Would you still play UO if..

[Eyes of Origin]

After looking at the website for Dragons Age:Origins and seeing what EA and Bioware can do with graphics.. I was wondering, who would still play UO if we had graphics like that? If nothing but the graphics changed.. Honestly, I'm jealous we dont have graphics like that.

http://dragonage.bioware.com/ link included for judging purposes hehe

 

[Black Sun]

Honestly, I prefer the fixed position view we have now. I don't like the idea of walking through a 3D environment and not knowing what's waiting for me around that next corner. I think that's why I never liked FPS style games.

 

[sablestorm]

I remember way back when, I was playing UO and Baldur's Gate came out. I loved the look of the trees and shorelines and all that and yearned for it in UO. These days, however, catchy graphics don't phase me. I recently went back and replayed Baldur's Gate and I must say, UO's game play has aged quite well despite being an older game. So no, catchy graphics don't give me a wandering eye.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Put them in maintaining UO's current perspective and interaction and make them scalable (thus smoothly zooming and sizing to larger monitors) and I'm all for it.

Biggest problem I see with bringing up DA:O is that you;re comparing two different styles of graphics rendering (3d vs isometric) which makes it difficult to determine how one would play in the other. You;d have to put the artwork from DA into a UO perspective to get a better idea.

Also for a thread like this, a link to or adding in screenshots would help people in providing sources to give their opinon rather than making them run to Google to find it.

 

[Eyes of Origin]

link added to my original post.

I understand the difference in graphics and it may not even be possible, hence why it hasnt been done yet, but I'm still jealous lol

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

My biggest issue right now with the graphics isn NOT IF they can do it, but after the past couple years, do we as the player base even DESERVE such an upgrade anymore.

 

[Pawain]

After seeing the brood mother, Ill never play that game!

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

After seeing the desire demon, and reading the complaints about the KR/EC female paperdoll... I can only IMAGINE the firestorm such an "armor" suit would cause.

 

[Wolfways]

Better graphics would make me want to play more.

 

[Aurelius]

I was wondering, who would still play UO if we had graphics like that? If nothing but the graphics changed..

Tricky...

I'm not impressed with the hybrid 'enhanced' clients to date, some features are nice but I've not found enough to offset my dislike of the look of them.... but if something like a 'Dragon Age' quality first person client was out, I think I'd be there.

Barring that though, I'll still be playing UO until the servers shut down, but almost certainly on the 2d client

 

[Gladius]

link added to my original post.

I understand the difference in graphics and it may not even be possible, hence why it hasnt been done yet, but I'm still jealous lol

They won't simply because the subscribers the majority anyways prefer to be in the "jurassic" age of graphics.

They could have improved on KR but didn't do so besides it would be costly for EA we suppose.

JOHO of course hehe.

-G-

 

[Eyes of Origin]

After seeing the brood mother, Ill never play that game!

I'm not talking about playing DA:O... I'm talking about if UO had graphics like DA:O

and I agree, I will play UO till they shut the servers down... in 2D, but I have a little hope we might get something like DA one day.

Dermott.. what do you mean, if we DESERVE a client like that? Havent people been faithful enough to UO to deserve something like that? Some players have stuck by UO through 10-12yrs, isnt that enough?

 

[Eyes of Origin]

Ok so it would be costly to EA to redo UO with 3d graphics, but with 3d isnt there a chance that maybe they would profit off it more than they would lose?

 

[Uvtha]

It would require a new game world, and as such, probably a whole new game. You cant make the current world 3d. It would look rediculous.

 

[Maplestone]

it could be done in overlapping games:

1. create a new game in modern graphics.

2. have a special moongate in each game that leads to a room that exists in both the new game and the classic game

3. you can only carry across the moongate items that exist in both games.

4. your character exists in only one game or the other (except in the crossover room)

this provides the ability to both reboot the game and preserve the existing game at the same time, allowing people to maintain their attachment. As analogs to old items are added to the new game over time, you can carry more and more stuff across.

no reboot of the universe needed, no need to recreate everything we now have in the 1.0 version

 

[pacific lily]

...

My biggest issue right now with the graphics isn NOT IF they can do it, but after the past couple years, do we as the player base even DESERVE such an upgrade anymore.

