Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

If it doesn't have player looting and stealing, the game will fail.

1678911

Comments

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Holophonist
    Originally posted by Golelorn
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by Golelorn
    Originally posted by Hariken
    Originally posted by Komandor

    The only thing that could really attract the hardcore crowd in this game is some good old, realistic PVP.

     

    If they go the carebare way and limit player looting and stealing from other players, this game will flop.

     

    They basically need to make a better Darkfall.

    Your way or the highway right? Why aren't all you hardcore players playing Eve? I get a kick out of these kind of post. Game companies want to make money. Your type of game fails at that. But you do have Eve. Although Eve been around for more than 10 years and has never broke 500k subs. Be thankful that CCP is a small company and its one game is still around. I do wish someone would have the guts to make the game you guys want. Then we would see less post like this or maybe not. You guys seem to get bored of the game after 2 or 3 months and start posting again.

    There have been games that the "hardcore pvp" crowd claims to want. They crash and burn almost instantly. Also, there have been pvp servers in games that always turn into ghost towns. Hell, even DAoC's pvp servers turned into a laughingstock of idiots camping trainers to kill newly rolled level 20s. Yup, that's pretty damn hardcore.

     

    Its very hard to take these guys seriously. To me it just seems like they want to rape newly rolled, or lesser geared toons. There are a lot of games out there with competitive pvp. There aren't too many that let you roam around knocking off lowbies. When I see this kind of thread all I see is "Please turn this game into a mindless gankfest."

    UO PvP was never about ganking new players, PK:ing was, but that is something else. Unexperienced players dont see the difference btw PK:s and PvP players.

    PvP is fighting about equally developed characters and full loot is the reward for being the better man.

    Skills mattered in UO and were still waiting for a game as skill demanding as UO was. SotA with it card magic system will definetly not be a competitor to that crown.

    And? I don't see where your going with this. There are a ton of games for competitive PvP players. Not so many for PK/gankers for the mere fact that games that tried to cater to this playstyle failed in terrific and amusing fashion. 

    Simply put, the OP is way off, and a lot of people hollering for full loot/stealing just want constant fresh meat to gank. 

    I'm all for a fantasy type EVE game. But we all know that's not what the OP wants. EVE is too tough for him.

    It's not about "competitive pvp." When I want competitive pvp, I'll play sc2 or quake. When I want an immersive virtual world with risk/reward, politics, danger, bounties, etc then I'll play UO or (hopefully) future sandbox titles. It frustrates me to no end when people talk about "competitive pvp" in these discussions.

    Agree. If i only want competitive PvP i play CoD. If i want the whole experience i play MMORPG games. 

  • VannorVannor YorkshirePosts: 2,970Member Uncommon
    hmm people need to stop thinking this is going to be another UO.. or even anything like it. It's not even an MMO.
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by The1ceQueen Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.




    "Felucca Old School" players were the minority in Ultima Online. Your personal experiences to the contrary, this was remarked upon and complained about by players as far back as 2001/2002. It's also something that's noted as common knowledge. If there was some reason to think this wasn't the case, someone would have made the case for it in the past decade on talking about it. The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

     

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.


     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

     

    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     

  • InsaneMembraneInsaneMembrane SydneyPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

     

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.


     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

     

    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     

    You are kidding right?

    AoS was released and several things happened, most notable was the increase in the cost of game time! What really broke the immersion in UO after AoS for me was the fact that the entire game was suddenly not about skill any longer, it was all about items. So many stupid items, silly colours, all sorts of junk. 

    That is what drove players away, not some cranked up false witness PvP junk.

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by InsaneMembrane
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

     

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.


     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

     

    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     

    You are kidding right?

    AoS was released and several things happened, most notable was the increase in the cost of game time! What really broke the immersion in UO after AoS for me was the fact that the entire game was suddenly not about skill any longer, it was all about items. So many stupid items, silly colours, all sorts of junk. 

    That is what drove players away, not some cranked up false witness PvP junk.

    Yeah that was what i just said. AoS with it's WoW items, the removal of loot and a new skill system - actually a new game- killed UO. 

    Just about all felucca players left the game and that is why subscribers goes down some months after AoS release.

