Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Age of Conan or Warhammer online
Raitsesman
Member UncommonPosts: 215
So in the end which one do you think is better? Explain why.
Comments
AOC will be because its an actual departure from the norm for mmos. WarHammer seems to be and hopefully the final attempt at cloning WoW. I see warhammer as a full version of the battlegrounds of WoW's pvp Instances.
Cohan is good too tho i am still a bit dubious on the combat aspect as its so different to what I'm used to but i guess ill try that one out too when its trial comes out.
As to which one i would prefer right now well i guess ill go for Warhammer for now partly because i'm an old time warhammer fan [17 years now] and there devs have been more open about whats it about. Tho lately Funcom have been more talkative.
"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand
I'll let you know when I can play both.
You're wrong in all counts.
WAR will not have instanced dungeons. AoC will.
WAR will have true world PvP with actual open-world guild-claimable keeps and sieges as well as capital city sackings with global impact. AoC PvP (meaningful bit, that is) takes place exclusively in instances.
In WAR you gain XP through both PvP and PvE while in AoC you get it from PvE exclusively.
WAR will have a much less steep power curve with regards to levels and gear. Three characters at level 10 will be able to kill a character at level 40 (max).
So which game is more similar to WoW? DX10, mounted combat and boobs doth not a revolution make.
Please do inform yourself a bit. Screenshots aren't everything you know.
AoC.
AoC is doing something different, it's not just WoW with different textures, like WAR.
/flameon
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
Whats with everyone comparing games according to graphics?
Yall are ignorant as hell. Many games graphics are alike. The Game play is nothing like WoW. I pretty sure it wont be.
They are just trying to troll ignore them.
"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand
Which one will be better? That is really impossible to answer objectively. Which one will be better for me? That is something I can answer.
I am going to be going with Warhammer Online. I do not like the look of Age of Conan's "Real Combat" system, and I really enjoy the RvR aspect WAR is going for, as it kicked ass in DAoC. I also just plain like the EA Mythic development team, as they have done more to show me what their game is about, what I should expect, and why I should play it. Funcom is a lot tighter with information and some of their actions seem a little suspicious. Not having an open beta is a tad worrisome, for example, though not a direct indication anything is wrong.
Besides, I enjoy high fantasy a lot more than low fantasy, and the Warhammer universe created by Games Workshop is a pretty sweet high fantasy universe.
A question that will be able to be answered objectively, one day, is which one is more popular. I suppose this is the fairest indication of which game is better, but it is not perfect. I am going to say WAR, but who knows? If AoC pulls off most of the things they are attempting it could do well, especially with the Xbox 360 release later in 2008.
You're wrong in all counts.
WAR will not have instanced dungeons. AoC will.
WAR will have true world PvP with actual open-world guild-claimable keeps and sieges as well as capital city sackings with global impact. AoC PvP (meaningful bit, that is) takes place exclusively in instances.
In WAR you gain XP through both PvP and PvE while in AoC you get it from PvE exclusively.
WAR will have a much less steep power curve with regards to levels and gear. Three characters at level 10 will be able to kill a character at level 40 (max).
So which game is more similar to WoW? DX10, mounted combat and boobs doth not a revolution make.
Please do inform yourself a bit. Screenshots aren't everything you know.
WAR is much more similar to WoW. Instances were in MMO's prior to WoW, and I will guarantee you that WAR will not be seamless. AoC has sieges as well, and IIRC had them before WAR did.DX10, Mounted Combat, "Real-Time Combat," the art direction, the PvP, the Siege, the mounts and their characteristics, and the voice overs are all things very different from WoW, and I left out quite a bit of things.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
to the op:
If you want different graphics and a new combat style go AoC.
If you want different basic premise of the game (no gear farming, no PvE raids, true global warfare) go WAR.
A perfect game for me would combine both but since I'm more fed up with WoW-like PvE grind than with WoW-like graphics at the moment I clearly prefer WAR as a breath of fresh air.
Honestly, I think they both have alot to offer. All boils down to if what WAR does right is what you like, and what they screw up, you couldn't care less about, and vice versa. I like to customize my toons, build things, and such. So obviously, leaning more toward Age of Conan. Not to mention, as a child of the 80s, I have a fondness for bad barbarian flicks that's been wanting a game outlet for years now.
But for the flashy fantasy races and such, obviously it's all WAR here. The Warhammer universe, if you're familiar with it (Sadly most of these WOW kiddies aren't, and are convinced anything with a green orc is a WOW clone-Sorry, Warhammer had droopy green orcs, about 10 years before) is loaded with races. Zones, worlds, it's HUGE. As for why they not in atlaunch-DUH. It's an MMO. they not going to dump in everything, let everyone get sick of it, and the game is closed up in 2 years. Nope, they'll string you along, a race here, class there... and 15 years later game still going strong.
