Trending Games | ArcheAge | World of Warcraft | Destiny | Star Trek Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,856,630 Users Online:0
Games:740  Posts:6,241,181
Broadsword Online Games | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 09/30/97)  | Pub:Electronic Arts
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:$09.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
System Req: PC | ESRB:TOut of date info? Let us know!

Ultima Online Forum » Britannia Tavern (General) » JUST MAKE A NEW UO ALREADY!

5 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 » Search
92 posts found
  RajCaj

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/11/08
Posts: 684

8/08/11 8:44:32 AM#41
Originally posted by Whitetree

 

Yes, ArcheAge looks like it "might" be the spiritual successor that we've longed for over the past decade or so, but so did Darkfall, and Mortal Online. Don't push your chips in just yet, but don't fold out of the game, either. Watch and Wait; that's the new game we're all playing, isn't it? Maybe something will come along to pull this genre out of the stinking rut it's in and get us back to our roots. Someone, do the sandbox justice; give this little niche corner of the market what we've been Watching and Waiting for.

 ....oh and I wanted to add one other thing.

 

It's entirely possible that the MMORPG industry doesn't feel that it's in a rut.  Traditional MMORPG gamers (like you and I) feel that it is.  However, when games like WOW make up 65% of the genere marketshare (not counting all the other casual MMORPG gamers in Aion, Rift, Warhammer, LOTRO, etc.).......your customers are looking for less "Virtual Worlds" and more "Themeparks". 

I see companies like EA / Bioware going in the opposite direction of "Virtual Worlds" and are putting MORE rails on their game exerience.  I also understand companies like EA / Bioware pay marketers a LOT of money to figure out what the public wants.  We may be out numbered (as traditional MMORPG enthusiasts), and may be why we haven't seen a whole lot of people put stock into our type of game.

-One of the two Alexanders from AOL Legends shard, 3x GM when that actually meant something

  Whitetree

Novice Member

Joined: 4/29/07
Posts: 76

8/08/11 11:27:24 AM#42

Amazingly enough, Rajcaj, we seem to agree on all points. I cannot say that's ever happened to me before on these forums, hehe.

 

Just to clarify, I didn't mean I have been following AA for ten years; in fact, I've only known about it since it posted on this site a few months ago. I meant that we have been waiting that long for a game to come along that has the same charm, community and immersion that UO gave us.

 

I agree with your final point as well. MMORPGs, in a way, have actually just found their footing in the overall gaming market in the past few years. As much as I hate to admit it, it's likely because of the success of these themepark games such as WoW and the vast majority of F2P titles. I do think that, given enough of a chance, a solidly produced sandbox could still change the landscape a bit with what our current offerings are. There is very little variation in the common themepark model between games, and I believe our hobby could use a little diversity, particularly in the form of more sandbox games from which to choose. I'm not expecting one of these games to rake in 6 million subscribers; if we could get to the point where UO was at it's peak (circa 200k subs), I would call that a smashing success.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -Edmund Burke

Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards. -Lois McMaster Bujold

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. -Abraham Lincoln

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

8/08/11 11:37:07 AM#43
Originally posted by TheDor

Both Darkfall and Mortal Online developers have said in multiple interviews that their primary goal was recreating the Ultima Online experience.

 

I'm not going to try and argue what your (or anyone's) opinion of the game is, when the developer states that they are "making the spiritual successor to Ultima Online" I'd consider it to be a UO clone.

 

So are you saying that you believe everything that you hear?

 

You can't see marketting tact in their statements?  You don't think the are using the UO name and popularity as fuel to sell some copies?  Hah.

 

Darkfall was not designed even remotely similar to UO other than the fact that you could kill anyone.  Mortal Online is actually pretty close, except that it was made horribly in my opinion.  Neither game is a true representation of UO and the sandbox genre.

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

8/08/11 11:43:25 AM#44
Originally posted by TheDor
Originally posted by howtoland

No, the problem is that modern attempts at UO (MO/Darkfall) are DEVELOPED by the reds.

 

Ok, allow me to ask this then:

Why do you guys want a new UO if it isn't for the full PvP and open loot.

 

Every time that I see a thread asking for devs to develop a new UO it's because they're tired of PvP with no consequences in other games. DF and MO came out with open PvP and full loot, and guess what, that's exactly the kind of players that they got.

