<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_22_0536213</id>
	<title>Why Are There No Popular <em>Ultima Online</em>-Like MMOs?</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1266831900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:my/.username@@@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">eldavojohn</a> writes <i>"I have a slightly older friend who played through the glory days of <em>Ultima Online</em>.  Yes, their servers are still up and running, but he often waxes nostalgic about certain gameplay functions of <em>UO</em> that he misses.  I must say that these aspects make me smile and wonder what it would be like to play in such a world &mdash; things like housing, thieving and looting that you don't see in the most popular massively multiplayer online games like <em>World of Warcraft</em>.  So, I've followed him through a few games, including <em>Darkfall</em> and now <em>Mortal Online</em>.  And these (seemingly European developed) games are constantly fading into obscurity and never catching hold.  We constantly move from one to the next.  Does anyone know of a popular three-dimensional game that has <em>UO</em>-like rules and gameplay?  Perhaps one that <em>UO</em> players gravitated to after leaving <em>UO</em>?  If you think that the very things that have been removed (housing and thieving would be two good topics) caused <em>WoW</em> to become the most popular MMO, why is that?  Do <em>UO</em> rules not translate well to a true 3D environment?  Are people incapable of planning for corpse looting?  Are players really that inept that developers don't want to leave us in control of risk analysis?  I'm familiar with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle\_Test">the Bartle Test</a> but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity, I'd be interested."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " I have a slightly older friend who played through the glory days of Ultima Online .
Yes , their servers are still up and running , but he often waxes nostalgic about certain gameplay functions of UO that he misses .
I must say that these aspects make me smile and wonder what it would be like to play in such a world    things like housing , thieving and looting that you do n't see in the most popular massively multiplayer online games like World of Warcraft .
So , I 've followed him through a few games , including Darkfall and now Mortal Online .
And these ( seemingly European developed ) games are constantly fading into obscurity and never catching hold .
We constantly move from one to the next .
Does anyone know of a popular three-dimensional game that has UO-like rules and gameplay ?
Perhaps one that UO players gravitated to after leaving UO ?
If you think that the very things that have been removed ( housing and thieving would be two good topics ) caused WoW to become the most popular MMO , why is that ?
Do UO rules not translate well to a true 3D environment ?
Are people incapable of planning for corpse looting ?
Are players really that inept that developers do n't want to leave us in control of risk analysis ?
I 'm familiar with the Bartle Test but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity , I 'd be interested .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "I have a slightly older friend who played through the glory days of Ultima Online.
Yes, their servers are still up and running, but he often waxes nostalgic about certain gameplay functions of UO that he misses.
I must say that these aspects make me smile and wonder what it would be like to play in such a world — things like housing, thieving and looting that you don't see in the most popular massively multiplayer online games like World of Warcraft.
So, I've followed him through a few games, including Darkfall and now Mortal Online.
And these (seemingly European developed) games are constantly fading into obscurity and never catching hold.
We constantly move from one to the next.
Does anyone know of a popular three-dimensional game that has UO-like rules and gameplay?
Perhaps one that UO players gravitated to after leaving UO?
If you think that the very things that have been removed (housing and thieving would be two good topics) caused WoW to become the most popular MMO, why is that?
Do UO rules not translate well to a true 3D environment?
Are people incapable of planning for corpse looting?
Are players really that inept that developers don't want to leave us in control of risk analysis?
I'm familiar with the Bartle Test but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity, I'd be interested.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228168</id>
	<title>UO-like does not mean PvP</title>
	<author>Flip102</author>
	<datestamp>1266846120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No discussion of UO ever happens without people arguing about PvP, but that's not what this post is about or what one should take from UO when comparing it to WoW and other contemporary games.</p><p>The thing that made UO way ahead of its time was personalization.  You could wear whatever you wanted, color it however you wanted, and surround yourself with personalized items.  People made gold from selling their creations.  There's a lot of talk about casuals and how you can't have a UO-like game succeed because casual players won't like it.  That's absurd.  You don't think all those gamer girls (and most gamers in general) want to dress up their internet dolls?  WoW is a very fun game but it's depressing how it not only does not support personalization, it seems to actively resist it.  Everyone looks the same in WoW - and maybe that's largely due to technology limitations, but it's still something that they should attempt to address.</p><p>Second Life is an awful cesspool of porn and spam, but the only activity that is creative, flourishing, and profitable is the selling of player-designed clothes and other customization for avatars.  Personalization is something people want in MMOs, and UO had a ton of it 15 years ago.  Not that Blizzard really needs any help digger deeper into the player's psyche, but if they wanted to hook even more casuals, that could certainly learn from UO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No discussion of UO ever happens without people arguing about PvP , but that 's not what this post is about or what one should take from UO when comparing it to WoW and other contemporary games.The thing that made UO way ahead of its time was personalization .
You could wear whatever you wanted , color it however you wanted , and surround yourself with personalized items .
People made gold from selling their creations .
There 's a lot of talk about casuals and how you ca n't have a UO-like game succeed because casual players wo n't like it .
That 's absurd .
You do n't think all those gamer girls ( and most gamers in general ) want to dress up their internet dolls ?
WoW is a very fun game but it 's depressing how it not only does not support personalization , it seems to actively resist it .
Everyone looks the same in WoW - and maybe that 's largely due to technology limitations , but it 's still something that they should attempt to address.Second Life is an awful cesspool of porn and spam , but the only activity that is creative , flourishing , and profitable is the selling of player-designed clothes and other customization for avatars .
Personalization is something people want in MMOs , and UO had a ton of it 15 years ago .
Not that Blizzard really needs any help digger deeper into the player 's psyche , but if they wanted to hook even more casuals , that could certainly learn from UO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No discussion of UO ever happens without people arguing about PvP, but that's not what this post is about or what one should take from UO when comparing it to WoW and other contemporary games.The thing that made UO way ahead of its time was personalization.
You could wear whatever you wanted, color it however you wanted, and surround yourself with personalized items.
People made gold from selling their creations.
There's a lot of talk about casuals and how you can't have a UO-like game succeed because casual players won't like it.
That's absurd.
You don't think all those gamer girls (and most gamers in general) want to dress up their internet dolls?
WoW is a very fun game but it's depressing how it not only does not support personalization, it seems to actively resist it.
Everyone looks the same in WoW - and maybe that's largely due to technology limitations, but it's still something that they should attempt to address.Second Life is an awful cesspool of porn and spam, but the only activity that is creative, flourishing, and profitable is the selling of player-designed clothes and other customization for avatars.
Personalization is something people want in MMOs, and UO had a ton of it 15 years ago.
Not that Blizzard really needs any help digger deeper into the player's psyche, but if they wanted to hook even more casuals, that could certainly learn from UO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244432</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>evocarti</author>
	<datestamp>1266940260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> What's funny, is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters. The rule book talks about dishonor, and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you, eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.</p></div><p>Just being a bit of a minor pedant - but dishonor wasn't in the game originally. It was part of a patch that added the 'honor' system (rank / rewards from pvp). The day that patch was released may have been one of the single greatest large-scale world pvp events that I can think of. Epic zerging<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>I knew some people who took dishonor as a challenge - it was leet to have 1337 dishonorable kills<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>Battlegrounds basically solved the ganking issue more than the dishonor system - move the pvp rewards to an instance, and that's where the people will go. People you met out in the open after that were generally after the same thing as you - gathering, questing, whatever - and more likely to be on the same footing level-wise (rather than a bored level 60 looking to cause a ruckus). Dishonor was later removed because of this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's funny , is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters .
The rule book talks about dishonor , and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you , eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.Just being a bit of a minor pedant - but dishonor was n't in the game originally .
It was part of a patch that added the 'honor ' system ( rank / rewards from pvp ) .
The day that patch was released may have been one of the single greatest large-scale world pvp events that I can think of .
Epic zerging : - ) I knew some people who took dishonor as a challenge - it was leet to have 1337 dishonorable kills ; - ) Battlegrounds basically solved the ganking issue more than the dishonor system - move the pvp rewards to an instance , and that 's where the people will go .
People you met out in the open after that were generally after the same thing as you - gathering , questing , whatever - and more likely to be on the same footing level-wise ( rather than a bored level 60 looking to cause a ruckus ) .
Dishonor was later removed because of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> What's funny, is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters.
The rule book talks about dishonor, and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you, eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.Just being a bit of a minor pedant - but dishonor wasn't in the game originally.
It was part of a patch that added the 'honor' system (rank / rewards from pvp).
The day that patch was released may have been one of the single greatest large-scale world pvp events that I can think of.
Epic zerging :-)I knew some people who took dishonor as a challenge - it was leet to have 1337 dishonorable kills ;-)Battlegrounds basically solved the ganking issue more than the dishonor system - move the pvp rewards to an instance, and that's where the people will go.
People you met out in the open after that were generally after the same thing as you - gathering, questing, whatever - and more likely to be on the same footing level-wise (rather than a bored level 60 looking to cause a ruckus).
Dishonor was later removed because of this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229316</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>bogatabeav</author>
	<datestamp>1266854280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could you mention griefing a few more times?  I'm not sure if everyone's gotten the point that you think UO was full of griefers.  After reading your reply, I can now see that the griefing was rampant.  Grief, grief, grief.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you mention griefing a few more times ?
I 'm not sure if everyone 's gotten the point that you think UO was full of griefers .
After reading your reply , I can now see that the griefing was rampant .
Grief , grief , grief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you mention griefing a few more times?
I'm not sure if everyone's gotten the point that you think UO was full of griefers.
After reading your reply, I can now see that the griefing was rampant.
Grief, grief, grief.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229294</id>
	<title>Re:Classic UO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266854160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.uosecondage.com</p><p>A large, active, and astoundingly accurate replication of UO Pre-Trammel. Even though the shard is free to play,  the staff are as or more professional than OSI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.uosecondage.comA large , active , and astoundingly accurate replication of UO Pre-Trammel .
Even though the shard is free to play , the staff are as or more professional than OSI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.uosecondage.comA large, active, and astoundingly accurate replication of UO Pre-Trammel.
Even though the shard is free to play,  the staff are as or more professional than OSI.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245158</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Raptor851</author>
	<datestamp>1266944220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>^ This ^  God i wish i had modpoints when i actually wanted to use them.. Every time i hear about the complaints about ganking and the like, that's UO past the release of WOW when they decided to make "WOW 2.0" really, and it sucked in every way.  Looting armor was useless before, at best you did it to make sure they guy had to go back to town before coming back.  And who traveled alone in UO anyways?  It was all about the player run cities, and aside from small tasks you'd always have at least one person watching your back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>^ This ^ God i wish i had modpoints when i actually wanted to use them.. Every time i hear about the complaints about ganking and the like , that 's UO past the release of WOW when they decided to make " WOW 2.0 " really , and it sucked in every way .
Looting armor was useless before , at best you did it to make sure they guy had to go back to town before coming back .
And who traveled alone in UO anyways ?
It was all about the player run cities , and aside from small tasks you 'd always have at least one person watching your back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>^ This ^  God i wish i had modpoints when i actually wanted to use them.. Every time i hear about the complaints about ganking and the like, that's UO past the release of WOW when they decided to make "WOW 2.0" really, and it sucked in every way.
Looting armor was useless before, at best you did it to make sure they guy had to go back to town before coming back.
And who traveled alone in UO anyways?
It was all about the player run cities, and aside from small tasks you'd always have at least one person watching your back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</id>
	<title>Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1266844380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While you can be griefed on a PvP server, all that does is make you lose time. You have to go back to where you were. In the event someone is camping you, you can't do anything until that's cleared up, but that's all. You don't lose gold, experience, loot, etc. So it is annoying, but little more. However in UO you stood to lose a lot, and most people don't like that.</p><p>You are correct in that what it comes down to is that there's few people who like this sort of thing. There are a fair number who like to be on the giving end, but less who are willing to be on the receiving end. So even if you decided to make a game that catered to grifers, you'd have the problem that many griefers wouldn't want to play it. Since it would more or less be a griefer only fest, they wouldn't have casual players to pick on and it wouldn't be fun for them. A large number of them aren't interested in an equal playing field where they might be griefed as well. They want a situation where they can band together with other griefers to pick on the weak, but that doesn't work.</p><p>As such there will be a small market for games like this. You can see this well with EVE. Not only is it rather small, compared to other MMOs, but many of the player base positively HATE WoW. I don't mean they dislike playing WoW so found a new game, I mean they hate that WoW exists and that people play it. Now why would that be? Shouldn't affect them. The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE. They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of. They are mad that these people have other places to play.</p><p>What it comes down to is people play games to have fun. What fun is for various people is different, but for an extremely large amount fun means "Not losing everything because of a jerk." They want something akin to a single player game with checkpoints and quick saves and such. A situation where you don't always move forward, but you never move backward. They don't want the equivalent to a single player game that deletes your save if you die.</p><p>As such, game companies will make games like that. If they don't make games people want to buy, they'll not be in business for long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While you can be griefed on a PvP server , all that does is make you lose time .
You have to go back to where you were .
In the event someone is camping you , you ca n't do anything until that 's cleared up , but that 's all .
You do n't lose gold , experience , loot , etc .
So it is annoying , but little more .
However in UO you stood to lose a lot , and most people do n't like that.You are correct in that what it comes down to is that there 's few people who like this sort of thing .
There are a fair number who like to be on the giving end , but less who are willing to be on the receiving end .
So even if you decided to make a game that catered to grifers , you 'd have the problem that many griefers would n't want to play it .
Since it would more or less be a griefer only fest , they would n't have casual players to pick on and it would n't be fun for them .
A large number of them are n't interested in an equal playing field where they might be griefed as well .
They want a situation where they can band together with other griefers to pick on the weak , but that does n't work.As such there will be a small market for games like this .
You can see this well with EVE .
Not only is it rather small , compared to other MMOs , but many of the player base positively HATE WoW .
I do n't mean they dislike playing WoW so found a new game , I mean they hate that WoW exists and that people play it .
Now why would that be ?
Should n't affect them .
The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE .
They want weak , inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of .
They are mad that these people have other places to play.What it comes down to is people play games to have fun .
What fun is for various people is different , but for an extremely large amount fun means " Not losing everything because of a jerk .
" They want something akin to a single player game with checkpoints and quick saves and such .
A situation where you do n't always move forward , but you never move backward .
They do n't want the equivalent to a single player game that deletes your save if you die.As such , game companies will make games like that .
If they do n't make games people want to buy , they 'll not be in business for long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you can be griefed on a PvP server, all that does is make you lose time.
You have to go back to where you were.
In the event someone is camping you, you can't do anything until that's cleared up, but that's all.
You don't lose gold, experience, loot, etc.
So it is annoying, but little more.
However in UO you stood to lose a lot, and most people don't like that.You are correct in that what it comes down to is that there's few people who like this sort of thing.
There are a fair number who like to be on the giving end, but less who are willing to be on the receiving end.
So even if you decided to make a game that catered to grifers, you'd have the problem that many griefers wouldn't want to play it.
Since it would more or less be a griefer only fest, they wouldn't have casual players to pick on and it wouldn't be fun for them.
A large number of them aren't interested in an equal playing field where they might be griefed as well.
They want a situation where they can band together with other griefers to pick on the weak, but that doesn't work.As such there will be a small market for games like this.
You can see this well with EVE.
Not only is it rather small, compared to other MMOs, but many of the player base positively HATE WoW.
I don't mean they dislike playing WoW so found a new game, I mean they hate that WoW exists and that people play it.
Now why would that be?
Shouldn't affect them.
The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE.
They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of.
They are mad that these people have other places to play.What it comes down to is people play games to have fun.
What fun is for various people is different, but for an extremely large amount fun means "Not losing everything because of a jerk.
" They want something akin to a single player game with checkpoints and quick saves and such.
A situation where you don't always move forward, but you never move backward.
They don't want the equivalent to a single player game that deletes your save if you die.As such, game companies will make games like that.
If they don't make games people want to buy, they'll not be in business for long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227634</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>dave1791</author>
	<datestamp>1266840180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reverse engineered gray shards are a FAR cry from what would happen if WoW were open sourced.  If you could create your own WoW shard, would you play on any of Blizzards?  Sure they lose people to gray shards now, but they would lose a lot more if they open sourced it.  MMO are fundamentally a service business and open sourcing your MMO is essentiaslly saying, "feel free to skip using our service".  Where exactly does Blizzard gain here?  I know where players and those advocating that it be open sourced gain, but where does Blizzard gain?</p><p>The only way it might work is if the servers were still closed source, but the content was OSS ( with a restrictive license such as GPL) and modifiable and you essentially rented a server from the company.  If you want your own highly customized world, then you can create one and pay the rental fee on the company's cloud.   Richard Bartle advocated exactly this on a Terra Nova thread yesterday and I think it has merit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reverse engineered gray shards are a FAR cry from what would happen if WoW were open sourced .
If you could create your own WoW shard , would you play on any of Blizzards ?
Sure they lose people to gray shards now , but they would lose a lot more if they open sourced it .
MMO are fundamentally a service business and open sourcing your MMO is essentiaslly saying , " feel free to skip using our service " .
Where exactly does Blizzard gain here ?
I know where players and those advocating that it be open sourced gain , but where does Blizzard gain ? The only way it might work is if the servers were still closed source , but the content was OSS ( with a restrictive license such as GPL ) and modifiable and you essentially rented a server from the company .
If you want your own highly customized world , then you can create one and pay the rental fee on the company 's cloud .
Richard Bartle advocated exactly this on a Terra Nova thread yesterday and I think it has merit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reverse engineered gray shards are a FAR cry from what would happen if WoW were open sourced.
If you could create your own WoW shard, would you play on any of Blizzards?
Sure they lose people to gray shards now, but they would lose a lot more if they open sourced it.
MMO are fundamentally a service business and open sourcing your MMO is essentiaslly saying, "feel free to skip using our service".
Where exactly does Blizzard gain here?
I know where players and those advocating that it be open sourced gain, but where does Blizzard gain?The only way it might work is if the servers were still closed source, but the content was OSS ( with a restrictive license such as GPL) and modifiable and you essentially rented a server from the company.
If you want your own highly customized world, then you can create one and pay the rental fee on the company's cloud.
Richard Bartle advocated exactly this on a Terra Nova thread yesterday and I think it has merit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232928</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>jythie</author>
	<datestamp>1266867360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, in theory the developers wanted political conflict, not griefing.  And EVE does not have death, just 'loose your stuff'.  EVE PvPers like talking how hardcore they are, but I doubt they would be so full of themselves if they played one of the old permadeath MUDs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , in theory the developers wanted political conflict , not griefing .
And EVE does not have death , just 'loose your stuff' .
EVE PvPers like talking how hardcore they are , but I doubt they would be so full of themselves if they played one of the old permadeath MUDs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, in theory the developers wanted political conflict, not griefing.
And EVE does not have death, just 'loose your stuff'.
EVE PvPers like talking how hardcore they are, but I doubt they would be so full of themselves if they played one of the old permadeath MUDs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372</id>
	<title>Classic UO</title>
	<author>alex\_royle</author>
	<datestamp>1266836700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can still play classic UO on independent servers.

The biggest one is <a href="http://www.uogamers.com/" title="uogamers.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.uogamers.com/</a> [uogamers.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can still play classic UO on independent servers .
The biggest one is http : //www.uogamers.com/ [ uogamers.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can still play classic UO on independent servers.
The biggest one is http://www.uogamers.com/ [uogamers.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31247614</id>
	<title>oldschool UO shard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266953340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if you want some oldtime UO experience check out http://www.uosecondage.com/ the shard is set in the T2A era</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you want some oldtime UO experience check out http : //www.uosecondage.com/ the shard is set in the T2A era</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you want some oldtime UO experience check out http://www.uosecondage.com/ the shard is set in the T2A era</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227338</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266836220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience the PvP servers are where the action is. The most prominent guilds that do dungeons and raids play on PvP server. Getting killed by another player in World of Warcraft isn't such a big deal though. The battles that spontaneously appear outside the entrances of the popular raids are a lot of fun and doesn't cost you anything. It's a shoot-em-up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience the PvP servers are where the action is .
The most prominent guilds that do dungeons and raids play on PvP server .
Getting killed by another player in World of Warcraft is n't such a big deal though .
The battles that spontaneously appear outside the entrances of the popular raids are a lot of fun and does n't cost you anything .
It 's a shoot-em-up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience the PvP servers are where the action is.
The most prominent guilds that do dungeons and raids play on PvP server.
Getting killed by another player in World of Warcraft isn't such a big deal though.
The battles that spontaneously appear outside the entrances of the popular raids are a lot of fun and doesn't cost you anything.
It's a shoot-em-up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230244</id>
	<title>EVE</title>
	<author>IQpierce</author>
	<datestamp>1266859320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See subject.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See subject .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See subject.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231538</id>
	<title>UO was fun but...</title>
	<author>Jthrow</author>
	<datestamp>1266863220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would have been awesome if they had made it to where the players were able to log in as the monsters.  Such as a monster client where you
started out as a lowly evil creature. If you made a kill you were given the option to control more powerful creatures in succession.  Yes, there would be all kinds of collusion between monsters and people (friends gaming the system) but would also cause enough excitement/confusion to make the game fun.  Non monster players would never really know until they fought a creature if it were being controlled by a wiley human.  It would have given pvp/pker's a chance to be murderous within the limits of their monster type/stats.  Not sure if this idea has been used by any MMOG's yet, but if not and someone wanted to use it, please do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would have been awesome if they had made it to where the players were able to log in as the monsters .
Such as a monster client where you started out as a lowly evil creature .
If you made a kill you were given the option to control more powerful creatures in succession .
Yes , there would be all kinds of collusion between monsters and people ( friends gaming the system ) but would also cause enough excitement/confusion to make the game fun .
Non monster players would never really know until they fought a creature if it were being controlled by a wiley human .
It would have given pvp/pker 's a chance to be murderous within the limits of their monster type/stats .
Not sure if this idea has been used by any MMOG 's yet , but if not and someone wanted to use it , please do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would have been awesome if they had made it to where the players were able to log in as the monsters.
Such as a monster client where you
started out as a lowly evil creature.
If you made a kill you were given the option to control more powerful creatures in succession.
Yes, there would be all kinds of collusion between monsters and people (friends gaming the system) but would also cause enough excitement/confusion to make the game fun.
Non monster players would never really know until they fought a creature if it were being controlled by a wiley human.
It would have given pvp/pker's a chance to be murderous within the limits of their monster type/stats.
Not sure if this idea has been used by any MMOG's yet, but if not and someone wanted to use it, please do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261696</id>
	<title>Hard to do right</title>
	<author>Hythlodaeus</author>
	<datestamp>1265136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main reason is that games like that are hard to make.  UO had problems, but they could have been refined into a game unlike any that has yet to exist.  However, that would have been very hard to do and less financially rewarding than a reasonably enjoyable game following the Diku model.  UO and Star Wars Galaxies trashed what was great about themselves to become more like Diku/Everquest/WoW.  EVE is probably doing the best at it currently, if you can accept that your character is a ship rather than a person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main reason is that games like that are hard to make .
UO had problems , but they could have been refined into a game unlike any that has yet to exist .
However , that would have been very hard to do and less financially rewarding than a reasonably enjoyable game following the Diku model .
UO and Star Wars Galaxies trashed what was great about themselves to become more like Diku/Everquest/WoW .
EVE is probably doing the best at it currently , if you can accept that your character is a ship rather than a person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main reason is that games like that are hard to make.
UO had problems, but they could have been refined into a game unlike any that has yet to exist.
However, that would have been very hard to do and less financially rewarding than a reasonably enjoyable game following the Diku model.
UO and Star Wars Galaxies trashed what was great about themselves to become more like Diku/Everquest/WoW.
EVE is probably doing the best at it currently, if you can accept that your character is a ship rather than a person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229854</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>WalesAlex</author>
	<datestamp>1266857220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>im sorry maybe i was unclear: they get to keep their servers and their, in my honest opinion, AWESOME way of making games and telling stories, however, with releasing the bits that made all that awesomeness, free creators could make content to give away for free (because the joy of creating is reward itself) back to blizzard and they get to choose what they put in it. Themselves say they wish they had more content to put in and people are standing outside the wall with tons of ideas they'd love to share. Look at the UI again, it was released free and people have been developing it for years eventually leading to products that made it into the game.

What do they gain by holding on to marketshares and stuff, it was the playhouse for the children that made that market possible to begin with??

sorry i seem to have lost my concentration, luckily my government is working on building a camp for people like me</htmltext>
<tokenext>im sorry maybe i was unclear : they get to keep their servers and their , in my honest opinion , AWESOME way of making games and telling stories , however , with releasing the bits that made all that awesomeness , free creators could make content to give away for free ( because the joy of creating is reward itself ) back to blizzard and they get to choose what they put in it .
Themselves say they wish they had more content to put in and people are standing outside the wall with tons of ideas they 'd love to share .
Look at the UI again , it was released free and people have been developing it for years eventually leading to products that made it into the game .
What do they gain by holding on to marketshares and stuff , it was the playhouse for the children that made that market possible to begin with ? ?
sorry i seem to have lost my concentration , luckily my government is working on building a camp for people like me</tokentext>
<sentencetext>im sorry maybe i was unclear: they get to keep their servers and their, in my honest opinion, AWESOME way of making games and telling stories, however, with releasing the bits that made all that awesomeness, free creators could make content to give away for free (because the joy of creating is reward itself) back to blizzard and they get to choose what they put in it.
Themselves say they wish they had more content to put in and people are standing outside the wall with tons of ideas they'd love to share.
Look at the UI again, it was released free and people have been developing it for years eventually leading to products that made it into the game.
What do they gain by holding on to marketshares and stuff, it was the playhouse for the children that made that market possible to begin with??
sorry i seem to have lost my concentration, luckily my government is working on building a camp for people like me</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228360</id>
	<title>unpopular</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1266848040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The simple fact is those gameplay elements that <i>you</i> liked in UO is what ultimately led to it being less popular than WoW.</p><p>Look at WoW - very simple gameplay, no character stats to worry about, just gear to collect.  Automatic group finding for PvP and instances.  It's basically a vaguely MMO-ish version of Diablo 2 at this point.</p><p>EVE Online has some gameplay aspects that require you to think ahead, and folks constantly show up on the forums complaining about them.  Not the folks who actually enjoy and play EVE on a daily basis...  But folks who showed up from WoW and are giving the free trial a spin.  And they're not happy about the fact that they have to plan ahead, be cautious, think about their decisions, etc.  They'd like something more user-friendly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The simple fact is those gameplay elements that you liked in UO is what ultimately led to it being less popular than WoW.Look at WoW - very simple gameplay , no character stats to worry about , just gear to collect .
Automatic group finding for PvP and instances .
It 's basically a vaguely MMO-ish version of Diablo 2 at this point.EVE Online has some gameplay aspects that require you to think ahead , and folks constantly show up on the forums complaining about them .
Not the folks who actually enjoy and play EVE on a daily basis... But folks who showed up from WoW and are giving the free trial a spin .
And they 're not happy about the fact that they have to plan ahead , be cautious , think about their decisions , etc .
They 'd like something more user-friendly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The simple fact is those gameplay elements that you liked in UO is what ultimately led to it being less popular than WoW.Look at WoW - very simple gameplay, no character stats to worry about, just gear to collect.
Automatic group finding for PvP and instances.
It's basically a vaguely MMO-ish version of Diablo 2 at this point.EVE Online has some gameplay aspects that require you to think ahead, and folks constantly show up on the forums complaining about them.
Not the folks who actually enjoy and play EVE on a daily basis...  But folks who showed up from WoW and are giving the free trial a spin.
And they're not happy about the fact that they have to plan ahead, be cautious, think about their decisions, etc.
They'd like something more user-friendly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245006</id>
	<title>I miss Felucca</title>
	<author>Toddimus</author>
	<datestamp>1266943440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the topic is strong enough for a front page story I am sure there is quite enough playerbase who still enjoy the pre-trammel PVP ruleset.

I personally ran a private UO server for years that was very successful pre-trammel rules, and no, not everyone was killers. a Lot of them took pride in their houses and would go out in groups to hunt down the local thief, who was usually walking around town naked.

I miss those days - I purposely lived in Felucca not only for cheap housing but for the risk of running into some red on my way home.  I never liked crybabies.  Once a guy was outside my house AFK so I killed and looted him, for him to whine that his kid was throwing up and he had to leave the computer.  He should have been hidden and not in felucca to begin with.

So I apologized, gave him all this stuff back and then healed him.  He said thank you, you are the nicest guy I met in Felucca, most people would laugh and keep my stuff.

To which I then proceeded to kill him, and loot him all over again.

He then said WTF?!  I then said "So was your kid throwing up again this time, or do you just suck?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>If the topic is strong enough for a front page story I am sure there is quite enough playerbase who still enjoy the pre-trammel PVP ruleset .
I personally ran a private UO server for years that was very successful pre-trammel rules , and no , not everyone was killers .
a Lot of them took pride in their houses and would go out in groups to hunt down the local thief , who was usually walking around town naked .
I miss those days - I purposely lived in Felucca not only for cheap housing but for the risk of running into some red on my way home .
I never liked crybabies .
Once a guy was outside my house AFK so I killed and looted him , for him to whine that his kid was throwing up and he had to leave the computer .
He should have been hidden and not in felucca to begin with .
So I apologized , gave him all this stuff back and then healed him .
He said thank you , you are the nicest guy I met in Felucca , most people would laugh and keep my stuff .
To which I then proceeded to kill him , and loot him all over again .
He then said WTF ? !
I then said " So was your kid throwing up again this time , or do you just suck ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the topic is strong enough for a front page story I am sure there is quite enough playerbase who still enjoy the pre-trammel PVP ruleset.
I personally ran a private UO server for years that was very successful pre-trammel rules, and no, not everyone was killers.
a Lot of them took pride in their houses and would go out in groups to hunt down the local thief, who was usually walking around town naked.
I miss those days - I purposely lived in Felucca not only for cheap housing but for the risk of running into some red on my way home.
I never liked crybabies.
Once a guy was outside my house AFK so I killed and looted him, for him to whine that his kid was throwing up and he had to leave the computer.
He should have been hidden and not in felucca to begin with.
So I apologized, gave him all this stuff back and then healed him.
He said thank you, you are the nicest guy I met in Felucca, most people would laugh and keep my stuff.
To which I then proceeded to kill him, and loot him all over again.
He then said WTF?!
I then said "So was your kid throwing up again this time, or do you just suck?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230144</id>
	<title>Corp Por! EQ killed UO for me...</title>
	<author>Phizzle</author>
	<datestamp>1266858960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The PKing by toons with names like L3ftNutz and R1teNutz, who were using macros, auto heals, auto target, etc, and exploiting (having homes and castles broken into and looted/defiled) was the final straw for me and my guild. When EQ came out we all migrated within weeks. Garriot created an amazing universe, the Internet filled it with cheating sploiting ftards, and the PVP environment forced you to interact with them. As far as UO vs EQ in terms of immersion, I still remember making my first run from Qeynos to Freeport, running through West Karana in the rain and watching a Hill Giant emerge from the fog - I shit you not I got goosebumps when that happened!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The PKing by toons with names like L3ftNutz and R1teNutz , who were using macros , auto heals , auto target , etc , and exploiting ( having homes and castles broken into and looted/defiled ) was the final straw for me and my guild .
When EQ came out we all migrated within weeks .
Garriot created an amazing universe , the Internet filled it with cheating sploiting ftards , and the PVP environment forced you to interact with them .
As far as UO vs EQ in terms of immersion , I still remember making my first run from Qeynos to Freeport , running through West Karana in the rain and watching a Hill Giant emerge from the fog - I shit you not I got goosebumps when that happened !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The PKing by toons with names like L3ftNutz and R1teNutz, who were using macros, auto heals, auto target, etc, and exploiting (having homes and castles broken into and looted/defiled) was the final straw for me and my guild.
When EQ came out we all migrated within weeks.
Garriot created an amazing universe, the Internet filled it with cheating sploiting ftards, and the PVP environment forced you to interact with them.
As far as UO vs EQ in terms of immersion, I still remember making my first run from Qeynos to Freeport, running through West Karana in the rain and watching a Hill Giant emerge from the fog - I shit you not I got goosebumps when that happened!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230052</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266858480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played and miss UO pre-trammel and I didn't go around PKing people.  But I DO miss the fear.  You had to be careful when you left your house or went into a dungeon.  The world was dangerous and you stood to lose quite a bit when you died, especially if you had some sweet gear (which was actually rare).  And when you or your buddy got PKed in a dungeon, you rounded up a posse and went for revenge.  Most of the time they just recalled away, but sometimes you got a really cool fight, where dying mattered.  Modern MMO's don't have any fear.  Oh no! Not a 5 minute walk from the graveyard!  And having a house in UO was a luxury.  There wasn't an empty house plot in the whole world.  Whenever you opened the door you were vulnerable, because people would do anything for a chance at getting in to loot your stuff.  Maybe casual players found all of that annoying or off putting, but the really hardcore players lived for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played and miss UO pre-trammel and I did n't go around PKing people .
But I DO miss the fear .
You had to be careful when you left your house or went into a dungeon .
The world was dangerous and you stood to lose quite a bit when you died , especially if you had some sweet gear ( which was actually rare ) .
And when you or your buddy got PKed in a dungeon , you rounded up a posse and went for revenge .
Most of the time they just recalled away , but sometimes you got a really cool fight , where dying mattered .
Modern MMO 's do n't have any fear .
Oh no !
Not a 5 minute walk from the graveyard !
And having a house in UO was a luxury .
There was n't an empty house plot in the whole world .
Whenever you opened the door you were vulnerable , because people would do anything for a chance at getting in to loot your stuff .
Maybe casual players found all of that annoying or off putting , but the really hardcore players lived for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played and miss UO pre-trammel and I didn't go around PKing people.
But I DO miss the fear.
You had to be careful when you left your house or went into a dungeon.
The world was dangerous and you stood to lose quite a bit when you died, especially if you had some sweet gear (which was actually rare).
And when you or your buddy got PKed in a dungeon, you rounded up a posse and went for revenge.
Most of the time they just recalled away, but sometimes you got a really cool fight, where dying mattered.
Modern MMO's don't have any fear.
Oh no!
Not a 5 minute walk from the graveyard!
And having a house in UO was a luxury.
There wasn't an empty house plot in the whole world.
Whenever you opened the door you were vulnerable, because people would do anything for a chance at getting in to loot your stuff.
Maybe casual players found all of that annoying or off putting, but the really hardcore players lived for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230748</id>
	<title>Early MMO - still learning</title>
	<author>Avatar8</author>
	<datestamp>1266861240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>UO was a generation of MMOs that was still learning how to do a MMO properly. WoW is so successful because Blizzard got the formula 99\% correct and MMORPG became a household name for 12 million people.<p>
I played UO from retail release in September 1997 until WoW came out in 2004. I was a long-time Ultima series player and had high hopes for UO. It greatly disappointed on that point. The first few months were pure frustration due to bugs, stealing and PKs. Sheer determination and attraction to the world of Britannia kept me playing. I am certain these issues and 'features' of the game steered others away.</p><p>
I tried to get my wife and friends interested in it multiple times over the years, but each time PKs and the sheer tediousness of repetitive tasks to increase skills left a bad impression. I kept playing because there was nothing else like it. EQ came out, but had such horrendous artwork (trying to be realistic with too low graphics/technology) I avoided it. I beta tested and tried many other MMOs, but they were all still learning, too:  poor interfaces, weak mechanics, no story, pure PvP.</p><p>
UO was a major stepping stone for MMORPGs. While the open-ended skill system is a good method for skill based systems, the PvP system, or lack thereof in the first years, was a good example of how NOT to design a game.</p><p>
Eye candy, easy interface, easy to learn, tons of information, low system requirements, appeal to casual, hard-core, PvP players all around... WoW learned all it could from its predecessors and put it all together correctly. There is a reason there are not games similar to UO; people learned well from its mistakes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UO was a generation of MMOs that was still learning how to do a MMO properly .
WoW is so successful because Blizzard got the formula 99 \ % correct and MMORPG became a household name for 12 million people .
I played UO from retail release in September 1997 until WoW came out in 2004 .
I was a long-time Ultima series player and had high hopes for UO .
It greatly disappointed on that point .
The first few months were pure frustration due to bugs , stealing and PKs .
Sheer determination and attraction to the world of Britannia kept me playing .
I am certain these issues and 'features ' of the game steered others away .
I tried to get my wife and friends interested in it multiple times over the years , but each time PKs and the sheer tediousness of repetitive tasks to increase skills left a bad impression .
I kept playing because there was nothing else like it .
EQ came out , but had such horrendous artwork ( trying to be realistic with too low graphics/technology ) I avoided it .
I beta tested and tried many other MMOs , but they were all still learning , too : poor interfaces , weak mechanics , no story , pure PvP .
UO was a major stepping stone for MMORPGs .
While the open-ended skill system is a good method for skill based systems , the PvP system , or lack thereof in the first years , was a good example of how NOT to design a game .
Eye candy , easy interface , easy to learn , tons of information , low system requirements , appeal to casual , hard-core , PvP players all around... WoW learned all it could from its predecessors and put it all together correctly .
There is a reason there are not games similar to UO ; people learned well from its mistakes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UO was a generation of MMOs that was still learning how to do a MMO properly.
WoW is so successful because Blizzard got the formula 99\% correct and MMORPG became a household name for 12 million people.
I played UO from retail release in September 1997 until WoW came out in 2004.
I was a long-time Ultima series player and had high hopes for UO.
It greatly disappointed on that point.
The first few months were pure frustration due to bugs, stealing and PKs.
Sheer determination and attraction to the world of Britannia kept me playing.
I am certain these issues and 'features' of the game steered others away.
I tried to get my wife and friends interested in it multiple times over the years, but each time PKs and the sheer tediousness of repetitive tasks to increase skills left a bad impression.
I kept playing because there was nothing else like it.
EQ came out, but had such horrendous artwork (trying to be realistic with too low graphics/technology) I avoided it.
I beta tested and tried many other MMOs, but they were all still learning, too:  poor interfaces, weak mechanics, no story, pure PvP.
UO was a major stepping stone for MMORPGs.
While the open-ended skill system is a good method for skill based systems, the PvP system, or lack thereof in the first years, was a good example of how NOT to design a game.
Eye candy, easy interface, easy to learn, tons of information, low system requirements, appeal to casual, hard-core, PvP players all around... WoW learned all it could from its predecessors and put it all together correctly.
There is a reason there are not games similar to UO; people learned well from its mistakes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229482</id>
	<title>It's called "EVE Online"</title>
	<author>nenya</author>
	<datestamp>1266855480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously. You can do as much or as little PvP as you want. But even in high security space (hi-sec) you can still get your pasty ass ganked if you aren't careful. <a href="http://hulkageddon.wordpress.com/" title="wordpress.com">Hulkageddon</a> [wordpress.com] is likely to occur with some regularity, and sticking your nose in a null-sec and even some lo-sec systems is just asking to get yourself jumped.

