Best Game Ever - Ultima Online Legacy

An interesting read for the 25th anniversary.

The Legacy of Ultima Online

Some takeaways and numbers:
1) UO first mmo to cross 6 digit population.
2) PK environment was driving away 70% of the game’s new players and that Origin had asked him for a “shutdown plan for the game” 
3) Introduction of Trammel doubles the player base from 125k to 245k subs.
4) Subsequent decline as it lost ground to newer titles with fancier 3-D graphics. The fight was never between EC and CC. EC failed to keep the players from switching to other games.
5) In 2012, Time honored Ultima Online in a list of the 100 greatest video games ever made, saying that subsequent MMOs “owed a debt to the lessons learned” from this game.

Will New Legacy get back the 6-digit?

“I know people say this every year but just recently I actually feel like the game is ending now.

I don’t think it’s a big issue to disclose I have access to a discord channel that automatically notifies of IDOCs (multi shard) and the notifications have been blowing up crazy this week.

combined with the seemingly end of support/development for official clients. 

Except most player I know really don't like PvP.

Another good read.

How Ultima Online was made

These articles should be on UO.com.

Yoshi said:

“I know people say this every year but just recently I actually feel like the game is ending now.

I don’t think it’s a big issue to disclose I have access to a discord channel that automatically notifies of IDOCs (multi shard) and the notifications have been blowing up crazy this week.

combined with the seemingly end of support/development for official clients. 

I hope it’s not the end but I really do feel it’s closing soon.

(trammel was needed back then, I remember the very first time I saw an orange I immediately lost connection and logged back in dead and lost my armor, but the introduction of item insurance has now mostly removed the requirement for trammel)”

Pvp and Pking are two different things. 

Pvp is fun in the boxing ring. Both sides are geared to fight. Both sides get the fun.

Getting murdered while u are just shopping or walking in the park isn't fun. One party gets the fun only. 

And they created the PK system like a rat trap waiting for greedy rats to run in. 

Yoshi said:

“I know people say this every year but just recently I actually feel like the game is ending now.

I don’t think it’s a big issue to disclose I have access to a discord channel that automatically notifies of IDOCs (multi shard) and the notifications have been blowing up crazy this week.

combined with the seemingly end of support/development for official clients. 

I hope it’s not the end but I really do feel it’s closing soon.

(trammel was needed back then, I remember the very first time I saw an orange I immediately lost connection and logged back in dead and lost my armor, but the introduction of item insurance has now mostly removed the requirement for trammel)”

Personally, I will never get it how anyone can be happy when seeing an IDOC.... for me, each and every time I see an IDOC it means to me that an UO player is shutting down his/her UO account and, thus, a piece of Ultima Online is going away....

Indeed, if recently there has been a surge in IDOCs, it is not a good sign.... for a game this old, I imagine that the shutting down of accounts might be more likely then the opening of new, subscribed accounts.... therefore, for an account that goes away, it is not guaranteed that a new, subscribed one, might open shortly after, to keep the game above that level of Accounts that are needed for it to keep going....

It would be interesting to know what the lowest number of Accounts is, to keep Ultima Online above its costs and thus possible to keep going....and how far we might be, from reaching that lowest number of Accounts below which, costs will exceed active subscriptions and, thus, call for a shutting down for good of Ultima Online because running at a loss.....

Atlantic had a massive flux of people come from all shards for the destard event. The timing is about right for those accounts to go down and their houses to drop. I would assume most shards had some of the same. The fly by nighters have always came and gone. 

You worry when you start seeing established 18x18s keeps and castles dropping. You definitely know it's the end when Luna houses open up. 

Urge said:

Atlantic had a massive flux of people come from all shards for the destard event. The timing is about right for those accounts to go down and their houses to drop. I would assume most shards had some of the same. The fly by nighters have always came and gone. 

You worry when you start seeing established 18x18s keeps and castles dropping. You definitely know it's the end when Luna houses open up. 

Considering how Housing on Atlantic is way more difficult as on other Shards, if it was as you say, this would mean that all those players moving to Atlantic had found a House there and, thus, they're getting their newer House on Atlantic condemning their House on whatever Shard they were moving from....

Quite unlikely, considering how difficult and expensive it is, to my understanding, to get a House on Atlantic for those many players.... not impossible for some but, certainly, significantly more difficult as compared to low Population Shards for a significant number of players....

Not to mention, that I would not understand why, if all of these players were "relocating" from a low Population Shard to Atlantic, why they did not first empty out their House on their source Shard, take all their items to Atlantic to stock up their new house there, and then take down their older House on the Low Population Shard and recover its cost...

I mean, why let it go IDOC and loose all of the items inside with it, if they keep playing the game, albeit on another Shard, Atlantic ?

By the way, from what I understand from other players who do IDOCs, Keeps and Catles do drop... maybe not on Atlantic, but on other Shards I heard that they do....

I meant opening another account for the event. 

Event ended, accounts closed, houses decay. 

Urge said:

I meant opening another account for the event. 

