What route would UO had taken if UO:R never had happened?

[copycon]

Change is needed. There is no doubt about that. But, there is a right way and a wrong way to approach change. The changes that were introduced with UO:R, AoS and others contained many good changes that were positively received and other more significant changes that were not well received and left a large number of players disgusted to the point of leaving.

The more significant changes have been illustrated in point form many times over, so it shouldn't be difficult for most to tell the difference. I could also go through and list the reasons that some changes were positive while others were negative and why, but that would take far too much time.

The point to be made is that change is necessary, but it must be carefully planned and implemented which was clearly not the case for much of it. It is obvious to see what "features" were added as a matter of "someones bright idea" versus those that were planned and implemented in a balanced and well thought out manner. I can also speak from experience in saying that the former had the bigger impact towards public opinion more so than the latter.

 

[Gunga_Din]

I posted this on mmorpg.com a while back to describe what UO was and meant to me. These are some of my stories. The biggest mistake was not having servers created without trammel. When they were gonna implement that, they should have immediately made 2 servers felucca only. I don't think transfers would be needed, just have people start from scratch but if no, then transfers to the fel only servers before trammel. Anyway, here was my post:

My first experience with a MMORPG was Ultima Online in 1998 (well before Trammel was implemented, mirror world , no PVP except with consent). I compare every MMORPG to UO in its early days. For those who never got a chance to play before Trammel, i'm gonna tell you about some events/gameplay that you will most likely never get the chance to experience or see implemented in a MMORPG again.

My first week in Ultima Online (Chesapeake server) was rough. On my 4th day online I decided to venture beyond the city limits. See in the City you were protected from PVP attacks by the NPC guards. Once you left the city limits, you were free game. So anyway, I came across a player (Name in RED = Which means he was a murder and has killed innocents or BLUE named online players)standing next to a Dragon, "hmmmm , what the hell is that guy doing?" 3 Seconds later..... "corp por" ! and a Dragon standing over my corpse.

Ok, that was my first PVP encounter ever online. Didn't go too well. I didnt realize what a Murderer was. So, I ran as a ghost to a healer, he rezes me. I run back to my corpse to get my equipment back....... "what the hell?" The guy who killed me looted my corpse. I had no idea lol. Ok now i was pissed. PVP anywhere ! WOW.

I travel back to town with my tail between my legs and find another online player (My first Online Encounter with a NON-NPC character) This guy had been playing for 3 weeks. "Veteran !" I thought. At this point all I can think about is revenge, so I talk this guy into helping me track down my assassin and maybe together we can kill him and I can get my stuff back.

I pick up some new supplies and with the added confidence of my companion we head out in search of my killer. We were ready ! He said he had killed a troll and a few bears ! I was impressed. After wandering around where I had been slayed for 15minutes, my friend says "Ok where is this guy?" 3 seconds later I see a Dragon come down from above and kill my savior in one hit. (Picture the Dragon from the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail. You know, the cartoon one that eats the Knights) At this point i'm so scared to even help him I just run back to within town limits with my heart racing. Hoping he doesnt catch up to me. (I actually laughed so hard running back to town, it was hilarious seeing the dragon one hit him lol)

Ok "I'm safe" "Phew". I thought to myself, this game is too difficult, I can't compete, I lost all my stuff, who knows how many times thats gonna happen to me. I was just about to quit right there. Obviously i was taken advantage of by a veteran player, a griefer at that. I logged out and thought i'd never log in again.

A few days later I jumped back in. Something drew me back. Maybe because I saw a real challenge here.

I'm at the bank in town and a player (Taizong) approaches me. A moment later over my head I see "Taizong is attacking you !" (In the normal style, in town !) I reacted and attacked him, 3 seconds later, a town guard was standing over my corpse.

I run to a healer , rez, run back.....my corpse was looted. I was scammed ! My first one ever online. Well that was just about it, "screw this game !". So I see Taizong and decide to ask him how he was able to attack me in the town limits and not get killed by the guards. He explains to me he just typed Taizong is attacking you!" into the spatial in the same font and color as it would appear any other time. Hmmm, you know, thats kind of creative and funny. I went from ready totally quit to having a laugh with the guy that scammed me and got me killed.

We talked at great length and in the end he gave me a ton of new equipment (better than what I had ever found) and introduced me to his guild. I met another 10 people within 5 minutes, joined their guild and went on to enjoy UO with them for over a year. They taught me how to survive, how to avoid danger and how to advance my character.
Good thing I stuck it out. PVP almost anywhere, if you die your corpse could be looted ! What was I thinking? Greifing? This can't be fun !

Well guess what, I miss getting my corpse looted, I miss getting scammed, I miss seeing a guy with his name in RED come on to the screen and my heart rate go up, I miss not knowing if a guy with his name in Blue would decide to attack me or befriend me. It was RAW, and barely any rules. All of us learned how to survive and apapt.

Even after Taizong left from UO (due to trammel) and another guild mate, Meth, we continued our friendship for yrs. Even playing some other MMO's together. If it wasn't for him getting me killed, I would have never got into my first guild or built this bond. Of course I had to also accept what he had done to me and not whine. Sometimes just talking to the scammers or Reds was enough for them to respect you. If both parties saw it as just a game, it usually worked in your favor.

UO had house decay, if someone didnt log in for 10 days their house would collapse and all there possessions would lie there for others to loot. We used to check house signs for signs of wear. Fairly worn, greatly worn, in danger of collapsing !! People would know in danger meant within 24 hrs and tons of characters would show up like it was a party. PVP was going on, friendships made, alliance made for when the house fell etc . When the house collapsed all hell broke out, some people got attacked, others when for rare items, and some just tried to place a house with a deed in that same spot. Early on the map would be full , and no space for housing. Hell it took our guild 3 months just to find a spot lol. But it was our spot ! A nice 7x7 on fire island !!

I had a Grandmaster Smith. People would die, get looted and come back to me for supplies. I was in constant demand and became very popular. Made many friends too. The guys that looted those they murdered would bring me weapons and armor to smelt back into ingots for them to sell to other smiths and of course they would tip me or give me ingots! lol. Nice circle economy.