Granted, the community here is a lot smaller--probably around 150,000 active players as opposed to the millions sported by WoW--but they're pretty hardcore about the whole thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
You can do as much or as little PvP as you want .
But even in high security space ( hi-sec ) you can still get your pasty ass ganked if you are n't careful .
Hulkageddon [ wordpress.com ] is likely to occur with some regularity , and sticking your nose in a null-sec and even some lo-sec systems is just asking to get yourself jumped .
Granted , the community here is a lot smaller--probably around 150,000 active players as opposed to the millions sported by WoW--but they 're pretty hardcore about the whole thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
You can do as much or as little PvP as you want.
But even in high security space (hi-sec) you can still get your pasty ass ganked if you aren't careful.
Hulkageddon [wordpress.com] is likely to occur with some regularity, and sticking your nose in a null-sec and even some lo-sec systems is just asking to get yourself jumped.
Granted, the community here is a lot smaller--probably around 150,000 active players as opposed to the millions sported by WoW--but they're pretty hardcore about the whole thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228094</id>
	<title>MMOs are now made for wimps</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266845280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now that MMOs have gone mainstream, they're games for kiddies who'll go crying to mommy if they can't play safely. So, the style of many great MMOs from the past will never come back again. The possibility of killing and looting other people, posessing world assets(houses or whatever), coordinating with others in gangs (yeah, guilds but they were more like gangs), all that made the games great. You didn't need single-player stuff like quests, because the games itself were so open that just the interactions with other guilds and so on were the real quests. you'd want a certain drop from  a certain creature to brew a certain potion and you'd go hunt for it, you'd find some guy causing you trouble, your guilds would clash and so on. That was the real essence and pleasure of playing a mmorpg. Now they're massive "single-player" games, as the players behave as intelligently as non-playing cvharecters anyway... WoW was great in the beginning (i played the USA beta back then and didn't play the game to avoid getting hooked to it), but it has progressively gone to hell. Player interaction is what makes a mmo great and the greatest player interaction of all is being able to kill, loot and play dirty, that's the fun of the game.</p><p>The game i've probably liked, enjoyed and played most is Helbreath, a Korean mmorpg. Addictive to the extreme and incredibly fun. If you're missing what i mentioned earlier in WoW or whatever current game you play, look for east asian games, they're the most hardcore players. I've also played other asian games like Mu online but Helbreath was at the same time simple (in the world setting) and complex (in that the world setting was a perfect framework for players to interact). There were 2 enemy cities, you could kill people from the other city without penalties. The "hunting" areas were common and there were raid days in the weekends when you could enter the other city and not be teleported back for an hour (normally it would take minutes). Weh you died you dropped just one random item, if you had expensive stuff you could buy zemstones that would get dropped always in place of any item (zems were drops from creatures, so they were somewhat expensive too).</p><p>While helbreath was isometric (almost, actually 120 deg perspective, better than pure isometric), everything was pre-rendered 3D which gave it an outstanding appearance. Another game (now 3D) i've enjoyed a lot was Lineage 2. It had many of the characteristics of helbreath (guilds, controlling guild houses, castles, sieges). The eye-candy doesn't matter so much as the gameplay experience.</p><p>So, to sum up, if you're a hardcore gamer and know the joy of taking risks, sometimes winning, sometimes losing, and level up for a reason rather than just for the sake of it, look for small east-asian game companies. Their programmers sometimes suck but the games are sooo great and addictive...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that MMOs have gone mainstream , they 're games for kiddies who 'll go crying to mommy if they ca n't play safely .
So , the style of many great MMOs from the past will never come back again .
The possibility of killing and looting other people , posessing world assets ( houses or whatever ) , coordinating with others in gangs ( yeah , guilds but they were more like gangs ) , all that made the games great .
You did n't need single-player stuff like quests , because the games itself were so open that just the interactions with other guilds and so on were the real quests .
you 'd want a certain drop from a certain creature to brew a certain potion and you 'd go hunt for it , you 'd find some guy causing you trouble , your guilds would clash and so on .
That was the real essence and pleasure of playing a mmorpg .
Now they 're massive " single-player " games , as the players behave as intelligently as non-playing cvharecters anyway... WoW was great in the beginning ( i played the USA beta back then and did n't play the game to avoid getting hooked to it ) , but it has progressively gone to hell .
Player interaction is what makes a mmo great and the greatest player interaction of all is being able to kill , loot and play dirty , that 's the fun of the game.The game i 've probably liked , enjoyed and played most is Helbreath , a Korean mmorpg .
Addictive to the extreme and incredibly fun .
If you 're missing what i mentioned earlier in WoW or whatever current game you play , look for east asian games , they 're the most hardcore players .
I 've also played other asian games like Mu online but Helbreath was at the same time simple ( in the world setting ) and complex ( in that the world setting was a perfect framework for players to interact ) .
There were 2 enemy cities , you could kill people from the other city without penalties .
The " hunting " areas were common and there were raid days in the weekends when you could enter the other city and not be teleported back for an hour ( normally it would take minutes ) .
Weh you died you dropped just one random item , if you had expensive stuff you could buy zemstones that would get dropped always in place of any item ( zems were drops from creatures , so they were somewhat expensive too ) .While helbreath was isometric ( almost , actually 120 deg perspective , better than pure isometric ) , everything was pre-rendered 3D which gave it an outstanding appearance .
Another game ( now 3D ) i 've enjoyed a lot was Lineage 2 .
It had many of the characteristics of helbreath ( guilds , controlling guild houses , castles , sieges ) .
The eye-candy does n't matter so much as the gameplay experience.So , to sum up , if you 're a hardcore gamer and know the joy of taking risks , sometimes winning , sometimes losing , and level up for a reason rather than just for the sake of it , look for small east-asian game companies .
Their programmers sometimes suck but the games are sooo great and addictive.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that MMOs have gone mainstream, they're games for kiddies who'll go crying to mommy if they can't play safely.
So, the style of many great MMOs from the past will never come back again.
The possibility of killing and looting other people, posessing world assets(houses or whatever), coordinating with others in gangs (yeah, guilds but they were more like gangs), all that made the games great.
You didn't need single-player stuff like quests, because the games itself were so open that just the interactions with other guilds and so on were the real quests.
you'd want a certain drop from  a certain creature to brew a certain potion and you'd go hunt for it, you'd find some guy causing you trouble, your guilds would clash and so on.
That was the real essence and pleasure of playing a mmorpg.
Now they're massive "single-player" games, as the players behave as intelligently as non-playing cvharecters anyway... WoW was great in the beginning (i played the USA beta back then and didn't play the game to avoid getting hooked to it), but it has progressively gone to hell.
Player interaction is what makes a mmo great and the greatest player interaction of all is being able to kill, loot and play dirty, that's the fun of the game.The game i've probably liked, enjoyed and played most is Helbreath, a Korean mmorpg.
Addictive to the extreme and incredibly fun.
If you're missing what i mentioned earlier in WoW or whatever current game you play, look for east asian games, they're the most hardcore players.
I've also played other asian games like Mu online but Helbreath was at the same time simple (in the world setting) and complex (in that the world setting was a perfect framework for players to interact).
There were 2 enemy cities, you could kill people from the other city without penalties.
The "hunting" areas were common and there were raid days in the weekends when you could enter the other city and not be teleported back for an hour (normally it would take minutes).
Weh you died you dropped just one random item, if you had expensive stuff you could buy zemstones that would get dropped always in place of any item (zems were drops from creatures, so they were somewhat expensive too).While helbreath was isometric (almost, actually 120 deg perspective, better than pure isometric), everything was pre-rendered 3D which gave it an outstanding appearance.
Another game (now 3D) i've enjoyed a lot was Lineage 2.
It had many of the characteristics of helbreath (guilds, controlling guild houses, castles, sieges).
The eye-candy doesn't matter so much as the gameplay experience.So, to sum up, if you're a hardcore gamer and know the joy of taking risks, sometimes winning, sometimes losing, and level up for a reason rather than just for the sake of it, look for small east-asian game companies.
Their programmers sometimes suck but the games are sooo great and addictive...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228370</id>
	<title>Re:EvE Online?</title>
	<author>Tromad</author>
	<datestamp>1266848040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I tried the 30 day trial. Other than maybe EQ it was probably the buggiest MMO I've played; I had to file more bug reports in 30 days than I have in all the MMORPGs I've played combined (I was mission running, which is only slightly more horrible than mining, an activity even more boring than MMO fishing). If you invest hundreds of hours and join huge corps running PVP you can probably have a great time, but the journey there passed my tolerance of boredom. The one great thing about EVE though is that it weeds out all the morons, there is a lot to figure out in the beginning and if you can't read up on things you won't last.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried the 30 day trial .
Other than maybe EQ it was probably the buggiest MMO I 've played ; I had to file more bug reports in 30 days than I have in all the MMORPGs I 've played combined ( I was mission running , which is only slightly more horrible than mining , an activity even more boring than MMO fishing ) .
If you invest hundreds of hours and join huge corps running PVP you can probably have a great time , but the journey there passed my tolerance of boredom .
The one great thing about EVE though is that it weeds out all the morons , there is a lot to figure out in the beginning and if you ca n't read up on things you wo n't last .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried the 30 day trial.
Other than maybe EQ it was probably the buggiest MMO I've played; I had to file more bug reports in 30 days than I have in all the MMORPGs I've played combined (I was mission running, which is only slightly more horrible than mining, an activity even more boring than MMO fishing).
If you invest hundreds of hours and join huge corps running PVP you can probably have a great time, but the journey there passed my tolerance of boredom.
The one great thing about EVE though is that it weeds out all the morons, there is a lot to figure out in the beginning and if you can't read up on things you won't last.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31263980</id>
	<title>Equillibrium</title>
	<author>Crasty</author>
	<datestamp>1265102760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This whole discussion, topic, and argument remind me of Equillibrium.  UO was fantastic because it offered (aside from bugs) a read world experience in a fantasy world.  There were very high highs, and very low lows.  WoW has eliminated that.  You win in BG, you get points, you lose in BG, you get less points.   In UO, you had times that you were a champion that defeated the evil players, everyone standing around cheering  because you were still alive to do so, AND you had their gear in your bags.  Then you got the hell out of there before they massed a larger group and returned.  Because otherwise you met with those low times, standing around dead, lamenting that you would never get back any of the things you watched the ravenous PK's pull off of your body.   <p>

So yeah, I loved UO.  Because I got real emotion from playing it.  WoW is so stripped of highs and lows, that it really doesn't matter..  like in Equillibrium.  You can't take away the extreme sadness without removing the potential for great joy.  And stomping a pk or two that made your life miserable early on was truly rewarding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole discussion , topic , and argument remind me of Equillibrium .
UO was fantastic because it offered ( aside from bugs ) a read world experience in a fantasy world .
There were very high highs , and very low lows .
WoW has eliminated that .
You win in BG , you get points , you lose in BG , you get less points .
In UO , you had times that you were a champion that defeated the evil players , everyone standing around cheering because you were still alive to do so , AND you had their gear in your bags .
Then you got the hell out of there before they massed a larger group and returned .
Because otherwise you met with those low times , standing around dead , lamenting that you would never get back any of the things you watched the ravenous PK 's pull off of your body .
So yeah , I loved UO .
Because I got real emotion from playing it .
WoW is so stripped of highs and lows , that it really does n't matter.. like in Equillibrium .
You ca n't take away the extreme sadness without removing the potential for great joy .
And stomping a pk or two that made your life miserable early on was truly rewarding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole discussion, topic, and argument remind me of Equillibrium.
UO was fantastic because it offered (aside from bugs) a read world experience in a fantasy world.
There were very high highs, and very low lows.
WoW has eliminated that.
You win in BG, you get points, you lose in BG, you get less points.
In UO, you had times that you were a champion that defeated the evil players, everyone standing around cheering  because you were still alive to do so, AND you had their gear in your bags.
Then you got the hell out of there before they massed a larger group and returned.
Because otherwise you met with those low times, standing around dead, lamenting that you would never get back any of the things you watched the ravenous PK's pull off of your body.
So yeah, I loved UO.
Because I got real emotion from playing it.
WoW is so stripped of highs and lows, that it really doesn't matter..  like in Equillibrium.
You can't take away the extreme sadness without removing the potential for great joy.
And stomping a pk or two that made your life miserable early on was truly rewarding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31240478</id>
	<title>A different way of playing</title>
	<author>Redbluefire</author>
	<datestamp>1266857520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I played UO, I was a rare collector.

Yep, a rare collector.  My character was built for money making and self defense.  I'd use my money to hire crews of warriors to go on live quests with me (or go myself, if I thought I could handle it) simply to get the rarest items I could. The nice thing about UO is that there were some completely unique items, and yet they were abundant enough that they weren't out of my reach.  Sure there were perils, and sometimes I lost items worth many hundreds of USD to PKs, or even monsters, though I'd never have sold them anyways, but I still carried on.

In my final days of UO I owned a castle with every rare I owned locked down in it.  The castle itself was open to the public as a museum.

That was my way of playing, sure it might seem lame, but no other game allowed me to express myself and play in my own unique way as much as UO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I played UO , I was a rare collector .
Yep , a rare collector .
My character was built for money making and self defense .
I 'd use my money to hire crews of warriors to go on live quests with me ( or go myself , if I thought I could handle it ) simply to get the rarest items I could .
The nice thing about UO is that there were some completely unique items , and yet they were abundant enough that they were n't out of my reach .
Sure there were perils , and sometimes I lost items worth many hundreds of USD to PKs , or even monsters , though I 'd never have sold them anyways , but I still carried on .
In my final days of UO I owned a castle with every rare I owned locked down in it .
The castle itself was open to the public as a museum .
That was my way of playing , sure it might seem lame , but no other game allowed me to express myself and play in my own unique way as much as UO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I played UO, I was a rare collector.
Yep, a rare collector.
My character was built for money making and self defense.
I'd use my money to hire crews of warriors to go on live quests with me (or go myself, if I thought I could handle it) simply to get the rarest items I could.
The nice thing about UO is that there were some completely unique items, and yet they were abundant enough that they weren't out of my reach.
Sure there were perils, and sometimes I lost items worth many hundreds of USD to PKs, or even monsters, though I'd never have sold them anyways, but I still carried on.
In my final days of UO I owned a castle with every rare I owned locked down in it.
The castle itself was open to the public as a museum.
That was my way of playing, sure it might seem lame, but no other game allowed me to express myself and play in my own unique way as much as UO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234200</id>
	<title>UO Still Has Unique Systems Never Copied</title>
	<author>BondGamer</author>
	<datestamp>1266871740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the biggest nostalgia factors of UO is housing. While other games have implemented instance housing or a rare few incorporated it into the main world (Star Wars Galaxies), no game has come close to copying what UO offered. UO offered not only function (storage of items) but the ability to decorate your house anyway you like. There is literally no limit to how you can design your house to look. And that was before custom house designs were introduced. That is all some people played UO for, it was the ultimate experiance for casual gamers.

UO has huge potential still and always will. Unfortunately the game is owned by EA and they constantly fire people, even when the game is seeing improvement in subscriber base.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the biggest nostalgia factors of UO is housing .
While other games have implemented instance housing or a rare few incorporated it into the main world ( Star Wars Galaxies ) , no game has come close to copying what UO offered .
UO offered not only function ( storage of items ) but the ability to decorate your house anyway you like .
There is literally no limit to how you can design your house to look .
And that was before custom house designs were introduced .
That is all some people played UO for , it was the ultimate experiance for casual gamers .
UO has huge potential still and always will .
Unfortunately the game is owned by EA and they constantly fire people , even when the game is seeing improvement in subscriber base .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the biggest nostalgia factors of UO is housing.
While other games have implemented instance housing or a rare few incorporated it into the main world (Star Wars Galaxies), no game has come close to copying what UO offered.
UO offered not only function (storage of items) but the ability to decorate your house anyway you like.
There is literally no limit to how you can design your house to look.
And that was before custom house designs were introduced.
That is all some people played UO for, it was the ultimate experiance for casual gamers.
UO has huge potential still and always will.
Unfortunately the game is owned by EA and they constantly fire people, even when the game is seeing improvement in subscriber base.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234360</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1266872160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are some MMOs with similar mechanics. Cabal Online (some random F2P MMORPG) has a system where people can simply turn off PvP but you can override it by shift-clicking them to target them anyway. Problem: If you attack someone without having successfully invited them to PvP first you accumulate penalties and are also free for anyone to attack.<br>
<br>
I didn't play long enough to see whether that system really works but it's there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some MMOs with similar mechanics .
Cabal Online ( some random F2P MMORPG ) has a system where people can simply turn off PvP but you can override it by shift-clicking them to target them anyway .
Problem : If you attack someone without having successfully invited them to PvP first you accumulate penalties and are also free for anyone to attack .
I did n't play long enough to see whether that system really works but it 's there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some MMOs with similar mechanics.
Cabal Online (some random F2P MMORPG) has a system where people can simply turn off PvP but you can override it by shift-clicking them to target them anyway.
Problem: If you attack someone without having successfully invited them to PvP first you accumulate penalties and are also free for anyone to attack.
I didn't play long enough to see whether that system really works but it's there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31260142</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a killer-socializer type of player myself in Bartle's terms, and a former UO player, I never understood why mmo's cannot be designed around the people, including myself, who want to be the wolves for the others to hunt down. Let the wolves drive the storyline of the game. Game immersion for me is killing skilled opponents as a member of a skilled tactical unit. I don't particularly mind dying, and don't mind being limited to relatively weak characters, since I dont really attach to avatars, and I don't like the whole exploring, leveling, and hoarding thing that dominates fantasy mmo's. Wouldn't it be great if evil overlord's minions would be challenging to kill because they are smart?</p><p>Since so many people bring up the wolves and sheep metaphor:</p><p>The ideal embodied in [chivalry] offers the only possible escape from a world divided between wolves who do not understand, and sheep who cannot defend, the things which make life desirable.<br>~C.S. Lewis, Present Concerns, "The Necessity of Chivalry" (in Time and Tide, Aug. 1940)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a killer-socializer type of player myself in Bartle 's terms , and a former UO player , I never understood why mmo 's can not be designed around the people , including myself , who want to be the wolves for the others to hunt down .
Let the wolves drive the storyline of the game .
Game immersion for me is killing skilled opponents as a member of a skilled tactical unit .
I do n't particularly mind dying , and do n't mind being limited to relatively weak characters , since I dont really attach to avatars , and I do n't like the whole exploring , leveling , and hoarding thing that dominates fantasy mmo 's .
Would n't it be great if evil overlord 's minions would be challenging to kill because they are smart ? Since so many people bring up the wolves and sheep metaphor : The ideal embodied in [ chivalry ] offers the only possible escape from a world divided between wolves who do not understand , and sheep who can not defend , the things which make life desirable. ~ C.S .
Lewis , Present Concerns , " The Necessity of Chivalry " ( in Time and Tide , Aug. 1940 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a killer-socializer type of player myself in Bartle's terms, and a former UO player, I never understood why mmo's cannot be designed around the people, including myself, who want to be the wolves for the others to hunt down.
Let the wolves drive the storyline of the game.
Game immersion for me is killing skilled opponents as a member of a skilled tactical unit.
I don't particularly mind dying, and don't mind being limited to relatively weak characters, since I dont really attach to avatars, and I don't like the whole exploring, leveling, and hoarding thing that dominates fantasy mmo's.
Wouldn't it be great if evil overlord's minions would be challenging to kill because they are smart?Since so many people bring up the wolves and sheep metaphor:The ideal embodied in [chivalry] offers the only possible escape from a world divided between wolves who do not understand, and sheep who cannot defend, the things which make life desirable.~C.S.
Lewis, Present Concerns, "The Necessity of Chivalry" (in Time and Tide, Aug. 1940)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227432</id>
	<title>Ultima Online; The Second Age. The way it was.</title>
	<author>AntiLaVista</author>
	<datestamp>1266837480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You want this.  <a href="http://uosecondage.com/" title="uosecondage.com" rel="nofollow">http://uosecondage.com/</a> [uosecondage.com]

"Second Age is a free Ultima Online Shard that can be accessed by anyone with UO client software.
Second Age is the most accurate emulation of the UO: T2A era online today.
There are no giveaways. On UO Second Age you will build your character(s) from the ground up."

Been running for about 2 years now, good user base and well moderated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You want this .
http : //uosecondage.com/ [ uosecondage.com ] " Second Age is a free Ultima Online Shard that can be accessed by anyone with UO client software .
Second Age is the most accurate emulation of the UO : T2A era online today .
There are no giveaways .
On UO Second Age you will build your character ( s ) from the ground up .
" Been running for about 2 years now , good user base and well moderated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want this.
http://uosecondage.com/ [uosecondage.com]

"Second Age is a free Ultima Online Shard that can be accessed by anyone with UO client software.
Second Age is the most accurate emulation of the UO: T2A era online today.
There are no giveaways.
On UO Second Age you will build your character(s) from the ground up.
"

Been running for about 2 years now, good user base and well moderated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244208</id>
	<title>Re:I Guess Now Eve is Considered Hardcore</title>
	<author>Wildclaw</author>
	<datestamp>1266939120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I Guess Now</p></div><p>Now????? What the fuck have you been smoking. Eve has always been a super hardcore game. Huge losses with failure. Huge amounts of grinding to get anywhere. Free PvP in a huge portion of the world, which also happens to be the most important portion. A "leveling" system that heavily favors those who have played the longest. The drama that comes with all of that. And on top of that, developers that directly interfere in the game.</p><p>I would never recommend Eve as a game to anyone because of that. Eve is basically your modern day hardcore MUD. Suitable only to a small minority of people. But they have done well, building on that small niche.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I Guess NowNow ? ? ? ? ?
What the fuck have you been smoking .
Eve has always been a super hardcore game .
Huge losses with failure .
Huge amounts of grinding to get anywhere .
Free PvP in a huge portion of the world , which also happens to be the most important portion .
A " leveling " system that heavily favors those who have played the longest .
The drama that comes with all of that .
And on top of that , developers that directly interfere in the game.I would never recommend Eve as a game to anyone because of that .
Eve is basically your modern day hardcore MUD .
Suitable only to a small minority of people .
But they have done well , building on that small niche .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Guess NowNow?????
What the fuck have you been smoking.
Eve has always been a super hardcore game.
Huge losses with failure.
Huge amounts of grinding to get anywhere.
Free PvP in a huge portion of the world, which also happens to be the most important portion.
A "leveling" system that heavily favors those who have played the longest.
The drama that comes with all of that.
And on top of that, developers that directly interfere in the game.I would never recommend Eve as a game to anyone because of that.
Eve is basically your modern day hardcore MUD.
Suitable only to a small minority of people.
But they have done well, building on that small niche.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261562</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Hythlodaeus</author>
	<datestamp>1265135760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shadowbane failed because they couldn't keep the server up for more than 4 hours at a time for the first 3 months after release, and couldn't keep the server up during a city siege within a year after release.  Eventually they hemorrhaged enough players that the servers could handle it, by which time critical mass for any kind of commercial success was long gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shadowbane failed because they could n't keep the server up for more than 4 hours at a time for the first 3 months after release , and could n't keep the server up during a city siege within a year after release .
Eventually they hemorrhaged enough players that the servers could handle it , by which time critical mass for any kind of commercial success was long gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shadowbane failed because they couldn't keep the server up for more than 4 hours at a time for the first 3 months after release, and couldn't keep the server up during a city siege within a year after release.
Eventually they hemorrhaged enough players that the servers could handle it, by which time critical mass for any kind of commercial success was long gone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228596</id>
	<title>I'm one of those Pre-Trammel UO Lovers</title>
	<author>begleysm</author>
	<datestamp>1266849660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am one of those guys that waxes poetic about the good ol' days when of pre-Trammel UO.  When MMO players were men! (j/k).  I think one thing that people have been missing when talking about the viability of losing your gear and getting griefed is that UO had a couple mechanisms to deal with that.  I thought they worked fairly well.

1.) Nothing you owned was worth that much.  If you were a melee fighter (say, a dexer) you'd have some GM ringmail, some GM chainmail, a GM kyrss, and a handful of potions.  If you lost all your gear, so what, it was only a drop in the bucket and you probably had 5 more sets in the bank.  UO made losing all your equipment ok because none of it was "Ringo's Flaming Axe of Death and Retribution" that took 97 hours to get.  There were good magic items (vanquisher weapons) but they were rare, and you could lose them.  This made them all the more revered and as such, they were only used in special situations and by those who were confident in their abilities.

2.) PKs were flagged red.  If you wanted to PK people heavily you could, but you'd go red, everyone would know it, and you couldn't go into town.  This was a big enough deal that the average person wouldn't go around slaughtering newbies for fun, but those who wanted to be PKs could.  In my opinion, this allowed for an excellent balance of "good guys" and "bad guys."

3.) There was no level system or con system.  Since you couldn't look at a person and see they were "10 levels above you" or they were "grey" and you couldnt tell from their gear because the biggest newb in the game and the best player in the game used approximately the same equipment you had to be weary of people.  It meant you couldn't go around griefing people without a high percentage chance that you would get killed yourself.  I think this also added to the fun of the game because there was a sense of the unknown when you left the confines of the town.  It was wise to grab a couple friends and take advantage of "safety in numbers."

In conclusion, I think the newer MMO's can't support the (imo great) rule set of UO because they focus too much on levels, and loot.  UO focused on interaction.  There were no classes,  no discrete levels, and the equipment was more "realistic."

Sean</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am one of those guys that waxes poetic about the good ol ' days when of pre-Trammel UO .
When MMO players were men !
( j/k ) . I think one thing that people have been missing when talking about the viability of losing your gear and getting griefed is that UO had a couple mechanisms to deal with that .
I thought they worked fairly well .
1. ) Nothing you owned was worth that much .
If you were a melee fighter ( say , a dexer ) you 'd have some GM ringmail , some GM chainmail , a GM kyrss , and a handful of potions .
If you lost all your gear , so what , it was only a drop in the bucket and you probably had 5 more sets in the bank .
UO made losing all your equipment ok because none of it was " Ringo 's Flaming Axe of Death and Retribution " that took 97 hours to get .
There were good magic items ( vanquisher weapons ) but they were rare , and you could lose them .
This made them all the more revered and as such , they were only used in special situations and by those who were confident in their abilities .
2. ) PKs were flagged red .
If you wanted to PK people heavily you could , but you 'd go red , everyone would know it , and you could n't go into town .
This was a big enough deal that the average person would n't go around slaughtering newbies for fun , but those who wanted to be PKs could .
In my opinion , this allowed for an excellent balance of " good guys " and " bad guys .
" 3 .
) There was no level system or con system .
Since you could n't look at a person and see they were " 10 levels above you " or they were " grey " and you couldnt tell from their gear because the biggest newb in the game and the best player in the game used approximately the same equipment you had to be weary of people .
It meant you could n't go around griefing people without a high percentage chance that you would get killed yourself .
I think this also added to the fun of the game because there was a sense of the unknown when you left the confines of the town .
It was wise to grab a couple friends and take advantage of " safety in numbers .
" In conclusion , I think the newer MMO 's ca n't support the ( imo great ) rule set of UO because they focus too much on levels , and loot .
UO focused on interaction .
There were no classes , no discrete levels , and the equipment was more " realistic .
" Sean</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am one of those guys that waxes poetic about the good ol' days when of pre-Trammel UO.
When MMO players were men!
(j/k).  I think one thing that people have been missing when talking about the viability of losing your gear and getting griefed is that UO had a couple mechanisms to deal with that.
I thought they worked fairly well.
1.) Nothing you owned was worth that much.
If you were a melee fighter (say, a dexer) you'd have some GM ringmail, some GM chainmail, a GM kyrss, and a handful of potions.
If you lost all your gear, so what, it was only a drop in the bucket and you probably had 5 more sets in the bank.
UO made losing all your equipment ok because none of it was "Ringo's Flaming Axe of Death and Retribution" that took 97 hours to get.
There were good magic items (vanquisher weapons) but they were rare, and you could lose them.
This made them all the more revered and as such, they were only used in special situations and by those who were confident in their abilities.
2.) PKs were flagged red.
If you wanted to PK people heavily you could, but you'd go red, everyone would know it, and you couldn't go into town.
This was a big enough deal that the average person wouldn't go around slaughtering newbies for fun, but those who wanted to be PKs could.
In my opinion, this allowed for an excellent balance of "good guys" and "bad guys.
"

3.
) There was no level system or con system.
Since you couldn't look at a person and see they were "10 levels above you" or they were "grey" and you couldnt tell from their gear because the biggest newb in the game and the best player in the game used approximately the same equipment you had to be weary of people.
It meant you couldn't go around griefing people without a high percentage chance that you would get killed yourself.
I think this also added to the fun of the game because there was a sense of the unknown when you left the confines of the town.
It was wise to grab a couple friends and take advantage of "safety in numbers.
"

In conclusion, I think the newer MMO's can't support the (imo great) rule set of UO because they focus too much on levels, and loot.
UO focused on interaction.
There were no classes,  no discrete levels, and the equipment was more "realistic.
"

Sean</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228276</id>
	<title>If you like old school MMORGPs</title>
	<author>sproketboy</author>
	<datestamp>1266847380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then have a look at <a href="http://www.forgottenworld.com/" title="forgottenworld.com" rel="nofollow">forgotten world. </a> [forgottenworld.com] A remake of the old gold box styled Never Winter Nights game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then have a look at forgotten world .
[ forgottenworld.com ] A remake of the old gold box styled Never Winter Nights game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then have a look at forgotten world.
[forgottenworld.com] A remake of the old gold box styled Never Winter Nights game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227680</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1266840600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Realistically why would Blizzard make it easier for people to build a competitor?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Realistically why would Blizzard make it easier for people to build a competitor ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Realistically why would Blizzard make it easier for people to build a competitor?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230930</id>
	<title>Get out of people's minds</title>
	<author>Jaeph</author>
	<datestamp>1266861720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, you have no idea what's going on inside someone else's brain.  I wish I had the points to mark you a "troll", because that's about the best we can say when you make suppositions about someone's motives from so little information.</p><p>-Jeff</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , you have no idea what 's going on inside someone else 's brain .
I wish I had the points to mark you a " troll " , because that 's about the best we can say when you make suppositions about someone 's motives from so little information.-Jeff</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, you have no idea what's going on inside someone else's brain.
I wish I had the points to mark you a "troll", because that's about the best we can say when you make suppositions about someone's motives from so little information.-Jeff</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229388</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Skuld-Chan</author>
	<datestamp>1266854760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity</p></div></blockquote><p>He could always play eve online<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunityHe could always play eve online ; ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunityHe could always play eve online ;).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228844</id>
	<title>Re:Classic UO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266851460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really classic UO when you can buy 1 million gold coins for $25 in their official online shop.. I don't know about this shard but such systems usually leads to inflation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really classic UO when you can buy 1 million gold coins for $ 25 in their official online shop.. I do n't know about this shard but such systems usually leads to inflation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really classic UO when you can buy 1 million gold coins for $25 in their official online shop.. I don't know about this shard but such systems usually leads to inflation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231776</id>
	<title>Re:Of course they wouldnt work. need to be stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot that lots of us are jobless and actually have lots of time to put into ganking a nub and getting ganked.</p><p>I would of thrown out shadow bane since that went free but the recently shut down the servers. That was a great game always got my blood pumping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot that lots of us are jobless and actually have lots of time to put into ganking a nub and getting ganked.I would of thrown out shadow bane since that went free but the recently shut down the servers .
That was a great game always got my blood pumping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot that lots of us are jobless and actually have lots of time to put into ganking a nub and getting ganked.I would of thrown out shadow bane since that went free but the recently shut down the servers.
That was a great game always got my blood pumping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227388</id>
	<title>I Guess Now Eve is Considered Hardcore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266836760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Eve, the PvP happens alongside (well, sorta -- too complex to go into detail about here) the PvE.  Players can build their own "home" -- a space station (but it's not a home for one character, it needs to be built by -- and more importantly -- defended by, a group of people).  You can steal from the weak, who in turn hire mercs to have their revenge.  Pretty much a complete player-run economy.</p><p>No Elves in lederhosen frolicking about in the woods hoping to steal a kiss, but then again, there are the Gallente...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Eve , the PvP happens alongside ( well , sorta -- too complex to go into detail about here ) the PvE .
Players can build their own " home " -- a space station ( but it 's not a home for one character , it needs to be built by -- and more importantly -- defended by , a group of people ) .
You can steal from the weak , who in turn hire mercs to have their revenge .
Pretty much a complete player-run economy.No Elves in lederhosen frolicking about in the woods hoping to steal a kiss , but then again , there are the Gallente.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Eve, the PvP happens alongside (well, sorta -- too complex to go into detail about here) the PvE.
Players can build their own "home" -- a space station (but it's not a home for one character, it needs to be built by -- and more importantly -- defended by, a group of people).
You can steal from the weak, who in turn hire mercs to have their revenge.
Pretty much a complete player-run economy.No Elves in lederhosen frolicking about in the woods hoping to steal a kiss, but then again, there are the Gallente...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231116</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>sabs</author>
	<datestamp>1266862260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cause having a bot walk you in and out of the stun field while you were at work.  That's fun and interesting gaming.<br>Any game where you gain skill by using, is going to suffer from the inbalance of "I use a bot to level up my magic skills" and "I actually play the freaking game"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cause having a bot walk you in and out of the stun field while you were at work .
That 's fun and interesting gaming.Any game where you gain skill by using , is going to suffer from the inbalance of " I use a bot to level up my magic skills " and " I actually play the freaking game "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cause having a bot walk you in and out of the stun field while you were at work.
That's fun and interesting gaming.Any game where you gain skill by using, is going to suffer from the inbalance of "I use a bot to level up my magic skills" and "I actually play the freaking game"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227478</id>
	<title>Mortal Online</title>
	<author>carp3\_noct3m</author>
	<datestamp>1266838320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want a UO like game, Mortal Online is where it is at. The summary is very unfair, because unlike darkfall, MO is still in beta, with plenty of want for polish. Despite this, I did a long evauluation of current and future MMO's, and keeping in mind I have little time to play in the first place, I wanted one and only one, I ended up getting MO. It is a great game, is very user unfriendly at the moment, but I really love having to theorize about this and that and not having everything handed to me in a cookie cutter style. So I highly suggest you ignore the quick dismissal of MO, and give it a shot. It should be noted that there are massive patches to the beta almost weekly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want a UO like game , Mortal Online is where it is at .
The summary is very unfair , because unlike darkfall , MO is still in beta , with plenty of want for polish .
Despite this , I did a long evauluation of current and future MMO 's , and keeping in mind I have little time to play in the first place , I wanted one and only one , I ended up getting MO .
It is a great game , is very user unfriendly at the moment , but I really love having to theorize about this and that and not having everything handed to me in a cookie cutter style .
So I highly suggest you ignore the quick dismissal of MO , and give it a shot .
It should be noted that there are massive patches to the beta almost weekly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want a UO like game, Mortal Online is where it is at.
The summary is very unfair, because unlike darkfall, MO is still in beta, with plenty of want for polish.
Despite this, I did a long evauluation of current and future MMO's, and keeping in mind I have little time to play in the first place, I wanted one and only one, I ended up getting MO.
It is a great game, is very user unfriendly at the moment, but I really love having to theorize about this and that and not having everything handed to me in a cookie cutter style.
So I highly suggest you ignore the quick dismissal of MO, and give it a shot.
It should be noted that there are massive patches to the beta almost weekly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229658</id>
	<title>Re:Haven &amp; Hearth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266856320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about wanking?  After all, that's really what MMOs are.  Nothing but a giant sausage-fest circle-jerk.  Why don't you get your ass out of your hovel and focus on your real life, not some fantasy bullshit where you pretend to be a level 3 elf master, or whatever?  The term "gamer" only applies to kiddies living off of their parents' dime, or adults with no social life and no social skills.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about wanking ?
After all , that 's really what MMOs are .
Nothing but a giant sausage-fest circle-jerk .
Why do n't you get your ass out of your hovel and focus on your real life , not some fantasy bullshit where you pretend to be a level 3 elf master , or whatever ?
The term " gamer " only applies to kiddies living off of their parents ' dime , or adults with no social life and no social skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about wanking?
After all, that's really what MMOs are.
Nothing but a giant sausage-fest circle-jerk.
Why don't you get your ass out of your hovel and focus on your real life, not some fantasy bullshit where you pretend to be a level 3 elf master, or whatever?
The term "gamer" only applies to kiddies living off of their parents' dime, or adults with no social life and no social skills.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229064</id>
	<title>Memories..</title>
	<author>Xadnem</author>
	<datestamp>1266853080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Life in early UO was often nasty, brutish, short, and fun.  If you were in town you had to be wary of thieves and scams, and if you were out of town you had to worry about being attacked at any second.  But, you picked up good friends and forged great memories doing it because it was the only game in town.  It's like my father reminiscing about the great depression - all the bad things created some good memories, but given the choice no one would go through that again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Life in early UO was often nasty , brutish , short , and fun .
If you were in town you had to be wary of thieves and scams , and if you were out of town you had to worry about being attacked at any second .
But , you picked up good friends and forged great memories doing it because it was the only game in town .
It 's like my father reminiscing about the great depression - all the bad things created some good memories , but given the choice no one would go through that again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Life in early UO was often nasty, brutish, short, and fun.
If you were in town you had to be wary of thieves and scams, and if you were out of town you had to worry about being attacked at any second.
But, you picked up good friends and forged great memories doing it because it was the only game in town.
It's like my father reminiscing about the great depression - all the bad things created some good memories, but given the choice no one would go through that again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229004</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266852540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A guy I knew liked OU for the sole fact he could grief other players with almost complete impunity. And yes, he used every exploit under the sun he could get away with in his shenanigans. Almost everyone I knew jumped to EQ as soon as possible, except for him, because he didn't like how there was far less opportunity for griefing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A guy I knew liked OU for the sole fact he could grief other players with almost complete impunity .
And yes , he used every exploit under the sun he could get away with in his shenanigans .
Almost everyone I knew jumped to EQ as soon as possible , except for him , because he did n't like how there was far less opportunity for griefing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A guy I knew liked OU for the sole fact he could grief other players with almost complete impunity.
And yes, he used every exploit under the sun he could get away with in his shenanigans.
Almost everyone I knew jumped to EQ as soon as possible, except for him, because he didn't like how there was far less opportunity for griefing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229920</id>
	<title>Developer risk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266857700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Devloping an MMO is a long, expensive, and therefore risky proposition. Great rewards if you succeed, devastation if you fail. And a failure can poison your future opportunities, too - how many people are going to avoid the next Star Wars MMO after disliking the first?</p><p>From a certain point of view, the history of MMOs since the late 90s has been one of a race for each generation of game to copy whatever was most successful from the previous generation. Less risky that way, right? Well, UO wasn't the most successful of its generation; Everquest was, and, in the far east, Lineage was. That's why we got level-based (or level-grind-based) MMOs from there. WoW's absolutely stunning success in particular has locked us into this rut.</p><p>The PvP question is an equally important one. People hate griefing, but the *reason* they hate it is mainly the lost time/progress. Games that balance that have a chance to succeed, games that don't balance it very rarely succeed. EVE is the one high-risk success outlier we can point to - but even then, compared to WoW, which one is a developer going to copy? WoW.</p><p>In practice, you could probably do a game based on the core ideas of UO, with modern adjustments added in, and be successful. UO had a lot of things going for it. Its approach to a player economy, its complete decoupling of trade skills from combat skills, and its comparatively low dependence on gear were all Good Things, in my opinion. Now add in modern conveniences like a UI that doesn't suck, auction house, soulbind-on-equip/soulbind-on-pickup items, better banking/party/guild/raid support, modern WoW-like quest system, instancing (but don't overdo it - those open dungeons were fun too), and so on. And, when you think about it, those changes would almost be enough to make UO's open PvP bearable, wouldn't they? Most of your good gear would be unlootable, as would the bits of monster parts from your current kill-x-collect-y quests, so there'd not be much penalty for your first player-induced death, and the other guy therefore only stands to lose by sticking around - you'd actually have a chance of killing him and taking back your stuff. The kind of NPC guard presence we see in WoW would also make for a lot less griefing too, since any place with questgivers becomes a small bubble of safety from the standard career criminal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Devloping an MMO is a long , expensive , and therefore risky proposition .
Great rewards if you succeed , devastation if you fail .
And a failure can poison your future opportunities , too - how many people are going to avoid the next Star Wars MMO after disliking the first ? From a certain point of view , the history of MMOs since the late 90s has been one of a race for each generation of game to copy whatever was most successful from the previous generation .
Less risky that way , right ?
Well , UO was n't the most successful of its generation ; Everquest was , and , in the far east , Lineage was .
That 's why we got level-based ( or level-grind-based ) MMOs from there .
WoW 's absolutely stunning success in particular has locked us into this rut.The PvP question is an equally important one .
People hate griefing , but the * reason * they hate it is mainly the lost time/progress .
Games that balance that have a chance to succeed , games that do n't balance it very rarely succeed .
EVE is the one high-risk success outlier we can point to - but even then , compared to WoW , which one is a developer going to copy ?
WoW.In practice , you could probably do a game based on the core ideas of UO , with modern adjustments added in , and be successful .
UO had a lot of things going for it .
Its approach to a player economy , its complete decoupling of trade skills from combat skills , and its comparatively low dependence on gear were all Good Things , in my opinion .
Now add in modern conveniences like a UI that does n't suck , auction house , soulbind-on-equip/soulbind-on-pickup items , better banking/party/guild/raid support , modern WoW-like quest system , instancing ( but do n't overdo it - those open dungeons were fun too ) , and so on .
And , when you think about it , those changes would almost be enough to make UO 's open PvP bearable , would n't they ?
Most of your good gear would be unlootable , as would the bits of monster parts from your current kill-x-collect-y quests , so there 'd not be much penalty for your first player-induced death , and the other guy therefore only stands to lose by sticking around - you 'd actually have a chance of killing him and taking back your stuff .
The kind of NPC guard presence we see in WoW would also make for a lot less griefing too , since any place with questgivers becomes a small bubble of safety from the standard career criminal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Devloping an MMO is a long, expensive, and therefore risky proposition.
Great rewards if you succeed, devastation if you fail.
And a failure can poison your future opportunities, too - how many people are going to avoid the next Star Wars MMO after disliking the first?From a certain point of view, the history of MMOs since the late 90s has been one of a race for each generation of game to copy whatever was most successful from the previous generation.
Less risky that way, right?
Well, UO wasn't the most successful of its generation; Everquest was, and, in the far east, Lineage was.
That's why we got level-based (or level-grind-based) MMOs from there.
WoW's absolutely stunning success in particular has locked us into this rut.The PvP question is an equally important one.
People hate griefing, but the *reason* they hate it is mainly the lost time/progress.
Games that balance that have a chance to succeed, games that don't balance it very rarely succeed.
EVE is the one high-risk success outlier we can point to - but even then, compared to WoW, which one is a developer going to copy?
WoW.In practice, you could probably do a game based on the core ideas of UO, with modern adjustments added in, and be successful.
UO had a lot of things going for it.
Its approach to a player economy, its complete decoupling of trade skills from combat skills, and its comparatively low dependence on gear were all Good Things, in my opinion.
Now add in modern conveniences like a UI that doesn't suck, auction house, soulbind-on-equip/soulbind-on-pickup items, better banking/party/guild/raid support, modern WoW-like quest system, instancing (but don't overdo it - those open dungeons were fun too), and so on.
And, when you think about it, those changes would almost be enough to make UO's open PvP bearable, wouldn't they?
Most of your good gear would be unlootable, as would the bits of monster parts from your current kill-x-collect-y quests, so there'd not be much penalty for your first player-induced death, and the other guy therefore only stands to lose by sticking around - you'd actually have a chance of killing him and taking back your stuff.
The kind of NPC guard presence we see in WoW would also make for a lot less griefing too, since any place with questgivers becomes a small bubble of safety from the standard career criminal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234854</id>
	<title>Re:Siege Perilous</title>
	<author>donatzsky</author>
	<datestamp>1266830460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The devs are fully aware that combat in MO isn't quite as fun as it should be and is working on it. I believe that the latest patch introduced the first part of the overhaul. (No, I'm not playing it myself - my current computer can't handle it)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The devs are fully aware that combat in MO is n't quite as fun as it should be and is working on it .
I believe that the latest patch introduced the first part of the overhaul .
( No , I 'm not playing it myself - my current computer ca n't handle it )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The devs are fully aware that combat in MO isn't quite as fun as it should be and is working on it.
I believe that the latest patch introduced the first part of the overhaul.
(No, I'm not playing it myself - my current computer can't handle it)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235742</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>McDozer</author>
	<datestamp>1266833100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You guys are all leaving out statloss if you died as a red.  That was a serious deterrant.  It wasn't easy to get back the skill points you lost, especially if you were 5 or 6X GM.  You'd lose days of grind time if you were red status and got killed......it really did suck.  This is one reason all the reds always ran together in huge gangs.  Also the bounty system, I remember there were some guys on my server ( Alice Cooper ), if you could get his head to turn in for the bounty you would be a VERY rich man for doing so.

