Originally posted by chomite

If it wasn't for that horrible update, and god forsaken retarded route that developers suddenly wanted to take the UO into pile of trash, it would still be the best mmo out there - granted once it brings its graphics and controls up to date. 

So if it weren't for x, y, and z...it'd be keen?

That IS a ringing endorsement!

i remember when a friend of mine gave me the cd to play UO. Back in the days i didnt have internet so i had to play it offline- god, i hated that shet game. You didnt knew where you went- zombies 1 hitted you that isometric perspectiv was just bad.

Originally posted by mindw0rk

Originally posted by Loktofeit

I like how you threw EVE in there in order to give some level of validity to your argument. I also like how you ignored the majority of my post, too.

I guess UO has outdated combat. It has collision detection, mounted combat, naval combat, no contrived taunt system, complete freedom to what skills/weapons you want to use, co-op spells and many other combat features that have long since disappeared as MMOs have gotten shallower and shallower. However, that wasn't the point being questioned, was it?

 

And what did I miss in majority of your post? I asked you about PvP, and after you realised you cant name many options in UO, you started on home decoration and smelling flowers. Believe me, there are plenty of flowers in AoW. And if you say "UO is the best sandbox EVAR!", why cant I take examples from EVE which is also sandbox? Much deeper sandbox then UO tbh.

About combat. On paper it has this, and has that, and even all these. But in reality here is your combat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FugqmDp_wdQ

ps/ Happy New Year you too.

 

Ok seriously, this is just getting retarded. This post is stating UO is the best sandbox ever. I would have to agree if they didn't fuck it up, it would be.

 

Anyway, you keep on about PvP, sandbox includes all features within the game.

 

To this day I have not seen any MMO's get close to UO's

Taming system

(When I was still playing I was walking around as a mage with a Frost Wyrm, I can only count one MMO where it is possible to actually walk around with a dragon as your pet, and that is UO. Not to mention you can sell them off to other players if you wished.

Housing System

(I dont even need to go into this considering others have already talked about it)

Combat System

(I am just going to tell you a story about when I used to play that I still remember to this day. Me and a guy were having a duel, I was a fencer/poisoner/thief, I cannot remember what he was but anyway. We continued to fight and when it got close to time to pot to heal up for him, I stole his healing potion out of his bag before he could heal. People who look at combat systems and do not take into account other skills have linear thinking. There is plenty of things you can do in a skill based game vs games with lvls.

 

Anyway back to you, stop talking about nothing but PvP as you arguement, this is about all features included in a Sandbox game. Not how many ways can you go around killing people, because in all honesty PvP is just that PvP.  The basis of a sandbox game is to allow players to do what they want. You could easily have guild battles in UO, there just weren't any "features" that made the guild battle server known.

 

Here is the list you provided -  school battles, clan battles, head bounties, spying, patrolling, caravan grabbing, offline players stealing, prison breaking, etc.

1. School Battles and Clan Battles are pretty much one in the same, a martial arts school is the same thing as a clan. A group of people.

2. Head Bounties - There were bounties in UO.

3. Spying - There was spying in UO, you want to spy on your neighbor or a clan you were at war with you could.

4. Patrolling - You mean walking back and forth from point a to b, seriously this is one of your "features" WTF?

5. Caravan grabbing - UO had all loot, every person was their own caravan.

6. Offline Players stealing - Wheres the fun in that, if I am going to steal I want to be online stealing, and UO had that. Hell you could steal someones house key and steal their shit.

7. Prison Breaking - This is the only thing I cannot really say anything about because in UO if you did something wrong you didn't go to prison you were hunted and killed, or you would have to go into hiding.

 

It proves my point that you don't grasp the point of sandbox gaming because you think linearly in terms of features and not what can I accomplish with the game I have been given.