One murderer and I formed an alliance, he wouldn't kill me while mining and I'd smelt armor for him. He'd even give me ore from miners he'd kill. I met him one day when 3 of us tried to kill him at his house near the N. Brit mine. He killed all 3 of us constantly with a bow from his house. One day the 3 of us just laughed with him and we talked about his tactics etc. Soon we all formed a friendship and he gave us gear back and alliances were born. Of course it didn't always work out, but having some PK friends added to the excitement.

To combat REDS the miners formed a guild at the N. Brit mine. You paid in ingots to have protection while mining and you were friended to the guild house for protection. Worked quite well. This is one example of how to decrease grief and increase survivability lol.

We also had a unique tavern by Yew called the Falconer's Inn. There Reds and blues would hang out together, have ale , tell stories and use the well stocked vendors. Rule was, if u attacked anyone out front or in the tavern you would be banned from the shop. One day I was attacked outside and the tavern cleared !! All the reds and blue inside left and ganked the guy , got my loot back and rezzed me. Then we all just went back into to tavern and continued on like nothing happened. Pretty cool huh?

New MMORPGs are missing these raw elements. And you know why? Because we all complained, its too tough, I was scammed, I was griefed ! Guess what , deal with it. The more restrictions placed upon the game mechanics, the less interesting these online games will become.

 

[NuSair]

I am rather amazed at the rose colored glasses people have on.

Having played since beta (toss in about a 4 year break to play EQ ~2000-2004), saying there wasn't rampant pking is just wishful thinking.

People were always trying to come up with new ways to kill you in guardzone. And you couldn't hunt anywhere without people training you (dragging creatures on top of you, then hiding to watch you die) or using some hack/script to pk you.

Twice I had my house looted because of hacks. Of course none of that was ever replaced. To lose everything you worked for, building up over 6 months all because some lame script/hack kidding thinks that makes him cool.

There was no 'hunting down' of pks. Either they ganked you or they ran off. And sorry, I have better things to do with my time than to spend 5 hours chasing after a couple of people.

I worked 40+ hours a week. Life is stressful enough, the last thing I wanted to do was come home to more greifing online is something I did to supposedly relax. That is what eventually caused me to leave the game in the first place. I had just finally had enough of it. There were no consequences for their actions. This has been brought up time and again by the people who MADE the game.

Nostalgia is a very powerful thing. Personally, I feel that it is nostalgia that is behind this classic/pre- AOS/UO:R shard.

I also feel that people seem to have the idea that by bringing back a shard of this type will return the game to some idealized utopia.... without remembering all the problems that existed back then. Pk, hacking, scripting, griefing....

Pre-UO:R there was no end game for UO. It had no place to go, it was just the accumliation of resources. I made my millions reselling regs, scribing and potion making. 5 houses, all on one account, all on Atlantic.

 

[Gunga_Din]

They still could have added content without adding trammel. Maybe add instances for boss encounters etc. Just have to be creative with the content with just the felucca rule set. Those things would have come to fruition when they saw what WOW and Everquest were bringing to the table.

Yea there wasn't much end game at the time, but they could have adapted once they saw what other MMO's were doing.

 

[NuSair]

They still could have added content without adding trammel. Maybe add instances for boss encounters etc. Just have to be creative with the content with just the felucca rule set. Those things would have come to fruition when they saw what WOW and Everquest were bringing to the table.

Yea there wasn't much end game at the time, but they could have adapted once they saw what other MMO's were doing.

I believe that Tram (May 2000) was added because of what they saw with Everquest (March 1999). A majority of the player base didn't like the fel rule set. Hence- Tram came into being.

 

[copycon]

Twice I had my house looted because of hacks. Of course none of that was ever replaced. To lose everything you worked for, building up over 6 months all because some lame script/hack kidding thinks that makes him cool.

I made my millions reselling regs, scribing and potion making. 5 houses, all on one account, all on Atlantic.

Sorry, I just found the contradiction kind of funny...

Did you ever think to yourself that you are never content with having X, Y or Z or that you tend to fixate and lash out on anything negative that happens to you regardless of how insignificant? Doesn't that seem a bit extreme?

Throughout UO's lifecycle there have been problems with PKs and such, but it was not nearly as bad as you describe. The problems were more visible for players that frequented high traffic areas during peak times, and weren't prepared to escape, or didn't prepare by minimizing their losses, so they became a target by default. Does that sound familiar? I should think so...

 

[NuSair]

Sorry, I just found the contradiction kind of funny...

Please do explain how that is a contradiction?

 

[Aragon100]

I am rather amazed at the rose colored glasses people have on.

Having played since beta (toss in about a 4 year break to play EQ ~2000-2004), saying there wasn't rampant pking is just wishful thinking.

People were always trying to come up with new ways to kill you in guardzone. And you couldn't hunt anywhere without people training you (dragging creatures on top of you, then hiding to watch you die) or using some hack/script to pk you.

Twice I had my house looted because of hacks. Of course none of that was ever replaced. To lose everything you worked for, building up over 6 months all because some lame script/hack kidding thinks that makes him cool.

There was no 'hunting down' of pks. Either they ganked you or they ran off. And sorry, I have better things to do with my time than to spend 5 hours chasing after a couple of people.

I worked 40+ hours a week. Life is stressful enough, the last thing I wanted to do was come home to more greifing online is something I did to supposedly relax. That is what eventually caused me to leave the game in the first place. I had just finally had enough of it. There were no consequences for their actions. This has been brought up time and again by the people who MADE the game.

Nostalgia is a very powerful thing. Personally, I feel that it is nostalgia that is behind this classic/pre- AOS/UO:R shard.

I also feel that people seem to have the idea that by bringing back a shard of this type will return the game to some idealized utopia.... without remembering all the problems that existed back then. Pk, hacking, scripting, griefing....

Pre-UO:R there was no end game for UO. It had no place to go, it was just the accumliation of resources. I made my millions reselling regs, scribing and potion making. 5 houses, all on one account, all on Atlantic.

