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" .
Did I say consentual open world pvp? And before you come up with some stupid response, no I did not. Pvp needs to be consentual.
But thank you for proving my point, "The people are not the same."
Sorry for obviously offending you in some unseen way. Certainly wasn't my intent. Now to clearify:
He said: Open World PvP - check
your reply to that statement: Make this consentiual or...
Now, your statement : Make it (Open world PvP was the only thing you quoted, thus, "this" can only be "Open world PvP" because it is the only thing applicable) consentual...
As a result, my reply to your statement seems accurate and thus, your attack on me completely unjustified. But, again, since I am dealing with a "new type of MMO player" I will once again say "sorry for offending you by quoting your exact statement in its complete and accurate context and then pointing out its obvious inaccuracy.
But again, one last time, sorry for offending you.
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.
I disagree with the highlighted statement. There are a few games that have had meaningful crafting without requiring full loss of items upon death.
Pre NGE SWG.
Saga of Ryzom.
Deteriorating gear also makes crafting meaningful. When gear loses durability, sooner or later, the gear is going to break. Thus, requiring players to buy new stuff from crafters. Some repair options can be offered. However, repair should reduce the maximum durability down or reduce the power of the gear.
^^ what the above poster is referring to is Ultimate Collector which is not Brittania Return's but something that he seems intent to use as part if a new MMO(iow Britania Returns..or whatever it may end up being called)
Tram didn't kill UO like many claim......Garriot leaving killed UO. Its a great game today but from the moment he left it went downhill in many significant ways. So cross your fingers that he revives the old feeling of UO even if it is in a somewhat different Brittania.........
EA owns significant portions of Ultima which is why he cannot simply make a new UO with what is after all the world he created.
UO with a top of the line graphics engine and high level developers could easily take in a few million subs.
The main keys are making being "red" a very painful experience and having fairly large guarded starting areas.
If you murder even one person you need to be at risk for stat loss, bounties, trials, bad karma, slower regeneration rates, slower skill gain rates, no access to important vendors that are in main towns etc., less resistance to ligh magics, severe penalty to hiding skills etc. There would also need to be bonuses given to non red players who are fighting red players.
This would make for very few murderers, but give the cream of the crop pvpers a chance at glory.
Another key factor is to make the crafting much, much more engaging, and not something that clutters the back pack. A mixture between SWG and EQII crafting would be a nice start. Longer crafting times per item, and less items to craft would be ideal.
Take UO or Darkfall for example... Your bag gets filled to the brim, over, and over, and over, for hours, and days with a bunch of crap and it is annoying. There needs to be an anutomatic button to "recycle bag" etc.
Jesus christ I've been thinking about this for years, I have so many ideas... we all do, we all have good ideas. We can only hope that some day, in this life time, we can get in a few hard core years of UO2 or something equaly as awesome.
The problem isn't that nobody has made a copy of UO, the problem is the people that it attractcs.
UO was good because it was one of a kind on the market. You had people who played it purely to be a crafter, or a trader, or a dungeon raider.
Now when someone makes a UO clone all that it attracts are the Reds.
A sandbox can't survive where every player is a murdering d-bag.
No one has made a MMO like UO, so how can you know what a clone would attract?
Implement a harsh murder penalty and your problems are fixed. You have to make it hard for reds. They will do it just to be the evil character, nearly no matter the cost. You can make it perma-death for reds and people would still do it. Not many, but some would.
You focus too much on the negative. Think about all of the positive people it would attract. Think about what a AAA sandbox could do for the MMO market in the future.
Both Darkfall and Mortal Online developers have said in multiple interviews that their primary goal was recreating the Ultima Online experience.
I'm not going to try and argue what your (or anyone's) opinion of the game is, when the developer states that they are "making the spiritual successor to Ultima Online" I'd consider it to be a UO clone.
So if I tell you that I'm a millionaire and not some guy in a two bedroom apartment, you'd believe me? Just because I said so?
They may have claimed such things, but their execution took them drastically in another direction. Mortal Online is somewhat similar, except that it's 1st person and to this day it's still in early beta state.
