Jump to content

Welcome to Ultima Online Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account

Welcome to UOForums

If not already a member, take a moment to join our awesome community. It is free to sign up and there are no ads.

 

When you click on CREATE ACCOUNT, the sign up form will appear at the bottom of the forum.

 

If you have issues, like not receiving a validation email. Then please contact us by email help@uoforums.com and we will help you get set up.

 

If you wish to contact us about our site for other reasons, then please contact us by using the contact form in top right corner of the forum


Photo

Should they have updated the 2D client instead?

- - - - - 2d client updated

  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#1
Adam

Adam

    Former Owner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
A burning question!

Does anyone else here think they should've spent the money/time/resources on updating the 2D client, instead of creating UOKR?

#2
Adam

Adam

    Former Owner

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
I voted yes
Main reason being, after seeing Saphireena's work on the 2D artwork (paperdoll etc) and what could've been possible for a newer/high res 2D client, I think they should've upgraded or created a new 2D client instead.

It's not that I don't enjoy 3D games, because I do, I'm currently addicted to the graphically gorgeous Eve Online
I also liked WOW's graphics and interface
But UOKR, to me at least, just seems like a waste of resources.

#3
Gnomy

Gnomy

    Forum Legend

  • Members
  • 4,946 posts
From a good resource I know that the 2d client is a technical mess from beginning.. so its good with a new client.. But they should have focused on a new client to 2d instead.. not KR.

Updating the old wouldnt help. They had to make a new. Sadly wrong path.

Posted Image


#4
Aurelius

Aurelius

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 631 posts
So far I'm the token 'no' vote - not because I particularly like KR, but I can't see a 2d client appealing to new players, and heaven knows the game needs them.... it's marking time on us vets remaining, with a smattering of 'new blood', but the figures keep consistently falling.

I can't see a 2d client appealing to gamers nowadays, so I'm convinced the idea of a new, isometric-style view 3d client was the way to set the game up for the future, not least because it's now done with a toolset that there are actually developers trained and working in. I don't think KR is anything like fit for release to the whole world, I reckon that 'delaying' of SA means that within EA/Mythic they recognise it's a long way short of a saleable product - it's improving gradually, but still has a long way to go - but the failings of this particular product don't persuade me that sticking with a 2d client was viable.

#5
audrey666

audrey666

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
I voted yes because that is the UO that I want to play. I have been playing it since 2000 (right after Ren.)

An updated 2D would have been great.

I think we have turned down a road that leads to a dead end with KR.


Off topic... I just heard that Led Zeppelin is reforming. Yay!!

#6
Guest_F'Nor_*

Guest_F'Nor_*
  • Guests
Yes here.

Yes as UO is the 2D isometric view. 3D eye candy does nothing for the game mechanics. A lot of those "3D" crap games don't even look 3D very well, all blocky and polygon like, naw....

They should have overhauled the client, building a new one, with new encryption, and re-used/converted the artwork to work with the newer client.

Regardless of the "ease" of use for 3D artwork mapping, you can't (in my opinion) remake a 3D off old 2D stuff, the engines and conversions just don't pan well.

If I wanted a "good" 3D type game I'll go fire up a console box.

#7
Vepl

Vepl

    Forum Legend

  • Members
  • 4,288 posts
I may be out in left field (nothing unusual for me :P ) but isn't KR really a new 2D client? If that is the case they are doing exactly what you asked :-/

Vepl

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Another Quality Job by Atlas607


#8
UOGuy...

UOGuy...

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts
I vote Yay... I played 3d actually and KR is a poor replacement... So I also vote with my logins and only log in with 2d.... I look at it again every patch... But until my house looks Beautiful again.... and Crafting works... and the Economy is more realistic, meaning if things are not so rare that they are worth more in real cash (US$), than for actual use ingame...

If the 2d client was such a wreck behind the scenes, IMO if you were really going to re-write everything, you should have started there.... With a known winner, graphics at the front end... If you wanted to make better graphics, that would have been a good base to start... IMO, you took the easier, more economic route and tried to adapt UO to another existing game engine... and it just doesn't quite feel the same at all...

I don't think that many took the bait...

#9
Skrekkugle

Skrekkugle

    Rebellion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 196 posts
I also voted yes, but mostly because that is the way UO has always been and what I want it to always be. I have tested KR alot and Its not BAD, but i PREFER 2d over KR.

For EA to really make a decent amount of money I think they should make a completely new game (Where did Ultima X: Odyssey go?) that is up to todays standards. KR just dosent cut it in todays market.

This new game should keep accounts from UO and maybe reward UO vets with something in the new game.

Think about it, ALL new mmorpgs today are exactly the same! ALL games are about grinding LEVELS and getting the high end loot. If EA/Mythic made a game based on UO (housing, crafting, rp, skillgains) WITH attractive graphics, they would actually make money. A totally free (as in gameplay) game for all kinds of players, just like UO.