I have a different experience of classic UO.

There was alot of PK:ing before statloss arrived and less after. Statloss in UO was a harsh consequence and if you can name another MMO with evenly hard consequences please do it. I would sometimes call PK:ing rampant but far from all the time. I could leave town with my blue gatherer and even mine in dungeons on Europe server. I had recall ready and PK:s usually failed to get me, paraboxes was also good to use. It was also very exiting to be in such a harsh game world, you had an adventure every time you left guardzone.

There was alot of PK hunting on Europe simply cause killing a renowned PK was inspiring and you could boost about it.

Never had any problems with loosing a house during the time i played classic UO, neither did the hundreds of friends i had. Guess you were very unlucky. Did'nt either feel that old classic UO were a cheater paradise, on the contrary i believe today UO is alot worse when it comes to hacking/scripting, far worse.

What i talk about when i describe classic UO is not nostagia, well abit, but far from all of it. I have continued to play classic UO from AoS arrived up til today.

What it comes down too is that we prefer different types of gameplay, thats all. Your game is still arround, mine is gone.

 

[Gunga_Din]

I believe that Tram (May 2000) was added because of what they saw with Everquest (March 1999). A majority of the player base didn't like the fel rule set. Hence- Tram came into being.

As I stated, they could have been more creative then just a mirror candy land. What if they made a few dungeons that REDS couldn't enter? There are plenty of ideas. Sure some would get you changing the game some, but not entirely like the creation of Trammel.

They could have just added a few areas for you to play in safely. Not too many lol, but a few.

 

[copycon]

Of course none of that was ever replaced.

I made my millions reselling regs, scribing and potion making. 5 houses, all on one account, all on Atlantic.

contradiction

1. the act of going against; opposition; denial
2. a declaration of the opposite or contrary
3. a statement that is at variance with itself (often in the phrase a contradiction in terms)
4. conflict or inconsistency, as between events, qualities, etc.
5. a person or thing containing conflicting qualities
6. (Philosophy / Logic) Logic a statement that is false under all circumstances; necessary falsehood

 

[MrWilliams]

PK's everywhere and no anti-pk'ers.
Where? Pk's Everywhere, I dont understand this comment still from players, I have spoke to a few who said it was so bad you couldn't leave town, Then others like me and a few friends can only remember being killed on a few occasions.

I agree, the degree to which people were pk'd is somewhat exagerrated. I was pk'd plenty of times in total yes, but the game certainly wasn't unplayable. You could go hours on a dungeon crawl without bumping into a Red and anyone who was half decent could escape at least 80% of the time.

The added danger also meant that guilds were important and this helped to create a thriving community with all manner of power hubs fighting for superiority.

 

[Aragon100]

As I stated, they could have been more creative then just a mirror candy land. What if they made a few dungeons that REDS couldn't enter? There are plenty of ideas. Sure some would get you changing the game some, but not entirely like the creation of Trammel.

They could have just added a few areas for you to play in safely. Not too many lol, but a few.

Yeah that would have been better. It would'nt have separated the community like trammel did.

PK's everywhere and no anti-pk'ers.
Where? Pk's Everywhere, I dont understand this comment still from players, I have spoke to a few who said it was so bad you couldn't leave town, Then others like me and a few friends can only remember being killed on a few occasions.

I agree, the degree to which people were pk'd is somewhat exagerrated. I was pk'd plenty of times in total yes, but the game certainly wasn't unplayable. You could go hours on a dungeon crawl without bumping into a Red and anyone who was half decent could escape at least 80% of the time.

The added danger also meant that guilds were important and this helped to create a thriving community with all manner of power hubs fighting for superiority.

I was a anti PK and died sometimes to PK:s and sometimes i killed them. Was alot of fun, competitive gaming for the win.

 

[NuSair]

contradiction

1. the act of going against; opposition; denial
2. a declaration of the opposite or contrary
3. a statement that is at variance with itself (often in the phrase a contradiction in terms)
4. conflict or inconsistency, as between events, qualities, etc.
5. a person or thing containing conflicting qualities
6. (Philosophy / Logic) Logic a statement that is false under all circumstances; necessary falsehood

Here, let me spell it out for you.

Twice, my house was hacked and I lost EVERYTHING inside of it. Even though it was hacked through a bug which the GMs admitted at the time, they replaced nothing that I had lost.

I made millions making potions, selling scrolls and regs.

How are those statements contradicting each other? Are you seriously that daft?

 

[Babble]

Because of severe server instability and the inability to log in... The constant shard crashes and reverts... The 4 hour waits for a GM only to have the shard crash/revert and start over... The placing a great house spot only to have the shard crash and revert...

It certainly wasn't because of the new content...

That was Renaissance, I could have sworn we got the AOS stuff because AOS introduced over 1000 new bugs and people still played

 

[Gunga_Din]

I believe that Tram (May 2000) was added because of what they saw with Everquest (March 1999). A majority of the player base didn't like the fel rule set. Hence- Tram came into being.

Also, you talk about endgame. Trammel did not produce endgame. Only easier way for you to make millions with your regs lol.

Take felucca and just branch off ideas. Again, i'm not gonna list all my ideas. But you could have added endgame type content to lets say 75% felucca ruleset with 25% NuSair ruleset.

 

[copycon]

How are those statements contradicting each other? Are you seriously that daft?

My point is that you are fixating on the negativity while ignoring the fact that you had near unlimited resources at the time.

I'd also be interested to hear what "bug" was used to loot your house(s) assuming that it was after locked down and secure containers were added. If not, and you still had all of those things afterwards then I'm still confused, but I realize that is not suitable discussion for these boards.

 

[NuSair]

Also, you talk about endgame. Trammel did not produce endgame. Only easier way for you to make millions with your regs lol.

Take felucca and just branch off ideas. Again, i'm not gonna list all my ideas. But you could have added endgame type content to lets say 75% felucca ruleset with 25% NuSair ruleset.

I never said Trammel added an endgame.