UO was the grief fest everyone made it out to be, I found it to be rather balanced and will always miss it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are all leaving out statloss if you died as a red .
That was a serious deterrant .
It was n't easy to get back the skill points you lost , especially if you were 5 or 6X GM .
You 'd lose days of grind time if you were red status and got killed......it really did suck .
This is one reason all the reds always ran together in huge gangs .
Also the bounty system , I remember there were some guys on my server ( Alice Cooper ) , if you could get his head to turn in for the bounty you would be a VERY rich man for doing so .
UO was the grief fest everyone made it out to be , I found it to be rather balanced and will always miss it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are all leaving out statloss if you died as a red.
That was a serious deterrant.
It wasn't easy to get back the skill points you lost, especially if you were 5 or 6X GM.
You'd lose days of grind time if you were red status and got killed......it really did suck.
This is one reason all the reds always ran together in huge gangs.
Also the bounty system, I remember there were some guys on my server ( Alice Cooper ), if you could get his head to turn in for the bounty you would be a VERY rich man for doing so.
UO was the grief fest everyone made it out to be, I found it to be rather balanced and will always miss it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227768</id>
	<title>Re:EvE Online?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266841920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even online is has the most terrible PVP of any game.  Because you lose your ship and all your gear when you get killed, it encourages people to never fight unless the odds are extremely in their favor.  Eve online PVP consists of groups of ten ships flying around for a half hour to find one ship who had the nerve to fly around alone, resulting in a 10 vs 1 fight.  Or a thirty man fleet stumbling into the ten man fleet for a 30 vs 10 match.  Hardly, fun, even if you are on the winning side.  Every large fleet has a person in a cheap ship scouting, so players are usually always aware of whether or not they will win the fight before engaging.  I rarely ever saw any PVP occurring without the odds in one sides extreme favor. There is very little solo PVP.  The solo PVP that does exists usually consists of a veteran player blowing up some newbie mining in lowsec.</p><p>The only thing mildly fun  about EVE PVP is conquering territory. Even then, however, it usually involves flying in a 400 man fleet to fight some other 400 man fleet, which are laggy as hell. Most of the time you usually get killed before before your screen even finishes loading the system. If you do actually make it in, most targets that get called primary die before you even finish locking on to them and getting one volley of ammo off.  If you are on the winning side, you have the joy of spending the rest of the night orbiting a defenseless space station and firing all your ammo at it until the station blows up many many hours later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even online is has the most terrible PVP of any game .
Because you lose your ship and all your gear when you get killed , it encourages people to never fight unless the odds are extremely in their favor .
Eve online PVP consists of groups of ten ships flying around for a half hour to find one ship who had the nerve to fly around alone , resulting in a 10 vs 1 fight .
Or a thirty man fleet stumbling into the ten man fleet for a 30 vs 10 match .
Hardly , fun , even if you are on the winning side .
Every large fleet has a person in a cheap ship scouting , so players are usually always aware of whether or not they will win the fight before engaging .
I rarely ever saw any PVP occurring without the odds in one sides extreme favor .
There is very little solo PVP .
The solo PVP that does exists usually consists of a veteran player blowing up some newbie mining in lowsec.The only thing mildly fun about EVE PVP is conquering territory .
Even then , however , it usually involves flying in a 400 man fleet to fight some other 400 man fleet , which are laggy as hell .
Most of the time you usually get killed before before your screen even finishes loading the system .
If you do actually make it in , most targets that get called primary die before you even finish locking on to them and getting one volley of ammo off .
If you are on the winning side , you have the joy of spending the rest of the night orbiting a defenseless space station and firing all your ammo at it until the station blows up many many hours later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even online is has the most terrible PVP of any game.
Because you lose your ship and all your gear when you get killed, it encourages people to never fight unless the odds are extremely in their favor.
Eve online PVP consists of groups of ten ships flying around for a half hour to find one ship who had the nerve to fly around alone, resulting in a 10 vs 1 fight.
Or a thirty man fleet stumbling into the ten man fleet for a 30 vs 10 match.
Hardly, fun, even if you are on the winning side.
Every large fleet has a person in a cheap ship scouting, so players are usually always aware of whether or not they will win the fight before engaging.
I rarely ever saw any PVP occurring without the odds in one sides extreme favor.
There is very little solo PVP.
The solo PVP that does exists usually consists of a veteran player blowing up some newbie mining in lowsec.The only thing mildly fun  about EVE PVP is conquering territory.
Even then, however, it usually involves flying in a 400 man fleet to fight some other 400 man fleet, which are laggy as hell.
Most of the time you usually get killed before before your screen even finishes loading the system.
If you do actually make it in, most targets that get called primary die before you even finish locking on to them and getting one volley of ammo off.
If you are on the winning side, you have the joy of spending the rest of the night orbiting a defenseless space station and firing all your ammo at it until the station blows up many many hours later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229428</id>
	<title>Re:Classic UO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266855120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I play on UOG and if you take some time to DL the uo client, install razor and create an account here you'll see exactly why games like this don't take off.  The reason UO took off like it did back in the day was that there wasnt much else that existed like it at the time. When EQ came out UO started to die and Wow pretty much nailed UO's coffin shut.  I love OU and UOG hybrid is awesome. They even have a custom rebuilt client called sallos that makes it even better. Though as good as it is, it doesn't have much appeal to the general gaming public.  It's a harsh world and you probably won't make it 30 minutes without being killed, looted and possibly res killed 10 times.  Skill gain is quick and you can hit the end-game in about a day and a half. PvP is insane, especially factions. You'll need friends, quick wits and quick fingers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I play on UOG and if you take some time to DL the uo client , install razor and create an account here you 'll see exactly why games like this do n't take off .
The reason UO took off like it did back in the day was that there wasnt much else that existed like it at the time .
When EQ came out UO started to die and Wow pretty much nailed UO 's coffin shut .
I love OU and UOG hybrid is awesome .
They even have a custom rebuilt client called sallos that makes it even better .
Though as good as it is , it does n't have much appeal to the general gaming public .
It 's a harsh world and you probably wo n't make it 30 minutes without being killed , looted and possibly res killed 10 times .
Skill gain is quick and you can hit the end-game in about a day and a half .
PvP is insane , especially factions .
You 'll need friends , quick wits and quick fingers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I play on UOG and if you take some time to DL the uo client, install razor and create an account here you'll see exactly why games like this don't take off.
The reason UO took off like it did back in the day was that there wasnt much else that existed like it at the time.
When EQ came out UO started to die and Wow pretty much nailed UO's coffin shut.
I love OU and UOG hybrid is awesome.
They even have a custom rebuilt client called sallos that makes it even better.
Though as good as it is, it doesn't have much appeal to the general gaming public.
It's a harsh world and you probably won't make it 30 minutes without being killed, looted and possibly res killed 10 times.
Skill gain is quick and you can hit the end-game in about a day and a half.
PvP is insane, especially factions.
You'll need friends, quick wits and quick fingers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233216</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>jbezorg</author>
	<datestamp>1266868620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth, I have to disagree. The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself, rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that. It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world, rather than the mechanics that we, as the game authors, build into it. The coolest thing about the world, if I may say so myself, is that there isn't a single structure in the world that hasn't been built by the players themselves.</p></div><p>I applaud and even agree with your effort, but you walk a dangerous road. Read the following about a similar effort and what happened if you haven't already. Maybe you can avoid the mistakes they made.</p><p><a href="http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2003/07/war\_of\_the\_jess.html" title="blogs.com">War of the Jessie Wall</a> [blogs.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth , I have to disagree .
The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself , rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game ; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that .
It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world , rather than the mechanics that we , as the game authors , build into it .
The coolest thing about the world , if I may say so myself , is that there is n't a single structure in the world that has n't been built by the players themselves.I applaud and even agree with your effort , but you walk a dangerous road .
Read the following about a similar effort and what happened if you have n't already .
Maybe you can avoid the mistakes they made.War of the Jessie Wall [ blogs.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth, I have to disagree.
The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself, rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that.
It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world, rather than the mechanics that we, as the game authors, build into it.
The coolest thing about the world, if I may say so myself, is that there isn't a single structure in the world that hasn't been built by the players themselves.I applaud and even agree with your effort, but you walk a dangerous road.
Read the following about a similar effort and what happened if you haven't already.
Maybe you can avoid the mistakes they made.War of the Jessie Wall [blogs.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229588</id>
	<title>Multi User Dungeons</title>
	<author>binkzz</author>
	<datestamp>1266856020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your best bet are MUDs. Graphically, I wouldn't say they quite reach 3D levels, but you have far greater freedom and a really cool userbase.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your best bet are MUDs .
Graphically , I would n't say they quite reach 3D levels , but you have far greater freedom and a really cool userbase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your best bet are MUDs.
Graphically, I wouldn't say they quite reach 3D levels, but you have far greater freedom and a really cool userbase.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31243220</id>
	<title>Lack of Trading &amp; Status</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266932520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played UO for 3 years on an EU Server, there was a vast number of players who just enjoyed the community of it all. The whole reason I left WoW was because it lacked the sense of friendship I found in UO where I played as a blacksmith in a guild where I had a lot of very good friends. I could repair gear for people and just have a chat with them while making a bit of money by selling armour etc. WoW is all thick and fast with no feeling in it, people bring materials, the job is done and they leave. I think the auction house is a large part of this, it has taken trading away and has far too much focus on end game and PvP once you reach the highest levels.</p><p>I also miss the status symbols of UO like owning a house and rare gear that was entirely useless but expensive but that was because I spent more time trying to be part of the community than dungeon running so why would I spend money on armour and the later *shudder* artifacts. The only way you can get anything like a 'status' symbol in WoW is by raiding and getting a rare drop or taking part in the large new patch/expansion events which quite frankly I find boring.</p><p>I think the UO system of almost infinite combinations of skills was also an excellent addition, it meant you almost had to have some combat skill or magic skill to even go and gather resources to become a crafter class, these largely went hand in hand later on as well, gating back to your house to get materials made life much easier.</p><p>The karma and fame systems were also great fun for a bit of grinding and your 'Lord' title or 'Glorious' title could easily be lost if you messed around too much, unlike the WoW world of achievements where you do it once and it's yours forever.</p><p>I miss UO every day.</p><p>Jericho - The Green Man of RAA</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played UO for 3 years on an EU Server , there was a vast number of players who just enjoyed the community of it all .
The whole reason I left WoW was because it lacked the sense of friendship I found in UO where I played as a blacksmith in a guild where I had a lot of very good friends .
I could repair gear for people and just have a chat with them while making a bit of money by selling armour etc .
WoW is all thick and fast with no feeling in it , people bring materials , the job is done and they leave .
I think the auction house is a large part of this , it has taken trading away and has far too much focus on end game and PvP once you reach the highest levels.I also miss the status symbols of UO like owning a house and rare gear that was entirely useless but expensive but that was because I spent more time trying to be part of the community than dungeon running so why would I spend money on armour and the later * shudder * artifacts .
The only way you can get anything like a 'status ' symbol in WoW is by raiding and getting a rare drop or taking part in the large new patch/expansion events which quite frankly I find boring.I think the UO system of almost infinite combinations of skills was also an excellent addition , it meant you almost had to have some combat skill or magic skill to even go and gather resources to become a crafter class , these largely went hand in hand later on as well , gating back to your house to get materials made life much easier.The karma and fame systems were also great fun for a bit of grinding and your 'Lord ' title or 'Glorious ' title could easily be lost if you messed around too much , unlike the WoW world of achievements where you do it once and it 's yours forever.I miss UO every day.Jericho - The Green Man of RAA</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played UO for 3 years on an EU Server, there was a vast number of players who just enjoyed the community of it all.
The whole reason I left WoW was because it lacked the sense of friendship I found in UO where I played as a blacksmith in a guild where I had a lot of very good friends.
I could repair gear for people and just have a chat with them while making a bit of money by selling armour etc.
WoW is all thick and fast with no feeling in it, people bring materials, the job is done and they leave.
I think the auction house is a large part of this, it has taken trading away and has far too much focus on end game and PvP once you reach the highest levels.I also miss the status symbols of UO like owning a house and rare gear that was entirely useless but expensive but that was because I spent more time trying to be part of the community than dungeon running so why would I spend money on armour and the later *shudder* artifacts.
The only way you can get anything like a 'status' symbol in WoW is by raiding and getting a rare drop or taking part in the large new patch/expansion events which quite frankly I find boring.I think the UO system of almost infinite combinations of skills was also an excellent addition, it meant you almost had to have some combat skill or magic skill to even go and gather resources to become a crafter class, these largely went hand in hand later on as well, gating back to your house to get materials made life much easier.The karma and fame systems were also great fun for a bit of grinding and your 'Lord' title or 'Glorious' title could easily be lost if you messed around too much, unlike the WoW world of achievements where you do it once and it's yours forever.I miss UO every day.Jericho - The Green Man of RAA</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416</id>
	<title>Siege Perilous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266837300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to play UO on Siege, the only hardcore pvp server UO has left. I left Siege due to the fact that it didn't have enough players on when i was playing, hours of running around to find a player. Its mostly americans that play there and the europian all leave, because of lack of players in their timezone.</p><p>So, i started looking for a new UO like game just like you. I found Darkfall, which was a grindfest and didn't give me the same adrenaline shots UO gave me when running around its forests. Also the Europian server was full of cheats and they didn't wan't to do a server wipe. Recently i tried the open beta of Mortal Online, wow the combat engine really felt sluggish, i hope i was wrong and it will be better, but i haven't logged in after the first hour. Guess thats another game that won't give the UO feel, although its mechanics looked more promising.</p><p>But what all these new games lack is the roleplay tools, UO has all these small parts as tables, chairs, flowers, paintings, etc.. You can really build your own scenery to play your character in, combined with a death penalty which makes life in the world much more intense.</p><p>If you find a good UO like game, please let me know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to play UO on Siege , the only hardcore pvp server UO has left .
I left Siege due to the fact that it did n't have enough players on when i was playing , hours of running around to find a player .
Its mostly americans that play there and the europian all leave , because of lack of players in their timezone.So , i started looking for a new UO like game just like you .
I found Darkfall , which was a grindfest and did n't give me the same adrenaline shots UO gave me when running around its forests .
Also the Europian server was full of cheats and they did n't wa n't to do a server wipe .
Recently i tried the open beta of Mortal Online , wow the combat engine really felt sluggish , i hope i was wrong and it will be better , but i have n't logged in after the first hour .
Guess thats another game that wo n't give the UO feel , although its mechanics looked more promising.But what all these new games lack is the roleplay tools , UO has all these small parts as tables , chairs , flowers , paintings , etc.. You can really build your own scenery to play your character in , combined with a death penalty which makes life in the world much more intense.If you find a good UO like game , please let me know ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to play UO on Siege, the only hardcore pvp server UO has left.
I left Siege due to the fact that it didn't have enough players on when i was playing, hours of running around to find a player.
Its mostly americans that play there and the europian all leave, because of lack of players in their timezone.So, i started looking for a new UO like game just like you.
I found Darkfall, which was a grindfest and didn't give me the same adrenaline shots UO gave me when running around its forests.
Also the Europian server was full of cheats and they didn't wan't to do a server wipe.
Recently i tried the open beta of Mortal Online, wow the combat engine really felt sluggish, i hope i was wrong and it will be better, but i haven't logged in after the first hour.
Guess thats another game that won't give the UO feel, although its mechanics looked more promising.But what all these new games lack is the roleplay tools, UO has all these small parts as tables, chairs, flowers, paintings, etc.. You can really build your own scenery to play your character in, combined with a death penalty which makes life in the world much more intense.If you find a good UO like game, please let me know ;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228668</id>
	<title>It's not really the genre at fault</title>
	<author>Ayashii </author>
	<datestamp>1266850200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a genre is way harder and more expensive to develop to a point where it stands any chance of competing with current MMO and as a consequence big companies tend to prefer to invest in more "safe" kinds of MMOs.

Darkfall and Mortal Online are shadowed and ignored not because of their genre, just because they're bad games devolped with not enough budget for a project of that scope.
If you take EvE Online for example it has most of the aspects of UO (full loot, free world pvp, ability to build and trade everything, you can build your own stations/houses, you can customize the skills of your character as you wish, etc) and while it doesn't have a HUGE success, it's hardly a ignored or unknown game. Even after all those years since the release.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a genre is way harder and more expensive to develop to a point where it stands any chance of competing with current MMO and as a consequence big companies tend to prefer to invest in more " safe " kinds of MMOs .
Darkfall and Mortal Online are shadowed and ignored not because of their genre , just because they 're bad games devolped with not enough budget for a project of that scope .
If you take EvE Online for example it has most of the aspects of UO ( full loot , free world pvp , ability to build and trade everything , you can build your own stations/houses , you can customize the skills of your character as you wish , etc ) and while it does n't have a HUGE success , it 's hardly a ignored or unknown game .
Even after all those years since the release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a genre is way harder and more expensive to develop to a point where it stands any chance of competing with current MMO and as a consequence big companies tend to prefer to invest in more "safe" kinds of MMOs.
Darkfall and Mortal Online are shadowed and ignored not because of their genre, just because they're bad games devolped with not enough budget for a project of that scope.
If you take EvE Online for example it has most of the aspects of UO (full loot, free world pvp, ability to build and trade everything, you can build your own stations/houses, you can customize the skills of your character as you wish, etc) and while it doesn't have a HUGE success, it's hardly a ignored or unknown game.
Even after all those years since the release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229438</id>
	<title>I can tell you exactly why.</title>
	<author>HellProphet</author>
	<datestamp>1266855240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a former player from 99-03 in UO. The simple fact is when Ultima Online was first out it was your major only choice. It was what WoW is now, the logical choice.
<p>
So with no other place to go, (figuring that there was miridian 59 and some NWN on aol.) Ultima Online had a collection of players. It had all styles of players because it was the only thing out worth playing for an MMO. You had your PK's, you had your adventures, you had your social players and crafters. The majority of the players couldn't stand getting murdered and losing their items, but what other game was available to them. There was none, that is why when EverQuest hit the market there were tons of non-PK's jumped ship to a safer world. So OSI/EA decided we need a safe place so we don't lose the majority of our adventurers. So they created the two facet world with a safe zone trammel. This pleased the sheep and some of the wolves died out.
</p><p>
So then you had a split player base and without enough sheep(non-pk's) to feed the wolves(pks) the game lost the whole heart racing excitiment of fight or flight for your life.
</p><p>
So as the MMORPG market kept opening up. The player base and game kept changing. Shadowbane came about, more wolves left. WoW came about, nearly everyone who could run WoW on their computers left UO.
</p><p>
OLD UO can not work in today's market. People have choices in their games now. What pu&amp;&amp;y is going to choice a safe RP wow server over a game where they can craft bad A&amp;&amp; gear but they have to worry about it being ripped away from them because their combat skills suck.
</p><p>
Basically games that have a realistic set of player vs player rules, that involving killing your oponent and enjoying the loot of their corpses; is not nearly as fun for the wolves without the sheep.
</p><p>
Wolves vs Wolves you might as well be playing arena in WoW or playing a first person shooter.
</p><p>
P.S. Tell your friend to check out UOSecondage.com
<br>
That is the closest as it will come to restoring glory days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a former player from 99-03 in UO .
The simple fact is when Ultima Online was first out it was your major only choice .
It was what WoW is now , the logical choice .
So with no other place to go , ( figuring that there was miridian 59 and some NWN on aol .
) Ultima Online had a collection of players .
It had all styles of players because it was the only thing out worth playing for an MMO .
You had your PK 's , you had your adventures , you had your social players and crafters .
The majority of the players could n't stand getting murdered and losing their items , but what other game was available to them .
There was none , that is why when EverQuest hit the market there were tons of non-PK 's jumped ship to a safer world .
So OSI/EA decided we need a safe place so we do n't lose the majority of our adventurers .
So they created the two facet world with a safe zone trammel .
This pleased the sheep and some of the wolves died out .
So then you had a split player base and without enough sheep ( non-pk 's ) to feed the wolves ( pks ) the game lost the whole heart racing excitiment of fight or flight for your life .
So as the MMORPG market kept opening up .
The player base and game kept changing .
Shadowbane came about , more wolves left .
WoW came about , nearly everyone who could run WoW on their computers left UO .
OLD UO can not work in today 's market .
People have choices in their games now .
What pu&amp;&amp;y is going to choice a safe RP wow server over a game where they can craft bad A&amp;&amp; gear but they have to worry about it being ripped away from them because their combat skills suck .
Basically games that have a realistic set of player vs player rules , that involving killing your oponent and enjoying the loot of their corpses ; is not nearly as fun for the wolves without the sheep .
Wolves vs Wolves you might as well be playing arena in WoW or playing a first person shooter .
P.S. Tell your friend to check out UOSecondage.com That is the closest as it will come to restoring glory days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a former player from 99-03 in UO.
The simple fact is when Ultima Online was first out it was your major only choice.
It was what WoW is now, the logical choice.
So with no other place to go, (figuring that there was miridian 59 and some NWN on aol.
) Ultima Online had a collection of players.
It had all styles of players because it was the only thing out worth playing for an MMO.
You had your PK's, you had your adventures, you had your social players and crafters.
The majority of the players couldn't stand getting murdered and losing their items, but what other game was available to them.
There was none, that is why when EverQuest hit the market there were tons of non-PK's jumped ship to a safer world.
So OSI/EA decided we need a safe place so we don't lose the majority of our adventurers.
So they created the two facet world with a safe zone trammel.
This pleased the sheep and some of the wolves died out.
So then you had a split player base and without enough sheep(non-pk's) to feed the wolves(pks) the game lost the whole heart racing excitiment of fight or flight for your life.
So as the MMORPG market kept opening up.
The player base and game kept changing.
Shadowbane came about, more wolves left.
WoW came about, nearly everyone who could run WoW on their computers left UO.
OLD UO can not work in today's market.
People have choices in their games now.
What pu&amp;&amp;y is going to choice a safe RP wow server over a game where they can craft bad A&amp;&amp; gear but they have to worry about it being ripped away from them because their combat skills suck.
Basically games that have a realistic set of player vs player rules, that involving killing your oponent and enjoying the loot of their corpses; is not nearly as fun for the wolves without the sheep.
Wolves vs Wolves you might as well be playing arena in WoW or playing a first person shooter.
P.S. Tell your friend to check out UOSecondage.com

That is the closest as it will come to restoring glory days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233374</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266869160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe the "thieving" he means is the actual stealing skill.</p><p>I cannot imagine that anyone is looking for a game where you lose your stuff through bugs. People may be looking for the reverse (you gain other's stuff through bugs), but I would hope that people have the brain to realize that it works both ways.</p><p>UO still has Trammel, which is the safety zone where people cannot be killed or robbed, unless they are guilded or at war somehow and housing has actually been secure for the past few years (though I quit a few times because it was not secure and I got tired of losing everything).</p><p>The problem with UO is that not only is it a griefer's paradise, but it's a cheater's paradise as well, and they usually go hand-in-hand. Ranging from speed cheats and dupers, to ignored exploiters (people abusing bugs to become practically invincible), the GMs really killed UO at the end of the day by turning a blind eye to everything except bad <i>spoken</i> behavior--if you typed it and it was racist or sexist, then, and only then would the GMs act; they also caught the occasional unattended macroer.  I blame EA for this because prior to them really taking control, the GMs were very forgiving and nice.  Ignoring the bad GMs, griefing comes with any game where people can rob from you, or kill you.</p><p>UO provided a unique atmosphere where players could build uniquely built (their skills) characters and compete on an open playing field. In my opinion, it failed to catch on for two reasons: some people are simply too stupid to do the risk analysis and prepare for the inevitable death, and the cheaters were not stomped out, so the people that played fair generally ended up getting tired of it.</p><p>My favorite gaming memories are still from UO and I really hope a game can start fresh <b>exactly</b> where UO is <b>now</b>, but without cheaters. If someone can get that, then they will be onto to something because it's the cheaters and exploiters that lead to the most serious griefers.  After all, if they are not cheating or exploiting something, then chances are, you can avoid it (whether that means you want to get it or not is a different story--maybe you need the quest creature or something).  I vastly preferred the "leveling" style of UO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe the " thieving " he means is the actual stealing skill.I can not imagine that anyone is looking for a game where you lose your stuff through bugs .
People may be looking for the reverse ( you gain other 's stuff through bugs ) , but I would hope that people have the brain to realize that it works both ways.UO still has Trammel , which is the safety zone where people can not be killed or robbed , unless they are guilded or at war somehow and housing has actually been secure for the past few years ( though I quit a few times because it was not secure and I got tired of losing everything ) .The problem with UO is that not only is it a griefer 's paradise , but it 's a cheater 's paradise as well , and they usually go hand-in-hand .
Ranging from speed cheats and dupers , to ignored exploiters ( people abusing bugs to become practically invincible ) , the GMs really killed UO at the end of the day by turning a blind eye to everything except bad spoken behavior--if you typed it and it was racist or sexist , then , and only then would the GMs act ; they also caught the occasional unattended macroer .
I blame EA for this because prior to them really taking control , the GMs were very forgiving and nice .
Ignoring the bad GMs , griefing comes with any game where people can rob from you , or kill you.UO provided a unique atmosphere where players could build uniquely built ( their skills ) characters and compete on an open playing field .
In my opinion , it failed to catch on for two reasons : some people are simply too stupid to do the risk analysis and prepare for the inevitable death , and the cheaters were not stomped out , so the people that played fair generally ended up getting tired of it.My favorite gaming memories are still from UO and I really hope a game can start fresh exactly where UO is now , but without cheaters .
If someone can get that , then they will be onto to something because it 's the cheaters and exploiters that lead to the most serious griefers .
After all , if they are not cheating or exploiting something , then chances are , you can avoid it ( whether that means you want to get it or not is a different story--maybe you need the quest creature or something ) .
I vastly preferred the " leveling " style of UO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe the "thieving" he means is the actual stealing skill.I cannot imagine that anyone is looking for a game where you lose your stuff through bugs.
People may be looking for the reverse (you gain other's stuff through bugs), but I would hope that people have the brain to realize that it works both ways.UO still has Trammel, which is the safety zone where people cannot be killed or robbed, unless they are guilded or at war somehow and housing has actually been secure for the past few years (though I quit a few times because it was not secure and I got tired of losing everything).The problem with UO is that not only is it a griefer's paradise, but it's a cheater's paradise as well, and they usually go hand-in-hand.
Ranging from speed cheats and dupers, to ignored exploiters (people abusing bugs to become practically invincible), the GMs really killed UO at the end of the day by turning a blind eye to everything except bad spoken behavior--if you typed it and it was racist or sexist, then, and only then would the GMs act; they also caught the occasional unattended macroer.
I blame EA for this because prior to them really taking control, the GMs were very forgiving and nice.
Ignoring the bad GMs, griefing comes with any game where people can rob from you, or kill you.UO provided a unique atmosphere where players could build uniquely built (their skills) characters and compete on an open playing field.
In my opinion, it failed to catch on for two reasons: some people are simply too stupid to do the risk analysis and prepare for the inevitable death, and the cheaters were not stomped out, so the people that played fair generally ended up getting tired of it.My favorite gaming memories are still from UO and I really hope a game can start fresh exactly where UO is now, but without cheaters.
If someone can get that, then they will be onto to something because it's the cheaters and exploiters that lead to the most serious griefers.
After all, if they are not cheating or exploiting something, then chances are, you can avoid it (whether that means you want to get it or not is a different story--maybe you need the quest creature or something).
I vastly preferred the "leveling" style of UO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228392</id>
	<title>Focus on item rarity and boring PvP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266848220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who played UO from the earliest days (beta 2 in 1996) right up until the downfall of the origin shards (shortly after release of second age) as well some dabbling on player run servers after that, I definitely sympathize with those who miss the type of gameplay UO offered.</p><p>I have played a number of other MMORPG since then but never really been immersed in any of them the way I was with UO.  Of course, this is partly because I am older now and do not have as much time; however, I have never seen any other game which offers the sense of freedom and social community the way UO did (EVE would be the only one that comes close).</p><p>UO didn't really offer any quests or 'raids' or anything like that, it was pretty much just players creating their own stories which forced you to socialize with people.<br>Also, because there was no real 'objective', ie no items to camp for and no certain area you had to go to in order to gain exp, each player had their own locations where they would hang out so you would frequently encounter the same people.  I made many friends playing UO who I still talk to today, nearly 15 years later.. can't say I talk to anyone I met playing EQ/WoW/DaOC or any other MMORPG.</p><p>I would say the primary reason that PvP does not work on newer games the way it did on UO is due to item rarity.  In UO there were relatively few 'rare' items, and even then.. they weren't *that* rare.  If you got killed and lost all your equipment, for the most part it was easily replaced.  On EQ/WoW if you were to get killed and lose the rare item you camped for days to get then most people are not going to take that very well.  Of course on UO there was the issue of housejacking, oftentimes where people would abuse bugs to break into someones house/castle and steal everything.. many people I know quit over that.</p><p>Another issue is that on UO items did not always determine who won a fight.  It took a good deal of practice and skill to become a good PvP fighter, and a good player with fast reflexes and the right macro setup could easily take down several opponents with better equipment.  None of the newer games I have played can compare in that regard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who played UO from the earliest days ( beta 2 in 1996 ) right up until the downfall of the origin shards ( shortly after release of second age ) as well some dabbling on player run servers after that , I definitely sympathize with those who miss the type of gameplay UO offered.I have played a number of other MMORPG since then but never really been immersed in any of them the way I was with UO .
Of course , this is partly because I am older now and do not have as much time ; however , I have never seen any other game which offers the sense of freedom and social community the way UO did ( EVE would be the only one that comes close ) .UO did n't really offer any quests or 'raids ' or anything like that , it was pretty much just players creating their own stories which forced you to socialize with people.Also , because there was no real 'objective ' , ie no items to camp for and no certain area you had to go to in order to gain exp , each player had their own locations where they would hang out so you would frequently encounter the same people .
I made many friends playing UO who I still talk to today , nearly 15 years later.. ca n't say I talk to anyone I met playing EQ/WoW/DaOC or any other MMORPG.I would say the primary reason that PvP does not work on newer games the way it did on UO is due to item rarity .
In UO there were relatively few 'rare ' items , and even then.. they were n't * that * rare .
If you got killed and lost all your equipment , for the most part it was easily replaced .
On EQ/WoW if you were to get killed and lose the rare item you camped for days to get then most people are not going to take that very well .
Of course on UO there was the issue of housejacking , oftentimes where people would abuse bugs to break into someones house/castle and steal everything.. many people I know quit over that.Another issue is that on UO items did not always determine who won a fight .
It took a good deal of practice and skill to become a good PvP fighter , and a good player with fast reflexes and the right macro setup could easily take down several opponents with better equipment .
None of the newer games I have played can compare in that regard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who played UO from the earliest days (beta 2 in 1996) right up until the downfall of the origin shards (shortly after release of second age) as well some dabbling on player run servers after that, I definitely sympathize with those who miss the type of gameplay UO offered.I have played a number of other MMORPG since then but never really been immersed in any of them the way I was with UO.
Of course, this is partly because I am older now and do not have as much time; however, I have never seen any other game which offers the sense of freedom and social community the way UO did (EVE would be the only one that comes close).UO didn't really offer any quests or 'raids' or anything like that, it was pretty much just players creating their own stories which forced you to socialize with people.Also, because there was no real 'objective', ie no items to camp for and no certain area you had to go to in order to gain exp, each player had their own locations where they would hang out so you would frequently encounter the same people.
I made many friends playing UO who I still talk to today, nearly 15 years later.. can't say I talk to anyone I met playing EQ/WoW/DaOC or any other MMORPG.I would say the primary reason that PvP does not work on newer games the way it did on UO is due to item rarity.
In UO there were relatively few 'rare' items, and even then.. they weren't *that* rare.
If you got killed and lost all your equipment, for the most part it was easily replaced.
On EQ/WoW if you were to get killed and lose the rare item you camped for days to get then most people are not going to take that very well.
Of course on UO there was the issue of housejacking, oftentimes where people would abuse bugs to break into someones house/castle and steal everything.. many people I know quit over that.Another issue is that on UO items did not always determine who won a fight.
It took a good deal of practice and skill to become a good PvP fighter, and a good player with fast reflexes and the right macro setup could easily take down several opponents with better equipment.
None of the newer games I have played can compare in that regard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231144</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266862320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sorry, you are an idiot. If you ever played UO you would know exactly what is missing. After UO turned into a carebear land, there was only one remaining bastion. Siege Perilous. Point is, in "glory days", there were not only PK clans, there were antis as well. It was a continuous struggle between murdering psychotic bastards and those who tried to stop them where later were a minority. People would not just join "good" or "bad" side like in WoW. They would BE good or evil. Good and evil were not hard coded into game. People would shape what good and evil meant. If you met an anti, you knew you are pretty much talking to a paladin. If you met an undead lord you knew they were a psychotic fuck that would kill you, rape you, loot you, dismember you and store one of your organs in a box somewhere as a part of sacrificial ceremony to whatever dark gods they pray. If you are lucky in that order. And you would know that by staring at your own guts in a grey world. OOOOOoooOOooOOOo. Fucking horde in WoW? They are pussies comparing to sick and twisted shit you had to deal with in UO. Instead of "oh cool you are a zombie lol" you would get *stare* *cling* *cling* *swoosh* *don't mind me while energy vortex is chacing you* *o shit it's coming for me now* *OoooOOooOoO*. In UO "evil" was real. I loved it. And I was on the receiving end of it. Why do PKs get all the glory? Why do people always forget those who held the line against them? By playing UO you realize how rare decent people actually are. After that any other MMO with the artificial rules becomes boring. UO was like giving kids a loaded gun and getting them drunk which is not legal in US. You can get a gun tho. The only game that comes close to UO is strangely enough EVE online. In 0.0 space it is just as sick and twisted, except less fun and more of a second job. And don't bitch or I'll feed you to my wyrm...<br>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; What I am trying to say in the end is, UO had no rules to guide the players. It was a chaos that gradualy organized itself. This "order" reflects our society. And that view was a good lesson. People are sick and twisted except few exceptions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sorry , you are an idiot .
If you ever played UO you would know exactly what is missing .
After UO turned into a carebear land , there was only one remaining bastion .
Siege Perilous .
Point is , in " glory days " , there were not only PK clans , there were antis as well .
It was a continuous struggle between murdering psychotic bastards and those who tried to stop them where later were a minority .
People would not just join " good " or " bad " side like in WoW .
They would BE good or evil .
Good and evil were not hard coded into game .
People would shape what good and evil meant .
If you met an anti , you knew you are pretty much talking to a paladin .
If you met an undead lord you knew they were a psychotic fuck that would kill you , rape you , loot you , dismember you and store one of your organs in a box somewhere as a part of sacrificial ceremony to whatever dark gods they pray .
If you are lucky in that order .
And you would know that by staring at your own guts in a grey world .
OOOOOoooOOooOOOo. Fucking horde in WoW ?
They are pussies comparing to sick and twisted shit you had to deal with in UO .
Instead of " oh cool you are a zombie lol " you would get * stare * * cling * * cling * * swoosh * * do n't mind me while energy vortex is chacing you * * o shit it 's coming for me now * * OoooOOooOoO * .
In UO " evil " was real .
I loved it .
And I was on the receiving end of it .
Why do PKs get all the glory ?
Why do people always forget those who held the line against them ?
By playing UO you realize how rare decent people actually are .
After that any other MMO with the artificial rules becomes boring .
UO was like giving kids a loaded gun and getting them drunk which is not legal in US .
You can get a gun tho .
The only game that comes close to UO is strangely enough EVE online .
In 0.0 space it is just as sick and twisted , except less fun and more of a second job .
And do n't bitch or I 'll feed you to my wyrm.. .     What I am trying to say in the end is , UO had no rules to guide the players .
It was a chaos that gradualy organized itself .
This " order " reflects our society .
And that view was a good lesson .
People are sick and twisted except few exceptions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sorry, you are an idiot.
If you ever played UO you would know exactly what is missing.
After UO turned into a carebear land, there was only one remaining bastion.
Siege Perilous.
Point is, in "glory days", there were not only PK clans, there were antis as well.
It was a continuous struggle between murdering psychotic bastards and those who tried to stop them where later were a minority.
People would not just join "good" or "bad" side like in WoW.
They would BE good or evil.
Good and evil were not hard coded into game.
People would shape what good and evil meant.
If you met an anti, you knew you are pretty much talking to a paladin.
If you met an undead lord you knew they were a psychotic fuck that would kill you, rape you, loot you, dismember you and store one of your organs in a box somewhere as a part of sacrificial ceremony to whatever dark gods they pray.
If you are lucky in that order.
And you would know that by staring at your own guts in a grey world.
OOOOOoooOOooOOOo. Fucking horde in WoW?
They are pussies comparing to sick and twisted shit you had to deal with in UO.
Instead of "oh cool you are a zombie lol" you would get *stare* *cling* *cling* *swoosh* *don't mind me while energy vortex is chacing you* *o shit it's coming for me now* *OoooOOooOoO*.
In UO "evil" was real.
I loved it.
And I was on the receiving end of it.
Why do PKs get all the glory?
Why do people always forget those who held the line against them?
By playing UO you realize how rare decent people actually are.
After that any other MMO with the artificial rules becomes boring.
UO was like giving kids a loaded gun and getting them drunk which is not legal in US.
You can get a gun tho.
The only game that comes close to UO is strangely enough EVE online.
In 0.0 space it is just as sick and twisted, except less fun and more of a second job.
And don't bitch or I'll feed you to my wyrm...
  
  What I am trying to say in the end is, UO had no rules to guide the players.
It was a chaos that gradualy organized itself.
This "order" reflects our society.
And that view was a good lesson.
People are sick and twisted except few exceptions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229606</id>
	<title>Re:EvE Online?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266856080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eve is just a really bad game.  The only reason it has any success is that it's been *marketed* as a really bad game.  But seriously, it crashes non-stop on pretty much any hardware, the game design is extremely poorly thought out with economy-wrecking changes coming every patch or so (that is to say, it's getting worse fast)...  its just not worth playing if you haven't already invested serious time into a character.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eve is just a really bad game .
The only reason it has any success is that it 's been * marketed * as a really bad game .
But seriously , it crashes non-stop on pretty much any hardware , the game design is extremely poorly thought out with economy-wrecking changes coming every patch or so ( that is to say , it 's getting worse fast ) ... its just not worth playing if you have n't already invested serious time into a character .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eve is just a really bad game.
The only reason it has any success is that it's been *marketed* as a really bad game.
But seriously, it crashes non-stop on pretty much any hardware, the game design is extremely poorly thought out with economy-wrecking changes coming every patch or so (that is to say, it's getting worse fast)...  its just not worth playing if you haven't already invested serious time into a character.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233864</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Reapy</author>
	<datestamp>1266870840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shadowbane failed due to not having the tech to support the point of the game. Whenever you put 200 players in one location the game would consistently crash to desktop. When the whole point of the game is to participate in city sieges, and then when you do, the game crashes...that'll drive people off... at least that is why I left. But I thought SB had a lot of potential and it was a well developed system... they just didn't have the $$ to pull it off imho.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shadowbane failed due to not having the tech to support the point of the game .
Whenever you put 200 players in one location the game would consistently crash to desktop .
When the whole point of the game is to participate in city sieges , and then when you do , the game crashes...that 'll drive people off... at least that is why I left .
But I thought SB had a lot of potential and it was a well developed system... they just did n't have the $ $ to pull it off imho .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shadowbane failed due to not having the tech to support the point of the game.
Whenever you put 200 players in one location the game would consistently crash to desktop.
When the whole point of the game is to participate in city sieges, and then when you do, the game crashes...that'll drive people off... at least that is why I left.
But I thought SB had a lot of potential and it was a well developed system... they just didn't have the $$ to pull it off imho.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231384</id>
	<title>Darkage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266862860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.darkagerp.com</p><p>Has been going strong for 7 years now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.darkagerp.comHas been going strong for 7 years now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.darkagerp.comHas been going strong for 7 years now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229548</id>
	<title>Re:Siege Perilous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266855840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mortal online has excellent combat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) It's just that you start with an axe for wood cutting and no agility or strength at all. Also, it's made of steel. When you got the stats up and a swift weapon, that's when the real game begins!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mortal online has excellent combat ; ) It 's just that you start with an axe for wood cutting and no agility or strength at all .
Also , it 's made of steel .
When you got the stats up and a swift weapon , that 's when the real game begins !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mortal online has excellent combat ;) It's just that you start with an axe for wood cutting and no agility or strength at all.
Also, it's made of steel.
When you got the stats up and a swift weapon, that's when the real game begins!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238354</id>
	<title>QQ More</title>
	<author>Ka D'Argo</author>
	<datestamp>1266843180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People who dislike open pvp are why most MMORPG's these days are carebear funfests of total safezones and little to no pvp which you usually have to flag for.
<p>
What you consider a "griefing fucktard" we consider part of the game. If the game allows us to kill someone, guess what, we may make use of that ability. This is why I do not play WoW. I did for a while, but not being able to kill people in my same "faction" was a deal breaker. If someone was annoying you, what could you do?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/ignore their username? What if they physically followed you around? It's a perpetual world so you couldn't just change instances (unless you went into an actual dungeon/raid without the person). So THEY could theoretically grief you. Sure, you can report them and maybe, maybe, a GM might give them a warning or whatever. Seriously though, the ability to kill anyone, anywhere, for any reason, is what attracts a lot of us to MMORPG's.
</p><p>
There are a few games that cater to this. Eve Online isn't half bad and Darkfall is decent. I personally loved UO and Shadowbane simply for the open pvp. I loved Shadowbane for it's player politically run servers. There was no real PvE content, you killed mobs en mass to level and you pvp till you were exhausted. The servers were ran by players, we decided who controlled what territory, who had rights to what resources. We chose our own paths in the game.
</p><p>
Then you log into game's like WoW where you can only fight persons X, Y, and Z and only in locations A, B, or C. It's so carebear it might as well be Hello Kitty Online with Orcs and Humans. We rofl at people who QQ over being killed in pvp. It's hilarious to watch people break down in a nerdrage of delicious tears over precious pixels they might lose on a digital screen. You would be shocked at grown men weeping over binary 1's and 0's which compose their +5 Sword Mastery gloves they suddenly dropped because they weren't keeping an eye on their surroundings and got wtfganked.
</p><p>
Yes, casual gamers and non-pvp fans make up the majority of mmo games. Sad as it may be. But there IS a market for these games. Darkfall, Mortal Online, Fallen Earth, Neocron, Shadowbane, UO, Eve Online, and more and more and more. There ARE games for the die hardcore pvpers.
</p><p>
As Shadowbane taught us, play to crush. If your ego can't check being killed, you need to go install Runescape or MS Hearts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People who dislike open pvp are why most MMORPG 's these days are carebear funfests of total safezones and little to no pvp which you usually have to flag for .
What you consider a " griefing fucktard " we consider part of the game .
If the game allows us to kill someone , guess what , we may make use of that ability .
This is why I do not play WoW .
I did for a while , but not being able to kill people in my same " faction " was a deal breaker .
If someone was annoying you , what could you do ?
/ignore their username ?
What if they physically followed you around ?
It 's a perpetual world so you could n't just change instances ( unless you went into an actual dungeon/raid without the person ) .
So THEY could theoretically grief you .
Sure , you can report them and maybe , maybe , a GM might give them a warning or whatever .
Seriously though , the ability to kill anyone , anywhere , for any reason , is what attracts a lot of us to MMORPG 's .
There are a few games that cater to this .
Eve Online is n't half bad and Darkfall is decent .
I personally loved UO and Shadowbane simply for the open pvp .
I loved Shadowbane for it 's player politically run servers .
There was no real PvE content , you killed mobs en mass to level and you pvp till you were exhausted .
The servers were ran by players , we decided who controlled what territory , who had rights to what resources .
We chose our own paths in the game .
Then you log into game 's like WoW where you can only fight persons X , Y , and Z and only in locations A , B , or C. It 's so carebear it might as well be Hello Kitty Online with Orcs and Humans .
We rofl at people who QQ over being killed in pvp .
It 's hilarious to watch people break down in a nerdrage of delicious tears over precious pixels they might lose on a digital screen .
You would be shocked at grown men weeping over binary 1 's and 0 's which compose their + 5 Sword Mastery gloves they suddenly dropped because they were n't keeping an eye on their surroundings and got wtfganked .
Yes , casual gamers and non-pvp fans make up the majority of mmo games .
Sad as it may be .
But there IS a market for these games .
Darkfall , Mortal Online , Fallen Earth , Neocron , Shadowbane , UO , Eve Online , and more and more and more .
There ARE games for the die hardcore pvpers .
As Shadowbane taught us , play to crush .
If your ego ca n't check being killed , you need to go install Runescape or MS Hearts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People who dislike open pvp are why most MMORPG's these days are carebear funfests of total safezones and little to no pvp which you usually have to flag for.
What you consider a "griefing fucktard" we consider part of the game.
If the game allows us to kill someone, guess what, we may make use of that ability.
This is why I do not play WoW.
I did for a while, but not being able to kill people in my same "faction" was a deal breaker.
If someone was annoying you, what could you do?
/ignore their username?
What if they physically followed you around?
It's a perpetual world so you couldn't just change instances (unless you went into an actual dungeon/raid without the person).
So THEY could theoretically grief you.
Sure, you can report them and maybe, maybe, a GM might give them a warning or whatever.
Seriously though, the ability to kill anyone, anywhere, for any reason, is what attracts a lot of us to MMORPG's.
There are a few games that cater to this.
Eve Online isn't half bad and Darkfall is decent.
I personally loved UO and Shadowbane simply for the open pvp.
I loved Shadowbane for it's player politically run servers.
There was no real PvE content, you killed mobs en mass to level and you pvp till you were exhausted.
The servers were ran by players, we decided who controlled what territory, who had rights to what resources.
We chose our own paths in the game.
Then you log into game's like WoW where you can only fight persons X, Y, and Z and only in locations A, B, or C. It's so carebear it might as well be Hello Kitty Online with Orcs and Humans.
We rofl at people who QQ over being killed in pvp.
It's hilarious to watch people break down in a nerdrage of delicious tears over precious pixels they might lose on a digital screen.
You would be shocked at grown men weeping over binary 1's and 0's which compose their +5 Sword Mastery gloves they suddenly dropped because they weren't keeping an eye on their surroundings and got wtfganked.
Yes, casual gamers and non-pvp fans make up the majority of mmo games.
Sad as it may be.
But there IS a market for these games.
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Fallen Earth, Neocron, Shadowbane, UO, Eve Online, and more and more and more.
There ARE games for the die hardcore pvpers.
As Shadowbane taught us, play to crush.
If your ego can't check being killed, you need to go install Runescape or MS Hearts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272</id>
	<title>Haven &amp; Hearth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266835620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/" title="havenandhearth.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/</a> [havenandhearth.com]</p><p>Still in beta but it has many things UO also had (building things, crafting, general freedom).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.havenandhearth.com/portal/ [ havenandhearth.com ] Still in beta but it has many things UO also had ( building things , crafting , general freedom ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.havenandhearth.com/portal/ [havenandhearth.com]Still in beta but it has many things UO also had (building things, crafting, general freedom).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31325024</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Bat Country</author>
	<datestamp>1267452360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never quite liked those Orc guys outside Yew on GL.  They decided to start ranging further afield and attacking miners so a couple of Yew Militia members (myself and another guy) strolled out there to have a word with them.  They got uppity and started attacking us.  We proceeded to spend the next 2 hours completely tearing apart their guild with just the two of us until they agreed to leave the miners alone and to only attack reds on the road.</p><p>To be fair, they were only Orcs and after the "accord" we had no trouble with them.  They got some good experience fighting real anti-pks from that brawl, and we turned up a couple of times later to help them out when they were having PK trouble.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never quite liked those Orc guys outside Yew on GL .
They decided to start ranging further afield and attacking miners so a couple of Yew Militia members ( myself and another guy ) strolled out there to have a word with them .
They got uppity and started attacking us .
We proceeded to spend the next 2 hours completely tearing apart their guild with just the two of us until they agreed to leave the miners alone and to only attack reds on the road.To be fair , they were only Orcs and after the " accord " we had no trouble with them .
They got some good experience fighting real anti-pks from that brawl , and we turned up a couple of times later to help them out when they were having PK trouble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never quite liked those Orc guys outside Yew on GL.
They decided to start ranging further afield and attacking miners so a couple of Yew Militia members (myself and another guy) strolled out there to have a word with them.
They got uppity and started attacking us.
We proceeded to spend the next 2 hours completely tearing apart their guild with just the two of us until they agreed to leave the miners alone and to only attack reds on the road.To be fair, they were only Orcs and after the "accord" we had no trouble with them.
They got some good experience fighting real anti-pks from that brawl, and we turned up a couple of times later to help them out when they were having PK trouble.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229880</id>
	<title>Re:Griefing was King!</title>
	<author>Jaybird1981</author>
	<datestamp>1266857340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Miles/Frosty from Lake Superior Baby! What What!