  • InsaneMembraneInsaneMembrane SydneyPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by InsaneMembrane
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

     

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.


     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

     

    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     

    You are kidding right?

    AoS was released and several things happened, most notable was the increase in the cost of game time! What really broke the immersion in UO after AoS for me was the fact that the entire game was suddenly not about skill any longer, it was all about items. So many stupid items, silly colours, all sorts of junk. 

    That is what drove players away, not some cranked up false witness PvP junk.

    Yeah that was what i just said. AoS with it's WoW items, the removal of loot and a new skill system - actually a new game- killed UO. 

    Just about all felucca players left the game and that is why subscribers goes down some months after AoS release.

     

    Ok, as long as you were not implying it was splitting up the players for Tram/Fel which caused the problems. It was the core changes to the game which were the issues. Not the Tram/Fel thing.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Aragon100 Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by The1ceQueen Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.   Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS. That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.
     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game. ** Sources: 1UP Article on UO Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel  
    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     




    Anything other than your word and the stuff that you saw to support what you're saying? Anything? You are one person. What you saw or experienced isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of thousands of people who played the game.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by InsaneMembrane
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by InsaneMembrane
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.

     

    Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS.

    That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.


     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game.

    **

    Sources:
    1UP Article on UO
    Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release
    More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums
    Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel

     

    Your wrong. 

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     

    You are kidding right?

    AoS was released and several things happened, most notable was the increase in the cost of game time! What really broke the immersion in UO after AoS for me was the fact that the entire game was suddenly not about skill any longer, it was all about items. So many stupid items, silly colours, all sorts of junk. 

    That is what drove players away, not some cranked up false witness PvP junk.

    Yeah that was what i just said. AoS with it's WoW items, the removal of loot and a new skill system - actually a new game- killed UO. 

    Just about all felucca players left the game and that is why subscribers goes down some months after AoS release.

     

    Ok, as long as you were not implying it was splitting up the players for Tram/Fel which caused the problems. It was the core changes to the game which were the issues. Not the Tram/Fel thing.

    I have no clue where you got that from.

    I have never said that trammel was the reason felucca died. Age of Shadows killed UO felucca.

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.   Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS. That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.
     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game. ** Sources: 1UP Article on UO Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel  
    Your wrong. 

     

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     



    Anything other than your word and the stuff that you saw to support what you're saying? Anything? You are one person. What you saw or experienced isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of thousands of people who played the game.

     

    I saw the population ingame before and after trammel and before and after Age of Shadows.

    UP felucca was just fine after trammel.

    After Age of Shadows it was soon to be deserted.

    And i am far from alone.

    Have to ask you again, did you play UO from beta -97 to Age of Shadows february 2003 as i did?

  • InsaneMembraneInsaneMembrane SydneyPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by Aragon100

    Originally posted by lizardbones  

    Originally posted by The1ceQueen

    Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.   Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS. That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.
     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game. ** Sources: 1UP Article on UO Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel  
    Your wrong. 

     

    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong. 

    Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS.

    Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.

     

     



    Anything other than your word and the stuff that you saw to support what you're saying? Anything? You are one person. What you saw or experienced isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of thousands of people who played the game.

     

    I saw the population ingame before and after trammel and before and after Age of Shadows.

    UP felucca was just fine after trammel.

    After Age of Shadows it was soon to be deserted.

    And i am far from alone.

    Have to ask you again, did you play UO from beta -97 to Age of Shadows february 2003 as i did?

    Anyways, I think all of this UO stuff belongs elsewhere. 

    The topic of this post was pretty much covered before the KS was actually even over. Stealing, Killing, Thieves and PvP is in SotA. I don't see why we can't just end this at that and open new topics about specific issues you have or god forbid something nice to say.

  • AralvarAralvar Boise, IDPosts: 34Member

    Gee, I sure love spending time collecting gear so that some guy can eventually take all of it. That seems like a good use of my time to me.

     

    Full loot, the ultimate time wasting feature!

  • InsaneMembraneInsaneMembrane SydneyPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by Aralvar

    Gee, I sure love spending time collecting gear so that some guy can eventually take all of it. That seems like a good use of my time to me.

     

    Full loot, the ultimate time wasting feature!