25% NuSair rule set? Interesting idea.....hmmmm.

 

[Babble]

Here, let me spell it out for you.

Twice, my house was hacked and I lost EVERYTHING inside of it. Even though it was hacked through a bug which the GMs admitted at the time, they replaced nothing that I had lost.

I made millions making potions, selling scrolls and regs.

How are those statements contradicting each other? Are you seriously that daft?

*coughs*
Which speaks badly of UO's programming,
Anyone remembers when there was a hack after AOS where people could steal from houses too?
And UO still does not replace anything today either, so not sure what point it does make, except that UO's programmers sucked/suck...depending what you think of bugs now



And neither Trammel nor anything UO really introduced is endgame material.
The deveolpers stated they considered felucca and pvp the endgame.

 

[NuSair]

My point is that you are fixating on the negativity while ignoring the fact that you had near unlimited resources at the time.

I'd also be interested to hear what "bug" was used to loot your house(s) assuming that it was after locked down and secure containers were added. If not, and you still had all of those things afterwards then I'm still confused, but I realize that is not suitable discussion for these boards.

Just because I had a lot of gold/resources at that time doesn't mitigate the facts. That is like saying someone steals 20mil from you, but it's ok because you have 100mil.

The first time my house was looted, it was before you could lockdown/secure anything. Evidently, I had a 'hole' under my house that allow someone to access my house and loot it.

The second time, someone using a bug waas able to access my secure chest and emptied my resource house (wood/ore/regs mostly). At that time, I kept most of my gold as house deeds.

The 1st time completely broke me (as in, they took everything I had).

The 2nd time, I had multiple houses and only 1 was looted, but it was all my resources.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

I am rather amazed at the rose colored glasses people have on.

-snip-

you couldn't hunt anywhere

-snip-

Twice I had my house looted

-snip-

I have better things to do with my time than to spend 5 hours chasing after a couple of people.

-snip-

That is what eventually caused me to leave the game in the first place.

-snip-

Nostalgia is a very powerful thing. Personally, I feel that it is nostalgia that is behind this classic/pre- AOS/UO:R shard.

I just wanted to highlight a few key points in your post.

Honestly, if nostalgia is behind the classic movement, then I would have to say that bitterness and, if there is a such thing...anti-nostalgia...drives those that are against a classic shard.

But why?

The existence of a classic shard would not subject you to the things that you saw as "griefing" back in the day...unless you made a choice to log onto that shard. The same can be said of Fel. Would you step through a red gate and then complain because you died?

Forget for a moment that what you call griefing was just people playing the game the way it was designed...and consider the last statement you made here:

Pre-UO:R there was no end game for UO. It had no place to go, it was just the accumliation of resources. I made my millions reselling regs, scribing and potion making. 5 houses, all on one account, all on Atlantic.

If the "griefing" was really that bad...how did you manage to amass millions of gold and 5 houses? I mean, your initial assertion was that you could basically not step foot outside of town without someone killing you and taking everything you had...but if you were able to amass that much wealth, then surely that could not be the case.

Also...you say that Pre-UO:R was just "the accumliation (I assume you meant accumulation) of resources". What exactly changed that with the addition of UO:R?? If anything, accumulating resources became infinitely easier with the introduction of Trammel.

I understand your distaste for PKs, but it seems to me you are the one that is looking at the past through tinted, jaded, lenses.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

Twice, my house was hacked and I lost EVERYTHING inside of it. Even though it was hacked through a bug which the GMs admitted at the time, they replaced nothing that I had lost.

My account was hacked years after Trammel was introduced, and I lost everything.

Please explain how Trammel can protect you from hacks or bug exploits.

 

[Uvtha]

PK's everywhere and no anti-pk'ers.
Where? Pk's Everywhere, I dont understand this comment still from players, I have spoke to a few who said it was so bad you couldn't leave town, Then others like me and a few friends can only remember being killed on a few occasions.

I agree, the degree to which people were pk'd is somewhat exagerrated. I was pk'd plenty of times in total yes, but the game certainly wasn't unplayable. You could go hours on a dungeon crawl without bumping into a Red and anyone who was half decent could escape at least 80% of the time.

The added danger also meant that guilds were important and this helped to create a thriving community with all manner of power hubs fighting for superiority.

There WAS a period of time where pks were basically camping outside brit on every side, but pre UO:R this was not at all the case. I like you rarley got pked, because I was smart about what I did, when I did it, where I did it, and who I took with me when I went, as did everyone I know. I had a small guild at the time fluctuating from 10 to like 25 members and none of them had issues with pks.
Really all you had to do was avoid like 10 specific areas and your chances of running into a went down like 80%, and especially back in that time running unprepared into a PK was hardly the instant death scenario it is today. Most pks were tottal noobs, and you could just run away, on foot no less. I did it ALLLLLL the time.

Much agreement with your comments.

And Id like to add that even if it had been so terrible as people say, Tram was still a disaster, and still a horrible horrible solution to the problem.

 

[BajaElladan]

One MORE of these Threads, eh??? OK!

I did not participate in Beta, so I have no idea what type players and behaviors were in Beta. However, I began playing Ultima Online in September of 1997 shortly after its Public Launch of production Shards.

The vast majority of Players back then, played a few hours when not at work, and a bit longer per log on on weekend days. Some immediately began sizing up angles, cheats, bugs, and exploits to enrich themselves. Some became Brokers, either in game at places like Skymall, or out of game by launching web sites to sell gold, and in time selling items, deeds, and accounts.

Some set about maximizing Thief skill and ways to gain from the work of others. Some became player killers and looters and some focused on becoming "first" to GM one or more skills to farm gold and items from npc prey.

Many became crafters, fishers, and a host of other professions or careers. Some focused mainly on themselves, some focused mainly on others or on the "community."

Some enjoyed the ability to attack or steal from other players anywhere possible. Some, behind the mask of their character identity resorted to the basest behavior possible.

For many different reasons players before long voted with their feet and cancelled subscriptions to send EA a clear message. Non-consensual player versus player combat was not merely unwelcome, It Was UNACCEPTABLE!