Good to see Bad Ad on here as well!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Miles/Frosty from Lake Superior Baby !
What What !
Good to see Bad Ad on here as well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Miles/Frosty from Lake Superior Baby!
What What!
Good to see Bad Ad on here as well!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229454</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266855360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>qq moar carebear</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>qq moar carebear</tokentext>
<sentencetext>qq moar carebear</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232978</id>
	<title>Hoowah Shadowclan!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266867600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was a longtime member of the Shadowclan Orcs southeast of Yew on the Catskills (and later Siege Perilous) servers.  Thanks for the shoutout!</p><p>Despite trying many games (EQ, AO, SWG, and WoW), I've never found an experience that matched the orc fort in the woods.  UO's freeform, non-level based play allowed new characters to interact meaningfully with experienced characters.  Compare this to WoW, where character level determines level of interaction.  The orcs held the fort despite (and because of!) constant attacks by griefers, thieves, and PvPers.  As UO restricted nonconsensual player interaction, our ability to roleplay &amp; fight with the larger server population diminished.  Siege Perilous was a haven when it opened, as the Catskills ruleset was slowly killing the clan.</p><p>Griefing sucks.  The orcs had class and didn't grief those who didn't grief us.  What stopped us from being intolerable buttheads to the rest of the server?  An internal, player-based, player-regulated code of conduct.  I think that we were the exception; most PKs/thieves probably didn't have such internal restrictions limiting their antisocial conduct.  We kicked out quite a few wanna-be orcs who refused to fight "honorably" or griefed unnecessarily.</p><p>We were antisocial, but honorably so -- we were orcs, after all!  Trespass on our lands, refuse to pay tribute, and you'd be "clomped."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was a longtime member of the Shadowclan Orcs southeast of Yew on the Catskills ( and later Siege Perilous ) servers .
Thanks for the shoutout ! Despite trying many games ( EQ , AO , SWG , and WoW ) , I 've never found an experience that matched the orc fort in the woods .
UO 's freeform , non-level based play allowed new characters to interact meaningfully with experienced characters .
Compare this to WoW , where character level determines level of interaction .
The orcs held the fort despite ( and because of !
) constant attacks by griefers , thieves , and PvPers .
As UO restricted nonconsensual player interaction , our ability to roleplay &amp; fight with the larger server population diminished .
Siege Perilous was a haven when it opened , as the Catskills ruleset was slowly killing the clan.Griefing sucks .
The orcs had class and did n't grief those who did n't grief us .
What stopped us from being intolerable buttheads to the rest of the server ?
An internal , player-based , player-regulated code of conduct .
I think that we were the exception ; most PKs/thieves probably did n't have such internal restrictions limiting their antisocial conduct .
We kicked out quite a few wan na-be orcs who refused to fight " honorably " or griefed unnecessarily.We were antisocial , but honorably so -- we were orcs , after all !
Trespass on our lands , refuse to pay tribute , and you 'd be " clomped .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was a longtime member of the Shadowclan Orcs southeast of Yew on the Catskills (and later Siege Perilous) servers.
Thanks for the shoutout!Despite trying many games (EQ, AO, SWG, and WoW), I've never found an experience that matched the orc fort in the woods.
UO's freeform, non-level based play allowed new characters to interact meaningfully with experienced characters.
Compare this to WoW, where character level determines level of interaction.
The orcs held the fort despite (and because of!
) constant attacks by griefers, thieves, and PvPers.
As UO restricted nonconsensual player interaction, our ability to roleplay &amp; fight with the larger server population diminished.
Siege Perilous was a haven when it opened, as the Catskills ruleset was slowly killing the clan.Griefing sucks.
The orcs had class and didn't grief those who didn't grief us.
What stopped us from being intolerable buttheads to the rest of the server?
An internal, player-based, player-regulated code of conduct.
I think that we were the exception; most PKs/thieves probably didn't have such internal restrictions limiting their antisocial conduct.
We kicked out quite a few wanna-be orcs who refused to fight "honorably" or griefed unnecessarily.We were antisocial, but honorably so -- we were orcs, after all!
Trespass on our lands, refuse to pay tribute, and you'd be "clomped.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227590</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266839700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EVE Online is a MMO that is based on griefing and death, and has been growing year on year since launch and is now one of the biggest. The problem with current MMOs is that the devs listen to whining players instead of keeping to a design brief. If the game is designed to be hard and unforgiving, then don't play if that's not your thing, don't whine and spoil it for others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EVE Online is a MMO that is based on griefing and death , and has been growing year on year since launch and is now one of the biggest .
The problem with current MMOs is that the devs listen to whining players instead of keeping to a design brief .
If the game is designed to be hard and unforgiving , then do n't play if that 's not your thing , do n't whine and spoil it for others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EVE Online is a MMO that is based on griefing and death, and has been growing year on year since launch and is now one of the biggest.
The problem with current MMOs is that the devs listen to whining players instead of keeping to a design brief.
If the game is designed to be hard and unforgiving, then don't play if that's not your thing, don't whine and spoil it for others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239438</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266849600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The original idea of UO was that players would govern themselves, and game mechanics should interfere as little as possible with the player's choice between good and evil. This would form communities, cause players to stick together and take sides. While the idea was great in theory, it didn't work out too well. UO was haunted by rampant player killing, griefing and cheating, causing many players to leave the game. After several other attempts, game designers decided to solve this problem by splitting the world into two facets (called Trammel and Felucca). In one facet, nonconsensual player killing was impossible. In the other facet, player killing was unrestricted.</p><p>The problems arising from this shaped Ultima Online until today. On the one hand, Felucca still allows unlimited mass-murdering and player griefing. On the other hand, Trammel is home to players who want to play a risk-free item-based game. The splitting of the world caused a lot of communities to break apart and fade. It opened Felucca as a niche for players who had fun with mass-murdering and who could afford the necessary equipment, and banned the rest of the players into a world without risk and challenge and without the necessity of player interaction. The original concept had been destroyed for good.</p><p>Today, most game designers know that the coexistence of good and evil in the same world is an essential feature of any MMORPG. It is what welds players together, forms communities, creates unlimited adventures. Implementing artificial PvP boundaries, like PvP switches or PvP zones, destroys all that and only proves that the game designer was not able to come up with realistic solutions.</p><p>Why did the original idea fail? It failed, cause it lacked the required tools to create a balance between good and evil. Players never really were able to govern themselves. "Good" players felt victimized and helpless against "evil" players.</p><p>The root of the problem was that the UO player is forced to make a choice. A choice between Felucca and Trammel. A choice between black and white. Those who preferred all the grays in between, left to play other MMORPGs. On this page, there's an interesting description of a system that would allow both good and evil in the same world, without the possibility of rampant griefing:</p><p>http://www.aschulze.net/ultima/blog/blog\_20100217.htm#coexistence</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The original idea of UO was that players would govern themselves , and game mechanics should interfere as little as possible with the player 's choice between good and evil .
This would form communities , cause players to stick together and take sides .
While the idea was great in theory , it did n't work out too well .
UO was haunted by rampant player killing , griefing and cheating , causing many players to leave the game .
After several other attempts , game designers decided to solve this problem by splitting the world into two facets ( called Trammel and Felucca ) .
In one facet , nonconsensual player killing was impossible .
In the other facet , player killing was unrestricted.The problems arising from this shaped Ultima Online until today .
On the one hand , Felucca still allows unlimited mass-murdering and player griefing .
On the other hand , Trammel is home to players who want to play a risk-free item-based game .
The splitting of the world caused a lot of communities to break apart and fade .
It opened Felucca as a niche for players who had fun with mass-murdering and who could afford the necessary equipment , and banned the rest of the players into a world without risk and challenge and without the necessity of player interaction .
The original concept had been destroyed for good.Today , most game designers know that the coexistence of good and evil in the same world is an essential feature of any MMORPG .
It is what welds players together , forms communities , creates unlimited adventures .
Implementing artificial PvP boundaries , like PvP switches or PvP zones , destroys all that and only proves that the game designer was not able to come up with realistic solutions.Why did the original idea fail ?
It failed , cause it lacked the required tools to create a balance between good and evil .
Players never really were able to govern themselves .
" Good " players felt victimized and helpless against " evil " players.The root of the problem was that the UO player is forced to make a choice .
A choice between Felucca and Trammel .
A choice between black and white .
Those who preferred all the grays in between , left to play other MMORPGs .
On this page , there 's an interesting description of a system that would allow both good and evil in the same world , without the possibility of rampant griefing : http : //www.aschulze.net/ultima/blog/blog \ _20100217.htm # coexistence</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The original idea of UO was that players would govern themselves, and game mechanics should interfere as little as possible with the player's choice between good and evil.
This would form communities, cause players to stick together and take sides.
While the idea was great in theory, it didn't work out too well.
UO was haunted by rampant player killing, griefing and cheating, causing many players to leave the game.
After several other attempts, game designers decided to solve this problem by splitting the world into two facets (called Trammel and Felucca).
In one facet, nonconsensual player killing was impossible.
In the other facet, player killing was unrestricted.The problems arising from this shaped Ultima Online until today.
On the one hand, Felucca still allows unlimited mass-murdering and player griefing.
On the other hand, Trammel is home to players who want to play a risk-free item-based game.
The splitting of the world caused a lot of communities to break apart and fade.
It opened Felucca as a niche for players who had fun with mass-murdering and who could afford the necessary equipment, and banned the rest of the players into a world without risk and challenge and without the necessity of player interaction.
The original concept had been destroyed for good.Today, most game designers know that the coexistence of good and evil in the same world is an essential feature of any MMORPG.
It is what welds players together, forms communities, creates unlimited adventures.
Implementing artificial PvP boundaries, like PvP switches or PvP zones, destroys all that and only proves that the game designer was not able to come up with realistic solutions.Why did the original idea fail?
It failed, cause it lacked the required tools to create a balance between good and evil.
Players never really were able to govern themselves.
"Good" players felt victimized and helpless against "evil" players.The root of the problem was that the UO player is forced to make a choice.
A choice between Felucca and Trammel.
A choice between black and white.
Those who preferred all the grays in between, left to play other MMORPGs.
On this page, there's an interesting description of a system that would allow both good and evil in the same world, without the possibility of rampant griefing:http://www.aschulze.net/ultima/blog/blog\_20100217.htm#coexistence</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261526</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>funny how that emulates life, "Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players."  Obviously not the killed part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>funny how that emulates life , " Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players .
" Obviously not the killed part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>funny how that emulates life, "Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players.
"  Obviously not the killed part.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>bishiraver</author>
	<datestamp>1266859080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage, then, as a complete non-griefer?</p><p>Granted, I was a lot younger back then, so this may all simply be rose-tinted goggles.</p><p>But here's what I liked about it:</p><p>Player housing that wasn't too widespread. This was before every buildable square inch of the gameworld was covered in castles and houses. The wilderness actually felt like wilderness. There were birds flitting around, and then all of a sudden you hear an ettin roar. Rut roh! (Compare to when I left it, about a year later: running between houses.. between houses.. argh what's with all the houses.. hey, a tower with "ASS" spelt out in cloth on its roof..)</p><p>First entrepreneurial act: saving up enough money to buy one of those rare dye tubs in the trinsic tailer's shop, and proceeding to sell customization to other players who missed the spawn! Then again, the guards were broken that day in beta, and a group of hoodlums had set up shop at the south entrance. (beta)</p><p>Hanging out at the Yew Trading Company; one of the first guilds on Great Lakes to get a house with a forge in it placed it in the field at the crossroads just south of Yew. They took &amp; delivered orders through the window. Occasionally PKs would attack, so they formed an alliance with a more combat oriented guild. They'd pay guildmembers to sit around outside and protect their clientele.</p><p>A true sense of "danger;" every time a stranger came on screen I'd hit my all names hotkey. If they were red, I'd run the other direction as fast as I could. Running away from those big bad dread lords was fun! It got my blood pumping! Heck, I'd just bought some new platemail from Lilo! Compared to yawn, another instance...</p><p>Had one character who was perpetually grey. Had studded leather armor of the best magical rating, along with an imminently accurate bow of vanquishing. And he was a GM archer/tactician/hiding. PKs and NPKs alike would try to kill him. He'd either run and hide or kill 'em outright. What kept him grey was if he saw someone kill an animal (bird|rabbit|hart|bear) and not skin it, he'd run em out of "his woods." After giving them ample warning to gtfo our quit it.</p><p>The Orcs who set up base at the orc camp southwest of Yew. They were badass, and humongous. Occasionally they'd set up camp along the road and demand tribute. Occasionally they'd get attacked by people who thought they were badass PvP guilds.</p><p>They almost always lost. There were almost always ten or twenty orcs hanging out at the fort. Sometimes a lot more.</p><p>Their Drinkee fests were freakin' great.</p><p>That's the kind of content you can't get from WoW. Or any other carebare MMO. You don't even get that kind of content with Eve (though you do get truly righteous massive space battles, which are kinda cool I guess). Heck, even a primarily PvP game like DAoC didn't get content like that.</p><p>What's missing? Here's the attributes UO had that garnered more of that kind of behavior than any other MMO to date:</p><p>1) Free-range PvP outside of towns<br>2) easy ability to tell if a PK was a PK on first sight<br>3) "stuff" was relatively easy and cheap to come by. Lost a set of armor? meh, you probably have another couple sets sitting in the bank that are just as good.<br>4) You didn't have to go out grinding a treadmill to get to a state where you could comfortable interact with the rest of the game. It took 3-4 days of heavy playing to get a solid character up and running.<br>5) there were craptons of "useless" items that actually showed up when you dropped 'em on the ground. Bones, rugs, mugs, clothes, everything. Heck, even "beef jerky" (too bad they had to take that out after they released in Germany)<br>6) It didn't force your playing into a paradigm. Instead of being an amusement park with clearly marked lines and rides, it was an adventure.<br>7) At the time, it was something that was brand spankin' new. Sure, Meridian 59 and other MUDs around had done similar stuff. But none of it had the mainstream appeal that UO had.</p><p>Of cou</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage , then , as a complete non-griefer ? Granted , I was a lot younger back then , so this may all simply be rose-tinted goggles.But here 's what I liked about it : Player housing that was n't too widespread .
This was before every buildable square inch of the gameworld was covered in castles and houses .
The wilderness actually felt like wilderness .
There were birds flitting around , and then all of a sudden you hear an ettin roar .
Rut roh !
( Compare to when I left it , about a year later : running between houses.. between houses.. argh what 's with all the houses.. hey , a tower with " ASS " spelt out in cloth on its roof.. ) First entrepreneurial act : saving up enough money to buy one of those rare dye tubs in the trinsic tailer 's shop , and proceeding to sell customization to other players who missed the spawn !
Then again , the guards were broken that day in beta , and a group of hoodlums had set up shop at the south entrance .
( beta ) Hanging out at the Yew Trading Company ; one of the first guilds on Great Lakes to get a house with a forge in it placed it in the field at the crossroads just south of Yew .
They took &amp; delivered orders through the window .
Occasionally PKs would attack , so they formed an alliance with a more combat oriented guild .
They 'd pay guildmembers to sit around outside and protect their clientele.A true sense of " danger ; " every time a stranger came on screen I 'd hit my all names hotkey .
If they were red , I 'd run the other direction as fast as I could .
Running away from those big bad dread lords was fun !
It got my blood pumping !
Heck , I 'd just bought some new platemail from Lilo !
Compared to yawn , another instance...Had one character who was perpetually grey .
Had studded leather armor of the best magical rating , along with an imminently accurate bow of vanquishing .
And he was a GM archer/tactician/hiding .
PKs and NPKs alike would try to kill him .
He 'd either run and hide or kill 'em outright .
What kept him grey was if he saw someone kill an animal ( bird | rabbit | hart | bear ) and not skin it , he 'd run em out of " his woods .
" After giving them ample warning to gtfo our quit it.The Orcs who set up base at the orc camp southwest of Yew .
They were badass , and humongous .
Occasionally they 'd set up camp along the road and demand tribute .
Occasionally they 'd get attacked by people who thought they were badass PvP guilds.They almost always lost .
There were almost always ten or twenty orcs hanging out at the fort .
Sometimes a lot more.Their Drinkee fests were freakin ' great.That 's the kind of content you ca n't get from WoW .
Or any other carebare MMO .
You do n't even get that kind of content with Eve ( though you do get truly righteous massive space battles , which are kinda cool I guess ) .
Heck , even a primarily PvP game like DAoC did n't get content like that.What 's missing ?
Here 's the attributes UO had that garnered more of that kind of behavior than any other MMO to date : 1 ) Free-range PvP outside of towns2 ) easy ability to tell if a PK was a PK on first sight3 ) " stuff " was relatively easy and cheap to come by .
Lost a set of armor ?
meh , you probably have another couple sets sitting in the bank that are just as good.4 ) You did n't have to go out grinding a treadmill to get to a state where you could comfortable interact with the rest of the game .
It took 3-4 days of heavy playing to get a solid character up and running.5 ) there were craptons of " useless " items that actually showed up when you dropped 'em on the ground .
Bones , rugs , mugs , clothes , everything .
Heck , even " beef jerky " ( too bad they had to take that out after they released in Germany ) 6 ) It did n't force your playing into a paradigm .
Instead of being an amusement park with clearly marked lines and rides , it was an adventure.7 ) At the time , it was something that was brand spankin ' new .
Sure , Meridian 59 and other MUDs around had done similar stuff .
But none of it had the mainstream appeal that UO had.Of cou</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage, then, as a complete non-griefer?Granted, I was a lot younger back then, so this may all simply be rose-tinted goggles.But here's what I liked about it:Player housing that wasn't too widespread.
This was before every buildable square inch of the gameworld was covered in castles and houses.
The wilderness actually felt like wilderness.
There were birds flitting around, and then all of a sudden you hear an ettin roar.
Rut roh!
(Compare to when I left it, about a year later: running between houses.. between houses.. argh what's with all the houses.. hey, a tower with "ASS" spelt out in cloth on its roof..)First entrepreneurial act: saving up enough money to buy one of those rare dye tubs in the trinsic tailer's shop, and proceeding to sell customization to other players who missed the spawn!
Then again, the guards were broken that day in beta, and a group of hoodlums had set up shop at the south entrance.
(beta)Hanging out at the Yew Trading Company; one of the first guilds on Great Lakes to get a house with a forge in it placed it in the field at the crossroads just south of Yew.
They took &amp; delivered orders through the window.
Occasionally PKs would attack, so they formed an alliance with a more combat oriented guild.
They'd pay guildmembers to sit around outside and protect their clientele.A true sense of "danger;" every time a stranger came on screen I'd hit my all names hotkey.
If they were red, I'd run the other direction as fast as I could.
Running away from those big bad dread lords was fun!
It got my blood pumping!
Heck, I'd just bought some new platemail from Lilo!
Compared to yawn, another instance...Had one character who was perpetually grey.
Had studded leather armor of the best magical rating, along with an imminently accurate bow of vanquishing.
And he was a GM archer/tactician/hiding.
PKs and NPKs alike would try to kill him.
He'd either run and hide or kill 'em outright.
What kept him grey was if he saw someone kill an animal (bird|rabbit|hart|bear) and not skin it, he'd run em out of "his woods.
" After giving them ample warning to gtfo our quit it.The Orcs who set up base at the orc camp southwest of Yew.
They were badass, and humongous.
Occasionally they'd set up camp along the road and demand tribute.
Occasionally they'd get attacked by people who thought they were badass PvP guilds.They almost always lost.
There were almost always ten or twenty orcs hanging out at the fort.
Sometimes a lot more.Their Drinkee fests were freakin' great.That's the kind of content you can't get from WoW.
Or any other carebare MMO.
You don't even get that kind of content with Eve (though you do get truly righteous massive space battles, which are kinda cool I guess).
Heck, even a primarily PvP game like DAoC didn't get content like that.What's missing?
Here's the attributes UO had that garnered more of that kind of behavior than any other MMO to date:1) Free-range PvP outside of towns2) easy ability to tell if a PK was a PK on first sight3) "stuff" was relatively easy and cheap to come by.
Lost a set of armor?
meh, you probably have another couple sets sitting in the bank that are just as good.4) You didn't have to go out grinding a treadmill to get to a state where you could comfortable interact with the rest of the game.
It took 3-4 days of heavy playing to get a solid character up and running.5) there were craptons of "useless" items that actually showed up when you dropped 'em on the ground.
Bones, rugs, mugs, clothes, everything.
Heck, even "beef jerky" (too bad they had to take that out after they released in Germany)6) It didn't force your playing into a paradigm.
Instead of being an amusement park with clearly marked lines and rides, it was an adventure.7) At the time, it was something that was brand spankin' new.
Sure, Meridian 59 and other MUDs around had done similar stuff.
But none of it had the mainstream appeal that UO had.Of cou</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230796</id>
	<title>Shadowbane</title>
	<author>Hausenwulf</author>
	<datestamp>1266861420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The game closest to the UO experience I've found was Shadowbane. The game was pvp only, so you knew what you were getting into when you joined. There were no "sheep." Unfortunately it had two problems. The game was horribly bugged and once a group/faction/alliance got the upper hand on a given server, there was little to balance it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The game closest to the UO experience I 've found was Shadowbane .
The game was pvp only , so you knew what you were getting into when you joined .
There were no " sheep .
" Unfortunately it had two problems .
The game was horribly bugged and once a group/faction/alliance got the upper hand on a given server , there was little to balance it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The game closest to the UO experience I've found was Shadowbane.
The game was pvp only, so you knew what you were getting into when you joined.
There were no "sheep.
" Unfortunately it had two problems.
The game was horribly bugged and once a group/faction/alliance got the upper hand on a given server, there was little to balance it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31237618</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266839520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a MUD I play (I know, not exactly what you're talking about) there is world PvP but it's opt in.  Players start out as non-targetable and after a certain fairly low level which gives them time to learn the ropes and see the risks they can choose to register as PvP.  After that they are valid targets for thieves, griefers and looters.  On the good side, in the cities there is an active police force which will automatically know if a crime has been committed if it's witnessed by a player or NPC.  There are different penalties for different crimes from being knocked unconscious and thrown in the river to fines or being thrown in jail for up to a quarter of an hour of real time.  Anyone caught has all their stolen goods confiscated on top of this as a further penalty.<br>There is also the possibility of putting as assassination contract on someone's head.  Lives are limited and if they hit 0 it really is game over.  They can be purchased at a not-insignificant price (after a few purchases it might take a high level player a week to make the gold for another life) and PvP deaths all take a life including assassinations, so annoying too many players may cause a constant stream of assassins jumping out of the shadows attempting to 1-hit the player.<br>The system seems to work fairly well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a MUD I play ( I know , not exactly what you 're talking about ) there is world PvP but it 's opt in .
Players start out as non-targetable and after a certain fairly low level which gives them time to learn the ropes and see the risks they can choose to register as PvP .
After that they are valid targets for thieves , griefers and looters .
On the good side , in the cities there is an active police force which will automatically know if a crime has been committed if it 's witnessed by a player or NPC .
There are different penalties for different crimes from being knocked unconscious and thrown in the river to fines or being thrown in jail for up to a quarter of an hour of real time .
Anyone caught has all their stolen goods confiscated on top of this as a further penalty.There is also the possibility of putting as assassination contract on someone 's head .
Lives are limited and if they hit 0 it really is game over .
They can be purchased at a not-insignificant price ( after a few purchases it might take a high level player a week to make the gold for another life ) and PvP deaths all take a life including assassinations , so annoying too many players may cause a constant stream of assassins jumping out of the shadows attempting to 1-hit the player.The system seems to work fairly well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a MUD I play (I know, not exactly what you're talking about) there is world PvP but it's opt in.
Players start out as non-targetable and after a certain fairly low level which gives them time to learn the ropes and see the risks they can choose to register as PvP.
After that they are valid targets for thieves, griefers and looters.
On the good side, in the cities there is an active police force which will automatically know if a crime has been committed if it's witnessed by a player or NPC.
There are different penalties for different crimes from being knocked unconscious and thrown in the river to fines or being thrown in jail for up to a quarter of an hour of real time.
Anyone caught has all their stolen goods confiscated on top of this as a further penalty.There is also the possibility of putting as assassination contract on someone's head.
Lives are limited and if they hit 0 it really is game over.
They can be purchased at a not-insignificant price (after a few purchases it might take a high level player a week to make the gold for another life) and PvP deaths all take a life including assassinations, so annoying too many players may cause a constant stream of assassins jumping out of the shadows attempting to 1-hit the player.The system seems to work fairly well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229398</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266854880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends on your p.o.v.. If everybody knows the bug, and uses it, it becomes another game. Which sometimes is better than the original.<br>Look up Quake 3 CPMA and Defrag (especially Shaolin Productions and CeTuS), to know what I mean.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on your p.o.v.. If everybody knows the bug , and uses it , it becomes another game .
Which sometimes is better than the original.Look up Quake 3 CPMA and Defrag ( especially Shaolin Productions and CeTuS ) , to know what I mean .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on your p.o.v.. If everybody knows the bug, and uses it, it becomes another game.
Which sometimes is better than the original.Look up Quake 3 CPMA and Defrag (especially Shaolin Productions and CeTuS), to know what I mean.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228854</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>craenor</author>
	<datestamp>1266851520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I miss pre-Trammel UO and I wasn't a killer. However, I also lived in Upstate NY at the time, in Time Warner's first area to test Road Runner (or one of the first). So everyone else was on dial-up while I was on Cable, and latency made a HUGE difference in UO. So, the only reason I'm able to miss it, is because I had a very unfair advantage that made me almost unkillable to PKers. <br> <br>
So yeah, the only reason I liked UO as much as I did, is because I could laugh at the killers seeming ineptitude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I miss pre-Trammel UO and I was n't a killer .
However , I also lived in Upstate NY at the time , in Time Warner 's first area to test Road Runner ( or one of the first ) .
So everyone else was on dial-up while I was on Cable , and latency made a HUGE difference in UO .
So , the only reason I 'm able to miss it , is because I had a very unfair advantage that made me almost unkillable to PKers .
So yeah , the only reason I liked UO as much as I did , is because I could laugh at the killers seeming ineptitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I miss pre-Trammel UO and I wasn't a killer.
However, I also lived in Upstate NY at the time, in Time Warner's first area to test Road Runner (or one of the first).
So everyone else was on dial-up while I was on Cable, and latency made a HUGE difference in UO.
So, the only reason I'm able to miss it, is because I had a very unfair advantage that made me almost unkillable to PKers.
So yeah, the only reason I liked UO as much as I did, is because I could laugh at the killers seeming ineptitude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398</id>
	<title>Griefing was King!</title>
	<author>Jaybird1981</author>
	<datestamp>1266836880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always wondered how long it would take before an Ultima Online post made its way to slashdot.

I played several years on the Lake Superior shard, and after finally selling my account and moving on in 2003 i kept in touch with over 25 people that i was friends with from the realm. from those people 4 or 5 were still playing a UO Hybrid on a private server while others merged into other popular MMO's yet i never found anyone that is still playing a particular MMO.

I've played Several MMORPGs after UO but i find the same thing to be true: You just cant compare 2D to 3D when it comes to Online Games like UO. The griefing was pretty widespread, even when OSI/EA released a mirrored world (Felucca/Trammel) for the PvE crowd to play in. Insurance on items so you wouldnt lose them quickly came after that, and the good old Ultima that we all knew started to dwindle and lose its sparkle.

The Skill based characters with cap limits also made for more interesting PvP, Only the non-elite would complain about Griefing or PKing. Bringing Harrowers into the game with AoS ment actual boss fights with multiple people. And to think that was almost 6 years after they released the game. and its still going on what, expansion number 7 now?

The 2D platform made larger fighters and group battles much more fun. Easier to see everything on screen but you have to know where to look to see where the danger is coming from. An old friend of mine once had a long discussion on why UO was so popular, and especially when it came to PvP i believe it to be the most skill based option for gamers out there.

When it came to Dueling you had to time everything right, keyboard shortcuts with UOAssist over clicking spells were key, insta-switching weapons and knowing when to time that stun punch or arm a halberd. As for recreating a success of underground status with lost UO players i dont think it will happen... Most people that enjoyed it will just go back to a player run shard that was pre UO:R.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always wondered how long it would take before an Ultima Online post made its way to slashdot .
I played several years on the Lake Superior shard , and after finally selling my account and moving on in 2003 i kept in touch with over 25 people that i was friends with from the realm .
from those people 4 or 5 were still playing a UO Hybrid on a private server while others merged into other popular MMO 's yet i never found anyone that is still playing a particular MMO .
I 've played Several MMORPGs after UO but i find the same thing to be true : You just cant compare 2D to 3D when it comes to Online Games like UO .
The griefing was pretty widespread , even when OSI/EA released a mirrored world ( Felucca/Trammel ) for the PvE crowd to play in .
Insurance on items so you wouldnt lose them quickly came after that , and the good old Ultima that we all knew started to dwindle and lose its sparkle .
The Skill based characters with cap limits also made for more interesting PvP , Only the non-elite would complain about Griefing or PKing .
Bringing Harrowers into the game with AoS ment actual boss fights with multiple people .
And to think that was almost 6 years after they released the game .
and its still going on what , expansion number 7 now ?
The 2D platform made larger fighters and group battles much more fun .
Easier to see everything on screen but you have to know where to look to see where the danger is coming from .
An old friend of mine once had a long discussion on why UO was so popular , and especially when it came to PvP i believe it to be the most skill based option for gamers out there .
When it came to Dueling you had to time everything right , keyboard shortcuts with UOAssist over clicking spells were key , insta-switching weapons and knowing when to time that stun punch or arm a halberd .
As for recreating a success of underground status with lost UO players i dont think it will happen... Most people that enjoyed it will just go back to a player run shard that was pre UO : R .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always wondered how long it would take before an Ultima Online post made its way to slashdot.
I played several years on the Lake Superior shard, and after finally selling my account and moving on in 2003 i kept in touch with over 25 people that i was friends with from the realm.
from those people 4 or 5 were still playing a UO Hybrid on a private server while others merged into other popular MMO's yet i never found anyone that is still playing a particular MMO.
I've played Several MMORPGs after UO but i find the same thing to be true: You just cant compare 2D to 3D when it comes to Online Games like UO.
The griefing was pretty widespread, even when OSI/EA released a mirrored world (Felucca/Trammel) for the PvE crowd to play in.
Insurance on items so you wouldnt lose them quickly came after that, and the good old Ultima that we all knew started to dwindle and lose its sparkle.
The Skill based characters with cap limits also made for more interesting PvP, Only the non-elite would complain about Griefing or PKing.
Bringing Harrowers into the game with AoS ment actual boss fights with multiple people.
And to think that was almost 6 years after they released the game.
and its still going on what, expansion number 7 now?
The 2D platform made larger fighters and group battles much more fun.
Easier to see everything on screen but you have to know where to look to see where the danger is coming from.
An old friend of mine once had a long discussion on why UO was so popular, and especially when it came to PvP i believe it to be the most skill based option for gamers out there.
When it came to Dueling you had to time everything right, keyboard shortcuts with UOAssist over clicking spells were key, insta-switching weapons and knowing when to time that stun punch or arm a halberd.
As for recreating a success of underground status with lost UO players i dont think it will happen... Most people that enjoyed it will just go back to a player run shard that was pre UO:R.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228240</id>
	<title>Nice!</title>
	<author>Exitar</author>
	<datestamp>1266847020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run away from MMORPG forums because they're full of whining people ("The game isn't the same anymore! It caters to casuals now!") and find the same whines here...</p><p>Anybody can suggest a good knitting forum?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run away from MMORPG forums because they 're full of whining people ( " The game is n't the same anymore !
It caters to casuals now !
" ) and find the same whines here...Anybody can suggest a good knitting forum ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run away from MMORPG forums because they're full of whining people ("The game isn't the same anymore!
It caters to casuals now!
") and find the same whines here...Anybody can suggest a good knitting forum?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300</id>
	<title>EvE Online?</title>
	<author>OS24Ever</author>
	<datestamp>1266835920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As far as penalty driven PvP and PvE (your ship goes boom, no getting it back, and stuff you fit to your ship can go boom with it along with stuff you were carrying)</p><p>Owning space regions is expensive &amp; cumbersome, but to be honest I don't remember the housing mechanic real well but it's similar.  You can own a Station as well has have Towers referred to as 'POS' (Player Owned Stations)</p><p>anything outside of account stealing and real money stealing is allowed and not reversed.</p><p>But you're not an elf running around casting things, you're in a space ship.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as penalty driven PvP and PvE ( your ship goes boom , no getting it back , and stuff you fit to your ship can go boom with it along with stuff you were carrying ) Owning space regions is expensive &amp; cumbersome , but to be honest I do n't remember the housing mechanic real well but it 's similar .
You can own a Station as well has have Towers referred to as 'POS ' ( Player Owned Stations ) anything outside of account stealing and real money stealing is allowed and not reversed.But you 're not an elf running around casting things , you 're in a space ship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as penalty driven PvP and PvE (your ship goes boom, no getting it back, and stuff you fit to your ship can go boom with it along with stuff you were carrying)Owning space regions is expensive &amp; cumbersome, but to be honest I don't remember the housing mechanic real well but it's similar.
You can own a Station as well has have Towers referred to as 'POS' (Player Owned Stations)anything outside of account stealing and real money stealing is allowed and not reversed.But you're not an elf running around casting things, you're in a space ship.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227992</id>
	<title>Because most people are somewhat decent?</title>
	<author>EWAdams</author>
	<datestamp>1266844200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a thief.</p><p>I don't choose to consort with thieves.</p><p>I don't like to live in thievery-prone areas.</p><p>Most people feel the way I do.</p><p>Simple, really.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a thief.I do n't choose to consort with thieves.I do n't like to live in thievery-prone areas.Most people feel the way I do.Simple , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a thief.I don't choose to consort with thieves.I don't like to live in thievery-prone areas.Most people feel the way I do.Simple, really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229162</id>
	<title>Depends on what you mean by "popular"</title>
	<author>Chas</author>
	<datestamp>1266853560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're talking an MMO someplace in the neighborhood of 100K players, there's lots of them out there.</p><p>If you're talking a WOW-style anomaly with a few million RMT accounts and a few hundred thousand players, you're bound to be disappointed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're talking an MMO someplace in the neighborhood of 100K players , there 's lots of them out there.If you 're talking a WOW-style anomaly with a few million RMT accounts and a few hundred thousand players , you 're bound to be disappointed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're talking an MMO someplace in the neighborhood of 100K players, there's lots of them out there.If you're talking a WOW-style anomaly with a few million RMT accounts and a few hundred thousand players, you're bound to be disappointed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31251592</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266923940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your game is ugly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your game is ugly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your game is ugly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31267208</id>
	<title>UO days are gone:(</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265119080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The biggest thing in the way of an old style UO open world is the popularity of online games today.</p><p>Back then, if you were ganked, it was often a lone roamer pk or gang of 3 guys or so. Today MMO's are more popular and guilds are more organized. I call it the irreversible arms race. In todays gaming world, you would never have your mining interupted by a loan pk that added some adventure to your evening. It is much more likely that a huge 40+ person guild would decide they own that mountain range and make it unuseable to you unless you were also in a 40 person active guild. Then the other side fields 60 guys, and so on. The allure of the old style UO days was roaming the world alone and ganking someone, or fighting back and winning vs the loan pk. That will never happen again, it will end up being 100's of players on each side in loose alliances or huge guilds. It might be pvp, mass pvp but it will not be what classic UO did with their sandbox game. Those days are gone forever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest thing in the way of an old style UO open world is the popularity of online games today.Back then , if you were ganked , it was often a lone roamer pk or gang of 3 guys or so .
Today MMO 's are more popular and guilds are more organized .
I call it the irreversible arms race .
In todays gaming world , you would never have your mining interupted by a loan pk that added some adventure to your evening .
It is much more likely that a huge 40 + person guild would decide they own that mountain range and make it unuseable to you unless you were also in a 40 person active guild .
Then the other side fields 60 guys , and so on .
The allure of the old style UO days was roaming the world alone and ganking someone , or fighting back and winning vs the loan pk .
That will never happen again , it will end up being 100 's of players on each side in loose alliances or huge guilds .
It might be pvp , mass pvp but it will not be what classic UO did with their sandbox game .
Those days are gone forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest thing in the way of an old style UO open world is the popularity of online games today.Back then, if you were ganked, it was often a lone roamer pk or gang of 3 guys or so.
Today MMO's are more popular and guilds are more organized.
I call it the irreversible arms race.
In todays gaming world, you would never have your mining interupted by a loan pk that added some adventure to your evening.
It is much more likely that a huge 40+ person guild would decide they own that mountain range and make it unuseable to you unless you were also in a 40 person active guild.
Then the other side fields 60 guys, and so on.
The allure of the old style UO days was roaming the world alone and ganking someone, or fighting back and winning vs the loan pk.
That will never happen again, it will end up being 100's of players on each side in loose alliances or huge guilds.
It might be pvp, mass pvp but it will not be what classic UO did with their sandbox game.
Those days are gone forever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239286</id>
	<title>My two cents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266848640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a very interesting thread to me, a passionate gamer. As someone who has played many MMORPGs (Everquest 1 &amp; 2, World of Warcraft, Darkfall, Mortal Online beta, Vanguard, and others), I have seen this question brought up and argued over many times on different game forums, and here is my take on it:</p><p>The overall breakdown of massive online games seems to be into two general categories, sandbox games like Ultima Online and themepark games like World of Warcraft and Everquest. Sandbox games resemble real life more, by basically presenting players with a background and tools, and then letting them do as they wish, whereas themepark games offer players paths predetermined by developers. As people have pointed out here, most sandbox games have experienced problems with ganking and griefing, and that among other things has led game companies to steer toward themepark MMOs for the most part. There are also other reasons themepark games appeal to the business decision makers. The mainstream gamer, who provides the most lucrative market, is more on the casual side these days, and probably has less time to play, so according to conventional wisdom, short, well defined tasks that provide rewards (e.g. quick dungeon run in WoW) prevalent in themepark games fit such gamers' playing style much better than the open gameplay of a sandbox world. Sandbox games require more imagination as well, with players needing to conjure up their own goals, and that also might not be the mainstream gamer's forte.</p><p>However, I happen to believe that sandbox games are the true goal of all game development. Games can be used for many different things, as substitutes for sport (ala Counter Strike), to tell an interesting story (as one of many single player RPGs), or to just burn a few hours while having nothing else to do. While they can be used for each of these purposes, so can other things, like playing basketball outside, reading a book, or talking with people. What truly makes games unique is that they have the potential to allow the player to experience an alternate reality, to do things they can never do in real life, and this is something that only sandbox games can excel at. After all, how can you really suspend your disbelief and think you are THERE, if your hand is constanly held and you can only do what the developer marked as possible. Only sandbox games have the depth, via their freedom, to approximate life. Only in a  game where you can attack anything and kill anyone can you have lifelike conflicts and treachery and deep relationships (without risking your life for real). By comparison, a game that holds your hand at every moment, and tells you what you can do arbitrarily, will always be extremely shallow. For that reason, I am a huge proponent of sandbox MMOs, but with a reasonable catch. Like others here, I agree that such a game cannot have endless ganking and griefing, nor do I think that player policing will be enough on its own, as for obvious reasons, players will not behave the same way in games as they do in real life. But I do believe that it is possible to create a game where certain game mechanics (probably difficult to design, so I will not propose them here, not being paid for it and all) "control" ganking and griefing. By "control" I mean it is still possible to kill anyone (retaining the game's free atmosphere), but there is a cost to it somehow, making the would be ganker consider the consequences in a serious way. This, I think, would lead to meaningful PvP, a ganker choosing to risk/face consequences if the target is ladden with riches (as a robber would in real life), but foregoing it if the target is simply a poor nooblet. Sure, people would still die and lose stuff, but this would spice up the gameplay and make people think as in real life (e.g. do NOT leave home ladden with gold without protection), and it would happen in tolerable amounts.</p><p>Another thing I want to add is that in the battle between sandbox and themepark, only one game has been massively successful, and that is WoW, and all</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a very interesting thread to me , a passionate gamer .
As someone who has played many MMORPGs ( Everquest 1 &amp; 2 , World of Warcraft , Darkfall , Mortal Online beta , Vanguard , and others ) , I have seen this question brought up and argued over many times on different game forums , and here is my take on it : The overall breakdown of massive online games seems to be into two general categories , sandbox games like Ultima Online and themepark games like World of Warcraft and Everquest .
Sandbox games resemble real life more , by basically presenting players with a background and tools , and then letting them do as they wish , whereas themepark games offer players paths predetermined by developers .
As people have pointed out here , most sandbox games have experienced problems with ganking and griefing , and that among other things has led game companies to steer toward themepark MMOs for the most part .
There are also other reasons themepark games appeal to the business decision makers .
The mainstream gamer , who provides the most lucrative market , is more on the casual side these days , and probably has less time to play , so according to conventional wisdom , short , well defined tasks that provide rewards ( e.g .
quick dungeon run in WoW ) prevalent in themepark games fit such gamers ' playing style much better than the open gameplay of a sandbox world .
Sandbox games require more imagination as well , with players needing to conjure up their own goals , and that also might not be the mainstream gamer 's forte.However , I happen to believe that sandbox games are the true goal of all game development .
Games can be used for many different things , as substitutes for sport ( ala Counter Strike ) , to tell an interesting story ( as one of many single player RPGs ) , or to just burn a few hours while having nothing else to do .
While they can be used for each of these purposes , so can other things , like playing basketball outside , reading a book , or talking with people .
What truly makes games unique is that they have the potential to allow the player to experience an alternate reality , to do things they can never do in real life , and this is something that only sandbox games can excel at .
After all , how can you really suspend your disbelief and think you are THERE , if your hand is constanly held and you can only do what the developer marked as possible .
Only sandbox games have the depth , via their freedom , to approximate life .
Only in a game where you can attack anything and kill anyone can you have lifelike conflicts and treachery and deep relationships ( without risking your life for real ) .
By comparison , a game that holds your hand at every moment , and tells you what you can do arbitrarily , will always be extremely shallow .
For that reason , I am a huge proponent of sandbox MMOs , but with a reasonable catch .
Like others here , I agree that such a game can not have endless ganking and griefing , nor do I think that player policing will be enough on its own , as for obvious reasons , players will not behave the same way in games as they do in real life .
But I do believe that it is possible to create a game where certain game mechanics ( probably difficult to design , so I will not propose them here , not being paid for it and all ) " control " ganking and griefing .
By " control " I mean it is still possible to kill anyone ( retaining the game 's free atmosphere ) , but there is a cost to it somehow , making the would be ganker consider the consequences in a serious way .
This , I think , would lead to meaningful PvP , a ganker choosing to risk/face consequences if the target is ladden with riches ( as a robber would in real life ) , but foregoing it if the target is simply a poor nooblet .
Sure , people would still die and lose stuff , but this would spice up the gameplay and make people think as in real life ( e.g .
do NOT leave home ladden with gold without protection ) , and it would happen in tolerable amounts.Another thing I want to add is that in the battle between sandbox and themepark , only one game has been massively successful , and that is WoW , and all</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a very interesting thread to me, a passionate gamer.
As someone who has played many MMORPGs (Everquest 1 &amp; 2, World of Warcraft, Darkfall, Mortal Online beta, Vanguard, and others), I have seen this question brought up and argued over many times on different game forums, and here is my take on it:The overall breakdown of massive online games seems to be into two general categories, sandbox games like Ultima Online and themepark games like World of Warcraft and Everquest.
Sandbox games resemble real life more, by basically presenting players with a background and tools, and then letting them do as they wish, whereas themepark games offer players paths predetermined by developers.
As people have pointed out here, most sandbox games have experienced problems with ganking and griefing, and that among other things has led game companies to steer toward themepark MMOs for the most part.
There are also other reasons themepark games appeal to the business decision makers.
The mainstream gamer, who provides the most lucrative market, is more on the casual side these days, and probably has less time to play, so according to conventional wisdom, short, well defined tasks that provide rewards (e.g.
quick dungeon run in WoW) prevalent in themepark games fit such gamers' playing style much better than the open gameplay of a sandbox world.
Sandbox games require more imagination as well, with players needing to conjure up their own goals, and that also might not be the mainstream gamer's forte.However, I happen to believe that sandbox games are the true goal of all game development.
Games can be used for many different things, as substitutes for sport (ala Counter Strike), to tell an interesting story (as one of many single player RPGs), or to just burn a few hours while having nothing else to do.
While they can be used for each of these purposes, so can other things, like playing basketball outside, reading a book, or talking with people.
What truly makes games unique is that they have the potential to allow the player to experience an alternate reality, to do things they can never do in real life, and this is something that only sandbox games can excel at.
After all, how can you really suspend your disbelief and think you are THERE, if your hand is constanly held and you can only do what the developer marked as possible.
Only sandbox games have the depth, via their freedom, to approximate life.
Only in a  game where you can attack anything and kill anyone can you have lifelike conflicts and treachery and deep relationships (without risking your life for real).
By comparison, a game that holds your hand at every moment, and tells you what you can do arbitrarily, will always be extremely shallow.
For that reason, I am a huge proponent of sandbox MMOs, but with a reasonable catch.
Like others here, I agree that such a game cannot have endless ganking and griefing, nor do I think that player policing will be enough on its own, as for obvious reasons, players will not behave the same way in games as they do in real life.
But I do believe that it is possible to create a game where certain game mechanics (probably difficult to design, so I will not propose them here, not being paid for it and all) "control" ganking and griefing.
By "control" I mean it is still possible to kill anyone (retaining the game's free atmosphere), but there is a cost to it somehow, making the would be ganker consider the consequences in a serious way.
This, I think, would lead to meaningful PvP, a ganker choosing to risk/face consequences if the target is ladden with riches (as a robber would in real life), but foregoing it if the target is simply a poor nooblet.
Sure, people would still die and lose stuff, but this would spice up the gameplay and make people think as in real life (e.g.
do NOT leave home ladden with gold without protection), and it would happen in tolerable amounts.Another thing I want to add is that in the battle between sandbox and themepark, only one game has been massively successful, and that is WoW, and all</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227278</id>
	<title>Shadowbane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266835680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They tried it.  It failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They tried it .
It failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They tried it.
It failed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31274314</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267122900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No reason you can't do just that on a PvP server, if an appropriate game came about.</p><p>Just don't QQ all damned day if people don't share your views and want to be on a non-pvp server instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No reason you ca n't do just that on a PvP server , if an appropriate game came about.Just do n't QQ all damned day if people do n't share your views and want to be on a non-pvp server instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No reason you can't do just that on a PvP server, if an appropriate game came about.Just don't QQ all damned day if people don't share your views and want to be on a non-pvp server instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230436</id>
	<title>The Dark Side shard</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266860220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you like PvP, check out this ultima shard that I used to play, that appears to still be running in full force (judging only by the website).<br>http://www.tdsuo.com/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you like PvP , check out this ultima shard that I used to play , that appears to still be running in full force ( judging only by the website ) .http : //www.tdsuo.com/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you like PvP, check out this ultima shard that I used to play, that appears to still be running in full force (judging only by the website).http://www.tdsuo.com/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228126</id>
	<title>Re:Of course they wouldnt work. need to be stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266845700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are able to carry "2-3 hours" of progress, you probably only put in 20-30 minutes of effective work.  There's no way to just keep farming for three hours and still being able to carry it all, and it's very easy to store your progress safe from the hands of others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are able to carry " 2-3 hours " of progress , you probably only put in 20-30 minutes of effective work .
There 's no way to just keep farming for three hours and still being able to carry it all , and it 's very easy to store your progress safe from the hands of others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are able to carry "2-3 hours" of progress, you probably only put in 20-30 minutes of effective work.
There's no way to just keep farming for three hours and still being able to carry it all, and it's very easy to store your progress safe from the hands of others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232944</id>
	<title>bounty boards</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266867420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the cooler features of UO pre-trammel was the bounty boards.  You could post bounties for PKers and anybody could bring the PKers skull back to get the reward.  Was pretty cool, and definitely not a free-for-all like some have suggested, there were repercussions to being evil.  For example, if you died as a murderer, you could only be ressurected by another player - who would then become a criminal.  There was only one town where murderers could go without being killed instantly by guards, and it was on an island inhabited by pirates.  Even though I was never a dread lord, I definitely preferred the freedom of UO to the canned "amusement park" gaming of Asheron, Everquest, WoW, or any other "level-based" mmo.  I played from 1997 til maybe 2004, and in that time I learned that the best massively multiplayer roleplaying game is real life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the cooler features of UO pre-trammel was the bounty boards .
You could post bounties for PKers and anybody could bring the PKers skull back to get the reward .
Was pretty cool , and definitely not a free-for-all like some have suggested , there were repercussions to being evil .
For example , if you died as a murderer , you could only be ressurected by another player - who would then become a criminal .
There was only one town where murderers could go without being killed instantly by guards , and it was on an island inhabited by pirates .
Even though I was never a dread lord , I definitely preferred the freedom of UO to the canned " amusement park " gaming of Asheron , Everquest , WoW , or any other " level-based " mmo .
I played from 1997 til maybe 2004 , and in that time I learned that the best massively multiplayer roleplaying game is real life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the cooler features of UO pre-trammel was the bounty boards.
You could post bounties for PKers and anybody could bring the PKers skull back to get the reward.
Was pretty cool, and definitely not a free-for-all like some have suggested, there were repercussions to being evil.
For example, if you died as a murderer, you could only be ressurected by another player - who would then become a criminal.
There was only one town where murderers could go without being killed instantly by guards, and it was on an island inhabited by pirates.
Even though I was never a dread lord, I definitely preferred the freedom of UO to the canned "amusement park" gaming of Asheron, Everquest, WoW, or any other "level-based" mmo.
I played from 1997 til maybe 2004, and in that time I learned that the best massively multiplayer roleplaying game is real life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229794</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>The Neck</author>
	<datestamp>1266856980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you have a one sided view to what exactly some people really loved. You have taken the one view that you have and exptrapolated it out to everyone.</p><p>What I personally liked about UO and personally believe killed it had to do with the introduction of portals and instant anywhere travel. When OU was big, open, and took a good bit of time to get from one corner of the world to the other it had a vastly different feel. In the beta and the first year it was the wild fucking west. I could stay out in the woods in the far north east corner of the map and not see someone for days.</p><p>It also at later levels became very interesting to battle. You talk of griefers and I would suggest that you did not fully understand how to deal with them. I would say stealing was a problem only if you did not have the understanding that the best gear was easy to get and made it very easy to have a level playing field.</p><p>I would also point out that a grandmaster with a dex of 100 and a str of 100 could kill a fully armored plate master with a barduchie(spelling?) with little to no problem ass naked with a dagger. The skill was more important than the gear! I could hit you 100 times before you could get a swing off because of the fighting mech would make you start your swing over every time you got hit.</p><p>Just because you did did not understand the mech of the game well enough to hand yourself does not make the game bad. I found that not having forced policies onto your game style to control the wild west part of the world does not mean that it was not fun as shit to have your ass handed to you every now and then.</p><p>People liked the idea of loosing things if you got to far away from the city without protection.</p><p>People in that game where stupid, if you carried more than you needed and die you lost it. Who carries eveyrthing they own. It was stupid people being stupid.</p><p>People liked the danger of running from town to town alone and the smartest mob out there was someone else.</p><p>People liked to hunt others down for being ass hats.</p><p>People liked playing in a group of five guys that knew how to handle the game, did not get griefed by anyone because they got there asses handed to them.</p><p>People disliked the game because it did not coddle the idea of the less common denominator. It was, dare I say it, a little more difficult.</p><p>You see, the people that did not like OU just did not like the game play. They wanted to be protected from the harshness. They wanted to be able to die without loosing anything. They wanted to play solo and not actually act like they where all alone.</p><p>I call bullshit on anyone that says UO was not fun and point to thier own lack of knowledge toward how they should have been playing instead of how they figured it should have been played.</p><p>I loved the game when it was in the first 2 years. I was not a griefer, I was the anti griefer. I was the guy that stood at the Fork glowing Red and never starting a fight. Just waiting and giving you the chance for glory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you have a one sided view to what exactly some people really loved .
You have taken the one view that you have and exptrapolated it out to everyone.What I personally liked about UO and personally believe killed it had to do with the introduction of portals and instant anywhere travel .
When OU was big , open , and took a good bit of time to get from one corner of the world to the other it had a vastly different feel .
In the beta and the first year it was the wild fucking west .
I could stay out in the woods in the far north east corner of the map and not see someone for days.It also at later levels became very interesting to battle .
You talk of griefers and I would suggest that you did not fully understand how to deal with them .
I would say stealing was a problem only if you did not have the understanding that the best gear was easy to get and made it very easy to have a level playing field.I would also point out that a grandmaster with a dex of 100 and a str of 100 could kill a fully armored plate master with a barduchie ( spelling ?
) with little to no problem ass naked with a dagger .
The skill was more important than the gear !
I could hit you 100 times before you could get a swing off because of the fighting mech would make you start your swing over every time you got hit.Just because you did did not understand the mech of the game well enough to hand yourself does not make the game bad .
I found that not having forced policies onto your game style to control the wild west part of the world does not mean that it was not fun as shit to have your ass handed to you every now and then.People liked the idea of loosing things if you got to far away from the city without protection.People in that game where stupid , if you carried more than you needed and die you lost it .
Who carries eveyrthing they own .
It was stupid people being stupid.People liked the danger of running from town to town alone and the smartest mob out there was someone else.People liked to hunt others down for being ass hats.People liked playing in a group of five guys that knew how to handle the game , did not get griefed by anyone because they got there asses handed to them.People disliked the game because it did not coddle the idea of the less common denominator .
It was , dare I say it , a little more difficult.You see , the people that did not like OU just did not like the game play .
They wanted to be protected from the harshness .
They wanted to be able to die without loosing anything .
They wanted to play solo and not actually act like they where all alone.I call bullshit on anyone that says UO was not fun and point to thier own lack of knowledge toward how they should have been playing instead of how they figured it should have been played.I loved the game when it was in the first 2 years .
I was not a griefer , I was the anti griefer .
I was the guy that stood at the Fork glowing Red and never starting a fight .
Just waiting and giving you the chance for glory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you have a one sided view to what exactly some people really loved.
You have taken the one view that you have and exptrapolated it out to everyone.What I personally liked about UO and personally believe killed it had to do with the introduction of portals and instant anywhere travel.
When OU was big, open, and took a good bit of time to get from one corner of the world to the other it had a vastly different feel.
In the beta and the first year it was the wild fucking west.
I could stay out in the woods in the far north east corner of the map and not see someone for days.It also at later levels became very interesting to battle.
You talk of griefers and I would suggest that you did not fully understand how to deal with them.
I would say stealing was a problem only if you did not have the understanding that the best gear was easy to get and made it very easy to have a level playing field.I would also point out that a grandmaster with a dex of 100 and a str of 100 could kill a fully armored plate master with a barduchie(spelling?
) with little to no problem ass naked with a dagger.
The skill was more important than the gear!
I could hit you 100 times before you could get a swing off because of the fighting mech would make you start your swing over every time you got hit.Just because you did did not understand the mech of the game well enough to hand yourself does not make the game bad.
I found that not having forced policies onto your game style to control the wild west part of the world does not mean that it was not fun as shit to have your ass handed to you every now and then.People liked the idea of loosing things if you got to far away from the city without protection.People in that game where stupid, if you carried more than you needed and die you lost it.
Who carries eveyrthing they own.
It was stupid people being stupid.People liked the danger of running from town to town alone and the smartest mob out there was someone else.People liked to hunt others down for being ass hats.People liked playing in a group of five guys that knew how to handle the game, did not get griefed by anyone because they got there asses handed to them.People disliked the game because it did not coddle the idea of the less common denominator.
It was, dare I say it, a little more difficult.You see, the people that did not like OU just did not like the game play.
They wanted to be protected from the harshness.
They wanted to be able to die without loosing anything.
They wanted to play solo and not actually act like they where all alone.I call bullshit on anyone that says UO was not fun and point to thier own lack of knowledge toward how they should have been playing instead of how they figured it should have been played.I loved the game when it was in the first 2 years.
I was not a griefer, I was the anti griefer.
I was the guy that stood at the Fork glowing Red and never starting a fight.
Just waiting and giving you the chance for glory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31240610</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>jadin</author>
	<datestamp>1266858900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage, then, as a complete non-griefer?</p></div><p>Interesting post. It seems to me that you enjoyed UO in spite of the griever's though, not because of them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage , then , as a complete non-griefer ? Interesting post .
It seems to me that you enjoyed UO in spite of the griever 's though , not because of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why did I enjoy UO in its late-beta early-release stage, then, as a complete non-griefer?Interesting post.
It seems to me that you enjoyed UO in spite of the griever's though, not because of them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228320</id>
	<title>It's probably because of hardware limitations...</title>
	<author>d1r3lnd</author>
	<datestamp>1266847680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or rather, the lack thereof. UO servers were limited in population to a relatively small number (at least relative to today's MMORPGs). When playing UO, the map was small enough and the playerbase was small enough that you could be reasonably certain of who you'd run into at Brit GY or Wind or wherever. They eventually changed the reputation system a bit, and while getting rid of dreadlords didn't kill the game, obviously, I think it promoted the rise of ganking, which is a shame.

