population base again !!

Be nice, helping and cuddling !! Then, when they will have developed their characters and will be competitive fights can start but initially, we need to be as supportive as we can with the new comers !!

 

[popps]

Yeah man "getting killed a thousand times every login by people who mock them for being newbies/free players" will totally get and keep them around.

That's what I am afraid of.....

I hope that current players will instead be all supportive and helping.......

 

[Kattasrophe]

Please, remember that they will be NEW players so, no pkilling and such !!

There is no need to scare away new players just as UO starts increasing the population base again !!

Be nice, helping and cuddling !! Then, when they will have developed their characters and will be competitive fights can start but initially, we need to be as supportive as we can with the new comers !!

Im nice helpful and cuddley, and I do not attack new players, I give them suits and such, many would vouch for me on that

 

[Viper09]

Uh, no it isn't, go ahead and re-read what he said.

You are indeed correct, I missed that single key-word "with" when I read that post...

 

[Smoot]

HAVE to buy? I haven't paid a penny for anything outside of expansions and the game is remarkably still playable!

yeah i mainly meant expansions. no reason someone should have to pay a sub, then pay for the expansions we have. which are all very old now. the items that could add revenue to free to play would be housing slots, dyes, minor stat / skill increase (say 5 dollars per 1 stat limit of 10, 25 dollars per 10 skill points (limit of 30) this is stuff people would buy that wouldnt be a gamebreaker for most.

Transfer tokens, forged tools, pet bonding potions, all that crap deco, this is stuff people already buy in addition to a sub.

Myself, i wouldnt give UO a second look on Steam if i saw i had to spend 15 dollars, plus 45 dollars for all content.

 

[Aran]

yeah i mainly meant expansions. no reason someone should have to pay a sub, then pay for the expansions we have.

I want you to look at all the subscription-model MMOs out there and tell me which ones haven't charged for expansions.

 

[Smoot]

I want you to look at all the subscription-model MMOs out there and tell me which ones haven't charged for expansions.

i just dont think a 5 year old expansion should cost the same as it did in 2009. it would surely deter steam players from coming back to UO.

 

[Yadd of Legends]

I agree. By now SA should be part of the initial download.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[popps]

i just dont think a 5 year old expansion should cost the same as it did in 2009. it would surely deter steam players from coming back to UO.

That is why a few months ago, when there were talks of a new Return to Britannia program, I suggested to couple it with a 50% off promotion for all UO codes........

So, returning players could take advantage of the Return to Britannia AND buy whatever codes they needed (and they will need a few..... hence the 50% off need.....) to get back up to date....

They could buy the expansions upgrades they need, housing storage upgrades, 7th character code, transfer tokens codes should they want to transfer their existing characters onto another shards (which means 6 or 7 tokens to purchase should they want to transfer all of their characters...) and so forth....

Personally, I think that a Return to Britannia program would be much more succesfull in terms of players coming back to the game IF it gets coupled with a 50% off promotion at the UO codes store....
And, possibly, it would be even a revenues increase even with the 50% off promotion considering that more codes would be sold to the returning players (and multiple codes, most likely...) AND, perhaps, existing players would also take advantage of the promotion buying codes which they probably would have not, so, overall, I think it could ALSO be a success not only in increasing UO's player base but also in getting in some extra revenues....

Besides, we all know how several expansions make the UO experience much better so, offering a consistent promotion for a 50% off for the purchasing of UO codes so that returning players could be able to upgrade their accounts and get the codes they may need to have a playable account back up again, would mean laying foundations to have more returning players actually happy to play Ultima Online again finding their UO experience more enjoyable and complete and so actually stick with the game even after the Return to Britannia window would end....

That's at least as I think.

 

[Spawn DF]

I want you to look at all the subscription-model MMOs out there and tell me which ones haven't charged for expansions.

