Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
It doesn't really matter who wins. Whichever game is more appealing to ME will get the subscription. These MMO wars are getting silly (same for PS3 vs 360 vs Wii).
Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
Wow talk about brainwashed. AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has). If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE. If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play? Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
A.) considering that WOW only has 1 expansion, AO has 4, plus the fact that AO's expansions much more than double the content in the original game, while BC only adds a small percentage to the original, the comparison is hardly valid.
B.) Ask just about any relatively recent veteran of the game, whether or not they pay for it. From nearly the minute the game opens up, the original version of the game feels more and more like a kiddie pool, an abnormally large version of a limited trial. The classic version of AO as time has gone by no longer is what AO is about. The expansions have made it an entirely different game, one that plenty of people are quite willing to pay monthly for and do.
C.) AO's one real fault is the fact that it is old and outdated. Most of the bickering these days about the game are from people that want Funcom to invest an unreasonable amount of time and money to rebuild the thing and bring it up to today's standards. Money that is currently going into the two other MMOs they're developing. They aren't Blizzard, with an essentially unlimited budget. I know a heck of a lot of people who canceled their subscriptions simply because they wanted something newer, and would come back in a heartbeat for a revamp and/or the release of AO2 The fact that most of these people are asking for a better version of Anarchy Online and not for something else should speak volumes. But I'm sure you'd just ignore that fact as well.
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
Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
I see even after all these posts you still haven't once tried to address the original point (or perhaps downright avoided) that AO is free to play. Seeing as how thats the point that started this its the only one I cared to move forward with. It seems you have no intent of answering that but just dragging out these nonsense personal swipes originally started by Aelfinn. So I bid you good day.
Not true. SWG at one time (just post the CU) had over a million subscribers. And today, 6 years later, AO has FAR more people playing it then DAoC. During prime-time most of DAoC's servers are lucky to have 200 people on them. Even the most popular servers, the 'classic servers' that don't have the worst expansion in history, ToA, are lucky to break 700 on a saturday night. Maybe when they were popular DAoC had more players, but was it the better game? In my opinion, not even CLOSE. Better PvP perhaps, but AO was never PvP centric.
Anyway, AoC has won 2 awards for 'best online game' from GC now. Thats 'best ONLINE GAME' across all platforms, not just best MMOG. Grats to them!
WoW what a bunch of Lies. SWG never had more then a million subscribers!
AO Has never had more subscribers then DAoC.
The Classic Servers for DAoC have a total of 2000+ people on them.
Right now there is over 10K people playing DAoC at 12pm on a Saturday.
Metacritic shows that DAoC was a better game then AO.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
Dude, get your facts straight before posting, it will really help you to stop this lookinglikeanidiot complex you seem to have.
Anarchy Online is NOT free, it is your standard $15 dollars a month to play the game. The original version of the game released six years ago, with only one of the four expansions, is available to play in what essentially boils down to a free trial with an indefinite time limit.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???
Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
I see even after all these posts you still haven't once tried to address the original point (or perhaps downright avoided) that AO is free to play. Seeing as how thats the point that started this its the only one I cared to move forward with. It seems you have no intent of answering that but just dragging out these nonsense personal swipes originally started by Aelfinn. So I bid you good day.
Or maybe you are not reading much. I agreed with you that AO is free to play. See that part where I wrote " If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of POSTING IT IN THE SAME SENTENCE AS SOMETHING THAT IS A FACT". I think you may have missed that part.
WoW what a bunch of Lies. SWG never had more then a million subscribers!
AO Has never had more subscribers then DAoC. The Classic Servers for DAoC have a total of 2000+ people on them. Right now there is over 10K people playing DAoC at 12pm on a Saturday. Metacritic shows that DAoC was a better game then AO.
You are correct as far as I'm aware about the rest, but Metacritic shows that the opinion of 100 semi random critics favored DAoC better than AO, not that it was a better game. Considering the massive subscription problems AO had from its botched launch, not to mention the lack of advertisement, it will always be... difficult to tell which would have been more popular if both had started on equal footing, and that is really all metacritic shows, popular opinion. I tend to ignore "professional" critics anyways, even when they generally agree with my personal views. It is an extremely rare event that they really know what they are talking about.
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
Wow talk about brainwashed. AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has). If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE. If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play? Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
A.) considering that WOW only has 1 expansion, AO has 4, plus the fact that AO's expansions much more than double the content in the original game, while BC only adds a small percentage to the original, the comparison is hardly valid.
