Had WoW chosen to model itself on UO rather than EQ we would now be all complaining how there was not enough theme park MMO’s.

Some will doubt it could have been as successful as a sandbox game and they would probably be right. But WoW sealed the direction MMO’s would go in till this day.

Good article

I still play UO ,it was my first MMO and even though I don't actively logon I still pay my subscription fees

The game is fun...it doens't have the graphics or exciting dungeons of a game like Vanguard for example but it is entertaining

I will be purchasing SA ...good to see a new expansion :)

Originally posted by Antarious

Originally posted by alacres

Nice article, but I did want to respond to one of your comments. You said, "It is often puzzling why so many MMOs have tried the Everquest model of game design and not the Ultima model, when you look back on MMO history."  There's a simple enough explanation for that and it comes in three letters - WoW. Blizzard proved that the EQ model, if done "correctly", is the most popular and easily accessible model for the mmo genre, with it's appeal expanding to a very large demographic.

 

 

This was probably addressed later and I saw a minor comment about it (didn't read past the first page).

 

This is just another "silly" comment on these forums.

 

First off Ultima Online released in September of 1997...

 

EverQuest went live in I believe it was March of 1999.

 

WoW went live in 2004 (november) now oddly a LOT of MMO's came out between March of 1999 and Oct of 2004.

 

Which my perspective on the quote you quoted is.. talking about game design in general and I agree with the quote.  The actual "truth" of the comment is...

 

UO peaked at around 250,000 subs (last EA press release I remember) and that was oddly after Age of Shadows (hated that xpac).

 

While EQ peaked around 450,000 subs...

 

So between those two it was seen as the more successful.  That was in relative terms short term tho...

 

You hardly ever see anyone mention the fact that (to my knowledge) UO has never closed or merged a server.  EQ has gone through multiple mergers.

 

EA also signed with NetDragon (I think it was) to release UO into more markets... as a 12 year old MMO.  Most current MMO's are lucky to expand much at all (before mergers) let alone even think about being around for 12 years... and having never merged a server.

 

WoW only ensured a continuation of the same crap core game design that limits you on every level and has the same fatal flaws to this day (yes that's my opinon of the EQ core design for MMO's).  Which would be an entirely new wall of text.. so I'll stop.

You're obviously not seeing my point. First of all, I know full well the release dates on all of these different games, and of course I know that Ultima Online was the first to reach large numbers.

Secondly, I wasn't talking about game design in my statement. I was merely stating which design was the most popular and no one can argue that it's the EQ model, by far. Sure, I'd love for every mainstream developer to live by the standards set by games like UO, but the reality is, it's not going to happen. Most mainstream developers are going to go with whatever is most profitable, and since the EQ/WoW model is so accessible to such a large playerbase, it will likely remain the champion in terms of popularity.
 

Also, the reason you never hear about server merges for UO in simple. UO is one of the few mmos that's ever sported non-instanced housing at such a grand scale. It simply wouldn't be feasible to try and merge servers because there would be way too many complications. It would be a CS nightmare to say the least. That said, there are many UO servers that could definitely benefit from a merge and I'm sure if it wasn't for the obvious complications involved, it would have already happened. I mean, as far as population goes, EQ still has about twice the subscription numbers of UO. But yeah, I'll agree that for a 12 year old game, UO is doing amazingly well. It seems to be a timeless game for many people, including myself.

Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with your opinion on game design. I honestly can't stomach games like WoW, or any other game that follows the same nauseating game formula (Old EQ is the ONLY one that I ever had any appreciation for, whatsoever), I'm just stating why I believe more mmo developers choose to copy the tired EQ/WoW model. It nets the most gain with the least amount of work. I'm just glad there are companies like Icarus Studios and Aventurine that attempt to break the mold and put the vision of the game before profit gains. Let's just hope we see more of that in the future.

Originally posted by nekollx

oldest MMO people remember?

 

What about The Realm?

I played the realm. Good times.

