Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In

Categories

Boardsword should have a client building contest.

Bark_At_The_MoonBark_At_The_Moon Posts: 28
in General Discussions
Boardsword should have a client building contest. 

UO clearly has many talented people that can (and have) created clients for UO. I know of at lest three clients that people currently use.

Client Developers could submit working clients to Boardsword. The ones that pass internal quality testing could be released to the public for testing/voting. 

Turn it into a prize contest with winners getting job offers or cash prizes.

Comments

  • mismis Posts: 177
    edited July 27
    Boardsword should have a client building contest. 

    UO clearly has many talented people that can (and have) created clients for UO. I know of at lest three clients that people currently use.

    Client Developers could submit working clients to Boardsword. The ones that pass internal quality testing could be released to the public for testing/voting. 

    Turn it into a prize contest with winners getting job offers or cash prizes.


    An alternative to the awards you mentioned, in case of restrictions or internal clauses with the parent company, could be for example a succulent amount of Sovereigns coins, game subscription, in-game title as Creative Designer and renowned objects as Outstanding Designer of the season.

    Thank you for your contribution

  • Jha_durJha_dur Posts: 29
    Not sure if this this is what they need to do, but from my lurking in different discussion channels they need to figure something out. General tone across the board is if they are going to force the change on players with no other options other than UOA, players are jumping shit. This is not just in the one application everyone despises but the other smaller applications. People enjoy the game but despise the clients.

    Ironically the main client that everyone hates is licensed under an MIT license. Go get the  files and update it to something that could be "legal" and used. It solves the problems complain about such as FPS, menus, container sizes, etc. Has a lot of functionality for very little investment. Rip the scripting engine out as we know that is why everyone truly complains about it. Never saw anyone complaining about some of the other programs 10 years ago.

    Ultima Online New Legacy is correct though. The management team for Ultima Online is taking it somewhere new for sure. At this point they are getting ready to drive off a cliff because unless New Legacy brings in thousands of subs they are going to take a revenue hit. I cannot see it doing that though because the people who love to play Ultima Online are typically quest grinders. They like the open world and freedom that comes from UO that you cannot find in other games. They need to stop trying to be like other games and be unique.
  • PawainPawain Posts: 10,019
    They do not want an automated UO!  
    Focus on what you can do, not what you can't.
  • Lord_NythraxLord_Nythrax Posts: 408
    They need to do something, the retail clients are not viable products at this point.
  • FeigrFeigr Posts: 512
    I think a new client is necessary and this isn't a bad idea to put on the table either.
  • Bark_At_The_MoonBark_At_The_Moon Posts: 28
    I do NOT want an automated UO either.

    I would be happy with a new client or the classic client with the following items:

    Text based searchable containers
    Static grid containers
    Magnetic Spell and skill icons that work with one click
    Better FPS performance
    Better way to create macros and see which keys have macros assigned to them.

    That's all I want in a client. I'm not even asking for UOA like capabilities. 

  • Jha_durJha_dur Posts: 29
    Pawain said:
    They do not want an automated UO!  

    I do not think a lot of people do. I think people want a way to not get carpel tunnel and have the game they are playing not look like a stop motion movie. There have been some good improvements to the classic client (my only choice of client) but it is still not what I would expect for the subscription I pay monthly to play. I have used the 3rd party clients before on emulated servers. There are a lot of cool features in them that make the game more playable.

    - Higher FPS
    - Text based searchable containers
    - Resizable grid containers

    Those would be my big ones. Other things I have used include buy, sell, and organizer agents. The ability to auto loot corpses based on rule sets that have been defined would be nice as well.

    Feigr said:
    I think a new client is necessary and this isn't a bad idea to put on the table either.
    While I am not a software developer, I think creating separate application like the existing 3rd party applications would likely be the least time intensive option and probably a more realistic option. Clearly it can be playable with a 3rd party option and people enjoy playing it. So why not just make a third party option that fixes the things people dislike about the existing client.

    I know some people like the EC and as someone who has never really used it outside of some basic testing I cannot speak to it's short comings.

  • Lord_FrodoLord_Frodo Posts: 2,421
    Building something is one thing but providing the documentation for it is another thing all together.
Sign In or Register to comment.