› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Ultima Online 2

spydermr2spydermr2 Member Posts: 336
in Ultima Online

Ah, but how I wish someone with an actual brain would buy the license for Ultima and bring out a worthy sequel. Don't screw with the gameplay of the pre-Trammel era -- use a modern engine. Keep the PvP, crafting, lore, etc.

I HATE the idiots who are running this game currently.

Comments

  • stopsstops Member Posts: 9

    How long I have wished for this too.

  • SnurfSnurf Member Posts: 2
    I played UO for 3 years, if they ever release an UO 2 I'd abandon my life and game like a maniac ;)

    Current game played:
    World of warcraft
    Lvl 60 priest Al'Akir
    Lvl 60 warrior Al'Akir
    Lvl 60 rouge Al'Akir

  • MisfitZMisfitZ Member Posts: 368

    Corp Por for life.

     

    Well...until EA took over, anyways.

    -----------------------------
    Listen Asmodeeus, seven years ago, Ultima Online didn't even have those pathetic "quests" that you refer to or those "professions" of ninja, samurai, necromancer, and paladin. Nor did it have any of the neon crap, or bug mounts. It didn't even have any "combat moves." You turned on attack and jousted with simplistic swings. It was a better game then. if you can't guess why then just uninstall the thing and move along. - Crabby

  • 0UTL4W0UTL4W Member Posts: 21

    Originally posted by spydermr2
    Ah, but how I wish someone with an actual brain would buy the license for Ultima and bring out a worthy sequel. Don't screw with the gameplay of the pre-Trammel era -- use a modern engine. Keep the PvP, crafting, lore, etc. I HATE the idiots who are running this game currently.

    I know how you feel... i'm still waiting aswell as many others to buy the licience of "Earth and Beyond" from EA it was a great game but it got murded ::::16:: by the Evil Association known as EA

  • SwizzleStickSwizzleStick Member Posts: 10

    EA owned UO (through origin) years before they started making the changes, its not like they bought it and the next day they decided to change everything.

  • nubsnubs Member Posts: 59


    Originally posted by SwizzleStick

    EA owned UO (through origin) years before they started making the changes, its not like they bought it and the next day they decided to change everything.

    That is true, but they didn't take an active participation in it until after it had become a major succcess. Since then EA has transformed the game into a Frankenstein's monster. Sadly, though it is a shadow of its former self, it's still superior to most of the games out there in terms of gameplay. If EA were smart, they would completely re-write the game with the same mechanics but allow it to use a fully 3d engine like WoW or EQ2.

    Join eRepublik today!

  • MaeEyeMaeEye Member UncommonPosts: 1,107

    Originally posted by nubs
    Originally posted by SwizzleStick
    EA owned UO (through origin) years before they started making the changes, its not like they bought it and the next day they decided to change everything.That is true, but they didn't take an active participation in it until after it had become a major succcess. Since then EA has transformed the game into a Frankenstein's monster. Sadly, though it is a shadow of its former self, it's still superior to most of the games out there in terms of gameplay. If EA were smart, they would completely re-write the game with the same mechanics but allow it to use a fully 3d engine like WoW or EQ2.

    I know if EA did this...I would probably give the game another try. I LOVE the 2d graphics, but 3D would be pretty sweet...cause i LOVE to explore the lands of Britannia. But EA isn't smart...why would they do this?

    /played-mmorpgs

    Total time played: 9125 Days, 21 Hours, 29 Minutes, 27 Seconds
    Time played this level: 39 Days, 1 Hour, 24 Minutes, 5 Seconds

  • nubsnubs Member Posts: 59
    They have a lot of room for growth especially when compared to companies like Blizzard and Sony. Their subscriber base is far lower and they could potentially hit the million subscriber mark if they do it right.

    Join eRepublik today!

  • dewolfedewolfe Member Posts: 19

    UO2 would be fantastic, but at this point I would just settle for someone to make a UO inspired modern game instead of the EQ clones that come out every year. If I see a tree I want to chop it, make a bow and use it to kill my neighbor when he comes out of his house!

  • herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925

    Well maybe they are scared.The 2 sequels we had are AC2 and EQ2.