 

Also this is all based on my recollection of when I played probably 10 years ago. I do not know what features it has presently.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Arglebargle

[mod edit]

Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

Yes, UO had problems. And the 'problem' you describe is the result of emergent behaviour - the desired outcome of a sandbox environment. If your players aren't doing unexpected things with the tools and toys you gave them, then either your sandbox isn't doing well or your tools and toys weren't all that fun to play with.

But, to stick with that 'problem'... does it really break the immersion so much for you that people use solid wooden objects as barriers? Barriers that another player can use an axe to smash? That breaks immersion for you?

...but game worlds where you can only keep object in egg-carton style bags and pockets, and where placing an object on the ground is impossible... that works for you?

Yes, I found myself immersed in the world of Britannia. A world where people didn't magically pull an invulnerable horse out of their ass and where proximity to other players meant something. A world where the various niches and communities were more than just IRC-style chat windows but were actual player venues in the game world itself. The game was flawed and far from perfect, yet still leaps and bounds ahead of what many of the sandbox style games of what a decade and a half later has to offer.

 

Yes, UO had problems.  Problems with some of that emergent behavior being used to cause problems for other players, which lead them to quit playing, and not supporting the game with their money.  I knew several Origin employees at the time, and they were constantly scrambling to fix various bits of the game that were driving away subscribers, and where the game mechanics caused issues.

 

The furniture issue, if I remember the story correctly,  happened because breakable furniture was being used to grief players, so the furniture was made unbreakable, thus allowing it to be used (inappropriatly) for beseiging cities.  Unbreakable furntiure....no axe useable.  I would be happy to hear of an instance of this tactic being used in a real world siege. 

 

All games are built on abstraction.   Everyone's tastes and feelings of immersion can differ.    I never begrudge fans of UO, Eve, or SWG their enjoyment of those games.   But there were serious problems with each, and there are problems that come from the base concept and design of them, as sandboxes.  Sometimes those very things are both strengths and weaknesses of the game.

 

 

I loved UO back in the day. I still have my subscription to this day just to keep my keep and vet rewards going, lol. There was so much to do. If I didn't want to do anything combat related I could make potions, kegs,armor, weapons,tinkering, mining, lumberjacking,taming,treasure hunting,decorating my house, waiting for idocs...just to name a few.. There was lots of fun to be had in UO.

Originally posted by Coldren

Originally posted by apb2011

Ultima Online = Best sandbox game ever.

 

Have to agree with this.. Certainly the best one so far. But we can always hope.

I'll sign in /support of this as well. 

everything else afterwords has been mediocre at best in terms of the sandy box. 

Originally posted by nariusseldon

UO was a horrible game. I was in the beta.

Bad combat mechanics .. too much griefing (some toons died within second spawning in the game), leveling up skills is as bad as today's themepark crafting (remember clicking on a rock again and again?).

Oh .. and tank mage everywhere (at least in the beginning).

Thank god other MMORPGs came along. 

Exactly, horrible game. But at same time kinda fun, but mainly because was ONLY available to play.

Delete this post?

Originally posted by Arglebargle

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Arglebargle

[mod edit]

Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

Yes, UO had problems. And the 'problem' you describe is the result of emergent behaviour - the desired outcome of a sandbox environment. If your players aren't doing unexpected things with the tools and toys you gave them, then either your sandbox isn't doing well or your tools and toys weren't all that fun to play with.

But, to stick with that 'problem'... does it really break the immersion so much for you that people use solid wooden objects as barriers? Barriers that another player can use an axe to smash? That breaks immersion for you?

...but game worlds where you can only keep object in egg-carton style bags and pockets, and where placing an object on the ground is impossible... that works for you?

Yes, I found myself immersed in the world of Britannia. A world where people didn't magically pull an invulnerable horse out of their ass and where proximity to other players meant something. A world where the various niches and communities were more than just IRC-style chat windows but were actual player venues in the game world itself. The game was flawed and far from perfect, yet still leaps and bounds ahead of what many of the sandbox style games of what a decade and a half later has to offer.

