The shadows in the first two might not display properly if your monitor sucks by the way , if it seems too dark try adjusting the contrast.
P.S. Those were the best two you could find for Warhammer? Even worse than I personally thought then. Of course someone addicted to crayola colors probably would be esctatic over it.
You got alot of mouth for someone who cant count.
Whether he can count or not, he just slapped you hard on your own challenge! The WINNA by knockout...AoC!!!
You HAVE to admit, the screens look so much better. Plus, the Adult rating is going to set this game apart. No cartoony graphics, just a grim, dark, harsh world full of violence and sex.
Warcraft: Looks like a WoW clone and developed by Mythic (/shudder), the famous Trials of Atlantis expansion developers. Furthermore, they don't have anything to compensate for population disparities; everyone will flock to the winning race/species and then it's over. No thanks.
Age of Conan: Looks realistic and is not a clone of WoW, developed by Funcom (although their launch of AO didn't go smoothly, after that it went well). There are no population disparities since is Guild vs. Guild, not race/species based. Add to this realistic fighting mechanics and that the beta PvP videos looks more fun (as opposed to the WoW clone). I'll take AoC over WoW (er, excuse me, I meant Warhammer, I get so confused).
Originally posted by SBE1 Warcraft: Looks like a WoW clone Your a moron and its developed by Mythic /CHEERS, the famous Developers of DAOC. Furthermore, they don't have anything to compensate for population disparities; everyone will flock to the winning race/species and then it's over. Thats the stupidest thing Ive heard said to date, well after the wow clone reference. Age of Conan: Looks realistic (looks choppy and hack and slash) and is not a clone of WoW, developed by Funcom (although their launch of AO didn't go smoothly, AND DAOCS LAUNCH DID GO REALLY SMOOTH after that it went well). There are no population disparities since is Guild vs. Guild,your repeating yourself not race/species based. Add to this realistic fighting mechanics and that the beta PvP videos (what beta pvp videos, link plz) looks more fun (as opposed to the WoW clone). I'll take AoC over WoW (er, excuse me, I meant Warhammer, I get so confused). Your hillaryAss
AoC without a doubt....the game looks amazing.....reserved my copy today suggest you all do the same!
Actually, I would strongly suggest that noone does so, yet at least.
Funcom has yet to announce any kind of preorders, the only reservations you can make at this time is through third parties.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
one thing about AoC is making me choose it: M rating. Which in a way assures the formation of a AO similar community.
on the other hand one always has questions about funcom...
Since when did M ratings stop kids from buying games? GTA anyone? It wont But the M rating to me means it will have more edgy content.And graphics wise AOC hands down over warhammer. Unless yer into WOW type graphics then warhammer wins
Graphics wise, AOC wins hands down over WAR? ORLY?
Ok hows this, I put up my best two screenshots and you put up your best two screenshots.
lol this is hilarious how ignorant are people? AoC is the first GAME to use DX10 and people still think a low-poly game like War looks better? idk wtf is going on man
WAR, no questions asked, just appeals to me more. Though, I will probably play both, since they both have really high hype scores, and look great. I think WAR will just be more to my taste. And although AoC has "better" graphics, I actually like WAR's better, the style with which they are made reminds me of WoW, and saying that WAR will fail BECAUSE of it's graphics is BS...look at WoW.
WAR, no questions asked, just appeals to me more. Though, I will probably play both, since they both have really high hype scores, and look great. I think WAR will just be more to my taste.
Just wondering, how many mmos have u played? because i think ive played them all, each one had similar mechanics but one mechanic was copyed and carried over in most of the mmos ive played and that is the combat system or auto attack..hopefully AoC will break the need to use auto attack over and over agian and encourage people to be a little more orginial...i mean comeon, you gotta change the mmo formula every once and a while or it just gets plain boring..
AGE OF CONAN. what other game lets you build your own city? that alone makes this game awesome. just read all the features in this game on the website. you will find out quickly you want age of conan. there is too much to say to put it here. if they got rid of the monthly fee it would be the perfect mmo in my opinion.
