Why Origin doesn't fix the PKing problem
Spawn
You wanna know why Origin has failed to fix the PKing problem? Why they are
reluctant to install a PVP switch, or do something to almost totally remove
PKing altogether? I'll tell you why; it's the same reason PKers attack
newbies and roleplayers: Money.
There is--unfortunately--a somewhat large community of people on UO who PK
and there are more joining everyday. For each of these jerks, Origin
recieves about $60.00 for the game and then $10.00 per month. Origin is
looking at $180.00 from a player (PKer or not) yearly and they do not want
their money amounts to go down. If they did something to get rid of PKing
or installed a PVP switch (basically the same thing since anyone who wants
to really roleplay will most likely turn it off) they would lost mass
quantities of money.
They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
is why Origin tells people that they are not "currently working" on a PVP
switch or that it is the player's responsibility to handle these problems
and keep themselves alive.
Now this is purely speculation but after much thinking I do believe I am at
least somewhat correct. They charged the amount a company would demand from
a full game that does not require monthly payment and then requires you to
pay $10.00 a month just to play what you bought. I've also heard that they
are going to be charging somewhere around $30.00 for UO Gold, an add-on to
the game. I realize they need some profit in order to make up for the time
and effort put into the addition however they could charge a much more
reasonable price of about $15.00-$20.00. Money does make the world go
around, and without their customers, Origin cannot run UO and eventually
themselves. Origin is not beyond such a thing, and if by avoiding getting
rid of PKers they lose 100 (not a factual number, just something to make a
point) people they consider that better than losing 4,000 (same as the
previous one) people who used the system to PK.
-- Spawn
russell
They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
is why Origin tells people that they are not "currently working" on a PVP
switch or that it is the player's responsibility to handle these problems
and keep themselves alive.
On the other hand, if OSI would just break down and
implement a PvP switch ( which I have seen numerous postings, at least
one from Raph Koster, that they wil never do) they would very quickly
solve this problem. Perhaps many of the PK and thieve types would
leave, but those that do would have left for the next game anyway.
There will be those that stay because the only reason they went PK or thief
or whatever was because they realized these were the types of characters
rewarded most by the games design. And of course, you keep the role
playing, non-notoriety-challenged ( I am not implying that no Dreads
are role players, they are just in the vast minority ) players like
myself, who suddenly find themselves able to quest, adventure, and explore.
These are all of the reasons we started playing this game in the first
place, the things we expected to be able to do. As a result, we will
end up developing, as one person has put it, a fanatical devotion to UO.
We will not leave UO for the next, KeWLeR game.
In addition, as I read in another post on this NG
which I agree with, a PvP switch is SIMPLE! It will be easier to
install, harder to find exploits for, and far simpler to fix when bugs
are found, than this crazy-ass reputation system which is obviously causing
major problems. It is at least 6-weeks overdue, it ended up taking
down Great Lakes yesterday for at least 10 hours, it already has several
potential bugs listed on this NG, and the list keeps going!
The only real reason I have seen listed for OSI to not implement a PvP
switch is that it is abusable in that people could turn it on and off.
This is so easy guys: MAKE IT PERMANENT!!! Or at least
very close. Perhaps, like EQ is suggesting with its version, it is
set at character creation, and from there it will turn itself "on" if a
non-PvP ever does anything to aid a +PvP player. The only possible
method to turn it back of involve a very long period of in-game quests,
deeds, etc. No one ever said it needed to be a switch that can be
turned on and off at will. The ones who want it will turn it "off"
and leave it that way. I know for a fact that I and all of my friends
would! The people asking for this switch are not asking for it in
order to take advantage of it. They are asking for it so that they
can PLAY THE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!
Origin also says that a switch would reduce
in-game policing. Could it really be any less than it is now?
As the world of Britannia stands currently, "policing" PKs as a concept
is ridiculous! As I mentioned before, the advantage the PKs enjoy
in terms of equipment and resources is so enormous that I have seen exactly
one die at the hands of blue players, and that only happened because
there were at least 7 or 8 blue guys on him at once who managed to paralyze
him thru all of his magic resistance and his magic reflection before he
could hide and recall as all PKs do when they sense defeat. In cotrast,
I have seen countless "Blue" players die at the hands of PKs, including
myself on 16 occasions now. And each time I die, it costs me at least
5,000 gold to get started again. Now that may not sound like much,
but to me, since I don't murder and loot for my gold, this represents at
least 5 hours of chopping trees or tailoring hides. I have been trying
to save enough for a house for 3 months now ( about the time I reached
22K the price was doubled to 44K ), but I fear I will never get there from
losing gold to all of these deaths.
This post has gotten entirely too long, so let me
conclude by saying that if the game balance between the serial killers
and the roleplayers isn't fixed soon, there will be a lot of people cancelling
their $10/month fees, not buying UO Gold, and finding an online-RPG
that allows them to actually play.
Steve
first off ill say if your the spawn on sonoma your wrong because if your
that spawn you couldnt figure out your ass from a hole in the ground and its
people like that spawn who pk just to ruin someone else fun. if your not
that spawn i apologize :)now lets talk about all the major bucks that OSI is
pulling in from all our 10 bucks a month something i think most everyone
here overlooks is the folks at digex dont you think OSI has to pay them a
significant portion of our money a month? figure it out a t-3 on average is
30k a month these people have 6 distinct locations as far as i can tell(some
servers run on the same lan) my math says they are probably paying digex
somewhere close to 180k a month thats 18 thousand of our 10 buck's they are
not even recieving guys then lest look at the gms programers and support
staff average them out at 2k a month and for argument sake add another 100k
of wages per month (i dont think 50 people for all that is an unreasonable
amount) there goes another 10,000 of our 10 bucks there is 28,000 of us
playing this game that orgin needs just to pay those bills lets not even
talk about r&d and development and server costs but anyhow thats just MHO
Steve
Zortam
Spawn
You wanna know why Origin has failed to fix the PKing problem? Why they are
reluctant to install a PVP switch, or do something to almost totally remove
PKing altogether? I'll tell you why; it's the same reason PKers attack
newbies and roleplayers: Money.
