What is with the UO freeshards?

[funtime2009]

This topic needed its own page.

It amazes me that EA would allow their game to be copied by people and thus allow the deterioration of their product. In the sense of the dollar why wouldn't a paying customer go to a freeshard?

The declining number of people in the EA UO user base is partly due to EA's lack of stopping the rampant pirating of their product and thus losing the user/financial base.

I do not play on a freeshard because EA's UO game has a lot more players and isn't buffed (where you can become max capped, max skilled in 2 days.)

EA finally did something about the duping and the undermining of the value of the game by deleting accounts but the damage is done now.

When I left UO 2.5 yrs ago a transfer token cost 3m and now its 25m...

Frankly what is the point to cheating? Why play a game if you have to cheat? There is no entertainment value if you become a god in 2 days.

Enough said.

 

[Kiminality]

Frankly what is the point to cheating? Why play a game if you have to cheat? There is no entertainment value if you become a god in 2 days.

In the case of PvP, the "journey" is not usually considered the important part.
Training up a character is the means to the end of being able to fight other players on reasonably even terms. In that case, having to dedicate two days to training up a character, in order to be able to have a hope of fulfilling your end goal, is too long.

It can be said for other playstyles, too.

 

[funtime2009]

Perhaps the issue here is there is no control on where a player can go in fel. People don't generally go to fel unless they want to pvp and there is no way to limit the level of the character (skill, armor (level.. no such thing)) to appropriate areas.

I played WOW a couple years and they had pvp dungeons specifically level capped for 11-19 (not totally sure), 20-29. 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69. 70-79, and 80. This allows people to pvp with same level/same equipment level people. The armors were also specific to the level needed to equip.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

Perhaps the issue here is there is no control on where a player can go in fel. People don't generally go to fel unless they want to pvp and there is no way to limit the level of the character (skill, armor (level.. no such thing)) to appropriate areas.

I played WOW a couple years and they had pvp dungeons specifically level capped for 11-19 (not totally sure), 20-29. 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69. 70-79, and 80. This allows people to pvp with same level/same equipment level people. The armors were also specific to the level needed to equip.

Of course this is impossible since there are no levels in uo at all, you can pvp with less skill than other players if you are as good as them or better, and items are not level specific and it would be beyond complicated to try and limit areas based on items, what is a good item? what is a medium level item? What one person wants or treasures is not the same as another person. Trying to compare a limited game to an unlimited game is probably not the best way to go about making this point, tho I do understand where you are coming from on the matter but it is not a feasible thing in uo.

 

[MuffinBear]

This topic needed its own page.

It amazes me that EA would allow their game to be copied by people and thus allow the deterioration of their product. In the sense of the dollar why wouldn't a paying customer go to a freeshard?

EA doesn't have a choice, as long as the freeshards do not charge people to play on them they aren't breaking any laws and there is nothing EA can do about it.

The declining number of people in the EA UO user base is partly due to EA's lack of stopping the rampant pirating of their product and thus losing the user/financial base.

I do play on one of the free shards and the reason people play there is because it is what UO used to be...pre trammel and pre AOS junk. Those players would not return to UO if all of the free shards were closed, they would just play something else like World of Warcraft.

This I do not play on a freeshard because EA's UO game has a lot more players and isn't buffed (where you can become max capped, max skilled in 2 days.)

UO Hybrid, the freeshard I play on has more players then any UO server.

This Frankly what is the point to cheating? Why play a game if you have to cheat? There is no entertainment value if you become a god in 2 days.

That kind of freeshard is one where you can just jump right in and start playing, it's kind of fun to have 120 of every skill.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

EA doesn't have a choice, as long as the freeshards do not charge people to play on them they aren't breaking any laws and there is nothing EA can do about it.

Wrong.

Someone tried to do the same thing with WoW, blizzard won, emulator is no longer there. EA took a stance on it once, but then dropped it. meh...Do not want to argue with some of the more intelligible people here (or even those who think they are) so I wont bother to explain how EA could shut it down if they wanted to, as my argument is full of holes and really only theoretical.

If another emulator for WoW has come about and I do not know about it, so be it, point still proven originally one was shut down.

 

[MuffinBear]

Wrong.

Someone tried to do the same thing with WoW, blizzard won, emulator is no longer there. EA took a stance on it once, but then dropped it. meh...Do not want to argue with some of the more intelligible people here (or even those who think they are) so I wont bother to explain how EA could shut it down if they wanted to, as my argument is full of holes and really only theoretical.

If another emulator for WoW has come about and I do not know about it, so be it, point still proven originally one was shut down.

WoW has more free shards than Ultima Online, the only thing WoW does is they cancel your account if they find out you play on one of them.


Sony recently threatened legal action against EQclassic.org when they were talking about opening a private and classic EQ server but I don't think they could of actually done anything against them either since even EQ has private servers.


I think the private servers only have a problem if they charge players to play on the servers...nothing wrong with donations though, Hybrid accepts donations and I assume makes alot of money from them.

 

[Aran]

The thing about the UO emulators is they're using their own code to run a server, it's simply the UO client being used to access it. They're not violating any copyrights in doing it.

 

[Saris]

Wrong.

Someone tried to do the same thing with WoW, blizzard won, emulator is no longer there. EA took a stance on it once, but then dropped it. meh...Do not want to argue with some of the more intelligible people here (or even those who think they are) so I wont bother to explain how EA could shut it down if they wanted to, as my argument is full of holes and really only theoretical.

If another emulator for WoW has come about and I do not know about it, so be it, point still proven originally one was shut down.

WOW has a billion free servers I got a neigbor playing on one right now, how you stop someone in a county that dont have laws protecting EA or Bliz?

not arguing just letting you know WOW may have won in a court but never has every free wow server gone down.

besides ppl go their when they get banned, so it dont realy effect sales much IMO
lawyers are already retained but im sure going after them cost $$$

 

[aranier]

Yes they are breaking the law. Try reading the EULA.

 

[Aran]

EULAs are not law. Many do not stand up in court.

Next?

 

[Lady_Calina]

Yes they are breaking the law. Try reading the EULA.

They can basically write whatever they want in there, but once it goes to court a judge can throw it out.

 

[Setanta]

The clone shards are usually written in Java or some other scripting language. They may use a playfield that is similar to the UO world, maybe even an actual copy. They pretty much all either emulate the UO server interface or download an update to the UO client to match it to their interface.
The legal problems they face are these and more:
Depending on how the copyright on the UO landscape is worded, It is certainly illegal to copy it outright, and may be illegal to copy tiles from UO.
The server interface is also undoubtedly copyrighted, so if they emulate it well enough to work with the standard UO clients, they have broken the law.
If EA retains ownership of the client code (which they do), it is illegal to modify it without permission to match your server interface.
If they use the terms UO, shard, etc. they have broken copyright laws.

So, yes they are illegal. Whether EA feels there is enough to be gained by prosecuting is something else.