4. How come EA doesn't open up a "classic" shard?
Darkscribe: I have very mixed feelings about a "classic" rule-set shard. The reason is this: What a "classic shard" should be depends on what player you ask and when they entered the game. Year One people want one that looks like Year One. Year Three people want a pre-AOS shard, but not a pre-Ren shard. Then there are lots of people who came in after AOS, but could do without some of the Samurai Empire and UOML stuff. Then again, there are Year One people who want all the expansion pack land masses, but pre-AOS item properties and also no Elves. So, is it about PvP rules, or item properties, or size of landmass, or insurance, or races, or professions, or crafting, or artifacts, or what? What would make the majority of players the happiest? It's very close to an unanswerable question. I've conducted the research, launched the surveys, conducted the focus groups, and I've yet to see a clean answer that wouldn't anger as many as it pleased.
Here is what I do think can be done, maybe, after a lot more research and player discussion: I think a shard with a unique rule set could provide a new kind of experience and be an important addition to the world of UO. I'm more excited by the thought creating something new, instead of the impossible task of re-creating something that existed years ago and maybe could never be re-created again.
At the Town Hall meeting, I compared expecting a "classic shard" to be as satisfying as your first UO experience to expecting your 20-year high school reunion to be as fun as your senior prom. It just isn't going to be as good.
The real question is what should a unique shard really look like? Or, should we take a closer look at our current hardcore shards, Siege Perilous and Mugen, and think about how to make the experience there more satisfying? These are questions we will try and answer within the next three months as development plans come together for the rest of the year.
Anyone else somewhat hopeful?
Author