There is--unfortunately--a somewhat large community of people on UO who PK
and there are more joining everyday. For each of these jerks, Origin
recieves about $60.00 for the game and then $10.00 per month. Origin is
looking at $180.00 from a player (PKer or not) yearly and they do not want
their money amounts to go down. If they did something to get rid of PKing
or installed a PVP switch (basically the same thing since anyone who wants
to really roleplay will most likely turn it off) they would lost mass
quantities of money.
They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
is why Origin tells people that they are not "currently working" on a PVP
switch or that it is the player's responsibility to handle these problems
and keep themselves alive.
Now this is purely speculation but after much thinking I do believe I am at
Spawn
Just so you know I am NOT that Spawn. Spawn is my NG name which I use for
all the NG's I go to. I never created a Spawn character in UO because there
are already too many.
I have been known as Sir John of York (Medieval Spawn) on either the Great
Lakes or Lake Superior server in Britain (I can't remember which since it's
been months since I've played him :P) and I am currently using Sentinel on
the Pacific server in the town of Vesper.
-- Spawn and many other people :)
Steve
and that means sentence one doesnt apply to you :) my appologies to you good
sir :)
Steve
Zortam
Spawn wrote in message <6lbtao$mlp$1...@suriname.it.earthlink.net>...
Janus
"The most evolved beings of all live in the sun. They've been entering my head every night now." Philip K. Dick, Confessions of a Crap Artist
russell wrote in message <35795A5...@ix.netcom.com>...
Dragon...@juno.com
On the subject of a PvP switch, or disallowing PK in its entirety, I'd have
to disagree with you.
Have you every played a MUD?
I'd probably be pretty accurate to say that 99% of all MUDs allow PK. Why?
Because if you make a MUD and don't allow PK, no one plays your MUD. Thats a
fact.
Why so?
Because, PK is the essence of roleplaying, fundementally. The greatest
problem with any roleplaying game is undermining reality. This is the reason
that TSR's Advanced Dungeons & Dragons is still very popular despite the
fact that it simply books, pencil, and paper. AD&D is extremely realistic,
and has no limitations except your own imagination. I love it, and UO is the
closest thing I've ever seen to it. Unfortunatly it is hard to find AD&D
players all with matching personal schedules once you become an adult ;(
The ability to kill at whim, take over the world, etc. is what drives the
majority of the players in RPGs and UO specifically. If someone slips in
your door when you enter your house, you have the ability to hand down
justice. If someone shouts out profanities at a dungeon entrance, you have
the ability to hand down justice. If someone is a greedy bastard who never
helps a soul and is always ripping off newbies with false claims about
items, you have the ability to hand down justice.
The juvenile PKers in UO will leave for the next flashy title, that you can
count on.
My prediction: Within 3 years, UO will be down to 4 servers or less, nearly
bug free, and chock-full-o-roleplayers. It will also be an outdated game,
just like MUDs, that people will still enjoy. People will probably be able
to purchase, or duplicate, servers as well. (With a limited number of
players of course.)
Spawn wrote in message <6lamkl$afl$1...@bolivia.it.earthlink.net>...
>You wanna know why Origin has failed to fix the PKing problem? Why they
are
>reluctant to install a PVP switch, or do something to almost totally remove
>PKing altogether? I'll tell you why; it's the same reason PKers attack
>newbies and roleplayers: Money.
>
>There is--unfortunately--a somewhat large community of people on UO who PK
>and there are more joining everyday. For each of these jerks, Origin
>recieves about $60.00 for the game and then $10.00 per month. Origin is
>looking at $180.00 from a player (PKer or not) yearly and they do not want
>their money amounts to go down. If they did something to get rid of PKing
>or installed a PVP switch (basically the same thing since anyone who wants
>to really roleplay will most likely turn it off) they would lost mass
>quantities of money.
>
>They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
>innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
>to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
>will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
>is why Origin tells people that they are not "currently working" on a PVP
>switch or that it is the player's responsibility to handle these problems
>and keep themselves alive.
>
foamy
<snipped>
and when Everquest comes out I'm giving
>odds of 2:1 that 50% or more of the Role Play fans quit UO and move to
>Everquest.
Bingo ! If anything, I think you are being conservative in your estimate.
and most of us are sick of UO
>because of the PvP element which is completely out of control,
Bingo !
the
>inability of OSI to provide any meaningful support whatsoever after
>midnight,
Bingo !
the lack of OSI to address in game inbalances in a timely
>fashion,
Bingo!
>comes out, I'll wager a lot of people quit as well, because the ability
>to play in that Multi Player with friends is a lot more pleasant that
>playing in the same sand box as a host of idiots.
Bingo !
>And OSI has already lost hundreds of customers to dozens of PKs. OSI
>marketing has to be occupied by the most mind numbingly ignorant fools
>that I've ever had the misfortune of encountering.
Bingo !
I give UO another year to live, at best, without MASSIVE revision.
Jeff-boy
Well Jeff, you might have picked up on the fact that i agree with you. :-)
I can say in all honesty, I have never encountered a company with worse
customer support. The contempt they demonstrate on a daily basis towards
their customers is deplorable. Compounding the problem is the kids playing the
game [ illegally ? ] which is tailored to their juvenile desires.