     

    PvP is optional. Dump your gear somewhere, take only easily replaceable essentials. Turn the slider to PvP. Go PvP.

     

    If anyone couldn't understand that simple of a process... other problems need to be taken care of first.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Aragon100 Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Aragon100 Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by The1ceQueen Originally posted by Holophonist Implemented Trammel boosted subs for about a year. After that the game entered a 6 - 7 year downward spiral that was only temporarily halted after they released AOS, which they probably did because they were bleeding subs after Trammel.
    That always happens when a game starts to age, newer Mmo's come out, take subscribers, people move on to the next best thing. Just the way it is.
    May 2000 Trammel releases, UO has just under 150k players. Early 2003, UO has just over 200k players. Mid 2003, UO peaks at 250k players, this is just after the release of AoS. 2003 to Present - UO subscribers decline, private servers are created, etc. This can be attributed to many things, including people just not finding anything new in the game, but SWG is probably the main culprit since it offered an alternative to UO. Trammel boosted subs steadily for almost three years. AoS boosted subs for a very short period of time, but it wasn't enough. UO could not compete in a market where games had both full 3D graphics, well known IPs and accommodated players who weren't interested in player killing, looting or thievery. Not to mention UO was just getting old. If the style of PvP is a factor in a game's success, then accommodating players who are interested in PvE and instanced PvP is much more of sales draw over world PvP meaning SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery. If the style of PvP is less of a factor than the game's developer or IP, then SotA doesn't need player killing, looting and thievery; they need a good developer and a decent IP. ** Sources: MMODATA.net Ultima Online Wikipedia Page  
    Players used to the old skillsystem and features tried AoS out for some months, i did, and then we left the game in drowes.   Felucca just about ended to exist some months after AoS. That was the main reason why UO lost so many subscribers after Age of Shadows. Destroying UO by making it a WoW clone wasnt that smart. Felucca oldschool players left the game.
     The game didn't diminish because "Felucca Old School" players left the game, UO diminished because everyone started leaving the game. ** Sources: 1UP Article on UO Someone complaining in the SotA forums about Trammel release More or less the same conversation from 2005 on these forums Blog from 2005 noting that the population moved to Trammel  
    Your wrong.    Felucca players left the game in drowes and thats why game lost loads subscribers some months after AoS. I was there and i saw just about all old felucca guilds ending their subscriptions. I knew them and thats why i know your dead wrong.  Thats also the reason why oldschool UO freeshards had an incredible boom in players after AoS. Some had +150000 followers. Thats alot of players, more then the original game had some years after AoS. Making UO to just another themepark WoW game removed more subscribers then any other change to the game.    
    Anything other than your word and the stuff that you saw to support what you're saying? Anything? You are one person. What you saw or experienced isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of thousands of people who played the game.  
    I saw the population ingame before and after trammel and before and after Age of Shadows.

    UP felucca was just fine after trammel.

    After Age of Shadows it was soon to be deserted.

    And i am far from alone.

    Have to ask you again, did you play UO from beta -97 to Age of Shadows february 2003 as i did?




    So, in other words, you have nothing but your own point of view, with anecdotes, which are refuted by more anecdotes from players with the opposing point of view. In terms of "not being alone", the opposing view point wins. Also, your math is a bit wonky. If "some" private servers had more than 150k players, they would well exceed the total population of UO at its peak. But again, I'm betting you have nothing to support your point other than your assertion that you're right.

    People who's job is to actually research things support the opposing point of view where the additional of Trammel largely emptied out Felucca because that's what players wanted.

    When you can actually prove what you're saying, or have more than your own opinion to support it, I would concede that you have a point. Until then, all you have is an opinion, with nothing to support it.

    The idea that player looting and stealing is necessary comes from the idea that SotA requires the support of UO players. Given the small population of UO players relative to the total number of MMORPG players, the support of UO players isn't terribly relevant, much less the support of only a portion of UO's population. None of those players could play SotA and it could be wildly successful as a game. If the support of UO players was required, the game would be called UO2 or something similar.

