Facepalm.....Mythic like Funcom....2 of the most epic fail studio's....they should work together to make a decent mmo.....wait a minute, that woulnt work either to much fail.
If they want to remain true to the spirit of Ultima then i'm all for it.
If however they want to include elves, ninja's, goofy weapons with a million edges, or armor that makes you look like a cross between a power ranger and a hummer, then i'm definitely against it.
You mean, the stuff that EA Bioware and Mythic have alreadyed added to original UO?
Facepalm.....Mythic like Funcom....2 of the most epic fail studio's....they should work together to make a decent mmo.....wait a minute, that woulnt work either to much fail.
Nothing's wrong with Mythic. But EA Mythic. Or Bioware Mythic, whatever they call it now... is awful. At least they're no Blizzard though.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Tibernicus: It's not just Matt frior, the number 2 guy on TESO is ex ultima dev and there are several ex mythic & origin people working on TESO
Too bad Zenimax is forcing them to put instancing and all that other BS in the game.
You are one of those people who uses words like "sandpark" or terms like "sandbox features".
I'm one of those people who use terms like... MMORPG and WoW clone.
Themepark is a term that was coined circa 2007 to describe games like WoW, LotRO, and the like. Linear, led by the hand, casual, safe, games.
It DOES NOT apply to DAoC or EQ.
No. I've been in MMO's since 2000 and heard it shortly after that. It definitely applied to EQ. It meant games where you were just partook in the rides (activities) that the devs let you do (dungeons, quests, mob grind...), linear in a sense that you went from zone to zone getting harder and harder mobs, every one in a class were exactly the same, and had no or no significant impact on the world.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by doragon86 As much as I would like to see a UO2, after what Mythic did with WAR, I'd prefer they not bother.
Ugh, stop moaning like some hurt teenagers. What do you have to lose to make you snub the idea of a UO2? Who cares if you don't like the company. There may be a slight chance that you will like the game, and you don't want it created because you don't like the companies behind it? Like I said before, you're not losing anything, let them make it, if it's bad don't play it...
At the very least it would be interesting to see how it turns out.
Actually, we would be losing something. Time. It most likely would be yet another rollout of a level grind without the soul of a "world". Which the original UO was NOT, but the current UO is as well as DAoC always was. The current fraternity of game developers and many of the hardcore gamers of today can't understand what that means, much less figure out what to do about it.
I thought SWTOR would be the final proof that the masses don't want any more of it, but I seem to have underestimated the density of the thinkness of the heads involved. Very well....
Let there be TSW!
Ack, that didn't work yet either. Then.....
Let there be GW2!
Ahh, why do I get the feeling that won't quite do it either. Alright....
Let there be Pathfinder Online!
Let there be TESO!
No? That still won't be enough? As I suspected. Ok, then...
Let there be ArchAge!
Bah, I suspect that still won't do it, even as all these fail to make a dent in the never ending rollout of "head-above-the-water" Themepark style MMO's.
Fine, whatever. Wallow in it yourselves. But the clock tics on anyways.
You are one of those people who uses words like "sandpark" or terms like "sandbox features".
I'm one of those people who use terms like... MMORPG and WoW clone.
Themepark is a term that was coined circa 2007 to describe games like WoW, LotRO, and the like. Linear, led by the hand, casual, safe, games.
It DOES NOT apply to DAoC or EQ.
No. I've been in MMO's since 2000 and heard it shortly after that. It definitely applied to EQ. It meant games where you were just partook in the rides (activities) that the devs let you do (dungeons, quests, mob grind...), linear in a sense that you went from zone to zone getting harder and harder mobs, every one in a class were exactly the same, and had no or no significant impact on the world.
Yep. I've been around since 1997, before UO was released in the later part of that year. The term "Themepark" came about with EQ to describe it as opposed to the "Sandbox" that UO was.
I'm not sure, because I wasn't around in the text based Muds/Diku's, but I think I've read that those terms were used even back in those days, well before any of these MMORPGs.
After EQ, the few new games were based on that same style and were called "EQ Clones", and even WoW was called that before that game became the undisputed champ through the massive sales to Blizzard fans, most of whome were entirely new to MMORPGs and never even heard of EQ, or UO for that matter.
