Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mythic To Assist Ultima Online Team

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the blast-from-the-past dept.

Gamasutra reports that Mythic will be assisting the UO team, now that they're both a part of the EA family. "The short website message indicates that the existing Ultima Online team will be working together with Mythic, best known for their work on the Dark Age of Camelot MMO, to 'forge Britannia's future.'" Fans of the venerable MMOG should be happiest, though, with speculation that the company will be assisting with a sequel or update to the world of Britannia.

28 comments

  1. PvP by maxogden · · Score: 1

    Maybe they'll design a new PVP system for UO. WoW's is still in it's infancy, and a good PVP game would definitely make me switch. Besides, it seems that PVP is all that Mythic is good at. Their PVE leaves more to be desired.

    1. Re:PvP by aCapitalist · · Score: 1

      I bought WoW a year and a half ago, played it for three hours, and then didn't play it again until last Friday (I was able to haggle 15 free trial days out of a customer service rep). But I really miss the race war servers on EQ1. Are neutral territories (like the Wetlands) free-for-all zones in WoW?

      Anyway, is this going to be shiny, new UO engine? I never played the original, but I think what MMOGs need are much more dynamic environments. Everything seems to be so predictable in current offerings.

    2. Re:PvP by Cadallin · · Score: 1

      Yes, to the FFA, but only between factions (horde/alliance). However due to numerous issues this means that if you play Alliance, you get murdered and spawn camped for 1/2 an hour. This was one of my numerous gripes with the game. Along with Crafting: nerfed to uselessness, control scheme: Starcraft with one (1) unit, constant grinding, and despite said grinding a complete lack of a feeling of accomplishment. My character never FELT like he was getting any better over 40+ levels. As opposed to say, a Diablo character.

    3. Re:PvP by the+unbeliever · · Score: 1

      On PVP servers, "contested territory" is FFA pvp. Wetlands numbers among the contested zones (basically, unless you zone in and the zone name is green, it's contested. If it's red, you've entered enemy territory.

    4. Re:PvP by crabpeople · · Score: 2, Informative

      "a good PVP game would definitely make me switch"

      Switch from wow to uo? bwahaha.. Uo is a sinking ship. Its been sinking for years and wow put the last cannonball through their hold. EA killed that game. UO2 was designed like over 5 years ago and scrapped. It was so horrible that they just rolled some of the better features it into the current game and made a 3d client out of it. A 3d client where you could stack things on the 2d client and then not see them on the 3d one. That was great fun. Lots of little bugs like that. I remember reading something that no more than like 2% of the playerbase actually used the 3d client for any length of time. Personally i always thought they should have improved ship travel. The fact that ships were the biggest dupe/leveling tool in the game probably made them shy away from introducing features there. Still some massive ship to ship battles with pirates and shit could have really saved that game.

      No ones moving back to UO. Uo was an amazing game 8 years ago but people generally like to move forward in technology not backwards. The only things EA EVER added to that game were stupid little trinkets (holliday bags, fake rares etc) and overpowered weaponry ( i remember when invulnerable meant something ) just so people think its changing. It isnt. No one wants a crappy 3d client bolted onto a 2d mmorpg. Or to put it another way - hey EA, 1997 called, they want their mmorpg back.

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    5. Re:PvP by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 1

      Check out Warhammer: Age of Reckoning. Mythic is making this game, it's going to be another realm vs realm game, where you can complete the game either entirely PvP or PvE.

    6. Re:PvP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not convinced that Mythis is really that good at PvP. I played DAoC for awhile, and tried out the PvP in all the battlegrounds from the low levels up to the large RvR shared zone. I played a couple different classes, and my experiences varied a little bit between the two. Mythic tried to create a bit of a rock-paper-scissors system with PvP where some classes were strong against some other classes, and weak against others. For this, I applaud them, however, I don't really think they pulled it off too well.

      One of the classes I played was a Light Mentalist. This is a ranged casting class with a mixture of high damage AoE spells and a couple decent damage single-target spells, combined with some minor paralyze type spells, and a limited pet ability.