UO was a sandbox, Darkfall and MO are just PVP games!
PLEASE. the reason UO was so addicting was the ability to get pixel rich! In order for a game to have the draw that UO did, it needs 75% of the items in game to have nothing to do with combat! THAT IS THE SAND! Not the pvp rules, not the death penalty, not the combat. All of those just make it a different sandbox. And it dosne't have to have full loot, or even have pvp at all. That it just an additional bit of sand. WHY IS THIS SO COMPLICATED?
UO was a land where you could build wealth and be unique. And people like shiny things they can show off. Or clothes they can customize. Housing, carpentry, and random professions like treasure hunting where the entire character is built to excel at one thing.
And I still play UO on the second age server. It's free, it's hard and it's awesome. And a remake would be amazing as long as they had all the tons of random items and ya know... SAND.
^^ what the above poster is referring to is Ultimate Collector which is not Brittania Return's but something that he seems intent to use as part if a new MMO(iow Britania Returns..or whatever it may end up being called)
Tram didn't kill UO like many claim......Garriot leaving killed UO. Its a great game today but from the moment he left it went downhill in many significant ways. So cross your fingers that he revives the old feeling of UO even if it is in a somewhat different Brittania.........
EA owns significant portions of Ultima which is why he cannot simply make a new UO with what is after all the world he created.
The main talents behind what made UO come to be was not the efforts of RG,but other employees at Origin whom by putting their heads together created the mechanics of the UO systems, one of them being Runesaber,who then went on to be on the team that developed SWG, hence why the housing was a 3d version of UO's and the skill system was like UO's at launch. RG just came in and sat down and played tested their Uo concepts and gave the nod, but many of the key ideas that made UO, UO was was not RG, besides the theme of Ultima from the original games which RG created.
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
If they could pull this off, I would be all for it. Unfortunately, I just don't think it is possible anymore.
For one, the community itself is so different and the playerbase of MMORPG's in general is so used to "easymode" everything, many of the younger gamers (and thin-skinned older gamers) would ragequit in a heartbeat (and generally complain so much in-game it would ruin everybody's experience, especially killing the sense of immersion for RP'ers .... who were a *big* part of what made UO so special, imho).
Also, it has to be pointed out that when UO came out, most of the players were longtime tabletop gamers (DnD in particular) and, more specifically, were actively involved in the various MUD/MUSH/MOOs which were around at that time (some which are still around and going strong). It made for a MUCH different community when the majority (or, at least, a sizable minority) of the playerbase conceded many gaming conventions common to tabletop gaming and MUDs/etc without a second thought. Most of the gamers now would feel shellshocked by a fraction of what most of us just came to take for granted about our experiences in UO, especially some of the more grindy and harsh aspects of its playstyle/mechanics. I wanted to point out this connection to MUDs/etc and tabletop gaming because Raph Koster (UO's lead designer) is on the record numerous times explaining that *MANY* of the mechanics and systems found in UO (and even SWG pre-NGE) were influenced and even outright stolen from the day's popular MUDs/etc. (and tabletop games as well, of course... which is less revelatory).
Essentially, it was a game for gamers by gamers (made mostly from love) where RP was normal and people expected and even embraced some of the things contemporary gamers would balk at nowadays. In contrast, most games now are made by people with degrees (and a lot of student loan debt/mortgage debt/etc. hanging over their heads), working on dev teams that ultimately answer and work for investors and corporate types (not to discount the importance of EA's money in UO's development, a necessary evil that most of the trammel-haters like to ignore). The difference was, back then, EA did not have the pressure or need to expect as much from UO (and previous models of success simply did not exist), so it allowed the corporate types to have a very "hands off" approach to the development process and to let the "geeks" do what they do. Now, a lot of the creative process and design choices are likely influenced by flowcharts, best practices, and investor expectations because clear patterns of success are well-established (primarlily by WoW and even EQ1 before it, which was a big part of EA pushing the changes that ultimately killed UO).