Another great thing about UO were the server-down fights. Yes, they might be annoying to deal with now, but being able to fight with wild abandon, with no fear of actually losing stuff, led to some incredible moments - and no doubt, was helpful for both game balance from a dev perspective, and new players learning how combat worked.

As far as "catch-up" time to get started with a new character - it was insanely low. Sure, your new character was likely to get his ass handed to him, but it was also possible to start a brand new character and kill a fair proportion of players who were of much higher experience, simply because they sucked at fighting. Yes, UO was a skill-based system, but more than that, combat required *skill* - and I'm not talking about learning the timing necessary beat repetitive and predictable WoW bosses by grinding raids until your clan can run it in their sleep.

And there were relatively few moments when one build of character was "the best" in the same way that you see guys relentlessly optimizing their talents and gear and all that other bullshit. Okay, maybe viking swords were the shit, or you'd want to make a dex-monkey, but you could also do something wild like a bard, and the game could still be fun.

And for all that PVP was a risk, there were plenty of players who had master craftsmen, who mostly chatted with their friends by the bank and never really saw that much combat. Which was fine, because there was also a legitimate (perhap's online-gamedom's only) player-run economy. It's also the only MMORPG I've played where players actually look different from each other, with no real need for all-names or tags, and...

God, now you've got me missing UO all over again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or rather , the lack thereof .
UO servers were limited in population to a relatively small number ( at least relative to today 's MMORPGs ) .
When playing UO , the map was small enough and the playerbase was small enough that you could be reasonably certain of who you 'd run into at Brit GY or Wind or wherever .
They eventually changed the reputation system a bit , and while getting rid of dreadlords did n't kill the game , obviously , I think it promoted the rise of ganking , which is a shame .
Another great thing about UO were the server-down fights .
Yes , they might be annoying to deal with now , but being able to fight with wild abandon , with no fear of actually losing stuff , led to some incredible moments - and no doubt , was helpful for both game balance from a dev perspective , and new players learning how combat worked .
As far as " catch-up " time to get started with a new character - it was insanely low .
Sure , your new character was likely to get his ass handed to him , but it was also possible to start a brand new character and kill a fair proportion of players who were of much higher experience , simply because they sucked at fighting .
Yes , UO was a skill-based system , but more than that , combat required * skill * - and I 'm not talking about learning the timing necessary beat repetitive and predictable WoW bosses by grinding raids until your clan can run it in their sleep .
And there were relatively few moments when one build of character was " the best " in the same way that you see guys relentlessly optimizing their talents and gear and all that other bullshit .
Okay , maybe viking swords were the shit , or you 'd want to make a dex-monkey , but you could also do something wild like a bard , and the game could still be fun .
And for all that PVP was a risk , there were plenty of players who had master craftsmen , who mostly chatted with their friends by the bank and never really saw that much combat .
Which was fine , because there was also a legitimate ( perhap 's online-gamedom 's only ) player-run economy .
It 's also the only MMORPG I 've played where players actually look different from each other , with no real need for all-names or tags , and.. . God , now you 've got me missing UO all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or rather, the lack thereof.
UO servers were limited in population to a relatively small number (at least relative to today's MMORPGs).
When playing UO, the map was small enough and the playerbase was small enough that you could be reasonably certain of who you'd run into at Brit GY or Wind or wherever.
They eventually changed the reputation system a bit, and while getting rid of dreadlords didn't kill the game, obviously, I think it promoted the rise of ganking, which is a shame.
Another great thing about UO were the server-down fights.
Yes, they might be annoying to deal with now, but being able to fight with wild abandon, with no fear of actually losing stuff, led to some incredible moments - and no doubt, was helpful for both game balance from a dev perspective, and new players learning how combat worked.
As far as "catch-up" time to get started with a new character - it was insanely low.
Sure, your new character was likely to get his ass handed to him, but it was also possible to start a brand new character and kill a fair proportion of players who were of much higher experience, simply because they sucked at fighting.
Yes, UO was a skill-based system, but more than that, combat required *skill* - and I'm not talking about learning the timing necessary beat repetitive and predictable WoW bosses by grinding raids until your clan can run it in their sleep.
And there were relatively few moments when one build of character was "the best" in the same way that you see guys relentlessly optimizing their talents and gear and all that other bullshit.
Okay, maybe viking swords were the shit, or you'd want to make a dex-monkey, but you could also do something wild like a bard, and the game could still be fun.
And for all that PVP was a risk, there were plenty of players who had master craftsmen, who mostly chatted with their friends by the bank and never really saw that much combat.
Which was fine, because there was also a legitimate (perhap's online-gamedom's only) player-run economy.
It's also the only MMORPG I've played where players actually look different from each other, with no real need for all-names or tags, and...

God, now you've got me missing UO all over again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231834</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>loafula</author>
	<datestamp>1266864000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>UO did have a sort of law in the way it handled player notoriety.
Every player starts the game with a neutral noteriety score of 0. You lose noteriety points by killing other players, looting, and stealing loot from the corpse of a monster you did not kill. Lose enough points, and eventually your character becomes evil. Evil characters stood out by having their names appear in red. If you were evil enough, town guards would kill you instantly and on sight.
Players who choose to take the good side were actually encouraged to kill evil players. By killing evil players, you gained noteriety points.
Each side of the noteriety scale had it's benefits. On the good side, you could earn the title Great Lord. As a great lord, you were entitled to special equipment and an overall sense of respect from other players.On the evil side, you could become a Dread Lord. As a dread lord, you had a cool title and automatically inflicted fear into other players. Time and time again, I'd encounter a random Dread Lord in the wilderness and the adrenaline surge I felt was intense.
This mostly player governed legal system worked. It worked because there were definite repercussions to death. You die, you lose your loot. Sure, as a PK you tend to accumulate more loot than the average good guy, but you had more at stake. Because you could not access towns, you could not rely on secure banks to hold your things. Your only real option was to purchase a house. The house required a key, which you could lose if killed. If you lose your key, you better pray whoever looted it does not find your house or you are fucked.</htmltext>
<tokenext>UO did have a sort of law in the way it handled player notoriety .
Every player starts the game with a neutral noteriety score of 0 .
You lose noteriety points by killing other players , looting , and stealing loot from the corpse of a monster you did not kill .
Lose enough points , and eventually your character becomes evil .
Evil characters stood out by having their names appear in red .
If you were evil enough , town guards would kill you instantly and on sight .
Players who choose to take the good side were actually encouraged to kill evil players .
By killing evil players , you gained noteriety points .
Each side of the noteriety scale had it 's benefits .
On the good side , you could earn the title Great Lord .
As a great lord , you were entitled to special equipment and an overall sense of respect from other players.On the evil side , you could become a Dread Lord .
As a dread lord , you had a cool title and automatically inflicted fear into other players .
Time and time again , I 'd encounter a random Dread Lord in the wilderness and the adrenaline surge I felt was intense .
This mostly player governed legal system worked .
It worked because there were definite repercussions to death .
You die , you lose your loot .
Sure , as a PK you tend to accumulate more loot than the average good guy , but you had more at stake .
Because you could not access towns , you could not rely on secure banks to hold your things .
Your only real option was to purchase a house .
The house required a key , which you could lose if killed .
If you lose your key , you better pray whoever looted it does not find your house or you are fucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UO did have a sort of law in the way it handled player notoriety.
Every player starts the game with a neutral noteriety score of 0.
You lose noteriety points by killing other players, looting, and stealing loot from the corpse of a monster you did not kill.
Lose enough points, and eventually your character becomes evil.
Evil characters stood out by having their names appear in red.
If you were evil enough, town guards would kill you instantly and on sight.
Players who choose to take the good side were actually encouraged to kill evil players.
By killing evil players, you gained noteriety points.
Each side of the noteriety scale had it's benefits.
On the good side, you could earn the title Great Lord.
As a great lord, you were entitled to special equipment and an overall sense of respect from other players.On the evil side, you could become a Dread Lord.
As a dread lord, you had a cool title and automatically inflicted fear into other players.
Time and time again, I'd encounter a random Dread Lord in the wilderness and the adrenaline surge I felt was intense.
This mostly player governed legal system worked.
It worked because there were definite repercussions to death.
You die, you lose your loot.
Sure, as a PK you tend to accumulate more loot than the average good guy, but you had more at stake.
Because you could not access towns, you could not rely on secure banks to hold your things.
Your only real option was to purchase a house.
The house required a key, which you could lose if killed.
If you lose your key, you better pray whoever looted it does not find your house or you are fucked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228822</id>
	<title>Timing, gear, levels</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266851280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Much of it comes down to the fact that the original game to reach mass market accessibility and popularity was Everquest, which was straightforwardly PVE. Previous games, namely UO and Meridian 59, were PVP-oriented but came out before the internet was a household thing for the average consumer. As is the nature of business, nearly every game developed thereafter tried to copy the most successful business model known to the genre, and as a result you wound up with PVE game after PVE game that ignored what made PVP work in other games.</p><p>One giant problem between PVP and PVE games is gear. Today, EVE (for all its glaring faults) is the closest thing to UO mechanically. You have full looting, item loss, and permanent death penalties. These work because in games like Meridian, UO, or EVE, nearly all equipment is generic, easily purchased, and quickly replaced. You purchase new armor identical to what you lost, or you buy a new hull and outfit it identically to what you had before. Warcraft really can't have item loss like this because nearly every item is unique (e.g. from quests) or requires a commitment of time and coordination (e.g. raiding). If someone in full raid equipment lost everything upon death, the player would face a steep climb back up to where he was through pre-raid, (possibly) old raid, and finally current raid content, potentially competing against strangers for everything. For many people, facing that gear grind again and again would drive them to quit. Ultimately Blizzard's best option is to make PVP death (and thus PVP play) meaningless while extending gear inflation and gear grinding to keep people obsessed with numbers.</p><p>Another problem is the nature of character advancement. Because of skill-based progression, in Meridian 59, UO, or EVE you can make a char and within an hour take your newbie mace/sword/railgun and start whacking at years-old veterans with varying degrees of success. In PVE-oriented games with level-based progression you can quickly become so powerful that lower level people can't land a hit on you at all. To use Warcraft as an example, this is made all the worse by item levels and the enormous endgame gear gap between even a newly level-capped character and one who has been raiding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Much of it comes down to the fact that the original game to reach mass market accessibility and popularity was Everquest , which was straightforwardly PVE .
Previous games , namely UO and Meridian 59 , were PVP-oriented but came out before the internet was a household thing for the average consumer .
As is the nature of business , nearly every game developed thereafter tried to copy the most successful business model known to the genre , and as a result you wound up with PVE game after PVE game that ignored what made PVP work in other games.One giant problem between PVP and PVE games is gear .
Today , EVE ( for all its glaring faults ) is the closest thing to UO mechanically .
You have full looting , item loss , and permanent death penalties .
These work because in games like Meridian , UO , or EVE , nearly all equipment is generic , easily purchased , and quickly replaced .
You purchase new armor identical to what you lost , or you buy a new hull and outfit it identically to what you had before .
Warcraft really ca n't have item loss like this because nearly every item is unique ( e.g .
from quests ) or requires a commitment of time and coordination ( e.g .
raiding ) . If someone in full raid equipment lost everything upon death , the player would face a steep climb back up to where he was through pre-raid , ( possibly ) old raid , and finally current raid content , potentially competing against strangers for everything .
For many people , facing that gear grind again and again would drive them to quit .
Ultimately Blizzard 's best option is to make PVP death ( and thus PVP play ) meaningless while extending gear inflation and gear grinding to keep people obsessed with numbers.Another problem is the nature of character advancement .
Because of skill-based progression , in Meridian 59 , UO , or EVE you can make a char and within an hour take your newbie mace/sword/railgun and start whacking at years-old veterans with varying degrees of success .
In PVE-oriented games with level-based progression you can quickly become so powerful that lower level people ca n't land a hit on you at all .
To use Warcraft as an example , this is made all the worse by item levels and the enormous endgame gear gap between even a newly level-capped character and one who has been raiding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Much of it comes down to the fact that the original game to reach mass market accessibility and popularity was Everquest, which was straightforwardly PVE.
Previous games, namely UO and Meridian 59, were PVP-oriented but came out before the internet was a household thing for the average consumer.
As is the nature of business, nearly every game developed thereafter tried to copy the most successful business model known to the genre, and as a result you wound up with PVE game after PVE game that ignored what made PVP work in other games.One giant problem between PVP and PVE games is gear.
Today, EVE (for all its glaring faults) is the closest thing to UO mechanically.
You have full looting, item loss, and permanent death penalties.
These work because in games like Meridian, UO, or EVE, nearly all equipment is generic, easily purchased, and quickly replaced.
You purchase new armor identical to what you lost, or you buy a new hull and outfit it identically to what you had before.
Warcraft really can't have item loss like this because nearly every item is unique (e.g.
from quests) or requires a commitment of time and coordination (e.g.
raiding). If someone in full raid equipment lost everything upon death, the player would face a steep climb back up to where he was through pre-raid, (possibly) old raid, and finally current raid content, potentially competing against strangers for everything.
For many people, facing that gear grind again and again would drive them to quit.
Ultimately Blizzard's best option is to make PVP death (and thus PVP play) meaningless while extending gear inflation and gear grinding to keep people obsessed with numbers.Another problem is the nature of character advancement.
Because of skill-based progression, in Meridian 59, UO, or EVE you can make a char and within an hour take your newbie mace/sword/railgun and start whacking at years-old veterans with varying degrees of success.
In PVE-oriented games with level-based progression you can quickly become so powerful that lower level people can't land a hit on you at all.
To use Warcraft as an example, this is made all the worse by item levels and the enormous endgame gear gap between even a newly level-capped character and one who has been raiding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456</id>
	<title>Of course they wouldnt work. need to be stupid</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1266838020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to play and put every 2-3 hours of your daily life into a game to increasingly progress and then get jumped on by a random group of 2-3 somewhere and all your progress stolen.</p><p>it only works when you are a teenager and you have unlimited time in your hands, so you can stomach the loss. but doesnt work for people with little time.</p><p>back then in uo days we had that kind of time, and we were stupid enough to stomach that kind of gameplay. but, curiously, i see that contrary to what we did back then, kids of today's generation do not waste their time in that fashion. they just go play proper mmos.</p><p>that kind of gameplay only can work in a setting in which you are not required to put inane amounts of time to make progress. if you could make up for the stolen items/whatever in a single session (2-3 hours) that would maybe work. but, else, cant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to play and put every 2-3 hours of your daily life into a game to increasingly progress and then get jumped on by a random group of 2-3 somewhere and all your progress stolen.it only works when you are a teenager and you have unlimited time in your hands , so you can stomach the loss .
but doesnt work for people with little time.back then in uo days we had that kind of time , and we were stupid enough to stomach that kind of gameplay .
but , curiously , i see that contrary to what we did back then , kids of today 's generation do not waste their time in that fashion .
they just go play proper mmos.that kind of gameplay only can work in a setting in which you are not required to put inane amounts of time to make progress .
if you could make up for the stolen items/whatever in a single session ( 2-3 hours ) that would maybe work .
but , else , cant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to play and put every 2-3 hours of your daily life into a game to increasingly progress and then get jumped on by a random group of 2-3 somewhere and all your progress stolen.it only works when you are a teenager and you have unlimited time in your hands, so you can stomach the loss.
but doesnt work for people with little time.back then in uo days we had that kind of time, and we were stupid enough to stomach that kind of gameplay.
but, curiously, i see that contrary to what we did back then, kids of today's generation do not waste their time in that fashion.
they just go play proper mmos.that kind of gameplay only can work in a setting in which you are not required to put inane amounts of time to make progress.
if you could make up for the stolen items/whatever in a single session (2-3 hours) that would maybe work.
but, else, cant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227352</id>
	<title>Ultima Online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266836340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UOGamers is where everyone went. There will never be another Ultima Online. Those who have played and enjoy will never again find tha hole to fill. UO was like that one drug that once you do has you messed up forever. I miss UO!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UOGamers is where everyone went .
There will never be another Ultima Online .
Those who have played and enjoy will never again find tha hole to fill .
UO was like that one drug that once you do has you messed up forever .
I miss UO ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UOGamers is where everyone went.
There will never be another Ultima Online.
Those who have played and enjoy will never again find tha hole to fill.
UO was like that one drug that once you do has you messed up forever.
I miss UO!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>dave1791</author>
	<datestamp>1266840720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And there were not many other choices in 1998.  If you wanted to play online and were not interested in being a wolf, then you had to be a sheep.  Now you have 10^7 other choices and the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers.  It is no accident that Shadowbane, which was built to cater to exactly those people, failed in the market and Darkfall will never be anything more than a niche.  I predict that it will fail in the long term because a world that only appeals to wolves will force most of them to be sheep (there can only ever be a few wolves, even if everyone aspires to be one) and they won't stay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And there were not many other choices in 1998 .
If you wanted to play online and were not interested in being a wolf , then you had to be a sheep .
Now you have 10 ^ 7 other choices and the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers .
It is no accident that Shadowbane , which was built to cater to exactly those people , failed in the market and Darkfall will never be anything more than a niche .
I predict that it will fail in the long term because a world that only appeals to wolves will force most of them to be sheep ( there can only ever be a few wolves , even if everyone aspires to be one ) and they wo n't stay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And there were not many other choices in 1998.
If you wanted to play online and were not interested in being a wolf, then you had to be a sheep.
Now you have 10^7 other choices and the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers.
It is no accident that Shadowbane, which was built to cater to exactly those people, failed in the market and Darkfall will never be anything more than a niche.
I predict that it will fail in the long term because a world that only appeals to wolves will force most of them to be sheep (there can only ever be a few wolves, even if everyone aspires to be one) and they won't stay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238974</id>
	<title>Re:Of course they wouldnt work. need to be stupid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266846900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the beauty of UO.  Your progress isn't robbed by dying, because your progress isn't measured by the items you've collected.  You gain SKILLS.  That's what every single person in this discussion has missed.  You cannot compare a game like World of Warcraft to a game like UO, because WoW has item-based progression, and UO had skill-tree progression.  And you gained skills as you played, regardless of the items you picked up.  The items you wore didn't affect your health, your magic skills, your weapon skills, anything like that.  The best magical weapon in the game did about 6 more damage (on average) than the more-than-common player-crafted weapon.  That was the beauty of it- items were virtually worthless.  The items that got value were completely useless- rocks, paintings, black cloth, purple armor, used to decorate your house.</p><p>The lack of dependence on items for character viability also allowed for players to customize their appearance way more than the current MMOs.  Want to be naked?  Sure.  Want to wear a dress, even though you're a man?  Go for it.  Wanna wear a fancy shirt and a sash and a skirt and have your spells be as effective to a naked person or someone wearing armor?  No problem.  It seperated cosmetics from gameplay.</p><p>Also, it rewarded intelligent players.  If you have more gold on you than you've ever had before, why the fuck WOULDN'T you put it in the bank?  Do you walk around in real life with 2500 in your pocket?  No, and it's probably WAY less likely that you'll get jumped in real life than a video game.  AND YOU KNOW YOU'RE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME.  If you can't afford to lose it, don't take it out of town with you.  And jesus, you can INSTANTLY TELEPORT ANYWHERE with just a tiny bit of magic skill.  It's PURE LAZINESS that people lose all their stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the beauty of UO .
Your progress is n't robbed by dying , because your progress is n't measured by the items you 've collected .
You gain SKILLS .
That 's what every single person in this discussion has missed .
You can not compare a game like World of Warcraft to a game like UO , because WoW has item-based progression , and UO had skill-tree progression .
And you gained skills as you played , regardless of the items you picked up .
The items you wore did n't affect your health , your magic skills , your weapon skills , anything like that .
The best magical weapon in the game did about 6 more damage ( on average ) than the more-than-common player-crafted weapon .
That was the beauty of it- items were virtually worthless .
The items that got value were completely useless- rocks , paintings , black cloth , purple armor , used to decorate your house.The lack of dependence on items for character viability also allowed for players to customize their appearance way more than the current MMOs .
Want to be naked ?
Sure. Want to wear a dress , even though you 're a man ?
Go for it .
Wan na wear a fancy shirt and a sash and a skirt and have your spells be as effective to a naked person or someone wearing armor ?
No problem .
It seperated cosmetics from gameplay.Also , it rewarded intelligent players .
If you have more gold on you than you 've ever had before , why the fuck WOULD N'T you put it in the bank ?
Do you walk around in real life with 2500 in your pocket ?
No , and it 's probably WAY less likely that you 'll get jumped in real life than a video game .
AND YOU KNOW YOU 'RE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME .
If you ca n't afford to lose it , do n't take it out of town with you .
And jesus , you can INSTANTLY TELEPORT ANYWHERE with just a tiny bit of magic skill .
It 's PURE LAZINESS that people lose all their stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the beauty of UO.
Your progress isn't robbed by dying, because your progress isn't measured by the items you've collected.
You gain SKILLS.
That's what every single person in this discussion has missed.
You cannot compare a game like World of Warcraft to a game like UO, because WoW has item-based progression, and UO had skill-tree progression.
And you gained skills as you played, regardless of the items you picked up.
The items you wore didn't affect your health, your magic skills, your weapon skills, anything like that.
The best magical weapon in the game did about 6 more damage (on average) than the more-than-common player-crafted weapon.
That was the beauty of it- items were virtually worthless.
The items that got value were completely useless- rocks, paintings, black cloth, purple armor, used to decorate your house.The lack of dependence on items for character viability also allowed for players to customize their appearance way more than the current MMOs.
Want to be naked?
Sure.  Want to wear a dress, even though you're a man?
Go for it.
Wanna wear a fancy shirt and a sash and a skirt and have your spells be as effective to a naked person or someone wearing armor?
No problem.
It seperated cosmetics from gameplay.Also, it rewarded intelligent players.
If you have more gold on you than you've ever had before, why the fuck WOULDN'T you put it in the bank?
Do you walk around in real life with 2500 in your pocket?
No, and it's probably WAY less likely that you'll get jumped in real life than a video game.
AND YOU KNOW YOU'RE PLAYING A VIDEO GAME.
If you can't afford to lose it, don't take it out of town with you.
And jesus, you can INSTANTLY TELEPORT ANYWHERE with just a tiny bit of magic skill.
It's PURE LAZINESS that people lose all their stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31241198</id>
	<title>Moving from the PvP responses to TheRealm</title>
	<author>bruceslog</author>
	<datestamp>1266865200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, moving away from the PvP conversation and more towards the OP's queries about the old games with housing, house thieves, pick pocketing, and whatnot, brought to mind a game I'd played for years, in a galaxy far, far away....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
<br>
No, nothing to do with Star Wars, but it is in it's own little world.
<br>
It's one of the oldest MMORPG games is still going. ( It claims to be THE Oldest still going ).
<p>
The Realm Online <a href="http://www.realmserver.com/" title="realmserver.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.realmserver.com/</a> [realmserver.com] , though not as popular as EQ or WoW, still has it's cartoonish charm, PvE or PvP, ( You can switch your own PvP on or off, or just attack another PvP flagged player to turn it on ).
<br>
And last I knew, each player still had their own password protected <b>house</b>, with lock chests in the bedrooms, but you needed to get into the habit of typing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/evict and using your see invisibility spell to make sure you weren't going to get robbed.
</p><p>
I return to The Realm every few years or so, it's such a neat trip down memory lane.. and I'm glad it's still there. And, every time I return, my trusty old characters are right there waiting for me.
<br>
Last time I'd played the max level was 1000.
And it didn't come easy.
</p><p>
Gee.. Thanks guys... now I'm thinking it's time to renew my subscription.
</p><p>
Well, I guess it won't hurt to help keep a piece of history going !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , moving away from the PvP conversation and more towards the OP 's queries about the old games with housing , house thieves , pick pocketing , and whatnot , brought to mind a game I 'd played for years , in a galaxy far , far away.... : ) No , nothing to do with Star Wars , but it is in it 's own little world .
It 's one of the oldest MMORPG games is still going .
( It claims to be THE Oldest still going ) .
The Realm Online http : //www.realmserver.com/ [ realmserver.com ] , though not as popular as EQ or WoW , still has it 's cartoonish charm , PvE or PvP , ( You can switch your own PvP on or off , or just attack another PvP flagged player to turn it on ) .
And last I knew , each player still had their own password protected house , with lock chests in the bedrooms , but you needed to get into the habit of typing /evict and using your see invisibility spell to make sure you were n't going to get robbed .
I return to The Realm every few years or so , it 's such a neat trip down memory lane.. and I 'm glad it 's still there .
And , every time I return , my trusty old characters are right there waiting for me .
Last time I 'd played the max level was 1000 .
And it did n't come easy .
Gee.. Thanks guys... now I 'm thinking it 's time to renew my subscription .
Well , I guess it wo n't hurt to help keep a piece of history going !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, moving away from the PvP conversation and more towards the OP's queries about the old games with housing, house thieves, pick pocketing, and whatnot, brought to mind a game I'd played for years, in a galaxy far, far away.... :)

No, nothing to do with Star Wars, but it is in it's own little world.
It's one of the oldest MMORPG games is still going.
( It claims to be THE Oldest still going ).
The Realm Online http://www.realmserver.com/ [realmserver.com] , though not as popular as EQ or WoW, still has it's cartoonish charm, PvE or PvP, ( You can switch your own PvP on or off, or just attack another PvP flagged player to turn it on ).
And last I knew, each player still had their own password protected house, with lock chests in the bedrooms, but you needed to get into the habit of typing /evict and using your see invisibility spell to make sure you weren't going to get robbed.
I return to The Realm every few years or so, it's such a neat trip down memory lane.. and I'm glad it's still there.
And, every time I return, my trusty old characters are right there waiting for me.
Last time I'd played the max level was 1000.
And it didn't come easy.
Gee.. Thanks guys... now I'm thinking it's time to renew my subscription.
Well, I guess it won't hurt to help keep a piece of history going !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228050</id>
	<title>PvP isn't for everyone.</title>
	<author>Phoenix</author>
	<datestamp>1266844800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Years ago, I played UO and enjoyed it.</p><p>For all of 5 days. Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.</p><p>Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers, you were their prey.</p><p>The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character, the more frustrating it became. I tried mining, and was frequently killed for my hard work. Logging, anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim's brow. I couldn't earn money, couldn't advance...</p><p>In fact, the only thing I was great at was dying.</p><p>Not exactly something I want to sink money into month after month. After 15 days, I gave it up as a bad idea.</p><p>Everquest came along with something that allowed the PvP'ers to have their fun and would leave us casual players to progress at our own pace. There was no real need to level to the max in nothing flat just to stay alive, one could enjoy the game. World of Warcraft did something different, but has the same result.</p><p>Why are games going this way? Because look at the "Make Love, Not Warcraft" episode of Southpark. Once someone was able to kill at will and in fact seemed to get off on ganking lower-than-he characters...people stopped playing the game. The Fictional Blizzard company in the episode saw millions of their user base turning off their computers and going outside to play.</p><p>The real Blizzard and other companies running MMORPG games would have a very real version of this problem. In fact, once EQ came out, people jumped from UO to it and most of them said that EQ was far superior not for graphics, or world development...but for the simple fact that they could PLAY the game and not flee anything that was controlled by another player.</p><p>That's why everyone maximizes game play and leaves options for people to decide to play PvP without interfering with everyone else who doesn't want to play that game.</p><p>Sure it sucks for the PvP'ers, but that's why there are PvP servers. If you want to be that kind of player...there's your world to do it in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Years ago , I played UO and enjoyed it.For all of 5 days .
Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers , you were their prey.The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character , the more frustrating it became .
I tried mining , and was frequently killed for my hard work .
Logging , anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim 's brow .
I could n't earn money , could n't advance...In fact , the only thing I was great at was dying.Not exactly something I want to sink money into month after month .
After 15 days , I gave it up as a bad idea.Everquest came along with something that allowed the PvP'ers to have their fun and would leave us casual players to progress at our own pace .
There was no real need to level to the max in nothing flat just to stay alive , one could enjoy the game .
World of Warcraft did something different , but has the same result.Why are games going this way ?
Because look at the " Make Love , Not Warcraft " episode of Southpark .
Once someone was able to kill at will and in fact seemed to get off on ganking lower-than-he characters...people stopped playing the game .
The Fictional Blizzard company in the episode saw millions of their user base turning off their computers and going outside to play.The real Blizzard and other companies running MMORPG games would have a very real version of this problem .
In fact , once EQ came out , people jumped from UO to it and most of them said that EQ was far superior not for graphics , or world development...but for the simple fact that they could PLAY the game and not flee anything that was controlled by another player.That 's why everyone maximizes game play and leaves options for people to decide to play PvP without interfering with everyone else who does n't want to play that game.Sure it sucks for the PvP'ers , but that 's why there are PvP servers .
If you want to be that kind of player...there 's your world to do it in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years ago, I played UO and enjoyed it.For all of 5 days.
Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers, you were their prey.The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character, the more frustrating it became.
I tried mining, and was frequently killed for my hard work.
Logging, anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim's brow.
I couldn't earn money, couldn't advance...In fact, the only thing I was great at was dying.Not exactly something I want to sink money into month after month.
After 15 days, I gave it up as a bad idea.Everquest came along with something that allowed the PvP'ers to have their fun and would leave us casual players to progress at our own pace.
There was no real need to level to the max in nothing flat just to stay alive, one could enjoy the game.
World of Warcraft did something different, but has the same result.Why are games going this way?
Because look at the "Make Love, Not Warcraft" episode of Southpark.
Once someone was able to kill at will and in fact seemed to get off on ganking lower-than-he characters...people stopped playing the game.
The Fictional Blizzard company in the episode saw millions of their user base turning off their computers and going outside to play.The real Blizzard and other companies running MMORPG games would have a very real version of this problem.
In fact, once EQ came out, people jumped from UO to it and most of them said that EQ was far superior not for graphics, or world development...but for the simple fact that they could PLAY the game and not flee anything that was controlled by another player.That's why everyone maximizes game play and leaves options for people to decide to play PvP without interfering with everyone else who doesn't want to play that game.Sure it sucks for the PvP'ers, but that's why there are PvP servers.
If you want to be that kind of player...there's your world to do it in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229556</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>d34dluk3</author>
	<datestamp>1266855840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the second cumming of the Messiah</p></div><p>I call Rule 34.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the second cumming of the MessiahI call Rule 34 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the second cumming of the MessiahI call Rule 34.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232800</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1266866880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of. They are mad that these people have other places to play."</p><p>Meta-griefing the griefers. Priceless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They want weak , inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of .
They are mad that these people have other places to play .
" Meta-griefing the griefers .
Priceless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of.
They are mad that these people have other places to play.
"Meta-griefing the griefers.
Priceless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227892</id>
	<title>Re:EvE Online?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266843360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with Eve is that building up your character takes time. You cannot grief people straight away by waiting for when they are at half health. The benefit of crowds is bigger, and the death penalty as well.</p><p>The balance has therefore shifted in favour of the builders, and has forced the PKers to become builders as well. Not everyone likes doing this or relying on someone who does, so they leave.</p><p>It's therefore simply a sign of what an angry baby the PK mentality is. "I like kicking over other people's sandcastles. But no wait, in this place there's too many people with bigger castles than mine, let's go somewhere else. Wait, in this place it's too easy for the people to gang up on me to take revenge, let's go somewhere else. Wait, in this place everyone is out to kick down castles and there aren't any noobs that just build, let's go somewhere else. Can't you find me a place I like, like  where everyone struggles with tiny shovels, and just me and my friend do the kicking?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Eve is that building up your character takes time .
You can not grief people straight away by waiting for when they are at half health .
The benefit of crowds is bigger , and the death penalty as well.The balance has therefore shifted in favour of the builders , and has forced the PKers to become builders as well .
Not everyone likes doing this or relying on someone who does , so they leave.It 's therefore simply a sign of what an angry baby the PK mentality is .
" I like kicking over other people 's sandcastles .
But no wait , in this place there 's too many people with bigger castles than mine , let 's go somewhere else .
Wait , in this place it 's too easy for the people to gang up on me to take revenge , let 's go somewhere else .
Wait , in this place everyone is out to kick down castles and there are n't any noobs that just build , let 's go somewhere else .
Ca n't you find me a place I like , like where everyone struggles with tiny shovels , and just me and my friend do the kicking ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Eve is that building up your character takes time.
You cannot grief people straight away by waiting for when they are at half health.
The benefit of crowds is bigger, and the death penalty as well.The balance has therefore shifted in favour of the builders, and has forced the PKers to become builders as well.
Not everyone likes doing this or relying on someone who does, so they leave.It's therefore simply a sign of what an angry baby the PK mentality is.
"I like kicking over other people's sandcastles.
But no wait, in this place there's too many people with bigger castles than mine, let's go somewhere else.
Wait, in this place it's too easy for the people to gang up on me to take revenge, let's go somewhere else.
Wait, in this place everyone is out to kick down castles and there aren't any noobs that just build, let's go somewhere else.
Can't you find me a place I like, like  where everyone struggles with tiny shovels, and just me and my friend do the kicking?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278904</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Bat Country</author>
	<datestamp>1267097460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers</p></div><p>...And the cops... and the people who want something more out of an MMO other than endless grinding and football matches (organized pvp).</p><p>There was something to be said for actually entering a world which contained some vague simulation of real danger and some consequence for failure.  It's true that pre-Trammel UO was extremely unfriendly at the entrance to the learning curve, but someone who was actually interested in a challenge could thrive in UO either despite or because of the constant predation.  It drove the in-game economy for the "sheep" as you put it.  It made a niche for those people who kept the griefers under control.  It allowed for interesting social constructions like bounties (although the in-game bounty system was useless, far better when dealt with informally by players).</p><p>More to the point, it made you value what you had more and be less interested in minmaxing your equipment when it could go away at any time.  The things you had were ones you worked hard to get and fought hard to keep.  It made the uncontrolled and unguarded (by players or NPC) areas more lively.  Contrast the Darkness Falls from Dark Age of Camelot to any other dungeon in the game and you'll see the one with unregulated PVP that you had to fight hard to keep out of the hands of your enemies was more populated.</p><p>Finally, there are other forms of griefing than just killing people and not letting them get their stuff.  Annoyance tactics and social griefing is far more disruptive than PVP ever was.  UO had a rather expedient way of dealing with that - if somebody was really annoying you and the people around you, you cut their head off and sold it at the bank on a vendor.</p><p>I played for 2-3 years as a "local militiaman" for the largest player-run city in UO (at the time) during my days off from work (I worked a 14 hour graveyard shift 4 days a week).  It was considerably more personally rewarding than any subsequent PVP or PVM-based game I've yet seen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers...And the cops... and the people who want something more out of an MMO other than endless grinding and football matches ( organized pvp ) .There was something to be said for actually entering a world which contained some vague simulation of real danger and some consequence for failure .
It 's true that pre-Trammel UO was extremely unfriendly at the entrance to the learning curve , but someone who was actually interested in a challenge could thrive in UO either despite or because of the constant predation .
It drove the in-game economy for the " sheep " as you put it .
It made a niche for those people who kept the griefers under control .
It allowed for interesting social constructions like bounties ( although the in-game bounty system was useless , far better when dealt with informally by players ) .More to the point , it made you value what you had more and be less interested in minmaxing your equipment when it could go away at any time .
The things you had were ones you worked hard to get and fought hard to keep .
It made the uncontrolled and unguarded ( by players or NPC ) areas more lively .
Contrast the Darkness Falls from Dark Age of Camelot to any other dungeon in the game and you 'll see the one with unregulated PVP that you had to fight hard to keep out of the hands of your enemies was more populated.Finally , there are other forms of griefing than just killing people and not letting them get their stuff .
Annoyance tactics and social griefing is far more disruptive than PVP ever was .
UO had a rather expedient way of dealing with that - if somebody was really annoying you and the people around you , you cut their head off and sold it at the bank on a vendor.I played for 2-3 years as a " local militiaman " for the largest player-run city in UO ( at the time ) during my days off from work ( I worked a 14 hour graveyard shift 4 days a week ) .
It was considerably more personally rewarding than any subsequent PVP or PVM-based game I 've yet seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the only people who really miss pre-trammel UO are the killers...And the cops... and the people who want something more out of an MMO other than endless grinding and football matches (organized pvp).There was something to be said for actually entering a world which contained some vague simulation of real danger and some consequence for failure.
It's true that pre-Trammel UO was extremely unfriendly at the entrance to the learning curve, but someone who was actually interested in a challenge could thrive in UO either despite or because of the constant predation.
It drove the in-game economy for the "sheep" as you put it.
It made a niche for those people who kept the griefers under control.
It allowed for interesting social constructions like bounties (although the in-game bounty system was useless, far better when dealt with informally by players).More to the point, it made you value what you had more and be less interested in minmaxing your equipment when it could go away at any time.
The things you had were ones you worked hard to get and fought hard to keep.
It made the uncontrolled and unguarded (by players or NPC) areas more lively.
Contrast the Darkness Falls from Dark Age of Camelot to any other dungeon in the game and you'll see the one with unregulated PVP that you had to fight hard to keep out of the hands of your enemies was more populated.Finally, there are other forms of griefing than just killing people and not letting them get their stuff.
Annoyance tactics and social griefing is far more disruptive than PVP ever was.
UO had a rather expedient way of dealing with that - if somebody was really annoying you and the people around you, you cut their head off and sold it at the bank on a vendor.I played for 2-3 years as a "local militiaman" for the largest player-run city in UO (at the time) during my days off from work (I worked a 14 hour graveyard shift 4 days a week).
It was considerably more personally rewarding than any subsequent PVP or PVM-based game I've yet seen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229168</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266853560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE. They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of. They are mad that these people have other places to play.</p></div><p>