I am simply killing time until an alternative comes on the scene. When that
day arrives, I'm out of here. If there are as many people like me as I believe
there are, Origin will regret their lack of attention and respect. Not only
will they lose our UO revenue, but I for one, will never purchase another OSI
product.
Regards
Jim Clarke
foamy / napa valley
Dopester
Pking sucks, but it is apart of UO... hopefluuy it can be made harder, but i
dont hink it should be removed...
Janus
Dragon...@juno.com wrote in message ...
>On the subject of a PvP switch, or disallowing PK in its entirety, I'd have
>to disagree with you.
>
>Have you every played a MUD?
I have played other MUDs and have played AD&D since I was a tot and have
played CRPGs since the Commodore Vic 20 days. I know your question wasnt
directed at me, but I want you to understand that, as I comment further
below, I am not completely inexperienced in RPGs, online or no.
>I'd probably be pretty accurate to say that 99% of all MUDs allow PK. Why?
>Because if you make a MUD and don't allow PK, no one plays your MUD. Thats
a
>fact.
You may be right on that one. I havent played all the MUDs out there, but
the ones I have played allowed PKing.
>Why so?
>Because, PK is the essence of roleplaying, fundementally.
er, no. PK is the essence of roleplaying a PKer.
The greatest
>problem with any roleplaying game is undermining reality. This is the
reason
>that TSR's Advanced Dungeons & Dragons is still very popular despite the
>fact that it simply books, pencil, and paper. AD&D is extremely realistic,
>and has no limitations except your own imagination. I love it, and UO is
the
>closest thing I've ever seen to it. Unfortunatly it is hard to find AD&D
>players all with matching personal schedules once you become an adult ;(
I agree that adulthood makes AD&D difficult ;( , and it is realistic, but
before drawing comparison between AD&D and UO, note a few very important
differences:
AD&D: Usually limited to a few people UO: teeming millions
AD&D: Face to face; share doritos UO: anonymity; name mule
characters "Doritos"
AD&D: Tight, controlled environment UO: loose environment.
So, yeah. I agree that UO captures some of the realism of AD&D, but other
than that (and other similarities like rolls, stats, mythologies, etc.) they
are totally different, IMHO.
>The ability to kill at whim, take over the world, etc. is what drives the
>majority of the players in RPGs and UO specifically. If someone slips in
>your door when you enter your house, you have the ability to hand down
>justice. If someone shouts out profanities at a dungeon entrance, you have
>the ability to hand down justice. If someone is a greedy bastard who never
>helps a soul and is always ripping off newbies with false claims about
>items, you have the ability to hand down justice.
The kicker is the first sentence in this paragraph: "The ability to kill at
whim....is what drives the majority of players in RPGs and UO specifically."
This really is just a blanket statement without any proof. And you, being
pro-PK are not the only person who makes such claims. Anti-PKers likewise
make statements like this (only in the reverse direction) and they similarly
have no proof. In any event, I wonder how many PKers, let alone anti-PKers,
would agree that the driving force behind all rpgs and even UO specifically
is the desire to destroy anyone on a whim without any thought in order to
take over the world or just for kicks. Others may have different views about
why they play RPGs, online or not, but I wonder how many true RPGers love
RPGs because they love killing things on a whim. I, for one, love RPGs
because I love the mythologies and love roleplaying characters that are
generally decent and can kick some evil butt. Sometimes I play a thief, and
probably would in UO if it had any teeth, but even my indecent characters
have some vestige of self-control. Whim doesn't control my characters, I do.
On the other hand, the rest of your paragraph pretty well outlines why I
don't reject PKs 100%. You make some very good points after sentence one and
I have to agree. I just wish their was a way to allow that kind of PKing
while eliminating the bullshit PKing.
>The juvenile PKers in UO will leave for the next flashy title, that you can
>count on.
>My prediction: Within 3 years, UO will be down to 4 servers or less, nearly
>bug free, and chock-full-o-roleplayers. It will also be an outdated game,
>just like MUDs, that people will still enjoy. People will probably be able
>to purchase, or duplicate, servers as well. (With a limited number of
>players of course.)
I hope you are right, and basically agree.
Basically, most of your comments are the main reason why I don't post
messages like "Remove PK Altogether."
You raise some very good points. But I don't think PKing is the central
driving force in MUDs. Pking does indeed add some spice, and I have PKed a
few people in my day if they attacked me or were murdering someone
senselessly (in other MUDs...not in UO....yet), but I still like the idea of
the PK switch because, all the OSI pop philosophical mumbo jumbo aside, I
think it makes good sense. People are real pigs, sometimes, and OSI has yet
to solve that problem. They will never solve the "people are pigs" problem
completely, even if they banned PKing, but I think the onus is on them to
reduce it significantly. Players bear some responsibility too, but
ultimately OSI has the power, and the need, to maximize enjoyment of the
game for the customers who will stick with the game. Don't forget...PK
switch wouldn't eliminate PKing, it would simply gives players the choice.
And if PKers or the OSI philosophers lament this kind of contrived
manipulation of the game, they shouldn't blame the anti-PKers...they should
blame the idiots who do nothing but run killing on a whim.
J
Canticle
Spawn wrote:
> They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
> innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
> to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
> will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
Wrong.
OSI has already lost this particular player base, and those that remain
and ultimately leave when something better comes along (which is
inevitable) will be lost forever. They will lose their PK player base
when Diablo II and Everquest (which has the 3D based style that a lot of
'action' PKs prefer) come out, and when Everquest comes out I'm giving
odds of 2:1 that 50% or more of the Role Play fans quit UO and move to
Everquest.