My answers in green - Like I said MOST of the warhammer fanbase are pretty cool. - STILL!
Ps. Did you know your name spelt backwards is "SOAR OK RAM" - dodgy!!
You're wrong in all counts.
WAR will not have instanced dungeons. AoC will.
WAR will have true world PvP with actual open-world guild-claimable keeps and sieges as well as capital city sackings with global impact. AoC PvP (meaningful bit, that is) takes place exclusively in instances.
In WAR you gain XP through both PvP and PvE while in AoC you get it from PvE exclusively.
WAR will have a much less steep power curve with regards to levels and gear. Three characters at level 10 will be able to kill a character at level 40 (max).
So which game is more similar to WoW? DX10, mounted combat and boobs doth not a revolution make.
Please do inform yourself a bit. Screenshots aren't everything you know.
WAR is much more similar to WoW. Instances were in MMO's prior to WoW, and I will guarantee you that WAR will not be seamless. AoC has sieges as well, and IIRC had them before WAR did.DX10, Mounted Combat, "Real-Time Combat," the art direction, the PvP, the Siege, the mounts and their characteristics, and the voice overs are all things very different from WoW, and I left out quite a bit of things.
Lol, I have to say this but that is a pretty shallow way of looking at things. "Voice overs"... damn, I'd take a chance of burning down another race's capital and making them seek refuge in nearby caves over any voice-overs, combat mounts and DX10 boobs any time of the month or year.
As for instances... I detest them. The worst thing that happened to MMORPGs in their history. A MMORPG designer's version of crack-cocaine. The easy way out. "Our servers can't handle more than 40 ppl interacting at the same time! Quick lets give those dopes some quick-fix - instances, yeah!!!" 5 years ago DAoC servers could handle 500+ person battles AT THE SAME TIME - so they never stooped into the morass of instancing. And WAR servers are based on DAoC architecture.
Instancing is a radical departure from the very essence of what a MMORPG is. The less the better. And AoC devs admitted they'll instance quite a bit since they've gone too far with their DX10 boobs and 10k+ polygon mounts. In essence - they're sacrificing gameplay for awesome screenshots. Meh.
You're wrong in all counts.
WAR will not have instanced dungeons. AoC will.
WAR will have true world PvP with actual open-world guild-claimable keeps and sieges as well as capital city sackings with global impact. AoC PvP (meaningful bit, that is) takes place exclusively in instances.
In WAR you gain XP through both PvP and PvE while in AoC you get it from PvE exclusively.
WAR will have a much less steep power curve with regards to levels and gear. Three characters at level 10 will be able to kill a character at level 40 (max).
So which game is more similar to WoW? DX10, mounted combat and boobs doth not a revolution make.
Please do inform yourself a bit. Screenshots aren't everything you know.
WAR is much more similar to WoW. Instances were in MMO's prior to WoW, and I will guarantee you that WAR will not be seamless. AoC has sieges as well, and IIRC had them before WAR did.DX10, Mounted Combat, "Real-Time Combat," the art direction, the PvP, the Siege, the mounts and their characteristics, and the voice overs are all things very different from WoW, and I left out quite a bit of things.
Lol, I have to say this but that is a pretty shallow way of looking at things. "Voice overs"... damn, I'd take a chance of burning down another race's capital and making them seek refuge in nearby caves over any voice-overs, combat mounts and DX10 boobs any time of the month or year.
As for instances... I detest them. The worst thing that happened to MMORPGs in their history. A MMORPG designer's version of crack-cocaine. The easy way out. "Our servers can't handle more than 40 ppl interacting at the same time! Quick lets give those dopes some quick-fix - instances, yeah!!!" 5 years ago DAoC servers could handle 500+ person battles AT THE SAME TIME - so they never stooped into the morass of instancing. And WAR servers are based on DAoC architecture.
Instancing is a radical departure from the very essence of what a MMORPG is. The less the better. And AoC devs admitted they'll instance quite a bit since they've gone too far with their DX10 boobs and 10k+ polygon mounts. In essence - they're sacrificing gameplay for awesome screenshots. Meh.
Lol. I would love to see this link. 40 people in the same area? BK battles are described to have hundreds of people fighting.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
My answers in green - Like I said MOST of the warhammer fanbase are pretty cool. - STILL!
Mine are in red since RED 'UNS GO FASTA!
Damn, I hope AoC gets instances.
The thing people forget about instances - instances can be fun! Its a heck of a lot of fun to get together with your buddies and trash some dungeon somewhere with no interference. Its a hell of a lot more relaxing than PvP, and is quite enjoyable.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
You're wrong in all counts.