Originally posted by nkryptik

1 Game Language: Everyone in this game were all of the basic human race and could understand what the other factions were saying and this made for when someone got you in an unfair match and you wanted to tell them where too sit you could do it and it worked the other way around as well if someone was after ticking you off and in a house you could call them out to fight, I can still remember the Role Players that would make those Orc guilds and role play till the cows came home you didin't need to be an Orc you just needed the gear to look like one the rest was your imagination.

this is something i don't get:

how does human = one language. A simple look atthe TV would say otherwise.

hell id loves for elives to have different languages

Originally posted by alacres

Blizzard proved that the EQ model, if done "correctly", is the most popular and easily accessible model for the mmo genre, with it's appeal expanding to a very large demographic. In the end, most developers seem to care exclusively about the bottom line. They want to go with the path most profitable, regardless at how tired and uninspired it is. 

Luckily though, for those of us who won't settle for the tired and overly done, we still have games like UO, AC, and even newer titles that aspire to be more like the old in terms of open-endedness and freedom of choice, ala Fallen Earth. And there seems to be quite a few others on the way (Mortal Online, would be one example). 

EQ was the EQ model "done correctly". It dominated the big three (over UO and AC) because of its addiction model.

WoW is the EQ model with the Warcraft lore and Blizzard's reputation, that's all. It took off because it was based on Warcraft.

The EQ model is used today because it's proven to be more likely to keep people attached to their characters and paying monthly.

I have lots of fond memories of the early days of UO from being robbed and murdered in my first 5 minutes in the game to the bugs, lag, ect. I used to lament about the pvp during those first few months (since I was busy trying to advance and death meant a virtual restart) but during the intervening years I have come to realize UO was the last true mmo where it really wasn't pvp vs nonpvp types but more pk's (player killers..murderers thieves ect) versus everyone else. Yes the world was a dangerous place but it made sense and seemed more based on a realistic working world that could have evolved into something very special. Except for folks like me. Yes the masses demanded a safer game and that's what followed. Origin made lots of mistakes but they had the right idea and I miss it. I am doubtful we will ever see it again so I'm glad I experienced it: warts and all.

I played the Realm and Meridian59 as well as lots of MUDS before UO came out. I remember seeing a story in a magazine about the upcoming release of UO (at that time) and was hooked. I still have my huge charter edition UO box with the cloth map, letter from lord british, awesome art print, etc. I was even a counselor in UO for a time on the LS shard.

I also remember all of the hype when EQ was announced and was going to be 3d. I was so surprised they went with a level based system. UO was pretty popular at the time and I felt it was taking a step back going to a level based system, so it kind of blew my mind. Then EQ was released and got popular. Since it was a "3d" game and took off, I think companies just jumped on that model after the fact and ignored what UO had achieved or brought to the table. The skill based system that UO refined is still awesome in my opinion.

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

Good article

I still play UO ,it was my first MMO and even though I don't actively logon I still pay my subscription fees

The game is fun...it doens't have the graphics or exciting dungeons of a game like Vanguard for example but it is entertaining

I will be purchasing SA ...good to see a new expansion :)

I still play too. Started playing in December 1997 and my sub is still active (with no lapses). As long as UO is alive, I'll be playing.

 I just wanted to make people realize one thing: 4 years ago, with more and more wonderful, original, mindboggling MMO's coming out, everyone assumed Ultima Online was going to disappear.

Now that MMO scenario turned out absolutely decadent and lacking of innovation, of actually worthy games, even Ultima Online thrives in prosperity.

It's a damn shame. There must be a roman saying that goes : "old generals are forced to come back when the young ones are all corrupted''

I would like the chance to talk to one of those developers, one of those who made tabula rasa, warhammer, age of conan, fallen earth and so many others, and tell them how much i despise them.

I also still play UO

I am  about to move from Europa to Atlantic as Europa is not really that populated

Thats one of the many benefits with UO ,you can purchase a Transfer Token and move to any server you want to with your character :)

 weird people not mentioning trammel...