You make me want to xfer to LS.

Let's pretend that the player base does deserve it... the development team would can the project before it got off the ground because those diehard 2D people would whine and fuss that it doesn't "look like UO." Heck, they're doing it in this thread and it isn't even a remote possiblity that we know of.

Lily

 

[pacific lily]

it could be done in overlapping games:

1. create a new game in modern graphics.

2. have a special moongate in each game that leads to a room that exists in both the new game and the classic game

3. you can only carry across the moongate items that exist in both games.

4. your character exists in only one game or the other (except in the crossover room)

this provides the ability to both reboot the game and preserve the existing game at the same time, allowing people to maintain their attachment. As analogs to old items are added to the new game over time, you can carry more and more stuff across.

no reboot of the universe needed, no need to recreate everything we now have in the 1.0 version

Yeah, that sounds like what they were GOING to do with Stygian Abyss till the herds of 2D people whined that they would close their accounts if they couldn't access SA in the 2D client.

Lily

 

[hawkeye_pike]

I don't think so. UO has always been a 3rd person perspective game, and it should not be turned into a WOW-style game. I think that technically this would be impossible anyway. However, I very much would like to see graphics like Titan Quest or Diablo 3 in UO.

 

[Maplestone]

I'm fairly sure it wasn't the whining itself that changed their minds, it was the fact that they didn't get critical mass of players using KR.

 

[Ender]

Players whined before KR was even in beta.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

We've been given THREE chances at an upgrade and they have all been hated for one reason or another.

You can even find threads on "What should be done to enhance the 2d client" which after you read the list is EXACTLY WHAT'S IN THE ENHANCED CLIENT and when you mention this the reaction "yeah, but I hate the new client". These same people claim to NOT care about graphics, but think anything NOT Legacy client "sucks" (which is a rather contradictory argument).

 

[Eyes of Origin]

Yeah, that sounds like what they were GOING to do with Stygian Abyss till the herds of 2D people whined that they would close their accounts if they couldn't access SA in the 2D client.

Lily

Well, compare 2.5d to 2d and yeah, I understand that, but with a fully 3d UO???

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

I doubt it will ever happen. 3d and Ultima have NOT had the best of history together.

Ultima 9 was a disaster
UO2 cancelled
UX:O cancelled
2 or 3 internal 3d UO projects cancelled while still in the rumour stage

 

[Masuri]

Absolutely I'd play it. Porting UO to a true 3D engine like that would be a dream come true. I'm not sure it would be a success in terms of drawing in enough people to make it worth the investment - at that stage, EA would be better off investing in a brand-new Ultima MMO that isn't saddled with 12 years of design muck. In the meantime, there's EC - not as pretty as KR, but it'll do.

You can even find threads on "What should be done to enhance the 2d client" which after you read the list is EXACTLY WHAT'S IN THE ENHANCED CLIENT and when you mention this the reaction "yeah, but I hate the new client".

ROFL Dermott, this is SO true. You can tell from threads like that - most people haven't even given it a cursory review before trashing it. Their agenda is abundantly clear.

 

[Gladius]

I'm fairly sure it wasn't the whining itself that changed their minds, it was the fact that they didn't get critical mass of players using KR.

You got it on the nail! But how could they get the mass base for KR when they deliberately failed to fix all the problems and bugs with KR eh?

The irony of it all is that folks and a lot of them still played the KR client with all it's problems. As a fact the KR thread still exists here at Stratics, what for only God and EA knows.

-G-

 

[red sky]

IMO, 3D graphics ruin games like this. I've played the original Command and Conquers and Starcraft and then played the new 3D versions of the games and it's just not the same. It's like taking a 63 Chevy and trying to add suicide doors and an air foil to it. It just doesn't work. If someone really likes a game just for it's graphics then they should go play a new game that incorporates it and not complain about the game that they are playing.

Like the old saying goes, "It's what's inside that matters, beauty is only skin deep." Or in this case, only graphics deep. LOL

 

[Tamburlaine]

I would yes. Unfortunately the constantly crying classic client purists would threaten once again to quit thus holding back a chance of renewing the life of UO.