Fair enough. But we can just as easily use another game then that better fits the number of expansions. EQ, well known for the quantity of its expansions. If the base EQ game was 100% free to play, and you had to pay for the expansions... would you still take issue if someone claimed that EQ was free to play? I think you are getting hung up on the word 'classic', which is just semantics. Its a renaming of the original main game after the fact.
B.) Ask just about any relatively recent veteran of the game, whether or not they pay for it. From nearly the minute the game opens up, the original version of the game feels more and more like a kiddie pool, an abnormally large version of a limited trial. The classic version of AO as time has gone by no longer is what AO is about. The expansions have made it an entirely different game, one that plenty of people are quite willing to pay monthly for and do.
Well of course veteran's are going to focus on the expansions.. they have already played through the regular content and maxed out all their characters on them for the past 8 years. You can't define your view on just the subset of the player base that happen to match your personal stance. Thats like arguing that mcdonalds food is good for dieting, and citing as your evidence the subset of customers that happen to not be overweight. You can't pick and choose the players that matter and those that don't.
How many levels can you go through with the base game? How long does it take the average person to hit max level with the base game? For a trial it seems to be remarkably like the length of a full game.
C.) AO's one real fault is the fact that it is old and outdated. Most of the bickering these days about the game are from people that want Funcom to invest an unreasonable amount of time and money to rebuild the thing and bring it up to today's standards. Money that is currently going into the two other MMOs they're developing. They aren't Blizzard, with an essentially unlimited budget. I know a heck of a lot of people who canceled their subscriptions simply because they wanted something newer, and would come back in a heartbeat for a revamp and/or the release of AO2 The fact that most of these people are asking for a better version of Anarchy Online and not for something else should speak volumes. But I'm sure you'd just ignore that fact as well.
I don't ignore facts. What facts do you feel I have ignored?
As for your point, I think everyone wants newer versions of everything. I'm sure people would be willing to pay for newer versions of anarchy online. And ultime online. And AC2, and shadowbane, horizons, and WoW, and every other game other there. I would not argue the interest isn't there. Its always there for something new, because new is better.
But I wasn't asking if people were willing to pay for new stuff. Its are people willing to pay for the old original stuff. There was a time in AO's lifespan amidst declining subscriptions where funcom asked 'can we make more money on our declining playerbase with paid subscriptions, or more money by free play with in game advertising'. We know what the answer was of course. But there is a reason for things to go free, and its not because more people were willing to pay than not pay. More people were willing to PLAY for free, and that allowed the advertising to reach a greater audience.
Hey I know its off topic, but I remember seeing a post where you were after a new video card, as for your location - try looking at www.memoryexpress.com they have some decent prices. I don't think new egg ships to CA.
Insecure!!! who?
Oh hey thanks Ill look into it. I don't know why I wrote insecure..
He obviously won't loose any sleep over it, but war likes to show their awards, as per there webpage. Good on you Warhammer Online : Hands on time with Warhammer from War lore table top fan: http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=38022
Avery... every time you post you just discredit yourself and worse you drag your guilds name with you. It is a shame since several others in your guild are rational nice guys. This whole thread is nothing but PR spin by you and the other fanboys. Anyone reading that link can tell that guy is a AoC fanboy. Throwing in at the end that he played WH table top 19 years ago is hardly proof he is a fan. Seriously man you need to relax a bit and just enjoy looking into AoC. You really bring nothing to these boards and only encourage flaming and the trolls on both sides. I would remove your guild tag as speaking with others in your guild, your actions do not reflect them as a whole.
As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I agree with the comment that it doesnt matter what you win 30 days BEFORE the release date, what matters is what happens to the game 30 days AFTER the release date.
That said I wish they all would just shut up and make a proper launch to those games.
I don't think it matters. I hope both games are good. But they are both targetting different audiences. AoC is appealing to the kiddie audience with its emphasis on blood, gore, nudity and the M rating while War is attempting to lure the older more mature audience that played DAOC. That being said the War dev makes a good point about flash over substance and the importance of polish at release. I played AO and DAOC at release and in beta and I thought both games were fantastic games. Unfortuntaley for AO had it awful technical problems that made the game virtually unplayable for a very long time. But there are important things we can learn from AO's release. Funcom stuck with AO and made it a fantastic game nad Funcom must understand the importance of a stable polished release. AO could have been a huge hit with betterr stability. I would hope that Funcom will make sure this time they wait until they are sure the game is ready before even considering releasing the game.