Warcraft: Looks like a WoW clone Your a moron and its developed by Mythic /CHEERS, the famous Developers of DAOC. Newsflash! Not everyone likes what Mythic did with DAOC, Just like I don't personally like what Blizzard did with WOW, or what SOE did with SWG Furthermore, they don't have anything to compensate for population disparities; everyone will flock to the winning race/species and then it's over. Thats the stupidest thing Ive heard said to date, well after the wow clone reference. Its something that has happened in every single RvR game to date, one side of the conflict invariably is more popular than the other Warhammer is using a system that will (potentially) be badly imbalanced by said popularity.
Age of Conan: Looks realistic (looks choppy and hack and slash) That is a matter of opinion, and personally, I and others happen to like hack and slash and is not a clone of WoW, developed by Funcom (although their launch of AO didn't go smoothly, AND DAOCS LAUNCH DID GO REALLY SMOOTH he never said it didn't, he was acknowledging Funcom's one big mistake in the past, and touching upon why it won't repeat itself here after that it went well). There are no population disparities since is Guild vs. Guild,your repeating yourself Not exactly, its the same concept yes, but hes talking about AoC's side of the bargian this time not race/species based. Add to this realistic fighting mechanics and that the beta PvP videos (what beta pvp videos, link plz) except for the leaked beta vid, I'm not sure what he's talking about myself looks more fun (as opposed to the WoW clone). I'll take AoC over WoW (er, excuse me, I meant Warhammer, I get so confused). Your hillaryAss perhaps not, but he does have a point, I personally am quite tired of both the graphics and interface style used by WAR and WOW
Aforementioned leaked beta vid HERE Note: its just a couple GMs screwing around late at night, it is quite difficult to say how accurately if at all this represents the game.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
AGE OF CONAN. what other game lets you build your own city? that alone makes this game awesome. just read all the features in this game on the website. you will find out quickly you want age of conan. there is too much to say to put it here. if they got rid of the monthly fee it would be the perfect mmo in my opinion.
I hate to dissapoint you, but Shadowbane to mention just one of them, in fact AoC's siege system and the one found in SB have a number of similarities. Of course, SB has its own problems...
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
Originally posted by SWGforreva Originally posted by logangregor
Originally posted by kano71
Originally posted by xAlrythx
Originally posted by Falfeir
one thing about AoC is making me choose it: M rating. Which in a way assures the formation of a AO similar community. on the other hand one always has questions about funcom...
Since when did M ratings stop kids from buying games? GTA anyone? It wont But the M rating to me means it will have more edgy content.And graphics wise AOC hands down over warhammer. Unless yer into WOW type graphics then warhammer wins
Graphics wise, AOC wins hands down over WAR? ORLY? Ok hows this, I put up my best two screenshots and you put up your best two screenshots.
lol this is hilarious how ignorant are people? AoC is the first GAME to use DX10 and people still think a low-poly game like War looks better? idk wtf is going on man
Your calling me ignorant yet your basing "BEST GRAPHICS" simply on the fact that AoC is using DX10?
I still dont think AOC wins "HANDS DOWN" over WAR. To each his own really. Some people like the realistic look, some people like the more fantasy/cartoony look.
I'm not a graphics designer and I've stated before that no one should take my word too seriously since I'm heavily opinionated. That being said, AoCs graphics look above and beyond Wars. I'm not saying that because I'm an AoC fan, which I am, but you really have to look closely at all of those images then stand back a bit and look at each one as a whole. AoCs are just more crisp and everything blends well together. Wars characters seem too blocky, hard for me to explain, but the first thing I noticed was that from the shoulder of one of the characters to their elbow, is was a complete straight line. Small matter maybe but it stood out.
When I look at AoC images, I'm seeing the whole picture, instead of bits and pieces here and there. I don't know, maybe I'm seeing more then the images are showing since I tend to lean more towards one game then the other, but as far as those images go it's just too obvious.