Plus the Win 98 users would cry that they were no longer supported even though their OS, and I presume computer, is 10 years old and no longer supported by the manufacturer.

 

[Ender]

IMO, 3D graphics ruin games like this. I've played the original Command and Conquers and Starcraft and then played the new 3D versions of the games and it's just not the same. It's like taking a 63 Chevy and trying to add suicide doors and an air foil to it. It just doesn't work. If someone really likes a game just for it's graphics then they should go play a new game that incorporates it and not complain about the game that they are playing.

There's a 3D Starcraft?

 

[Eyes of Origin]

Ok maybe UO is just a classic and should be left alone as is.. dont get me wrong, I love 2d, would just like to see the game we all love brought current graphic wise....
and to reply back to someones post about turning UO into WoW.. do you realize that some of the stuff in the EC is just like WoW?? and also, if you look at the graphics for DA:O.. they are sooo much better than WoW in my opinion.

in the long term heres the options... keep 2d and add new expansions, hoping EA keeps the current player base and maybe gaining a few new players.. at the same time hoping they dont continue losing people to the point where they shut the doors on everyone, forcing them to either play 3d games or not playing anything at all.
second option... completely overhaul the graphics of UO and go to a full 3d version of UO .. yes losing some die hard 2d fans along the way, but also bringing it up to speed with the other 3d games and hopefully gaining more players than they would lose.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

Trust me, I've been at the forefront of wanting an updated graphical client for YEARS. The whole CONCEPT of the "persistent world" of an MMOG basically negates the idea of a sequel (because the original never ends) and that with client-server structure, you can always update the graphics, UI, and technology to keep up with the times (at least without dealing with the naysayers anyway).

3d was released FAAAAR too early as a concept at all (we're talking the EARLY days of 3d acceleration and polygonal graphics) and was a step backwards in "smoothness" of the graphics, but a HUGE step forward in animation smoothness and graphics vs filesize.

KR was rushed out the door and then abandoned, left unfinished. In the last year of KR's lifespan, more bugs were fixed by modders than devs.

EC does the give and take act ultimately taking a huge step sideways from KR by upgrading several UI features, but removing many others entirely. Upgrading the terrain and effects, but downgrading everything else.

The comparison to WoW is really shallow at best. The whole concept of the comparison is based on "hotbars = WoW". Well, KR/EC hotbars blow WoW's hotbars AWAY in functionality to the point that the comparison is really a weak joke.

I don't think UO needs to go FULL 3d, but it DOES need at the very least the ability to set options to give us better graphical quality for those who can and want to make use of them.

Watching detailed models be reduced to pixelated blobs and item art distort all over the place after the detail given in the KR client is disgusting. UO deserves better... but the attitude of some of its players say otherwise.

 

[Eyes of Origin]

I was just saying, some things look just like they do in WoW.. not saying they work better or worse in UO.

I played KR for a whole 10mins before deleting it from my computer At the time my computer was brand new, upgraded graphics card and all and KR ran like crap. Were the graphics ok? Yeah, but they were just ok, they werent spectacular by any means.

 

[pacific lily]

...


I don't think UO needs to go FULL 3d, but it DOES need at the very least the ability to set options to give us better graphical quality for those who can and want to make use of them.

Watching detailed models be reduced to pixelated blobs and item art distort all over the place after the detail given in the KR client is disgusting. UO deserves better... but the attitude of some of its players say otherwise.

I think their best move would be full 3D. Then it would have the chance of drawing in all of the people who play... well... every other console game on the market and most of the MMOs as well. As it stands, people DO look at this game and LOL regardless of what people here say. Pretending that anything less than a complete modernization of the look of the game will do anything other than provide something for the 5% or so players that embrace and use whatever new client the development team comes up with is not realistic imo.

Don't back down dude, keep wanting BETTER. Someday maybe our voices will make more sense than theirs.

Lily

 

[Eyes of Origin]

IMHO, I think it would need to go full 3D ... without full 3D, we get KR and EC, EC isnt that bad, but KR was horrible.

 

[MalagAste]

Part of the problem is everytime they release a new client they rush it...