The exodus of players in time exceeded the influx of new players even tho UO was the dominant kid on the MMORPG block, for a net LOSS in subsrcibers. Something needed done, and fast or UO would forfeit its position as largest and fastest growing community of subscribers.

Hindsight is nice but no one knows what the impact would have been of any other choices open to Developers and Administrators of EA. Personally, I would have favored a "PvP switch or button" toggled or pressed at log on either giving consent to murderers and thieves, or withholding that consent. This would have avoided the division of the players into Felucca and Trammel communities.

However, all of this is moot and really pointless ... you can't unring the Bell! We would be far better served to discuss how to make today's UO the best it can be, and how to make Tomorrow's UO even better.

Elladan

 

[Babble]

By the time Trammel was introduced UO was not the fastest growing mmo. Heck EQ surpassed it quickly (i had no 3d card in my computer so I could not play it then) and later DAoC.

UO was only for a very short time really fast growing in a very fast growing market. If you really want to see it in that concept then the whole UO is a failure. It has staying power but grew slower than eq or other games.

Is maybe the reason why no UO similar product is considered by the big companies there is no real money in it. At least at the moment with the concepts developers have.

 

[Gunga_Din]

Looks its quite simple. Trammel was needed for part of the community. The problem is, they never addressed those that enjoyed the game world as it was.

They should have just cloned 2 Felucca only servers right then and there. Sure that would mean allocating some resources to a different rule set, but you would have had those 2 servers running till this day I bet. (Not Siege P)

 

[Skrag]

That UO still grew does not mean anything as long as the mmo market itself grew

Tell that to Shadowbane. Remember years ago when Shadowbane was going to "kill UO" with it's open PVP world? Tell that to Tabula Rasa, Richard Garriot's cutting-edge second MMO.

Both of those games are dead, gone, unplugged, kaput.

Tell it to Matrix Online, Asheron's Call 2, Hellgate London, Auto Assault, APB, and every other MMO that has died over the last few years. Tell it to big-budget flops like Vanguard, Warhammer, and Conan. Tell it to Lord of the Rings Online and D&D Online, games that have given up on the traditional subscription model and gone to "free-to-play plus cash shop" models.

Meridian 59 is still bumbling around as a free-to-play game, but that's nothing but a vanity project with a one-man development team. He bought the rights after the original owners finally shut down. For every game not named "World of Warcraft" the subscription MMO market has been absolutely brutal for years now.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

The exodus of players in time exceeded the influx of new players even tho UO was the dominant kid on the MMORPG block, for a net LOSS in subsrcibers.

Just a point of fact that the gain in new accounts approached levelling off, but never enetered a "net loss" prior to Trammel. Of course it took the implementatiion of Trammel (and Factions) to jump start the gains in accounts again (which then peaked after Third Dawn and lagged until AOS where it peaked again then dropped off).

However without Trammel, that UO:R peak never would have happened and the chart would have had a much smaller "hump" for UO's life cycle.

 

[Coppelia]

Ninjas would have taken over the world and we would all have to speak Morse code.

It's really scabrous to try to imagine what UO would be after ten years of development (or lack of development) without UO:R. I guess we can imagine everything.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

...

without Trammel, that UO:R peak never would have happened and the chart would have had a much smaller "hump" for UO's life cycle.

There is absolutely no way for you to know that.

Suppose for a moment that instead of Trammel, they had put in a simple PvP switch (the second worse thing they could have done IMO). The population would not have been split, the communities and establishments would not have died...and many, but not all, of those players might have stuck around instead of canceling their accounts.

Or even better, what if EA had found a solution that allowed for much more controlled amount of open PvP...but not eliminating it completely. Like safe areas, better justice system, harsher penalties for PKs...but not a complete shut down of their playstyle. How many of those subscribers would have remained? Once the new wore off of EQ, which it did, how many players would have returned to a more challenging, more realistic, more dynamic world?

To say that Trammel was the only answer is just plain wrong. There is no way to no for certain, and there never will be...but I will always contend that UO could have been spared its WoW-ization had Trammel not be introduced.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Ok, so you berate me for having "no way of knowing" something then go off on multiple tangents which you have just as much of a "way of knowing" that you claim I do for mine.

Where did I say that Trammel was the ONLY answer? Where have I said that in ANY of my posts?

I've maintained the same position on Trammel since they ANNOUNCED what they were doing for it.

The game needed a method to give players a BETTER choice in if or how they wanted to be involved in PvP (no... "stay in town" was not acceptable, nor was "only go out of town with a group").

The IDEA of separating lands was a good idea, however the implementation I always believed to be incorrect. Either they should have had full PvP and non-PvP shards (only one Britannia facet), or if they were to retain the mirror aspect, then I always believed that the rulesets should have been implemented in reverse of the way they were and that the LESSER amount of players be uprooted (which would have at least helped to maintain the current at the time establishments).

Was Trammel perfect? No. Did it procure the long term survival of UO... absolutely, the numbers prove that out quite clearly both for UO and for the Fantasy MMOG genre as a whole.

Final thought on the chart and the UO:R release date... while it seems like the push upwards for UO starts a bit before UO:R's release date, this is because UO:R was patched in and active ingame for a couple months prior to store release. Those were also the months that Trammel was open but before housing could be placed.

 

[NorCal]

...

The exodus of players in time exceeded the influx of new players even tho UO was the dominant kid on the MMORPG block, for a net LOSS in subsrcibers.

Just a point of fact that the gain in new accounts approached levelling off, but never enetered a "net loss" prior to Trammel. Of course it took the implementatiion of Trammel (and Factions) to jump start the gains in accounts again (which then peaked after Third Dawn and lagged until AOS where it peaked again then dropped off).

However without Trammel, that UO:R peak never would have happened and the chart would have had a much smaller "hump" for UO's life cycle.

It is correct that they never had a net loss in accounts until after UO:R. Also there are facts that can refute that it was Trammel that lead directly to gains in sub in the EA quarterlies from the time. In late 1999 early 2000 UO launched servers in Korea, Taiwan, and Australia, which EA specifically mentions lead to a gain in subs. One house per account contributed as well.

