Updating UO to a next gen MMO

[Dougan Ironfist]

If an item appears in all phases, then yes it should be created as a simple static not a phased static. I will make sure to notate that in a more polished release. The example I provided doesn't have any items carried thru all phases so that didn't even occur to me. I have found a better way to handle Phased changes for just the PlayerMobile that has changed phases. The rough version finds all mobiles in range and forces them to update even if they have nothing to do with the process. That was indeed a waste of resources. The new method is much more clean and efficient.

 

[Kennyd]

Leveling systems are retarded imo... the beauty of UO lies in its open skill/open gameplay system.

 

[Jeff]

Leveling systems are retarded imo... the beauty of UO lies in its open skill/open gameplay system.

You opinion... I think they both have their place... obviously an item driven game (like wow) would be dumb as a skill based game.

 

[courtjester12804]

While phasing was an interesting addition to WoW, I don't feel it fits very well in the scope of UO. This is mainly because there isn't anything that is currently done in UO that would require any changes to an area. Now if we did something like create varying difficulties like they did in Diablo, phasing could be used to represent each of the areas based on the difficulty. Creating a world with instanced dungeons could be accomplished with the use of VMWare, VSphere, or something similar. Virtual servers can be created with VMWare, which could each represent an instance version of the dungeons. Each virtual server could be relatively small, just enough to house the map and mobiles. Virtualization is a fairly new type of technology that helps to minimize hardware costs for industries that need alot of space while minimizing the risks of hardware failure.

While WoW has some great technology implemented and it is a leader in the MMO world, it is not perfect by any means. I have played that game for 7 years, and in that time I've done everything outside of Cataclysm raiding. I did not come back to UO to make it more like WoW, I came back here to get away from it. Due to WoW's popularity, there are many players, both young and old. Overall, the community is mostly composed of a younger demographic, ranging from ages 12-17. There are players of all ages that play, but the community is immature in comparison to other MMOs. While FFXI is not a widely popular game, the community that does exist are much more mature. The restriction placed by having fewer players requires more cooperation among those players. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that nobody wants to group or party with a petulant child.

The goal of this thread is not to emulate WoW, as they already have emulators for that purpose. However, adding in elements to improve the same world everyone has is the goal. I am pretty sure there is a free version of VMWare. If we could find a way to include a starting set of instanced dungeons and a tool to help each shard owner, regardless of experience, create their own instanced dungeons through a template, we could create a stream of shareable, player-made content that will expand the game.

 

[Pure Insanity]

Instanced dungeons have been done for UO before, without the need of VMWare...all you have to do is create a clone of a map and restrict the instanced areas. There are tons of ways to skin a cat...

As for this system...it may just be me. But I can think of a ton of different ways to use this system, very few are related to any of WoW's features either. The limits on this system are w/e you think they are. With a system like this, you could force all players to experience huge moments in your shard's history. While letting the "current" players continue to play on in the real world.

Although I think that there are some things that could be added to this system. Can phased mobiles see other phased mobiles? Even if they are in different phases? Perhaps a mini work around by letting the phases some-what overlap at times. Or even a collision system for phased objects, to restrict the same phased item going in the same spot on two different phases. Or notifying staff that multiple phases are in the same spot so we can freeze it.

I'm going to continue to play with this system and see what I can come up with, perhaps share my stuff in the future. Atm I'm trying to get it to play nicely with cloned maps. So I can have phased maps, items, and mobiles. =D

 

[Jeff]

Lol at VMWare... There is no need for that complexity...not to mention... data persistence over multiple servers is just retarded for RunUO... if RunUO can support the volume UOGamers contains... no one needs to run multiple servers...

 

[LordHogFred]

The biggest restriction I see for implementing some nice advanced features like phasing and instances is the actual UO client. It's so dated now and we are having to work within the restrictions of the client. That is not to say that things like phasing and instances are impossible, far from it, it would just be a lot easier if the client was designed to support them.
As for instances, surely it's possible for the server to by designed so that it handles a seperate instance of the map and then deletes that instances once players have left it. This keeps all the actual player data on the same server and just has the server creating a second, third, etc insatnce of the actual map with it's own mobs, items, etc that are just discarded after use.

 

[dagrimreefah]

I would like to speak out AGAINST instances. What fun is grinding in your own personal little instance without the risk of a red coming in and murdering you?

 

[Pure Insanity]

I would like to speak out AGAINST instances. What fun is grinding in your own personal little instance without the risk of a red coming in and murdering you?