To even suggest that WAR is going after a mature audience is hilarious! They are going after Bnet kids and every thing about their tittle caters to the less mature gamer. Cartoony graphics, UBER casters and zomg 1337 ELVES!!!!!
Not saying it will be a bad game, it will be better then WoW and the developers have a history of good pvp. But the community will suck just like WoW.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by atziluth
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
He obviously won't loose any sleep over it, but war likes to show their awards, as per there webpage. Good on you Warhammer Online : Hands on time with Warhammer from War lore table top fan: http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=38022
Avery... every time you post you just discredit yourself and worse you drag your guilds name with you. It is a shame since several others in your guild are rational nice guys. This whole thread is nothing but PR spin by you and the other fanboys. Anyone reading that link can tell that guy is a AoC fanboy. Throwing in at the end that he played WH table top 19 years ago is hardly proof he is a fan. Seriously man you need to relax a bit and just enjoy looking into AoC. You really bring nothing to these boards and only encourage flaming and the trolls on both sides. I would remove your guild tag as speaking with others in your guild, your actions do not reflect them as a whole.
As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
Thanks for the flaming to bring the boards some information from the GC.
This is the Age of Conan Boards, expect to see some fans, like you would say in any sports game forums. I am totally relaxed, and as for the bringing nothing new to the forums idea, I have a few dozen thankfull pm's to the contrary. Please don't tell me my guilds feelings on the whole based on your assumptions as your words have never held ANY meaning.
Are you really going to sit there typing that all my posts have not been either informative or a help to people finding out about the game? "I bring nothing new to the boards" - I thought I had posted a wealth of new information the last few days for example, but anyway thanks again for the personal attack, but I won't loose any sleep over it, thanks for saying I can't have an opinion, and thanks for showing the only way you can deal with it is a flame.
I think trying to make up facts or rewrite history should be left to forum dwellers like us.. rather than have a developer try to do it. The main reason being it just reflects badly on him, the company he works for and well... Its just not something a company rep should do. The first thing they taught us when I did customer service for UO... Anything you say is seen as a representation of the company.. even if they don't feel that way. Its perception... Now um.. I think if you consider when AO came out.. and when DAoC came out.. take into consideration the technology and a lot of other factors.. Oh lets put out that AO was running ONE server at release... The GeForce 1.. was fairly new etc.. Ya obviously it had problems. DAoC had how many servers at release? (was more than 1) and its graphics looked like what compared to AO? I mean I played both games at release... If you look at DAoC TODAY... compared to AO.. well I'm sorry but Funcom won. What's the high population of daoc today? (they don't hide their logged in numbers). Do you think that its more than AO or SWG? He claims they beat SWG and AO in every way... At what point was DAoC listed as the number 2 most populated north american MMO? Oh that's right never... SWG's peak was second only to EQ1.. and after WoW launched yes forget it. I'm sorry they didn't win then and I'm sorry they didn't win now.. as it obviously meant so much to this guy. Who cares... if you launch a game and make a profit.. didn't you win? Anyone remember playing DAoC at launch? I mean when after the 20's or early 30's none of the dungeons were itemized? all that dropped was coin? Oddly enough in AO I still got items.. Altho I must say I had very little difficulty running AO at launch. I know many did... but its not like a "fact" that no one could run it. There was just as much content missing from AO, DAoC and SWG at launch.. hell the only thing SWG didn't have at launch was "space". DAoC is widely touted (even by me) as a smooth launch.. but SWG was a more complete game at launch.. that just needed polish (the cu and nge weren't that polish). If you played DAoC at launch.. log in today.. right now.. and see what the game is like now.. and tell me "they won". Its a steaming pile of dog droppings.. that in its own way had an NGE. In fact out of the 3 .. I personally think AO/Funcom won... and I don't even play AO (haven't for years). Oh as far as DAoC goes.. you could also talk to people that played Hibernia at launch (I didn't play there but I saw what that realm went through).. and ask them how polished the game was? I'm not sure Midgard was much better off..... well maybe before the left axe nerf (yes I actually played daoc..) I played Albion.. which I guess was Mythics love child.. I played there because.. um well I liked Merlin stories as a kid /shrug. I mean honestly.. that statement was for us forum trolls to make.. Personally I think the guy should either issue an apology or be fired.. that's not something a company employee should say... err I should say if he worked for me.. he'd be fired.. Just totally unprofessional... and on top of that... his "facts" weren't exactly all that factual. I'd love to see AO, SWG and DAoC compare subscriber numbers today.. if anything they are close.. DAoC is pretty dead.. and I'd love to see where he can prove that DAoC at its peak .. had more subs than SWG... because I've never even heard DAoC claimed to have ever been high on that list... just the smooth launch... which it did have.