The early MMO charts are extremely accurate because the number of subs was taken directly from EA quarterly reports before they hid these numbers from the public.

 

[Skrag]

I end up linking this in every one of these threads, but I guess I can do it again. The following quote is from former UO community manager and developer Calandryll, speaking several years after leaving EA.

Anyway, whether Trammel was the right thing for UO or not is somewhat debatable. What isn't really debatable though is that Trammel did have a positive affect on UO's subscriber numbers. It's very tricky to figure out exactly how positive though since a lot of UO's total growth in the months leading up to the release of UO:R is heavily skewed because of Japan. Japan had a HUGE impact on UO’s subscribers during that time. If you remove the outside factors and just look at the US numbers you can see that Trammel worked. It’s especially important to look at the growth after Trammel was announced, including the growth from reactivations during that time.

Now one can argue that continuing down the road of "fixing" the PK problem without implementing Trammel might have been MORE successful - we'll never know. Trammel definitely "ruined" the game for a group of players who enjoyed a certain play-style, but that by no means make it a failure in the grand scheme of UO's success as a product. Trammel absolutely made UO's subscriber numbers better in both the short and long term.

The thing PKs need to understand is that their playstyle was driving people out of the game - in droves. It was also the source of a LOT of really, really bad PR. And lastly, in the short-term anyway, Trammel increased UO's subscribers and overall retention. All of those are undeniable facts. As a player, I rarely got PKed. I knew how to fight back and I learned recall. I held the opinion that PKs weren't really a big part of the game. In fact, my character was “red" for most of the time I played UO from killing looters, fire-fielders, and other people who abused the notoriety and reputation systems to PK or loot people without incurring a penalty. We used to joke that the only way to actually be virtuous in UO was to go Dread. But that’s a different story.

Anyway, from my personal perspective, I didn’t see PKing as that big of a deal. Until I came to OSI and saw the effect on UO's subscribers and saw just how many people were in fact upset about and quitting over it.

Link to first quote.
Link to second quote.

You might need to register to use the links, I don't know. There was a bit of a stink a while back when it turned out that Mark Jacobs was posting there and not here, so I take it nobody is going to try to pretend this is some sort of impostor. Also realize that these are years-old threads and don't run onto the forum trying to talk about UO when nobody there cares.

Anyway yes, there is direct quotation from a UO player and developer of the era, telling you that even though he didn't mind PVP people were "quitting in droves" over the PK problem. There is a former developer who didn't even like Trammel and would have preferred a different solution telling you that Trammel "worked" and "absolutely made UO's subscriber numbers better in both the short and long term".

One of you chuckleheads come back and tell me again how nobody was quitting because of PK and everyone hated Trammel and bla bla bla revisionist history bla. I dare you.

 

[Aragon100]

I end up linking this in every one of these threads, but I guess I can do it again. The following quote is from former UO community manager and developer Calandryll, speaking several years after leaving EA.




Link to first quote.
Link to second quote.

You might need to register to use the links, I don't know. There was a bit of a stink a while back when it turned out that Mark Jacobs was posting there and not here, so I take it nobody is going to try to pretend this is some sort of impostor. Also realize that these are years-old threads and don't run onto the forum trying to talk about UO when nobody there cares.

Anyway yes, there is direct quotation from a UO player and developer of the era, telling you that even though he didn't mind PVP people were "quitting in droves" over the PK problem. There is a former developer who didn't even like Trammel and would have preferred a different solution telling you that Trammel "worked" and "absolutely made UO's subscriber numbers better in both the short and long term".

One of you chuckleheads come back and tell me again how nobody was quitting because of PK and everyone hated Trammel and bla bla bla revisionist history bla. I dare you.

Trammel was just the first step to ruin the game for players that played the game from the beginning and learned to enjoy the classic felluca playstyle. I never saw trammel as a catastrophy even though i know others did and i enjoyed UOR immensly on the Europe shard all the way up to the release of AoS. Felucca on Europe shard was a very active shard during UOR.

The real nail in the coffin for classic felucca gamers was the implementation of AoS that felt like a dagger in the back, and the dagger was held by UO developers and the target was the old faithful playerbase that fed them from 1997 up to the arrival of AoS february 2003.

So i could'nt care less about trammel and subscription numbers, i do believe trammel had a positive impact to subscription numbers, but selling out the old felluca playerbase completely and leaving them with nothing but freeshards to play is what really hurts and still hurts 7 years after the implementation of AoS.

Felluca players subscription money wasnt something EA had any interest in. If they had interest they would have left a couple of classic shards up for their old faithful felucca subscribers. This they didnt do and that tell me they didnt care about the classic felluca players at all.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

...

Ok, so you berate me for having "no way of knowing" something then go off on multiple tangents which you have just as much of a "way of knowing" that you claim I do for mine.

The difference is, I did not make this statement:

without Trammel, that UO:R peak never would have happened

----

Where did I say that Trammel was the ONLY answer? Where have I said that in ANY of my posts?

without Trammel, that UO:R peak never would have happened

Was Trammel perfect? No. Did it procure the long term survival of UO... absolutely, the numbers prove that out quite clearly both for UO and for the Fantasy MMOG genre as a whole.

Once again, I disagree...and there is no way to prove that it was Trammel, and only Trammel, that 'procuded the long term survival'. Perhaps if you had said 'making changes that stopped rampant PKing procuded the long term survival' I would not disagree. In fact, I have long stood by that position myself. Something had to be done, that is for certain...but it should not have been Trammel.

 

[Morgana LeFay (PoV)]

One of you chuckleheads come back and tell me again how nobody was quitting because of PK and everyone hated Trammel and bla bla bla revisionist history bla. I dare you.

I don't think anyone is going to say that 'everyone hated Trammel'. What I will say, and others will back me up I am sure, is that a certain percentage of the UO population hated, and quit, because of Trammel.