 

You want a game that's an updated version of UO? Go play PotBS.

Full PvP? Check.

PvP that matters? Check.

Crafting? Check.

Crafting that matters? Check.

Player Driven Economy? Check.

Not a gear grind? Check.

Two main reasons that I want UO.  I'm tired of games that are only about killing the next mob and getting the next epic loot.  Also, the game is player driven.  That comes with it's ups and downs, but it's what truely makes an experience that cannot be duplicated by hand holding.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to a trammel style UO, but they need to make crafting powerful.  Item decay, dropping your belongings when getting killed by monsters, mob train protections so people do not exploit the previous feature, limited travel and death that actually means something.  I personally wouldn't mind PK'ing, as long as it was incredibly hard to do...even harder than old school UO was.  Make it possible, but unlikely that most people will even try due to the massive drawbacks that come with it.

 

Also, not many people want to play pirate games. 

  Mathizsias

Novice Member

Joined: 7/19/06
Posts: 16

8/08/11 11:47:04 AM#45

I haven't read a single post, but this is what I found and is probably holding back releasing new games based on the Ultima license:

Ultima X was developed without participation of the original creator Richard Garriott and he no longer owns the rights to the series. However, he still owns the rights to several of the game characters so it is impossible for either him or Electronic Arts to produce a new Ultima title without getting permission from each other.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_%28series%29

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

8/08/11 11:47:20 AM#46
Originally posted by Loke666
Originally posted by howtoland

It didn't work because THEY DIDN'T MAKE A NEW UO. They made a hollowed out shell of what UO was, cherry picking whatever systems they liked and getting rid of those they didn't.

Why is this so complicated for you people? :|

No. It didn't work because they didn't have any original thoughts and just stole stuff from other games. UO did nothing like that and therefor you can't remake UO.

Easy enough?

It's nice to throw around theories and claim them as facts isn't it?  Makes arguments easier.

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

8/08/11 11:50:08 AM#47
Originally posted by Lienhart

Yes, lets recreate a game full of inconviences for a few thousand people that used to enjoy UO. If I were an investor, I'd invest in this great idea!

 

(NO)

 

What were those inconveiences?  I love how people bash an idea when (I'm assuming) they probably never tried it themselves.  Obviously the game was popular and remains to be to this day.  Over 200,000 subscriptions when the market was 100x smaller and still drawing a profit 14 years after it's launch. 

 

But only a few people like it right?

  Havekk

Advanced Member

Joined: 7/14/08
Posts: 1366

8/08/11 11:51:44 AM#48

Weren't they going to do this at one point? I think it's around the time WoW came out, or just after. It looked pretty cool, kinda like WoW/Warhammer if I recall correctly. 

 

I think if they put out a new version with all of the same aspects, it would be a hit. At least I iknow I would play. 

  Chilliesauce

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/27/10
Posts: 577

8/08/11 11:55:09 AM#49
Originally posted by DAS1337
Originally posted by Lienhart

Yes, lets recreate a game full of inconviences for a few thousand people that used to enjoy UO. If I were an investor, I'd invest in this great idea!

 

(NO)

 

What were those inconveiences?  I love how people bash an idea when (I'm assuming) they probably never tried it themselves.  Obviously the game was popular and remains to be to this day.  Over 200,000 subscriptions when the market was 100x smaller and still drawing a profit 14 years after it's launch. 

 

But only a few people like it right?

Apparently so. Otherwise there would have been another UO or something similar. Would be nice to have sequel but i hardly doubt it is ever going to happen. Investors are not going to put any money into project unless they are sure they will get their money back and make profit. And considering EA owns the game, no chance in hell for new UO.

  Whitetree

Novice Member

Joined: 4/29/07
Posts: 76

8/08/11 12:04:52 PM#50

I would think that the smash-hit success of WoW changed the direction of the market that any developer or investor would try to match that success, or at least carve out a profitable little corner of it.

 

There once was a potential sequel in the works (see the forum for Ultima X: Odyssey), but for various reasons it went away. It is for many of those same reasons that we have not seen anyone pick this up. I, for one, am not looking for a direct sequel or successor in the Ultima series but for a game that takes the spirit of what UO was and bring it to today's market.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -Edmund Burke

Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards. -Lois McMaster Bujold

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. -Abraham Lincoln

  korr

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/18/04
Posts: 301

TACO! TACO! TACO!