      I have never been more frustrated that when trying to PvP with that character. That is because, the class that I was 'weak' against where enemy stealth/assassin characters. The problem for me was, my mentalist wasn't just 'weak' against those classes. They had such MASSIVE advantages over me that it was essentially no contest, and additionally, it seemed most of the teams I was on could do very little to protect me. It would often go down that the stealther would insta-kill me with backstab (which would leave me with maybe 10 percent of my health), and before I could target them and quickcast a paralyze or anything, they would insta-hit with a melee stab attack that would kill me. Literally going from no combat to dead in about 3 seconds. And, because they were stealthed before they were attacked, my team couldn't react fast enough to save me.

      I suppose there were some counter tactics to this, but I just fealt that in trying to create rock-paper-scissors, Mythic went way overboard in making mages, particularly light mentalists, far too vulnerable to stealthers (and it seemed like about 40-50% of enemy PvPers were stealthers). And that is just one example. I don't think Mythic ever got the class balance and tactics down very well for PvP. (My Light Mentalist was a lot of fun for PvE, but just an utter waste of time for PvP it seemed like). Things that Mythic did very well in their RvR system was the siege system, with building and destroying towers and castles using siege engines. That was very cool.

      But, overall, I just wasn't that enthused about their PvP. Far too much mezzing was another problem. I've never been a big fan of paralyze powers in any kind of PvP system. It usually makes the battle come down to who paralyzes the other team first. Once the team gets hit with an AE mez that lasts for like 30-45 seconds, its all over.

      But, time will tell. Maybe Mythic + the UO team can come up with something more engaging next time 'round.

    7. Re:PvP by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However due to numerous issues this means that if you play Alliance, you get murdered and spawn camped for 1/2 an hour

      Definitely depends on the server. I've only been corpse camped once in the six months I've played.

      Crafting: nerfed to uselessness

      Not sure what you mean by this, tailoring/skinning makes me a pretty decent income.

      constant grinding

      Now that's totally untrue, WoW has thousands of quests, some are kill x amount of bad guys, some are gather x amount of things, some are proper quests with a story.
      My character never FELT like he was getting any better over 40+ levels. As opposed to say, a Diablo character.

      You didn't say what class you played but my warlock has gone from free HK to someone you don't annoy without a reason.

      I've played quite a few MMORPGs and most were just one dimensional "grind until you're high enough to spend all your time fighting other players" type games. WoW has a lot to do: don't want to grind, do some quests. Don't want to quest go join a battleground. Fed up with battlegrounds go attack random strangers out in the world. Or if none of that appeals you could just wander around looking at the pretty graphics.
      I wouldn't describe WoW as perfect, there are things that annoy me about it but it's by far the best one of the bunch that I've ever played. Sounds like you got to Stranglethorn Vale and got fed up with the regular ganking.

    8. Re:PvP by SupremoMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      WOW dude you must be sarcastic. Before EA got it's filthy hands on it, UO had the best PvP system in the world. They slowly started to destroy it by turnign it mroe and more item-based with each patch. Now UO is dead to me! This was the game where player's skill counted for 99% of the equation in both team and 1 vs 1 combat. There was simply nothing like it anywhere. PvP was fast-paced, exciting, and very risky (hence very rewarding). For it's part in ruining this gem, EA is dead to me! And so is any company in their clutches.

    9. Re:PvP by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      >Not sure what you mean by this, tailoring/skinning makes me a pretty decent income ..mainly making sub-components for other people's quests?

    10. Re:PvP by Hellsbells · · Score: 1

      I just switched back to UO after playing WoW for the last year or so.

      WoW is a good game, incredibly polished and a good amount of content, but after a while it just gets boring. After playing until level 40 or so, it all feels like lots of work for a tiny bit of fun now and again.

      On starting up UO for the first time, I winced at the old graphics engine, but after playing for a bit I got right back into the game.