    While EQ2 might have nearly 400k subs(still less then the original mind you),AC2 was running at a lose for a long time and now finally closed shop.It is risky.

    But 8 yrs is a long time for a game even if it is a mmorpg so yes its time they bite the bullet and make a sequel.

    I honestly doubt they hit a million subs as they never even had more then 250k(from mmorpgchart.com) on UO1.

    But 2 seperate developers on and a Q&A have said you 50-75k is what is needed to start making a profit depending on cost of development .

    And unless they really mess it up i can easily see UO2 hitting 100k at least.

  • dewolfedewolfe Member Posts: 19

    There was a AC2? Wow they sure didn't spend much money promoting that game did they?

  • PsyXPsyX Member Posts: 220

    ok..............

    Stop making threads about things that will never happen..

    If anything start hoping for the entire EA company to be taken over by

    Space PONIES! becouse its more likley to hapen then EA ever making a uo2

    ..stop dreaming .....

  • Maca0716Maca0716 Member Posts: 76

    WoW haven't you guys figured out yet why they cancelled other previous sequels? because they know that a sequal cannot live up to the original just like EQ2.

    geddit?

  • herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925


    Originally posted by Maca0716

    WoW haven't you guys figured out yet why they cancelled other previous sequels? because they know that a sequal cannot live up to the original just like EQ2.
    geddit?

    Actually UO2 was cancelled well before AC2 or EQ2 came out and UOX was cancelled before EQ2 went live.

    Problem lies with EA.They are scared ppl might migrate to UO2 from UO1 and then not like it and leave UO series altogether.

    But they can always make a sequal quite different from the original and thus bring back old(who quit) and new players.

    You say EQ2.But here is a classice example of a mmorpg that used this formulae.They made a mmorpg to attract ppl who quit a while ago and new ones.

    Result is EQ1 still has over 400k accounts and EQ2 has over 350k accounts.A year ago EQ1 had about 500k accounts.

    Do the maths they gained 250k extra ppl which is 3.75m$ a month extra! That is smart buisness.Note this is even at the low estimate as some sites already projecting EQ2 has suprassed EQ1 now following the expansion but i personally believe it still has lower numbers then EQ1 at its heydays.

    Of course like i mentioned you could have an AC2 fiasco in which the sequel has so few ppl(under 50k) that it runs at a lose.


     

  • Maca0716Maca0716 Member Posts: 76

    Originally posted by hercules
    Originally posted by Maca0716
    WoW haven't you guys figured out yet why they cancelled other previous sequels? because they know that a sequal cannot live up to the original just like EQ2.
    geddit?
    Actually UO2 was cancelled well before AC2 or EQ2 came out and UOX was cancelled before EQ2 went live.
    Problem lies with EA.They are scared ppl might migrate to UO2 from UO1 and then not like it and leave UO series altogether.
    But they can always make a sequal quite different from the original and thus bring back old(who quit) and new players.
    You say EQ2.But here is a classice example of a mmorpg that used this formulae.They made a mmorpg to attract ppl who quit a while ago and new ones.
    Result is EQ1 still has over 400k accounts and EQ2 has over 350k accounts.A year ago EQ1 had about 500k accounts.
    Do the maths they gained 250k extra ppl which is 3.75m$ a month extra! That is smart buisness.Note this is even at the low estimate as some sites already projecting EQ2 has suprassed EQ1 now following the expansion but i personally believe it still has lower numbers then EQ1 at its heydays.
    Of course like i mentioned you could have an AC2 fiasco in which the sequel has so few ppl(under 50k) that it runs at a lose.

    350k accounts? what the hell are you smoking? the servers are pretty much empty!!! 350k? that is laughable to say the least.

    EQ2 is a failure and did not live up to anyones expectations.

  • nubsnubs Member Posts: 59

    Well, according to Bruce over at mmogchart.com UO doesn't have more than 150k subscribers right now. He also said that the majority of those subscribers are not even in North America anymore. Supposedly, the greatest number of subscribers are actually in Japan. But who knows at this point; I bet EA is keeping tight lips on that information since their subscriber base has been steadily dropping over the past year or two.

    http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1.html

     

    Join eRepublik today!

