Originally posted by Psiho246 Well, you are quite wrong.
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two. 2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok . Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms. 3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
This is just not true.
I've got an:
AMD 64 3800X2
2 GB Corsair Ram
GEforce 7600GT 256MB GPU
This was a pretty high end rig in November 2006, and less than 2 full years later I can't even play AoC.
Even with all graphics on low, all shadows disabled, and minimum distance, it's so choppy it can't even be played.
My wife has an old gaming rig from the same time, around the same specs, and she can't play Conan either. So bottom line is we're skipping this MMO even though we were originally considering it.
If we're in that boat, you can count on that others are as well.
Wow, I musta touched a nerve! Heh heh thanks, that actually made me laugh out loud... imagining myself with a beret and monocle poring lovingly over the shiny pixels on my screen while toking off a gigantic opium pipe.
I guess if I were equally perverse I'd tell you that 99% of console games are likewise still the same old shit, that they too are trying to push the bleeding edge of graphics just like everyone else with the release of a new chassis every few years, and that if you're such a 'gameplay purist' perhaps you should go find a friend and play some chess and leave these futuristic pastimes to the rest of us.
But I'm not.
So I won't.
The difference here is that, regardless of the chassis, the teams developing them are all equally limited to the same specs across all consumers. Therefore, they cannot be 'prettier' than anyone else really. They can only be as beautiful as the system allows and must offer up gameplay treats to overcome competition (where it even exists, since most people can buy and play more than one console game where most PC MMO players only have one at a time.).
As for your "futuristic pastimes"......
Well, I actually lost was I was going to say here because I glanced up to read over your beret and monocle section. That IS pretty funny, I guess. So funny, I wish someone here was doing a webcomic....because that is perfect material for it.
Anyway, the point is...this hungry for pretty is really causing the developers to ignore advancing mechanics because they know you people will eat it up regardless. It sucks realizing that I'm probably going to have to wait for Blizzard to lay out their new MMO to see any real change here. I was really looking to get AWAY from them, ya know? But, they are probably the only ones with enough pocket change to take some game play risks and move us out of this boring crap. Well...them or CoS. Spellborn is looking to do some neat things. So is Fallen Earth, I suppose.
Well, actually it proved several things: 1. 2008 video cards are just not powerful enough to run an MMORPG using "realistic" graphics engine. At least not in MMO mode. I mean look at the 88800 Ultra. A card released 18 months ago and still nothing can beat it. I remember times where you bought the best card only for it to be crap a year later. Sure Crysis looks great at full settings but only 0.1% of PC gamers have a rig that can run that decently (read MAX settings in DX10). And Crytek only had to deal with the engine and AI. No quests, no balancing, no crowded areas. In short, do the decent thing and stick to cartoony graphics as in WAR, LOTRO and WOW. 2. The best part in an MMO is the fact that you feel like you are a character in a parallel world. A seamless world just waiting for you to discover it. So what is the last thing you need in it? Loading screens. That is your greatest enemy. And AoC is basically a loading screen experience spiced up with some gameplay. I kid you not. That is why with all its shitty graphics people still play WOW. You can take a horse and run from Booty Bay to the Eastern Plaguelands without ever seeing a single loading screen. Try that in AoC. 3. Releasing a game that requires a high end computer to run at medium settings goes against the whole point of an MMO (FYI the first M stands for Massive). Anyone with a computer older than 2 years will not be able to play this game at all. Sure some people run dual 8800 GTS in SLI mode, but even them don't run the game very smoothly. These problems can be reduced after release, but a crappy game engine is a crappy game engine. If WAR can avoid the loading screen plague and have the game running on average machines, it will have a decent shot at success. If the gameplay and combat are good of course
Well, you are quite wrong.
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two.
2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok . Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms.
3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
You know that water is separating Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms?
You sir are an abuser of smileys!
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
The difference here is that, regardless of the chassis, the teams developing them are all equally limited to the same specs across all consumers. Therefore, they cannot be 'prettier' than anyone else really. They can only be as beautiful as the system allows and must offer up gameplay treats to overcome competition (where it even exists, since most people can buy and play more than one console game where most PC MMO players only have one at a time.). As for your "futuristic pastimes"...... Well, I actually lost was I was going to say here because I glanced up to read over your beret and monocle section. That IS pretty funny, I guess. So funny, I wish someone here was doing a webcomic....because that is perfect material for it. Anyway, the point is...this hungry for pretty is really causing the developers to ignore advancing mechanics because they know you people will eat it up regardless. It sucks realizing that I'm probably going to have to wait for Blizzard to lay out their new MMO to see any real change here. I was really looking to get AWAY from them, ya know? But, they are probably the only ones with enough pocket change to take some game play risks and move us out of this boring crap. Well...them or CoS. Spellborn is looking to do some neat things. So is Fallen Earth, I suppose.