      UO is just fun. There seems to be a lot more freedom in what you can do. It seems that everyone who's played it has a story or two to tell about the time they got jumped by PKers, or when they bought their first house, etc...
      It may be unbalanced, feel really old, and have a ridiculous number of rules to learn, but perhaps this is the appeal. It's the only MMORPG I've played that doesn't have the dreaded everquest level grind. You can just muck around in the game and end up with a half decent character.

      Still it would be good to see an updated fully 3d client done properly, a decent quest engine, and some more content.

  2. If I were a fan of Mythic titles though by Cherveny · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I were a fan of Mythic titles though, i'd be scared. EA has a history of closing down any internal competition to Ultima Online in the MMORPG sphere, no matter how much promise they show (look at UO2, UO:X, etc)

    --
    --- It's not my fault this post looks redundant. I just type too slow.
    1. Re:If I were a fan of Mythic titles though by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      I'm already scared. I don't think EA is dumb enough to kill a well established MMORPG in favor of one that has been dying for years. (Yes, I know, DAoC is dying too, but it's still FAR more healthy than UO.)

      EA's track record of killing new MMOs before launch, and destroying any well established one that they do acquire (see UO) DOES scare me though. EA's track record with MMOGs is awful.

      If only EVE's implementation hadn't ruined a great concept... (EVE Online had a wonderful concept and had so much potential, but CCP's lack of experience in game development and running an MMOG led to lots of awful problems such as "sledgehammer balancing" and horrible bugs with every patch.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  3. UO was great by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

    I must have wasted a lot of time going through UO dungeons with friends. That game was fun.

    Their late attempts at 3d have been laughable at best, and they rarely give any new gameplay. Hopefully they can make it great again.

  4. an update or new version of UO would awesome by steak · · Score: 1

    as long as they didnt add a level grind like all other mmos, the system of skills in UO is what makes it timeless. i love the lack of a rigid class system also; the ability to raise and lower skills so i can create my perfect character.

    --
    lose != loose
    1. Re:an update or new version of UO would awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Mythic, I think, will remain anti-grind.

      You see, the premise of DAoC, when it came out was that it was anti-grind. 50 levels. No five billion expansions like Everquest, each one tacking on another 10. Nope - just 50. And levelling was quick. You could effectively take any class to 50 *solo* if you had to.

      Then they bought into the bullshit of 'PvE' and released Trials of Atlantis. The expansion added such things as: a) Massive raids, requiring several dozen (to the point of 100+) people, b) Artifacts, which completely changed the face of PvP and as a result were necessary to get. Artifact encounters could take anywhere from 1 to a few dozen people. They required days, weeks or even months of PvE in order to 'activate' and 'level' - this even after the encounter.

      The game was struck a heavy blow, and its population fled en masse. They've since 'fixed' ToA by making it much easier to get through (IE, accessible for those who don't even have a life, but might have a job), but the population of the game is still dwindling.

      Unless they're absolutely batshit stupid, they won't make the same mistake twice. As they've managed to pull off the best implementation of PvP combat seen on any MMOG, I've hope that they're not stupid.

  5. They better hurry it up then by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 1

    Blizz has announced World PvP and a lot of other changes to PvP dynamics (plus the Rogue talent rebalancing) for patch 1.12, which IMO will come out shortly before Burning Crusade to ensure a maximal playerbase for launch.

    --
    I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
  6. I currently Play Ultima by Ian+McBeth · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am not only a current player of Ultima Online, I also have 3 accounts. I also play their 2.5d(3d)client instead of their SouthPark quality 2d client. Mostly because the 3d client supports modern monitors and High res better, along with a few UI features that dont exist in the original 2d client. (resizable Containers to name one).

    What UO needs most is a good Scalable 3d client, that maintains the isometric camera angle. The Worst thing that could happen to UO is to turn in into an FPS or an over the shoulder perspective. As long as the EA dev team sticks with that sorry 2d client the artwork in UO is always gona be less than stellar(2d pixil graphics don't scale).

    If the Mythic team can get UO a new 3d client great. Or if they are finally gona make a sequal, great. But its long past time for the status quo to end.

