PVP Full Loot and the PKing experience!

The advantage to Selective Multiplayer is if you are flagged for open PvP, everyone you see will also be flagged for open PvP. Everyone will be enthusiastic about it, no one will be there reluctantly, every one will be ready to fight, and no one should have any reason to complain if they are attacked.

As a PvPer, what more could you want?

 

So you found some articles on the matter, how nice. But as i said before, biased commentaries that totally contradict my own experience i couldn't care less about. Without any statistics it is nothing more then opinions.

Most likely some PvE players with an agenda of miscrediting the felucca playstyle.

 

Access to the people who don't want to PvP.

The reason Post-Tram was so traumatic to some players is because it became the industry norm to seperate PvPers and PvEers onto different servers. They didn't lose access to PvP - they lost access to PvEers.

For some people, the "thrill" was never about PvP (as this still exists in virtually every game since) but instead about the psychological pleasure derived from aggressively dominating, abusing or intimidating those they perceived as weak. In short "bullying".

@Ara - I have played on PvP servers on every game I played, and I have enjoyed it. I don't need to kick around PvEers to get my fix.

 

This is not the game for you, then. Sorry.

 

Eh, I wasn't talking about myself.

 

If you read again from the text you quoted me on you will have the answer:

 

No and that is kind of my point. You can't use "felucca vs trammel" without proper facts and from what I have seen so far do none have those facts, just guesses.

 

i don't like this... neither i like the idea of separate servers for separate gameplay styles.... different styles of gameplay MUST MEET! it's a pity to separate people on the base of pvp-like guy or pvm-like guy, the game is about both pvp AND pvm, so if you like just one of these 2 something is wrong with you! you should be enjoing the game in its fullness! you don't like pvp? so you want a shard all for yourself just to make pvm?

Come on what kind of idea is this? separate different syles of gameplay? separate players and their exeriences? NO WAY the more we are the more fun we can have! example:
-you go for pvm, you like only pvm
-you go on your server, or you toggle pvp off
-you just play pvm limiting yourself to discover just 50% of the game

you have to meet different gameplay styles cause the fun about this kind of games is INTERACTION and with this sort of "good ideas" you LIMIT IT!
we would end up having farmers flagged for pvm working all day for pvp-on guys NONSENSE!
you like ONLY pvm?
you like ONLY pvp?
the game is about both! if somebody has a problem is you, you got to solve it on your own (maybe discovering other gameplay styles by yourself or helped/inspired by other players)
allowing you to flag some pvp/pvm button on-off TO ISOLATE YOURSELF for other players who could play against you is vile, no fun.

solution? learn to enjoy the game you like in its fullness, learn to loose and from that, again, learn how to win. your victories will be even sweeter if you acknowledge loss and actually accept it!

you still like to play differently? you can still do that! but dont FORCE other players to do so, themselfs!

 

NO WAY! PKing is ALL about killing other players, OBVIOUSLY, without their consent! who said pvp must be consenual?

 

like i said, most kids are like that cause they didn't really have a different choice on the market! they've known ONLY games like wow!
let's show them something different (wich is actually more fun!) they'll like it if it's well done!

cm on guys everyone says trammel ruined the game, and we wanna brig that back?

 

MY FRIEND, YOU AND ARA SAID EVERYTHING.



When blackrougue said: i saw RG name's on it, i knew what a kind of game it would be. (YEAH I DID THE SAME AS YOU FELLA. )
Now its getting me frustrate, because this games wont be even close what UO once was. I watched the video of Hangout with the Avatar. And they said: we have just an idea for now but we think we are not going to see a full loot, maybe you can DROP an RANDOM item and if some one lose their "luck sword", he can PAY A RENT AND GET IT BACK. WTF !!! this is the most stupid idea for loot i ever heard.
But we all know that this "idea" is pretty much whats going to be. And they said about instances between this nonsense of flag on-off for pvp.

Boooooring !!!

Edit: think i will play medieval The sims, at least i can kill anyone if i want u.u

 

But we werent talking about today games ( it was about old UO and trammel vs felucca subs, i just asked the same impossible question to answer to you) and the comparison is flawed since AAA developers dont make UO felucca today, they make WoW. So taking any numbers from today games without a good felucca UO game made by a AAA company to compare with is not doable.