I would argue that the `level playing field' that programming for console platforms creates makes writing the software a lot easier (since you can more or less predict any conceivable problem before release barring actual hardware failure), but I don't think it's limiting anyone's attempts to create more visually stunning material with the tools that are available. They're just having to be a little smarter about it.
Don't get me wrong, while I've been taking a pretty one-sided perspective on this particular thread I certainly would love to see more creative and original gameplay ideas appearing in MMO (or in fact any) games. However I disagree with your theory that it's some overriding obsession with graphics that is causing developers to pass over elements of 'substance', any more than is the case in the film industry, which has experienced a similar technological renaissance over the last decade or more.
As is the nature of all creativity, there is a limited pool of truly original ideas, yet we see that when they are properly implemented the market does reward them. That's why new releases from developers like Bioware, Valve and (once for the same reasons) Blizzard are so highly anticipated and economically successful. Sure there will always be a market for the EA's of the world, but don't think that their success is choking the life out of the industry. It just makes everyone else work a little harder to raise their standards so they'll be noticed in the crowd.
No offense Matt but your problem is that you think yea lets build this awsome cool shit..and then no one can play it...except for a small portion of the PC population...that doesn't FLY with investors in a world where Money is needed to build said awsomeness. A good developer lets its design team come up with awsome stuff thinking forward but when it comes time to solidfy the plans they have to take into account alot more things than being 'progressive' because beign 'progressive' for progresses sake...only ends up in major crash and burn.
In the MMO market its all about numbers..massivesness..you can't expect the entire world to just suddenly update from a 6 series to a 8 or a 9 series just to play a game..it won't happen. Trying to keep up with the speed in which hardware comes out is the dumbest way to run a business and game development is a business..a HUGE one. Expecting everyone to update everytime something new is out is incredibly limiting your game..and limits the money that people are willing to invest. If you can't prove that your software will be useable on a massive scale ... people won't give you money to survive.
Game Development is not an experimental market where you can just push the button without any sort of Marketing or Business sense anymore. Its also not an experimental market where you can' t think about the limitations & future probabilities..there are still parts of the world and even the US that don't even have broadband capability or where computers especially mid to high end ones are incredibly expensive.
Plus what good does it do your game to look like a fantastic beautiful theme park if there's nothing to do other than stand around and look at it? Balance is necessary and developers that can't balance between graphics, good game play, realistic user capabilities, realistic broadband capabilities in major market areas, and expected needed income from users ... will fall flat on their face.
I'm not saying games like AoC will suffer this...but I think the numbers they Need in order to make back the costs may severly hurt them in the end. It definitly hurt Everquest 2 they had to struggle and redesign and constantly release expansions in order to make up the money they were not able to recieve from the hopeful expected user numbers. EQ2 expected masses of people but only got a respectable amount instead due to the heavy hardware requirements. Yea you could play it on mid to low in spec'd computers but it looked like ultra crap and who wants to pay 50 dollars for a game plus an additional 15 to play on the lowest crappiest settings...it didnt' work for me thats for sure and I loved Everquest (i had a mid end spec'd pc for that game). I ended up loving the look and world of WoW enough to play it..but in the end their inability to make a balanced endgame killed it for me.
btw .. making a game with crazily awsome graphics is NOT in any shape or form some awsome original idea or even a creative Move at all. In Games ... Original Ideas & Creative game play innovations are from games like Spore...or Portal. THOSE are true innovations in the market for games. Graphics are just the shiny extras that SHOULD be reigned in adn heavily controlled so that games look good but dont' BOG down & destroy what a game is...A Game.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two.
2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok . Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms.
3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
This is just not true.
I've got an:
AMD 64 3800X2
2 GB Corsair Ram
GEforce 7600GT 256MB GPU
This was a pretty high end rig in November 2006, and less than 2 full years later I can't even play AoC.
Even with all graphics on low, all shadows disabled, and minimum distance, it's so choppy it can't even be played.
My wife has an old gaming rig from the same time, around the same specs, and she can't play Conan either. So bottom line is we're skipping this MMO even though we were originally considering it.
If we're in that boat, you can count on that others are as well.
Dude, fire your tech... My computer has a AMD64 3200xp, 4 gigs of ram (useless I know but that is a mistake of the tech ) and a 6800 and can run the game at low without lags....