I'm not a graphics designer and I've stated before that no one should take my word too seriously since I'm heavily opinionated. That being said, AoCs graphics look above and beyond Wars. I'm not saying that because I'm an AoC fan, which I am, but you really have to look closely at all of those images then stand back a bit and look at each one as a whole. AoCs are just more crisp and everything blends well together. Wars characters seem too blocky, hard for me to explain, but the first thing I noticed was that from the shoulder of one of the characters to their elbow, is was a complete straight line. Small matter maybe but it stood out.
When I look at AoC images, I'm seeing the whole picture, instead of bits and pieces here and there. I don't know, maybe I'm seeing more then the images are showing since I tend to lean more towards one game then the other, but as far as those images go it's just too obvious.
I agree with AoC's graphics looking better hands down when it comes to Scenery, Background, bloom effects, water effects. the environment in general.
I don't agree when it comes to character models. In AoC they're very unappealing (IMO) and I would have to go with the stylized, more unique look that WAR is offering with character models as opposed to the realistic plastic look that AoC has going.
The animations as well are up for debate. the animations in AoC seem very unrealistic compared to the models. The running doesn't look correct, especially in the vid where the guy is running with a two handed sword. He's holding the sword with both hands as if he's standing still, and sort of shuffling forward. it looks very awkward.
WAR's animations so far look much cleaner and more fluid than AoC. So while the graphics are very different in style, it's up to personal preference whether you choose scenery quality or character model quality.
--------------------------------------------- I live to fight, and fight to live.
Let me get something straight for anyone not following WARs development as closely as I am.
WAR is based on WARHAMMER. NO MATTER how good the graphics "CAN" ultimately be, they will still be based off of WARHAMMER painted miniatures. WARHAMMER models are cartoony in a sense.
So if you dont like cartoony, the graphics of WARHAMMER will never be good enough FOR YOU. That doesnt mean there bad though or even worse than AOC. If they got super realistic looking graphics it wouldnt be Warhammer any longer and original fans would be severely disappointed.
But go post on the Warhammer forum and ask for yourself how happy all the Warhammer fans are about the current state of graphics. From what Ive read, they couldnt be happier.
And one more thing that has been really bugging me. Why isnt funcom putting up more info about AOC?
As For WAR I have nothing to complain about. WAR is just crushing the industry with the amount of info they continually release, whether it be developer journals, gameplay videos, interviews, hands on pvp demos for Gamesites---they are doing a great job.
My game of choice is on WAR. If this was an investment option, my money would be with WAR as well.
I hesitate a lot between these two titles. I'm a bit worried about WAR, though. I read that the game will be focused on perpetual war. Everything (questing, crafting) being war oriented. Since war means PvP, I'm afraid they will bypass the PvE part of the game, implementing poor quests, reduced PvE content to push people into full time PvP right from the start. I hope I'm wrong.
wow, i hope your right, so tired of pve based mmo's whats the point realy, play a game whit thousands of players, and you want more
AI? more computer controlled mobs? i wish there was less, in every game, if you want mobs and little cute quests why not play a single player rpg? i just dont get this image of the questing mmo, real people, real fights, real action.
both these games look like something some of us been whaiting for for a while. i think the pvp whil be a bigger focus in war, but the look
of aoc is way more intersting, althow we have to remember, so far, games that look to good wer never good, funfactor before graphics.
i will try both, hopefully they wont come out the same month:)
One thing is for sure, mythic making an rvr game, if your old school daoc, i know your gona at least try it. I gotta agree. I play mmos for the hopes of PvPing. Even if you do like to quest and whatnot, what happens when you've done every quest, raided every boss, gained the most powerfull weapons and armor etc.? To me there isn't much left after that to keep me interested in a game except for PvP (not that I care to do quests or anything. I wanna PvP ASAP). Also, is it right to play AoC off like its any less of a PvP game then WAR just because it has quests etc.? I mean, its cool to like quests and all but I think its going to be just as much as a PvP oriented game.