WAR will not have instanced dungeons. AoC will.
WAR will have true world PvP with actual open-world guild-claimable keeps and sieges as well as capital city sackings with global impact. AoC PvP (meaningful bit, that is) takes place exclusively in instances.
In WAR you gain XP through both PvP and PvE while in AoC you get it from PvE exclusively.
WAR will have a much less steep power curve with regards to levels and gear. Three characters at level 10 will be able to kill a character at level 40 (max).
So which game is more similar to WoW? DX10, mounted combat and boobs doth not a revolution make.
Please do inform yourself a bit. Screenshots aren't everything you know.
WAR is much more similar to WoW. Instances were in MMO's prior to WoW, and I will guarantee you that WAR will not be seamless. AoC has sieges as well, and IIRC had them before WAR did.DX10, Mounted Combat, "Real-Time Combat," the art direction, the PvP, the Siege, the mounts and their characteristics, and the voice overs are all things very different from WoW, and I left out quite a bit of things.
AoC may have announced their intentions to include seiges in AoC, but Mythic wins hands down with experience from DAOC.
Yeah, mounted combat, seen the videos, mounted caverly running right through infantry! Collision detection FTW, guess who has it? WAR.
There is collision detection in AoC too...
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
A voice of reason there..
AoC is definitely more PvE/small scale PvP oriented and I'm sure it will be pretty awesome in that respect. (Like WoW with DX10 and mounted combat and boobs)
WAR is about mass PvP combat hence the lower gfx. (Like DAoC with better UI, orcs and big guns and stuff)
So if both games come out technically valid it'll be down to the matter of personal player taste. Pick your poison.
If 3 level 10s can beat a level 40, that level 40 would have to be AFK, gearless and one sad excuse for a gimped class.
I call BS.
Believe it when I see it.If 3 level 10s can beat a level 40, that level 40 would have to be AFK, gearless and one sad excuse for a gimped class.
I call BS.
Well we'll have to wait and see until the NDA lifts, right?
This is based on a dev interview a year or so ago so my hands are clean. Take it or leave it. No other way for me to call your BS off.
Also just to clarify some points about RvR and GvG below from my opinion based from the 2 games:
In a factional system you have built-in friends and enemies. It's just the way the game is designed. People on your faction are your friends (you typically can't attack them at all except in a /duel), and people on the other faction are your enemies. It's a very black and white situation.
In a guild-based or non-factional system the line is not so clear. The guy that helped you out yesterday might take your head off today. Politics and guild drama run rampant. People in your guild today might splinter off and be your sworn enemies tomorrow. Your enemies today might ask to ally with you to take on a bigger foe. You never know what the game will hold for you. It's a much more chaotic/exciting environment.
I want the freedom to choose my own friends and enemies. GvG gives that to me.
There is little to no accountability for behavior in RvR; punks, gankers, and smack talkers can fade into the anominity and safety of their faction. Not to mention leechers and people there for the ride doing nothing to help in a battle… Often such behavior is encouraged in RvR because the enemy is faceless and the consequences are few. No thanks RvR.
I want to choose who my enemies are and not have the game choose them for me. The Border Kingdoms 'Open' in design provide several different mechanics in which there can be many enemies, not just "You Vs Me" I could have several guilds after mine. Who knows whats going to happen, large scale battles in the Border Kingdoms are defined on a "ticket" system - again this shows thought in developement and promote logic and tactics to those 'for' and 'against' the ability to be cohesive with you guild members allows for taking apart the enemy faster. In a realm a bunch of people get together and go fight, in a guild system you know your team mates, you know their strengths and weakness as you play with them all the time. In a realm fight your might be paired up with people you don't know. Working to accomplish and maintain a guild promotes togetherness more, and you see yourself as a working unit with specific goals to do with your friends.
GvG offers more freedom. RvR is repetitive really unless there are more than 2 facets. Once a certain time has passed, the entire regions are reset. There is no long-lasting effect. It just starts all over. AoC's battlekeeps offer near unlimited tactics, you don't have to do the same thing over and over (being a ticket system) in a fight. The same objective on a realm map might by exactly the same each time you do it, in AoC you have to take into consideration 'formation mounted' combat, Rhinos, War Mammoths, Horses all have different strengths and weakness's. Seige engines have to be placed in different locations depending on the enemys or aggressors stance - each time its different. Whats more is your fighting against the same class / same races that might be present on your side, so at the same time you have an advantage and disadvantage, its how you play it out thats different. Did I mention everything is craftable? Yes it is in AoC, in warhammer things are laying around on the floor, you dont make things, cities are static and just there, never moving same location..