EVE Online

 

[Llewen]

Been a raft of good news lately. First an independent studio, now release on Steam. What's next? Cross platform support for Linux? I say that because Valve (the developers of the Steam platform) are pretty committed to developing Linux as a gaming platform. Either way, the best news we've had for our game in a long time.

 

[Aran]

EVE Online

Okay, there's one. I guess colorful spreadsheets kind of count as games.

 

[Llewen]

I never got into EVE Online, but EVE and CCP are one of the most respected games and independent game developers in the industry. What they've done with EVE is nothing short of miraculous. It's a skill based MMO in an ocean of level based crap, there are protected areas but it is pretty much a wide open pvp environment with full loot and even the potential for permanent death. They celebrate their scammers and villains. And most importantly, it is one of the most successful MMO's financially in the history of the industry, with a player base that has continued to grow throughout it's life span.

It's a complete anomaly, and in spite of the fact that it didn't grab me, it's an amazing game, and CCP is one of my three most respected game developers.

 

[popps]

I never got into EVE Online, but EVE and CCP are one of the most respected games and independent game developers in the industry. What they've done with EVE is nothing short of miraculous. It's a skill based MMO in an ocean of level based crap, there are protected areas but it is pretty much a wide open pvp environment with full loot and even the potential for permanent death. They celebrate their scammers and villains. And most importantly, it is one of the most successful MMO's financially in the history of the industry, with a player base that has continued to grow throughout it's life span.

It's a complete anomaly, and in spite of the fact that it didn't grab me, it's an amazing game, and CCP is one of my three most respected game developers.

I never got to play EVE Online so do not know much about it, I wonder whether or not it may have problems with scripting, duping and in general cheating from players or whether it is a cheat-free game.

I always look for games that I may like but my pre-requisite to even start trying one out is that they must be as cheat-free as possible and that the policy for the game is a zero tolerance for cheating ......

 

[Llewen]

If you only play cheat free games you'll never play any online game, let alone an mmo. I know from the short time that I play that scripted resource gathering was an issue then. I have no idea about other problems. They do celebrate villains, but villains that play within the rules. Regardless of that, if science fiction and spaceships are your thing, it's an amazing game.

One thing I do know about EVE is that they have one of the healthiest in game economies in the industry. It is vibrant and full of opportunities. That's usually a good sign with regard to issues like the use of cheats and exploits.

 

[The Craftsman]

Im not expecting UO on Steam to generate new players in any sort of quantity that would make a difference.

The monthly subscription price for starters will put people off. Its an obscene amount for an archaic game. Players expect more for their money these days. Secondly its a toss up which people will do first ... laugh when they see the CC or puke when they see the EC. Even if it did bring in a few thousand new players (more likely in the hundreds) then keeping those players is a whole different ball game. Plus any extra revenue generated will just go the way of all other UO revenue, i.e. used on other projects whilst UO is kept on life support.

So nah ... not excited at all about this. Much too little much too late to save UO. Only the F2P model can ever do that but I cant see that happening either as EA dont want UO to develop or grow ... its simply a cash cow and small additional revenue stream to support/develop other titles. Its a niche, throwback game and those who still play should think themselves lucky that the server still comes up everyday. It will however never be more than that due to years and years of neglect and mismanagement.

 

[Flagg]

If nothing else, being featured prominently on Steam should put UO back on maps of older gamers who either remember playing UO or hearing good things about it. There are millions of 30-somethings who are either old vets or "UO curious". If like 5-10% of these people ended up returning over few months, it'd be enough to make us all very excited. I think this in and of itself can be valid enough a reason to be at least mildly optimistic about Steam release. Ending up in Steam will mean few old vets returning. Like as not some former freeshard heroes end up climbing aboard. too.