Another important point to address is the assertion I've seen in this thread about how a true successor to UO would be plagued by reds, as if that was a bad thing. Granted, a whole server full of murderous fiends would make for a pretty miserable experience, but it was actually an intended design of the game to have threat/risk present in order to induce players to band together and find strength in numbers. It was a mechanic to promote socializing and group formation. Again, this is coming directly from Raph Koster's own lectures about the matter. Given the way many gamers today want to be solo-star of their one SP-RPG's (with a crowd on hand to see their achievements), the social aspect of these games has really fallen by the wayside. People used to want to group because they both needed to and, often, the people they were grouped with were buddies and friends from earlier experiences in MUDs, tabletop gaming experiences in RL, and even other online communitites like listservs and the like. Even with the guilds of today, many of us don't know much about our guildies except their class, playstyle and perhaps a bit about their personal lives after months of playing and talking to them on vent/TS/etc. *(Oh, and as I've seen even posters in this thread admit, some of you would probably be surprised how many of the virtuous blues you thought were the best people also had some red toons they liked to log-in and make mischief with from time to time)
With all that being said, I do think there is a place for a UO-style sandbox. If a game like EVE can be viable and "fun" for most of its playerbase, it's not impossible for somebody to come along and create another UO-type game that isn't a totally broken mess like DF/MO. However, the resources and time needed to pull off such a product gets greater and greater as games become more and more refined and polished. With each passing year, the chance for something of this nature becoming reality decreases more and more. There is a reason that Garriott and Koster are heavily involved with social gaming. As Koster argues, often convincingly, social gaming is the next big growth area and the potential for creating new and exciting play mechanics and virtual worlds is wide open in this genre (when you look at the simplistic crap that is farmville, it's kinda obvious that even a half decent social game that adds some depth and complexity to flash gaming will stand proud and tall over its competitors). It's kinda how UO was striking out in a mostly unknown niche and the money behind it had to just let the devs do what they do. I'm no fan of flash/social-gaming, but it *could* perhaps become something amazing that few of us are able to envision at the present time.
Okay... /end wall of text
For those interested, I've found these two talks by Koster (and his blog) particularly interesting (both from the perspective of a former UO player and as a gamer in general):
Comments
Did I say consentual open world pvp? And before you come up with some stupid response, no I did not. Pvp needs to be consentual.
But thank you for proving my point, "The people are not the same."
Sorry for obviously offending you in some unseen way. Certainly wasn't my intent. Now to clearify:
He said: Open World PvP - check
your reply to that statement: Make this consentiual or...
Now, your statement : Make it (Open world PvP was the only thing you quoted, thus, "this" can only be "Open world PvP" because it is the only thing applicable) consentual...
As a result, my reply to your statement seems accurate and thus, your attack on me completely unjustified. But, again, since I am dealing with a "new type of MMO player" I will once again say "sorry for offending you by quoting your exact statement in its complete and accurate context and then pointing out its obvious inaccuracy.
But again, one last time, sorry for offending you.
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
Offend?!? Far from it. This is the internet you have to espect people to try to act cute.
"Open World" PVP
"Consentual" PVP
You see how PVP was changed from "Open World" to "Consentual".
I disagree with the highlighted statement. There are a few games that have had meaningful crafting without requiring full loss of items upon death.
Pre NGE SWG.
Saga of Ryzom.
Deteriorating gear also makes crafting meaningful. When gear loses durability, sooner or later, the gear is going to break. Thus, requiring players to buy new stuff from crafters. Some repair options can be offered. However, repair should reduce the maximum durability down or reduce the power of the gear.
Richard Garriot is making Britannia Returns.
Look at his facebook blog entry.
It will resemble Farmville moreso than anything else.
^^ what the above poster is referring to is Ultimate Collector which is not Brittania Return's but something that he seems intent to use as part if a new MMO(iow Britania Returns..or whatever it may end up being called)
Recent article on it-->
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-08-garriotts-ultimate-collector-the-backbone-of-new-uo-inspired-rpg
Tram didn't kill UO like many claim......Garriot leaving killed UO. Its a great game today but from the moment he left it went downhill in many significant ways. So cross your fingers that he revives the old feeling of UO even if it is in a somewhat different Brittania.........