As it stands, the entire House al-Nasir (all 20+ members) are quitting
UO the moment an alternative comes along, and most of us are sick of UO
because of the PvP element which is completely out of control, the
inability of OSI to provide any meaningful support whatsoever after
midnight, the lack of OSI to address in game inbalances in a timely
fashion, and a host of other problems which plague the product.
Seperately, none of them are too bad, and UO has its wonderful moments,
but as a consistently good game, it fails miserably. When Baldur's Gate
comes out, I'll wager a lot of people quit as well, because the ability
to play in that Multi Player with friends is a lot more pleasant that
playing in the same sand box as a host of idiots.
And OSI has already lost hundreds of customers to dozens of PKs. OSI
marketing has to be occupied by the most mind numbingly ignorant fools
that I've ever had the misfortune of encountering. The development team,
I have respect for, but they are operating under the constraints of what
is increasingly appearing to be a completely clued out, out of touch,
worthless management structure whose sole ability is in destroying the
creative process in as complete a manner as is humanly possible. I
encounter people like them every day, I know of what I speak...they
crunch numbers and examine marketing trends for so long they forget what
CAUSES those trends.
I give UO another year to live, at best, without MASSIVE revision.
And until I see the Revision to a Reputation system in place and working
on an actual server, I'm standing by this post.
Jeff-boy
Will Brickles
foamy wrote in message <897201969.690749@michelob>...
>
><snipped>
> and when Everquest comes out I'm giving
>>odds of 2:1 that 50% or more of the Role Play fans quit UO and move to
>>Everquest.
>
>Bingo ! If anything, I think you are being conservative in your estimate.
Everquest will not be God's gift to roleplayers. From what I understand,
Everquest will have a more limited environment than Ultima Online along with
steeper hardware requirements. I would believe that UO won't lose too much
of its playerbase permanently to Everquest. The people that leave UO for
Everquest will also leave Everquest for the next big thing.
>
> and most of us are sick of UO
>>because of the PvP element which is completely out of control,
>
>Bingo !
I have had a character for 3 months playing, on average, two hours a day in
dungeons and wilderness (I spend VERY little time in town) and have yet to
be playerkilled. I have been attacked, sure. In terms of deaths, it's zero
for me and twice for my attackers. Sure, I've had to run sometimes - just
the nature of the fight. I've also forced would be PK's to run as well.
If the populace of good players in UO would just put the smack down on PK's
then the PVP element would be in control. But the reality is, most players
enjoy PvP and don't find it out of control.
>
> the
>>inability of OSI to provide any meaningful support whatsoever after
>>midnight,
>
>Bingo !
Umm... Most companies don't offer support 24hrs a day. If your cable went
out, could you call your cable company? Not at 2am (at least for my cable,
I can't).
OSI's support could be better, but I'm sure Sony's won't be great itself.
>
> the lack of OSI to address in game inbalances in a timely
>>fashion,
>
>Bingo!
>
Hmm... In defense of OSI, the game was so large in scale that there were
more imbalances than they could possibly fix "in a timely fashion." I think
the programmers are doing a fairly good job.
>>comes out, I'll wager a lot of people quit as well, because the ability
>>to play in that Multi Player with friends is a lot more pleasant that
>>playing in the same sand box as a host of idiots.
>
>Bingo !
When an alternative comes out... Ha ha. Everquest will put you in the same
sandbox as UO, except with the first-person shooter crowd. And they'll turn
their PvP switch off so you couldn't even lay the smack down on the annoying
turds.
>>And OSI has already lost hundreds of customers to dozens of PKs. OSI
>>marketing has to be occupied by the most mind numbingly ignorant fools
>>that I've ever had the misfortune of encountering.
>
>Bingo !
Ultima Online has made more money than OSI ever thought it would. That's
why you are seeing so many clones "in development." I think it's lame that
people would quit because of PKs. If they quit because of bugs, support,
price, whatever, it would be different - but quiting because of other people
killing you is kind of lame in my opinion.
>I give UO another year to live, at best, without MASSIVE revision.
>Jeff-boy
>
>Well Jeff, you might have picked up on the fact that i agree with you. :-)
>I can say in all honesty, I have never encountered a company with worse
>customer support.
Have you played an EA Sports product. Origin took a turn for the worst when
it was acquired by Electronic Arts. Origin actually has better support than
the rest of the company.
>The contempt they demonstrate on a daily basis towards
>their customers is deplorable.
Which contempt might that be? I have always been helped if help was
available.
>Compounding the problem is the kids playing the >game [ illegally ? ] which
is >tailored to their juvenile desires.
Shit, what makes kids playing illegal? Didn't know children lost their
freedom of expression. The game is definitely NOT tailored towards
juveniles. UO is more or less a hack and slash game, with a little more
depth than Diablo. Is it hack-and-slash that makes it juvenile?
>I am simply killing time until an alternative comes on the scene. When that
>day arrives, I'm out of here.
The fact that you hang around instead of quitting today tells me that either
a) you like to play the game or b) you have more money than you know what to
do with.
>If there are as many people like me as I believe
>there are, Origin will regret their lack of attention and respect.
Reading this NG gives you skewed vision of how players feel. Most players I
come across like playing.
>Not only
>will they lose our UO revenue, but I for one, will never purchase another
OSI
>product.
Whatever. You'll hear how good UO 2 will be and buy that. Or Ultima:
Ascension. The bottom line is, OSI puts out quality products, and you would
be missing out if you didn't purchase them.
Canticle
Will Brickles wrote:
> Everquest will not be God's gift to roleplayers. From what I understand,
It'll be a damn site better than UO. UO is not an Ultima, it has no
background, and whatever shoddy storyline is currently taking place on
the Shards is completely inaccessable to anyone who plays after
midnight. There are islands of RP in the vast filth that is UO, but not
much.