I can 't imagine too many younger Steam users completely new to game finding a single valid reason to end up paying for archaic game with archaic business model. This I think is sad. I'm old. You are old. We are all oldD: This dusty nest of wrinkling,balding, grey vampires could use some fresh blood < - creepy smiley

 

[Llewen]

I think you might be surprised what Steam could do for UO in terms of marketing. And people keep bringing up EA as though they are relevant anymore - they aren't. All they are doing is collecting licensing fees from Broadsword, and providing some transitioning and billing support. Do you think if EA was still in charge there would be any chance that UO would become available on Steam, when EA is trying to develop it's own version of Steam?

But some of my hopes for Steam, such as it becoming mandatory and being included in VAC, were just wishful thinking. The same is probably also true for the native Linux support that Valve is so keen on. However, even without those things, this is the best thing to happen to UO in terms of marketing since it stopped being available on store shelves.

 

[The Craftsman]

Steam will undoubtedly be a better marketing platform than anything EA/Mythic have done for UO to date. My point is however is that the high monthly fee (for an old game with decades old graphics), antiquated CC, even worse EC (including its terrible performance even on some high end machines) will stop people playing no matter what the level of marketing. Sure some will give it a go, but the account management will put most off if the subscription and graphics dont.

UO is what it is and is never going to attract players in any large numbers in this day and age. The vast majority of current players are nostalgia freaks. Players with a higher than average age than probably any other MMO. Hardcore fans who will play until they pull the plug. Uo isnt for the modern day player im afraid no amount of marketing will change the nuts and bolts of what the game is, which is a dinosaur in a modern marketplace. You cant polish a turd.

 

[popps]

Steam will undoubtedly be a better marketing platform than anything EA/Mythic have done for UO to date. My point is however is that the high monthly fee (for an old game with decades old graphics), antiquated CC, even worse EC (including its terrible performance even on some high end machines) will stop people playing no matter what the level of marketing. Sure some will give it a go, but the account management will put most off if the subscription and graphics dont.

I will never EVER understand why most players always bring up the topic of Graphics being old, outdated and all that but HARDLY bring up the VAST, IMMENSE depth and complexity of the game.

This is an ONLINE multi player virtual world ! Who cares for the graphics when the world works like a charm, has a LOT of things that can be done and a depth and a complexity that is unmatched (and by far) by most if not all other games out there ??

Besides, it is not like UO's graphics are horrible...... they may not be top notch but they do are acceptable....

At least for me.

UO is what it is and is never going to attract players in any large numbers in this day and age. The vast majority of current players are nostalgia freaks. Players with a higher than average age than probably any other MMO. Hardcore fans who will play until they pull the plug. Uo isnt for the modern day player im afraid no amount of marketing will change the nuts and bolts of what the game is, which is a dinosaur in a modern marketplace. You canr polish a turd.

Well, I have read posts on these same forums of adult UO players bringing up their actual testimony of their family youngsters not just actually only getting interested in playing UO by watching their parents, grand parents or uncles/aunts playing, but actually liking its vast depth, complexity and incredible game play, despite of the old graphics....

And we are talking about young gamers here, used to who knows what graphics out there !!

This shows to me, that game depth and vastness of the world CAN beat the battle over eye candy graphics even with today's young gamers ....

 

[kronides]

This is an ONLINE multi player virtual world ! Who cares for the graphics when the world works like a charm, has a LOT of things that can be done and a depth and a complexity that is unmatched (and by far) by most if not all other games out there ??

I agree with you, I don't give two flips about graphics, but the fact is that there are many, many gamers who do. It's the first thing people notice and often the first thing they care about.

 

[The Craftsman]

Who cares about graphics? The majority of video games players in this day and age Im afraid. Rightly or wrongly, they are brought up on sumptuous graphics, and whilst gameplay should remain the most important factor, for many many players good gameplay is lost withpout the eye candy graphics to match.

You may not like or agree with the fact but graphics DO matter, to a very large percentage of players.

And yes, some younger players play UO. But on the whole its a much more mature (older) playerbase. Without the graphics you simply arent going to attract enough new players to a game such as this. Some, but not close to enough to make any sort of discernable difference. Sad but true.