I'm sorry dude, but pretty much everything you said is incorrect.
Anarchy Online released in June of 2001. DAoC released less than six months later in November 2001. 5 months and a lot of hardware changes?
AO had 2 servers available as of the second month post release, Rubi-Ka 1 and Rubi-Ka 2. They only had 60,000 subs in the first 3 months. After that, it dropped to 40,000. Dark Age of Camelot had over 200,000 subs at release and retained that for a few years. I'd say Mark Jacobs is correct.
I also played both games and DAoC's graphics were no worse than AO. I actually prefered to look at DAoC over AO because it had far fewer clipping issues.
Populations as they exist right now are this. DAoC has over 100,000 subs. Anarchy Online has a massive 12,000. If you count in the free accounts, maybe AO has 100,000 but those aren't generating any revenue for Funcom.
Like I said in the Leipzig Siege Thread, to me, awards mean nothing. Most of the games I play right now never won a single award at a show.
He obviously won't loose any sleep over it, but war likes to show their awards, as per there webpage. Good on you Warhammer Online : Hands on time with Warhammer from War lore table top fan: http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=38022
Avery... every time you post you just discredit yourself and worse you drag your guilds name with you. It is a shame since several others in your guild are rational nice guys. This whole thread is nothing but PR spin by you and the other fanboys. Anyone reading that link can tell that guy is a AoC fanboy. Throwing in at the end that he played WH table top 19 years ago is hardly proof he is a fan. Seriously man you need to relax a bit and just enjoy looking into AoC. You really bring nothing to these boards and only encourage flaming and the trolls on both sides. I would remove your guild tag as speaking with others in your guild, your actions do not reflect them as a whole.
As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
Thanks for the flaming to bring the boards some information from the GC.
This is the Age of Conan Boards, expect to see some fans, like you would say in any sports game forums. I am totally relaxed, and as for the bringing nothing new to the forums idea, I have a few dozen thankfull pm's to the contrary. Please don't tell me my guilds feelings on the whole based on your assumptions as your words have never held ANY meaning.
Are you really going to sit there typing that all my posts have not been either informative or a help to people finding out about the game? "I bring nothing new to the boards" - I thought I had posted a wealth of new information the last few days for example, but anyway thanks again for the personal attack, but I won't loose any sleep over it, thanks for saying I can't have an opinion, and thanks for showing the only way you can deal with it is a flame.
I won't post any more on this subject.
I agree with Avery. People that flame others for having a different opinion (like expressing concern over AoC/Funcom) and telling them they should just leave the community (if they don't share the same enthusiasm) is downright wrong! People that do that should be ashamed, and think long and hard about what they post, because its just personal attacks and telling people they aren't allowed to have opinions. Flaming people for not agreeing is just for the small minded.
I sincerely hope you have learned your lesson atz! You could not have paid for a better teacher.
Now then, can we move on please? This isn't a discussion board... its a funcom advertisement board. Only information related to promoting the game is allowed here. Anything that doesn't meet that goal must leave.
I feel odd doing this, on an Age of Conan fan forum, me an Age of Conan fan, but...
Who really cares what Mark Jacobs had to say? It isnt that I think he's a bad guy, or anything like that, but his comments seemed to me pretty much what I'd expect, and that's far from a bad thing. His game did not win the award, fans could be concerned, but instead he goes back in time, and explains why he doesnt feel it's all that big a deal. Bottom line is that Warhammer Online did not win the award, and that when you boil it all down, the award doesnt mean the end of the world for Warhammer fans.
I'm not going to read into it that he is trying to bash anyone, he's not. What he is doing, is talking to HIS fans, and that's absolutely fine. Much like when Athelan was here, and there as that one moron who tried to make it into something it was not, as if Athelan was slamming something else. Why try to make it into something that it's not? Is Jacobs really bashing AoC? Not at all.