EA owns significant portions of Ultima which is why he cannot simply make a new UO with what is after all the world he created.
UO with a top of the line graphics engine and high level developers could easily take in a few million subs.
The main keys are making being "red" a very painful experience and having fairly large guarded starting areas.
If you murder even one person you need to be at risk for stat loss, bounties, trials, bad karma, slower regeneration rates, slower skill gain rates, no access to important vendors that are in main towns etc., less resistance to ligh magics, severe penalty to hiding skills etc. There would also need to be bonuses given to non red players who are fighting red players.
This would make for very few murderers, but give the cream of the crop pvpers a chance at glory.
Another key factor is to make the crafting much, much more engaging, and not something that clutters the back pack. A mixture between SWG and EQII crafting would be a nice start. Longer crafting times per item, and less items to craft would be ideal.
Take UO or Darkfall for example... Your bag gets filled to the brim, over, and over, and over, for hours, and days with a bunch of crap and it is annoying. There needs to be an anutomatic button to "recycle bag" etc.
Jesus christ I've been thinking about this for years, I have so many ideas... we all do, we all have good ideas. We can only hope that some day, in this life time, we can get in a few hard core years of UO2 or something equaly as awesome.
No one has made a MMO like UO, so how can you know what a clone would attract?
Implement a harsh murder penalty and your problems are fixed. You have to make it hard for reds. They will do it just to be the evil character, nearly no matter the cost. You can make it perma-death for reds and people would still do it. Not many, but some would.
You focus too much on the negative. Think about all of the positive people it would attract. Think about what a AAA sandbox could do for the MMO market in the future.
So if I tell you that I'm a millionaire and not some guy in a two bedroom apartment, you'd believe me? Just because I said so?
They may have claimed such things, but their execution took them drastically in another direction. Mortal Online is somewhat similar, except that it's 1st person and to this day it's still in early beta state.
Few thousand.. how about over 250,000 players. This, in a market x1000 times smaller than it is today.
Next?
HOLY COW!
I logged in just to rant!
STOP COMPARING UO to MO or DF...
UO was a sandbox, Darkfall and MO are just PVP games!
PLEASE. the reason UO was so addicting was the ability to get pixel rich! In order for a game to have the draw that UO did, it needs 75% of the items in game to have nothing to do with combat! THAT IS THE SAND! Not the pvp rules, not the death penalty, not the combat. All of those just make it a different sandbox. And it dosne't have to have full loot, or even have pvp at all. That it just an additional bit of sand. WHY IS THIS SO COMPLICATED?
UO was a land where you could build wealth and be unique. And people like shiny things they can show off. Or clothes they can customize. Housing, carpentry, and random professions like treasure hunting where the entire character is built to excel at one thing.
And I still play UO on the second age server. It's free, it's hard and it's awesome. And a remake would be amazing as long as they had all the tons of random items and ya know... SAND.
The main talents behind what made UO come to be was not the efforts of RG,but other employees at Origin whom by putting their heads together created the mechanics of the UO systems, one of them being Runesaber,who then went on to be on the team that developed SWG, hence why the housing was a 3d version of UO's and the skill system was like UO's at launch. RG just came in and sat down and played tested their Uo concepts and gave the nod, but many of the key ideas that made UO, UO was was not RG, besides the theme of Ultima from the original games which RG created.
Id be so on board for this.
Except for 1 thing.
NO EA INVOLVEMENT!!!!!
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
Go to:
Goblinworks.com
"It would be awesome if you could duel your companion. Then you could solo pvp".--Thanes
/signed
If they could pull this off, I would be all for it. Unfortunately, I just don't think it is possible anymore.
For one, the community itself is so different and the playerbase of MMORPG's in general is so used to "easymode" everything, many of the younger gamers (and thin-skinned older gamers) would ragequit in a heartbeat (and generally complain so much in-game it would ruin everybody's experience, especially killing the sense of immersion for RP'ers .... who were a *big* part of what made UO so special, imho).