 

[popps]

Who cares about graphics? The majority of video games players in this day and age Im afraid. Rightly or wrongly, they are brought up on sumptuous graphics, and whilst gameplay should remain the most important factor, for many many players good gameplay is lost withpout the eye candy graphics to match.

You may not like or agree with the fact but graphics DO matter, to a very large percentage of players.

And yes, some younger players play UO. But on the whole its a much more mature (older) playerbase. Without the graphics you simply arent going to attract enough new players to a game such as this. Some, but not close to enough to make any sort of discernable difference. Sad but true.

Well, that I understand and I am all in favour of Ultima Online upgrading its graphics wherever possible....

Nonetheless, personally, as a UO player, I'd rather see resources spent on bettering AIs which, to my thinking, in a virtual digital world like Ultima Online should be the most important thing for me as a player....

I'd rather stay with current UO graphics but gain a blasting AI for all monsters and NPCs in the game then the other way around....

Unfortunately, I see most gamers look as a priority at graphics rather than AIs and depth of game play and of the world....

 

[The Craftsman]

Personally I dont want them to upgrade UO's Graphics. UO is UO and I think that once you start radically changing it, it becomes not the UO you know and love. A major graphics overhall would change it to a point where it just wasnt the same game. Hell, if they ditched the CC and ran EC only that would be enough in itself to drive away a load of players for whom the classic look 'is' UO. Im sure thats not true for everybody but it is for me. In its time UO has been the best game ive ever played. I say in its time because it was an amazing game at a certain point in its history. Again im sure that point in time is different for different people, which is why no one can agree on exactly what a classic shard should be.

To some people that perfect time in UO's evolution may well be now. To me it changed over a period and lost a lot of its immersion. I loved having a Silver Broadsword of Vanquishing. I dont like having a sword with a list of properties attached to it that looks like a spreadsheet. Its become a numbers fest, to the point where the only way to keep track of your 'suit' is with a spreadsheet as you try and make the numbers add up. Thats not gameplay. Thats not immersion.

If gameplay is number one in terms of importance, why is UO not the worlds leading MMO? Its not all about marketing. You could spent tens of millions on advertising and marketing but it wouldnt bring players into the game in droves. UO has the player base that it has because its a dinosaur (and I mean that in the nicest way). The last surviving game of a generation, which is kept alive when other games of that era have long gone for two reasons ... 1. It is a bloody good game. 2. Because the core player base are still in love with UO and keep enough subs rolling in to keep its head above water.

Players need to accept however that UO is never going to be anything other than what it is now. There is simply no appetite within EA/Mythic (or whoever the hell is pulling the strings now) to drive it forward or make UO a modern game (re write the entire architecture and coding), nor are there enough players out there who want to pay a monthly subscription for a game with graphics that have been around since before they were born. F2P would undoubtedly bring in thousands of players but are they the sort of players us UO fans want in the game? Would EA invest money from the F2P model back into UO? Probably not. UO2 is probably the best shot. Written from the ground up to be the game UO shpuld be in this modern age. All of the great features and gameplay but with a modern game engine and Graphics.

However ... even if UO2 came to be, and was brilliantly done, true to the original concept, there would still be swathes of players to whom UO2 wouldnt be UO, because only UO is UO. Which brings me back to my long winded way of saying that Steam will not help UO in any noticable way and UO will remain the niche game it has become over the years. Great for us fans and old nostalgics but its never ever going to cut the mustard with the enough of todays gamers to be the game we would all love it to be. i.e. thriving.

 

[The Craftsman]

Oh Dear. Ive just clicked on the Steam link to take a look and its not good. 20 discussion threads and over 700 posted comments on Steam and barely a good word being said about UO. It reads like a list of reasons why you shouldnt go near the game if you are a new player considering it. Its just horrendous.