Event ended, accounts closed, houses decay. 

If so, that would mean all these house would be falling on Atlantic.... assuming that so many players where able to get a House on Atlantic for the Event, where we know Housing is significantly more difficult and expensive as compared to other Shards...

@Yoshi , out of curiosity, all or most of those IDOCs notifications that you are getting are referred to Atlantic or to other Shards ?

Because, if they were related to players opening an extra Account on Atlantic for the Event, and getting somehow Housing there for the limited time of the Event, then most of the notifications that you talked about, should refer to IDOCs on Atlantic, and not on other Shards....

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

popps said:

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

If only there was a pvp only shard..

popps said:

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

Seth said:

popps said:

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

Again, please don't mix up PvP and PK. Many multiplayer games that are designed solely for PvP is fun. PvP is like a sport.

PK is not, just like real life. E.g. our houses are supposed to be secured so we don't get murdered in our sleep. There is no need to go deeper but you all should know what I mean.

Back to the OP, its not about Fel Vs Trammel, not about EC vs CC. Each serve a purpose and players are free to choose any client or facet. They don't compete with one another. You can argue which is the best, but none of them has succeeded to keep the bulk of players. They have all failed.

Perhaps others have learnt from UO to become successful, but what has UO learn from its own history.

“league of legends, starcraft, fortnite, crossfire, all total game business failures because literally nobody likes PvP, delete fel"

Yoshi said:

“league of legends, starcraft, fortnite, crossfire, all total game business failures because literally nobody likes PvP, delete fel"

are you saying that banana taste the same than orange now? cant compare any games you mention with uo....and btw for your idocs numbers nothing have change since i do some since couples years ago....uo is a come and go cycle for many people...the population seems to be the same or even mroe people than 5 years ago...but yeah if you only look fel like you seem to be...maybe you need to go play a shooter game...

Have played a lot of games over the years.  Even with all the bugs and primitive graphics this game has all the elements it needs to succeed except for one.  It does not have the thinking going into it that knows how to put all of the elements together in a meaningful way to attract and retain new players.

Fortis said:

  for your idocs numbers nothing have change since i do some since couples years ago......

"i have the actual logs, but yeah lets just go by your rough experience.."

Yoshi said:

Fortis said:

  for your idocs numbers nothing have change since i do some since couples years ago......

"i have the actual logs, but yeah lets just go by your rough experience.."

you have logs of every idocs on the last 5 years on every shards...how come? i really want you to share with us where you get this info and give us all the information to prove you are right...

I just think persons more experienced in knowing what players want and selling games take a hard look at this one and develop a plan to make it more desirable to more players young and old.  Maybe determine what player base this game appeals to.  I really enjoy playing with the players I know and really like that most of them are middle aged and older adults that I can relate too.

Sorry for the two posts.  Did not realize I had posted the other one when I thought I had saved it.

this month i started keeping idoc info. now this isnt every idoc cause some days i cant check. 
Between 9/1 and 9/15, 216 idocs 31 of those keeps and castles. This doesnt count SP or asian SP. There was a few days i missed all idocs. There is a player that does idocs and keeps all info and still has it. maybe he will share how many have fallen in last few years. 

Is there not a way to combine Feluca and Trammel and let players chose to PvP with a char or opt out and make it invunerable to player attack? Maybe some way to change designation with a delay for it to take effect? (ie VvV) That way we could all live in same world.

I suppose combining shards to increase population would be good but how do you decide who moves and where they place their houses on new shard? Maybe blow up both shards (placing gold for houses in account) and let players place houses first come first served on new shard. Could be a fun restart like when shards came online one at a time, but knowing UO there will be bitching like never before! LOL

PvP, especially in large scale melee, is some of the most fun I've had in UO and being PKd some of the worst. (Insurance took most of sting from both!) PvP is an important part of the game and I think needs to be kept but players should be able to opt out! (murder sucks)

UO pulled me, and most of the others playing Diablo, to it when it came online and it keeps pulling players back (this is third return for me) because it is more than PvP and PvM ! Many players have tradesmen or merchants as main chars and hardly ever hunt/fight! 

Sorry if im rambling and thats all so far. 

Soldahouse said:

this month i started keeping idoc info. now this isnt every idoc cause some days i cant check. 
Between 9/1 and 9/15, 216 idocs 31 of those keeps and castles. This doesnt count SP or asian SP. There was a few days i missed all idocs. There is a player that does idocs and keeps all info and still has it. maybe he will share how many have fallen in last few years. 

Considering that every House that falls means a subscription cancelled.... that is quite a lot of accounts closed in a couple of weeks only....

popps said:

Soldahouse said:

this month i started keeping idoc info. now this isnt every idoc cause some days i cant check. 
Between 9/1 and 9/15, 216 idocs 31 of those keeps and castles. This doesnt count SP or asian SP. There was a few days i missed all idocs. There is a player that does idocs and keeps all info and still has it. maybe he will share how many have fallen in last few years. 

