Why this game is important

Come on, I don't need to be scolded. ******** is not a rude term; it was a succinct way to accurately describe your preferred style of play, and I presented it pretty inoffensively.

Let's not ruin a productive thread!

 

@baltae If I called all PKers Jerks would it be ok? ******** is used to degrade someone and belittle them so as to make their beliefs seems less. So yeah, didn't appreciate it, don't care if you think it is ok.

 

******** has long been a term of derision in UO. You need to be aware of that, and act accordingly. Now let's get back to the productive topic.

 

Will Carebears be allowed to get married in game?

Sorry, couldn't resist..

Anyhow, if there is only consensual PvP I at least hope for some sort of a hardcore mode where perma death is enabled for just your character. Then have hit be somehow indicated as such in game. The only pure PvE I like is when it's perma death. Hardcore Diablo 2 was an all time favorite of mine.

 

I agree with the OP 100% and that wall of text brought tears to eyes.

Trammel was not a hit: in 1997 there were only 100mil internet users. In the year 2000 that number tripled and UO went from 50,000 subscribers to 150,000 subs.

In the year 2000 the Renaissance split the UO world. The internet had 300mil users. UO had 150,000 Users.

Between 2000 and 2003 the internet more than doubled, reaching 700mil users and UO reached its prime of 250,000 subscriptions.

Between 2003 and 2006 the internet reached 1 billion. UO subscriptions fell to 100,000 subscriptions and never recovered.

(+or- 15% error in my stats taken off of various sites) I averaged and rounded some. For instance the 700mil was 716mil.

 

If you take % increase compared to internet growth and line graph it. The downward trend starts exactly the same time Trammel did.

Consider the momentum it had and the player's invested interests (buying houses on eBay $1000 a pop pre-trammel); It flat out tanked. FAILED! the people who truly loved the game cut their losses and left.

You "cry" about PvP. We CRY for what you did!

 

Nice arguement Acrylic, except for the fact that LB stated that the PVP cost them a lot of the subscriptions.

 

From the reddit:

Q: Do you regard the early days of UO with large amount of PVP/Griefing via Tinkering, Thievery, etc to be a mistake or would you say it was the kind of emergent game play you were going for?

A: ?emergent game play you were going for? ? HA!!!! We had no F?n Clue! We were both amazed and shocked, thrilled and horrified all at the same time! We are trying hard to get back most of that feeling, with some safety nets to keep it from driving away customers, as it really did do in UO.

No one is crying last I checked, are you ok?

 

Well, you could also state that the fact they have open pvp and a completely open world is why they kept the loyal subscribers over all these years...

And only the people that always complain left, they would have left either way.

 

I hope Portalarium ll work hard for not create a Tramal 2.0

 

@rune_74
He didn't say "a lot", but he was truthful. That doesn't mean Trammel was the right solution. It also does nothing to prove that Trammel did not ruin UO. Numbers don't lie.

 

@rune_74
If you read it more carefully he plans to bring MOST of those feelings back again.

 

Not only were people culturally unfamiliar with the online communities, but there are no reliable ways to reach that kind of conclusion. So yeah, Lord British is most likely wrong. If you see things like large scale quitting after a patch or major change like the New Game Enhancements for Star Wars: Galaxies? That's the the clearest source available to a developer for why people quit a game.

 

I'm sure he has more actual real numbers then the ones you to have generated, since you have no actual source to what happened. I would take what they say over a zealous fan.

 

"Between 2003 and 2006 the internet reached 1 billion. UO subscriptions fell to 100,000 subscriptions and never recovered."

Might have something to do with all the other ******** MMO that came out. lol sorry couldn't resist. ******** is not a derogatory word in this house. My granddaughter loves Carebears.

 

@rune_74
In the Reddit quote you posted. RG is not saying that PvP cost the game "a lot" of subscriptions. Those are your words.

He is saying he wants to keep MOST of the feelings he listed: Amazement, Shock, Horror, and Thrill. Including SOME safety nets to keep from driving people away.

The quote is arguing in favor of Trammel being bad more than it is good. RG definitely knows the numbers better than I do. Everything that he wants most happened before Trammel not after. The question was harshly stated and he made an eloquent stand that has escaped you.

 

<blockquote cite>Our primary objectives are to tell a story even more compelling than Ultimas IV-VII, create a virtual world more interactive than Ultima VII, develop deep rich multi-player capabilities beyond combat akin to Ultima Online, and offer a bold new approach to integrate them with ?Selective Multi-Player?.</blockquote>

<blockquote cite> In any case this is what we?re toying with, this story-driven PvP as opposed to open-PvP but we?ll set up a whole debate on this, on the SotA website, just talking about PvP, so that we don?t upset either camp of extremes but that we also make it compelling enough to be desirable, we want to make it so even the players that normally wouldn?t be interested are enticed to try it and that it is sufficiently deep and allows that full looting that I see some people are talking about and maybe we can include full looting if the people understand that they are at risk of this and that the reward is encouraging enough to enter into it. We?re toying with that and we?ll figure it out together, we?ll figure out PvP.</blockquote>

As you can see, they have already stated how they are looking at PvP. Felucca + (Trammel + PvP compelling enough to visit Felucca)

 

In update#4 Chris mentions rare resources tile being open pvp not so sure about full loot though.

 

@rune_74: Amen to that! Virtues have always been one of the most fascinating, inspiring, and grounding features of RG's work. So much thought and effort that have gone into the Virtues and Principles.

It's just a hypothesis but I have the impression that there's a great deal of overlap between the crowd that loved UO PvP and wants to recreate it in SotA and the crowd that is minimally aware of RG's Virtues and Principles.

 

I loved UO PvP, and I loved the Virtues. Half the fun for me in UO PvP was hunting reds and playing a good guy. I remember a few people in my guild RPed witch hunters who only went after reds.