8/08/11 12:10:15 PM#51
Originally posted by Whitetree

 I, for one, am not looking for a direct sequel or successor in the Ultima series but for a game that takes the spirit of what UO was and bring it to today's market.

 I just want a game that makes me feel like i did in UO.  The constant fear, never knowing what some one would want when they apear on your screen.  Did he need some black pearl to recal home and just ran out?  is he just checking to see if you might have some regs on you so you are worth killing?  you just never knew, and it made the game interesting.

 

I once remember running a guy down from Brit to Yew while red, only to give him some gold and a few items since he apeared to be new (saw him casting low lvl spells).  The guy just kept running away scared hehe.  But even some one flagged as a murderer could be a decent person, and even some one blue with not a single kill count could be some bad word im not allowed to type.

You always had to be on your toes, and could never assume you knew what was going to happen next.

the missing link in a chain of destruction.

All spelling and typographical errors are based soely on the fact that i just dont care. If you must point out my lack of atention to detail, please do it with a smile.

  Whitetree

Novice Member

Joined: 4/29/07
Posts: 76

8/08/11 12:17:59 PM#52

Agree 100% korr.

 

As a new player, I remember a new 'friend' supposedly helping get me somewhere (can't remember where exactly) when he actually was leading me into a PK ambush. It was classic, dirty, and downright exciting. I escaped with my life and learned a hard lesson not to trust anyone.

 

On the other hand I also had a complete stranger give me my first full set of plate and 1k gold. I thought he was a saint for doing such a good deed, and to this day I remember the character's name: Thor. 13 years ago and I remember it vividly; can't say that about almost any other experience I've had in today's themeparks.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -Edmund Burke

Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards. -Lois McMaster Bujold

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. -Abraham Lincoln

  Jakdstripper

Apprentice Member

Joined: 2/14/10
Posts: 2114

8/08/11 12:22:14 PM#53

belive it or not Mortal Online was made by old UO hardcore fans. you can actually see a lot of resemblence between the two. the spirit behind MO was to bring back  UO in a 3d world and add a first person combat. of course lack in programing experties, but mostly MONEY, resulted in the very sad stated MO is today.

 

when investors/game directors look at a game like MO (a UO inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers, and then look at Rift (a WoW inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers there is really no contest. the first it's a huge gamble with a very limited "niche" appeal and the second it's pretty much a sure thing.

 

it is sad but true. the grand majority of mmo players these days are not looking for a UO like game but are very content with anything WoW like.

  WaruTaru

Novice Member

Joined: 7/22/10
Posts: 7

8/08/11 12:38:00 PM#54
Originally posted by Jakdstripper

belive it or not Mortal Online was made by old UO hardcore fans. you can actually see a lot of resemblence between the two. the spirit behind MO was to bring back  UO in a 3d world and add a first person combat. of course lack in programing experties, but mostly MONEY, resulted in the very sad stated MO is today.

 

when investors/game directors look at a game like MO (a UO inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers, and then look at Rift (a WoW inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers there is really no contest. the first it's a huge gamble with a very limited "niche" appeal and the second it's pretty much a sure thing.

 

it is sad but true. the grand majority of mmo players these days are not looking for a UO like game but are very content with anything WoW like.

And when investors look at Zynga's numbers, it won't be long before they abandon ship and jump on the social-game bandwagon.

 

Money is being invested and channeled into easier and easier games. The dominant forces of the MMO market who can develop new MMOs and have the cash needed to sustain it aren't likely to experiment with UO-ish type of game. Even Blizzard is making their next MMO casual-friendly.

 

When there are so many choices in the MMOG pool, UO-type games will attract even less people. True, UO dominated the MMO market in the past, but that was because choices were limited back then, and UO was the only thing players had. For UO to work in this day and age, either you "dumb down" UO into an easier game (No FFA PVP, No Full Loot, Newbie friendly, etc) to attract big investors, or you find an investor willing to dump a large sum of money to cater to a niche market with a small profit.

  Chimps

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/19/07
Posts: 201

8/08/11 12:41:51 PM#55

Mortal Online seems like a great UO copy.