    There is no aspect of the idea "If it doesn't have player looting and stealing, the game will fail" that is supportable with anything other than personal opinions. The total UO population is too small to make the difference between success and failure if the target audience isn't the UO population. Every game that targets player looting and stealing as a core game mechanic has a population so small that they do not matter either. Put them all together in one bucket and you'd have less than 100k people. Unless you include Eve players, but then you'd have to work with the idea that Eve players are going to leave Eve for SotA, and that doesn't seem likely. The total MMORPG population, even excluding WoW, is in the millions of players and half or more of them are pretty iffy on open world PvP in general, much less hard core open world PvP. Never mind that it's entirely possible for players to like more than one kind of game and more than one style of PvP. Eve players could be perfectly happy playing Eve with cut throat PvP, and playing SotA with no PvP at all.

    The game doesn't need player looting and stealing at all. I would say be happy that they are providing it in the manner they are providing it, with the option for players to opt out because the more players there are, the more money the game will make, and less likely it is to be horrible like Mortal Online.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Aralvar
    Gee, I sure love spending time collecting gear so that some guy can eventually take all of it. That seems like a good use of my time to me. Full loot, the ultimate time wasting feature!

    One of the aspects of full loot games is the idea that gear is replaceable or insurable. There usually isn't gear that's nearly impossible to replace. In Eve, something can be expensive, but with enough ISK and enough insurance anything can be rebuilt. Something has to be lost, or the game is nearly meaningless, but with preparation, that loss isn't the end of the game and it doesn't mean starting over from scratch.

    There's also a different focus in the game itself. In WoW, full loot would completely break the game. Players would suddenly be unable to run raids without re-running all the preliminary things. If WoW's focus wasn't raids to get gear, but rather crafting and territory control, the loss of gear wouldn't be such a big deal.

    Full loot doesn't exist in a vacuum as the only game mechanic, it exists in relation to all the other game mechanics. There are games where it makes sense because that's how the game is made. There are games where it makes no sense because that's how the game is made.

    I have no idea how SotA's gear is setup. Would losing gear suddenly prevent players from participating in a large part of game play? Would there be no recourse, other than repeating content that players have already "cleared"? I have no idea. It's not nearly as much of a road block as it could be, since SotA is going to offer players a choice about whether or not they want to participate in that kind of game play.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • HellidolHellidol TACOMA, WAPosts: 405Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Darth-Batman
    Because Darkfall is a shining example of a success story? All those open-world-pvp-full-loot games have something in common, they all struggle. All the 'hardcore' players chase away potential customers with their ganking until the community dies off. Players like me are left with nothing to do but hunt noob-hunters, which gets boring after day one and after day two all the 'noobs' have quit due to gankers small penile syndrome. I hope Shroud doesnt follow this pattern because if it does, chances are it'll share the same fate as Mortal Online and DF. 

    not true at all but ok....hardcore and jackass are very different. Hardcore is someone being able to take out a group by him self or pestering them for a long period of time. Jackass is getting a group to camp some lowbies because you are not skilled enough to attack a group on your level.

    Also know your audience, the target audience might have nothing not be whom you think it is.

    image
  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,295Member Uncommon
    Personally, im more than happy to have the PVP be an 'option' where players can choose to either participate, or not, it should not be forced upon them, of course i have no problem with players who choose to participate in the PVP also have full loot options on those they defeat, it keeps them happy, in the meantime the players who prefer to play PVE can do so without restrictions, sounds good to me image
  • BilgatoBilgato Tempe, AZPosts: 23Member Uncommon

    Getting armor shouldn't be hard or expensive if they keep with the UO style.

    In UO my fighter guy wore nothing but orc armor and axes, I had stacks of it in my shack, I just dyed the boots and gloves brown to and wore a brown cape personalize it and keep my friends from accidently hitting me when we were around orcs.

     

    I started my fighting career from being a lumberjack trying to get revenge on an orc camp that kept robbing and killing me...so really  all of my war-gear was free...accept for paying in a little blood occasionally.

     

    Buying vendor "whites" was as good as anything, since it was skill based combat and not modern MMO gear based...I hope they do it the same way. I liked being able to roll out and PvE or PvP in junk you scrounged off the ground at the bank much better than these modern systems. I really am not a fan of twinks/twinking, that's just a cheap short-cut to a hollow win in my book.