Half the stuff does not work as intended and it oft times lacks many of the things uo with UOA and UOAM offer... thereby most of the 2d "loyalists" refuse to use it....

Top that off with the fact that many times the "look" of the game is changed so drastically and the art oft times is HORRIBLE and inconsistent with what the playerbase is used to. Which turns off more players.

And then there is the issue of performance. Often people suffer performance issues when we have tried new clients.

If they could get some seriously good artists with some good programmers... who could blend all that together they might..... must might get people to switch... but someone is always going to be unsatisfied.

Much like with what we have now....

Course that's a whole other can of worms.

 

[Warsong of LS]

if they could use either never winter nights or titan quest that would be sweet, same perspective. But I have not stayed with UO for 12 years for the graphics.it is about the gameplay. Heck I still play the original diablo and the hellfire add on, it is just a great game.

 

[Maplestone]

IMHO, I think it would need to go full 3D ... without full 3D, we get KR and EC, EC isnt that bad, but KR was horrible.

I think you are severely underestimating the fundamental difficulty of porting over 12 years of accumulated history into a new client in one fell swoop. KR was baby steps compared to what you are suggesting. And if you attempt to reboot the universe, there's no guarantee that people would play a "UO2" - it would simply be one more new hyped game in the huge sea of games out there.

Evolution, not revolution.

 

[Uvtha]

Absolutely I'd play it. Porting UO to a true 3D engine like that would be a dream come true.

I think its pointless to have uo as it is all redone to be a 3d game. The world was designed as a 2d game with like... no more than 5 people lengths of height in any area, and then only in buildings. It would be super flat and confusing.

I would like a titan quest/D3 type graphic for UO2. Which really is what KR was (sans item art which was abhorrent), but expecting it to fly as a repaint of UO was pretty foolish if you ask me. Especially with such an, as I said, flat world, and a player base that is like 80% curmudgeony veteran.

 

[Jhym]

Sorry, I won't view a site that insists I put an age in just to see their graphics.

In any case, 3D pushers can never explain what it would help IN THE GAME. UO has never needed 3D, because the first-person perspective doesn't make any sense for game play.

I have mentioned now and then that having the option to sometimes render scenes in 3d (or perhaps be able to play some in 3d for roleplaying) would be wonderful, but for standard play in a dungeon, or running through the woods?

Nope.

I played Tabula Rasa until it died, which was a fps immersive 3D game system -- and it worked because you BEGAN the game in 3d. Switching UO to 3D now would just be too wrenching to most players and truly doesn't improve game play at ALL.

Imagine chopping wood out of a tree in front of you, not noticing that something is banging on your head from behind until you're dead. Or getting a "damage" direction finder pointing in some direction but you can't figure out which one because the creature is above you.

Things like this are incredibly frustrating for most people who aren't FPS types, and would lead to people quitting.

At least with isometric view you have a good idea what's going on around you and are able to react more quickly -if you want to-.


Again, for 3D to work at all, there has to be definitive, concrete reasons WHY that gameplay would be better, and I've never heard ONE person give me any good reasons for UO.

 

[Eyes of Origin]

Please dont mistake any of my posts as complaining.. I love 2d, things dont look right in 2.5D or whatever its called. My question simply was.. would you still play UO if we had graphics like DA:O? I think it would be kinda cool to see what some of the stuff in UO would look like in 3d graphics. Perhaps, even after 12 yrs UO or the UO community isnt ready for that in any sense, whether it be the 2D we all know and love converted to 3d or a UO"2" made in 3D.
Other than from an aesthetical point of view there is no reason for UO to change.

 

[Phaen Grey]

I honestly think they could make money by making a UO sequel with the 3d graphics those who like/want change keep asking for. A new game wouldn't alienate the 2d diehards, and present for the 3d lovers what they want; with a shelf presence and EA/Bioware's backing I don't think it would fail. What keeps failing is trying to change the 2d game the majority of subscribers love.

 

[Zyon Rockler]

This is an upsetting topic to me personally because I feel we lost a great deal of time but i'm sure when the time is right the best RPG in the world will be created.

I think change was the problem with most people who just didn't want to commit to something new. Do you remember a long time ago, I believe before AoS when they changed the menus, then vendors and the crafting menus? There were other menus that were updated as well and they took out that annoying mixing sound.

