The demand for any game is there. It just needs to be done right.
You could have a 3d world with a fixed camera to give it a top-down look. You don't need to rely on 2d unless you find a practical purpose for it over 3d.
Determining what makes the game worth creating is more important than whether or not someone would want to play it. The game is to be created, not sold. If all you want is money there are probably much better avenues to earning money.
A descendent of UO with RTS elements added and a world that players actually discover is something I have had in concept mode for a while. The desire for a game like it is there, but it is all in the implementation. One small error in design could break the whole thing.
You misunderstand what I mean by 2d. I am talking about a 3d world in 2d perspective. Meaning it would actually be built using 3d models and textures with a locked overhead view like you said. Rather than being a 2d game built using flat images.
A lot of the design concepts from UO are lost with today's games I think. To this day there are unique aspects that have yet to be used again.
I have no desire to create a new UO I want to kind of make that as clear as possible. If I get to the point of making something it will be wildly different from UO but should still encompass the same general feeling players got from UO if that makes sense.
Anyhow I can't get off of the idea of making this type of game. It has little to do with making money and everything to do with creating a game that people actually enjoy. As if we have never heard that said before eh. In this case I am a gamer who is simply disappointed with games in the current market and I know there are others who have the same sentiment but I am also able to do a great deal of the work towards making a game and because of that I have a pretty strong desire to see this game happen at some point. Even if that means throwing a lot of money at it to make this happen.
There are many ways to secure funding these days. I give only minor thought to that at the moment. Right now I would like to continue research and start laying out some kind of roadmap for the project. Simply jumping in head first without any direction would be foolish. If I can focus on single tasks things will progress and stay on track. So again right now just getting as much information from as many sources as I can before moving forward.
Corpsecrank, that is the ideal. Get players playing together, not just in the same world. I was working on a concept for a full blown open world game that's influence was mostly UO, but that influence was primarily the camera view as well as the aspect that if you sail to the north, eventually you arrive in the south. Not just maps. A world.
I came to the conclusion that while this is the game that I desire the most it is not the one I should aim to bring to fruition first. I have since gone back to the concept stages and I am going to tackle something a bit easier, in comparison, that uses a world divided like Dark Age of Camelot. PvE areas for each side of the conflict with PvP areas for each and a central PvP area that connects them all. It is divided, but I feel it will help the process along and I will be able to learn many things along the way. If by some miracle things work out, it would only be that much bigger a step toward creating an ideal game.
Summary: I am not aiming for Pong. I am aiming for less challenging concept that would bring educational benefits and experience towards making the game that I feel is best eventually, not immediately.