In another recent thread, people mentioned several times that Warhammer is getting more attention and news simply because UO is over 10 years old. A valid argument, but it got me to thinking. These game companies all hold a common belief that a game has a life cycle. That no matter how good it is or how popular, it will eventually decline into extinction. EA/M is in a unique position to prove them all wrong. Many of us have been around for years -some since the beginning- and it is easy for us to say there is nothing wrong with the game other than their failure to support it. But it simply is not the truth. I love the 2D client. Of all of the online games I've played, including those I helped create, none have ever had that sense of... . For lack of a better word - Home. Something about the client just 'Feels' right. You can see just as far as you should, the angle is just right to interract with the world, and everything fits in the world as it is shown. But 2D/ThirdDawn/KR are never going to allow the game to be great again. Even if they peak up to 250k players again, it won't be for long, while other games are boasting 10million. We can say UO will be around for ever, and to some degree that is probably true. But when the game reaches the point it is 2 shards running with minimal support and no new content is ever added, is it really still running? Or is it a memorial to what the game once was? Many don't like the idea of a real 3D client, but without one the game will continue to decline. New games in 2D draw people out of curiosity, and then fail. Old games in 2D hold a few dedicated players (as UO does) but they too eventually fall to more of a memorial status than actual Game status. Game development is expensive. To make a game that can compete on the current market is an investment of millions, in some cases 10s of millions. But a large portion of that goes to design. The creation of the world and its lore, the creatures and their placement and nature, and so forth. But all of that work has already been done for UO. A complete rebuild of UO could put it both in direct competition with games like WoW AND maintain the core systems that have held so many of us since the '90s. The crafting systems, the skill-based game play, housing and pets, etc. With a little care, it could be the best of both. I fully expect to see reponses that contain (possibly direct quotes) "If I wanted to play WoW, I would play WoW, not UO." But if there were a game out there right now that had WoW's graphics and UO's unique game systems, it would no doubt be one of the top 3 games on the market today. And the creation of exactly that would cost them only a small fraction of what they are investing in Warhammer. There is no question that Warhammer will be popular, but no guarantee that its popularity will last, while UO has already proven it will.