I would support it if they would keep the game small and not shoot for a million players on day one, and that they don't themepark it up. If they keep the original ideas it could turn out to be a great game. As much as I would like to see the original developers work on it, I think they would be the ones to mess it up more. Times have changed and so has their visions. If they keep the community in the development they might have something going for them.
You are one of those people who uses words like "sandpark" or terms like "sandbox features".
I'm one of those people who use terms like... MMORPG and WoW clone.
Themepark is a term that was coined circa 2007 to describe games like WoW, LotRO, and the like. Linear, led by the hand, casual, safe, games.
It DOES NOT apply to DAoC or EQ.
No. I've been in MMO's since 2000 and heard it shortly after that. It definitely applied to EQ. It meant games where you were just partook in the rides (activities) that the devs let you do (dungeons, quests, mob grind...), linear in a sense that you went from zone to zone getting harder and harder mobs, every one in a class were exactly the same, and had no or no significant impact on the world.
Right... except in DAoC all classes weren't the same and the players COULD impact the world. And it also applies to MMOs that hold you by the hand and don't let you get hurt. None of these apply to DAoC. It was not a themepark.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Would you guys rather have SOE take over? blizztard?. No matter which way you swing it, at least mythic TRIED to bring back some old shool after EA buthcered it with expansions and uber leet gear. I remember a post a while back where a mythic dev was trying hard to get some official pre-t2a or progression servers in, obviously the EA execs turned that down.
If you don't think they can make it into a good game, then still help them. If it fails EA looses money, and that's great, if it turns out to be good after all, we have a good new game!
If you don't think they can make it into a good game, then still help them. If it fails EA looses money, and that's great, if it turns out to be good after all, we have a good new game!
All vote
I'd rather not get my hopes up and kill any chance of a future UO.
Originally posted by Chiram Would you guys rather have SOE take over? blizztard?. No matter which way you swing it, at least mythic TRIED to bring back some old shool after EA buthcered it with expansions and uber leet gear. I remember a post a while back where a mythic dev was trying hard to get some official pre-t2a or progression servers in, obviously the EA execs turned that down.
Just like the former Mythic RvR head is trying to get instances removed from Elderscrolls Online. Instead the execs forced him to compromise and have phasing instancing AND public dungeons, which do NOT work together.
The point is, the execs have too much control, so no one should bother.
And yes, I'd rather have SoE do it. Vanguard and Planetside proves they at least remember what good MMOs were about.
There is no market for a game like the original game, at least not big enough for EA. And anything else would just srum up a s-storm from the raving luntics that are sometimes called "fans".
Also this idea have been tried before and some insane amounts of money was tossed in to the conceptual process and still we do not have a UO2... And i don't think they will bring in Todd McFarelane this time to drum up intrest.
I guess the assumption by many people is that the folks at Mythic didn't learn anything from WAR. A strange assumption, but I guess it is a common thought.
My assumption is that Mythic wants to make money. Going further with my assumption, I believe that they will take a look at what made UO so iconic, what made WAR less so. I assume that they will also look at other games to see the good and the bad.
Because of this, I believe that they will adapt and build on the successes and failures of the past.
There is no market for a game like the original game
There's no market for WoW clones either, but that didn't stop every MMO company from making one or two for the last 7 years. There's probably a much MUCH better chance of making a profit from UO2 than there ever was with SWTOR. Its uncontested.
I guess the assumption by many people is that the folks at Mythic didn't learn anything from WAR. A strange assumption, but I guess it is a common thought.
My assumption is that Mythic wants to make money. Going further with my assumption, I believe that they will take a look at what made UO so iconic, what made WAR less so. I assume that they will also look at other games to see the good and the bad.
Because of this, I believe that they will adapt and build on the successes and failures of the past.
Mythic was never the problem. EA is the problem. Mythic didn't need to learn anything from WAR... it already had 8 online games an 1 MMORPG under its belt by the time they made WAR. All of their old games were successful. But WAR crashed and burned. Why?
EA.
Every MMO EA touches turns to garbage, hence why no one wants EA involved with a new Ultima.
If you leave EA, form your own company, make 1/5 of the game with your money, and then show me what you have done and what you hope to do on kickstarter and I might just support you.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Comments
Facepalm.....Mythic like Funcom....2 of the most epic fail studio's....they should work together to make a decent mmo.....wait a minute, that woulnt work either to much fail.