So why do we have to have a big huge long thread about it? I seriously doubt that the CEO's and dev teams want other games to "tank" as much as fans do. They simply want the market to expand exponentially, and they realize that the best way to do that, is to see more good games put out there. (Of course they certainly want their own game to be the top dog). Failures dont do anyone any good.
Thanks for the flaming to bring the boards some information from the GC.
This is the Age of Conan Boards, expect to see some fans, like you would say in any sports game forums. I am totally relaxed, and as for the bringing nothing new to the forums idea, I have a few dozen thankfull pm's to the contrary. Please don't tell me my guilds feelings on the whole based on your assumptions as your words have never held ANY meaning. Are you really going to sit there typing that all my posts have not been either informative or a help to people finding out about the game? "I bring nothing new to the boards" - I thought I had posted a wealth of new information the last few days for example, but anyway thanks again for the personal attack, but I won't loose any sleep over it, thanks for saying I can't have an opinion, and thanks for showing the only way you can deal with it is a flame. I won't post any more on this subject.
So you don't admit to spinning on these boards and bad mouthing other games? Funny I can list several threads starting with this one. Don't worry though... where you spin I will be there to point out your hypocricy. The only personal things I have said is you spin the truth and tend to be a hypocrite when attacking other games. Calling you out on some things is hardly a personal attack. I did not call you any names or was derogatory. If you think this is a personal attack you better grow thicker skin for AoC PvP.
Lets start with this thread... nicely done ignoring the point I made about you blowing off the insult FC tossed at mythic to validate their role back on release. Also the point where you tried to pass off a AoC fanboy that played WH years ago as a warhammer fan. You want to do this board justice... be fair not biased. Have you posted good information on these boards... absolutely when it suits your motives and promotes AoC which I have no problem with. Why sully that by making THESE threads which damage your credibility.
You have every right to have an opinion... You should not spin the truth to suit your own agenda.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I agree with Avery. People that flame others for having a different opinion (like expressing concern over AoC/Funcom) and telling them they should just leave the community (if they don't share the same enthusiasm) is downright wrong! People that do that should be ashamed, and think long and hard about what they post, because its just personal attacks and telling people they aren't allowed to have opinions. Flaming people for not agreeing is just for the small minded. I sincerely hope you have learned your lesson atz! You could not have paid for a better teacher. Now then, can we move on please? This isn't a discussion board... its a funcom advertisement board. Only information related to promoting the game is allowed here. Anything that doesn't meet that goal must leave.
LOL... thank you. The first time I read this I was scratching my head... then I put {sarcasm] quotes around it... *salutes*
Well played sir... well played.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Comments
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
It doesn't really matter who wins. Whichever game is more appealing to ME will get the subscription. These MMO wars are getting silly (same for PS3 vs 360 vs Wii).
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
A.) considering that WOW only has 1 expansion, AO has 4, plus the fact that AO's expansions much more than double the content in the original game, while BC only adds a small percentage to the original, the comparison is hardly valid.
B.) Ask just about any relatively recent veteran of the game, whether or not they pay for it. From nearly the minute the game opens up, the original version of the game feels more and more like a kiddie pool, an abnormally large version of a limited trial. The classic version of AO as time has gone by no longer is what AO is about. The expansions have made it an entirely different game, one that plenty of people are quite willing to pay monthly for and do.
C.) AO's one real fault is the fact that it is old and outdated. Most of the bickering these days about the game are from people that want Funcom to invest an unreasonable amount of time and money to rebuild the thing and bring it up to today's standards. Money that is currently going into the two other MMOs they're developing. They aren't Blizzard, with an essentially unlimited budget. I know a heck of a lot of people who canceled their subscriptions simply because they wanted something newer, and would come back in a heartbeat for a revamp and/or the release of AO2 The fact that most of these people are asking for a better version of Anarchy Online and not for something else should speak volumes. But I'm sure you'd just ignore that fact as well.
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
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
I see even after all these posts you still haven't once tried to address the original point (or perhaps downright avoided) that AO is free to play. Seeing as how thats the point that started this its the only one I cared to move forward with. It seems you have no intent of answering that but just dragging out these nonsense personal swipes originally started by Aelfinn. So I bid you good day.