 

Yes, UO had problems.  Problems with some of that emergent behavior being used to cause problems for other players, which lead them to quit playing, and not supporting the game with their money.  I knew several Origin employees at the time, and they were constantly scrambling to fix various bits of the game that were driving away subscribers, and where the game mechanics caused issues.

 

The furniture issue, if I remember the story correctly,  happened because breakable furniture was being used to grief players, so the furniture was made unbreakable, thus allowing it to be used (inappropriatly) for beseiging cities.  Unbreakable furntiure....no axe useable.  I would be happy to hear of an instance of this tactic being used in a real world siege. 

 

All games are built on abstraction.   Everyone's tastes and feelings of immersion can differ.    I never begrudge fans of UO, Eve, or SWG their enjoyment of those games.   But there were serious problems with each, and there are problems that come from the base concept and design of them, as sandboxes.  Sometimes those very things are both strengths and weaknesses of the game.

 

 

 Actually the thing with the "unbreakable furniture" never rembered that but you could always just go up and pick up the furniture once its been dropped on the ground by whoever is "Besieging" your player town and put it in your pack and walk away lol. I remember people tried to do that to us with Candlebras and we just put a bunch of DP poison blade spirits in there with them and they all died.

Ultima Onlne always looked fun.  I never had the pleasure to play it.  I do play EVE quite extentivey alsong with DAYZ and I love what sandboxes have to offer.  I've tried playing UO but the graphics are so insanely outdated.  EVE is fun but i'll be honest I like the traditional skill use/hotkey skill type of games way better.  I'm mostly placing hope in Archage.  Themeparks can be fun but they grow boring because the content is always the same.  Even ones as good as TSW.  And P.S. GW2 is not a sandbox.  Its 400000% themepark.

Yes, indeed it was.

looool... UO ....

I remember when I played it many years ago, 5 guys standing around a player summoned elementar in passiv mode, attaking it for hours just to leech some skill points so they can better grief newbies.

Yes that was much better then the heartbeating action that I had when I camptured my first flag in warsong....

 

 

Originally posted by madazz

Originally posted by Xthos

Originally posted by chomite

People are really trashing UO?

If it wasn't for that horrible update, and god forsaken retarded route that developers suddenly wanted to take the UO into pile of trash, it would still be the best mmo out there - granted once it brings its graphics and controls up to date. 

Yeah, if they went back to a classic type game, and made content with that style forward, I would be back in a heartbeat.  I have gone back here and there, but I do not like the current setup of skills and the systems.  I am fine with the 2Dclient, but it seems they will not be bringing an official classic server back.

 

 

And people were talking about GM's interacting with the community, well UO was a great example of that too.

 

This part was really cool to me.  I remember them showing up at different imes in their blue robes outlined with gold trim hooded.

We all used to gather around them when we saw them.

Only real sandbox I've played for any length of tiime is EVE, so I have nothing to compare.

I really regret missing UO, AC1 and SWG back in their heyday, I feel I missed some pretty amazing experiences that won't soon be replicated.

Yeah, I know some of them are still around, but they are shadows of their former glory.

Sounds like from what I have read UO was definitely one of the best virtual world simulators ever built.

 

Originally posted by Kyleran

Only real sandbox I've played for any length of tiime is EVE, so I have nothing to compare.

I really regret missing UO, AC1 and SWG back in their heyday, I feel I missed some pretty amazing experiences that won't soon be replicated.

Yeah, I know some of them are still around, but they are shadows of their former glory.

Sounds like from what I have read UO was definitely one of the best virtual world simulators ever built.

 

And still is. Too bad UO didn't have a dedicated dev team willing to stick with their vision, like EVE has. Instead they sold out to EA and the game was promptly turned to shit.

But all hope is not lost. Sandbox games are picking up interest again and several new interesting games are under development. With a little luck, we might be entering into another golden age of Sandbox MMORPGs in the coming years.

Would be about god damn time, too.