My point is that after trammel loads of players still played felucca (sure some left but many also joined) and most UO players see it as the best time of felucca.

 

I agree.

I don't like this idea of theirs with the random item drop. It's just totally non-immersive, and against the freedoms and open world feeling of Ultima Online. While I still acknowledge that this is not Ultima Online 2, I hope SotA does indeed try to maintain some of the open-world/do anything you can realistically think of feeling of the original MMO.

I don't see the point of additional threads against full looting, since those that don't want to participate have an opt-out with the slider options. What seems to be happening in these threads is that PvE'rs who have already been assured that they will not have to participate in PvP if they do not want to, are still coming into these threads trying to change PvP for those that do. I wish we could try to keep some of the original openness feeling of the original game without all these safety nets.

RG, you recently came on UO: Second Age to promote your game. It was awesome that you did, but if you are sincere about trying to get these players who still play the game after all these years, please keep some of the original feeling of Ultima Online in the game. I have faith, but I think these types of restrictions are a step in the wrong direction.

 

Well then you totally misunderstood me. I quote the whole conversion so it might be clear:

As I said in my first post I have no idea about the numbers but it looks like you had them so I asked. If you had said "I think.." or something I would not have reacted in the way I did but you made a sure statement so I was curious.

To actually figure out who is the potential users of a game and who of them have the most money in the long run and who of them are willing to pay is not an easy task. One example is the age of the player, today the average age person interested to play a RPG are way higher then it was 17 years ago. Also the disposable income are higher within that higher age range. This is factors and numbers that a game producer pay pretty huge amounts of many to get. This is the reason I asked if you know the numbers because it would been fun to know.

All I know that 17 years ago it was the age group of 15 - 25 that spent most money on games. To day that number is 25-34. I think that if you are going to address a more mature age group, with more money, you need take that in to consideration when you design the game. One thing to take in to consideration is that that age group, even if they spend more money they actually spends less time playing then the younger groups so the playing style will be more casual.

 

what about us poor PKKs ...nothing has come close to the joy I had back then. I could spend Hours in Rat town just casting "In Mani" waiting for my prey to show up..nothing was more satisfying that ruining the "wolfs" day.

 

It's dead simple:
If the developers are thinking of making another "commercial" game to please every PvE kid, well, it will be a huge flop.
Like everybody knows there are tons of that kind of game... and many look waaaay cooler than this one.
This will only be another game like many...and, trust me, people are not going to play it just for the name of Lord British.
Do you wanna challange incoming games like Bless, Black Desert or even Everquest Next on their territory? it will be a tremendous flop! a disgrace!

Viceversa if this forums are full of people, and the founding was a success it's a merit of ALL THE ULTIMA ONLINE PLAYERS and their nostalgia!
Give them the game they want, fellucca-like, whatsoever, and you will have:
-actually all these players playing your game
-guaranteed success, cause such amazing gameplay will have no serious competitors at all. people will discover it and LOVE IT!


The reason games like Mortal online or Darkfall had little success is not the "full-loot" format, not even "forcing people doing pvp" bullshit...
It's just that those games were done REALY BADLY!

 

It was never planned to be like UO. It was supposed to be a spiritual successor to Ultima and that's how they worded it on the KS. There was absolutely NO PvP in the Ultima games... I should think you'd be glad to get some.

 

There was PvP in 'Ultima' online......(which was/is multiplayer)
There was not PvP in there other Ultima games because guess what....they were not mmos

So......

Single player Shroud there will be no PvP, multiplayer the will be PvP.


....Enjoy playing alone


EDIT:

So are we lucky to have multiplayer or are you lucky to have single player?

Good job we have both!

 

Hmm... If PvP in the OPO level game is too overbearing I suspect that most users will simply drop to FPO and play with only friends, rather than dropping straight down to SPO.

 

Wierd. Then what would be the point of the publicity stunts on UO free shards if he wasn't trying to entice former UO players. Seems like there's at least some relation there.......



Anyone got the interview video handy where he said that if he still had the IP it could be called UO2 (Or however he phrased it)?