Not true. SWG at one time (just post the CU) had over a million subscribers. And today, 6 years later, AO has FAR more people playing it then DAoC. During prime-time most of DAoC's servers are lucky to have 200 people on them. Even the most popular servers, the 'classic servers' that don't have the worst expansion in history, ToA, are lucky to break 700 on a saturday night. Maybe when they were popular DAoC had more players, but was it the better game? In my opinion, not even CLOSE.
Better PvP perhaps, but AO was never PvP centric.
Anyway, AoC has won 2 awards for 'best online game' from GC now. Thats 'best ONLINE GAME' across all platforms, not just best MMOG. Grats to them!
WoW what a bunch of Lies. SWG never had more then a million subscribers!AO Has never had more subscribers then DAoC.
The Classic Servers for DAoC have a total of 2000+ people on them.
Right now there is over 10K people playing DAoC at 12pm on a Saturday.
Metacritic shows that DAoC was a better game then AO.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
Meaning that essentially its free to play... dont be stupid.
No, meaning that AO is pay to play, and classic AO is free to play with ingame advertisments. There are plenty of people including myself who pay to play the game, rendering Sires argument null and void.
Classic AO???Wow talk about brainwashed.
AO is free to play. PERIOD. Only a complete moron would deny that (and has).
If you want to argue that expansions cost money... then say expansions cost money. But expansions are not AO. AO is the main version of the game. The main version of the game is the one that was there at release time. And that is FREE.
If WoW became free, but burning crusade cost money.... would you say WoW was free to play? or that classic WoW was free to play?
Use your brain, if you have one hidden under the many layers of fanboy BS. AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it. You can stick your head in the sand or funcom's rear orifice and repeat 'its classic ao its classic ao' but that doesnt change the FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it.
Nice post! Only a complete moron, or somebody completely ignorant, would go out and make such a bold claim "AO is free, because AO is pathetic and no one is willing to pay for it." All we would need is one person to claim they would pay to play AO and your brainwashed statement becomes void. You can not state opinions and think they are FACTS. Your post was a complete waste of time and I'm ashamed to have read it and responded.
I didn't say AO being pathetic and no one paying for it was a fact. I said that AO is free is a fact and calling it classic ao doesn't change that. If you want to address that point, do so. If you want to blindly defend AoC fanboys spouting lies just because you happen to be in their guild... then move along cause im not interested.
Here are the points again for the slow:
- AO is the base game
-Expansions are expansions
-AO is free to play
-Some of the expansions cost money
I have no need to defend him because we are in the same guild, a person can defend themselves. If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of posting it in the same sentence as something that is fact. If you want to blindly assume that somebody addresses your statements because a fellow guild member had a response to his post... then move along because I'm not interested.
I see even after all these posts you still haven't once tried to address the original point (or perhaps downright avoided) that AO is free to play. Seeing as how thats the point that started this its the only one I cared to move forward with. It seems you have no intent of answering that but just dragging out these nonsense personal swipes originally started by Aelfinn. So I bid you good day.
Or maybe you are not reading much. I agreed with you that AO is free to play. See that part where I wrote " If it was your opinion you should have stated so instead of POSTING IT IN THE SAME SENTENCE AS SOMETHING THAT IS A FACT". I think you may have missed that part.
You are correct as far as I'm aware about the rest, but Metacritic shows that the opinion of 100 semi random critics favored DAoC better than AO, not that it was a better game. Considering the massive subscription problems AO had from its botched launch, not to mention the lack of advertisement, it will always be... difficult to tell which would have been more popular if both had started on equal footing, and that is really all metacritic shows, popular opinion. I tend to ignore "professional" critics anyways, even when they generally agree with my personal views. It is an extremely rare event that they really know what they are talking about.
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
A.) considering that WOW only has 1 expansion, AO has 4, plus the fact that AO's expansions much more than double the content in the original game, while BC only adds a small percentage to the original, the comparison is hardly valid.
Fair enough. But we can just as easily use another game then that better fits the number of expansions. EQ, well known for the quantity of its expansions. If the base EQ game was 100% free to play, and you had to pay for the expansions... would you still take issue if someone claimed that EQ was free to play? I think you are getting hung up on the word 'classic', which is just semantics. Its a renaming of the original main game after the fact.
B.) Ask just about any relatively recent veteran of the game, whether or not they pay for it. From nearly the minute the game opens up, the original version of the game feels more and more like a kiddie pool, an abnormally large version of a limited trial. The classic version of AO as time has gone by no longer is what AO is about. The expansions have made it an entirely different game, one that plenty of people are quite willing to pay monthly for and do.