No offense Matt but your problem is that you think yea lets build this awsome cool shit..and then no one can play it...except for a small portion of the PC population...that doesn't FLY with investors in a world where Money is needed to build said awsomeness. A good developer lets its design team come up with awsome stuff thinking forward but when it comes time to solidfy the plans they have to take into account alot more things than being 'progressive' because beign 'progressive' for progresses sake...only ends up in major crash and burn. In the MMO market its all about numbers..massivesness..you can't expect the entire world to just suddenly update from a 6 series to a 8 or a 9 series just to play a game..it won't happen. Trying to keep up with the speed in which hardware comes out is the dumbest way to run a business and game development is a business..a HUGE one. Expecting everyone to update everytime something new is out is incredibly limiting your game..and limits the money that people are willing to invest. If you can't prove that your software will be useable on a massive scale ... people won't give you money to survive. Game Development is not an experimental market where you can just push the button without any sort of Marketing or Business sense anymore. Its also not an experimental market where you can' t think about the limitations & future probabilities..there are still parts of the world and even the US that don't even have broadband capability or where computers especially mid to high end ones are incredibly expensive. Plus what good does it do your game to look like a fantastic beautiful theme park if there's nothing to do other than stand around and look at it? Balance is necessary and developers that can't balance between graphics, good game play, realistic user capabilities, realistic broadband capabilities in major market areas, and expected needed income from users ... will fall flat on their face. I'm not saying games like AoC will suffer this...but I think the numbers they Need in order to make back the costs may severly hurt them in the end. It definitly hurt Everquest 2 they had to struggle and redesign and constantly release expansions in order to make up the money they were not able to recieve from the hopeful expected user numbers. EQ2 expected masses of people but only got a respectable amount instead due to the heavy hardware requirements. Yea you could play it on mid to low in spec'd computers but it looked like ultra crap and who wants to pay 50 dollars for a game plus an additional 15 to play on the lowest crappiest settings...it didnt' work for me thats for sure and I loved Everquest (i had a mid end spec'd pc for that game). I ended up loving the look and world of WoW enough to play it..but in the end their inability to make a balanced endgame killed it for me.
btw .. making a game with crazily awsome graphics is NOT in any shape or form some awsome original idea or even a creative Move at all. In Games ... Original Ideas & Creative game play innovations are from games like Spore...or Portal. THOSE are true innovations in the market for games. Graphics are just the shiny extras that SHOULD be reigned in adn heavily controlled so that games look good but dont' BOG down & destroy what a game is...A Game.
Yeah, I'll second all that, and add a little more. (Okay, maybe a lot more.)
Without getting too pedantic about it, all engineering/software problems have to fall within given constraints. In some cases, you don't know ahead of time what all the constraints are. In the case of a PC-based game, you have no idea what hardware your users will have, not only when you start your project, but more importantly when it finishes. You are basically trying to hit a (sometimes quickly) moving target.
So what do you do? You do what engineers always do, you plan conservatively. You assume from the start that users will have the lowest-common-denominator PC with some reasonably average network speed, and you design towards that. If you have time, you add bells and whistles for the high-end customers. But only if you have time.
AoC made their assumptions years ago. Unfortunately for them, they guessed wrong. They assumed people would have hardware that it turns out they don't actually have. This is an easy mistake to make, because during the early adoption years of PCs, users really were willing to update their rigs at least once a year.
However, as the PC market has reached saturation point, users now have systems that are "fast enough" for 95% of their needs (which at this point is basically accessing the Internet.) Except for notable exceptions, most people are totally unwilling to upgrade their entire system for one game. Not all people, but most people. And as stated by others, the MMO market is all about "most" people. These games thrive or fail based on sheer volume of subscriptions.
But Funcom made a second, and more unforgivable, mistake. They ignored the feedback they were getting from their testers, and did not make adjustments accordingly. Software is unique in that it can be morphed relatively quickly to fix problems that are discovered much later. Funcom should've recognized that their new engine was not viable with current PC technology, and either redesigned it, or scrapped it altogether.
In the behind-the-scenes interviews with Blizzard developers, they talked about their first iteration of a 3D engine for WoW. It had realistic graphics and everything. And ran like a sloth. So they completely scrapped it for the simpler engine you see today. They admitted their mistake early, and solved the engineering problem. Funcom did not.
Which leaves them two options. Release now, and accept a smaller fan-base. Or wait til the year 2010 to release, when (maybe) everyone will have the hardware necessary to run this game.