Nah, EVE players hate WoWers because EVE is 'hard' and WoW is 'for the kiddies'.  EVE is more complex, so it attracts arrogant people who look down on anyone that thinks it is too difficult to play.  Nearly everyone who plays EVE has played WoW so it's easy to associate the people who can't figure it out with the 'lolnubwtf!' idiots that populate some areas of WoW (Barrens, when I was last playing).</p><p> I say this as someone who has played and enjoyed both games quite a bit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE .
They want weak , inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of .
They are mad that these people have other places to play .
Nah , EVE players hate WoWers because EVE is 'hard ' and WoW is 'for the kiddies' .
EVE is more complex , so it attracts arrogant people who look down on anyone that thinks it is too difficult to play .
Nearly everyone who plays EVE has played WoW so it 's easy to associate the people who ca n't figure it out with the 'lolnubwtf !
' idiots that populate some areas of WoW ( Barrens , when I was last playing ) .
I say this as someone who has played and enjoyed both games quite a bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason is because they want all those casual people to come play EVE.
They want weak, inexperienced people to pick on and take advantage of.
They are mad that these people have other places to play.
Nah, EVE players hate WoWers because EVE is 'hard' and WoW is 'for the kiddies'.
EVE is more complex, so it attracts arrogant people who look down on anyone that thinks it is too difficult to play.
Nearly everyone who plays EVE has played WoW so it's easy to associate the people who can't figure it out with the 'lolnubwtf!
' idiots that populate some areas of WoW (Barrens, when I was last playing).
I say this as someone who has played and enjoyed both games quite a bit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228622</id>
	<title>Re:PvP isn't for everyone.</title>
	<author>Kozz</author>
	<datestamp>1266849840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Years ago, I played UO and enjoyed it.</p><p>For all of 5 days. Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.</p><p>Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers, you were their prey.</p><p>The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character, the more frustrating it became. I tried mining, and was frequently killed for my hard work. Logging, anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim's brow. I couldn't earn money, couldn't advance...</p></div><p>I was a hardcore UO gamer in the beginning, way back when they were making major changes to the karma/reputation system.  When starting out as some kind of "laborer" character, your best bet was to be in/near one of the major cities, such as Britain.  Here, there were a few places you could practice your skills like lumberjacking, etc within the confines of the guarded city.  But once you wanted to leave, well, most of us learned that the "Hiding" skill was something you should learn.  If not that, then wear brown/green clothing and learn to stand directly behind a tree in the hopes that any pursuer might not get close enough to spot you.</p><p>Later on, I'd play with a few friends.  We had horses, decent armor and swords, and we'd sweep through the first two or three levels of a popular dungeon on a frequent basis.  It was good fun.  Then the Player-Killer tank mages would enter, and you had to use your hiding skill to cower like a little girl, because these "reds" could drop you with a single fireball.  Or maybe there was a bug with archery that week which they exploited, instead of the latest magic bug.  It was always something.</p><p>So between the PKs and the various bugs they would exploit while UO was seemingly in perpetual beta, there's lots of us that felt the way you do.  It was unfortunate, yet I still played for nearly a year before I burnt out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Years ago , I played UO and enjoyed it.For all of 5 days .
Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers , you were their prey.The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character , the more frustrating it became .
I tried mining , and was frequently killed for my hard work .
Logging , anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim 's brow .
I could n't earn money , could n't advance...I was a hardcore UO gamer in the beginning , way back when they were making major changes to the karma/reputation system .
When starting out as some kind of " laborer " character , your best bet was to be in/near one of the major cities , such as Britain .
Here , there were a few places you could practice your skills like lumberjacking , etc within the confines of the guarded city .
But once you wanted to leave , well , most of us learned that the " Hiding " skill was something you should learn .
If not that , then wear brown/green clothing and learn to stand directly behind a tree in the hopes that any pursuer might not get close enough to spot you.Later on , I 'd play with a few friends .
We had horses , decent armor and swords , and we 'd sweep through the first two or three levels of a popular dungeon on a frequent basis .
It was good fun .
Then the Player-Killer tank mages would enter , and you had to use your hiding skill to cower like a little girl , because these " reds " could drop you with a single fireball .
Or maybe there was a bug with archery that week which they exploited , instead of the latest magic bug .
It was always something.So between the PKs and the various bugs they would exploit while UO was seemingly in perpetual beta , there 's lots of us that felt the way you do .
It was unfortunate , yet I still played for nearly a year before I burnt out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years ago, I played UO and enjoyed it.For all of 5 days.
Then it became a cringe-making hell for me.Unless you were one of the uber-elite of gamers out there who knew how to level to demi-godhood on the servers, you were their prey.The game became less and less fun the more I tried to simply to do something...anything to get better than a lowbie character, the more frustrating it became.
I tried mining, and was frequently killed for my hard work.
Logging, anything...I was a target for players who wanted nothing more than to kill and enjoy the sweat off of their victim's brow.
I couldn't earn money, couldn't advance...I was a hardcore UO gamer in the beginning, way back when they were making major changes to the karma/reputation system.
When starting out as some kind of "laborer" character, your best bet was to be in/near one of the major cities, such as Britain.
Here, there were a few places you could practice your skills like lumberjacking, etc within the confines of the guarded city.
But once you wanted to leave, well, most of us learned that the "Hiding" skill was something you should learn.
If not that, then wear brown/green clothing and learn to stand directly behind a tree in the hopes that any pursuer might not get close enough to spot you.Later on, I'd play with a few friends.
We had horses, decent armor and swords, and we'd sweep through the first two or three levels of a popular dungeon on a frequent basis.
It was good fun.
Then the Player-Killer tank mages would enter, and you had to use your hiding skill to cower like a little girl, because these "reds" could drop you with a single fireball.
Or maybe there was a bug with archery that week which they exploited, instead of the latest magic bug.
It was always something.So between the PKs and the various bugs they would exploit while UO was seemingly in perpetual beta, there's lots of us that felt the way you do.
It was unfortunate, yet I still played for nearly a year before I burnt out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278928</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Bat Country</author>
	<datestamp>1267097580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had that too in the Seattle area on Comcast's cable setup.  It was nice being able to run down two horsebacked PKs on foot and kill them with your miner, then return to mining.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had that too in the Seattle area on Comcast 's cable setup .
It was nice being able to run down two horsebacked PKs on foot and kill them with your miner , then return to mining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had that too in the Seattle area on Comcast's cable setup.
It was nice being able to run down two horsebacked PKs on foot and kill them with your miner, then return to mining.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227316</id>
	<title>EVE: Online</title>
	<author>DylanDarko</author>
	<datestamp>1266836040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It isn't fantasy, but EVE: Online has all the things you mentioned.  Thieving, looting, emphasis on killing other players.  It is set in space instead of fantasy, but that is a plus in my opinion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't fantasy , but EVE : Online has all the things you mentioned .
Thieving , looting , emphasis on killing other players .
It is set in space instead of fantasy , but that is a plus in my opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't fantasy, but EVE: Online has all the things you mentioned.
Thieving, looting, emphasis on killing other players.
It is set in space instead of fantasy, but that is a plus in my opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31252476</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>bckrispi</author>
	<datestamp>1266927960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unfortunately, pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing. I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that wasn't a skull (more than 10 levels above me) until I got to level 61, where they would fly overhead on their flying mount, waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill.</p></div></blockquote><p>

The reason for this is actually pretty simple.  There's a good shot that the number of lv 80's logged in to any PvP realm is greater than the number of 1-79's <i>combined</i>.  When leveling, PvP against equal opponents <i>is</i> rare (my Druid just got his first Honorable Kill at level 46), but this is just a function of the population.  On my realm, Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms are virtually empty compared to Northrend.  Frequent world PvP doesn't really happen until you hit 80.  Even on my low-population server, farming Hodir reputation invariably turns into a PvP bloodbath.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing .
I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that was n't a skull ( more than 10 levels above me ) until I got to level 61 , where they would fly overhead on their flying mount , waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill .
The reason for this is actually pretty simple .
There 's a good shot that the number of lv 80 's logged in to any PvP realm is greater than the number of 1-79 's combined .
When leveling , PvP against equal opponents is rare ( my Druid just got his first Honorable Kill at level 46 ) , but this is just a function of the population .
On my realm , Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms are virtually empty compared to Northrend .
Frequent world PvP does n't really happen until you hit 80 .
Even on my low-population server , farming Hodir reputation invariably turns into a PvP bloodbath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing.
I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that wasn't a skull (more than 10 levels above me) until I got to level 61, where they would fly overhead on their flying mount, waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill.
The reason for this is actually pretty simple.
There's a good shot that the number of lv 80's logged in to any PvP realm is greater than the number of 1-79's combined.
When leveling, PvP against equal opponents is rare (my Druid just got his first Honorable Kill at level 46), but this is just a function of the population.
On my realm, Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms are virtually empty compared to Northrend.
Frequent world PvP doesn't really happen until you hit 80.
Even on my low-population server, farming Hodir reputation invariably turns into a PvP bloodbath.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235474</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Darinbob</author>
	<datestamp>1266832380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>UO and the early days of MMOs were essentially experimental.  They actually repeated many mistake discovered in early MUDs too.  A sort of idealistic view of society that self-policing, minimal government, with everyone armed would actually work, which turns out to be naive.<br><br>Essentially players migrate to safer places like WoW and most other newer MMOs because they don't like the frustration of playing in lawless society governed by gangs.  When people are in virtual worlds, they typically prefer to see a resemblance to utopia more than dystopia.  The bottom line is that people play games to have fun.<br><br>There is a big factor here that I see in many games, and that is many players seem utterly unable to comprehend that some players want a different style or gameplay to have fun.  Thus you see people absolutely baffled that some people prefer smaller servers, or that others want teeming masses, or that some think PvP is mandatory while others despise it, some want competition while others want cooperation, etc.  The early MMOs were very much niche games, and it's too expensive to support the tiny niche of players who liked griefing or pvp-only free for all games, or 8+ hour raids, etc.  Sure there are some that eke out a survival this way, such as EVE, but they're mostly dominated by long term veterans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>UO and the early days of MMOs were essentially experimental .
They actually repeated many mistake discovered in early MUDs too .
A sort of idealistic view of society that self-policing , minimal government , with everyone armed would actually work , which turns out to be naive.Essentially players migrate to safer places like WoW and most other newer MMOs because they do n't like the frustration of playing in lawless society governed by gangs .
When people are in virtual worlds , they typically prefer to see a resemblance to utopia more than dystopia .
The bottom line is that people play games to have fun.There is a big factor here that I see in many games , and that is many players seem utterly unable to comprehend that some players want a different style or gameplay to have fun .
Thus you see people absolutely baffled that some people prefer smaller servers , or that others want teeming masses , or that some think PvP is mandatory while others despise it , some want competition while others want cooperation , etc .
The early MMOs were very much niche games , and it 's too expensive to support the tiny niche of players who liked griefing or pvp-only free for all games , or 8 + hour raids , etc .
Sure there are some that eke out a survival this way , such as EVE , but they 're mostly dominated by long term veterans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UO and the early days of MMOs were essentially experimental.
They actually repeated many mistake discovered in early MUDs too.
A sort of idealistic view of society that self-policing, minimal government, with everyone armed would actually work, which turns out to be naive.Essentially players migrate to safer places like WoW and most other newer MMOs because they don't like the frustration of playing in lawless society governed by gangs.
When people are in virtual worlds, they typically prefer to see a resemblance to utopia more than dystopia.
The bottom line is that people play games to have fun.There is a big factor here that I see in many games, and that is many players seem utterly unable to comprehend that some players want a different style or gameplay to have fun.
Thus you see people absolutely baffled that some people prefer smaller servers, or that others want teeming masses, or that some think PvP is mandatory while others despise it, some want competition while others want cooperation, etc.
The early MMOs were very much niche games, and it's too expensive to support the tiny niche of players who liked griefing or pvp-only free for all games, or 8+ hour raids, etc.
Sure there are some that eke out a survival this way, such as EVE, but they're mostly dominated by long term veterans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>sarahbau</author>
	<datestamp>1266856560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe one way they could counter griefing is to give some kind of risk to the griefer. Most MMOs have no system of law. You can go around killing all the players/NPCs you want, with little more risk than being chased by few guards for 30 seconds. You can then go talk to the baker, who just witnessed you brutally kill 30 peasants, children, and low-level players, but thinks nothing of it. What if killing low level players had consequences, like your character being "executed" (obviously being killed just to respawn 10 seconds later isn't really a punishment, so it could mean something else). What's funny, is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters. The rule book talks about dishonor, and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you, eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.</p><p>By the time the honor system was implemented though, they had removed dishonor (I think initially they did give negative honor for killing passive NPCs, but not for killing low level players). There was no penalty for killing lowbies all day. I played WoW on an RP-PVP server for a while, thinking it would provide some of the world-pvp I missed on my PVE server after Battlegrounds came out. Unfortunately, pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing. I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that wasn't a skull (more than 10 levels above me) until I got to level 61, where they would fly overhead on their flying mount, waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill.</p><p>Even though I'm not a "wolf," I wouldn't be opposed to a game including some kind of loss when killed, IF the person doing the killing faced some kind of risk as well. A level 80 player might not be able to get anything of value from a level 30, but they'd kill them all day just for the "fun" of causing them to lose something. In real life (most) people don't go around killing random helpless people because of morals, and a risk of imprisonment. In the game world, neither exists (most people aren't morally opposed to annoying someone).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe one way they could counter griefing is to give some kind of risk to the griefer .
Most MMOs have no system of law .
You can go around killing all the players/NPCs you want , with little more risk than being chased by few guards for 30 seconds .
You can then go talk to the baker , who just witnessed you brutally kill 30 peasants , children , and low-level players , but thinks nothing of it .
What if killing low level players had consequences , like your character being " executed " ( obviously being killed just to respawn 10 seconds later is n't really a punishment , so it could mean something else ) .
What 's funny , is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters .
The rule book talks about dishonor , and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you , eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.By the time the honor system was implemented though , they had removed dishonor ( I think initially they did give negative honor for killing passive NPCs , but not for killing low level players ) .
There was no penalty for killing lowbies all day .
I played WoW on an RP-PVP server for a while , thinking it would provide some of the world-pvp I missed on my PVE server after Battlegrounds came out .
Unfortunately , pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing .
I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that was n't a skull ( more than 10 levels above me ) until I got to level 61 , where they would fly overhead on their flying mount , waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill.Even though I 'm not a " wolf , " I would n't be opposed to a game including some kind of loss when killed , IF the person doing the killing faced some kind of risk as well .
A level 80 player might not be able to get anything of value from a level 30 , but they 'd kill them all day just for the " fun " of causing them to lose something .
In real life ( most ) people do n't go around killing random helpless people because of morals , and a risk of imprisonment .
In the game world , neither exists ( most people are n't morally opposed to annoying someone ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe one way they could counter griefing is to give some kind of risk to the griefer.
Most MMOs have no system of law.
You can go around killing all the players/NPCs you want, with little more risk than being chased by few guards for 30 seconds.
You can then go talk to the baker, who just witnessed you brutally kill 30 peasants, children, and low-level players, but thinks nothing of it.
What if killing low level players had consequences, like your character being "executed" (obviously being killed just to respawn 10 seconds later isn't really a punishment, so it could mean something else).
What's funny, is WoW originally DID have penalties intended for killing passive NPCs or low-level characters.
The rule book talks about dishonor, and how getting enough dishonor would cause you own faction to stop talking to you, eventually even attacking you if you entered town before your dishonor wore off.By the time the honor system was implemented though, they had removed dishonor (I think initially they did give negative honor for killing passive NPCs, but not for killing low level players).
There was no penalty for killing lowbies all day.
I played WoW on an RP-PVP server for a while, thinking it would provide some of the world-pvp I missed on my PVE server after Battlegrounds came out.
Unfortunately, pretty much the only PVP that exists on PVP servers any more is griefing.
I leveled from 1-70 without encountering a single enemy player that wasn't a skull (more than 10 levels above me) until I got to level 61, where they would fly overhead on their flying mount, waiting for me to drop to low health so they could swoop in for the easy kill.Even though I'm not a "wolf," I wouldn't be opposed to a game including some kind of loss when killed, IF the person doing the killing faced some kind of risk as well.
A level 80 player might not be able to get anything of value from a level 30, but they'd kill them all day just for the "fun" of causing them to lose something.
In real life (most) people don't go around killing random helpless people because of morals, and a risk of imprisonment.
In the game world, neither exists (most people aren't morally opposed to annoying someone).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31293558</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>JonnysAnAmerican</author>
	<datestamp>1267195500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being a player of WoW and EVE both for quite some time now, I would like to disagree with some of your post.

I played WoW roughly at launch, played all the expansions, and while finding it an incredible time sink, it's still fun for the casual gamer. Some may recall the days when Molten Core was the thing to do, and it wasn't as casual a game as it is now. Hours of farming materials for potions, food, and gearing up. Not something that can just be jumped into like it is now.

EVE is something of a time sink as well, and doesn't generally do well with the casual players (though I've not done Militia, so maybe it is). With EVE being a relatively large sandbox, with all the things one can do in the game, I don't think it's so much a wolf mentality as it is elitism. There are indeed people who prey on the 'noobs', while on the same token, there are corps dedicated to helping new players. With EVE, as there is so much risk involved with loss of ships, etc, that I think it does bring out the best, and worst, in people. As such, I think some feel as if they're superior for playing a 'smarter' game, or whatever logic they use.

I do agree that games are about fun, and if you look at Blizzard's model for WoW, it's clearly paying off. There's a reason they make so much money; easy to jump into, make pals, and social networking, in a sense. Anyways, just wanting to disagree with you a bit and all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a player of WoW and EVE both for quite some time now , I would like to disagree with some of your post .
I played WoW roughly at launch , played all the expansions , and while finding it an incredible time sink , it 's still fun for the casual gamer .
Some may recall the days when Molten Core was the thing to do , and it was n't as casual a game as it is now .
Hours of farming materials for potions , food , and gearing up .
Not something that can just be jumped into like it is now .
EVE is something of a time sink as well , and does n't generally do well with the casual players ( though I 've not done Militia , so maybe it is ) .
With EVE being a relatively large sandbox , with all the things one can do in the game , I do n't think it 's so much a wolf mentality as it is elitism .
There are indeed people who prey on the 'noobs ' , while on the same token , there are corps dedicated to helping new players .
With EVE , as there is so much risk involved with loss of ships , etc , that I think it does bring out the best , and worst , in people .
As such , I think some feel as if they 're superior for playing a 'smarter ' game , or whatever logic they use .
I do agree that games are about fun , and if you look at Blizzard 's model for WoW , it 's clearly paying off .
There 's a reason they make so much money ; easy to jump into , make pals , and social networking , in a sense .
Anyways , just wanting to disagree with you a bit and all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a player of WoW and EVE both for quite some time now, I would like to disagree with some of your post.
I played WoW roughly at launch, played all the expansions, and while finding it an incredible time sink, it's still fun for the casual gamer.
Some may recall the days when Molten Core was the thing to do, and it wasn't as casual a game as it is now.
Hours of farming materials for potions, food, and gearing up.
Not something that can just be jumped into like it is now.
EVE is something of a time sink as well, and doesn't generally do well with the casual players (though I've not done Militia, so maybe it is).
With EVE being a relatively large sandbox, with all the things one can do in the game, I don't think it's so much a wolf mentality as it is elitism.
There are indeed people who prey on the 'noobs', while on the same token, there are corps dedicated to helping new players.
With EVE, as there is so much risk involved with loss of ships, etc, that I think it does bring out the best, and worst, in people.
As such, I think some feel as if they're superior for playing a 'smarter' game, or whatever logic they use.
I do agree that games are about fun, and if you look at Blizzard's model for WoW, it's clearly paying off.
There's a reason they make so much money; easy to jump into, make pals, and social networking, in a sense.
Anyways, just wanting to disagree with you a bit and all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227508</id>
	<title>balance</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1266838680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm playing (well, trying to, it's laggy and buggy) the open beta of Mortal Online, and I've followed Darkfall a little, as well as playing EVE and a bunch of others MMOs. What I've learnt there is it is very, very hard to balance a game that allows players to act against each other freely.</p><p>Most MMOs restrict PvP to zones, disallow looting, etc. etc. - all those restrictions are mostly there because they make balancing a TON easier. Just read the Mortal Online forums and you can see how difficult it is to get thieving right. If it's too difficult, nobody will use it and you can just as well leave it out. If it is too easy, it attracts all the griefers and assholes who don't steal from people to advance their own character, but merely to annoy other players.</p><p>It is unbelievably difficult to find the correct balance once your game has a certain amount of complexity, because all those features interact with each other. EVE did one thing right, and that's why they are still top dog. By setting things into space and a SciFi setting, they eliminated a lot of complexities. The seperation of the game world into solar systems is a natural seperation that players accept. It solves a ton of technical issues without the disturbing portals of other games. The whole cloning and insurance system covers the looting, death and resurrection part from a believable angle that gives the designers lots of freedom in tweaking things. And finally, having security ratings from 1.0 to 0.0 with a smooth transition from "carebear space" to "free for all hardcore space" is a brilliant idea.</p><p>Any MMO that doesn't learn from EVE is doomed to fail, I say. And I don't play EVE any more, it's not my game. But they made a good number of brilliant design decisions and have the ability to learn from their mistakes. Kudos for that. Now if you look back at the failed or failure-in-progress games, you will often see devs fanatically defending an original vision that turned out to be impossible to implement. Those who can not adapt, fail.</p><p>I still hope MO turns out to be right, but my hopes are fading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm playing ( well , trying to , it 's laggy and buggy ) the open beta of Mortal Online , and I 've followed Darkfall a little , as well as playing EVE and a bunch of others MMOs .
What I 've learnt there is it is very , very hard to balance a game that allows players to act against each other freely.Most MMOs restrict PvP to zones , disallow looting , etc .
etc. - all those restrictions are mostly there because they make balancing a TON easier .
Just read the Mortal Online forums and you can see how difficult it is to get thieving right .
If it 's too difficult , nobody will use it and you can just as well leave it out .
If it is too easy , it attracts all the griefers and assholes who do n't steal from people to advance their own character , but merely to annoy other players.It is unbelievably difficult to find the correct balance once your game has a certain amount of complexity , because all those features interact with each other .
EVE did one thing right , and that 's why they are still top dog .
By setting things into space and a SciFi setting , they eliminated a lot of complexities .
The seperation of the game world into solar systems is a natural seperation that players accept .
It solves a ton of technical issues without the disturbing portals of other games .
The whole cloning and insurance system covers the looting , death and resurrection part from a believable angle that gives the designers lots of freedom in tweaking things .
And finally , having security ratings from 1.0 to 0.0 with a smooth transition from " carebear space " to " free for all hardcore space " is a brilliant idea.Any MMO that does n't learn from EVE is doomed to fail , I say .
And I do n't play EVE any more , it 's not my game .
But they made a good number of brilliant design decisions and have the ability to learn from their mistakes .
Kudos for that .
Now if you look back at the failed or failure-in-progress games , you will often see devs fanatically defending an original vision that turned out to be impossible to implement .
Those who can not adapt , fail.I still hope MO turns out to be right , but my hopes are fading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm playing (well, trying to, it's laggy and buggy) the open beta of Mortal Online, and I've followed Darkfall a little, as well as playing EVE and a bunch of others MMOs.
What I've learnt there is it is very, very hard to balance a game that allows players to act against each other freely.Most MMOs restrict PvP to zones, disallow looting, etc.
etc. - all those restrictions are mostly there because they make balancing a TON easier.
Just read the Mortal Online forums and you can see how difficult it is to get thieving right.
If it's too difficult, nobody will use it and you can just as well leave it out.
If it is too easy, it attracts all the griefers and assholes who don't steal from people to advance their own character, but merely to annoy other players.It is unbelievably difficult to find the correct balance once your game has a certain amount of complexity, because all those features interact with each other.
EVE did one thing right, and that's why they are still top dog.
By setting things into space and a SciFi setting, they eliminated a lot of complexities.
The seperation of the game world into solar systems is a natural seperation that players accept.
It solves a ton of technical issues without the disturbing portals of other games.
The whole cloning and insurance system covers the looting, death and resurrection part from a believable angle that gives the designers lots of freedom in tweaking things.
And finally, having security ratings from 1.0 to 0.0 with a smooth transition from "carebear space" to "free for all hardcore space" is a brilliant idea.Any MMO that doesn't learn from EVE is doomed to fail, I say.
And I don't play EVE any more, it's not my game.
But they made a good number of brilliant design decisions and have the ability to learn from their mistakes.
Kudos for that.
Now if you look back at the failed or failure-in-progress games, you will often see devs fanatically defending an original vision that turned out to be impossible to implement.
Those who can not adapt, fail.I still hope MO turns out to be right, but my hopes are fading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Greyfox</author>
	<datestamp>1266856320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually in pre-tram UO you really didn't stand to lose that much if you died. The top-end gear wasn't hugely better than what you could buy at a vendor, and two or three relative lowbies could drop a guy in the best gear in the game. Experience counted for a lot more, and it encouraged you to invest more in things your character couldn't lose, mainly his skills.
<p>
The WoW-like item grind is what really threw off the balance of that world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually in pre-tram UO you really did n't stand to lose that much if you died .
The top-end gear was n't hugely better than what you could buy at a vendor , and two or three relative lowbies could drop a guy in the best gear in the game .
Experience counted for a lot more , and it encouraged you to invest more in things your character could n't lose , mainly his skills .
The WoW-like item grind is what really threw off the balance of that world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually in pre-tram UO you really didn't stand to lose that much if you died.
The top-end gear wasn't hugely better than what you could buy at a vendor, and two or three relative lowbies could drop a guy in the best gear in the game.
Experience counted for a lot more, and it encouraged you to invest more in things your character couldn't lose, mainly his skills.
The WoW-like item grind is what really threw off the balance of that world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239468</id>
	<title>i miss the good old Atari 2600 also</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1266849780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to have fun back in those days.</p><p>but now?   games look like shit and I have no idea how I played with the crappy controls.</p><p>Tell your friend to quit crying like a little girl and move on with tech, before it moves too far past you.</p><p>And quit telling me to get off your lawn, I'm standing in your driveway!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to have fun back in those days.but now ?
games look like shit and I have no idea how I played with the crappy controls.Tell your friend to quit crying like a little girl and move on with tech , before it moves too far past you.And quit telling me to get off your lawn , I 'm standing in your driveway !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to have fun back in those days.but now?
games look like shit and I have no idea how I played with the crappy controls.Tell your friend to quit crying like a little girl and move on with tech, before it moves too far past you.And quit telling me to get off your lawn, I'm standing in your driveway!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239100</id>
	<title>UO was a gem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266847560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've read thru almost all of the replies here and there are quite a few misconceptions of what actually happened during UO.  UO was a great game that offered an unrivaled level of freedom in game (especially compared to today's MMO's).  Almost every negative post has focused on robbery and out of control griefing as a major concern of the game, but that really wasn't the case.  True, there were griefers, i'd argue there are more now in WOW and such (level 80s camping the stupid water elemental spawns for no reason but to piss me off), but for every random PKer or griefer there were 4-5 ANTI-PKs who did nothing but prey on the predators.  After the newness of the game wore off, about 6 months, players really starting policing themselves and the majority of the random PKing went away.  Instead people joined forces and started large player run cities by aligning themselves w/ other guilds (do that today in any game, not happening), and then guild vs guild play was the majority of the PVPing.  Where UO really shined was in the player run housing, sure you can say it could be tedious and such, but thats by today's "i run my wow combat sequence with a click of 1 button macros" standards. Pathetic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've read thru almost all of the replies here and there are quite a few misconceptions of what actually happened during UO .
UO was a great game that offered an unrivaled level of freedom in game ( especially compared to today 's MMO 's ) .
Almost every negative post has focused on robbery and out of control griefing as a major concern of the game , but that really was n't the case .
True , there were griefers , i 'd argue there are more now in WOW and such ( level 80s camping the stupid water elemental spawns for no reason but to piss me off ) , but for every random PKer or griefer there were 4-5 ANTI-PKs who did nothing but prey on the predators .
After the newness of the game wore off , about 6 months , players really starting policing themselves and the majority of the random PKing went away .
Instead people joined forces and started large player run cities by aligning themselves w/ other guilds ( do that today in any game , not happening ) , and then guild vs guild play was the majority of the PVPing .
Where UO really shined was in the player run housing , sure you can say it could be tedious and such , but thats by today 's " i run my wow combat sequence with a click of 1 button macros " standards .
Pathetic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've read thru almost all of the replies here and there are quite a few misconceptions of what actually happened during UO.
UO was a great game that offered an unrivaled level of freedom in game (especially compared to today's MMO's).
Almost every negative post has focused on robbery and out of control griefing as a major concern of the game, but that really wasn't the case.
True, there were griefers, i'd argue there are more now in WOW and such (level 80s camping the stupid water elemental spawns for no reason but to piss me off), but for every random PKer or griefer there were 4-5 ANTI-PKs who did nothing but prey on the predators.
After the newness of the game wore off, about 6 months, players really starting policing themselves and the majority of the random PKing went away.
Instead people joined forces and started large player run cities by aligning themselves w/ other guilds (do that today in any game, not happening), and then guild vs guild play was the majority of the PVPing.
Where UO really shined was in the player run housing, sure you can say it could be tedious and such, but thats by today's "i run my wow combat sequence with a click of 1 button macros" standards.
Pathetic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227676</id>
	<title>Re:EVE: Online</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266840540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, you could stay in high-security space and not fear being killed by other players (frankly, decided players in groups could kill any beginner even in the highest security space, but it's not worth the effort and loss).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , you could stay in high-security space and not fear being killed by other players ( frankly , decided players in groups could kill any beginner even in the highest security space , but it 's not worth the effort and loss ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, you could stay in high-security space and not fear being killed by other players (frankly, decided players in groups could kill any beginner even in the highest security space, but it's not worth the effort and loss).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229570</id>
	<title>Re:The second most popular MMO in the world....</title>
	<author>solarlux</author>
	<datestamp>1266855900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I haven't tried Runescape, but I've found Runes of Magic to be quite enjoyable.  It's been called a free "clone" of WoW.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't tried Runescape , but I 've found Runes of Magic to be quite enjoyable .
It 's been called a free " clone " of WoW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't tried Runescape, but I've found Runes of Magic to be quite enjoyable.
It's been called a free "clone" of WoW.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</id>
	<title>UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Captain Kirk</author>
	<datestamp>1266835740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of of the people who rave about pre-Tramell UO are people who fit the "Multi-player appeal to the Killer" label Bartle uses.</p><p>Sadly they needed 1000s of "Multi-player appeal to the Socializer" players to feed on.  Beign griefed is not fun for such a person so UO failed to grow.  No other game that allows griefign will be fun so you won't see them get developed or launched.</p><p>WoW allows griefing on PVP realms - you have to opt in.  Most of those realms are empty for the same reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of of the people who rave about pre-Tramell UO are people who fit the " Multi-player appeal to the Killer " label Bartle uses.Sadly they needed 1000s of " Multi-player appeal to the Socializer " players to feed on .
Beign griefed is not fun for such a person so UO failed to grow .
No other game that allows griefign will be fun so you wo n't see them get developed or launched.WoW allows griefing on PVP realms - you have to opt in .
Most of those realms are empty for the same reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of of the people who rave about pre-Tramell UO are people who fit the "Multi-player appeal to the Killer" label Bartle uses.Sadly they needed 1000s of "Multi-player appeal to the Socializer" players to feed on.
Beign griefed is not fun for such a person so UO failed to grow.
No other game that allows griefign will be fun so you won't see them get developed or launched.WoW allows griefing on PVP realms - you have to opt in.
Most of those realms are empty for the same reason.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232106</id>
	<title>UO was different.. a rare gem so to speak..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266864720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played UO for several years back before they implemented their deterrent system and trammel and all of that nonsense.. I just wanted to say, nothing, no game, has ever incorporated such a real experience other than UO.. Simply put, the range of emotions and experiences that were apart of UO, have never been developed into new games. It was the only place, besides the stock market, that could get my adrenalin flowing, my heart beating, and simply cause a over-all feeling of fear just for being around other players..</p><p>Yes, I did see many new players come and go, the experience was hard to put up with for many people and of course this influenced the developing company OSI to make changes. UO, simply put, was hard to play by yourself, there was always someone out there looking to kill and loot your corpse and your entire past hour of work and take advantage of your skills and knowledge IF you didn't prepare for it.. It was the wild west, and anything goes.. You don't see that anymore.. And I think that is the main reason old UO players miss the good ole days. The player had much more control..</p><p>Today's MMOs have a cookie cutter scheme they like to follow, and limitations they all have in common are the ones that prevent the true chaos and freedom found in UO from blossoming again - The minor (and pointless) details, the emotions, the limitless freedoms, are all lost in today's virtual worlds. It really is a complete different experience that I have yet to see duplicated or replicated in any way even a decade+ later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played UO for several years back before they implemented their deterrent system and trammel and all of that nonsense.. I just wanted to say , nothing , no game , has ever incorporated such a real experience other than UO.. Simply put , the range of emotions and experiences that were apart of UO , have never been developed into new games .
It was the only place , besides the stock market , that could get my adrenalin flowing , my heart beating , and simply cause a over-all feeling of fear just for being around other players..Yes , I did see many new players come and go , the experience was hard to put up with for many people and of course this influenced the developing company OSI to make changes .
UO , simply put , was hard to play by yourself , there was always someone out there looking to kill and loot your corpse and your entire past hour of work and take advantage of your skills and knowledge IF you did n't prepare for it.. It was the wild west , and anything goes.. You do n't see that anymore.. And I think that is the main reason old UO players miss the good ole days .
The player had much more control..Today 's MMOs have a cookie cutter scheme they like to follow , and limitations they all have in common are the ones that prevent the true chaos and freedom found in UO from blossoming again - The minor ( and pointless ) details , the emotions , the limitless freedoms , are all lost in today 's virtual worlds .
It really is a complete different experience that I have yet to see duplicated or replicated in any way even a decade + later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played UO for several years back before they implemented their deterrent system and trammel and all of that nonsense.. I just wanted to say, nothing, no game, has ever incorporated such a real experience other than UO.. Simply put, the range of emotions and experiences that were apart of UO, have never been developed into new games.
It was the only place, besides the stock market, that could get my adrenalin flowing, my heart beating, and simply cause a over-all feeling of fear just for being around other players..Yes, I did see many new players come and go, the experience was hard to put up with for many people and of course this influenced the developing company OSI to make changes.
UO, simply put, was hard to play by yourself, there was always someone out there looking to kill and loot your corpse and your entire past hour of work and take advantage of your skills and knowledge IF you didn't prepare for it.. It was the wild west, and anything goes.. You don't see that anymore.. And I think that is the main reason old UO players miss the good ole days.
The player had much more control..Today's MMOs have a cookie cutter scheme they like to follow, and limitations they all have in common are the ones that prevent the true chaos and freedom found in UO from blossoming again - The minor (and pointless) details, the emotions, the limitless freedoms, are all lost in today's virtual worlds.
It really is a complete different experience that I have yet to see duplicated or replicated in any way even a decade+ later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233718</id>
	<title>Skill Based...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266870300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>UO was far more then houses and thieves.  It was skill based so you had the ability to custom build a character to match your playing style.  You could combine magic, swords, spears, maces,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... healing, potions, traps,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... stealing, hiding, stealth,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>There were a ton of powerful combination of skills.<br>It wasn't all about grinding, lvl'n, and talent paths.<br>It was about building a solid character and knowing how to combo macros to take down an enemy or accomplish a task.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UO was far more then houses and thieves .
It was skill based so you had the ability to custom build a character to match your playing style .
You could combine magic , swords , spears , maces , ... healing , potions , traps , ... stealing , hiding , stealth , ...There were a ton of powerful combination of skills.It was n't all about grinding , lvl'n , and talent paths.It was about building a solid character and knowing how to combo macros to take down an enemy or accomplish a task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UO was far more then houses and thieves.
It was skill based so you had the ability to custom build a character to match your playing style.
You could combine magic, swords, spears, maces, ... healing, potions, traps, ... stealing, hiding, stealth, ...There were a ton of powerful combination of skills.It wasn't all about grinding, lvl'n, and talent paths.It was about building a solid character and knowing how to combo macros to take down an enemy or accomplish a task.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230442</id>
	<title>UO is still great.</title>
	<author>Grimbleton</author>
	<datestamp>1266860220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe he needs to try Siege Perilous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe he needs to try Siege Perilous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe he needs to try Siege Perilous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229974</id>
	<title>Focus and implementation</title>
	<author>valkenar</author>
	<datestamp>1266858000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of people assume that the point of any MMO is to gain levels, items powers and build a character over time, to defeat big monsters, and that anything that detracts from that is bad. Alternatively, you could make a point of a game that isn't about attaching yourself emotionally to some glorified ProgressQuest, and whose interest is the conflict. There's a lot of mileage to be gotten out of the combination of varied builds, fast leveling, player lootings, permanent death, and meaningful in-game factions.  Lots of people like quake, and lots of people like MMO style pvp. So what you do is you make a game that combines the interesting aspects of experimenting with a reasonably complex character skillset system, which is something people like about PVP in MMOs, with the action and general painlessness of dieing in Quake.</p><p>The other thing wrong with PVP in MMOs is that it is very rarely balanced well. It's often the case that there's either NO pvp or unlimited pvp.  A system that allows pvp within a certain power range (as determined by levels, for example) is a way to make it so that PVP doesn't devolve into griefing. Most of the real griefing problems come from letting people of maximum power freely attack those of minimum power. By restricting it within a range that creates at least a reasonable baseline of parity while allowing freedom to fight otherwise, you avoid the stupid kind of pvp which is not fun, and you get a fun style of competition using the RPG style combat mechanics.</p><p>I play a mud called carrion fields which works on this model, but it's still a mud (and combines roleplay with the pvp focus I described, which will be a turnoff to people who want pure quake-style action). I've always hoped to see an MMO which applies the same kind of rules, but so far I haven't seen any.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of people assume that the point of any MMO is to gain levels , items powers and build a character over time , to defeat big monsters , and that anything that detracts from that is bad .
Alternatively , you could make a point of a game that is n't about attaching yourself emotionally to some glorified ProgressQuest , and whose interest is the conflict .
There 's a lot of mileage to be gotten out of the combination of varied builds , fast leveling , player lootings , permanent death , and meaningful in-game factions .
Lots of people like quake , and lots of people like MMO style pvp .
So what you do is you make a game that combines the interesting aspects of experimenting with a reasonably complex character skillset system , which is something people like about PVP in MMOs , with the action and general painlessness of dieing in Quake.The other thing wrong with PVP in MMOs is that it is very rarely balanced well .
It 's often the case that there 's either NO pvp or unlimited pvp .
A system that allows pvp within a certain power range ( as determined by levels , for example ) is a way to make it so that PVP does n't devolve into griefing .
Most of the real griefing problems come from letting people of maximum power freely attack those of minimum power .
By restricting it within a range that creates at least a reasonable baseline of parity while allowing freedom to fight otherwise , you avoid the stupid kind of pvp which is not fun , and you get a fun style of competition using the RPG style combat mechanics.I play a mud called carrion fields which works on this model , but it 's still a mud ( and combines roleplay with the pvp focus I described , which will be a turnoff to people who want pure quake-style action ) .
I 've always hoped to see an MMO which applies the same kind of rules , but so far I have n't seen any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of people assume that the point of any MMO is to gain levels, items powers and build a character over time, to defeat big monsters, and that anything that detracts from that is bad.
Alternatively, you could make a point of a game that isn't about attaching yourself emotionally to some glorified ProgressQuest, and whose interest is the conflict.
There's a lot of mileage to be gotten out of the combination of varied builds, fast leveling, player lootings, permanent death, and meaningful in-game factions.
Lots of people like quake, and lots of people like MMO style pvp.
So what you do is you make a game that combines the interesting aspects of experimenting with a reasonably complex character skillset system, which is something people like about PVP in MMOs, with the action and general painlessness of dieing in Quake.The other thing wrong with PVP in MMOs is that it is very rarely balanced well.
It's often the case that there's either NO pvp or unlimited pvp.
A system that allows pvp within a certain power range (as determined by levels, for example) is a way to make it so that PVP doesn't devolve into griefing.
Most of the real griefing problems come from letting people of maximum power freely attack those of minimum power.
By restricting it within a range that creates at least a reasonable baseline of parity while allowing freedom to fight otherwise, you avoid the stupid kind of pvp which is not fun, and you get a fun style of competition using the RPG style combat mechanics.I play a mud called carrion fields which works on this model, but it's still a mud (and combines roleplay with the pvp focus I described, which will be a turnoff to people who want pure quake-style action).
I've always hoped to see an MMO which applies the same kind of rules, but so far I haven't seen any.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232860</id>
	<title>UO Secondage</title>
	<author>stupidcomputers</author>
	<datestamp>1266867120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one has mentioned <a href="http://www.uosecondage.com/" title="uosecondage.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.uosecondage.com/</a> [uosecondage.com] ?