Well of course veteran's are going to focus on the expansions.. they have already played through the regular content and maxed out all their characters on them for the past 8 years. You can't define your view on just the subset of the player base that happen to match your personal stance. Thats like arguing that mcdonalds food is good for dieting, and citing as your evidence the subset of customers that happen to not be overweight. You can't pick and choose the players that matter and those that don't.
How many levels can you go through with the base game? How long does it take the average person to hit max level with the base game? For a trial it seems to be remarkably like the length of a full game.
C.) AO's one real fault is the fact that it is old and outdated. Most of the bickering these days about the game are from people that want Funcom to invest an unreasonable amount of time and money to rebuild the thing and bring it up to today's standards. Money that is currently going into the two other MMOs they're developing. They aren't Blizzard, with an essentially unlimited budget. I know a heck of a lot of people who canceled their subscriptions simply because they wanted something newer, and would come back in a heartbeat for a revamp and/or the release of AO2 The fact that most of these people are asking for a better version of Anarchy Online and not for something else should speak volumes. But I'm sure you'd just ignore that fact as well.
I don't ignore facts. What facts do you feel I have ignored?
As for your point, I think everyone wants newer versions of everything. I'm sure people would be willing to pay for newer versions of anarchy online. And ultime online. And AC2, and shadowbane, horizons, and WoW, and every other game other there. I would not argue the interest isn't there. Its always there for something new, because new is better.
But I wasn't asking if people were willing to pay for new stuff. Its are people willing to pay for the old original stuff. There was a time in AO's lifespan amidst declining subscriptions where funcom asked 'can we make more money on our declining playerbase with paid subscriptions, or more money by free play with in game advertising'. We know what the answer was of course. But there is a reason for things to go free, and its not because more people were willing to pay than not pay. More people were willing to PLAY for free, and that allowed the advertising to reach a greater audience.
Hey I know its off topic, but I remember seeing a post where you were after a new video card, as for your location - try looking at www.memoryexpress.com they have some decent prices. I don't think new egg ships to CA.
Insecure!!! who?
Oh hey thanks Ill look into it. I don't know why I wrote insecure..
As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
I agree with the comment that it doesnt matter what you win 30 days BEFORE the release date, what matters is what happens to the game 30 days AFTER the release date.
That said I wish they all would just shut up and make a proper launch to those games.
Not saying it will be a bad game, it will be better then WoW and the developers have a history of good pvp. But the community will suck just like WoW.
Avery... every time you post you just discredit yourself and worse you drag your guilds name with you. It is a shame since several others in your guild are rational nice guys. This whole thread is nothing but PR spin by you and the other fanboys. Anyone reading that link can tell that guy is a AoC fanboy. Throwing in at the end that he played WH table top 19 years ago is hardly proof he is a fan. Seriously man you need to relax a bit and just enjoy looking into AoC. You really bring nothing to these boards and only encourage flaming and the trolls on both sides. I would remove your guild tag as speaking with others in your guild, your actions do not reflect them as a whole.As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
Thanks for the flaming to bring the boards some information from the GC.
This is the Age of Conan Boards, expect to see some fans, like you would say in any sports game forums. I am totally relaxed, and as for the bringing nothing new to the forums idea, I have a few dozen thankfull pm's to the contrary. Please don't tell me my guilds feelings on the whole based on your assumptions as your words have never held ANY meaning.
Are you really going to sit there typing that all my posts have not been either informative or a help to people finding out about the game? "I bring nothing new to the boards" - I thought I had posted a wealth of new information the last few days for example, but anyway thanks again for the personal attack, but I won't loose any sleep over it, thanks for saying I can't have an opinion, and thanks for showing the only way you can deal with it is a flame.
I won't post any more on this subject.
Anarchy Online released in June of 2001. DAoC released less than six months later in November 2001. 5 months and a lot of hardware changes?
AO had 2 servers available as of the second month post release, Rubi-Ka 1 and Rubi-Ka 2. They only had 60,000 subs in the first 3 months. After that, it dropped to 40,000. Dark Age of Camelot had over 200,000 subs at release and retained that for a few years. I'd say Mark Jacobs is correct.