> Everquest will have a more limited environment than Ultima Online along with
> steeper hardware requirements. I would believe that UO won't lose too much
MORE limited? You haven't seen what they've got to offer, clearly. How
is it more limited? Let's see, you don't have to play a Tank Mage/Archer
in order to compete, you don't have to compete with macroed to the max
fools who cast Energy Vortex, and you don't have to create mule
characters to fund your primary characters (the advantages to creating a
system with the emphasis on ROLE playing and an experience point based
system. Macros fall apart under that system).
As for steeper hardware requirements...it requires less than
Ultima:Ascension, and to be bluntly honest, by the time its released
almost anyone with a game playing machine will (or should be) running
their minimum requirements, just to play the average game on the market.
> of its playerbase permanently to Everquest. The people that leave UO for
> Everquest will also leave Everquest for the next big thing.
Wrong.
I can list 20 people quitting UO for Everquest right now because UO is
literally a sewer of mediocrity. Role playing on UO requires you either
stay in town, or risk being Energy Vortexed at any moment by someone you
cannot retaliate against without losing Notoriety (especially if you try
to play the role of a warrior, because in that case you're just out of
luck, period). We're not leaving EQ for the 'next big thing' unless EQ
makes the same monumental mistakes UO has.
> I have had a character for 3 months playing, on average, two hours a day in
> dungeons and wilderness (I spend VERY little time in town) and have yet to
> be playerkilled. I have been attacked, sure. In terms of deaths, it's zero
> for me and twice for my attackers. Sure, I've had to run sometimes - just
> the nature of the fight. I've also forced would be PK's to run as well.
Luck you. I just got Energy Vortexed by some fool and his friend who
were PKing newbies in the Orc Valley. They'd wait for them to be
occupied in a fight and drop the Vortex on their heads. I went to
Dishonourable attacking them, hoping they'd concentrate on me instead of
the two newbies (they were having trouble killing goats, for god's
sake). They did. I died, the newbies ran for the hills (and hopefully
lived) and UO lost a customer. Me. UO is history the moment EQ (or if
its as good as it looks, Baldur's Gate) comes out. And with me, eight to
ten members of my Guild will be gone from UO permanently, and even those
who state they are possibly going to say are talking about quitting in
favour of Everquest if it delivers on its promises.
> Umm... Most companies don't offer support 24hrs a day. If your cable went
> out, could you call your cable company? Not at 2am (at least for my cable,
> I can't).
Depends on how committed a company is to the customers, or to the bottom
line. I've worked for a company that provided 24-7 service, and one that
didn't...and the ONLY difference between the two was the level of
respect they have for the consumer.
> OSI's support could be better, but I'm sure Sony's won't be great itself.
You haven't ever dealt with Sony, have you?
They have a corporate attitude which is scary and admirable all at once.
They are the classic juggernaut when it comes to competition (I'm
willing to be Sony has pretty much told the EQ development staff
'Whatever it takes to be #1, just bill us'). However, they do NOT
stomach a shoddy product. EQ will deliver, or it will disappear.
> Hmm... In defense of OSI, the game was so large in scale that there were
> more imbalances than they could possibly fix "in a timely fashion." I think
> the programmers are doing a fairly good job.
So far...
But their priorities are so completely skewed sometimes its just sad...
In addition, their fixes are never fixes. They create imabalances
because they do not take long term consequences into account when they
go out to fix a bug. They fix the exploit, and create three new ones.
> When an alternative comes out... Ha ha. Everquest will put you in the same
> sandbox as UO, except with the first-person shooter crowd. And they'll turn
> their PvP switch off so you couldn't even lay the smack down on the annoying
> turds.
And whats stopping the annoying turds now? Nothing.
I'm not fond of the PK switch idea myself...
However, at least when I'm starting out I ONLY have to deal with the
annoying turds. Not the annoying turds who drop the bomb on newbies just
because they can.
> Ultima Online has made more money than OSI ever thought it would. That's
Want to make a bet?
Short term profit does not equal a profitable product.
Fastest and best selling? Yes. How long was UO in development? Years.
How much did that development time cost. Millions. How much is monthly
maintainance, and salaries for those on the UO project? Tens of
thousands a month.
And UOs player base is constantly dwindling. UO Gold is more than likely
an attempt to lure in more players while getting a big cash influx from
the old ones, to keep the product going a little while longer. I'm
willing to wager that right now, the monthly fees OSI keeps charging for
UO are turning a fractional profit, and not much more than that. They
hemmorhage a few more customers, they are going to be hurting.
> Have you played an EA Sports product. Origin took a turn for the worst when
> it was acquired by Electronic Arts. Origin actually has better support than
> the rest of the company.
No kidding. As far as I'm concerned the purchase destroyed Origin.
> Whatever. You'll hear how good UO 2 will be and buy that. Or Ultima:
> Ascension. The bottom line is, OSI puts out quality products, and you would
> be missing out if you didn't purchase them.
Origin hasn't produced a quality product in a long, long time...
Wing Commander:Prophecy was good. Very good compared to the dreck
they've churned out the last few years. However, UO was merely good. And
its not got staying power.
Jeff-boy
Labuser
> You wanna know why Origin has failed to fix the PKing problem? Why they are
> reluctant to install a PVP switch, or do something to almost totally remove
> PKing altogether? I'll tell you why; it's the same reason PKers attack
> newbies and roleplayers: Money.