Why would anyone say that "everyone hated Trammel"? There have been cowards and people that wanted the easiest gameplay possible since long before UO ever existed...so of course, there will be those that enjoy Trammel.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Is the above quote from Calyndryll (who was a dev at the time) enough for you?

Trammel absolutely made UO's subscriber numbers better in both the short and long term.

Like I said (and have maintained for over a decade), the implementation wasn't the best way they could have done it, but the game would not have survived SOME FORM of choice implementation, the lack of choice started costing BIG marketshare as soon as actual competitors arrived on the scene.

The fact remains that regardless of what Dermott of LS or Morgana LeFay thinks would have been the better implementation, Trammel the way it is now is what we got and it is what kept UO from closing its doors years ago.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

They lost millions of dollars by alienating the classic UO subscribers with trammel and AoS. Those subscription money could easily been kept if they had one classic intact game and another for the trammies.

That was the mistake and it was a very costly one. Keeping the classic game was more or less free since that game was already developed.

So instead they decided to give away loads of potential subscription money to the freeshards.

Why? I have no idea.

So the route should rather have been keeping the classic game and develop a trammie friendly one and that way keeping all potential subscribers.



It was exactly the new content that made thousand upon thousand of old UO veterans leave the game when AoS was introduced. They left for their only available option freeshards since there beloved classic UO was dead and buried.

You speculate a lot of things. They lost nothing by introducing trammel, the people who don't like trammel never had to go there. Thus making an all fel shard and all trammel shard would have had the same effect on the game balance, difference is you could take your fully developed character between the worlds if you so desired. AoS I might have sympathy for you with, but none of what I said is false, the time might not have been right, but still not false. And you speculate a ton that people left after AoS for freeshards because they wanted a classic game, but again speculation.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

I don't think anyone is going to say that 'everyone hated Trammel'. What I will say, and others will back me up I am sure, is that a certain percentage of the UO population hated, and quit, because of Trammel.

Why would anyone say that "everyone hated Trammel"? There have been cowards and people that wanted the easiest gameplay possible since long before UO ever existed...so of course, there will be those that enjoy Trammel.

*ahem*

so is that where "they" lay their claim that UO is/was theirs?

Looks more like the Roleplayers, whom the game was built for ...
managed to defeat them, control them ... run them out ...

and they appear to be saying: no no no! we deserve a shard of our own because the RP's are cowards ...

*ahem*


I think there is a term for that ...

Megalomania is a close fit ...
but I do think there is a word that also covers ... those who were driven off and/or just quit playing/participating ... in A community
and still try to "enforce" their view that THEY are the wronged party ... and further that
(since their numbers are legion {by their count})

It would behoove those ensconced in power ... to accede to their demands or be doomed to ignominious defeat ...

hummmm ...
is there a singular word for Sore Losers?

 

[Ox AO]

You didn't even give the most obvious answer. Which I expected UO to take from the beginning.

Rather then destroying the old lands as they did with trammel they could have given the Anti-PKers an obvious advantage.
Some very simple things that could have been done:

All of this stuff still assumes that everyone wants to play a game which is entirely about PKs and fighting PKs.

kinda like real life isn't it?

The best direction the game could have taken was to go in the direction of simulating real life set in a fantasy world

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

The best direction the game could have taken was to go in the direction of simulating real life set in a fantasy world

So... perma-death?

 

[Sevin0oo0]

I know myself and several others wouldn't of played. uo:r was the turning point that made us play at all

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

...

The best direction the game could have taken was to go in the direction of simulating real life set in a fantasy world

So... perma-death?

I believe that may have been one of the "alternate paths" (accompanied with: loss of char slot, all items held dropped to ground and at bank(in cases of theft / chance to recover for "victims"))

but (as attractive as it sounds) I believe there was a "counter exploit" that became obvious ... something about hacked accounts ... or younger brother/sis did it ...

*shrugs*

 

[AesSedai]

...
is there a singular word for Sore Losers?

- Well, in many ways I think this word has a similar connotation:

revisionist

I luv a good burma shave in the morning.
Smells, in a way, like napalm

 

[HD2300]

imo Trammel was the ultimate implementation of Player Justice. Ignore mode. It was implemented 10 years ago, and the 5% that were ignored by the 95% are still whining about it 10 years later. Justice has been served.

Dont like Trammel and insurance? The solution is to play Siege. Dont like AOS? The solution is to only use NPC purchased items. Want to play 1998 T2A? Form a guild of likeminded people who all agree to not use insurance and only use NPC items. Just do it. No one is stopping you.

I challenge 1998 fanbois to do this. Prove that we are wrong and 1998 fanbois are right. But I know that 1998 fanbois will not accept this challenge, simply because they know "there is no there there".

 

[NorCal]

I end up linking this in every one of these threads, but I guess I can do it again. The following quote is from former UO community manager and developer Calandryll, speaking several years after leaving EA.

Anyway, whether Trammel was the right thing for UO or not is somewhat debatable. What isn't really debatable though is that Trammel did have a positive affect on UO's subscriber numbers. It's very tricky to figure out exactly how positive though since a lot of UO's total growth in the months leading up to the release of UO:R is heavily skewed because of Japan. Japan had a HUGE impact on UO’s subscribers during that time. If you remove the outside factors and just look at the US numbers you can see that Trammel worked. It’s especially important to look at the growth after Trammel was announced, including the growth from reactivations during that time.

Now one can argue that continuing down the road of "fixing" the PK problem without implementing Trammel might have been MORE successful - we'll never know. Trammel definitely "ruined" the game for a group of players who enjoyed a certain play-style, but that by no means make it a failure in the grand scheme of UO's success as a product. Trammel absolutely made UO's subscriber numbers better in both the short and long term.

The thing PKs need to understand is that their playstyle was driving people out of the game - in droves. It was also the source of a LOT of really, really bad PR. And lastly, in the short-term anyway, Trammel increased UO's subscribers and overall retention. All of those are undeniable facts. As a player, I rarely got PKed. I knew how to fight back and I learned recall. I held the opinion that PKs weren't really a big part of the game. In fact, my character was “red" for most of the time I played UO from killing looters, fire-fielders, and other people who abused the notoriety and reputation systems to PK or loot people without incurring a penalty. We used to joke that the only way to actually be virtuous in UO was to go Dread. But that’s a different story.