This is what should of been done with the new client. They should of just updated it. People would have accepted it, instead they made it a seperate client and by the time people were ready for it and understood it they pulled the plug. Irony.

People in general are always arguing, rather than supporting and helping to create which requires self sacrifice, meaning even if there is something we don't want we allow it because it makes it better for everyone. Then we continue working on it so that everyone can get something good from it, simply stopping is the same thing as giving up but there has to be a point where we make a decision.

The fact is, is that there will be an RPG king. It will have the best graphics in all views, the best skill system, the coolest races, the best PvP system, oceans and even skies. This will be a long road for UO. Every three steps forward is two steps back and everything learned is sold or used up by other companies who try to defeat UO from a business perspective.

They should definitely produce a game that has everything that is UO and much more. I don't know what to say about 2d but I think i'm willing to let it go if it means another 12 years of UO, in my opinion, of course.

 

[Fink]

If nothing but the graphics changed..

If you changed the graphics from sprite-based 2D isometric to full model-based 3D, basically everything else would change.

 

[Mitzlplik_SP]

Its funny how some peaple blame the 2d crowd for an inferior client failing.

I love (real) 3d games. What is passed off as 3d in UO is a joke. No offense toward the devs. I`m sure they are pretty limited on what they can do without making a whole new game like UO2.

All the hardcore 3d whiners can get off their high horse. Its not the 2d peaple holding back a good client. Its the client itself that is keeping it in second place. I for one will not settle and dump 2d for full time EC/SA. SA is a great expac/client,even the EC is OK but it is not the game the masses will pick up and buy when peaple compare it to Titan Quest and the likes.

Lets say you bought Titan Quest and when installed it looked like SA and the EC......would peaple still use it to compare to others? I think not.

I think its the 3d crowd that is in denial. I think the hard truth is..... We`ll never have a 3d game peaple will drool over and forget about 2d unless it is a totally new UO. Not an expac based on 2d (with all its restrictions on what and how they can do stuff),like the last 3 attempts. Granted SA is by far the best attempt but it is still not what is possible in this day and age. So go ahead and settle. No one blames you.

If ya want the 2d`rs to convert....try puttin out something that is better graphically than 2d.

 

[Aurelius]

Let's pretend that the player base does deserve it... the development team would can the project before it got off the ground because those diehard 2D people would whine and fuss that it doesn't "look like UO."

Eh? So you reckon EA decided that a possible multi-million dollar payoff from a really succesful new MMORPG - which a 3d UO pretty much would be, in marketing terms - was not worth doing because a couple of hundred at most posters on a forum said they'd quit if they went ahead with it? You think the 'dev team' cancel projects if EA think there is a profit to be made?

You really think business works like that? Or that what people rant on a forum only game-fans know about really has such an impact on big-budget ideas?

Whan they look at a big redesign, they measure the likely new market it will bring in. If that looks like making a load more cash than the existing market, they do it. If they doubt it will make them money, they don't. Fanboys screaming 'I'll quit' on a forum have absolutely NO effect on the business side of EA. We can influence in-game design, patches that might be needed, give good ideas to the dev team - but we have zero impact on the soulless accountants who weigh up likely profit and decide to invest or not.

KR, SA, 3d, Dragon Age style,or any other client 'upgrade' gets made if there's big enough profit assessed likely from making it. It's canned when the bean-counters think the profits of making and marketing it will not give a big enough return on the cost. Decisions are not affected because a few hundred existing subscribers out of several tens of thousands yell 'I'll sulk if you do it'.

Nice as it is for the ego of a few posters on pretty small (in EA marketing terms) forums to think they can sway a corporate like EA in business decisions, it's frankly deluded to believe so.

 

[Blind Otto]

Consider the Nintendo WII. A few years ago, some of the things the WII can do were laughed off as "will never happen". Now, it's in a good many living rooms.
Five years from now, things will be even more out-of-this-world.
For instance, the price of PC-linked projectors is falling. The speed of graphic chips keeps increasing. Advances in hologram technology are coming along nicely.