I played the Open Beta and i was very impressed in fact i was amazed. I never enjoyed a game that much before. It was amazing running around the game and exploring it. At some points i found huge caves and before the open beta ended i found a secret cave it seemed. I would walk in and it was all scary it was torches everywhere and bunch of artwork on the walls and then i came into some spider thing where there was tons of spider web, then i came into a place where there was a broken bridge and water under it. 

I remember how i gathered up a huge amount of people to show them the place and we all ended up in the water stuck lols.

Thinking about all of this makes me want to play it again. Thanks OP i'm gonna go download 14 day trial now lols.

  Fusion

Old School

Joined: 5/21/03
Posts: 1364

8/08/11 1:36:14 PM#56

Most of the poster here are correct, games like UO and AC are very niche game-types if one can say such, the AAA-companies will propably never embark on such a task simply because of the niche revenue they'd produce, even if the game itself was a billion times better than original UO and AC. it'd just not be profitable and that is exactly what companies are for: PROFIT.

It just won't happen, the closest i thing you might be able to get in the foreseable future is Archeage (sp?)

Currently playing: -

Waiting for: Class4.

Dead and Buried: ESO, NWO, GW2, SWTOR, Darkfall, AO, AC2, Vanguard, CoH/V, EnB, EVE, Neocron, FE, EQ, EQ2, DAoC, FFXI, FFXIV, SWG, WoW, and billions of eastern junks!

  RajCaj

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/11/08
Posts: 684

8/08/11 1:45:27 PM#57
Originally posted by Mathizsias

I haven't read a single post, but this is what I found and is probably holding back releasing new games based on the Ultima license:

Ultima X was developed without participation of the original creator Richard Garriott and he no longer owns the rights to the series. However, he still owns the rights to several of the game characters so it is impossible for either him or Electronic Arts to produce a new Ultima title without getting permission from each other.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_%28series%29

 Math,  Ultima X was going to be the "next generation" MMORPG in the same vein as an EQ experience.  It was going to be nothing like the classic Ultima Online you know.  I think the powers that be with Electronic Arts decided it wasn't economic enough, given the increasing competition in the market, to pull the trigger.  UO has been a cash cow for EA for a long time now.  It requires very little overhead (hell, they probably make summer interns work on the UO project) and people still pay to play.  My guess is they decided to keep UO classic rolling on this path.

 

It's interesting to see EA take a crack at new MMO  titles with other IPs before they try to develop UO into something.  They were involved with Dark Age of Camelot, Warhammer, and now SW:TOR. 

 

And don't expect anything out of Richard Garriot.  He talked about potentially digging up the old "Lord British" persona for a new game....but his focus has moved to social media gaming.  Say it aint so Richard...

  RajCaj

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/11/08
Posts: 684

8/08/11 2:01:08 PM#58
Originally posted by Chilliesauce
Originally posted by DAS1337
Originally posted by Lienhart

Yes, lets recreate a game full of inconviences for a few thousand people that used to enjoy UO. If I were an investor, I'd invest in this great idea!

 

(NO)

 

What were those inconveiences?  I love how people bash an idea when (I'm assuming) they probably never tried it themselves.  Obviously the game was popular and remains to be to this day.  Over 200,000 subscriptions when the market was 100x smaller and still drawing a profit 14 years after it's launch. 

 

But only a few people like it right?

Apparently so. Otherwise there would have been another UO or something similar. Would be nice to have sequel but i hardly doubt it is ever going to happen. Investors are not going to put any money into project unless they are sure they will get their money back and make profit. And considering EA owns the game, no chance in hell for new UO.

 My theory why the "themepark" model took over the "virtual world" model is two fold....

1) Bigger Opprotunity with the Casual Gamer Market

2) A more streamlined development cycle that is also more predictable for investors.

 

I'll explain...

Judging off of some early interviews given by the WOW team.....they recognized that the traditional MMORPG model had too steep of a learning curve and caused the majority of the players to quit shortly after playing.  The ones that stayed are generally considered to be dedicated to the genere....and my most definitions, are NOT considered casual gamers.  Considering the large majority of "gamers" are casual......Blizzard saw a HUGE opprotunity to tap into this Casual Gaming market by removing some of those barriers to entry.  Reduce the learning curve, and you reduce the number of people quiting in fustration.

