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
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.
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.
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.
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?)
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.
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...
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....
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
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.
Multi Faction Wars (Guild Wars That meant something) - Check
SERIOUSLY! It's got a following. There's no denying nostalgia will sell plenty of boxes. EA now owns the name.... If anyone has the money to sink into a game it's them. DO IT!!!
Please.... Update the graphics a bit... You don't even have to make it 3rd person. The overview type of game still works for people... Look at Diablo III! It will sell millions of copies. Easy.
Please for the love of anything holy. Do it. Stop digging up other ideas for games that COULD be a good MMO. Ultima Online WAS a good MMO. It's got the lore to build on top of. Like, what, 8 single player games before UO came out? That's up there with Final Fantasy...
What the hell is up with people... Notch (Minecraft) has made millions off a simple concept. Let people have the freedom to do what they want. Build things. Adventure. We don't need something stringing us along. GIVE US SOMETHING. I have my wallet out right now waiting for the next game that can acheive this...
Loot tables!??!?!?!! WTF are those? Your purple armor of Azeroth helped slay the Dragon of One Million Respawns? Congrats? How many times did you wipe? Only 2x? Nice! What did you lose?! 5% off your total health of 1,000,000 gazillion hit points?! Oh noes, better pick up your gravestone to be back at 100%! And you finally got the "Bracers of 900 Hours of Raiding" Lucky drop dude. Only a .5% chance of them dropping on the second Wednesday following a full moon.
Give me a GM Katana and some decent plate and lets see what we can do.
/rant
Couldnt agree more. This is the UO players remember and want for more than anything else. Last night I was on Rift I saw people chatting about wanting for an open sandbox game just like Ultima Online USED to be. The players are sick of the WoW clones and their BS. Its time for the MMORPG industry to get back to the basics, back to the game and the rules that started it all and put this genre of games on the map, back to the UO style of game.
What players need to do is start bugging the crap out of Richard Garriott and tell him to get off of his ass, to stop f**king around with the retarded ass social games and get back to what he was best known for, and that was making high quality RPGs and MMORPGs.
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.
agreed.
for fans of the sandbox design philosophy, interesting gameplay is more important than fancy graphics and shiny but shallow content (like a new instanced raid dungeon).
I actually prefer simple but nice-looking graphics, at least as long as they mean that I get a fluid and working gaming experience.
for example, a game like Linkrealms works with very simple technical solutions and still produce a charming little virtual world where players can do lots of different stuff (from dungeon crawling to PvP, farming and cockerel breeding), and where the models and animations still look sharp and modern, in spite of being simple and old-school.
in a game like Mortal Online on the other hand, the super-advanced graphics, forced first person view, multiple hitboxes, weapon arcs and so on just gets in the way of actually playing the game.
besides, most people turn the settings down to avoid crashes and lag and increase their fps - and then the game looks blurred and horrible anyway.
Didnt they try to make a UO 2 ? It fell through but I have no idea why.
I dont think another UO will ever come personally. Im really surprised UO is still going. If the UO IP was going to keep going we'd be on UO 3 or UO 4 by now. After the sequel fell through I think that was the end of any real future installments. I sort of consider it a dead franchise. In that I dont expect it to grow any further than it really has.
Didnt they try to make a UO 2 ? It fell through but I have no idea why.
I dont think another UO will ever come personally. Im really surprised UO is still going. If the UO IP was going to keep going we'd be on UO 3 or UO 4 by now. After the sequel fell through I think that was the end of any real future installments. I sort of consider it a dead franchise. In that I dont expect it to grow any further than it really has.
They tried to make a Ultima Online 2, but from what I remembered.....it was going to be nothing like the original UO. I can't remember exactly but UO2 (or UOX) was going to be less "open". I think they finally canned the project in the midst of EQ's success.
And the reason the original UO IP is still going is because its now in Cash Cow status for EA. The hardware requirement is a joke compared to whats needed for modern MMORPGs. They probably have summer interns working on development and maintance and there is still a cult following for all the qualities that haven't really been able to be duplicated today.
I think EA will evoke it again in a new age MMO when the opprotunity strikes. So far, they have been busy enough with DAoC, Warhammer, and now SW:TOR.
I think UO will be remade eventually in 3D environment.
It's too good of a franchise to pass up. But I presume they will still see how much they can milk the existing UO.
However, I suspect the new version might be dumbed down quite a bit. Look at what kids are playing these days. Carebare crap.