Considering that every House that falls means a subscription cancelled.... that is quite a lot of accounts closed in a couple of weeks only....

Or they placed another house and didn't bother to take down the old one.

popps said:

Soldahouse said:

this month i started keeping idoc info. now this isnt every idoc cause some days i cant check. 
Between 9/1 and 9/15, 216 idocs 31 of those keeps and castles. This doesnt count SP or asian SP. There was a few days i missed all idocs. There is a player that does idocs and keeps all info and still has it. maybe he will share how many have fallen in last few years. 

Considering that every House that falls means a subscription cancelled.... that is quite a lot of accounts closed in a couple of weeks only....

might be an account that was opened just for  a month 

Arnold7 said:

Have played a lot of games over the years.  Even with all the bugs and primitive graphics this game has all the elements it needs to succeed except for one.  It does not have the thinking going into it that knows how to put all of the elements together in a meaningful way to attract and retain new players.

Most of the marketing effort appears to focused on meeting the needs of those existing players whose subscriptions pay the bills.  The little bit of effort that goes elsewhere is focused on using EJ accounts to get old players that that have quit back into the game.  Although I admire EA’s commitment to the existing player base, I suspect EA has already set a sunset date for UO.

The developers thinking continues to be focused on bringing back those elements of the game, pvp, stealing and forcing players to go to Fel., that don’t really hold must interest for much of the player base.  I appreciate that UO provides separate environments and that players are free to play in either.  NL appears to be focused on bring back group play, guilds, and pvp.

As the years pass I see fewer and fewer players on my shard.  I also see fewer and fewer of the essentials being bought and sold on vendor search.  I see the game itself being a little more stable now than it was a few months ago.  I just think 

I hope there are indicators to show that it's not heading for sunset soon. I hope what @Yoshi suspects won't come true.

I am not sure about the rest of you. When I pay for UO sub, I feel that I am paying to keep virtual assets that will last my "lifetime". Assets that I value alot and afraid to lose. We don't pay sub to keep "playing actively" but if we don't pay, we will lose the valuable items and rewards earned over the years. Paying is for keeping and earning such items.

If I need to pay to play and entertain, then I would look at standalone PC games or perhaps try a seasonal game, which I may pay one time or for a few months until I get bored and move on. I don't care about "owning" anything in the game. Paying is for the active playing, and there is nothing to lose if we stop any time.

Seth said:

Arnold7 said:

Have played a lot of games over the years.  Even with all the bugs and primitive graphics this game has all the elements it needs to succeed except for one.  It does not have the thinking going into it that knows how to put all of the elements together in a meaningful way to attract and retain new players.

Most of the marketing effort appears to focused on meeting the needs of those existing players whose subscriptions pay the bills.  The little bit of effort that goes elsewhere is focused on using EJ accounts to get old players that that have quit back into the game.  Although I admire EA’s commitment to the existing player base, I suspect EA has already set a sunset date for UO.

The developers thinking continues to be focused on bringing back those elements of the game, pvp, stealing and forcing players to go to Fel., that don’t really hold must interest for much of the player base.  I appreciate that UO provides separate environments and that players are free to play in either.  NL appears to be focused on bring back group play, guilds, and pvp.

As the years pass I see fewer and fewer players on my shard.  I also see fewer and fewer of the essentials being bought and sold on vendor search.  I see the game itself being a little more stable now than it was a few months ago.  I just think 

I hope there are indicators to show that it's not heading for sunset soon. I hope what @ Yoshi suspects won't come true.

I am not sure about the rest of you. When I pay for UO sub, I feel that I am paying to keep virtual assets that will last my "lifetime". Assets that I value alot and afraid to lose. We don't pay sub to keep "playing actively" but if we don't pay, we will lose the valuable items and rewards earned over the years. Paying is for keeping and earning such items.

If I need to pay to play and entertain, then I would look at standalone PC games or perhaps try a seasonal game, which I may pay one time or for a few months until I get bored and move on. I don't care about "owning" anything in the game. Paying is for the active playing, and there is nothing to lose if we stop any time.

I feel that I am paying to keep virtual assets that will last my "lifetime". 

And what about the time, if it will come, when that paying will be useless anyways, because too many other players have closed their accounts and costs will exceed resources and the decision will be made to close down Ultima Online for good ?

Will keeping paying one's own subscription be of any good to keep one's own virtual assets or will it become useless, overwhelmed by a large number of other players shutting down their subscribed accounts for good ?

This is why I insist that the Developers should do A WHOLE LOT better when Designing Veteran Rewards to prize Ultima Online players who have maitained their accounts as active for so long.... to incentivate them to keep doing so and appraise their being loyal customers to Ultima Online....

Unfortunately, the latest 25 Years Veteran Reward, totally underwhelming to my opinion, does not look to go in that direction....

There is much better Veteran Rewards for lower Years as there are for higher Years (just look at Auction Safes, a mere 1st Year Veteran Reward and the extreme high value that they have, and you'll easily understand my argument...) and this sends a wrong message to my opinion.... why should a player want to keep maintaining their account as active for amazing 25 Years and soon to come 26 Years if then, the Veteran Reward to thank them for their amazing, long loyalty will be an item that is totally, absolutely sub-par as compared to Veteran Rewards which can be gotten with much, much less Years of an active subscription ?