In comparison, in a GvG type game, guilds can hold their assets as long as they can hold their assets. They are able to make a permanent impact on the game world itself, shaping it, forming it, contributing to it. - This is AoC’s border kingdoms. You shape your BattleKeep to your own designs - your guild is in charge of placements and fortifications, you choose where to place your seige weapons - You actually build them by your own hands! You own these things because you made them - they arent just given to you in AoC. In warhammer its like here is a city and another city, fight, the winner moves up to the next city and so on and so on, etc etc - did the players make this city or are they just lying around? How can you have a sense of ownership if nothing in it is not made by you.
In an RvR system, I am stuck with idiots. I cannot throw them out of my faction. I cannot kill them, and they are free to annoy me with their childish behaviour. I don’t even get to chose who my "friends and allies" are. The Computer decides for me. And in return I get an ever repeating, yet senseless struggle of trying to compete and be a cohesive unit.
Now you have to wonder how long anyone will play the game when nothing they accomplish means anything because the world resets all by itself, back to the same objectives, the same static infrastructure, fighting the same race over and over - but in AoC your objectives are clear, obviously to WIN, but also to do your objectives and have a high kill count. The 'Ticket' system is genius. Thats "definative" for you, thats "meaning", in a guild environment you can get more cohesive and act as one, in a realm environment you hoping everyone feels the same like a guild with ambition does.
How different AoC battlekeeps be, when the lay of the land has impact tactically in your fight. In a PvP fight in WAR you press the shortcut for Auto Attack - stream off your skills, how easy is that, and how many times have we seen that in other games.... We have already seen rangers jumping 20 times their height in the latest war video shooting at the same time. Directional Attacks in AoC will make PvP much more fun, and ultimately more skill based as the onus of your movement in game is directly tied to you attacking actions. I know for sure which game you have to actually pay attention to in game.
Different buildings in the Keep can only be built by certain prestige classes too, as well as holding additional benefits. In warhammer you seige weapons are just lying around, the hardwork done for you..
These are my thoughts on GvG in AoC, it isn't a stab at war, its a comparison of systems which are both different.
This are some of the options that you will find only in GvG, factor in the 'Mercenary' in AoC into GvG and that gives you a great facet on such a flexible system. GvG is anything but static, politics, alliances, relations all have an effect.
In an RvR system you have two sides, in the Border Lands for example there is the opportunity for dozens of guilds to present themselves best on the open PvP floor. Open being a key word.
There is talk of FFA Open PvP servers where the only safe place is Cities /Hubs in Age of Conan. Age of Conan will be a different mmo, with a unique flavour. It will have longevity and wont be some repetitive 3 month game.
Btw Funcom Invented Instance technology. I think they know how to use it, when its appropriate
A voice of reason there..
AoC is definitely more PvE/small scale PvP oriented and I'm sure it will be pretty awesome in that respect. (Like WoW with DX10 and mounted combat and boobs)
WAR is about mass PvP combat hence the lower gfx. (Like DAoC with better UI, orcs and big guns and stuff)
So if both games come out technically valid it'll be down to the matter of personal player taste. Pick your poison.
Dev's have said it before, PvP will be AoC's main thing. There is your normal PvE/raiding, but PvP is main. These aren't small scale battles and I have no clue where you are getting that from, dev's have described BK battles as "hundreds of players" fighting at once.It is not like WoW, the only similarity is that it is an MMO.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
If 3 level 10s can beat a level 40, that level 40 would have to be AFK, gearless and one sad excuse for a gimped class.
I call BS.
If a lvl 40 goes to the lvl 10s to PvP then he is turned into a chicken with 1hp and 1dmg so sure they beat him.
On topic, I'm going to play WAR, i believe that WAR will be the most successful of the 2. AoC is aimed towards a smaller market and player base. It all depends on what type of game you want.
MMO's Played: 20 , Closed Beta: 9 , Open Beta: 3 , Currently:Warhammer Beta
Guild: Futilez
If 3 level 10s can beat a level 40, that level 40 would have to be AFK, gearless and one sad excuse for a gimped class.
I call BS.
If a lvl 40 goes to the lvl 10s to PvP then he is turned into a chicken with 1hp and 1dmg so sure they beat him.
Chicken mechanic works in lower tier zones only... If a rank 40 player goes into a rank 10 zone he will turn into a chicken if he attacks lower rank characters. On the other hand, if a bunch of rank 10s zerg, there is nothing stopping them from going into a rank 40 zone and bothering rank 40s (without the 40s turning into chickens that is since this is their natural zone anyway)
(I'm using ranks instead of tiers in the above example in order not to confuse the uninitiated)
On topic, I'm going to play WAR, i believe that WAR will be the most successful of the 2. AoC is aimed towards a smaller market and player base. It all depends on what type of game you want.