Anyway, from my personal perspective, I didn’t see PKing as that big of a deal. Until I came to OSI and saw the effect on UO's subscribers and saw just how many people were in fact upset about and quitting over it.

I find this informative for a few parts you didn't bold. It's a fact that PKs were a problem and caused many to quit. It was probably the best solution at the time and a short term success, but that quote must be really old because no game would implement a split like that ever again. Games have learned from this and it was a mistake, although Tram had the intended results of curbing PKs, it alienated a part of its subscribers and split the community. Even if the Fel playerbase was only 25% of UO, it's bad business. Games today would find a way to keep 100% of their customers and that solution is seperate PvP and PvE servers not Tram/Fel.

It specificly mentions the growth in new markets, so it backs up what I said about EA quarterlies from 2000. In fact the only way they could show the true impact of Tram was to ignore the massive amount of new subs from Japan and focus on North American subs, which it points out that a lot are reactivations of old accounts. Isn't that kinda like the idea behind a classic shard

 

[Skrag]

It specifically mentions the growth in new markets so it back up what I said about EA quarterlies from 2000. In fact the only way they could show the true impact of Tram was to ignore the massive amount of new subs from Japan and focus on North American subs, which it points out that a lot are reactivations of old accounts.

Did you miss the part where it says "if you remove the outside factors and just look at the US numbers you can see that Trammel worked" or just decide to ignore it?

Also, what does the fact that droves of people reactivated old subscriptions because of Trammel do for your side of the argument? Oh I know you want to pretend there are legions of players out there just waiting to play a classic shard, but all I see are the same four trolls spamming in eight different threads. Seriously half the "clamor" for a classic shard on this forum is Morgana alone.

kinda like real life isn't it?

The best direction the game could have taken was to go in the direction of simulating real life set in a fantasy world

Yeah, if they wanted to go out of business.

 

[HD2300]

... which it points out that a lot are reactivations of old accounts. Isn't that kinda like the idea behind a classic shard

My judgement is that after about 6 months you will have some of these reactivations still subscribing, but UO will lose many more existing subscriptions from cancellations. "T2A" shard would result in a significant loss of subscriptions overall.

Want to play 1998 T2A UO? Form a guild of likeminded people who all agree to not use insurance and only use NPC items. Just do it. No one is stopping you. I challenge any 1998 fanboi to do this. Prove that the 1998 fanbois are right and there is massive demand. It is easy. You can do it now.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

I don't think anyone is going to say that 'everyone hated Trammel'. What I will say, and others will back me up I am sure, is that a certain percentage of the UO population hated, and quit, because of Trammel.

Why would anyone say that "everyone hated Trammel"? There have been cowards and people that wanted the easiest gameplay possible since long before UO ever existed...so of course, there will be those that enjoy Trammel.

Only the "wolves" are allowed to say they "hated" trammel. It did not impact anyone in any way other than it made the world "smaller" but if someone so wished to enlarge it all they need do is run or recall to WBB in tram to do their interacting.

The "split" was needed, I am not entirely sure if the implementation was the right one, but honestly it seems like the most fruitful. Think about it like this, people do not like to redo things, if for instance they went with adding new shards with just Tram rules Then people would have to start over there, not only that, but a percentage of people who play in tram eventually try out fel, not only try it out but like it and continue to play there, in the world where each shard is its own implementation you would have to start over to attempt to play in fel, which most people would not do.

While AoS diminished the population greatly, and diminished the chance for my above example to really work itself out, but still to think that having UO as an all Fel rule set game with no new content would have lasted for this long is just not the right mindset. Honestly, if they made fel rules only and tram rules only shards. What would be the difference between that and people who don't like tram just staying in fel?

As most are aware I have played this game from the beginning, most are aware I am a Fel advocate. But I am above all else a UO advocate, what prolongs the life of the game is what is best.

I don't think tram did anything for the short term, but the long haul it was needed.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

... which it points out that a lot are reactivations of old accounts. Isn't that kinda like the idea behind a classic shard

My judgement is that after about 6 months you will have some of these reactivations still subscribing, but UO will lose many more existing subscriptions from cancellations. "T2A" shard would result in a significant loss of subscriptions overall.

Want to play 1998 T2A UO? Form a guild of likeminded people who all agree to not use insurance and only use NPC items. Just do it. No one is stopping you. I challenge any 1998 fanboi to do this. Prove that the 1998 fanbois are right and there is massive demand. It is easy. You can do it now.

but but but ... that would make us too easy to kill/harass, we'd need a safe place to ... wait a minute!!!

 

[NorCal]

Did you miss the part where it says "if you remove the outside factors and just look at the US numbers you can see that Trammel worked" or just decide to ignore it?

Also, what does the fact that droves of people reactivated old subscriptions because of Trammel do for your side of the argument? Oh I know you want to pretend there are legions of players out there just waiting to play a classic shard, but all I see are the same four trolls spamming in eight different threads. Seriously half the "clamor" for a classic shard on this forum is Morgana alone.

Are you serious? I mentioned North American subs in the part you quoted me. You have to completely eliminate Japan from the equation, those are all new subs and don't know or care about Tram/Fel. The quote you provided mentioned reactivation. You can't ignore the expansion factor or one house per account either. Games usually experience an increase in subs after an expansion from advertising and prime shelf space. New customers don't count they don't know about rampant PKing. I didn't know about PKs when I bought T2A. Just saw it on the shelf, I had my first computer and thought it looked cool. Reactivations are the only way to prove its impact. As for quiting in droves I admit that PKs caused people to quit. Tram caused people to quit, so did AOS. What is a drove exactly, can you put a real number on it without making one up?

All I see in classic shard threads are the same 4 anti-classic trolls trying to derail them and bait Morgana. Funny how it works both ways.