Hell, a mere 1st Year active Account can get Auction Safes which obliterate the value of pretty much most of any of the other Veteran Rewards from much higher Years, even the 25 Years one !!!

Just a thought....

What veteran reward I will get has no impact whatsoever on my decision to keep playing, and nor should it. I keep playing because I enjoy playing. 
When assessing the number of IDOCs one must also take into account
1. How many of them are in fact the result of the owner placing a new house elsewhere and
2. How many of the are instantly replaced by new homes. 
I understand that on Atlantic those houses may be replaced by persons selling them for profit - but there still must be someone to sell them TO, otherwise they wouldn't do it.
Instead of spreading doom and gloom referring to 'dead shards' and forecasting the end of the game take the time to actually go out and count the number of houses spread over the shards, because for every house that isn't falling, there is an active account paying for it!

Petra_Fyde said:

What veteran reward I will get has no impact whatsoever on my decision to keep playing, and nor should it. I keep playing because I enjoy playing. 
When assessing the number of IDOCs one must also take into account
1. How many of them are in fact the result of the owner placing a new house elsewhere and
2. How many of the are instantly replaced by new homes. 
I understand that on Atlantic those houses may be replaced by persons selling them for profit - but there still must be someone to sell them TO, otherwise they wouldn't do it.
Instead of spreading doom and gloom referring to 'dead shards' and forecasting the end of the game take the time to actually go out and count the number of houses spread over the shards, because for every house that isn't falling, there is an active account paying for it!

What veteran reward I will get has no impact whatsoever on my decision to keep playing, and nor should it. I keep playing because I enjoy playing. 

Not all players are, and think the same.... while it might have no impact for you, don't you think that, among the UO players out there, there might be a number out there to whom, instead, the quality of the Veteran Rewards which they receive for their long years of custmer loyalty might have an impact ? With this in mind, shouldn't therefore, Veteran Rewards be Design with some consistency  about what Year of customer loyalty active age they are intended for ?

Instead of spreading doom and gloom referring to 'dead shards' and forecasting the end of the game take the time to actually go out and count the number of houses spread over the shards, because for every house that isn't falling, there is an active account paying for it!

Well, not exactly, considering that, I heard, some players might play the "90 days" game to keep multiple Houses up but minimizing their subscription costs.... so, I would not go as far as to say that "every" House out there necessarily means a subscription that is earning resources to UO...

“Forget the vet rewards, they just need to fix the bugs so people can play.

i hear in discord whenever there is a new player, the third party client set up is so complicated they have to screen share just to install the game.

you should be able to just download the game from UO.com and play it, should not need to download this complex third party crap from untrusted sources just to play without bugs”

popps said:

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

The perspective that Trammel marked the end of UO is more spiritual than it is material. The "spirit" of UO as a sandbox fantasy world changed to something a little bit more engineered. When bringing things back to reality, it can be hard to temper these immaterial feelings about how you might remember things versus how things really were.

That said, as much as Trammel made sense within the context of an imminent shutdown, we shouldn't determine the success of updates based solely on their impact to subscription numbers. Something can be hugely popular but poor in design. From a design standpoint, the Felucca/Trammel split was a lazy way to deal with the emergent sociopathy of a persistent online world. From a utilitarian standpoint, where a solution was needed quickly to improve the player's experience and avoid a shutdown, it made a lot of sense, and I do not think we would have UO today without it.

In fact, a lot of controversial changes to UO make sense when viewed in context. Item Insurance makes sense if you move to a more item-based, Diablo-style foundation. Shard Transfers make sense as populations dwindle. Vendor Search makes sense from a usability standpoint and in the context of more complex itemization, at the expense of the virtual real estate market. Others, like abandoning Kingdom Reborn and settling on the Enhanced Client, are harder for me to understand.

I'm interested to see whether Broadsword, being the official custodians of the game, will use New Legacy as a platform to create an experience that they have full ownership of which, in some sense, puts them even more in direct competition with private servers that cater to a classic experience, some of which are very well produced and which receive high quality updates. My hope is that Broadsword will be in a better position to learn from UO's past and that New Legacy's success brings greater resourcing to improve the CC/Enhanced clients or at least a more transparent reckoning with the really amazing work going on within the private shard community.

loop said:

popps said:

JohnKnighthawke said:

People's ability to deny reality never ceases to amaze me. The article's couple of paragraphs on the Trammel go something like this.

1-90% of population goes to Trammel and doesn't look back.

(So logically that means most people didn't want the Fel lifestyle.)

2-Someone says that somehow this was the "beginning of the end."

(What? Based on all available empirical data it helped, not hurt.)

3-Someone else says subscriptions doubled after Trammel.

(So not only does this mean most players don't want the Fel lifestyle, but that Fel was actually a problem for the UO brand name. People stayed away because of it.)