I can't really say that I'm a huge fan of WARs look, because I'm getting tired of the whole orcs/elves/dwarves genre and the cartoony look factor, but I'll still try it, and who knows, it could be fun. RPG's since before they were ever single player titles by square enix or any other developer were tabletop games, I almost don't have to call out D&D and the slew of others that lead to the existance of this genre, but I will. In all those games, the idea of questing and the players all working together cooperatively defined the experience. Video games, and more precisely MMORPG's have steadily tried to recapture it. By design these PnP games required player's to party up and cooperate to succeed, and while many allowed PvP to exist, not one of them encouraged it. Character classes are all specialists in a particular element required to succeed in an adventure. The reason for specialist classes? Creating a party interdependencies, or a need to group. These aren't necessarily ever balanced for PvP because they are designed to encourage cooperation, and are not designed to be good at all things. This is why many MMO Devs fail at introducing PvP into a game with character classes without watering down these specialists. (WoW for example, is 2+ years into the game, and Blizzard is still constantly tweaking character classes, playing to the neverending nerf/buff balancing act of PvP in a class based system). But that is a whole different argument. By its nature, an RPG isn't a competitive PvP concept, which is why if a game is going to label itself an RPG, it shouldn't be solely focused on PvP, or the classes will get screw-jobbed and the game will suffer. Want PvP? I recommend games like Halo/CS/Doom... pick a FPS, where there are almost never any differences between one character's abilities vs another outside of who gets which weapon/armor quickest in a match. If a MMORPG is going to be truly an RPG then PvP should exist as a non-primary, un-catered to element, with priorities on the PvE/RPG elements in the game. IMO MMORPG's that are driven on PvP will likely see it as an out for not developing any real content, hoping that the player's will pay them to keep themselves entertained.
Sorry for how off-topic that was, but i felt the need to defend my position as someone who, reasonably so, likes to "...like to quest and all" in a game calling itself an RPG! If ditching content, questing, and grouping elements in the programmed content ever becomes a trend for MMORPG's, I will quit playing them altogether, and personally consider titling such games as RPG's false advertisement. I don't even know why people look for hardcore PvP in games designed around classic RP concepts promoting character classes and group dynamics. If they truly desire a hardcore PvP experience...again, go play an FPS for that, where everyone is equal until they get a pickup on a battlemap...then at least no one will whine about class balance anymore.
I am looking forward to Conan, it looks good to me, and WAR looks too much like the next WoW. The only reason I am even looking at AoC, or any MMO's coming out, is because I am dog tired of WoW and want something new. For similar reasons, I discarded any notion of playing Vanguard, when I noticed it looked a little too much like EQ with a graphic face-lift. Heard its launch bombed and I lol'ed, I hated EQ with a burning passion, and Brad can go die. But enough of my petty fantasies. My 2 cents.
Comments
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/features/hardware/vista/rollover1_over.jpg
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2007/features/hardware/vista/rollover2_over.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/khemi3.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/khemi5.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/fieldofthedead6.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/harbor.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/street.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/acheronian_ruins.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/jungle.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/tortage2.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/ConallsValley_4.jpg
http://community.ageofconan.com/conan/frontend/files/CONTENT/ruins2.jpg
The shadows in the first two might not display properly if your monitor sucks by the way , if it seems too dark try adjusting the contrast.
P.S. Those were the best two you could find for Warhammer? Even worse than I personally thought then. Of course someone addicted to crayola colors probably would be esctatic over it.
You got alot of mouth for someone who cant count.
Whether he can count or not, he just slapped you hard on your own challenge! The WINNA by knockout...AoC!!!
You HAVE to admit, the screens look so much better. Plus, the Adult rating is going to set this game apart. No cartoony graphics, just a grim, dark, harsh world full of violence and sex.
Warcraft: Looks like a WoW clone and developed by Mythic (/shudder), the famous Trials of Atlantis expansion developers. Furthermore, they don't have anything to compensate for population disparities; everyone will flock to the winning race/species and then it's over. No thanks.
Age of Conan: Looks realistic and is not a clone of WoW, developed by Funcom (although their launch of AO didn't go smoothly, after that it went well). There are no population disparities since is Guild vs. Guild, not race/species based. Add to this realistic fighting mechanics and that the beta PvP videos looks more fun (as opposed to the WoW clone). I'll take AoC over WoW (er, excuse me, I meant Warhammer, I get so confused).