I also played both games and DAoC's graphics were no worse than AO. I actually prefered to look at DAoC over AO because it had far fewer clipping issues.
Populations as they exist right now are this. DAoC has over 100,000 subs. Anarchy Online has a massive 12,000. If you count in the free accounts, maybe AO has 100,000 but those aren't generating any revenue for Funcom.
Like I said in the Leipzig Siege Thread, to me, awards mean nothing. Most of the games I play right now never won a single award at a show.
As to Mark's comments... These teams are competitive and they dig each other. I did not see you defend Mythic when AoC dev put a dig in about WARs delay to cover their own. I remember you trying to blow it off actually... yet here you are now blazing the trail of scorn when it is done to FC. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Really what constructive thing do you bring to these boards? Nothing I can see.
Thanks for the flaming to bring the boards some information from the GC.
This is the Age of Conan Boards, expect to see some fans, like you would say in any sports game forums. I am totally relaxed, and as for the bringing nothing new to the forums idea, I have a few dozen thankfull pm's to the contrary. Please don't tell me my guilds feelings on the whole based on your assumptions as your words have never held ANY meaning.
Are you really going to sit there typing that all my posts have not been either informative or a help to people finding out about the game? "I bring nothing new to the boards" - I thought I had posted a wealth of new information the last few days for example, but anyway thanks again for the personal attack, but I won't loose any sleep over it, thanks for saying I can't have an opinion, and thanks for showing the only way you can deal with it is a flame.
I won't post any more on this subject.
I agree with Avery. People that flame others for having a different opinion (like expressing concern over AoC/Funcom) and telling them they should just leave the community (if they don't share the same enthusiasm) is downright wrong! People that do that should be ashamed, and think long and hard about what they post, because its just personal attacks and telling people they aren't allowed to have opinions. Flaming people for not agreeing is just for the small minded.
I sincerely hope you have learned your lesson atz! You could not have paid for a better teacher.
Now then, can we move on please? This isn't a discussion board... its a funcom advertisement board. Only information related to promoting the game is allowed here. Anything that doesn't meet that goal must leave.
Geez...
I feel odd doing this, on an Age of Conan fan forum, me an Age of Conan fan, but...
Who really cares what Mark Jacobs had to say? It isnt that I think he's a bad guy, or anything like that, but his comments seemed to me pretty much what I'd expect, and that's far from a bad thing. His game did not win the award, fans could be concerned, but instead he goes back in time, and explains why he doesnt feel it's all that big a deal. Bottom line is that Warhammer Online did not win the award, and that when you boil it all down, the award doesnt mean the end of the world for Warhammer fans.
I'm not going to read into it that he is trying to bash anyone, he's not. What he is doing, is talking to HIS fans, and that's absolutely fine. Much like when Athelan was here, and there as that one moron who tried to make it into something it was not, as if Athelan was slamming something else. Why try to make it into something that it's not? Is Jacobs really bashing AoC? Not at all.
So why do we have to have a big huge long thread about it? I seriously doubt that the CEO's and dev teams want other games to "tank" as much as fans do. They simply want the market to expand exponentially, and they realize that the best way to do that, is to see more good games put out there. (Of course they certainly want their own game to be the top dog). Failures dont do anyone any good.
So you don't admit to spinning on these boards and bad mouthing other games? Funny I can list several threads starting with this one. Don't worry though... where you spin I will be there to point out your hypocricy. The only personal things I have said is you spin the truth and tend to be a hypocrite when attacking other games. Calling you out on some things is hardly a personal attack. I did not call you any names or was derogatory. If you think this is a personal attack you better grow thicker skin for AoC PvP.
Lets start with this thread... nicely done ignoring the point I made about you blowing off the insult FC tossed at mythic to validate their role back on release. Also the point where you tried to pass off a AoC fanboy that played WH years ago as a warhammer fan. You want to do this board justice... be fair not biased. Have you posted good information on these boards... absolutely when it suits your motives and promotes AoC which I have no problem with. Why sully that by making THESE threads which damage your credibility.
You have every right to have an opinion... You should not spin the truth to suit your own agenda.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
LOL... thank you. The first time I read this I was scratching my head... then I put {sarcasm] quotes around it... *salutes*
Well played sir... well played.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
Calling people nerds for not wanting sex in their video games.
Beds and computers are different, and name calling in the world of MMOs when everyone has a different identity is ridiculous and waste of forum space.