4-Same person then says Trammel was somehow a problem because it cost UO the hard-core PKers.

(Umm...what? Based on the information provided, they were a problem...)

First thing someone says here? "Trammel isn't needed anymore."

(Umm....What?)

Oh well. We're living in the post-fact, post-truth world now. When UO finally does shut down these folks will blame Trammel even though the available evidence suggests the polar opposite and even though the end of UO by definition will have occurred decades after Trammel.

It might be interesting to read what, to my understanding, a Developer who was there when it happened, remembers....

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

A paragraph which I found very much interesting to read, was this....

We were not successful in bringing back the (literally)100's of thousands of players who had quit due to the unbridled PvP in the world (~5% of former customers came back to try the new UO, but very few of them stayed).  We discovered that people didn't just quit UO, they divorced it in a very emotional way.

This is why, to my opinion, game Design dealing with PvP should be dealt with with a ten foot pole.....

The perspective that Trammel marked the end of UO is more spiritual than it is material. The "spirit" of UO as a sandbox fantasy world changed to something a little bit more engineered. When bringing things back to reality, it can be hard to temper these immaterial feelings about how you might remember things versus how things really were.

That said, as much as Trammel made sense within the context of an imminent shutdown, we shouldn't determine the success of updates based solely on their impact to subscription numbers. Something can be hugely popular but poor in design. From a design standpoint, the Felucca/Trammel split was a lazy way to deal with the emergent sociopathy of a persistent online world. From a utilitarian standpoint, where a solution was needed quickly to improve the player's experience and avoid a shutdown, it made a lot of sense, and I do not think we would have UO today without it.

In fact, a lot of controversial changes to UO make sense when viewed in context. Item Insurance makes sense if you move to a more item-based, Diablo-style foundation. Shard Transfers make sense as populations dwindle. Vendor Search makes sense from a usability standpoint and in the context of more complex itemization, at the expense of the virtual real estate market. Others, like abandoning Kingdom Reborn and settling on the Enhanced Client, are harder for me to understand.

I'm interested to see whether Broadsword, being the official custodians of the game, will use New Legacy as a platform to create an experience that they have full ownership of which, in some sense, puts them even more in direct competition with private servers that cater to a classic experience, some of which are very well produced and which receive high quality updates. My hope is that Broadsword will be in a better position to learn from UO's past and that New Legacy's success brings greater resourcing to improve the CC/Enhanced clients or at least a more transparent reckoning with the really amazing work going on within the private shard community.

The thing is, at least to my opinion, that if the New Legacy Shard will bring on new, or returning players, then things will get better as more subscriptions might come and, thus, more resources be available for more Developers and all that....

But if the New Legacy Shard will get most of its players from the current Production Shards and from Siege/Mugen, players who already have a subscription, this might cause gameplay problems to current UO players remaining to play the Production Shards and Siege/Mugen because not having interest in the New Legacy Shard the way that it was Designed to play out, leaving them to play on Production Shards and on Siege/Mugen which could get further depleted and more deserted of players because spending most of their time, now, on the New Legacy Shard rather then on their home Shards.....

If this was to happen, is my worry, especially if the limited Developers' time was mostly directed at the New Legacy Shard rather then at current Production Shards and for Siege/Mugen, this might end up seeing some of the players of these Shards not being interested in the New Legacy Shard, finding themselves playing on Shards further impoverished of players and with less new content to enjoy, and some could decide to thus end their UO gaming experience and go play other games, thus closing their subscribed accounts.... that is, I worry, that not only active subscriptions might not go significantly up but, there could even be a loss of active subscriptions due to the impact what the New Legacy Server might have on current, existing Production Servers, Siege/Mugen, and to their players....

So, is my opinion, it remains to be seen what the impact of the New Legacy Shard will be on Ultima Online..... time will tell..... I sure hope for the best for Ultima Online, though.

 No one else notices or finds odd the complete lack of mention or updates on NL...

The easiest way to know that UO is shutting down is to watch and see when the gold sellers start cleaning out their "inventory". Because I'm willing to bet they WILL be given an advance "heads up". Allowing them to "cash out" before the general UO players knows. Watch and see!

But if the New Legacy Shard will get most of its players from the current Production Shards and from Siege/Mugen, players who already have a subscription, this might cause gameplay problems to current UO players remaining to play the Production Shards and Siege/Mugen because not having interest in the New Legacy Shard the way that it was Designed to play out, leaving them to play on Production Shards and on Siege/Mugen which could get further depleted and more deserted of players because spending most of their time, now, on the New Legacy Shard rather then on their home Shards.....

Agreed. New Legacy could very well have a negative impact on the game if there is no significant influx of new revenue and if the resources spent on its development come at the expense of players who are not interested in it. If the server fails, the team's best hopes is that they simply shut the server down "no harm, no foul", but I doubt they could so in that fashion.