Funcom has yet to announce any kind of preorders, the only reservations you can make at this time is through third parties.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
It wont But the M rating to me means it will have more edgy content.And graphics wise AOC hands down over warhammer. Unless yer into WOW type graphics then warhammer wins
Graphics wise, AOC wins hands down over WAR? ORLY?
Ok hows this, I put up my best two screenshots and you put up your best two screenshots.
Ill go first,
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/screenshots/full/pressSS0107_05.jpg
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/screenshots/full/pressSS0107_25.jpg
Tag your it!!
lol this is hilarious how ignorant are people? AoC is the first GAME to use DX10 and people still think a low-poly game like War looks better? idk wtf is going on man
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
It wont But the M rating to me means it will have more edgy content.And graphics wise AOC hands down over warhammer. Unless yer into WOW type graphics then warhammer wins
Graphics wise, AOC wins hands down over WAR? ORLY?
Ok hows this, I put up my best two screenshots and you put up your best two screenshots.
Ill go first,
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/screenshots/full/pressSS0107_05.jpg
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/screenshots/full/pressSS0107_25.jpg
Tag your it!!
lol this is hilarious how ignorant are people? AoC is the first GAME to use DX10 and people still think a low-poly game like War looks better? idk wtf is going on man
Your calling me ignorant yet your basing "BEST GRAPHICS" simply on the fact that AoC is using DX10?
I still dont think AOC wins "HANDS DOWN" over WAR. To each his own really.
Some people like the realistic look, some people like the more fantasy/cartoony look.
When I look at AoC images, I'm seeing the whole picture, instead of bits and pieces here and there. I don't know, maybe I'm seeing more then the images are showing since I tend to lean more towards one game then the other, but as far as those images go it's just too obvious.
Never give up and never surrender!
Or better yet... wait for a trial to be offered
I don't agree when it comes to character models. In AoC they're very unappealing (IMO) and I would have to go with the stylized, more unique look that WAR is offering with character models as opposed to the realistic plastic look that AoC has going.
The animations as well are up for debate. the animations in AoC seem very unrealistic compared to the models. The running doesn't look correct, especially in the vid where the guy is running with a two handed sword. He's holding the sword with both hands as if he's standing still, and sort of shuffling forward. it looks very awkward.
WAR's animations so far look much cleaner and more fluid than AoC. So while the graphics are very different in style, it's up to personal preference whether you choose scenery quality or character model quality.
---------------------------------------------
I live to fight, and fight to live.
Let me get something straight for anyone not following WARs development as closely as I am.
WAR is based on WARHAMMER. NO MATTER how good the graphics "CAN" ultimately be, they will still be based off of WARHAMMER painted miniatures. WARHAMMER models are cartoony in a sense.
So if you dont like cartoony, the graphics of WARHAMMER will never be good enough FOR YOU.
That doesnt mean there bad though or even worse than AOC. If they got super realistic looking graphics it wouldnt be Warhammer any longer and original fans would be severely disappointed.
But go post on the Warhammer forum and ask for yourself how happy all the Warhammer fans are about the current state of graphics. From what Ive read, they couldnt be happier.
And one more thing that has been really bugging me.
Why isnt funcom putting up more info about AOC?
As For WAR I have nothing to complain about. WAR is just crushing the industry with the amount of info they continually release, whether it be developer journals, gameplay videos, interviews, hands on pvp demos for Gamesites---they are doing a great job.
My game of choice is on WAR.
If this was an investment option, my money would be with WAR as well.
Without a doubt, Conan
heres some decent looking WAR screens
http://ve3dmedia.ign.com/ve3d/image/article/715/715414/warhammer-online-screenshots-20060628034731347.jpg
http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/screenshots/full/SS_0706_13.jpg
http://www.warhammeralliance.com/gallery/files/3/warhammer-online-screenshots-20060714031416859_thumb.jpg
http://www.gucomics.com/images/screenshots/warhammer/Perkhammerer_024.jpg
http://a248.e.akamai.net/f/248/5462/2h/images.gamezone.com/screens/29/0/66/s29066_pc_175.jpg
http://warhammer.mystics.de/networkuploads/screenshots/00000009481-1.jpg
"The new age is upon us, yet the past refuses to rest in its shallow grave."