Their main goal is to replicate the best times in UO's history.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one has mentioned http : //www.uosecondage.com/ [ uosecondage.com ] ?
Their main goal is to replicate the best times in UO 's history .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one has mentioned http://www.uosecondage.com/ [uosecondage.com] ?
Their main goal is to replicate the best times in UO's history.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235128</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266831300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem they ran into with dishonor and low-level players was "What happens when a lowby annoys you or when a dozen lowbies get together and attack you?"    A fair world-pvp system is all but impossible, there are just too many variables.  Battlegrounds are a much better solution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem they ran into with dishonor and low-level players was " What happens when a lowby annoys you or when a dozen lowbies get together and attack you ?
" A fair world-pvp system is all but impossible , there are just too many variables .
Battlegrounds are a much better solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem they ran into with dishonor and low-level players was "What happens when a lowby annoys you or when a dozen lowbies get together and attack you?
"    A fair world-pvp system is all but impossible, there are just too many variables.
Battlegrounds are a much better solution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227714</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266841080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source, I mean if I just want to "steal" the game I'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver, I wanna play the game however (interaction between people all over the world) and to do that I need the infrastructure they're selling (Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest)

Now.. if they'd release the code, free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works, incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant off, ex-WoW addict</p></div><p>Somebody please, for the love of God, mod this man.......... down. Seriously, what the fuck are you thinking? What in the world would Blizzard <b>possibly</b> have to gain by open-sourcing their game? Are you trolling?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source , I mean if I just want to " steal " the game I 'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver , I wan na play the game however ( interaction between people all over the world ) and to do that I need the infrastructure they 're selling ( Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest ) Now.. if they 'd release the code , free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works , incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work /rant off , ex-WoW addictSomebody please , for the love of God , mod this man.......... down. Seriously , what the fuck are you thinking ?
What in the world would Blizzard possibly have to gain by open-sourcing their game ?
Are you trolling ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source, I mean if I just want to "steal" the game I'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver, I wanna play the game however (interaction between people all over the world) and to do that I need the infrastructure they're selling (Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest)

Now.. if they'd release the code, free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works, incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work /rant off, ex-WoW addictSomebody please, for the love of God, mod this man.......... down. Seriously, what the fuck are you thinking?
What in the world would Blizzard possibly have to gain by open-sourcing their game?
Are you trolling?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Tridus</author>
	<datestamp>1266838980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, this. Griefing and thieving only work as gameplay when there are lots of victims. Unfortunately, for the victims it isn't very fun. Those people stop playing when it happens enough times to frustrate them.</p><p>Game companies tend to dislike it when people stop playing, and the victim pool massively outnumbers the jerk pool. So naturally they make games friendlier to that group.</p><p>Face up to reality. The number of people who actually want to do this type of anti-social behavior simply isn't large enough to support a big game on its own, and nobody else but those people actually likes it. Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players. Thus, most players go find games that are fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , this .
Griefing and thieving only work as gameplay when there are lots of victims .
Unfortunately , for the victims it is n't very fun .
Those people stop playing when it happens enough times to frustrate them.Game companies tend to dislike it when people stop playing , and the victim pool massively outnumbers the jerk pool .
So naturally they make games friendlier to that group.Face up to reality .
The number of people who actually want to do this type of anti-social behavior simply is n't large enough to support a big game on its own , and nobody else but those people actually likes it .
Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players .
Thus , most players go find games that are fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, this.
Griefing and thieving only work as gameplay when there are lots of victims.
Unfortunately, for the victims it isn't very fun.
Those people stop playing when it happens enough times to frustrate them.Game companies tend to dislike it when people stop playing, and the victim pool massively outnumbers the jerk pool.
So naturally they make games friendlier to that group.Face up to reality.
The number of people who actually want to do this type of anti-social behavior simply isn't large enough to support a big game on its own, and nobody else but those people actually likes it.
Being killed and robbed is not fun for most players.
Thus, most players go find games that are fun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229260</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1266853980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still blame Evocare, Destroyer of MMOs and his new guise of Kalgan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still blame Evocare , Destroyer of MMOs and his new guise of Kalgan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still blame Evocare, Destroyer of MMOs and his new guise of Kalgan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227522</id>
	<title>MMOs ain't what they used to be</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266838800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything on the internet starts off as a group of reasonable, intelligent people. MMOers in the olden days were willing to take sudden extreme losses like having most of their stuff looted and being camped for a few hours, with the understanding that they themselves, with their guilds, were responsible for retribution. Butt then, as with everything, the size grows and the quality of the users and community gets diluted down. Now, we have things like MMOs like WoW where 90\% of the effort put into them is just there for the first 6 months of your playing time, until you get to level 80 and just teleport between your favorite instances. The only cure is to start over from scratch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything on the internet starts off as a group of reasonable , intelligent people .
MMOers in the olden days were willing to take sudden extreme losses like having most of their stuff looted and being camped for a few hours , with the understanding that they themselves , with their guilds , were responsible for retribution .
Butt then , as with everything , the size grows and the quality of the users and community gets diluted down .
Now , we have things like MMOs like WoW where 90 \ % of the effort put into them is just there for the first 6 months of your playing time , until you get to level 80 and just teleport between your favorite instances .
The only cure is to start over from scratch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything on the internet starts off as a group of reasonable, intelligent people.
MMOers in the olden days were willing to take sudden extreme losses like having most of their stuff looted and being camped for a few hours, with the understanding that they themselves, with their guilds, were responsible for retribution.
Butt then, as with everything, the size grows and the quality of the users and community gets diluted down.
Now, we have things like MMOs like WoW where 90\% of the effort put into them is just there for the first 6 months of your playing time, until you get to level 80 and just teleport between your favorite instances.
The only cure is to start over from scratch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227510</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>Tridus</author>
	<datestamp>1266838680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's in it for them, other then absolutely nothing?</p><p>That's kind of the problem here. Blizzard has no reason to do that. They have enough developers, artists, and money that if they want to do something and it's technically doable with their infrastructure, they can. Things that aren't in the game are likely not there for a reason.</p><p>All you'd get with them releasing the code is more pirate servers, and people adding stuff to the open source version that Blizzard wouldn't add back into the main game anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's in it for them , other then absolutely nothing ? That 's kind of the problem here .
Blizzard has no reason to do that .
They have enough developers , artists , and money that if they want to do something and it 's technically doable with their infrastructure , they can .
Things that are n't in the game are likely not there for a reason.All you 'd get with them releasing the code is more pirate servers , and people adding stuff to the open source version that Blizzard would n't add back into the main game anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's in it for them, other then absolutely nothing?That's kind of the problem here.
Blizzard has no reason to do that.
They have enough developers, artists, and money that if they want to do something and it's technically doable with their infrastructure, they can.
Things that aren't in the game are likely not there for a reason.All you'd get with them releasing the code is more pirate servers, and people adding stuff to the open source version that Blizzard wouldn't add back into the main game anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31241160</id>
	<title>How can I try UO?</title>
	<author>BigSes</author>
	<datestamp>1266864840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there a way that I can try out UO?  I've always wanted to, and this thread has piqued my interest once again. I didn't think that I would like the game back when it was popular, even though I enjoyed the experience of U6, U7 (and expansions), and even U8.  I always thought of Ultima as a singular experience, that you enjoy as a lone player.  Now that it doesn't have the popularity that it once did, I thought I might try it. I, like many other people, have grown quite tired of WoW and would like to put a few hours into something else.  Is it still available to purchase or has it become OOP?  Do I have to buy a standard retail copy and pay the subscription fees or can I pick it up and try a shard sever to see what I think?  I was a player of The Realm for years back in Sierra's heyday, so I do have more MMORPG experience than WoW, but never played UO or know anyone that did.  I just don't know how it operates now, so forgive me if I sound like an idiot.  If it would be some super complicated thing, I'll just check out EvE, but I always wanted to see how the UO world worked.  Thanks!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a way that I can try out UO ?
I 've always wanted to , and this thread has piqued my interest once again .
I did n't think that I would like the game back when it was popular , even though I enjoyed the experience of U6 , U7 ( and expansions ) , and even U8 .
I always thought of Ultima as a singular experience , that you enjoy as a lone player .
Now that it does n't have the popularity that it once did , I thought I might try it .
I , like many other people , have grown quite tired of WoW and would like to put a few hours into something else .
Is it still available to purchase or has it become OOP ?
Do I have to buy a standard retail copy and pay the subscription fees or can I pick it up and try a shard sever to see what I think ?
I was a player of The Realm for years back in Sierra 's heyday , so I do have more MMORPG experience than WoW , but never played UO or know anyone that did .
I just do n't know how it operates now , so forgive me if I sound like an idiot .
If it would be some super complicated thing , I 'll just check out EvE , but I always wanted to see how the UO world worked .
Thanks !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a way that I can try out UO?
I've always wanted to, and this thread has piqued my interest once again.
I didn't think that I would like the game back when it was popular, even though I enjoyed the experience of U6, U7 (and expansions), and even U8.
I always thought of Ultima as a singular experience, that you enjoy as a lone player.
Now that it doesn't have the popularity that it once did, I thought I might try it.
I, like many other people, have grown quite tired of WoW and would like to put a few hours into something else.
Is it still available to purchase or has it become OOP?
Do I have to buy a standard retail copy and pay the subscription fees or can I pick it up and try a shard sever to see what I think?
I was a player of The Realm for years back in Sierra's heyday, so I do have more MMORPG experience than WoW, but never played UO or know anyone that did.
I just don't know how it operates now, so forgive me if I sound like an idiot.
If it would be some super complicated thing, I'll just check out EvE, but I always wanted to see how the UO world worked.
Thanks!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</id>
	<title>Missing the point</title>
	<author>Moraelin</author>
	<datestamp>1266847320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Methinks that's missing the point. Judging by the summary, what his friend misses isn't crafting or just housing, but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity. He doesn't miss just housing (which half the games have nowadays anyway), but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to. Basically he's missing a game that's equally half-baked, buggy, exploitable, and with equally piss-poor GM support, so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.</p><p>And I seriously doubt that many games aim for the bottom of the proverbial barrel nowadays. Even those who end up there, it's not by design. They may end up an exploitable griefer's paradise by plain old fashioned half-arsed effort, but not by aiming to be a buggy exploitable mess by design.</p><p>Arguably even UO didn't aim to be the mess it was for its first years. Lord British and later Raph Koster didn't as much aim to fuck up, but just found rationales as to why and how the players will do all the policing and content so they don't have to bother with that. (Raph Koster would then take this idea with him to SWG, and contribute to that one's ending up barely niche appeal, in spite of the millions of SW fans who awaited it like the second cumming of the Messiah.) UO was not \_supposed\_ to be a lawless griefer's paradise and driving almost all the player base off, as soon as the first competitor appeared. It was supposed to be the place where players form their own posses and do their own policing and enforcing the rules, so Origin and EA don't have to spend money and manpower on that. All that happened was simply that that idea didn't work: there was nothing you could do in-character to a griefer seeing his character as just a disposable harrassment tool. Even if you could get a bunch of people to form a posse to hunt him down, that just fed the troll, instead of deterring him.</p><p>But anyway UO ended up a griefer's paradise more by simple fuck-up, than by design. People and social dynamics were supposed to take the place of coded restrictions, except they never actually worked that way. And the end result was just the result of that "it never worked as they intended."</p><p>So, yeah, I doubt that the guy's friend will find many games which \_aim\_ to be what he misses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Methinks that 's missing the point .
Judging by the summary , what his friend misses is n't crafting or just housing , but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity .
He does n't miss just housing ( which half the games have nowadays anyway ) , but more specifically thieving , which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone 's furniture that per the game rules you should n't have had access to .
Basically he 's missing a game that 's equally half-baked , buggy , exploitable , and with equally piss-poor GM support , so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.And I seriously doubt that many games aim for the bottom of the proverbial barrel nowadays .
Even those who end up there , it 's not by design .
They may end up an exploitable griefer 's paradise by plain old fashioned half-arsed effort , but not by aiming to be a buggy exploitable mess by design.Arguably even UO did n't aim to be the mess it was for its first years .
Lord British and later Raph Koster did n't as much aim to fuck up , but just found rationales as to why and how the players will do all the policing and content so they do n't have to bother with that .
( Raph Koster would then take this idea with him to SWG , and contribute to that one 's ending up barely niche appeal , in spite of the millions of SW fans who awaited it like the second cumming of the Messiah .
) UO was not \ _supposed \ _ to be a lawless griefer 's paradise and driving almost all the player base off , as soon as the first competitor appeared .
It was supposed to be the place where players form their own posses and do their own policing and enforcing the rules , so Origin and EA do n't have to spend money and manpower on that .
All that happened was simply that that idea did n't work : there was nothing you could do in-character to a griefer seeing his character as just a disposable harrassment tool .
Even if you could get a bunch of people to form a posse to hunt him down , that just fed the troll , instead of deterring him.But anyway UO ended up a griefer 's paradise more by simple fuck-up , than by design .
People and social dynamics were supposed to take the place of coded restrictions , except they never actually worked that way .
And the end result was just the result of that " it never worked as they intended .
" So , yeah , I doubt that the guy 's friend will find many games which \ _aim \ _ to be what he misses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Methinks that's missing the point.
Judging by the summary, what his friend misses isn't crafting or just housing, but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity.
He doesn't miss just housing (which half the games have nowadays anyway), but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to.
Basically he's missing a game that's equally half-baked, buggy, exploitable, and with equally piss-poor GM support, so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.And I seriously doubt that many games aim for the bottom of the proverbial barrel nowadays.
Even those who end up there, it's not by design.
They may end up an exploitable griefer's paradise by plain old fashioned half-arsed effort, but not by aiming to be a buggy exploitable mess by design.Arguably even UO didn't aim to be the mess it was for its first years.
Lord British and later Raph Koster didn't as much aim to fuck up, but just found rationales as to why and how the players will do all the policing and content so they don't have to bother with that.
(Raph Koster would then take this idea with him to SWG, and contribute to that one's ending up barely niche appeal, in spite of the millions of SW fans who awaited it like the second cumming of the Messiah.
) UO was not \_supposed\_ to be a lawless griefer's paradise and driving almost all the player base off, as soon as the first competitor appeared.
It was supposed to be the place where players form their own posses and do their own policing and enforcing the rules, so Origin and EA don't have to spend money and manpower on that.
All that happened was simply that that idea didn't work: there was nothing you could do in-character to a griefer seeing his character as just a disposable harrassment tool.
Even if you could get a bunch of people to form a posse to hunt him down, that just fed the troll, instead of deterring him.But anyway UO ended up a griefer's paradise more by simple fuck-up, than by design.
People and social dynamics were supposed to take the place of coded restrictions, except they never actually worked that way.
And the end result was just the result of that "it never worked as they intended.
"So, yeah, I doubt that the guy's friend will find many games which \_aim\_ to be what he misses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230210</id>
	<title>Re:Shadowbane</title>
	<author>bishiraver</author>
	<datestamp>1266859200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shadowbane had the following flaws:</p><p>* You had to mercilessly camp mob spawns in order to get money for your guild/city.<br>* It was disasterously easy to quit your guild and join the rival so you end up on the winning side</p><p>This made things: boring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shadowbane had the following flaws : * You had to mercilessly camp mob spawns in order to get money for your guild/city .
* It was disasterously easy to quit your guild and join the rival so you end up on the winning sideThis made things : boring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shadowbane had the following flaws:* You had to mercilessly camp mob spawns in order to get money for your guild/city.
* It was disasterously easy to quit your guild and join the rival so you end up on the winning sideThis made things: boring.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Dolda2000</author>
	<datestamp>1266859620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Methinks that's missing the point. Judging by the summary, what his friend misses isn't crafting or just housing, but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity. He doesn't miss just housing (which half the games have nowadays anyway), but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to. Basically he's missing a game that's equally half-baked, buggy, exploitable, and with equally piss-poor GM support, so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.</p></div><p>As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth, I have to disagree. The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself, rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that. It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world, rather than the mechanics that we, as the game authors, build into it. The coolest thing about the world, if I may say so myself, is that there isn't a single structure in the world that hasn't been built by the players themselves.</p><p>It is true, of course, that theft and raiding are important parts of that, and the primary enjoyment of many players is the politics that arise out of factions competing with each other; but mind you that theft and raiding does not necessarily equal "griefing". In Haven, despite only having a few hundred players, there are actual wars being played out without us authors having to write a back-story for them. We don't have to write a back-story at all since that can be done entirely by players; and it also leads to a story that the players can actually care about since they are part of it themselves, rather than having had it pushed upon them.</p><p>I shan't pretend that Haven isn't buggy and exploitable, but those are things that we do plan to remedy before going into beta without having to rip out the most defining aspect of the game, viz., its mutable world. "Piss-poor GM support", as you put it, is an intended feature: We don't want to set the rules for the game any more than is necessary as a part of writing basic game mechanics, and in the end, we believe that it leads to a more meaningful player experience since players don't have to be bothered by any arbitrary rules of morality that we may set up. The point is that most of our players don't want to be "griefers" -- they simply want to be a meaningful part of the game world itself, which they cannot be in a theme-park game like WoW. I don't want to pretend everyone wants a game like that (there is obviously a reason why WoW has four or so orders of magnitude more players than we do), but it's not like it's just for griefers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Methinks that 's missing the point .
Judging by the summary , what his friend misses is n't crafting or just housing , but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity .
He does n't miss just housing ( which half the games have nowadays anyway ) , but more specifically thieving , which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone 's furniture that per the game rules you should n't have had access to .
Basically he 's missing a game that 's equally half-baked , buggy , exploitable , and with equally piss-poor GM support , so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth , I have to disagree .
The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself , rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game ; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that .
It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world , rather than the mechanics that we , as the game authors , build into it .
The coolest thing about the world , if I may say so myself , is that there is n't a single structure in the world that has n't been built by the players themselves.It is true , of course , that theft and raiding are important parts of that , and the primary enjoyment of many players is the politics that arise out of factions competing with each other ; but mind you that theft and raiding does not necessarily equal " griefing " .
In Haven , despite only having a few hundred players , there are actual wars being played out without us authors having to write a back-story for them .
We do n't have to write a back-story at all since that can be done entirely by players ; and it also leads to a story that the players can actually care about since they are part of it themselves , rather than having had it pushed upon them.I sha n't pretend that Haven is n't buggy and exploitable , but those are things that we do plan to remedy before going into beta without having to rip out the most defining aspect of the game , viz. , its mutable world .
" Piss-poor GM support " , as you put it , is an intended feature : We do n't want to set the rules for the game any more than is necessary as a part of writing basic game mechanics , and in the end , we believe that it leads to a more meaningful player experience since players do n't have to be bothered by any arbitrary rules of morality that we may set up .
The point is that most of our players do n't want to be " griefers " -- they simply want to be a meaningful part of the game world itself , which they can not be in a theme-park game like WoW .
I do n't want to pretend everyone wants a game like that ( there is obviously a reason why WoW has four or so orders of magnitude more players than we do ) , but it 's not like it 's just for griefers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Methinks that's missing the point.
Judging by the summary, what his friend misses isn't crafting or just housing, but the opportunity to be a griefing fucktard with impunity.
He doesn't miss just housing (which half the games have nowadays anyway), but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to.
Basically he's missing a game that's equally half-baked, buggy, exploitable, and with equally piss-poor GM support, so he can be as big a griefer as in the good old days of UO.As one of the writers of Haven &amp; Hearth, I have to disagree.
The reason me and my friend wanted to write the game is that we wanted a world where the actions that players can perform actually have an impact on the world itself, rather than just another theme park where you can just enjoy yourself withing the very strict frame set by the authors of the game; and those of our current players that seem to enjoy the game the most seem to agree with that.
It leads naturally to a game world where the emergent phenomena become the most defining feature of the world, rather than the mechanics that we, as the game authors, build into it.
The coolest thing about the world, if I may say so myself, is that there isn't a single structure in the world that hasn't been built by the players themselves.It is true, of course, that theft and raiding are important parts of that, and the primary enjoyment of many players is the politics that arise out of factions competing with each other; but mind you that theft and raiding does not necessarily equal "griefing".
In Haven, despite only having a few hundred players, there are actual wars being played out without us authors having to write a back-story for them.
We don't have to write a back-story at all since that can be done entirely by players; and it also leads to a story that the players can actually care about since they are part of it themselves, rather than having had it pushed upon them.I shan't pretend that Haven isn't buggy and exploitable, but those are things that we do plan to remedy before going into beta without having to rip out the most defining aspect of the game, viz., its mutable world.
"Piss-poor GM support", as you put it, is an intended feature: We don't want to set the rules for the game any more than is necessary as a part of writing basic game mechanics, and in the end, we believe that it leads to a more meaningful player experience since players don't have to be bothered by any arbitrary rules of morality that we may set up.
The point is that most of our players don't want to be "griefers" -- they simply want to be a meaningful part of the game world itself, which they cannot be in a theme-park game like WoW.
I don't want to pretend everyone wants a game like that (there is obviously a reason why WoW has four or so orders of magnitude more players than we do), but it's not like it's just for griefers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31236060</id>
	<title>Re:The second most popular MMO in the world....</title>
	<author>Elshar</author>
	<datestamp>1266834060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If other people see runescape the way I do, they probably see it the way I do. Keep in mine, I played it years ago, so maybe things have changed.</p><p>When I first played it years ago, it was kinda cool. But so many things about it annoyed the hell out of me, such as:</p><p>1) <b>The players</b>: I always felt like I was just playing with a bunch of immature 11-15 year olds. The chats were always spammed with some immature people, and it was impossible to actually hold an intelligent conversation.</p><p>2) <b>The world</b>: The 3/4's overhead pseudo-3d with a very limited view distance caused me to be lost more often than not. Interacting with things wasn't terribly intuitive, and instructions were often vague, incomplete, or apparently wrong.</p><p>2b) <b>The world: redux</b>: It might be free to play, but it's not really. You're really gimped as a f2p char, and there's constant roadblocks and such that either make it really difficult or impossible to get places, or do things as a f2p char. One instance I remember off the top of my head is that I was reading a map on how to get somewhere, walking along a path, and encountered a gate. The only purpose for that gate was to cause me to walk around it (about 15 minutes), unless I paid for the game. Otherwise, I'd be able to go through it just fine. I think I quit that day, but there's more...</p><p>3) <b>Quests</b>: They were uninspired, badly written and just downright bland. I mean, you couldn't get worse unless you said "QUEST: HARVEST 30 FARFANUGENS, REWARD: 1 ARFANGENTIUM". I mean, really?</p><p>There's more, but that's the top three off the top of my head. Not to mention that I didn't feel that their asking price was worth it, I dropped runescape before I put much more time into it. I'm sure it's come a long way, but in the MMO biz, people don't tend to try games they don't like or had a bad experience with again, and they tend to not suggest them to others either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If other people see runescape the way I do , they probably see it the way I do .
Keep in mine , I played it years ago , so maybe things have changed.When I first played it years ago , it was kinda cool .
But so many things about it annoyed the hell out of me , such as : 1 ) The players : I always felt like I was just playing with a bunch of immature 11-15 year olds .
The chats were always spammed with some immature people , and it was impossible to actually hold an intelligent conversation.2 ) The world : The 3/4 's overhead pseudo-3d with a very limited view distance caused me to be lost more often than not .
Interacting with things was n't terribly intuitive , and instructions were often vague , incomplete , or apparently wrong.2b ) The world : redux : It might be free to play , but it 's not really .
You 're really gimped as a f2p char , and there 's constant roadblocks and such that either make it really difficult or impossible to get places , or do things as a f2p char .
One instance I remember off the top of my head is that I was reading a map on how to get somewhere , walking along a path , and encountered a gate .
The only purpose for that gate was to cause me to walk around it ( about 15 minutes ) , unless I paid for the game .
Otherwise , I 'd be able to go through it just fine .
I think I quit that day , but there 's more...3 ) Quests : They were uninspired , badly written and just downright bland .
I mean , you could n't get worse unless you said " QUEST : HARVEST 30 FARFANUGENS , REWARD : 1 ARFANGENTIUM " .
I mean , really ? There 's more , but that 's the top three off the top of my head .
Not to mention that I did n't feel that their asking price was worth it , I dropped runescape before I put much more time into it .
I 'm sure it 's come a long way , but in the MMO biz , people do n't tend to try games they do n't like or had a bad experience with again , and they tend to not suggest them to others either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If other people see runescape the way I do, they probably see it the way I do.
Keep in mine, I played it years ago, so maybe things have changed.When I first played it years ago, it was kinda cool.
But so many things about it annoyed the hell out of me, such as:1) The players: I always felt like I was just playing with a bunch of immature 11-15 year olds.
The chats were always spammed with some immature people, and it was impossible to actually hold an intelligent conversation.2) The world: The 3/4's overhead pseudo-3d with a very limited view distance caused me to be lost more often than not.
Interacting with things wasn't terribly intuitive, and instructions were often vague, incomplete, or apparently wrong.2b) The world: redux: It might be free to play, but it's not really.
You're really gimped as a f2p char, and there's constant roadblocks and such that either make it really difficult or impossible to get places, or do things as a f2p char.
One instance I remember off the top of my head is that I was reading a map on how to get somewhere, walking along a path, and encountered a gate.
The only purpose for that gate was to cause me to walk around it (about 15 minutes), unless I paid for the game.
Otherwise, I'd be able to go through it just fine.
I think I quit that day, but there's more...3) Quests: They were uninspired, badly written and just downright bland.
I mean, you couldn't get worse unless you said "QUEST: HARVEST 30 FARFANUGENS, REWARD: 1 ARFANGENTIUM".
I mean, really?There's more, but that's the top three off the top of my head.
Not to mention that I didn't feel that their asking price was worth it, I dropped runescape before I put much more time into it.
I'm sure it's come a long way, but in the MMO biz, people don't tend to try games they don't like or had a bad experience with again, and they tend to not suggest them to others either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227408</id>
	<title>Tibia</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266837240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you looked at Tibia (www.tibia.com)?</p><p>It was developed and released a bit before Ultima Online, and has somewhat similar graphics and gameplay.  There are three server types: Full PVP where PVP is encouraged and unpenalized, Normal PVP servers where PVP is allowed, but players are penalized for murdering too many people in a short time span, and Optional-PVP servers, where PVP is impossible except during guild wars.  The Tibia community is usually pretty hostile, especially on PVP servers, with players quick to kill and slow to forgive, and each server has its own politics.  Besides the botting problem which CipSoft, the developers, have only just begun to address, it's a great game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you looked at Tibia ( www.tibia.com ) ? It was developed and released a bit before Ultima Online , and has somewhat similar graphics and gameplay .
There are three server types : Full PVP where PVP is encouraged and unpenalized , Normal PVP servers where PVP is allowed , but players are penalized for murdering too many people in a short time span , and Optional-PVP servers , where PVP is impossible except during guild wars .
The Tibia community is usually pretty hostile , especially on PVP servers , with players quick to kill and slow to forgive , and each server has its own politics .
Besides the botting problem which CipSoft , the developers , have only just begun to address , it 's a great game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you looked at Tibia (www.tibia.com)?It was developed and released a bit before Ultima Online, and has somewhat similar graphics and gameplay.
There are three server types: Full PVP where PVP is encouraged and unpenalized, Normal PVP servers where PVP is allowed, but players are penalized for murdering too many people in a short time span, and Optional-PVP servers, where PVP is impossible except during guild wars.
The Tibia community is usually pretty hostile, especially on PVP servers, with players quick to kill and slow to forgive, and each server has its own politics.
Besides the botting problem which CipSoft, the developers, have only just begun to address, it's a great game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31252386</id>
	<title>UO set and broke the mold.</title>
	<author>Big SexXxy</author>
	<datestamp>1266927480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having played UO for a few years I can tell you that I loved and hated UO. UO's game mechanics early on actually brought a sense of real danger when you went out to adventure. The game was almost free form (as much as any game can be) and players truly could do what they wanted, be it a merchant, or farmer or player killer and have a compelling gaming experience.

Imagine Grand Theft Auto as an MMO. If you so desired you could walk up to a nice car, toss out the driver, kick the hell out of them, and drive away in that car. Best of all the player you just jacked would be standing best they're corpse as a helpless ghost watching as you looted them and if you desired, cut up they're corpse and take they're head as a trophy.

Modern games simply will not go there. I played WoW for many years and laughed at what people considered griefing. WoW is 2 ply extra soft toliet paper compared to UO's 20 Grit sand paper on your backside.. Wired to a taser.. Served via jack hammer.

I liked the more viseceral action of the Conan MMO. Its definitely NOT UO but it certainly isn't WoW either. I was under whelmed by end game prospects and quit after level 40 due to my 1 month free expiration. Check that one out for a more realistic and visceral approach. Its got style and isn't as care bear.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having played UO for a few years I can tell you that I loved and hated UO .
UO 's game mechanics early on actually brought a sense of real danger when you went out to adventure .
The game was almost free form ( as much as any game can be ) and players truly could do what they wanted , be it a merchant , or farmer or player killer and have a compelling gaming experience .
Imagine Grand Theft Auto as an MMO .
If you so desired you could walk up to a nice car , toss out the driver , kick the hell out of them , and drive away in that car .
Best of all the player you just jacked would be standing best they 're corpse as a helpless ghost watching as you looted them and if you desired , cut up they 're corpse and take they 're head as a trophy .
Modern games simply will not go there .
I played WoW for many years and laughed at what people considered griefing .
WoW is 2 ply extra soft toliet paper compared to UO 's 20 Grit sand paper on your backside.. Wired to a taser.. Served via jack hammer .
I liked the more viseceral action of the Conan MMO .
Its definitely NOT UO but it certainly is n't WoW either .
I was under whelmed by end game prospects and quit after level 40 due to my 1 month free expiration .
Check that one out for a more realistic and visceral approach .
Its got style and is n't as care bear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having played UO for a few years I can tell you that I loved and hated UO.
UO's game mechanics early on actually brought a sense of real danger when you went out to adventure.
The game was almost free form (as much as any game can be) and players truly could do what they wanted, be it a merchant, or farmer or player killer and have a compelling gaming experience.
Imagine Grand Theft Auto as an MMO.
If you so desired you could walk up to a nice car, toss out the driver, kick the hell out of them, and drive away in that car.
Best of all the player you just jacked would be standing best they're corpse as a helpless ghost watching as you looted them and if you desired, cut up they're corpse and take they're head as a trophy.
Modern games simply will not go there.
I played WoW for many years and laughed at what people considered griefing.
WoW is 2 ply extra soft toliet paper compared to UO's 20 Grit sand paper on your backside.. Wired to a taser.. Served via jack hammer.
I liked the more viseceral action of the Conan MMO.
Its definitely NOT UO but it certainly isn't WoW either.
I was under whelmed by end game prospects and quit after level 40 due to my 1 month free expiration.
Check that one out for a more realistic and visceral approach.
Its got style and isn't as care bear.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228450</id>
	<title>UO was fun, but had its problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266848580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I played UO during the "glory days" and after, eventually leaving to play SWG (ha). The reason that, IMVHO, that type of game did not catch on again is because the very things that made UO "cool" were what also made it horrible and eventually prompted major changes in the game.  Having everything in your home stolen was NOT any fun.  Getting jumped repeatedly for no reason other than the lulz and all your gear taken was NOT fun.  Finally getting a house and realizing it was so far from anything to be any use at all was NOT fun, nor was having to wind between a million houses in wilderness areas.  People tend to forget that UO jumped in popularity after stealing and house-robbing was taken out, and while they complained that Trammel/Felucia "ruined" the game, there was a reason that players preferred the safe side of the fence.  SWG realized the problems with player housing when they too ended up with whole areas of nothing but houses and no one in them everywhere.</p><p>I miss UO as well, certain aspects of it, but having played plenty of MMO's without those aspects has shown me that they really weren't needed to have a good time.</p><p>~~BlindTyldak</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I played UO during the " glory days " and after , eventually leaving to play SWG ( ha ) .
The reason that , IMVHO , that type of game did not catch on again is because the very things that made UO " cool " were what also made it horrible and eventually prompted major changes in the game .
Having everything in your home stolen was NOT any fun .
Getting jumped repeatedly for no reason other than the lulz and all your gear taken was NOT fun .
Finally getting a house and realizing it was so far from anything to be any use at all was NOT fun , nor was having to wind between a million houses in wilderness areas .
People tend to forget that UO jumped in popularity after stealing and house-robbing was taken out , and while they complained that Trammel/Felucia " ruined " the game , there was a reason that players preferred the safe side of the fence .
SWG realized the problems with player housing when they too ended up with whole areas of nothing but houses and no one in them everywhere.I miss UO as well , certain aspects of it , but having played plenty of MMO 's without those aspects has shown me that they really were n't needed to have a good time. ~ ~ BlindTyldak</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played UO during the "glory days" and after, eventually leaving to play SWG (ha).
The reason that, IMVHO, that type of game did not catch on again is because the very things that made UO "cool" were what also made it horrible and eventually prompted major changes in the game.
Having everything in your home stolen was NOT any fun.
Getting jumped repeatedly for no reason other than the lulz and all your gear taken was NOT fun.
Finally getting a house and realizing it was so far from anything to be any use at all was NOT fun, nor was having to wind between a million houses in wilderness areas.
People tend to forget that UO jumped in popularity after stealing and house-robbing was taken out, and while they complained that Trammel/Felucia "ruined" the game, there was a reason that players preferred the safe side of the fence.
SWG realized the problems with player housing when they too ended up with whole areas of nothing but houses and no one in them everywhere.I miss UO as well, certain aspects of it, but having played plenty of MMO's without those aspects has shown me that they really weren't needed to have a good time.~~BlindTyldak</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496</id>
	<title>The second most popular MMO in the world....</title>
	<author>netsavior</author>
	<datestamp>1266855540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is so stupid that everyone ignores <a href="http://runescape.com/" title="runescape.com">Runescape</a> [runescape.com] <br>
The <b>number two</b> MMORPG, and of course the number one free to play one.  Free to play version is kind of like a starter and indeed is missing many of the functions you want, however the full version ($5 monthly) has most.<br>
It has been around since 2001 and is developed in England.  The pay version still has weekly updates.<br> <br>
Runescape is a skill based MMO (where every skill is trained semi-independantly), there are no character classes, every skill is open to every player.<br> <br>
<b>Thieving:</b> most NPCs can be pickpocketed, thieving is a skill that can be leveled.  Only in a few scenarios can you actually steal from other players though.<br>
<b>Looting:</b> Runescape still has a very harsh death tax.  In PvM, if you die you lose all but the 3 most expensive items you are holding (there are modifiers to this of course, you have 5 minutes to retrieve your corpse, unless a party member "blesses" your gravestone.) On PvP worlds, you lose all but your 1 most expensive item, and on certain worlds all of your gear is dropped as loot, but not every time.  Griefers don't get a full loot drop, cerial noob killers get hardly any drop at all.<br>
<b>Player housing:</b> There is a skill called "Construction" which you use to modify and improve your house... adding things such as a wardrobe (can store certin kinds of clothing without taking up bank space), repair bench(discounting the cost of repairing high level gear), teleport room (access to many "free" teleports if you have the magic level to build them), combat room (where you and your friends can have friendly, safe fights for fun).  Player owned housing is instanced, unlike UO, so it is not as "epic" since there is not limited real-estate, but the housing is more useful, especially for Clans and group trips (imagine meeting in one place, where you can resupply, buff, etc then one guy teles the whole group to the action)<br> <br>
All that being said, Most MMOs are "barely 3D" at best, and RS is only really 3D in polygon terms... There is no need to jump, there are plenty of multilevel dungeons and things like that, but terrain usually doesn't matter and targeting is very simplistic... like most mmorpgs, but RS wears it on the sleeve a bit more, and it is 3rd person perspective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is so stupid that everyone ignores Runescape [ runescape.com ] The number two MMORPG , and of course the number one free to play one .
Free to play version is kind of like a starter and indeed is missing many of the functions you want , however the full version ( $ 5 monthly ) has most .
It has been around since 2001 and is developed in England .
The pay version still has weekly updates .
Runescape is a skill based MMO ( where every skill is trained semi-independantly ) , there are no character classes , every skill is open to every player .
Thieving : most NPCs can be pickpocketed , thieving is a skill that can be leveled .
Only in a few scenarios can you actually steal from other players though .
Looting : Runescape still has a very harsh death tax .
In PvM , if you die you lose all but the 3 most expensive items you are holding ( there are modifiers to this of course , you have 5 minutes to retrieve your corpse , unless a party member " blesses " your gravestone .
) On PvP worlds , you lose all but your 1 most expensive item , and on certain worlds all of your gear is dropped as loot , but not every time .
Griefers do n't get a full loot drop , cerial noob killers get hardly any drop at all .
Player housing : There is a skill called " Construction " which you use to modify and improve your house... adding things such as a wardrobe ( can store certin kinds of clothing without taking up bank space ) , repair bench ( discounting the cost of repairing high level gear ) , teleport room ( access to many " free " teleports if you have the magic level to build them ) , combat room ( where you and your friends can have friendly , safe fights for fun ) .
Player owned housing is instanced , unlike UO , so it is not as " epic " since there is not limited real-estate , but the housing is more useful , especially for Clans and group trips ( imagine meeting in one place , where you can resupply , buff , etc then one guy teles the whole group to the action ) All that being said , Most MMOs are " barely 3D " at best , and RS is only really 3D in polygon terms... There is no need to jump , there are plenty of multilevel dungeons and things like that , but terrain usually does n't matter and targeting is very simplistic... like most mmorpgs , but RS wears it on the sleeve a bit more , and it is 3rd person perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is so stupid that everyone ignores Runescape [runescape.com] 
The number two MMORPG, and of course the number one free to play one.
Free to play version is kind of like a starter and indeed is missing many of the functions you want, however the full version ($5 monthly) has most.
It has been around since 2001 and is developed in England.
The pay version still has weekly updates.
Runescape is a skill based MMO (where every skill is trained semi-independantly), there are no character classes, every skill is open to every player.
Thieving: most NPCs can be pickpocketed, thieving is a skill that can be leveled.
Only in a few scenarios can you actually steal from other players though.
Looting: Runescape still has a very harsh death tax.
In PvM, if you die you lose all but the 3 most expensive items you are holding (there are modifiers to this of course, you have 5 minutes to retrieve your corpse, unless a party member "blesses" your gravestone.
) On PvP worlds, you lose all but your 1 most expensive item, and on certain worlds all of your gear is dropped as loot, but not every time.
Griefers don't get a full loot drop, cerial noob killers get hardly any drop at all.
Player housing: There is a skill called "Construction" which you use to modify and improve your house... adding things such as a wardrobe (can store certin kinds of clothing without taking up bank space), repair bench(discounting the cost of repairing high level gear), teleport room (access to many "free" teleports if you have the magic level to build them), combat room (where you and your friends can have friendly, safe fights for fun).
Player owned housing is instanced, unlike UO, so it is not as "epic" since there is not limited real-estate, but the housing is more useful, especially for Clans and group trips (imagine meeting in one place, where you can resupply, buff, etc then one guy teles the whole group to the action) 
All that being said, Most MMOs are "barely 3D" at best, and RS is only really 3D in polygon terms... There is no need to jump, there are plenty of multilevel dungeons and things like that, but terrain usually doesn't matter and targeting is very simplistic... like most mmorpgs, but RS wears it on the sleeve a bit more, and it is 3rd person perspective.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229164</id>
	<title>Re:Griefing was King!</title>
	<author>Bad Ad</author>
	<datestamp>1266853560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I played on LS too</htmltext>
<tokenext>I played on LS too</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I played on LS too</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228024</id>
	<title>Re:Of course they wouldnt work. need to be stupid</title>
	<author>BlackHawk-666</author>
	<datestamp>1266844440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The easy way to get it back is to group with 5-6 and jump the groups of 2-3. Sorted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The easy way to get it back is to group with 5-6 and jump the groups of 2-3 .
Sorted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The easy way to get it back is to group with 5-6 and jump the groups of 2-3.
Sorted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228656</id>
	<title>Re:EVE: Online</title>
	<author>EmperorKagato</author>
	<datestamp>1266850080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hulkageddon. That is all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hulkageddon .
That is all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hulkageddon.
That is all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231056</id>
	<title>Eve and DAoC</title>
	<author>Jaeph</author>
	<datestamp>1266862080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As many have pointed out, Eve is a spiritual descendent of UO, and I think DAoC is as well.</p><p>I think the lessons from Eve and DAoC are very simple - you need "timeout" areas; places where people can go to avoid the full-on PvP.  Eve also has consequences for being a pirate - you can't enter high-sec space anymore.</p><p>Finally, I think Eve has a skill &amp; equipment system that allows new players to enter PvP fairly easy.  Unlike most games, it's not simply "bigger=better"; all levels of ships have a role in combat, and quite frankly what you see in low-sec areas (I can't speak to 0.0) is mostly frigates, cruisers, and battle-cruiser classed ships.</p><p>So distinct pvp regions and an easy entry for low "level" players is what's necessary.</p><p>-Jeff</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As many have pointed out , Eve is a spiritual descendent of UO , and I think DAoC is as well.I think the lessons from Eve and DAoC are very simple - you need " timeout " areas ; places where people can go to avoid the full-on PvP .
Eve also has consequences for being a pirate - you ca n't enter high-sec space anymore.Finally , I think Eve has a skill &amp; equipment system that allows new players to enter PvP fairly easy .
Unlike most games , it 's not simply " bigger = better " ; all levels of ships have a role in combat , and quite frankly what you see in low-sec areas ( I ca n't speak to 0.0 ) is mostly frigates , cruisers , and battle-cruiser classed ships.So distinct pvp regions and an easy entry for low " level " players is what 's necessary.-Jeff</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As many have pointed out, Eve is a spiritual descendent of UO, and I think DAoC is as well.I think the lessons from Eve and DAoC are very simple - you need "timeout" areas; places where people can go to avoid the full-on PvP.
Eve also has consequences for being a pirate - you can't enter high-sec space anymore.Finally, I think Eve has a skill &amp; equipment system that allows new players to enter PvP fairly easy.
Unlike most games, it's not simply "bigger=better"; all levels of ships have a role in combat, and quite frankly what you see in low-sec areas (I can't speak to 0.0) is mostly frigates, cruisers, and battle-cruiser classed ships.So distinct pvp regions and an easy entry for low "level" players is what's necessary.-Jeff</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234546</id>
	<title>DAoC Housing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266829560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Housing (without any of the thieving aspects) was implemented well in Dark Ages of Camelot. There was no auction or mail system in DAoC, so people could set up their own consignment merchants at their houses to sell items they had found or crafted.</p><p>As members of guilds bought housing near each other, little communities built up centered around the guild house. You could assign "house-friends" that you give permissions to access items (such as personal or guild vaults) within the house.</p><p>It has been 5 years since I played, but I still miss it somewhat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Housing ( without any of the thieving aspects ) was implemented well in Dark Ages of Camelot .
There was no auction or mail system in DAoC , so people could set up their own consignment merchants at their houses to sell items they had found or crafted.As members of guilds bought housing near each other , little communities built up centered around the guild house .
You could assign " house-friends " that you give permissions to access items ( such as personal or guild vaults ) within the house.It has been 5 years since I played , but I still miss it somewhat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Housing (without any of the thieving aspects) was implemented well in Dark Ages of Camelot.
There was no auction or mail system in DAoC, so people could set up their own consignment merchants at their houses to sell items they had found or crafted.As members of guilds bought housing near each other, little communities built up centered around the guild house.
You could assign "house-friends" that you give permissions to access items (such as personal or guild vaults) within the house.It has been 5 years since I played, but I still miss it somewhat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228172</id>
	<title>Lord of Ultima</title>
	<author>Charliemopps</author>
	<datestamp>1266846120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.lordofultima.com/en" title="lordofultima.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.lordofultima.com/en</a> [lordofultima.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.lordofultima.com/en [ lordofultima.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.lordofultima.com/en [lordofultima.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31281496</id>
	<title>Re:UO wasn't that much fun really</title>
	<author>Surt</author>
	<datestamp>1267119300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only is the jerk pool not as large as the victim pool, you can't even get the jerks to accept being the victims, so even if you had jerk world online, you'd find the jerks complaining about the unfairness of it.  So no matter how large that pool is, unless you can find a pool of people who enjoy losing, you're not going to have a viable pvp game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only is the jerk pool not as large as the victim pool , you ca n't even get the jerks to accept being the victims , so even if you had jerk world online , you 'd find the jerks complaining about the unfairness of it .
So no matter how large that pool is , unless you can find a pool of people who enjoy losing , you 're not going to have a viable pvp game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only is the jerk pool not as large as the victim pool, you can't even get the jerks to accept being the victims, so even if you had jerk world online, you'd find the jerks complaining about the unfairness of it.
So no matter how large that pool is, unless you can find a pool of people who enjoy losing, you're not going to have a viable pvp game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229104</id>
	<title>Dawntide</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266853260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He may want to check out Dawntide. Currently in very early development, but looks promising for the style of play that he is describing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He may want to check out Dawntide .
Currently in very early development , but looks promising for the style of play that he is describing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He may want to check out Dawntide.
Currently in very early development, but looks promising for the style of play that he is describing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231360</id>
	<title>Long term Newbie stomping kills pvp mmo games</title>
	<author>LordZardoz</author>
	<datestamp>1266862800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ultima Online had the loosest pvp rules.  This kind of  play absolutely has appeal to competitive players.  However, most MMO's tend to end up putting the balance of power, in terms of competition, towards those players who have been in the game the longest and who can spend the most time playing the game.  This much is of course obvious, but consider the ramifications a few steps beyond that.</p><p>If you are a competitive player, but you cannot spend massive amounts of time in game, after a short time, you are not going to be able to compete effectively against the best.  The game then stops being fun for you and you move on.  You simply wont stick around very long.  If you are the strongest, pretty soon viable competition will go away, and you will get bored.  Unless your a griefer and really enjoy newbie stomping.  If you are a newbie and you get into the game late, you are never going to be able to compete well against the top end players.  So over time, the supply of newbies will dry up, and even the griefers will stop playing.</p><p>With UO, if you liked PVP, while pick pocket was possible, it was not very easy to practice the skill without getting murdered a great deal.  And if you like the pvp, you are going to eventually leave when everyone worth playing against has also left.</p><p>Most newer MMO games, such as World of Warcraft, have chosen to address PVP by making it an opt in proposition.  This will protect the newbies, but it still creates less gameplay for competitive types, and it negates any real means of looting or PvP theft.  Until someone comes up with an alternate solution to PVP that will protect newbies and permit game elements like theft, it will not be a viable option in any successful MMO game.</p><p>END COMMUNICATION</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ultima Online had the loosest pvp rules .
This kind of play absolutely has appeal to competitive players .
However , most MMO 's tend to end up putting the balance of power , in terms of competition , towards those players who have been in the game the longest and who can spend the most time playing the game .
This much is of course obvious , but consider the ramifications a few steps beyond that.If you are a competitive player , but you can not spend massive amounts of time in game , after a short time , you are not going to be able to compete effectively against the best .
The game then stops being fun for you and you move on .
You simply wont stick around very long .
If you are the strongest , pretty soon viable competition will go away , and you will get bored .
Unless your a griefer and really enjoy newbie stomping .
If you are a newbie and you get into the game late , you are never going to be able to compete well against the top end players .
So over time , the supply of newbies will dry up , and even the griefers will stop playing.With UO , if you liked PVP , while pick pocket was possible , it was not very easy to practice the skill without getting murdered a great deal .
And if you like the pvp , you are going to eventually leave when everyone worth playing against has also left.Most newer MMO games , such as World of Warcraft , have chosen to address PVP by making it an opt in proposition .
This will protect the newbies , but it still creates less gameplay for competitive types , and it negates any real means of looting or PvP theft .
Until someone comes up with an alternate solution to PVP that will protect newbies and permit game elements like theft , it will not be a viable option in any successful MMO game.END COMMUNICATION</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ultima Online had the loosest pvp rules.
This kind of  play absolutely has appeal to competitive players.
However, most MMO's tend to end up putting the balance of power, in terms of competition, towards those players who have been in the game the longest and who can spend the most time playing the game.
This much is of course obvious, but consider the ramifications a few steps beyond that.If you are a competitive player, but you cannot spend massive amounts of time in game, after a short time, you are not going to be able to compete effectively against the best.
The game then stops being fun for you and you move on.
You simply wont stick around very long.
If you are the strongest, pretty soon viable competition will go away, and you will get bored.
Unless your a griefer and really enjoy newbie stomping.
If you are a newbie and you get into the game late, you are never going to be able to compete well against the top end players.
So over time, the supply of newbies will dry up, and even the griefers will stop playing.With UO, if you liked PVP, while pick pocket was possible, it was not very easy to practice the skill without getting murdered a great deal.
And if you like the pvp, you are going to eventually leave when everyone worth playing against has also left.Most newer MMO games, such as World of Warcraft, have chosen to address PVP by making it an opt in proposition.
This will protect the newbies, but it still creates less gameplay for competitive types, and it negates any real means of looting or PvP theft.
Until someone comes up with an alternate solution to PVP that will protect newbies and permit game elements like theft, it will not be a viable option in any successful MMO game.END COMMUNICATION</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227584</id>
	<title>Re:the way i see it</title>
	<author>Svartalfar</author>
	<datestamp>1266839640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Blizz will never *ever* open source their game or let players develop areas because of one main fact. Blizzard is extremely focused on their storyline. Say what you want about their servers, the graphics, or how terrible you think their pvp is. The company can tell a story. Yes, they kill off a bad guy every expansion and are probably running out of baddies to off.. but they stick to their lore. If you're curious about why anything happens in almost any part of the game you can pull out a book and look it up.