Basing future games on what the kids play today is not a great idea. Kids are just kids a short while and game trends change eventually.
Still, UO ain't UO without Garriot. And just remaking it exactly the same wont work either, remaking old games only works for PSP and Nintendo DS.
UO was great because it did it's own thing, by just remaking it you take that away from it. A good remade UO needs to take the best things from UO and improve the bad things. If you can't remember any bad things you are wearing rose colored glasses like so many SWG vets.
Basing future games on what the kids play today is not a great idea. Kids are just kids a short while and game trends change eventually.
Still, UO ain't UO without Garriot. And just remaking it exactly the same wont work either, remaking old games only works for PSP and Nintendo DS.
UO was great because it did it's own thing, by just remaking it you take that away from it. A good remade UO needs to take the best things from UO and improve the bad things. If you can't remember any bad things you are wearing rose colored glasses like so many SWG vets.
Could you clarify this? Do you mean character skill values, player skill at playing their character, or something else?
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I think these two things are what made UO a step above everything else since. And I also think these are the two things that wil never be done right again (and not because a dev team won't ever get it right, but because the MMO community won't ever be the same)
One example is DF, I think they have a system close enough to UO (in these two areas) to work, IF the community in the MMO world was the same as it was when UO started.
The problem is this (IMO) since EQ2 and then WoW had a great deal of success bringing in a new type of MMO gamer, it changed the community to the extreme. In order for a crafting system in an MMO to really matter, you MUST have players losing EVERYTHING THEY HAVE ON so that they are buying new player made equipment ALL THE TIME.
The problem with this, is the community of MMO players now (due largely to EQ2 and WoW) do not like the idea of losing that really cool sword they finally got, or that awesome new chestplate and so on... (I am not bashing them or saying they are wrong) And since they won't play a game that puts the chance of them losing everything, the Devs simply can't make that the standard for the game (special rule set servers or areas simply do not work the same way). So without having players drop a corpes with everything on it when they die (and the mobs (like in UO) or other players able to loot it) Crafting will never matter.
As far as open world PvP, it can NEVER work as long as it is only an option (rule set server or area) If you split the average player and the "gankers" onto different servers or areas, then the only thing going on in the PvP area is "ganking" and it becomes nothing more than a FPS. Open world PvP to truely be successful like it was when UO launched, must be a full, complete, open gaming world where anything can happen but doesn't always have too.
The corpes drops (Needed meaningful crafting) and open PvP worllds are not something this new age of MMO players enjoy, thus, will never be done like UO did again.
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?
I have a UO account for 13 years now ... and i have played MO and Darkfall .. these 2 games are nothing in any way shape or form like UO............
I can go im my backyard and say im gonna build a rocket in the spirit of the spaceshuttle to .. but it wont be anyhting but maybe the shell..
Thats what these devs have manged .................period ...easy enough..
and please stop trying to squeeze M59 into every single thread .. it was aterrible game then and when they revived it and now .. It has nothing to do with this conversation but you seem to have a need to bring it up in every single thread....
Comments
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
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.
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.
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?)
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...
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....
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
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.
Couldnt agree more. This is the UO players remember and want for more than anything else. Last night I was on Rift I saw people chatting about wanting for an open sandbox game just like Ultima Online USED to be. The players are sick of the WoW clones and their BS. Its time for the MMORPG industry to get back to the basics, back to the game and the rules that started it all and put this genre of games on the map, back to the UO style of game.
What players need to do is start bugging the crap out of Richard Garriott and tell him to get off of his ass, to stop f**king around with the retarded ass social games and get back to what he was best known for, and that was making high quality RPGs and MMORPGs.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/Richard.Garriott.de.Cayeux?sk=wall
There's the link to his Facebook page, go nuts people!
ultima online was so good cause it was the only mmo available, planty of games have those featrures now
agreed.
for fans of the sandbox design philosophy, interesting gameplay is more important than fancy graphics and shiny but shallow content (like a new instanced raid dungeon).
I actually prefer simple but nice-looking graphics, at least as long as they mean that I get a fluid and working gaming experience.
for example, a game like Linkrealms works with very simple technical solutions and still produce a charming little virtual world where players can do lots of different stuff (from dungeon crawling to PvP, farming and cockerel breeding), and where the models and animations still look sharp and modern, in spite of being simple and old-school.
in a game like Mortal Online on the other hand, the super-advanced graphics, forced first person view, multiple hitboxes, weapon arcs and so on just gets in the way of actually playing the game.
besides, most people turn the settings down to avoid crashes and lag and increase their fps - and then the game looks blurred and horrible anyway.
