Why hasn't a Ultima Online 2 ever surfaced?

tvalentine

Serious question here. I think we can all agree that EA is mostly out to make money more so than making good innovative games, but i don't see the reasoning to let the UO name die out. Sure UO still has a population and it is still being supported with updates, but EA has to see the benefits ($$$ wise) of making a succesor to one of the most popular games in the mmorpg genre. UO is out dated and the name alone is worth alot of money, even making a good looking UO2 with good marketing should net them a hefty profit and if they put some actual thought and effort into the game they should be able to retire UO1 for a healthier, newer ultima world. Was wondering what other people's thoughts on this would be as multiple other UO games have been in development before yet they were canceled before release.

HeroEvermore

if you fail to recreate the first it might tarnish reputation even further? I dont know. Just food for thought. It would be a tough IP to swallow, that's for sure.

Yamota

Simply put, because of EA. Richard Garriot made the biggest misstake in his professional career when he decided to sell out to EA. He made money sure, but at what cost?

His entire Ultima legacy was flushed down the toilet.

punkrock

They were going to back in 03 i think it was, or make it 3D. it was closed down for some reason, not sure why thou.

tvalentine

Ok, we know about the cancelled UO2 and the fact that it is EA's decision not to make a new one, was really wondering as to why they aren't making another one. I know nobody here is going to know the exact reason why since noone here works at EA, but i wanted to see other people's opinions on the matter as to "Why". Considering how UO becomes more and more outdated by each new MMO release, the reasons to make a UO2 have never seemed better.

thekid1

Perhaps because they are only interested in making themepark mmorpgs?

 

Would be funny if they would make Ultima Online 2 and make it even more lineair and themepark then Star Wars TOR.

punkrock

i looked up and found the name, it was called ultima x, the reason why it closed was due to people getting let go, and orgin failing. Really crapy reasons.

ShakyMo

Try wakfu, yes it looks cartoony, has homm style combat and is plain weird, but.... it borrows a lot of good ideas from uo imo

Asuran24

Originally posted by tvalentine

Serious question here. I think we can all agree that EA is mostly out to make money more so than making good innovative games, but i don't see the reasoning to let the UO name die out. Sure UO still has a population and it is still being supported with updates, but EA has to see the benefits ($$$ wise) of making a succesor to one of the most popular games in the mmorpg genre. UO is out dated and the name alone is worth alot of money, even making a good looking UO2 with good marketing should net them a hefty profit and if they put some actual thought and effort into the game they should be able to retire UO1 for a healthier, newer ultima world. Was wondering what other people's thoughts on this would be as multiple other UO games have been in development before yet they were canceled before release.

 The issue is that really with how the majority of gamers play games, as well as how they expect things to be, it is better to ask what would a UO2 be if it were created now. In terms of  populations back in the era of mmo gaming when UO was launched, and played majorly it was popular, but those numbers even with a good bump in numbers of subs based on the increase in playerbase. It would not be much more successful then some of the mmos that are barely holding on really. Much of what made UO great (also take into account  much of this was brand new at the time, as well as having a vastly smaller market of games fighting for subs too.) are not really seen by the majority of vocal mmo players as wanted (also we can not use the vast unheard playerbase as a fact of saying one or the other is bigger as they have not made their opinions known.). i doubt most companies see any need or reward that would warrent spending the kind of money needed to update UO or remake it. I mean even games like it such as swg, eve, and such that sit in a area that is nitch like UO has with the groups it appeals to have a rather small population comparitively to other mmos now. It is merely that UO might just not be seen as being worth the money, effort, and relative risk of losing what population the outdated version has if the newr game flops badly.

 

Also think about what it would cost for the new UO2 to be made and updated really, and what would happen if it garnered no more or less subs after launch. They spent how much money on the game's developement to basically make a whole new upgraded game for hwo much of a population, when they could have just  left it alone, Add in that if they move it too far from the fomula that is UO of the past it will be seen as  a failure by core players who might leave it, and if still it has no more new players in the game it is a complete failure then. It is the risk to me that is the issue here, that the risk they take by revamping it is too much for the reward that they  might get for it (which may not even be there really.).

punkrock

If UO2 would of never been taken down in 04, WOW would not of been such a big deal. But then again if DAOC never released TOA it would not been been in thw state it is know. In other words, we can say a lot of what if's. If the big 3 did not try to copy WOW before it came out we would not been in the spot we are in know. UO2 will never happen sadly, or DAOC 2.