Also, it has to be pointed out that when UO came out, most of the players were longtime tabletop gamers (DnD in particular) and, more specifically, were actively involved in the various MUD/MUSH/MOOs which were around at that time (some which are still around and going strong). It made for a MUCH different community when the majority (or, at least, a sizable minority) of the playerbase conceded many gaming conventions common to tabletop gaming and MUDs/etc without a second thought. Most of the gamers now would feel shellshocked by a fraction of what most of us just came to take for granted about our experiences in UO, especially some of the more grindy and harsh aspects of its playstyle/mechanics. I wanted to point out this connection to MUDs/etc and tabletop gaming because Raph Koster (UO's lead designer) is on the record numerous times explaining that *MANY* of the mechanics and systems found in UO (and even SWG pre-NGE) were influenced and even outright stolen from the day's popular MUDs/etc. (and tabletop games as well, of course... which is less revelatory).
Essentially, it was a game for gamers by gamers (made mostly from love) where RP was normal and people expected and even embraced some of the things contemporary gamers would balk at nowadays. In contrast, most games now are made by people with degrees (and a lot of student loan debt/mortgage debt/etc. hanging over their heads), working on dev teams that ultimately answer and work for investors and corporate types (not to discount the importance of EA's money in UO's development, a necessary evil that most of the trammel-haters like to ignore). The difference was, back then, EA did not have the pressure or need to expect as much from UO (and previous models of success simply did not exist), so it allowed the corporate types to have a very "hands off" approach to the development process and to let the "geeks" do what they do. Now, a lot of the creative process and design choices are likely influenced by flowcharts, best practices, and investor expectations because clear patterns of success are well-established (primarlily by WoW and even EQ1 before it, which was a big part of EA pushing the changes that ultimately killed UO).
Another important point to address is the assertion I've seen in this thread about how a true successor to UO would be plagued by reds, as if that was a bad thing. Granted, a whole server full of murderous fiends would make for a pretty miserable experience, but it was actually an intended design of the game to have threat/risk present in order to induce players to band together and find strength in numbers. It was a mechanic to promote socializing and group formation. Again, this is coming directly from Raph Koster's own lectures about the matter. Given the way many gamers today want to be solo-star of their one SP-RPG's (with a crowd on hand to see their achievements), the social aspect of these games has really fallen by the wayside. People used to want to group because they both needed to and, often, the people they were grouped with were buddies and friends from earlier experiences in MUDs, tabletop gaming experiences in RL, and even other online communitites like listservs and the like. Even with the guilds of today, many of us don't know much about our guildies except their class, playstyle and perhaps a bit about their personal lives after months of playing and talking to them on vent/TS/etc. *(Oh, and as I've seen even posters in this thread admit, some of you would probably be surprised how many of the virtuous blues you thought were the best people also had some red toons they liked to log-in and make mischief with from time to time)
With all that being said, I do think there is a place for a UO-style sandbox. If a game like EVE can be viable and "fun" for most of its playerbase, it's not impossible for somebody to come along and create another UO-type game that isn't a totally broken mess like DF/MO. However, the resources and time needed to pull off such a product gets greater and greater as games become more and more refined and polished. With each passing year, the chance for something of this nature becoming reality decreases more and more. There is a reason that Garriott and Koster are heavily involved with social gaming. As Koster argues, often convincingly, social gaming is the next big growth area and the potential for creating new and exciting play mechanics and virtual worlds is wide open in this genre (when you look at the simplistic crap that is farmville, it's kinda obvious that even a half decent social game that adds some depth and complexity to flash gaming will stand proud and tall over its competitors). It's kinda how UO was striking out in a mostly unknown niche and the money behind it had to just let the devs do what they do. I'm no fan of flash/social-gaming, but it *could* perhaps become something amazing that few of us are able to envision at the present time.
Okay... /end wall of text
For those interested, I've found these two talks by Koster (and his blog) particularly interesting (both from the perspective of a former UO player and as a gamer in general):
http://gdcvault.com/play/1015142/It-s-All-Games-Now
http://www.raphkoster.com/2011/08/25/video-of-my-casual-connect-talk/
http://www.raphkoster.com/
wurmonline.com - wurm online is rough around the edges but it's the only thing filling my UO twitch.