  • martin99rmartin99r Member Posts: 8
    It's a real shame UO2 got cancelled, a lot of people were wanting to play it. I think one of the main problems with UO is that it looks so dated now, 3D is just horrible looking. But then the code is I guess 8 years old...Might be nice to keep the same game but with new first person graphics...Sorry was dreaming again!! lol Has UO really only got 150k accounts now? Hmm that explains why they keep bringing out new 'expansions' and 'anniversary packs' I still play UO mainly because I haven't really found another game to take its place, the community on Europa is generally pretty nice. I have tried Horizons, EQ2, SWG, Guild Wars and Lineage 2 so far, as well as a few beta's and free trials, but havent found another game I really love. The latest was Irth online and that wasn't much fun at all. Maybe next year Vanguard or D&D online will be the one. Is there a concrete release date for either of those yet? In the meantime I still hope to get into beta.....
  • PsyXPsyX Member Posts: 220

    Originally posted by martin99r
    It's a real shame UO2 got cancelled, a lot of people were wanting to play it. I think one of the main problems with UO is that it looks so dated now, 3D is just horrible looking. But then the code is I guess 8 years old...Might be nice to keep the same game but with new first person graphics...Sorry was dreaming again!! lol Has UO really only got 150k accounts now? Hmm that explains why they keep bringing out new 'expansions' and 'anniversary packs' I still play UO mainly because I haven't really found another game to take its place, the community on Europa is generally pretty nice. I have tried Horizons, EQ2, SWG, Guild Wars and Lineage 2 so far, as well as a few beta's and free trials, but havent found another game I really love. The latest was Irth online and that wasn't much fun at all. Maybe next year Vanguard or D&D online will be the one. Is there a concrete release date for either of those yet? In the meantime I still hope to get into beta.....


    Umm if UO had its grapihcs redone making it First person would be a great way to lose their entire playerbase. UO's graphics should (i dare say will here) stay ISOMETRIC until the day the game dies
    . EA aint stupid enough to change the view ;) so if they roll out new 3d for the players it would surely be
    iso view

  • martin99rmartin99r Member Posts: 8
    I have to admit that I do like the graphics as they are, even though it makes the game look old. Its just a bit hard getting back into UO with almost every other game out there having a totally different perspective, but maybe that's why people like UO, cause its different hehe I did think UO2 looked like it would be a good game though, shame EA didnt want to risk their player base on it image
  • herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925


    Originally posted by Maca0716




    Originally posted by hercules


    Originally posted by Maca0716
    WoW haven't you guys figured out yet why they cancelled other previous sequels? because they know that a sequal cannot live up to the original just like EQ2.
    geddit?

    Actually UO2 was cancelled well before AC2 or EQ2 came out and UOX was cancelled before EQ2 went live.
    Problem lies with EA.They are scared ppl might migrate to UO2 from UO1 and then not like it and leave UO series altogether.
    But they can always make a sequal quite different from the original and thus bring back old(who quit) and new players.
    You say EQ2.But here is a classice example of a mmorpg that used this formulae.They made a mmorpg to attract ppl who quit a while ago and new ones.
    Result is EQ1 still has over 400k accounts and EQ2 has over 350k accounts.A year ago EQ1 had about 500k accounts.
    Do the maths they gained 250k extra ppl which is 3.75m$ a month extra! That is smart buisness.Note this is even at the low estimate as some sites already projecting EQ2 has suprassed EQ1 now following the expansion but i personally believe it still has lower numbers then EQ1 at its heydays.
    Of course like i mentioned you could have an AC2 fiasco in which the sequel has so few ppl(under 50k) that it runs at a lose.


    350k accounts? what the hell are you smoking? the servers are pretty much empty!!! 350k? that is laughable to say the least.

    EQ2 is a failure and did not live up to anyones expectations.

    Hmm your sig explains it all.Or you just want to babble junk.I rather trust mmorpgchart.com which is done by a guy who has proven to be right in the past many times then you who clearly are trollingimage.

    The topic and reference are made as regards UO2 not your own personal crusade with EQ2 or SoE or whatever.

Sign In or Register to comment.