Lazytown - The Dark Codex - Moonlight
Part of UO since 1999, always willing to help!


#10
Gieschen

Gieschen

    Bringing RP back to mmoRPg! w0o+!!!!!!1 <

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts
I chose other. I think they should of rewritten the game from the ground up, updated the graphics, and added a "legacy" graphics option. I do like the new graphics of KR and I like that it has a customizeable interface(are we allowed to do this with 2d-that I would love also, maybe players could even send in the ideas/post them for others like the simcity exchange), and I can't comment on gameplay since I haven't logged in but maybe for a few minutes since beta (I am sure this has improved as well). I'd like to see UO done with the art of the original Diablo (cleaned up of course). That environment was just beautiful when I first picked up the game. I agree with Skrekkugle (this is similar to what I was saying in my "What EA need to do" rant).


#11
DarksieD

DarksieD

    The old guy from Atlantic

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 675 posts
absolutely...since everyone plays 2d anyway
Posted Image

#12
Spree

Spree

    I ♥ ORKIES !!!!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 109 posts
They should have redone the 2d client and got rid of all the crappy 3d graphic by the I blew all my money on a worthless baseball guy.
Posted Image
Ahh. Sorry to misinform. I redirect your questions on all things Stratics to Delilah ~ TizzyL

#13
Winfield

Winfield

    Governor of PaxLair, Chesapeake

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 877 posts
I love the 2D Client -- but I voted NO for the 2D Client. Why?

Note: I am not an expert in understanding all the programming aspects, just my impressions of it. So I may be totally wrong in some of my comments here; more expert people can critique what I say (please be gentle, I am old *smiles*).

1. The 3D is basically a 2D client using various features of 3D graphics technology. It's still a single point of view, not first person or rotating point of view... but who knows... maybe down the road you can "turn the screen" and look from North to South, rather than South to North (seeing the backside of a tower)? One example of the 3D technology used now is Zoom in and Zoom out (I love that feature).

2. From what I understand, programming is WAY EASIER using 3D technology, even if the end result is forced to look like 2D. Making "bombs" visually explode is a 3D rendering effect. I think in 2D engine you'd have to program every pixel, every screen slice.

3. Sure much of what we've seen so far in 3D are visual effects, but we've also seen enhanced User Interfaces. We can even make our own Custom UIs. I imagine that is possible due to XML and commands going to the 3D engine. I have not tried the Custom UI, but I imagine it is a WONDERFUL way to enhance your own client/gumps, etc.

4. Maybe the core UO mechanics engine (rule sets and such) can be more easily modified with a better graphical interface and representation? I don't know enough about the rule sets engine layer versus the graphics layer (i.e., how independent they are).

5. Again, I am not a programmer, but I can imagine the 3D programming could offer more dynamic content in the game, like a new dungeon easily installed in the land for a weekend, or get a scroll or T-Map and that dynamically makes a dungeon for your party to play in until vanquished. Again, I'm just guessing at possibilities.

6. Bottom line from my perspective is ... programmers need to keep up with latest programming techniques and capabilities, switching to new languages if needed. Sort of like taking your old MS BASIC program and converting it to FORTRAN or going from FORTRAN to C. (now I am dating myself). Using latest programming technologies and techniques opens the door for expansion, simplicity, and disciplined coding/self-documentation.

Sorry for the ramblings ... again, some of my thoughts may be way off-base or not technically correct.

- Player behind Winfield

#14
noixiata

noixiata

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
Other.
Without knowing I believe programmers and artists who know how they made games in the 90's are not in large supply nor demand for that matter.

I actually think they considered doing nothing at all for the 10th anniversary and basicly leave the game to it's own fate (sure, some new rewards, but nothing like this) , or trying something different to make the client more flexible for updating combined with a distinguished expansion to show it has gone 10 years. That is centuries in the terms of computer development, especially in the fund crazed capitalist entertainment industry.

I am thankful they did not abandon the game, but in a perfect world I would love for everything to stay in 2d.

Posted Image

"..the first lesson: that we must be
powerful, beautiful and without regret.."
- Armand


#15
DiP

DiP

    The Anti-Adam (which means I'm cool)

  • Members
  • 9,578 posts
Had to go with "Other".

From the programming standpoint (as stated earlier) it was highly needed, albeit a day (ok, maybe 1/2 decade) late and a dollar (couple mil?) short.

To re-iterate, the code in the 2D client was basically the original made by entirely different teams, added to by another different team, and passed on to another team who patched/added/attempted to backtrack and fail to realize it is basically a dead client living on life-support machines. It's been said (I forget by who) that the language used in the original coding is (almost) unique and difficult to understand at best.

So with that said (again) a "new" client was in tall order.

I just think they went about it entirely wrong. I think KR is an attempt to appease the Vet players (keeping it 2D but using 3D programming) and bring in young blood at the same time. IMO taking that approach can only lead to failure.

Posted Image

Thanks again Maddux!

Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes*


Adam: aye and in order to expedite the production of solidiers, i kill off the old people (Carp was right, Adam IS evil!)

#16
Deraj

Deraj

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 433 posts
Voted "other".

KR could have been good if only they did three things:
-Designed better graphics and artwork that is consistent with 2D artwork (i.e. monsters, etc look the same in KR and 2D).
-Realize that "UI Standardization" is synonymous with generic RPGs and work on actual improvements to the way we play instead of assuming there's only one good UI in the entire universe.
-Not released it in its pathetic state.

Actually, if they did these things you may as well say they upgraded the 2D client, but unfortunately that is not the case.
Still we loom in the mists as the ages roll away,
And we say of our folk, "they are here!"
That they built us and they died and you'll not be knowing why,
Save we stand on the bare plains of Wiltshire.

#17
Winmere

Winmere

    Lady of the Spring

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
I voted no, but not because that's what I want. I love the 2D client and want to see it survive. I would have loved an updated 2D client! I'm not satisfied with how things look in UO:KR. Hopefully, KR will get better. The UI allows you to do so much more than you ever could, and probably ever will, in 2D.

I voted no, because something was needed to attract new players and give UO a robust future. Whether, or not, UO:KR is the right solution, I don't know. I'm not a programmer, nor developer. I can only hope that those responsible for bringing us UO:KR made intelligent, informed, and wise decisions for the future of UO. I do hope it improves exponentially, and everyone will be able to play it, including me.

The two deciding factors for my vote:

1. The 2D client is difficult to update and add new content. That would explain why UO gets infrequent patches and new content, compared to other online games, which gets weekly, or monthly patches with upgrades, bug fixes, and new content.

2. UO:KR will be easy to update and add new content. This would put UO back on par with other online games. UO players are always wanting new content, or something new to do.

Based on the second half of an interview that the Warcry Network did with Mark Jacobs, you don't even need to read between the lines, to see the handwriting on the wall. Because UO:KR has not been well received by the majority of the player base, the date for the SA expansion has been pushed forward to next year. If they have to rethink the SA expansion, it might take even longer, especially if they have to code it to work in the 2D client.

EA/Mythic is not averse to maintaining old games (sounds like UO to me), because as long as it still makes a profit, as Mark Jacobs said, " The advantage of a mature MMO is that ultimately, it can be maintained - if not expanded - with a very small workforce." I don't wish to see UO relegated to the status of relic, and given minimal life support, with no new expansions, or content. I'm willing to sacrifice what I want, if it means a better future for UO. Ten years from now, I want to see new players saying, "I'll be playing UO 'till they shut the servers down!"

#18
Brom

Brom

    Introverted Barbarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 376 posts
I voted "Other".

I'm very biased towards 2d because it reminds of the golden age of RPG's. I really like how 2d looks! 2d is eye candy for me :)! That being said, yes I would love to see an updated 2d client, even if it had to be re-built from the ground up.

However...

That may not be best for the future of UO. The game can't survive on vet's and pure willpower alone (as much as I wish it could). New blood is needed to keep the creature alive, and too many people will discard something as brilliant as UO simply due to how "dated" it looks.

I love UO and want to see it thrive and grow. Thats my first concern as a Citizen of Sosaria. If that means leaving behind the 2d client at some point in the future... then so be it.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]


#19
Dawrid

Dawrid

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
I Voted no. But I reserve my right to change it to "Other".:)

As others have mentioned, I feel that Kingdom Reborn should have been just that. An Ultima Online 2 if you want. New client, new server code, NEW servers. NO character transfers from one game to the other, everyone on a clean slate.

Let me try to explain why. I played UO from Jan 98 up till early 2004. I tried my best to adapt to AoS, but I decided I needed to take a break, so I did. During that time, I literally tried every other MMO out there, with the bulk of the time in EQ2, and two tours of WoW. When I read about KR, I was like, "Cool, about time they redid it."

So the prodigal son returned home. =)

But then came the realization that KR was ONLY a client upgrade, and not what I had misinterpreted in my excitement as a new UO.

To say that upon re-activation of account(s), and logging into the game, that I was a little amazed at what UO had become, would be a little more than an understatement.:-/ I suppose that I had had hopes that they would have gotten a grip on the item based system, the gold selling/buying, duping, cheating, etc... But alas, to me, these things have gone unchecked and some are even accepted (glances up at the banner advert). :?

So, after all that, I change(at least in this post) my vote to "Other".

I apologize for the rambling.

#20
Brom

Brom

    Introverted Barbarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 376 posts

(glances up at the banner advert). :?


Not to offend anyone, but I don't understand the point of buying items for cash. The entire purpose of having a character in game is to play and collect things and experience the game for what it is. Why even bother playing if your just going to buy stuff? It seems counter-intuitive to me.

*smacks himself for the off topic rambling*:tard:
Sorry... lost myself for a moment.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: 2d, client, updated