Yup. They didn't make UO to make the kiddies smile. :)
>
> There is--unfortunately--a somewhat large community of people on UO who PK
> and there are more joining everyday. For each of these jerks, Origin
> recieves about $60.00 for the game and then $10.00 per month. Origin is
> looking at $180.00 from a player (PKer or not) yearly and they do not want
> their money amounts to go down. If they did something to get rid of PKing
> or installed a PVP switch (basically the same thing since anyone who wants
> to really roleplay will most likely turn it off) they would lost mass
> quantities of money.
Hmm. True. Some people who like being pkers would quit or never start
playing. However, there could be other explanations as well. For
example, what if the loss of pkers would cease to make the game 'fun'? If
it weren't fun, wouldn't everyone quit? Personally, I think that without
pkers, dangers from AIs would be too limited to prevent the game form
stagnating. I know that some people will think to themselves, "What about
a drake, they're bad ass!" Yes they are, but they can't endanger them
unless you give them the opportunity.
>
> They know that the PKers would leave if they could no longer hack to pieces
> innocent victims. They also know--based on evidence--that players who want
> to play and roleplay, while disgruntled over Origin's lack to do anything,
> will most likely not quit and just try their hardest to avoid PKers. This
> is why Origin tells people that they are not "currently working" on a PVP
> switch or that it is the player's responsibility to handle these problems
> and keep themselves alive.
>
This could be true. However, it appears to me that people who truly want
to roleplay are leaving the game in droves. Thus if OSI is truly a profit
maximizing firm, then either the loss of pkers due to PVP switch would be
greater than loss of roleplayers without switch, OR, a PVP switch would
make the game suck for everyone.
> Now this is purely speculation but after much thinking I do believe I am at
> least somewhat correct. They charged the amount a company would demand from
> a full game that does not require monthly payment
UO is not a standard game however.
and then requires you to
> pay $10.00 a month just to play what you bought. I've also heard that they
> are going to be charging somewhere around $30.00 for UO Gold, an add-on to
> the game. I realize they need some profit in order to make up for the time
> and effort put into the addition however they could charge a much more
> reasonable price of about $15.00-$20.00.
Here, without knowing the facts, I can tell you that you are mistaken. I
know a little about business (I'm going to biz school) and I can assure
you, if they are charging 30 bucks for the add on, they would lose their
shirts if they sold it for 20. I would guess they could break even
selling at 28. However, I don't know the exact figues. Haha. Thats
almost laughable. A company trying to make 50 percent profit per sale?
Not in the real world my friend.
Money does make the world go
> around, and without their customers, Origin cannot run UO and eventually
> themselves. Origin is not beyond such a thing, and if by avoiding getting
> rid of PKers they lose 100 (not a factual number, just something to make a
> point) people they consider that better than losing 4,000 (same as the
> previous one) people who used the system to PK.
>
> -- Spawn
All around, some interesting points.
Dennis Heffernan
|Because if you make a MUD and don't allow PK, no one plays your MUD. Thats a
|fact.
And if you make a MUD and don't do anything to control PKing, no one plays your MUD either.
That is also a fact. People have better things to do with their recreation time than being practice
targets.
|Because, PK is the essence of roleplaying, fundementally.
Unbelievable bullshit.
Have you LOOKED at the RPG industry lately?
|The ability to kill at whim, take over the world, etc. is what drives the
|majority of the players in RPGs and UO specifically. If someone slips in
|your door when you enter your house, you have the ability to hand down
|justice. If someone shouts out profanities at a dungeon entrance, you have
|the ability to hand down justice. If someone is a greedy bastard who never
|helps a soul and is always ripping off newbies with false claims about
|items, you have the ability to hand down justice.
No, you have the ability to inflict damage on their playing piece. Which they will then ignore,
and then return to their harassment.
Dennis F. Heffernan UO: Venture (Catskills) df...@worldnet.att.net
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
inner child and kick its little ass!" - D. Henley/G. Frey, "Get Over It"
Dennis Heffernan
Spawn wrote in message <6lbsiv$lo3$1...@suriname.it.earthlink.net>...
|You wanna know why Origin has failed to fix the PKing problem? Why they are
|reluctant to install a PVP switch, or do something to almost totally remove
|PKing altogether? I'll tell you why; it's the same reason PKers attack
|newbies and roleplayers: Money.
The PKs are _costing_ them money. One PK can easily drive ten or more
people off the system.
|their money amounts to go down. If they did something to get rid of PKing
|or installed a PVP switch (basically the same thing since anyone who wants
|to really roleplay will most likely turn it off) they would lost mass
|quantities of money.
Quite the reverse.
|pay $10.00 a month just to play what you bought. I've also heard that they
|are going to be charging somewhere around $30.00 for UO Gold, an add-on to
|the game. I realize they need some profit in order to make up for the time
UO Gold looks to me like "milking the cow before the slaughter".
|themselves. Origin is not beyond such a thing, and if by avoiding getting
|rid of PKers they lose 100 (not a factual number, just something to make a
|point) people they consider that better than losing 4,000 (same as the
|previous one) people who used the system to PK.
It's the other way around.
Dennis Heffernan
Will Brickles wrote in message ...
|Everquest will not be God's gift to roleplayers. From what I understand,
More limited in what way?
DD bragged a while back about how you won't be able to make things in EverQuest the way you can
in UO. My answer is to point out that it doesn't matter what you can make in UO when you can't keep
any of it. They won't give you any secure storage worth talking about. My character has a big
brick house (about 70K when I bought it, now about 150K). It has some sewing kits and spare hides
on the floor in one room. It's not furnished because I know it would be pointless to do so. It's
just a convenient place for me to log out. (I've thought about putting a vendor in front of it with
keys and a book saying "My home is open to all weary travellers" just for the convenience of others.
I could keep the spare stuff in my ship just as easily.)
|than Ultima Online along with steeper hardware requirements.