Yes.
It's not just Matt frior, the number 2 guy on TESO is ex ultima dev and there are several ex mythic & origin people working on TESO
Nothing's wrong with Mythic. But EA Mythic. Or Bioware Mythic, whatever they call it now... is awful. At least they're no Blizzard though.
Too bad Zenimax is forcing them to put instancing and all that other BS in the game.
Yep. I am not the only one that wants to forget the work they did on SWTOR...No. I've been in MMO's since 2000 and heard it shortly after that. It definitely applied to EQ. It meant games where you were just partook in the rides (activities) that the devs let you do (dungeons, quests, mob grind...), linear in a sense that you went from zone to zone getting harder and harder mobs, every one in a class were exactly the same, and had no or no significant impact on the world.
Actually, we would be losing something. Time. It most likely would be yet another rollout of a level grind without the soul of a "world". Which the original UO was NOT, but the current UO is as well as DAoC always was. The current fraternity of game developers and many of the hardcore gamers of today can't understand what that means, much less figure out what to do about it.
I thought SWTOR would be the final proof that the masses don't want any more of it, but I seem to have underestimated the density of the thinkness of the heads involved. Very well....
Once upon a time....
Yep. I've been around since 1997, before UO was released in the later part of that year. The term "Themepark" came about with EQ to describe it as opposed to the "Sandbox" that UO was.
I'm not sure, because I wasn't around in the text based Muds/Diku's, but I think I've read that those terms were used even back in those days, well before any of these MMORPGs.
After EQ, the few new games were based on that same style and were called "EQ Clones", and even WoW was called that before that game became the undisputed champ through the massive sales to Blizzard fans, most of whome were entirely new to MMORPGs and never even heard of EQ, or UO for that matter.
Once upon a time....
Right... except in DAoC all classes weren't the same and the players COULD impact the world. And it also applies to MMOs that hold you by the hand and don't let you get hurt. None of these apply to DAoC. It was not a themepark.
/this
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
If you don't think they can make it into a good game, then still help them. If it fails EA looses money, and that's great, if it turns out to be good after all, we have a good new game!
All vote
I'd rather not get my hopes up and kill any chance of a future UO.
Just like the former Mythic RvR head is trying to get instances removed from Elderscrolls Online. Instead the execs forced him to compromise and have phasing instancing AND public dungeons, which do NOT work together.
The point is, the execs have too much control, so no one should bother.
And yes, I'd rather have SoE do it. Vanguard and Planetside proves they at least remember what good MMOs were about.
Blizzard... hell no.
There is no market for a game like the original game, at least not big enough for EA. And anything else would just srum up a s-storm from the raving luntics that are sometimes called "fans".
Also this idea have been tried before and some insane amounts of money was tossed in to the conceptual process and still we do not have a UO2... And i don't think they will bring in Todd McFarelane this time to drum up intrest.
If you want a FFA gankfest... Day Z is that way.
This have been a good conversation
I guess the assumption by many people is that the folks at Mythic didn't learn anything from WAR. A strange assumption, but I guess it is a common thought.
My assumption is that Mythic wants to make money. Going further with my assumption, I believe that they will take a look at what made UO so iconic, what made WAR less so. I assume that they will also look at other games to see the good and the bad.
Because of this, I believe that they will adapt and build on the successes and failures of the past.
I self identify as a monkey.
There's no market for WoW clones either, but that didn't stop every MMO company from making one or two for the last 7 years. There's probably a much MUCH better chance of making a profit from UO2 than there ever was with SWTOR. Its uncontested.
Mythic was never the problem. EA is the problem. Mythic didn't need to learn anything from WAR... it already had 8 online games an 1 MMORPG under its belt by the time they made WAR. All of their old games were successful. But WAR crashed and burned. Why?
EA.
Every MMO EA touches turns to garbage, hence why no one wants EA involved with a new Ultima.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Talk of Richard Garriot involvement?
I am actually one of the few who actually enjoyed Tabula Rasa so I won't comment further than that.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
If he was there might be some hope. But EA is busy destroying the Ultima name.
And yeah, CCP would be great for this game...