If any Tom, Dick, or Harry could code an area, throw it up, and let people run wild over it, they will lose complete control over the lore aspect. If the dev's would shitcan anything that isn't 100\% in keeping with the lore, they would probably deny 99.9\% of areas. We'd hear more bitching about denials on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. then we do about apple's appstore. What's the point? They already have in house people who they can hand a book to and say, Read this, write an instance around the place between pages 55-70.

As much as I hate how Blizz does things sometimes, they have reasons.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Blizz will never * ever * open source their game or let players develop areas because of one main fact .
Blizzard is extremely focused on their storyline .
Say what you want about their servers , the graphics , or how terrible you think their pvp is .
The company can tell a story .
Yes , they kill off a bad guy every expansion and are probably running out of baddies to off.. but they stick to their lore .
If you 're curious about why anything happens in almost any part of the game you can pull out a book and look it up .
If any Tom , Dick , or Harry could code an area , throw it up , and let people run wild over it , they will lose complete control over the lore aspect .
If the dev 's would shitcan anything that is n't 100 \ % in keeping with the lore , they would probably deny 99.9 \ % of areas .
We 'd hear more bitching about denials on / .
then we do about apple 's appstore .
What 's the point ?
They already have in house people who they can hand a book to and say , Read this , write an instance around the place between pages 55-70 .
As much as I hate how Blizz does things sometimes , they have reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blizz will never *ever* open source their game or let players develop areas because of one main fact.
Blizzard is extremely focused on their storyline.
Say what you want about their servers, the graphics, or how terrible you think their pvp is.
The company can tell a story.
Yes, they kill off a bad guy every expansion and are probably running out of baddies to off.. but they stick to their lore.
If you're curious about why anything happens in almost any part of the game you can pull out a book and look it up.
If any Tom, Dick, or Harry could code an area, throw it up, and let people run wild over it, they will lose complete control over the lore aspect.
If the dev's would shitcan anything that isn't 100\% in keeping with the lore, they would probably deny 99.9\% of areas.
We'd hear more bitching about denials on /.
then we do about apple's appstore.
What's the point?
They already have in house people who they can hand a book to and say, Read this, write an instance around the place between pages 55-70.
As much as I hate how Blizz does things sometimes, they have reasons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228996</id>
	<title>UO - Best MMO I ever Played.</title>
	<author>uolamer</author>
	<datestamp>1266852480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Housing that is part of the landscape. That is something I never really saw in other games. You could have a house outside the entrance of dungeon, town or off in the middle of no where.. People ended up building player towns, GMs decorated the towns (back in the day at least). When you were a newbie you lived out of your bank, then maybe a boat or small house. Some people had a castle with a large tower behind it, etc. Houses also served as storage for items, I really never used the bank I kept everything (besides gold) in my castle.<br> <br>

Skill based PvP.. Before the Age of Shadows expansion you really could not gain an item advantage to speak of. There was many times I took on 3 and 4 people at once and killed them all never running away to hide or heal, etc. After AoS it was really not feasible to do that anymore. It was hard enough taking on 2 people. But even after AoS the harrower battles &amp; spawn fights made for some of the best PvP ever. Imagine WoW without the instances.. People fight their way all the way to the end boss then some other guild comes in, kills them all, the boss and the loot. Sorrta like anyway. Some times you had 3 or 4 guilds fighting over one, made for some real fun.<br> <br>

You could also trade everything in UO. Best armor and weapons in the game for sale.. There was only around 2 items you could trade but werent usable by others, personal bless deed and newbie tickets.<br> <br>

There was bad things about UO of course. They would release a new patch, unbalance things way way too far and take a year to fix it.. Several times they put in a small 'fix' to stop something somewhat irrelevant and caused all sorts of issues. Their bug testing was just terrible. I found bugs on the test servers reported them and it still went live. (inscription with level 1 cost mana to scribe a level 8 scroll when they changed the menu one time)<br> <br>

UO could have used an auction house like WoW.. We had vendors we could put in the houses making houses close or even in towns worth much more but it still was annoying compared to WoW. The economy in UO got screwed terribly all the time also.. It slowly dropped down to $20 a mill which wasnt bad. By the time I left it was $1 or $2 a mill, making it near worthless in some aspects.<br> <br>

Travel in UO was great.. You had runes (later on runebooks) you could mark anywhere. One book would have all the dungeons, one spell and 2 sec later your outside (or inside before one of the patches) your favorite dungeon. So even if I only had 20 minutes to play I could get where I wanted to instantly and actually accomplish something, unlike WoW (although it improved some).
<br> <br>
But... The reason there isnt more games like UO is it was Skill based.. period.. The day tram came out 98\% of the population went there and almost never came back. So you had 98\% of players playing a non pvp social networking 2nd life with dragons... aka WoW with housing. They had little insensitive to fix pvp issues and other issues we had when those things didnt effect 98\% of their customers at all and those customers had their own problems they needed fixed.. So.. here we are talking about glory days of UO..<br> <br>

sry I like to ramble about UO, it provided me so much fun. notice my name uolamer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Housing that is part of the landscape .
That is something I never really saw in other games .
You could have a house outside the entrance of dungeon , town or off in the middle of no where.. People ended up building player towns , GMs decorated the towns ( back in the day at least ) .
When you were a newbie you lived out of your bank , then maybe a boat or small house .
Some people had a castle with a large tower behind it , etc .
Houses also served as storage for items , I really never used the bank I kept everything ( besides gold ) in my castle .
Skill based PvP.. Before the Age of Shadows expansion you really could not gain an item advantage to speak of .
There was many times I took on 3 and 4 people at once and killed them all never running away to hide or heal , etc .
After AoS it was really not feasible to do that anymore .
It was hard enough taking on 2 people .
But even after AoS the harrower battles &amp; spawn fights made for some of the best PvP ever .
Imagine WoW without the instances.. People fight their way all the way to the end boss then some other guild comes in , kills them all , the boss and the loot .
Sorrta like anyway .
Some times you had 3 or 4 guilds fighting over one , made for some real fun .
You could also trade everything in UO .
Best armor and weapons in the game for sale.. There was only around 2 items you could trade but werent usable by others , personal bless deed and newbie tickets .
There was bad things about UO of course .
They would release a new patch , unbalance things way way too far and take a year to fix it.. Several times they put in a small 'fix ' to stop something somewhat irrelevant and caused all sorts of issues .
Their bug testing was just terrible .
I found bugs on the test servers reported them and it still went live .
( inscription with level 1 cost mana to scribe a level 8 scroll when they changed the menu one time ) UO could have used an auction house like WoW.. We had vendors we could put in the houses making houses close or even in towns worth much more but it still was annoying compared to WoW .
The economy in UO got screwed terribly all the time also.. It slowly dropped down to $ 20 a mill which wasnt bad .
By the time I left it was $ 1 or $ 2 a mill , making it near worthless in some aspects .
Travel in UO was great.. You had runes ( later on runebooks ) you could mark anywhere .
One book would have all the dungeons , one spell and 2 sec later your outside ( or inside before one of the patches ) your favorite dungeon .
So even if I only had 20 minutes to play I could get where I wanted to instantly and actually accomplish something , unlike WoW ( although it improved some ) .
But... The reason there isnt more games like UO is it was Skill based.. period.. The day tram came out 98 \ % of the population went there and almost never came back .
So you had 98 \ % of players playing a non pvp social networking 2nd life with dragons... aka WoW with housing .
They had little insensitive to fix pvp issues and other issues we had when those things didnt effect 98 \ % of their customers at all and those customers had their own problems they needed fixed.. So.. here we are talking about glory days of UO. . sry I like to ramble about UO , it provided me so much fun .
notice my name uolamer ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Housing that is part of the landscape.
That is something I never really saw in other games.
You could have a house outside the entrance of dungeon, town or off in the middle of no where.. People ended up building player towns, GMs decorated the towns (back in the day at least).
When you were a newbie you lived out of your bank, then maybe a boat or small house.
Some people had a castle with a large tower behind it, etc.
Houses also served as storage for items, I really never used the bank I kept everything (besides gold) in my castle.
Skill based PvP.. Before the Age of Shadows expansion you really could not gain an item advantage to speak of.
There was many times I took on 3 and 4 people at once and killed them all never running away to hide or heal, etc.
After AoS it was really not feasible to do that anymore.
It was hard enough taking on 2 people.
But even after AoS the harrower battles &amp; spawn fights made for some of the best PvP ever.
Imagine WoW without the instances.. People fight their way all the way to the end boss then some other guild comes in, kills them all, the boss and the loot.
Sorrta like anyway.
Some times you had 3 or 4 guilds fighting over one, made for some real fun.
You could also trade everything in UO.
Best armor and weapons in the game for sale.. There was only around 2 items you could trade but werent usable by others, personal bless deed and newbie tickets.
There was bad things about UO of course.
They would release a new patch, unbalance things way way too far and take a year to fix it.. Several times they put in a small 'fix' to stop something somewhat irrelevant and caused all sorts of issues.
Their bug testing was just terrible.
I found bugs on the test servers reported them and it still went live.
(inscription with level 1 cost mana to scribe a level 8 scroll when they changed the menu one time) 

UO could have used an auction house like WoW.. We had vendors we could put in the houses making houses close or even in towns worth much more but it still was annoying compared to WoW.
The economy in UO got screwed terribly all the time also.. It slowly dropped down to $20 a mill which wasnt bad.
By the time I left it was $1 or $2 a mill, making it near worthless in some aspects.
Travel in UO was great.. You had runes (later on runebooks) you could mark anywhere.
One book would have all the dungeons, one spell and 2 sec later your outside (or inside before one of the patches) your favorite dungeon.
So even if I only had 20 minutes to play I could get where I wanted to instantly and actually accomplish something, unlike WoW (although it improved some).
But... The reason there isnt more games like UO is it was Skill based.. period.. The day tram came out 98\% of the population went there and almost never came back.
So you had 98\% of players playing a non pvp social networking 2nd life with dragons... aka WoW with housing.
They had little insensitive to fix pvp issues and other issues we had when those things didnt effect 98\% of their customers at all and those customers had their own problems they needed fixed.. So.. here we are talking about glory days of UO.. 

sry I like to ramble about UO, it provided me so much fun.
notice my name uolamer ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232150</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266864900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>www.uosecondage.com</p><p>The most active era accurate T2A server in existence.</p><p>* Balance of PvM, PvP and RP<br>* Era accuracy is our top priority<br>* Helpful and Knowledgeable Player Community<br>* True Risk, Epic Battles<br>* T2A Era Crafting System<br>* T2A Era Housing<br>* Rare Items and Classic Quests<br>* Murderer Bounty System<br>* Magic Clothing and Jewelry<br>* Spell imbuded magic weapons<br>* Authentic Combat and Magery Systems<br>* Pre-Casting / Insta-Hit<br>* Unique PvM / PvP Events<br>* Authentic Economy<br>* Great Player Community<br>* Era Authentic Bugs<br>* Helpful, Responsive, Dedicated, Professional Staff</p><p>Player base seems to be fast growing as WoW and others decay and people realize how amazing a game like Ultima Online was. No carebear bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>www.uosecondage.comThe most active era accurate T2A server in existence .
* Balance of PvM , PvP and RP * Era accuracy is our top priority * Helpful and Knowledgeable Player Community * True Risk , Epic Battles * T2A Era Crafting System * T2A Era Housing * Rare Items and Classic Quests * Murderer Bounty System * Magic Clothing and Jewelry * Spell imbuded magic weapons * Authentic Combat and Magery Systems * Pre-Casting / Insta-Hit * Unique PvM / PvP Events * Authentic Economy * Great Player Community * Era Authentic Bugs * Helpful , Responsive , Dedicated , Professional StaffPlayer base seems to be fast growing as WoW and others decay and people realize how amazing a game like Ultima Online was .
No carebear bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>www.uosecondage.comThe most active era accurate T2A server in existence.
* Balance of PvM, PvP and RP* Era accuracy is our top priority* Helpful and Knowledgeable Player Community* True Risk, Epic Battles* T2A Era Crafting System* T2A Era Housing* Rare Items and Classic Quests* Murderer Bounty System* Magic Clothing and Jewelry* Spell imbuded magic weapons* Authentic Combat and Magery Systems* Pre-Casting / Insta-Hit* Unique PvM / PvP Events* Authentic Economy* Great Player Community* Era Authentic Bugs* Helpful, Responsive, Dedicated, Professional StaffPlayer base seems to be fast growing as WoW and others decay and people realize how amazing a game like Ultima Online was.
No carebear bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231460</id>
	<title>Balancing is VERY hard</title>
	<author>waTR</author>
	<datestamp>1266863100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would say it is because balancing a game as complex as ones with classes + skills is a order of magnitude greater than doing the same for a level based system. These days, with companies wanting a quicker release in order to profit from the game sooner, it is very difficult to get the funding to develop a skills based game. I say skills based, but usually those include a lot of other aspects of UO like housing and such.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would say it is because balancing a game as complex as ones with classes + skills is a order of magnitude greater than doing the same for a level based system .
These days , with companies wanting a quicker release in order to profit from the game sooner , it is very difficult to get the funding to develop a skills based game .
I say skills based , but usually those include a lot of other aspects of UO like housing and such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would say it is because balancing a game as complex as ones with classes + skills is a order of magnitude greater than doing the same for a level based system.
These days, with companies wanting a quicker release in order to profit from the game sooner, it is very difficult to get the funding to develop a skills based game.
I say skills based, but usually those include a lot of other aspects of UO like housing and such.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228502</id>
	<title>Probably typical, but I went WoW</title>
	<author>Xenious</author>
	<datestamp>1266848880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I never liked EQ because I thought the graphics were weak.  I suppose it was hard to do 3d and compete with the neat-ness of isometric.  I was a huge Ultima fan and played both the alpha and beta for UO.  I played through its hey day up until a point where the servers crashed, restored from an older backup and when I logged back in to refresh my house (yes you had to log in every so often to do that) it was gone with all my stuff.  That was the last time I played UO.</p><p>I had played the WoW beta and thought it was EQish but a step in the right direction.  After I quit UO I eventually picked up WoW (a little late to the game post release) after my friends went there.  It was very confusing at first going from 2d to 3d.  I've played off and on through both expansions.  Done endgame work from the first raids to the recent stuff.  I really like the lore of warcraft which helps make the game a winner for me.  The best thing is while I liked the housing and economics of UO, I don't have to log on at a regular interval to keep my stuff from vanishing.  I can play whenever I want.  I tried some MMOs along the way (the LotR one, EVE online, etc).  I will prob try the Lego MMO when it comes out just for fun.  So far nothing as been was well done as WoW.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I never liked EQ because I thought the graphics were weak .
I suppose it was hard to do 3d and compete with the neat-ness of isometric .
I was a huge Ultima fan and played both the alpha and beta for UO .
I played through its hey day up until a point where the servers crashed , restored from an older backup and when I logged back in to refresh my house ( yes you had to log in every so often to do that ) it was gone with all my stuff .
That was the last time I played UO.I had played the WoW beta and thought it was EQish but a step in the right direction .
After I quit UO I eventually picked up WoW ( a little late to the game post release ) after my friends went there .
It was very confusing at first going from 2d to 3d .
I 've played off and on through both expansions .
Done endgame work from the first raids to the recent stuff .
I really like the lore of warcraft which helps make the game a winner for me .
The best thing is while I liked the housing and economics of UO , I do n't have to log on at a regular interval to keep my stuff from vanishing .
I can play whenever I want .
I tried some MMOs along the way ( the LotR one , EVE online , etc ) .
I will prob try the Lego MMO when it comes out just for fun .
So far nothing as been was well done as WoW .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I never liked EQ because I thought the graphics were weak.
I suppose it was hard to do 3d and compete with the neat-ness of isometric.
I was a huge Ultima fan and played both the alpha and beta for UO.
I played through its hey day up until a point where the servers crashed, restored from an older backup and when I logged back in to refresh my house (yes you had to log in every so often to do that) it was gone with all my stuff.
That was the last time I played UO.I had played the WoW beta and thought it was EQish but a step in the right direction.
After I quit UO I eventually picked up WoW (a little late to the game post release) after my friends went there.
It was very confusing at first going from 2d to 3d.
I've played off and on through both expansions.
Done endgame work from the first raids to the recent stuff.
I really like the lore of warcraft which helps make the game a winner for me.
The best thing is while I liked the housing and economics of UO, I don't have to log on at a regular interval to keep my stuff from vanishing.
I can play whenever I want.
I tried some MMOs along the way (the LotR one, EVE online, etc).
I will prob try the Lego MMO when it comes out just for fun.
So far nothing as been was well done as WoW.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228848</id>
	<title>Star Wars Galaxies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266851460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>n it's heyday, I feel like Star Wars Galaxies was the last hugely successful game of this type. Player owned housing, maps that measured 10 square kilometers, very little instancing, and PVP that could happen anywhere at any time. This was the greatest MMO imho. It had a place for the casual player and a place for the hard core. It had places for people who didn't even want to fight, and just played socially. This game had it all until Sony (Whom I havent bought a game from since) completely at utterly destroyed their game, and consequently, their subscriber base.

Ever since SWG, my heart just isn't in it anymore. MMO's lost their magic the day they turned my lightsaber into a nerf bat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>n it 's heyday , I feel like Star Wars Galaxies was the last hugely successful game of this type .
Player owned housing , maps that measured 10 square kilometers , very little instancing , and PVP that could happen anywhere at any time .
This was the greatest MMO imho .
It had a place for the casual player and a place for the hard core .
It had places for people who did n't even want to fight , and just played socially .
This game had it all until Sony ( Whom I havent bought a game from since ) completely at utterly destroyed their game , and consequently , their subscriber base .
Ever since SWG , my heart just is n't in it anymore .
MMO 's lost their magic the day they turned my lightsaber into a nerf bat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>n it's heyday, I feel like Star Wars Galaxies was the last hugely successful game of this type.
Player owned housing, maps that measured 10 square kilometers, very little instancing, and PVP that could happen anywhere at any time.
This was the greatest MMO imho.
It had a place for the casual player and a place for the hard core.
It had places for people who didn't even want to fight, and just played socially.
This game had it all until Sony (Whom I havent bought a game from since) completely at utterly destroyed their game, and consequently, their subscriber base.
Ever since SWG, my heart just isn't in it anymore.
MMO's lost their magic the day they turned my lightsaber into a nerf bat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261574</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Blackmere</author>
	<datestamp>1265135820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hear what you're saying but Shadowbane tried a very similar thing and it was a nightmare. One side formed up and overwhelmed those trying to be a part of something. Daily. Over and over again. Perhaps they thought they were adding to the world but they ignored a simple fact. You can only get on and spend your precious free time building something up just to have it torn down again by a force that you have no hope of defending against so many times before you just go play something else.

Good luck with your game but if you don't build in a way to force some balance, you will not get balance. Obscurity might help, but who wants to build an online game that no one plays?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear what you 're saying but Shadowbane tried a very similar thing and it was a nightmare .
One side formed up and overwhelmed those trying to be a part of something .
Daily. Over and over again .
Perhaps they thought they were adding to the world but they ignored a simple fact .
You can only get on and spend your precious free time building something up just to have it torn down again by a force that you have no hope of defending against so many times before you just go play something else .
Good luck with your game but if you do n't build in a way to force some balance , you will not get balance .
Obscurity might help , but who wants to build an online game that no one plays ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear what you're saying but Shadowbane tried a very similar thing and it was a nightmare.
One side formed up and overwhelmed those trying to be a part of something.
Daily. Over and over again.
Perhaps they thought they were adding to the world but they ignored a simple fact.
You can only get on and spend your precious free time building something up just to have it torn down again by a force that you have no hope of defending against so many times before you just go play something else.
Good luck with your game but if you don't build in a way to force some balance, you will not get balance.
Obscurity might help, but who wants to build an online game that no one plays?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340</id>
	<title>the way i see it</title>
	<author>WalesAlex</author>
	<datestamp>1266836280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source, I mean if I just want to "steal" the game I'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver, I wanna play the game however (interaction between people all over the world) and to do that I need the infrastructure they're selling (Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest)

Now.. if they'd release the code, free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works, incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant off, ex-WoW addict</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source , I mean if I just want to " steal " the game I 'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver , I wan na play the game however ( interaction between people all over the world ) and to do that I need the infrastructure they 're selling ( Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest ) Now.. if they 'd release the code , free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works , incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work /rant off , ex-WoW addict</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still dont understand why blizzard cant release the WoW engine as open source, I mean if I just want to "steal" the game I'd pirate it and run it on a pirateserver, I wanna play the game however (interaction between people all over the world) and to do that I need the infrastructure they're selling (Physical servers built by people paid SHIT and maintained by devs standing in a sea of fire of corporate interest)

Now.. if they'd release the code, free-devs could code whatever idea they come up with and present it the way the custom UI structure of WoW already works, incorporating new and novel ideas to the existing system without having giant penises all over the place the way it ends up on the pirateservers or games that fail at understanding how humans work /rant off, ex-WoW addict</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228618</id>
	<title>Constant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266849840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does the author constantly use "constantly"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the author constantly use " constantly " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the author constantly use "constantly"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230534</id>
	<title>Bartle Test</title>
	<author>Fozzyuw</author>
	<datestamp>1266860580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I'm familiar with the Bartle Test but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity, I'd be interested.</p></div><p>I feel like I should be marked redundant for how often I mention it, but I feel it worth mentioning on the topic of MMO's and particular since you mentioned the Bartle Test.  If you're familiar with the Barlte Test are you familiar with his book: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Virtual-Worlds-Richard-Bartle/dp/0131018167/ref=sr\_1\_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1266855390&amp;sr=8-1" title="amazon.com">Designign Virtual Worlds</a> [amazon.com]?.  The book is a bit dated by todays terms but still very insightful in the genre of MMO's.  I believe the book mentions a little bit about Dark Age of Camelot as it was the "new" thing that was barely out when the book came out.  Even then, the points he makes remains true.  It's worth a read.  He mentions why "PvP" centric games don't work for the masses and it's as obvious as you would expect: "Griefing".  Most people don't want to spend their time playing "their" game to have someone else take most or all away from them, particularly without much recourse as a truly open world allows some much more powerful person to prey on the less powerful for shits and giggles.</p><p>There are some people who enjoy that kind of game, but not enough to get some AAA development house to make a game for it.  MMO's aren't cheap to develop and their not easy to do right.   Even looking at World of Warcraft, the game is pretty different now than it was at release (this might be a good time to mention I started MMOing at the early days of Everquest, missing UO and MUDs, but I've tried most MMOs since that point) and it's still scheduled to change quite a bit with the next expansion.  And I mean this by saying, when WoW game out, it was criticized for being far and away the most casual friendly MMO there is... and it pales in comparison to how casual friendly the game is now.</p><p>Anyway, I digress.  PvP games will always be niche and less successful simply because they can't design around "griefing" without getting to the point that for all the safety measures you put in place to protect the weak from the powerful until some level of equality is reached makes it to the point that you might as well just remove PvP all together and just implement power (often translated into level) restricted "arena/battleground" areas.</p><p>Onto the question about player housing.  That's more along the lines of a development issue.  Do you spend your man-hours working on new dungeons, lands, weapons, content, balance issues, spells, etc or do you spend it on implementing something like housing?  And what does housing do to a game?  How does it fit with the guided flow and purpose of said game?</p><p>Blizzard has recently stated why they haven't implemented housing (as one of the most popular requests for player generated like content or world customization) and that reason is that it both doesn't seem to have the value of spending resources on it vs other things as-well-as housing could (and likely would) have a negative impact on the atmosphere of the game.  Guild houses and personal houses will become little cities onto themselves and people will segment farther into their own little cliches and cities will become more and more desolate.  You could try to design around that.  Force houses to be in cities or to reach it you can only enter leave through a city.  Prevent houses from being any more than empty space that you could perhaps put some digital art.</p><p>But all developers simply ask themselves, what does this do to make the game better?  Not much.  Games like WoW can't just popular houses anywhere in the world.  Like DAoC, you'll have to create special instanced zones that can have housing, so you can create as much or little space as you need as needs grow.  If you allow people to build houses anywhere, then you'll have the issues of people placing stuff that just breaks the atmosphere.</p><p>And you could say "what's wrong with that?".  Honestly?  Nothing.  It's not "wrong" to have it, but simply put, there's a lot of people who don't like it.  And since these are games we're talking about, if people simply don't like it, you company won't succeed.  That's the side many gamers don't seem to keep on their mind.  As much as we want to treat a game as "art" in that we want to keep making it cooler by doing this or by doing that, there's a real business science to these choices that effect the game.   Good games are also run by people who know how to make good business decisions for that game and not just give the player base everything they ask for on the forums, kind of thing.</p><p>Anyway, read Bartle's book if you haven't.  It's really quite good and it does cover the Bartle test.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm familiar with the Bartle Test but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity , I 'd be interested.I feel like I should be marked redundant for how often I mention it , but I feel it worth mentioning on the topic of MMO 's and particular since you mentioned the Bartle Test .
If you 're familiar with the Barlte Test are you familiar with his book : Designign Virtual Worlds [ amazon.com ] ? .
The book is a bit dated by todays terms but still very insightful in the genre of MMO 's .
I believe the book mentions a little bit about Dark Age of Camelot as it was the " new " thing that was barely out when the book came out .
Even then , the points he makes remains true .
It 's worth a read .
He mentions why " PvP " centric games do n't work for the masses and it 's as obvious as you would expect : " Griefing " .
Most people do n't want to spend their time playing " their " game to have someone else take most or all away from them , particularly without much recourse as a truly open world allows some much more powerful person to prey on the less powerful for shits and giggles.There are some people who enjoy that kind of game , but not enough to get some AAA development house to make a game for it .
MMO 's are n't cheap to develop and their not easy to do right .
Even looking at World of Warcraft , the game is pretty different now than it was at release ( this might be a good time to mention I started MMOing at the early days of Everquest , missing UO and MUDs , but I 've tried most MMOs since that point ) and it 's still scheduled to change quite a bit with the next expansion .
And I mean this by saying , when WoW game out , it was criticized for being far and away the most casual friendly MMO there is... and it pales in comparison to how casual friendly the game is now.Anyway , I digress .
PvP games will always be niche and less successful simply because they ca n't design around " griefing " without getting to the point that for all the safety measures you put in place to protect the weak from the powerful until some level of equality is reached makes it to the point that you might as well just remove PvP all together and just implement power ( often translated into level ) restricted " arena/battleground " areas.Onto the question about player housing .
That 's more along the lines of a development issue .
Do you spend your man-hours working on new dungeons , lands , weapons , content , balance issues , spells , etc or do you spend it on implementing something like housing ?
And what does housing do to a game ?
How does it fit with the guided flow and purpose of said game ? Blizzard has recently stated why they have n't implemented housing ( as one of the most popular requests for player generated like content or world customization ) and that reason is that it both does n't seem to have the value of spending resources on it vs other things as-well-as housing could ( and likely would ) have a negative impact on the atmosphere of the game .
Guild houses and personal houses will become little cities onto themselves and people will segment farther into their own little cliches and cities will become more and more desolate .
You could try to design around that .
Force houses to be in cities or to reach it you can only enter leave through a city .
Prevent houses from being any more than empty space that you could perhaps put some digital art.But all developers simply ask themselves , what does this do to make the game better ?
Not much .
Games like WoW ca n't just popular houses anywhere in the world .
Like DAoC , you 'll have to create special instanced zones that can have housing , so you can create as much or little space as you need as needs grow .
If you allow people to build houses anywhere , then you 'll have the issues of people placing stuff that just breaks the atmosphere.And you could say " what 's wrong with that ? " .
Honestly ? Nothing .
It 's not " wrong " to have it , but simply put , there 's a lot of people who do n't like it .
And since these are games we 're talking about , if people simply do n't like it , you company wo n't succeed .
That 's the side many gamers do n't seem to keep on their mind .
As much as we want to treat a game as " art " in that we want to keep making it cooler by doing this or by doing that , there 's a real business science to these choices that effect the game .
Good games are also run by people who know how to make good business decisions for that game and not just give the player base everything they ask for on the forums , kind of thing.Anyway , read Bartle 's book if you have n't .
It 's really quite good and it does cover the Bartle test .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I'm familiar with the Bartle Test but if anyone could point me to more resources as to why Killer-oriented games have faded out of popularity, I'd be interested.I feel like I should be marked redundant for how often I mention it, but I feel it worth mentioning on the topic of MMO's and particular since you mentioned the Bartle Test.
If you're familiar with the Barlte Test are you familiar with his book: Designign Virtual Worlds [amazon.com]?.
The book is a bit dated by todays terms but still very insightful in the genre of MMO's.
I believe the book mentions a little bit about Dark Age of Camelot as it was the "new" thing that was barely out when the book came out.
Even then, the points he makes remains true.
It's worth a read.
He mentions why "PvP" centric games don't work for the masses and it's as obvious as you would expect: "Griefing".
Most people don't want to spend their time playing "their" game to have someone else take most or all away from them, particularly without much recourse as a truly open world allows some much more powerful person to prey on the less powerful for shits and giggles.There are some people who enjoy that kind of game, but not enough to get some AAA development house to make a game for it.
MMO's aren't cheap to develop and their not easy to do right.
Even looking at World of Warcraft, the game is pretty different now than it was at release (this might be a good time to mention I started MMOing at the early days of Everquest, missing UO and MUDs, but I've tried most MMOs since that point) and it's still scheduled to change quite a bit with the next expansion.
And I mean this by saying, when WoW game out, it was criticized for being far and away the most casual friendly MMO there is... and it pales in comparison to how casual friendly the game is now.Anyway, I digress.
PvP games will always be niche and less successful simply because they can't design around "griefing" without getting to the point that for all the safety measures you put in place to protect the weak from the powerful until some level of equality is reached makes it to the point that you might as well just remove PvP all together and just implement power (often translated into level) restricted "arena/battleground" areas.Onto the question about player housing.
That's more along the lines of a development issue.
Do you spend your man-hours working on new dungeons, lands, weapons, content, balance issues, spells, etc or do you spend it on implementing something like housing?
And what does housing do to a game?
How does it fit with the guided flow and purpose of said game?Blizzard has recently stated why they haven't implemented housing (as one of the most popular requests for player generated like content or world customization) and that reason is that it both doesn't seem to have the value of spending resources on it vs other things as-well-as housing could (and likely would) have a negative impact on the atmosphere of the game.
Guild houses and personal houses will become little cities onto themselves and people will segment farther into their own little cliches and cities will become more and more desolate.
You could try to design around that.
Force houses to be in cities or to reach it you can only enter leave through a city.
Prevent houses from being any more than empty space that you could perhaps put some digital art.But all developers simply ask themselves, what does this do to make the game better?
Not much.
Games like WoW can't just popular houses anywhere in the world.
Like DAoC, you'll have to create special instanced zones that can have housing, so you can create as much or little space as you need as needs grow.
If you allow people to build houses anywhere, then you'll have the issues of people placing stuff that just breaks the atmosphere.And you could say "what's wrong with that?".
Honestly?  Nothing.
It's not "wrong" to have it, but simply put, there's a lot of people who don't like it.
And since these are games we're talking about, if people simply don't like it, you company won't succeed.
That's the side many gamers don't seem to keep on their mind.
As much as we want to treat a game as "art" in that we want to keep making it cooler by doing this or by doing that, there's a real business science to these choices that effect the game.
Good games are also run by people who know how to make good business decisions for that game and not just give the player base everything they ask for on the forums, kind of thing.Anyway, read Bartle's book if you haven't.
It's really quite good and it does cover the Bartle test.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31267210</id>
	<title>Re:Also WoW keeps it sane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265119080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with Greyfox exactly. It was great when things weren't based on equipment but were rather determined by skill, and not just by character skills, but the skill of the actually player and their keyboard. I got skooled by some incredible 5th graders back then who wore nothing but a halberd.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with Greyfox exactly .
It was great when things were n't based on equipment but were rather determined by skill , and not just by character skills , but the skill of the actually player and their keyboard .
I got skooled by some incredible 5th graders back then who wore nothing but a halberd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with Greyfox exactly.
It was great when things weren't based on equipment but were rather determined by skill, and not just by character skills, but the skill of the actually player and their keyboard.
I got skooled by some incredible 5th graders back then who wore nothing but a halberd.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231608</id>
	<title>Re:Missing the point</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266863400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to.</p></div><p>I am not entirely sure of this, but I vaguely remember that you could steal house keys(among other things) with the pickpocketing skill when a player had the key with him. Unless the owner whined to a GM, or had a copy of the house key, you could effectively take over a house that way.</p><p>It was also possible to just copy the key while pickpocketing. The victim would be totally oblivious of the copy being made since the original was still in his inventory. The thief could of course use this key to loot the victims house. Some people who did not know of this possibility would claim that they had been subject to a "hacker".</p><p>The more experienced players would make sure to keep their keys in the bank, and when carrying their keys would stay away from people walking suspiciously close to them in towns.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but more specifically thieving , which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone 's furniture that per the game rules you should n't have had access to.I am not entirely sure of this , but I vaguely remember that you could steal house keys ( among other things ) with the pickpocketing skill when a player had the key with him .
Unless the owner whined to a GM , or had a copy of the house key , you could effectively take over a house that way.It was also possible to just copy the key while pickpocketing .
The victim would be totally oblivious of the copy being made since the original was still in his inventory .
The thief could of course use this key to loot the victims house .
Some people who did not know of this possibility would claim that they had been subject to a " hacker " .The more experienced players would make sure to keep their keys in the bank , and when carrying their keys would stay away from people walking suspiciously close to them in towns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but more specifically thieving, which in the context of housing really boiled down to exploiting some clipping bug to nick someone's furniture that per the game rules you shouldn't have had access to.I am not entirely sure of this, but I vaguely remember that you could steal house keys(among other things) with the pickpocketing skill when a player had the key with him.
Unless the owner whined to a GM, or had a copy of the house key, you could effectively take over a house that way.It was also possible to just copy the key while pickpocketing.
The victim would be totally oblivious of the copy being made since the original was still in his inventory.
The thief could of course use this key to loot the victims house.
Some people who did not know of this possibility would claim that they had been subject to a "hacker".The more experienced players would make sure to keep their keys in the bank, and when carrying their keys would stay away from people walking suspiciously close to them in towns.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245328</id>
	<title>Re:Siege Perilous</title>
	<author>Raptor851</author>
	<datestamp>1266945120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Role-playing is the big one, I've yet to see that...at all in any current game.  I miss setting up the conference table and chairs in the middle of our guild castle and having a (in character) meeting about the state of our alliance.  I know about the UO freeservers too, they'd be great if they weren't so vacant of life, laggy, plagued by cheating, and the AI being ridiculously dumb even in comparison to the original.  Not to mention there doesn't seem to be any role-players on them anyways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Role-playing is the big one , I 've yet to see that...at all in any current game .
I miss setting up the conference table and chairs in the middle of our guild castle and having a ( in character ) meeting about the state of our alliance .
I know about the UO freeservers too , they 'd be great if they were n't so vacant of life , laggy , plagued by cheating , and the AI being ridiculously dumb even in comparison to the original .
Not to mention there does n't seem to be any role-players on them anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Role-playing is the big one, I've yet to see that...at all in any current game.
I miss setting up the conference table and chairs in the middle of our guild castle and having a (in character) meeting about the state of our alliance.
I know about the UO freeservers too, they'd be great if they weren't so vacant of life, laggy, plagued by cheating, and the AI being ridiculously dumb even in comparison to the original.
Not to mention there doesn't seem to be any role-players on them anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31240610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31236060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31267210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31293558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244208
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230052
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227634
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31237618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31252476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31325024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31281496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31251592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31274314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31260142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_22_0536213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31236060
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227768
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31241198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228274
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229454
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230180
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31274314
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31239438
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232978
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31325024
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31240610
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235474
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229388
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230930
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229004
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230300
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233216
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261574
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31251592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227676
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31238974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228848
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227432
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31281496
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278904
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31230052
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228854
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31278928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31233864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31261562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31228018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229708
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31252476
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31237618
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31260142
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235128
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31234360
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31235742
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31244432
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31293558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31229652
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31267210
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31231116
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31245158
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31232928
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_22_0536213.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_22_0536213.31227352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