Now, picture an Ultima Online that uses all of that. True virtual reality.

A dragon that towers over you, as you feel the heat of its breath on your head and shoulders. Scratch-n-sniff v 3.0 technology in the swamps and dungeons. Hear the snap of a twig behind you as a thief tries to sneak up on your unsuspecting backpack. Read about protesting do-gooders as dozens of players suffer cardiac arrest from chasing monsters up and down too many flights of stairs. Then feel those gold coins in your fist - and the surge of energy in your hands as you cast a spell.

THAT, I would take as a replacement for our current UO.
Until then, I'm happy.

 

[maroite]

After looking at the website for Dragons Age:Origins and seeing what EA and Bioware can do with graphics.. I was wondering, who would still play UO if we had graphics like that? If nothing but the graphics changed.. Honestly, I'm jealous we dont have graphics like that.

http://dragonage.bioware.com/ link included for judging purposes hehe

Many people would still play UO because their computers wouldn't be able to handle DA:O. lol

Its only the truth.

 

[pacific lily]

Let's pretend that the player base does deserve it... the development team would can the project before it got off the ground because those diehard 2D people would whine and fuss that it doesn't "look like UO."

Eh? So you reckon EA decided that a possible multi-million dollar payoff from a really succesful new MMORPG - which a 3d UO pretty much would be, in marketing terms - was not worth doing because a couple of hundred at most posters on a forum said they'd quit if they went ahead with it? You think the 'dev team' cancel projects if EA think there is a profit to be made?

You really think business works like that? Or that what people rant on a forum only game-fans know about really has such an impact on big-budget ideas?

Whan they look at a big redesign, they measure the likely new market it will bring in. If that looks like making a load more cash than the existing market, they do it. If they doubt it will make them money, they don't. Fanboys screaming 'I'll quit' on a forum have absolutely NO effect on the business side of EA. We can influence in-game design, patches that might be needed, give good ideas to the dev team - but we have zero impact on the soulless accountants who weigh up likely profit and decide to invest or not.

KR, SA, 3d, Dragon Age style,or any other client 'upgrade' gets made if there's big enough profit assessed likely from making it. It's canned when the bean-counters think the profits of making and marketing it will not give a big enough return on the cost. Decisions are not affected because a few hundred existing subscribers out of several tens of thousands yell 'I'll sulk if you do it'.

Nice as it is for the ego of a few posters on pretty small (in EA marketing terms) forums to think they can sway a corporate like EA in business decisions, it's frankly deluded to believe so.

If you can't get the customers you already have to try something new, it's difficult to justify investing (and it would be a HUGE investment) in that something new. That's Marketing 101, not my ego. Right now without a HUGE investment, this game makes money. The investment in true 3D graphics would be significant, and perhaps not something they're willing to risk without a playerbase that is screaming for that change. If everyone here had my view that this game needs to visually move into the 21st century, then it would probably happen, or at least, they might be more willing to RISK some money to see.

ooh... Risk vs. Reward... doesn't just happen in Felucca I guess!

They know which client players log in on. And if you think they AREN'T reading these boards, you're mistaken. This is the kind of crap marketing people live for... real input from people who actually use their product. They might not read every post, and they might not read my posts or your posts specifically... but this is the most valuable input that a marketing team has other than sales & login statistics.

Lily

 

[red sky]

There's a 3D Starcraft?

http://www.starcraft2.com/

 

[Eyes of Origin]

If you changed the graphics from sprite-based 2D isometric to full model-based 3D, basically everything else would change.

I know everything else would change.. =/ I guess the point to the question was missed..
Make a UO where I get everything I currently get in game, but make it in 3D.. could it all be converted from 2D to 3D under the current client? possibly, but more than likely not. Could they make a new version of UO, keep the races, keep the skills, keep the pets, keep the deco, keep the houses, keep everything, but create new art for them and put them into 3D art? Probably. Will it ever happen? again, most likely not.
Imo, IF there was a 3d version of UO that was to offer everything we have now in game, EA could possibly profit from it, but it would be a risk, like Lily said and with a majority of current players against anything like this, its a risk they probably wouldnt take.

 

[Kaleb]

I would leave UO in a hartbeat.