I believe my Presario 4850 already surpasses the hardware requirements for EverQuest, and you
can now buy a better model (4880) for what my family paid for this one five months ago.
|I would believe that UO won't lose too much of its playerbase permanently to |Everquest.
I suggest returning your seat to the upright position and preparing for landing. The discontent
out there is thick enough to cut with a knife. I'd be out myself if the game was any more
expensive.
|If the populace of good players in UO would just put the smack down on PK's
|then the PVP element would be in control.
It would not matter one bit. They are not going to go away just because you shoot back. Most
of the people they attack can't fight back effectively anyway.
|But the reality is, most players enjoy PvP and don't find it out of control.
Bullshit.
Not once have I been in a dungeon, seen PKs arrive, and seen everyone (or anyone) go "ALL RIGHT!
THE PKs ARE HERE! YAY!". I do see lots of people suddenly say "Kal Ort Por", and lots of others
run in six different directions.
|Umm... Most companies don't offer support 24hrs a day. If your cable went
|out, could you call your cable company? Not at 2am (at least for my cable,
|I can't).
You need a new cable company.
|OSI's support could be better, but I'm sure Sony's won't be great itself.
It All Depends. Sony can sure as hell outspend OSI if it wants to.
|When an alternative comes out... Ha ha. Everquest will put you in the same
|sandbox as UO, except with the first-person shooter crowd. And they'll turn
|their PvP switch off so you couldn't even lay the smack down on the annoying
|turds.
Since our PvP switches will be off, they won't be able to "lay the smack down" on US.
|people would quit because of PKs. If they quit because of bugs, support,
|price, whatever, it would be different - but quiting because of other people
|killing you is kind of lame in my opinion.
Why? We came here to play. Because of PKs, we can't play. It's called denial-of-service. If
you were a member of a tennis club, paying to use its facilities, and every time you went to play
the same bunch of jerkoffs were monopolizing the courts, staying long past the time limit, ignoring
reservations, etc., and you went to management to complain and they told you to deal with it
yourself, would you keep paying?
|The fact that you hang around instead of quitting today tells me that either
|a) you like to play the game or b) you have more money than you know what to
|do with.
It's only $10. So I see three movies this month instead of four.
|Whatever. You'll hear how good UO 2 will be and buy that. Or Ultima:
|Ascension. The bottom line is, OSI puts out quality products, and you would
|be missing out if you didn't purchase them.
I guess I'll be missing out then, since I have no intention of ever purchasing another product
from this company unless I see some real improvement over here.
Slay
Canticle <cant...@escape.ca> wrote:
<snip>
>I can list 20 people quitting UO for Everquest right now because UO is
>literally a sewer of mediocrity.
Woohoo! I hope this means less lag!
Will Brickles
Dennis Heffernan wrote in message <6lfi7l$c...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>Will Brickles wrote in message ...
>|Everquest will not be God's gift to roleplayers. From what I understand,
>|Everquest will have a more limited environment
>
> More limited in what way?
Now, I'm not an EQ expert, but from what I understand, it will be first
person (YUCK - I continually buy games like Doom, Duke, Quake, and Unreal
just to be fed up with first person - and I'll buy Ascension too if I can
run it :( ), the game world will be smaller than in UO, and you are going to
be in a class system (won't you?). While a class system does have some
inherent advantages, it is still more limited than a skill system.
>|than Ultima Online along with steeper hardware requirements.
>
> I believe my Presario 4850 already surpasses the hardware requirements
for EverQuest, and you
>can now buy a better model (4880) for what my family paid for this one five
months ago.
Wow, didn't know Everquest even had hardware requirements... The game is
still a ways off. And, you quoted my statement and didn't address it. I
said EQ will have steeper requirements than UO, not that the requirements
can't be met. Hell, I meet the requirements and my PC is over a year old
(IBM PC365 - IBM rules as far as I'm concerned. Hail Big Blue!).
>|I would believe that UO won't lose too much of its playerbase permanently
to |Everquest.
>
> I suggest returning your seat to the upright position and preparing for
landing. The discontent
>out there is thick enough to cut with a knife. I'd be out myself if the
game was any more
>expensive.
UO will lose playerbase to EQ, I admit that. It will lose a lot of
roleplayers hoping that EQ will be better. It will lose a lot of teens who
know EQ will be cooler (they love first person). EQ will steal UO's
thunder, but it won't kill UO. I, for one, will continue to play UO until
long after EQ is released. If EQ does turn out to deliver on its promises
(it won't, just as UO and every other game ever hyped hasn't), then I may
switch, but I'm relatively happy playing UO. Haven't played a game this
much since Civ II.
>
>|If the populace of good players in UO would just put the smack down on
PK's
>|then the PVP element would be in control.
>
> It would not matter one bit. They are not going to go away just
because you shoot back. Most
>of the people they attack can't fight back effectively anyway.
No, they won't go away. But putting the smack down doesn't entail going
away. It just feels better if you know you have the ability to kill an
especially obnoxious person, but in EQ, you won't have that ability unless
you and the obnoxious one agree on it.
>
>|But the reality is, most players enjoy PvP and don't find it out of
control.
>
>
> Bullshit.
>
> Not once have I been in a dungeon, seen PKs arrive, and seen everyone
(or anyone) go "ALL RIGHT!
>THE PKs ARE HERE! YAY!". I do see lots of people suddenly say "Kal Ort
Por", and lots of others
>run in six different directions.
Hey, if I yelled out that "Three Ancient Wyrms and Two Demons just came in"
most people would run too (would they?). Just because they are afraid of
PK's doesn't mean that they think PvP is out of control.