I may be overblowing things, but New Legacy is a fairly important development in Broadsword's oversight of the game. If you were to take the official servers side by side with the most popular private server and just focus on the optics -- the website, the experience of initially downloading the client, setting up your account, visibility on social media and streaming platforms, the updates and roadmap, the supported client applications  -- not even getting into the interesting debates that can be had on the game's systems (Felucca vs Trammel, Age of Shadows vs Renaissance vs Second Age) -- it would be hard to argue that the future of UO is in Broadsword's hands. New Legacy helps make the case, though.

We should also recognize that niche game doesn't need a super large population. Hell, subscription-based games don't even need an active population. Broadsword can have it both ways: New Legacy can be an engine to attract new players, but it can be a platform for an alternative business model that doesn't disturb the existing servers. What I hope is that Broadsword doesn't fall victim to the unfortunate trends we see among MMOs -- compartmentalized experiences, exploitative microtransactions, to name a few. UO is still the best MMO, and it's always been a vanguard of interesting ideas.

It's 25 years the gaming world is interested and paying attention why haven't we seen one interview with mesanne?? 

McDougle said:

 No one else notices or finds odd the complete lack of mention or updates on NL...

I don't blame the team for not giving an update on New Legacy. There is no benefit to offering "we have nothing to show right now". If anything, they would likely be heckled and bashed.

I think the gaming industry is unique among the tech world in that we expect development teams to interface directly with customers, but these interactions require training in community relations. I've literally seen people on this forum who have no visibility into the codebase or architecture follow up their demands with "it's just an if-check" or "you just write a SQL query". As a software developer myself, I would have little patience for this.

What I do fault the team for is not getting ahead of things and hiring someone to manage community expectations, develop roadmaps, and share media. When you post a screenshot of UO on any gaming subreddit, it immediately generates a ton of chatter. Right now there certainly is a gap in communication.

loop said:

McDougle said:

 No one else notices or finds odd the complete lack of mention or updates on NL...

I don't blame the team for not giving an update on New Legacy. There is no benefit to offering "we have nothing to show right now". If anything, they would likely be heckled and bashed.

I think the gaming industry is unique among the tech world in that we expect development teams to interface directly with customers, but these interactions require training in community relations. I've literally seen people on this forum who have no visibility into the codebase or architecture follow up their demands with "it's just an if-check" or "you just write a SQL query". As a software developer myself, I would have little patience for this.

What I do fault the team for is not getting ahead of things and hiring someone to manage community expectations, develop roadmaps, and share media. When you post a screenshot of UO on any gaming subreddit, it immediately generates a ton of chatter. Right now there certainly is a gap in communication.

 ❤️ 

loop said:

 we shouldn't determine the success of updates based solely on their impact to subscription numbers.

Umm.....UO is a business. It's here to make money for EA. The fact that we enjoy it is just sort of a means to an end. And besides, in this kind of context what's "better" is pretty subjective. The PKs and their friends loved the old game. But there weren't enough of them to make it successful that way.

JohnKnighthawke said:

loop said:

 we shouldn't determine the success of updates based solely on their impact to subscription numbers.

Umm.....UO is a business. It's here to make money for EA. The fact that we enjoy it is just sort of a means to an end. And besides, in this kind of context what's "better" is pretty subjective. The PKs and their friends loved the old game. But there weren't enough of them to make it successful that way.

Thanks -- I understand this perspective but disagree with it, even while I think Trammel was beneficial to the game from a user and business perspective. Changes to subscription-based services can increase clientele in the short term but have detrimental impacts in the long term, and viewing software development in a Machiavellian, purely output-driven way means you might as well just be mimicking the most popular model of the day. The predatory systems I see in more popular MMOs are models that should not be emulated, and I would not want to see them in UO.

I really don't think you're playing a 25-year-old MMO because it's a means to an end. I think you play it because it has a magic unlike any other game. I concur that UO is a business, but the revenue it generates for EA amounts to pennies in the grand scheme of things.

JohnKnighthawke said:

loop said:

 we shouldn't determine the success of updates based solely on their impact to subscription numbers.

Umm.....UO is a business. It's here to make money for EA. The fact that we enjoy it is just sort of a means to an end. And besides, in this kind of context what's "better" is pretty subjective. The PKs and their friends loved the old game. But there weren't enough of them to make it successful that way.

The PKs and their friends loved the old game. But there weren't enough of them to make it successful that way.

Not only that....

According to a Developer who, to my understanding, was there back then (see my post here https://forum.uo.com/discussion/comment/81606/#Comment_81606 ), it looks like that many PvPers who enjoyed targeting PvE players who were weaker, did not like so much to then end up having to face tougher nuts to crack.... that is, experienced PvPers.... and so also stopped playing...

https://community.crowfall.com/topic/102-gordon-walton-are-you-the-one-who-brought-us-trammel/?tab=comments#comment-1610

The bad:  Without the "sheep to shear" the hard core PvP'ers were disenfranchised.  They didn't like preying on each other (hard targets versus soft targets), and they became a smaller minority in the overall game.  The real bad though was that the intensity and "realness" of the game for all players was diminished.  This was the major unintended consequence.