If DFO had a skill cap, I'd still be playing it
Didnt they try to make a UO 2 ? It fell through but I have no idea why.
I dont think another UO will ever come personally. Im really surprised UO is still going. If the UO IP was going to keep going we'd be on UO 3 or UO 4 by now. After the sequel fell through I think that was the end of any real future installments. I sort of consider it a dead franchise. In that I dont expect it to grow any further than it really has.
They tried to make a Ultima Online 2, but from what I remembered.....it was going to be nothing like the original UO. I can't remember exactly but UO2 (or UOX) was going to be less "open". I think they finally canned the project in the midst of EQ's success.
And the reason the original UO IP is still going is because its now in Cash Cow status for EA. The hardware requirement is a joke compared to whats needed for modern MMORPGs. They probably have summer interns working on development and maintance and there is still a cult following for all the qualities that haven't really been able to be duplicated today.
I think EA will evoke it again in a new age MMO when the opprotunity strikes. So far, they have been busy enough with DAoC, Warhammer, and now SW:TOR.
I think UO will be remade eventually in 3D environment.
It's too good of a franchise to pass up. But I presume they will still see how much they can milk the existing UO.
However, I suspect the new version might be dumbed down quite a bit. Look at what kids are playing these days. Carebare crap.
Keep on rockin'!
Basing future games on what the kids play today is not a great idea. Kids are just kids a short while and game trends change eventually.
Still, UO ain't UO without Garriot. And just remaking it exactly the same wont work either, remaking old games only works for PSP and Nintendo DS.
UO was great because it did it's own thing, by just remaking it you take that away from it. A good remade UO needs to take the best things from UO and improve the bad things. If you can't remember any bad things you are wearing rose colored glasses like so many SWG vets.
I agree completely.
Yeah, and people said the same of DF and MO as well.
But Origin already had many hit single player games behind it when it made UO, a good team and at the time a good budget.
UO didn't come from nowhere, and there were a lot behind it. Archeage don't have that behind them so I doubt it will be similar to UO.
Hey OP,
Could you clarify this? Do you mean character skill values, player skill at playing their character, or something else?
I think these two things are what made UO a step above everything else since. And I also think these are the two things that wil never be done right again (and not because a dev team won't ever get it right, but because the MMO community won't ever be the same)
One example is DF, I think they have a system close enough to UO (in these two areas) to work, IF the community in the MMO world was the same as it was when UO started.
The problem is this (IMO) since EQ2 and then WoW had a great deal of success bringing in a new type of MMO gamer, it changed the community to the extreme. In order for a crafting system in an MMO to really matter, you MUST have players losing EVERYTHING THEY HAVE ON so that they are buying new player made equipment ALL THE TIME.
The problem with this, is the community of MMO players now (due largely to EQ2 and WoW) do not like the idea of losing that really cool sword they finally got, or that awesome new chestplate and so on... (I am not bashing them or saying they are wrong) And since they won't play a game that puts the chance of them losing everything, the Devs simply can't make that the standard for the game (special rule set servers or areas simply do not work the same way). So without having players drop a corpes with everything on it when they die (and the mobs (like in UO) or other players able to loot it) Crafting will never matter.
As far as open world PvP, it can NEVER work as long as it is only an option (rule set server or area) If you split the average player and the "gankers" onto different servers or areas, then the only thing going on in the PvP area is "ganking" and it becomes nothing more than a FPS. Open world PvP to truely be successful like it was when UO launched, must be a full, complete, open gaming world where anything can happen but doesn't always have too.
The corpes drops (Needed meaningful crafting) and open PvP worllds are not something this new age of MMO players enjoy, thus, will never be done like UO did again.
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
Make this consentual or the people that made all the other aspects great won't waste there money.
You will NEVER be able to recreate what UO was, because the people are not the same.
Thats like saying "Manditory Volunteer"
it's either "consentual PvP" or "Open world PvP" .
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
I have a UO account for 13 years now ... and i have played MO and Darkfall .. these 2 games are nothing in any way shape or form like UO............
I can go im my backyard and say im gonna build a rocket in the spirit of the spaceshuttle to .. but it wont be anyhting but maybe the shell..
Thats what these devs have manged .................period ...easy enough..
and please stop trying to squeeze M59 into every single thread .. it was aterrible game then and when they revived it and now .. It has nothing to do with this conversation but you seem to have a need to bring it up in every single thread....