>|Umm... Most companies don't offer support 24hrs a day. If your cable
went
>|out, could you call your cable company? Not at 2am (at least for my
cable,
>|I can't).
>
> You need a new cable company.
Thanks for the advice.
>
>|OSI's support could be better, but I'm sure Sony's won't be great itself.
>
> It All Depends. Sony can sure as hell outspend OSI if it wants to.
Does Sony's game division have as much moolah as EA? Sony, the huge
company, could (and probably will) outspend OSI, but so what? More money
will not make a product better, and it won't make support any better either.
Better people and policies make support better. Sony's money will make
support more available.
>|When an alternative comes out... Ha ha. Everquest will put you in the
same
>|sandbox as UO, except with the first-person shooter crowd. And they'll
turn
>|their PvP switch off so you couldn't even lay the smack down on the
annoying
>|turds.
>
> Since our PvP switches will be off, they won't be able to "lay the
smack down" on US.
True, but why would they want to? Are you going to go around annoying them?
They sure as hell will annoy you.
>|people would quit because of PKs. If they quit because of bugs, support,
>|price, whatever, it would be different - but quiting because of other
people
>|killing you is kind of lame in my opinion.
>
> Why? We came here to play. Because of PKs, we can't play. It's
called denial-of-service. If
>you were a member of a tennis club, paying to use its facilities, and every
time you went to play
>the same bunch of jerkoffs were monopolizing the courts, staying long past
the time limit, ignoring
>reservations, etc., and you went to management to complain and they told
you to deal with it
>yourself, would you keep paying?
It's not the same situation. The same situation would be if you were
playing tennis and Martina Hingis or Pete Sampras came by every day and said
"I will play on this court until you beat me and make me leave." Of course,
you wont' make them leave, so you find another court. What can management
do? Tell Hingis to play somewhere else? That's not fair to Hingis. By the
way, Anna Kournikova can play tennis at my place any time... It might be
statutory rape in most states, but she's a hottie.
>
>|The fact that you hang around instead of quitting today tells me that
either
>|a) you like to play the game or b) you have more money than you know what
to
>|do with.
>
> It's only $10. So I see three movies this month instead of four.
Holy geez. I watch three movies a year. Talk about expensive - movies are
ridiculous!
>
>|Whatever. You'll hear how good UO 2 will be and buy that. Or Ultima:
>|Ascension. The bottom line is, OSI puts out quality products, and you
would
>|be missing out if you didn't purchase them.
>
> I guess I'll be missing out then, since I have no intention of ever
purchasing another product
>from this company unless I see some real improvement over here.
Yah. You really sound convicted - "unless I see some real improvement."
Will Brickles
>100 spells Already in place with another 500 to go NOT including magic
I can see them now - "summon cat/dog/dolphin/ferret/fern/etc"
Have you played the Realms of Arkania series from Sir-Tech? Those guys know
CRPG's and also had a ton of spells, and most of them were utterly useless.
500 spells my ass. There will be two dozen useful ones - about the same
amount in UO.
Dennis Heffernan
Will Brickles wrote in message ...
|away.
Then there's no point in doing it.
|It just feels better if you know you have the ability to kill an
|especially obnoxious person, but in EQ, you won't have that ability unless
|you and the obnoxious one agree on it.
Perhaps you think so. I think it would be better if the
system prevented the twit from being obnoxious towards me. PvP
and ignore switches do exactly that.
|Hey, if I yelled out that "Three Ancient Wyrms and Two Demons just came in"
|most people would run too (would they?). Just because they are afraid of
|PK's doesn't mean that they think PvP is out of control.
Well, yes it does, because if they thought PKs were controllable they'd
stay and fight them.
|Does Sony's game division have as much moolah as EA?
Probably.
|Sony, the huge
|company, could (and probably will) outspend OSI, but so what? More money
|will not make a product better, and it won't make support any better either.
It sure doesn't hurt.
|> Since our PvP switches will be off, they won't be able to "lay the
|smack down" on US.
|
|True, but why would they want to? Are you going to go around annoying them?
No -- I'm not an asshole.
|They sure as hell will annoy you.
No, they won't.
Look, I've been on systems with PvP-switches. The kind of things you
are talking about were so rare as to be of no account. My PvP was ON and
I had far less trouble than anyone has in UO, because the mere existence
of the switch deterred assholes from jumping in in the first place. (Until
management started powering up what was essentially a PK race, but that
caused a major firestorm on the system, and the race ended up becoming a
GM-only race.)
|It's not the same situation. The same situation would be if you were
|playing tennis and Martina Hingis or Pete Sampras came by every day and said
|"I will play on this court until you beat me and make me leave."
No, they can't MAKE you play them. PK's force you to play their
game whether you want to or not.
Additionally, they can't do that. Tennis courts, whether private or
public, have time limits. You can play for an hour or two or whatever the
limit is, and then if someone is waiting for the court you have to leave.
If you don't, they go get management (if private) or a cop (if public) and
you are escourted off the premises.
|you wont' make them leave, so you find another court. What can management
|do? Tell Hingis to play somewhere else?
Absolutely.
|That's not fair to Hingis.
Doesn't have to be. He has no more right to a public court than
anyone else. At a private facility, if one person is harassing the
other customers and complaints are being made, you can bet your last
dollar that person will be tossed out, either for the day or (in a
severe enough case) permanently. They're not stupid; if one guy is
going to cause ten people to quit, they're going to remove that guy.
OSI needs to learn this.
|Holy geez. I watch three movies a year. Talk about expensive - movies are
|ridiculous!
I go to matinees -- $5 to get in, another $5 for popcorn and soda. ;-)
|Yah. You really sound convicted - "unless I see some real improvement."
Hey, I'm reasonable. If they fix it, why not relent?