Asuran24

Originally posted by punkrock

If UO2 would of never been taken down in 04, WOW would not of been such a big deal. But then again if DAOC never released TOA it would not been been in thw state it is know. In other words, we can say a lot of what if's. If the big 3 did not try to copy WOW before it came out we would not been in the spot we are in know. UO2 will never happen sadly, or DAOC 2.

 that is it though you need to determine many fo the worse case "what ifs" and find out how bad they woudl be for you, and the whole. Even loking at the state of games in mmos it is pretty easy to see many of the mmos have two groups of vocal groups that are disatified with the game, yet the vast majority of the gamers in these are largely happy/enjoying the game in it's state it is in. Also gaming has become about enjoying the game content in the mmos, but the way you enjoy it has been streamlined to focus on the common style of play that is shared by the majority of gamers in mmos. As such you would have the issue a company like EA would develope it towards even more this wow-like style of gamng over keeping it how UO was, as you would open the possiblity for the largest possible amount of gamers to want to try it. Uo was not so much about enjoyment as mmos now are abotu that, but about enjoyment based from the perception of the playerbase that it was released in it at the time.  IF they were to redo UO i hope it would be by another company that would only improve area that trully needed it, and keep much of what made the game great, but yet still it may still be a nitch game. You can make alot of pretty well informed guessed on what will happen, what can happen, from looking at what has happened so far.

Aethaeryn

EA doesnt seem to make "new" games. . only "build" on the success of current fumulae and franchises.  They tend to take a studio that has developed something unique and amazing that sells well and then continue to resell that same product.

cancel UO2 and focus on UO,  The sims franchise (Sims Meieval?), etc etc.

 

Making UO2 now would be a risk and EA does not take risks.  They will wait for someone else to develope a sandbox that works and sells well and then buy it and prduce the sequal in a watered down more "accessible" version for the general public.  This is not hate. . just the trend I noticed.

Dameonk

Originally posted by punkrock

i looked up and found the name, it was called ultima x, the reason why it closed was due to people getting let go, and orgin failing. Really crapy reasons.

FYI.  UO2 is different than Ultima X: Odyssey. 

UO2 pre-dates UXO by a few years and was going to be a game set in a future Britannia more resembling the Charr environments in GW2 than the original UO landscape.  Full game design details were never released but based on what was released it had more in common with EQ than UO.

UXO was in development around the same time as WoW and used the Ultima-series single player story as a backdrop instead of UO.  Public details for this title were slim and about the only thing I remember is that it promised to NOT be a EQ clone.

Nitth

---

Originally posted by Yamota
Simply put, because of EA. Richard Garriot made the biggest misstake in his professional career when he decided to sell out to EA. He made money sure, but at what cost?
His entire Ultima legacy was flushed down the toilet.

---

I don't think he really cares sailing around the world on his "big fuckin yacht"

kishe

EA has "almost" released sequel to UO TWICE just to cancel it week after beta signups appear.

 

 

punkrock

Ah ok, i did not know there was two. Thanks for the heads up, i stoped following most UO stuff when DAOC was released lol.

Aethaeryn

I hate to say this but I thought UO 2 looked aweful.  I still have my Charter Edition box of UO and  the back sleve of the CD case has an add for it.  The only thing they really showed was the full motion capture of dancing /  bowing etc.  They were changing the look / feel / gameplay quite a bit.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWumht6AuZo

 

Don't get me wrong it could have been good. . or it could have been  terrible.  We all wish it would have been produced and awesome etc.  Look at Asheron's Call 2 or all of the initial complaining about EQ2.

I think for a game to be truly gripping the way UO was at the time a new development studio would have to make it with the funding of something like EA with the ability to completey direct the development without any interferance.  Good luck there :P

 

I was actually hired by Origin just before UO2 was cancelled.  Glad I decided to do something else.  The fact that EA calls their new online store Origin makes me convulse a bit!

Gorilla

Simply because there are other IP's that have much greater portential for making $'s for EA. A good example would be Star Wars. EA are in it for the money (of course) however they seem to have little interest in the products they sell (beyond how to squeeze cash out of them) and a flagrant diseregard for there customers.

 

MosesZD

Originally posted by tvalentine

Serious question here. I think we can all agree that EA is mostly out to make money more so than making good innovative games, but i don't see the reasoning to let the UO name die out. Sure UO still has a population and it is still being supported with updates, but EA has to see the benefits ($$$ wise) of making a succesor to one of the most popular games in the mmorpg genre. UO is out dated and the name alone is worth alot of money, even making a good looking UO2 with good marketing should net them a hefty profit and if they put some actual thought and effort into the game they should be able to retire UO1 for a healthier, newer ultima world. Was wondering what other people's thoughts on this would be as multiple other UO games have been in development before yet they were canceled before release.