They also recognized the HUGE opprotunity in the pricing model the MMO industry was using.  You mean we get to charge people for the box AND monthly access fee?  Yes Please!

So on one hand, they have this HUGE uptapped market of Casual Gamers, and on the other hand, you have this HUGE earning potential if they could get the largest section of the gamer pie (casual gamers) onto one of the most lucrative pricing models in the industry.

And then WOW was born....

 

Another factor is the investment side.  The market is becoming more competitive, and the fans are becoming more fickle.  It becomes a risker business to invest money in. 

The themepark model means that the majority of the content creation...and experience...is generated by the developers.  This gives the developers greater control over the player experience.  This means there is less variability in play...and allows the development team to be more predictable.  Predictable is an investors favorite word.

A predictable content release schedule can allow your development team to articulate to investors things about future expansions, future sub numbers, etc.

It's a more pro-active development model than a re-active development style that might come with a sandbox type MMO.

 

So with all that said, AAA dev companies are making really good (and expensive) games for folks that like story driven content that can be experienced at their own pace....

  RajCaj

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/11/08
Posts: 684

8/08/11 2:36:45 PM#59
Originally posted by Jakdstripper

belive it or not Mortal Online was made by old UO hardcore fans. you can actually see a lot of resemblence between the two. the spirit behind MO was to bring back  UO in a 3d world and add a first person combat. of course lack in programing experties, but mostly MONEY, resulted in the very sad stated MO is today.

 

when investors/game directors look at a game like MO (a UO inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers, and then look at Rift (a WoW inspired game) and it's box sales/subscribers numbers there is really no contest. the first it's a huge gamble with a very limited "niche" appeal and the second it's pretty much a sure thing.

 

it is sad but true. the grand majority of mmo players these days are not looking for a UO like game but are very content with anything WoW like.

 I think it goes a little deeper than the numbers.  In a post above, I highlight some of the development strategy differences between Themepark & Sandbox development that may lend itself better to investors.

But I disagree on one part of your last statement.  True, I dont' think they are looking for a game with features we'd liken to a traditional MMORPG....but I think they are getting disatisfied / board with the Quest / Raid on rails model and are looking for something more.  EA / Bioware think its more story.....so they went in that direction.  So Ironic that RPG players left their casual console game market to jump into the MMO space....only for the MMO space to come full circle back to personalized, story driven content.  Me thinks they just wanted the monthly pricing model HAHA

  RajCaj

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/11/08
Posts: 684

8/08/11 2:48:35 PM#60
Originally posted by Fusion

Most of the poster here are correct, games like UO and AC are very niche game-types if one can say such, the AAA-companies will propably never embark on such a task simply because of the niche revenue they'd produce, even if the game itself was a billion times better than original UO and AC. it'd just not be profitable and that is exactly what companies are for: PROFIT.

It just won't happen, the closest i thing you might be able to get in the foreseable future is Archeage (sp?)

 Well....it doesn't HAVE to mean that no one could ever put out a good sandbox game.

 

True, its not likely IF you operate under the assumption that a MMORPG MUST

  • Have a rich bug free state of the art graphics engine
  • Have a soundtrack laid down by an award winning orchestra & composer
  • Have developers working on a 24/7 365 content development cycle
  • Have hardware that can support 10s of millions of subs, and fancy cross server grouping mechanics
In fact, most people looking for a good Sandbox experience view these features as bonus material...not staples of a great game.  Indie developers (or even AAA publishers) could instead...
  • Use a nice looking top down / 3rd person Diablo-ish style of graphics would save a TON on graphics & animation tech.
  • Have a good sounding selection of music that can come at a cheaper price than the orchestra
  • Sandbox content means the developers make the tools...and the players generate the content.  Where in a themepark.....since questing / raiding IS what the game is about......smart (and expensive) developers are working around the clock to keep up with the demand of content.
  • Scale down the hardware to a subscriber base something more reasonable...under 1 mill, and you have savings in that department too.
 
Many of the primary cost drivers in the new Themepark Model ARE due to the Themepark model.  I'd play a carbon copy of old school UO with a Battle of Immortals style of Graphics any day of the week over a broken version of Darkfall or Mortal Online.
5 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 » Search