My honest opinion is that Tram helped and hurt the population at the same time. It shielded the population from unwanted pks but also paved the way for all the afk farming we see today. With the lack of support there almost isn't a downside to hitting that macro and doing something else. 

The biggest thing in my mind that hurt UO was going from that simple game to what it is today with all the needed items, funky mechanics you almost need a doctorate degree to decypher and total lack of bug fixes. That's why all these pre-insert era freebies are mostly successful. Simple is better. 

“I hope NL provides a boost to the subscribers.
But I am interested to know why posters here are so interested in NL.
Surely they won’t allow current active subscribers to join it and ruin the experience of new players. It will hopefully be for brand new customers only”

Yoshi said:

"  ...
Surely they won’t allow current active subscribers to join it and ruin the experience of new players. It will hopefully be for brand new customers only”

How would you manage this? I am certain many current subscribers are looking forward to New Legacy.

Urge said:

My honest opinion is that Tram helped and hurt the population at the same time. It shielded the population from unwanted pks but also paved the way for all the afk farming we see today. With the lack of support there almost isn't a downside to hitting that macro and doing something else. 

The biggest thing in my mind that hurt UO was going from that simple game to what it is today with all the needed items, funky mechanics you almost need a doctorate degree to decypher and total lack of bug fixes. That's why all these pre-insert era freebies are mostly successful. Simple is better. 

Well, I found this from another famous Ultima Online Developer, Raph Koster....

https://www.raphkoster.com/games/interviews-and-panels/live-forum-qa-with-raph-koster-1016/

I do believe in a crime/punishment system. But everything we tried did fall prey to new accounts and killers who just didn’t care. If they have no emotional attachment to losing (e.g., don’t give a shit) then there isn’t any in-game punishment you can offer up. I don’t know if you were around for it, but I tried for a LONG time to get that balance right in SWG. Bounty systems became high score tables. Rewards were claimed by dummy accounts. Most everything we tried became a tool for the bad guys. And the good guys literally had no way to win, because the bad guys could just come back the next day, over and over, and just wear your spirit down.

To my opinion, that is where the problem lays in MMOs that want to "mix" PvP and PvE players in the same one Environment.... their crime/punishment system is not effective.... either players use dummy/disposable accounts, or the punishments associated for being a criminal are too lenient and not sufficient to contain the problem basically, what causes the issue is that these players "e.g., don't give a shit .....".

In order to be able to Design a functional and working (sustainable) common gaming Environment that was to mix PvE players with PvP players, the Design and mechanics associated would need to indeed, make players behaving as criminals in the game, "have to give a shit" for the punishments associated and not be able to just shrug their shoulders caring nothing about those punishments associated to in-game criminal behaviour....

Rorschach said:

Yoshi said:

"  ...
Surely they won’t allow current active subscribers to join it and ruin the experience of new players. It will hopefully be for brand new customers only”

How would you manage this? I am certain many current subscribers are looking forward to New Legacy.

@Rorschach

Do we realize that, if many current subscribers will join the New Legacy Shard, inevitably, if they will spend their leisure time on the NL Shard, they won't spend any longer much of their playing time on their home Shard....

This will inevitably mean, for those current subscribers NOT interested in the New Legacy Shard and thus continuing to spend their playing time on their Home Shard, that they will have their gameplay further impoverished by lesser players being around on their Home Shards (because they went to the New Legacy Shard...) and, thus, also a poorer and more stagnating economy with less items being bought and less being sold....

Can the New Legacy Shard be limited to only brand new accounts and, thus, customers ?

I do not know.... as well as I do not either know whether it would be more or less beneficial to Ultima Online as a whole to do that....

Notheless, I do worry if a significant number of the current subscribers will spent most if not all of their UO playing time on the New Legacy Shard rather then on their current, Home Shard.... because I worry much that this might further impoverish the playing experience for all of those UO players who will actually remain  on the current UO Shards and not migrate to the New Legacy Shard....

Not an easy solution to the problem, me thinks.....

Rorschach said:

Yoshi said:

"  ...
Surely they won’t allow current active subscribers to join it and ruin the experience of new players. It will hopefully be for brand new customers only”

How would you manage this? I am certain many current subscribers are looking forward to New Legacy.

Stop worrying.  What is that going to do?  People will use both their home shard and NL. How much of each is entirely on them. What are you suggesting? Discontinue NL? Also the suggestion of having it for only new players is absurd. 

Yoshi said:

"one of the reasons people left the game is because of the unpleasant people, so what we are left with is generally unpleasant people.

Why you would want to ruin new player's experiences by subjecting them to the unpleasant current player base?

they will log off immediately

let the new players have a fresh new nice experience"

There has been zero advertising how do you feel any new players would even know about it..

