silent

you forgot LA

Nyght

In the end, this is the issue. To pay for the large development investment required, such a shard must either attract new players, attract more returning players, or retain players longer.

I know that players that did like the old ways would argue that this is indeed the case. But a steely eyed producer must decide what the odds are that this is truly the case before funding such a project and I believe that their glasses are a bit less rose colored.

Adam

Keep it civil guys and girls.
One of the reasons threads like this got banned on Stratics is because they turned into a rant fest.

__________________

deadite

I think the population numbers on the popular freeshards speak volumes. Even if you *half* the active population numbers and call the other half "bots" or "macroers" you still have quite a sizable number.

And those are the folks who feel comfortable playing on a freeshard... Surely there are plenty of folks who would return to an EA-sponsored classic shard and steer clear of the player run ones.

If EA ever wanted to really hurt the freeshards, the best way would be to just give them what they have been asking for. Make it official and prepare for the flood of returning players.

merth

welcome to UOF Deadite! Pls dont forget that many people play freeshards for that very reason they are free. I agree a few would return but not so sure many would "pay" to play what they already have for free. I think the "classic" shard might attract a few returning players and some existing players would transfer/start over on it, but I really dont think to many will leave the "free" for "fee".

Repowski

Not trying to rain on anyone's parade.

I personally would love to live back in the days pre UO:R

I just know that

1. They don't have the code to go back to that time
2. If they did it would be full of bugs that have been fixed in the last 8 years
3. To make everyone happy (loaded statement) they would have to redevelop the game
4. This would mean that they would have to stop progress on new content, and allocate all their time to reverting the game to a prior period of time with select enhancements. To compensate for all of this work, they would need to generate more sales - and thus advertise: "Hey everyone, we've rolled back all of the new stuff we made in the last 8 years... COME ON BACK!" Doesn't seem like a very good advertising message

Again, pre UO:R was awesome. I just happen to work for a software company, so I feel the pain of the development's time and efforts - and having to make tough decisions on where to allocate limited resources.

UO doesn't have 10 million subscribers like some other games do. We have what we have, and those devs need to spend time on what is best for their path. I just can't see how a legacy shard could generate enough money for them that it should and ever would take top priority.

Repowski

And remember - whatever they spend their time on needs to generate long term value to the company. It is my opinion that many people would return once they heard of the classic shard - but for a short period of time.

Also, for me... the best part of the old game was community. People are simply too spread out now, and too independent. Large amounts of land, and interesting monsters which people can kill on their own has driven the idea of working together out the window. So as far as I'm concerned - if folks want the old UO back, they can get there. Just do things TOGETHER. Choose to hang out in one spot (I think the Moonglow event has been great for this...). Help other players. Stay in contact with them.

Don't count on the devs to make you happy. Create your own enjoyment by spending time with UO's greatest asset: People.

Nok

Hi deadite,

The UO Team isn't against it, they already provide two classic shards... Mugen and Siege Perilous. The problem is who defines "classic"?

Some claim that it isn't classic unless it's pre-AoS. Others pre-LBR. Others pre-Publish 16. Others still pre-T2A. But they want certain events and items, but not all (just the ones they want)... even though they want it to be "classic". And they are adamant it has to be their definition... or it's not "classic".

This was a dead horse years ago. It's been continued to be beaten for years. We have two shards that are going to be as classic as they are going to get.

__________________

Krallis

There really isn't a good reason why they don't. There are plenty enough people who would sign on for the new retro shard. Not too many people will debate this with anything that is resembling sense. The only thing that is questionable is will this bring in enough new/existing players to make up for the cost or will it simply be something to make a few come back and the majority of users would be current subs. Then there is the question as to whether or not it will have the numbers it needs in a few months time after the newness/nostalgia wears off. In my opinion, it's worth a shot for them to do it.

MalagAste

So ..... Let me get this straight???? YOu actually want to play on a server where folk will rob you blind right down to your very home???? Throw you out on the streets???..... I'm sorry but that's about as appealing to me as having my eyelids removed.... I like my home... I like to keep the rewards of my hard work... I don't want some punk taking it away from me.

__________________

JCtheBuilder

No. Siege also has all the expansions, ROT skill training, single character restriction and some other minor differences. It might be possible to turn Siege into a "classic" type shard but the big issue would be what do about housing in Malas/Tokuno Islands.

__________________

Adam

This isn't about converting all shards into pre AOS, it's about opening a new, classic era shard, based on that ruleset.
If you wouldn't play such a shard, great, you wouldn't HAVE to.

And as I said in my previous post, keep it civil please
Calling pk'ers/pvp'ers "punks" isn't civil.

__________________