  7. UO is dead by sinij · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Best thing Mythic could do to UO is to return to pre-UO:R days and scrap years of misguided efforts to clone EQ.

    1. Re:UO is dead by A.K.A_Magnet · · Score: 1

      Amen!!!

    2. Re:UO is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, that's right. EA spends shitloads of money to buy a game studio, then immediately puts them to work returning the game to its 9-year-old roots.

      You dumbass. I'm fed up with pre-UOR fanboys always spouting how trammel was the death of everything cool. That schtick was old in 2000, here it is 6 years later and your attitude hasn't changed one bit.

      Get over your inability to enjoy change, learn to deal with new environments, and expect that EA is going to push for a completely new redesign of the UO system. Over the course of a few years, they will phase out the old servers for a new generation, and it will be more EQ/Wowish than ever before.

      The reason? Emulation. RunUO and Sphere have been around for years, and are engaged in a cat-and-mouse game with OSI. They allow players to own their own servers, or to run public servers. EA has thus far been unable or unwilling to put a stop to the practice.

      This could be the nail in that coffin, with emulator-writers forced to start all over or abandon any hopes of emulating modern game play. If they choose to stick with the old architecture, they inherit clients that will never again see security or gameplay updates, and a server system that gets older every day. If they start over, it will take them years to be in a similar position once again.

    3. Re:UO is dead by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      Trammel
      n.
              1. A shackle used to teach a horse to amble.
              2. Something that restricts activity, expression, or progress; a restraint.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
  8. Uh-huh... by bluemeep · · Score: 1
    ...speculation that the company will be assisting with a sequel or update to the world of Britannia.

    Third time's the charm, right?

    1. Re:Uh-huh... by Avatar8 · · Score: 1
      Exactly!

      ...any new Ultima title would need at least two years of development to release, such is the complexity of current MMOs.
      Since I'm completely certain that EA owns ALL of the IP that those two development teams created, I don't see why the new development team can't pick up where they left off, bring it up to speed and knock it out in a year.

      I played UO for seven and a half years. I enjoyed four of them. The two cancelled "upgrades" was disappointing, the McFarlane content was horrendous and the 3d attempt was laughable. Oh, how I wish I'd have sold my account at UO's peak. I could have funded my WoW account for years. :-)

      Yes, WoW is what finally helped me sever my ties to UO. No, I wouldn't consider going back to UO regardless of how much they attempt to clone WoW. I just can't stand to see EA ruin Richard Garriott's creation any further.

  9. Bring back Richard Garriott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever since EA acquired Origin, Ultima has suffered under its rule.
    Ultima IX: Ascension is the worst one because of EA.

    1. Re:Bring back Richard Garriott by Hai-Etlik · · Score: 1

      Personaly I'd put Ascension ahead of Pagan, if only slightly. Not that taht changes the point about EA ruining Ultima.

  10. A sequel is like six years overdue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really hope they make a UO sequel deserving of the name. Out of all the MMOs I've played, it was always my favorite.

    The level of customization in appearance and the system of skill-specialization are unparalled to this day. I can't stand the traditional level-grind.

    But yes, it badly needs a graphics overhaul. A 3D "isometric-look" would definitely be in order (like NWN), as long as they could keep the UO style.

    Fixing the need for macroing/8x8 gridding/whatever couldn't hurt either. And although I personally didn't have huge issues with UO:R (they could always just have PvP servers), but every expansion thereafter was pretty horrific.

  11. Re:UO is dead *mod parent up!* by vertinox · · Score: 1

    Best thing Mythic could do to UO is to return to pre-UO:R days and scrap years of misguided efforts to clone EQ.

    Bravo sir. Bravo!

    Ultima Online was a great game unto itself between 1997-1999 and I always said it would be perfect if they just fixed the lag, bugs, cheating, and then program crashes.

    However, EA saw the success of EQ and thought they would just change their game into EQ and cash in on its success. It basically ruined the game for many of us old timers. I played until 2001 or so but after Reinnassance I just gave up trying to play a game that was no longer the game I used to know.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)