"i imagine when they have a release date, they might advertise"

Yoshi, think, on my shard anyway, there are many more pleasant and helpful players than jerks. Many already grandparents and my age although not all.  But what you said about an unpleasant player base forming on NL is absolutely true.  From what I understand one of NL’s goals is to get players into groups, like guilds, and to bring back the days of the guild wars.  Think from what I have read here those groups that prey on weaker and experienced players have been around since year one for UO.  Think since they are already formed and know how to build templates quickly and how to play together unless UO can find some way to put the brakes on there is a real possibility that they will rule the shard. 

Rorschach said:

Yoshi said:

"  ...
Surely they won’t allow current active subscribers to join it and ruin the experience of new players. It will hopefully be for brand new customers only”

How would you manage this? I am certain many current subscribers are looking forward to New Legacy.

I was but yearly shard wipe is a major turn off for me. 

Arnold7 said:

Yoshi, think, on my shard anyway, there are many more pleasant and helpful players than jerks. Many already grandparents and my age although not all.  But what you said about an unpleasant player base forming on NL is absolutely true.  From what I understand one of NL’s goals is to get players into groups, like guilds, and to bring back the days of the guild wars.  Think from what I have read here those groups that prey on weaker and experienced players have been around since year one for UO.  Think since they are already formed and know how to build templates quickly and how to play together unless UO can find some way to put the brakes on there is a real possibility that they will rule the shard. 

There is suppose to be a PvP switch in NL so everything you said can not happen unless you want it to.  Also I have read and listened to everything put out by UO about NL so where are you getting this group thing from.

Have not read everything about NL but last I looked, it looked like this would be a guild oriented shard and that groups would be encouraged to fight one another.  PvP would be voluntary but if you wanted to advance you would have to engage in it unless you were going to be a crafts person.  That’s the message I got.  Could be wrong.  Would hope that would be the case.  Don’t really plan on playing there.  Just don’t have the time commitment so I have not followed it that closely.

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

and so begins phase two, getting said character geared and ready for a normal shard. 

Victim_Of_Siege said:

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

and so begins phase two, getting said character geared and ready for a normal shard. 

If they charge to transfer off it'd be a nice cash source 

I think some people missed the point of the quote on the inability to punish "criminal /bad behaviour" 

Unless they can positively identify you in the real world there is no way to stop you from just starting another account. All your characters get tossed in jail just start a new account and transfer all your stuff. Existing players are banned from NL same solution.

PS. If any game  anything on the web asks for more personal information than needed to make sure the credit card is good think really really hard about walking away.

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

Chars not Xfered will keep their skills.  Chars that are Xfered to prodo shard are that much closer to becoming a legendary char and not everybody plays to have the UBBER char some of us play UO for fun.  And when did you become such a DEBBIE DOWNER, you are starting to sound worse than popps.

Yoshi said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new

"This forum is made up of only current subscribers,

asking the opinions on this forum of whether or not current subscribers should be able to access NL is the same as asking all the criminals in the jail if they think everyone in the jail should be freed

you're only ever going to get 1 perspective"

Everyone, new or current, should be able to play the game.

But I feel the design and effort should be focused on acquiring and keeping new subscribers. 

Yoshi said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new

"This forum is made up of only current subscribers,

asking the opinions on this forum of whether or not current subscribers should be able to access NL is the same as asking all the criminals in the jail if they think everyone in the jail should be freed

you're only ever going to get 1 perspective"

LMAO You are a current subscribe and you have a different perspective, nice that you just proved yourself wrong.  PRICELESS

Lord_Frodo said:

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

Chars not Xfered will keep their skills.  Chars that are Xfered to prodo shard are that much closer to becoming a legendary char and not everybody plays to have the UBBER char some of us play UO for fun.  And when did you become such a DEBBIE DOWNER, you are starting to sound worse than popps.

Why would characters survive the wipe and more importantly link me to the developers stating so

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

Chars not Xfered will keep their skills.  Chars that are Xfered to prodo shard are that much closer to becoming a legendary char and not everybody plays to have the UBBER char some of us play UO for fun.  And when did you become such a DEBBIE DOWNER, you are starting to sound worse than popps.

Why would characters survive the wipe and more importantly link me to the developers stating so

It was in their videos if you bothered to watch them.

Lord_Frodo said:

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

McDougle said:

Lord_Frodo said:

My 2 cents on NL.
Everybody can play NL, old and new and yes even EJ
Transferring items/char to prodo shard should be for paid accounts only.
All items that can be transferred from NL should be account bound only
Can't wait to play a pre AoS shard where GM Skills meant something.

So will you leave the character there to be wiped  cuz if you transfer to a production shard you suddenly have just another under geared under powered character...if you're playing NL   you won't have time for the next TOT so you miss out on leet gear that is more and more necessary..

Chars not Xfered will keep their skills.  Chars that are Xfered to prodo shard are that much closer to becoming a legendary char and not everybody plays to have the UBBER char some of us play UO for fun.  And when did you become such a DEBBIE DOWNER, you are starting to sound worse than popps.

Why would characters survive the wipe and more importantly link me to the developers stating so

It was in their videos if you bothered to watch them.

The ones from 2 years ago yeah i remember stuff from that...