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Personally, im more than happy to have the PVP be an 'option' where players can choose to either participate, or not, it should not be forced upon them, of course i have no problem with players who choose to participate in the PVP also have full loot options on those they defeat, it keeps them happy, in the meantime the players who prefer to play PVE can do so without restrictions, sounds good to me image

    If you play the riskier game (PvP) you should have better rewards for doing that.

    Taking part in open PvP should give you more and better rescources both from gathering and from killing mobs.

    Getting the same rescources in the PvE version of SotA will destroy the incentive to ever gather in open PvP places.

    Their need to be carrots if you really want the PvE crowd to enter areas with risk for getting involved in PvP.

  • InsaneMembraneInsaneMembrane SydneyPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by Phry
    Personally, im more than happy to have the PVP be an 'option' where players can choose to either participate, or not, it should not be forced upon them, of course i have no problem with players who choose to participate in the PVP also have full loot options on those they defeat, it keeps them happy, in the meantime the players who prefer to play PVE can do so without restrictions, sounds good to me image

    If you play the riskier game (PvP) you should have better rewards for doing that.

    Taking part in open PvP should give you more and better rescources both from gathering and from killing mobs.

    Getting the same rescources in the PvE version of SotA will destroy the incentive to ever gather in open PvP places.

    Their need to be carrots if you really want the PvE crowd to enter areas with risk for getting involved in PvP.

     

     

    You are speaking for yourself again. 

    I do not need an incentive to PvP. I don't care if the "reward" as you put it is 25% of what PvE players get. As long as I get to PK in game, then I am totally fine with the game!!

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by InsaneMembrane
    Originally posted by Aragon100
    Originally posted by Phry
    Personally, im more than happy to have the PVP be an 'option' where players can choose to either participate, or not, it should not be forced upon them, of course i have no problem with players who choose to participate in the PVP also have full loot options on those they defeat, it keeps them happy, in the meantime the players who prefer to play PVE can do so without restrictions, sounds good to me image

    If you play the riskier game (PvP) you should have better rewards for doing that.

    Taking part in open PvP should give you more and better rescources both from gathering and from killing mobs.

    Getting the same rescources in the PvE version of SotA will destroy the incentive to ever gather in open PvP places.

    Their need to be carrots if you really want the PvE crowd to enter areas with risk for getting involved in PvP.

     

     

    You are speaking for yourself again. 

    I do not need an incentive to PvP. I don't care if the "reward" as you put it is 25% of what PvE players get. As long as I get to PK in game, then I am totally fine with the game!!

    Its not about need of better reward, it is common sense.

  • iridescenceiridescence Elliot Lake, ONPosts: 1,486Member

    The way I understand it, their method of game design will give full loot PVP griefing lulz to those who want that sort of gameplay. Isn't that enough for you?

     

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by iridescence

    The way I understand it, their method of game design will give full loot PVP griefing lulz to those who want that sort of gameplay. Isn't that enough for you?

     

    Griefing is not in the game, PvP is consent only.

    Full loot isnt decided yet. I doubt we will see full loot.

    Risk vs reward is important in any game and giving better rewards to the ones that take bigger risks is logical..

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by VikingGamer
    UO as originally released proved exactly the opposite. Try again.

    UO didn't start getting really popular until Tramel released.  AKA the PvE server.

     

     

    Face it folks, FFA PvP is a niche and will never be mega huge.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • Aragon100Aragon100 OsloPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by VikingGamer
    UO as originally released proved exactly the opposite. Try again.

    UO didn't start getting really popular until Tramel released.  AKA the PvE server.

     

     

    Face it folks, FFA PvP is a niche and will never be mega huge.

    Had little problem with trammel since the felucca PvP players still played with me in felucca. And the game was really popular even before trammel was introduced even though i give you right that trammel had a positive effect on subs.

    Felucca died when Age of Shadows were released february 2003. AoS changed UO to a WoW game. So what actually happened was that removing full loot with the insurance on gear and creating a game with uber weapons and armor was what destroyed UO. Add different retarded skill and PvP system to that and you had the total fiasco.

    EA destroyed UO.

    The demand for a similar game as old UO is still very high and will continue to be like that. Some players dont like the carebear games.

Sign In or Register to comment.