AI? more computer controlled mobs? i wish there was less, in every game, if you want mobs and little cute quests why not play a single player rpg? i just dont get this image of the questing mmo, real people, real fights, real action.
both these games look like something some of us been whaiting for for a while. i think the pvp whil be a bigger focus in war, but the look
of aoc is way more intersting, althow we have to remember, so far, games that look to good wer never good, funfactor before graphics.
i will try both, hopefully they wont come out the same month:)
One thing is for sure, mythic making an rvr game, if your old school daoc, i know your gona at least try it. I gotta agree. I play mmos for the hopes of PvPing. Even if you do like to quest and whatnot, what happens when you've done every quest, raided every boss, gained the most powerfull weapons and armor etc.? To me there isn't much left after that to keep me interested in a game except for PvP (not that I care to do quests or anything. I wanna PvP ASAP). Also, is it right to play AoC off like its any less of a PvP game then WAR just because it has quests etc.? I mean, its cool to like quests and all but I think its going to be just as much as a PvP oriented game.
I can't really say that I'm a huge fan of WARs look, because I'm getting tired of the whole orcs/elves/dwarves genre and the cartoony look factor, but I'll still try it, and who knows, it could be fun. RPG's since before they were ever single player titles by square enix or any other developer were tabletop games, I almost don't have to call out D&D and the slew of others that lead to the existance of this genre, but I will. In all those games, the idea of questing and the players all working together cooperatively defined the experience. Video games, and more precisely MMORPG's have steadily tried to recapture it. By design these PnP games required player's to party up and cooperate to succeed, and while many allowed PvP to exist, not one of them encouraged it. Character classes are all specialists in a particular element required to succeed in an adventure. The reason for specialist classes? Creating a party interdependencies, or a need to group. These aren't necessarily ever balanced for PvP because they are designed to encourage cooperation, and are not designed to be good at all things. This is why many MMO Devs fail at introducing PvP into a game with character classes without watering down these specialists. (WoW for example, is 2+ years into the game, and Blizzard is still constantly tweaking character classes, playing to the neverending nerf/buff balancing act of PvP in a class based system). But that is a whole different argument. By its nature, an RPG isn't a competitive PvP concept, which is why if a game is going to label itself an RPG, it shouldn't be solely focused on PvP, or the classes will get screw-jobbed and the game will suffer. Want PvP? I recommend games like Halo/CS/Doom... pick a FPS, where there are almost never any differences between one character's abilities vs another outside of who gets which weapon/armor quickest in a match. If a MMORPG is going to be truly an RPG then PvP should exist as a non-primary, un-catered to element, with priorities on the PvE/RPG elements in the game. IMO MMORPG's that are driven on PvP will likely see it as an out for not developing any real content, hoping that the player's will pay them to keep themselves entertained.
Sorry for how off-topic that was, but i felt the need to defend my position as someone who, reasonably so, likes to "...like to quest and all" in a game calling itself an RPG! If ditching content, questing, and grouping elements in the programmed content ever becomes a trend for MMORPG's, I will quit playing them altogether, and personally consider titling such games as RPG's false advertisement. I don't even know why people look for hardcore PvP in games designed around classic RP concepts promoting character classes and group dynamics. If they truly desire a hardcore PvP experience...again, go play an FPS for that, where everyone is equal until they get a pickup on a battlemap...then at least no one will whine about class balance anymore.
I am looking forward to Conan, it looks good to me, and WAR looks too much like the next WoW. The only reason I am even looking at AoC, or any MMO's coming out, is because I am dog tired of WoW and want something new. For similar reasons, I discarded any notion of playing Vanguard, when I noticed it looked a little too much like EQ with a graphic face-lift. Heard its launch bombed and I lol'ed, I hated EQ with a burning passion, and Brad can go die. But enough of my petty fantasies. My 2 cents.