That all depends on how the instance is handled. The phasing system recently released still has players on the same map/area. Just each player would see phased items differently, or not even see them at all. I think phased maps would go great with the system, but as you mentioned...it can take some fun out of the game. Which is why it should be limited and restricted, like for specific story lines, quests, or even dungeons. Not an entire world. Wouldn't exactly be a fun MMO if everyone was connecting and playing on their own phase by their selves...

 

[Tresdni]

I think that the only thing that really anyone has agreed upon thus far, is that everyone has their own opinion. Which in turn, I think is exactly why RunUO exists and there are hundreds of servers to play on, each (well some) with their own niche.

There's no real point in arguing which points of the game are close to another game, and which ones UO needs. If you feel that RunUO really needs said addition, by all means - write the addition and add it to your server. If people really want it that way, they will play on your shard.

As everyone else, just putting my two cents in. Two pennies and a ball of lint kid.

 

[Jeff]

I think that the only thing that really anyone has agreed upon thus far, is that everyone has their own opinion. Which in turn, I think is exactly why RunUO exists and there are hundreds of servers to play on, each (well some) with their own niche.

There's no real point in arguing which points of the game are close to another game, and which ones UO needs. If you feel that RunUO really needs said addition, by all means - write the addition and add it to your server. If people really want it that way, they will play on your shard.

As everyone else, just putting my two cents in. Two pennies and a ball of lint kid.

Couldn't have said it better myself... This thread was going to get out of hand if someone hadn't come along and said this... so thank you.

 

[dagrimreefah]

As everyone else, just putting my two cents in. Two pennies and a ball of lint kid.

Don't be so cheap!

 

[ETsCat]

This is definately not impossible, however in order to benefit from this sort of modification fully would require making client modifications.
It's all well and good having multiple servers with different worlds but the client needs to have access to these worlds. If you are just talking about having multiple mirrors of Tram, Fel, Malas, etc then this is fine. If you are thinking of having different servers using different world files then this becomes a problem because the client can only support 6 (I think) map files. A single server is capable of providing access to all of these 6 worlds already so, with the exception of world decor, every server would be the same.
A much more interesting approach (in my opinion) to this however would be to use multiple servers to support instances. Whenever a party enters a dungeon a "mini server" would be started up and place those players in the dungeon. This way you could have heavily scripted dungeons without the worry of having to restrict access to other players or needing to reset the dungeon. Of course this has it's own problems with each "mini server" using extra resources, etc.
Don't take this the wrong way, I think your idea is excellent. Once we have access to an open source UO client then all of these things will be possible. The limited factor that we all have to work to is the restrcitions of the client itself, when a stable open source UO client is available then the potential of what can be done with RunUO will be endless.

I have been working on this for 2 years, Problem is Your speed of Download for the different shards. If you have to reload ALL the Maps for each shard you may have 1-2 hours D/L time.
With 6 computers in the same house I had it set up with 6 sectioms each with all 6 maps. Worked. BUT It takes time and a lot of work making the PHP files that change your charactores to each shard sectin.
Would Send my attempt to anyone IF I was not back to first base. Lost 8 computers and ALL my files to a fire.
This has sent me back to the drawing board.

 

[Kennyd]

Creating a world with instanced dungeons could be accomplished with the use of VMWare, VSphere, or something similar. Virtual servers can be created with VMWare, which could each represent an instance version of the dungeons. Each virtual server could be relatively small, just enough to house the map and mobiles. Virtualization is a fairly new type of technology that helps to minimize hardware costs for industries that need alot of space while minimizing the risks of hardware failure.

That's crazy dude you'd need one hell of a server for that.

 

[Vorspire]

Instanced server have long been an engine I've wanted to write and it can be done easily by simply registering new Map clones... You don't want a new clone fr every dungeon that is available, of course that would be silly.

The main concept, starting with an empty systm setup would be:

0 Cloned Maps
0 Active Instances
0 Player Parties

Player Party enters Shame...
1 Cloned Map
1 Active Instance
1 Player Party

Another Player Party enters Deceit...
1 Cloned Map
2 Active Instances
2 Player Parties

A third Player Party enters Shame...
2 Cloned Maps
3 Active Instances
3 Player Parties

As you can see, since Clone 1 already has an active party in Shame, it requires a new Map Clone in order to allocate the Player Party.
The Party that entered Deceit would be on the same Map Clone as the first Player Party to enter Shame (Clone 1)

In order for Dungeons to be built, a simple Templating Clone of a Map can be used for design purposes, whenever an instance is created, it builds it's structure, items, quests and mobs from the template.

And that is the basic concept of an instanced dungeon engine.