Things we don't like about EA/OSI - we still want?

Lokai

Lokai

Moderator
So, this is more of a General discussion than a laundry list of what is different, what needs to be fixed, etc.

I was testing something on EA's server, and I thought "wow, this is dumb. I am glad ServUO doesn't do this!"

So, the questions is, do you think a difference like this should be discussed? If it's known verifiable behavior on EA's servers, should it just be adopted regardless of how stupid it is? Are there degrees of stupidity that we will find acceptable.

Here are some examples of things I have found on EA:

If you start a Newbie quest, you are NOT allowed to buy Skill from ANY vendor unless you complete or resign from the quest first. I found this hilarious and stupid. In order to train Inscription, I started the quest, then tried to buy some skill. NOPE, have to resign first, then start. OK. Next I figured I better get some Magery so I can work on those scrolls. So, I go to buy some Magery from the Mage Quest guy. NOPE. have to resign the Inscription quest, then go to the Magery guy and buy that skill, THEN I can go back and start the Inscription quest for the third time. ("Thank God we don't do that on ServUO," I thought to myself.)

All of the Newbie quest starters allow you to buy 400 Skill points of the quest skill, EXCEPT Inscription, which only lets you buy 333. (Huh?)

These are obviously just 2 really small examples. It's not so much a matter of wanting things to be different because I think they missed something - like it's a bug in their software, although that may be the case, but that I am wondering if we should be striving to emulate something so exactly that we incorporate their problems along with their strengths. Do we want to be an "OSI-Clone" with all their faults? Or do we want to be "better than the original?"

Thoughts?
 
I hate to say this... but it is better to have the base of what OSI is and then build off it with our branching servers than not.
Now don't get me wrong, I agree about the way you did the newbie skills. Some stuff specially new player stuff should not be harder than it should be. That being said, who decides if my idea of items going directly into your bank when you are overloaded at a vendor or selling and the gold falls to your feet is a good "fix" or not.

I also think it is nice to at least go, "WELL IT IS LIKE THIS ON UO" haha

I am all for modifications that make the game less dumb, I just dunno how we gauge what is dumb and what isn't. Like is 16 tiles of aggro OK when a greater dragon can one shot you from off screen due to it?
 
I 100% think that if we can do something BETTER than EA and it makes more sense...why not? It gives us an edge. We should not simply code poorly designed systems just because they did. For all we know they had to design their code a certain way due to the limitations of its age. We do not have those constraints and so should try to be as optimized and efficient as possible.
 
Tasanar said:
I 100% think that if we can do something BETTER than EA and it makes more sense...why not? It gives us an edge. We should not simply code poorly designed systems just because they did. For all we know they had to design their code a certain way due to the limitations of its age. We do not have those constraints and so should try to be as optimized and efficient as possible.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree. I think though, that there should be some way to see what we changed maybe?
 
I absolutely err on the side of what I think is the "better" experience on the shard I am constructing. I keep current with ServUO updates but also have disabled or edited some scripts to stick with the game play I think will be the most rewarding. I like having the choice of being identical to the "real" game or switching to a custom approach. It's more flexible than being either a faithful clone or a totally custom shard.

For example, I have all the new animal training scripts in place but they aren't being used since I like the FS-ATS system better. I removed the new second bank gump because we won't be using wall safes and there's no such thing as cross-shard transfers outside EA/Broadsword's realm. Simple is better!

I started playing with emulators back when LoneWolf / UOX was new. The goal has always been the same: the best game play for the players!
 
Recreating flaws and complicating things for the sake of exactitude seems a bit pushed.
Listing all those little differences in a .txt file and dumping it on the latest repo would make more sense if it's really an issue.
Then people could recreate those issues without investigating too much of their time and resource finding those differences.
 
I think the major appeal to many is to be able to download the latest version of the game without the sub fee honestly. And then the changes they want they can make. There is no way to get changes everyone will agree on with certain things. That is the only worry. What constitutes QoL and what constitutes too much?
[doublepost=1531554058][/doublepost]
Falkor said:
I absolutely err on the side of what I think is the "better" experience on the shard I am constructing. I keep current with ServUO updates but also have disabled or edited some scripts to stick with the game play I think will be the most rewarding. I like having the choice of being identical to the "real" game or switching to a custom approach. It's more flexible than being either a faithful clone or a totally custom shard.

For example, I have all the new animal training scripts in place but they aren't being used since I like the FS-ATS system better. I removed the new second bank gump because we won't be using wall safes and there's no such thing as cross-shard transfers outside EA/Broadsword's realm. Simple is better!

I started playing with emulators back when LoneWolf / UOX was new. The goal has always been the same: the best game play for the players!
Click to expand...

So you prefer a neutral starting ground that you can then edit.
 
Not just neutral but as accurate to EA/Broadsword as reasonably possible. Then each shard can stay as close to that as they desire, whether it's a clone of a previous era or exactly as game play is on the paid servers or something barely recognizable as UO at first glance. It's easier to decide "we won't use this feature" than to say "I wish this feature was able to be implemented."

For example, I didn't care if the item properties weren't displayed in the same order they are on EA, but then again, I did make the changes on my end when they were corrected here. Nothing wrong with being accurate where you can be!
 
I think (for what it’s worth) that it would be good for ServUO to have everything RealUO has but then making it simple to configure things.
Easy ways to turn systems on and off and such.. there’s already some of that setup and I think the more flexibility a server owner has in simply changing “true” to “false” is a lot better then having to remove loads of code and what not.. also I think it’s cool with the configure menu because it can allow server owners to disable content until they feel the bugs have been cleaned pretty well from the system if they want to keep their server up to date yet not have all the content from ServUO by default..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back