 

Because EA got butt-hurt over the way things went down and refused to, after they canceled it, sell the IP to Garriott who wanted to finish it.   You can see the promo video here:   http://tinyurl.com/52n32t

 

EA is, simply put, the dumbest fracking group of suits in gaming.  The only reason they got big was because they stole the guts of Madden from Bethesda then reneged on their co-pub/cross-platform deal for Bethesda's competeing (same AI) football game (Gridiron).   Bethesda won the lawsuit, but EA kept the Madden franchise then locked Bethesda out of licensing by going exclusive with the NFLPA.

 

And, of course, EA got into mutiple lawsuits (which the lost) for over-working and misclassifying its employees as management to avoid over-time...   They lost all those lawsuits, too.

 

So, EA and stupid, dysfunctional moves...   They got lucky in stealing a few good properties.   And buying up some others.   But their core business is failing as the chickens come home to roost vis heir churning, greed and second-rate (yet over-rated) games that are more hype than reality.

 

 

 

OberanMiM

Actually a UO Sequel was canceled TWICE by EA.

There was a UO2 (canceled March 21, 2001) and a UOX that got cancelled around 2004ish

fenistil

Originally posted by Aethaeryn

EA doesnt seem to make "new" games. . only "build" on the success of current fumulae and franchises.  They tend to take a studio that has developed something unique and amazing that sells well and then continue to resell that same product.

cancel UO2 and focus on UO,  The sims franchise (Sims Meieval?), etc etc.

 

Making UO2 now would be a risk and EA does not take risks.  They will wait for someone else to develope a sandbox that works and sells well and then buy it and prduce the sequal in a watered down more "accessible" version for the general public.  This is not hate. . just the trend I noticed.

THIS.

 

Yeah that bascially what corporations do , and EA is even more bolder with it than others. (Activision is preety close thou).

 

I am not expecting anything innovative out of EA and neither should anybody imo.

Loktofeit

EA trying to make a UO 2 would be like Slayer trying to top Reign in Blood. It's a waste of time for both the artists and the audience.

MosesZD

Originally posted by Gorilla

Simply because there are other IP's that have much greater portential for making $'s for EA. A good example would be Star Wars. EA are in it for the money (of course) however they seem to have little interest in the products they sell (beyond how to squeeze cash out of them) and a flagrant diseregard for there customers.

 

 

I agree.   It seems fairly easy to see that they only seem to care about how to get money out of their customers.   These games are top-down, designed by marketers and suits, and executed by over-worked, under-paid programmers and artists without regard to their input.

 

They have all the classic earmarks of 'bad movies hidden behind special effects."      Battlefield Earth, Spiderman 3, Superman IV, Highlander 2, Batman and Robin...   Bigger CGI.  More explosions.   More flash!    Crappier movies...

MosesZD

Originally posted by ShakyMo

Try wakfu, yes it looks cartoony, has homm style combat and is plain weird, but.... it borrows a lot of good ideas from uo imo

 

My daughter and most of my friends play that.   I sub, too.   But I only play a couple of days a week.    I like it, don't get me wrong.  But it's early in the game and the idiot-brigade is out in full force...    So I'm biding my time...

 

gainesvilleg

Originally posted by deziwright

if you fail to recreate the first it might tarnish reputation even further? I dont know. Just food for thought. It would be a tough IP to swallow, that's for sure.

I don't think anything would tarnish UO brand's reputation more than Ultimat 9 did LOL.  But it is odd they let the brand die.  I don't think some newer players realize how deep and storied that brand is.  Ultima 1 was so long ago (early 1980's I think) and such a collectors item even just a few years ago (had cloth map, other stuff in the box) I actually sold my old copy of the game on ebay for a couple hundred bucks a few years back to a collector in London.

Loktofeit

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by deziwright

if you fail to recreate the first it might tarnish reputation even further? I dont know. Just food for thought. It would be a tough IP to swallow, that's for sure.

I don't think anything would tarnish UO brand's reputation more than Ultimat 9 did LOL.  But it is odd they let the brand die.  I don't think some newer players realize how deep and storied that brand is.  Ultima 1 was so long ago (early 1980's I think) and such a collectors item even just a few years ago (had cloth map, other stuff in the box) I actually sold my old copy of the game on ebay for a couple hundred bucks a few years back to a collector in London.

Did he wonder why there was a map in the box of the only game in the series that didn't come with one?