Well, actually it proved several things: 1. 2008 video cards are just not powerful enough to run an MMORPG using "realistic" graphics engine. At least not in MMO mode. I mean look at the 88800 Ultra. A card released 18 months ago and still nothing can beat it. I remember times where you bought the best card only for it to be crap a year later. Sure Crysis looks great at full settings but only 0.1% of PC gamers have a rig that can run that decently (read MAX settings in DX10). And Crytek only had to deal with the engine and AI. No quests, no balancing, no crowded areas. In short, do the decent thing and stick to cartoony graphics as in WAR, LOTRO and WOW. 2. The best part in an MMO is the fact that you feel like you are a character in a parallel world. A seamless world just waiting for you to discover it. So what is the last thing you need in it? Loading screens. That is your greatest enemy. And AoC is basically a loading screen experience spiced up with some gameplay. I kid you not. That is why with all its shitty graphics people still play WOW. You can take a horse and run from Booty Bay to the Eastern Plaguelands without ever seeing a single loading screen. Try that in AoC. 3. Releasing a game that requires a high end computer to run at medium settings goes against the whole point of an MMO (FYI the first M stands for Massive). Anyone with a computer older than 2 years will not be able to play this game at all. Sure some people run dual 8800 GTS in SLI mode, but even them don't run the game very smoothly. These problems can be reduced after release, but a crappy game engine is a crappy game engine. If WAR can avoid the loading screen plague and have the game running on average machines, it will have a decent shot at success. If the gameplay and combat are good of course
Well, you are quite wrong.
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two.
2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok . Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms.
3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
You know that water is separating Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms?
You sir are an abuser of smileys!
Nooo, actually it's loading screen that separates the two.
Todays and past 2 years computers can run the game. Period.
If your computer is older, then don't cry because they finally made a game for those who like to take advantage of the technology. You like cartoons, 3 feet tall ears and funny looking trolls, stay on WoW. But don't come shit on AoC because you can't afford it. The clan I am in will play this game. Only about 20% will change hardware. Not because they can't play the game but because they want to maximize performances. Only 1 didn't have requirements and it will cost him $150. lol 2010... I really hope we won't take WoW as example in 2 years. If you guys like WoW that much, why are you looking for another game? Unless you have more then 60 hours a week to put in gaming....
Anyways... TODAY'S COMPUTERS RUN THE GAME JUST FINE.
I buy a new rig each 3rd year. And I dont think thats expensive for a worker like me. AOC dont focus on people that are younger then 18 years and play games on mamas laptop. So my conclusion is if you are younger then 18, play wow on your mamas laptop or a cardgame on your cellphone. /LV
No offense Matt but your problem is that you think yea lets build this awsome cool shit..and then no one can play it...except for a small portion of the PC population...that doesn't FLY with investors in a world where Money is needed to build said awsomeness. A good developer lets its design team come up with awsome stuff thinking forward but when it comes time to solidfy the plans they have to take into account alot more things than being 'progressive' because beign 'progressive' for progresses sake...only ends up in major crash and burn. In the MMO market its all about numbers..massivesness..you can't expect the entire world to just suddenly update from a 6 series to a 8 or a 9 series just to play a game..it won't happen. Trying to keep up with the speed in which hardware comes out is the dumbest way to run a business and game development is a business..a HUGE one. Expecting everyone to update everytime something new is out is incredibly limiting your game..and limits the money that people are willing to invest. If you can't prove that your software will be useable on a massive scale ... people won't give you money to survive. Game Development is not an experimental market where you can just push the button without any sort of Marketing or Business sense anymore. Its also not an experimental market where you can' t think about the limitations & future probabilities..there are still parts of the world and even the US that don't even have broadband capability or where computers especially mid to high end ones are incredibly expensive. Plus what good does it do your game to look like a fantastic beautiful theme park if there's nothing to do other than stand around and look at it? Balance is necessary and developers that can't balance between graphics, good game play, realistic user capabilities, realistic broadband capabilities in major market areas, and expected needed income from users ... will fall flat on their face. I'm not saying games like AoC will suffer this...but I think the numbers they Need in order to make back the costs may severly hurt them in the end. It definitly hurt Everquest 2 they had to struggle and redesign and constantly release expansions in order to make up the money they were not able to recieve from the hopeful expected user numbers. EQ2 expected masses of people but only got a respectable amount instead due to the heavy hardware requirements. Yea you could play it on mid to low in spec'd computers but it looked like ultra crap and who wants to pay 50 dollars for a game plus an additional 15 to play on the lowest crappiest settings...it didnt' work for me thats for sure and I loved Everquest (i had a mid end spec'd pc for that game). I ended up loving the look and world of WoW enough to play it..but in the end their inability to make a balanced endgame killed it for me.
btw .. making a game with crazily awsome graphics is NOT in any shape or form some awsome original idea or even a creative Move at all. In Games ... Original Ideas & Creative game play innovations are from games like Spore...or Portal. THOSE are true innovations in the market for games. Graphics are just the shiny extras that SHOULD be reigned in adn heavily controlled so that games look good but dont' BOG down & destroy what a game is...A Game.
Yeah, I'll second all that, and add a little more. (Okay, maybe a lot more.)
Without getting too pedantic about it, all engineering/software problems have to fall within given constraints. In some cases, you don't know ahead of time what all the constraints are. In the case of a PC-based game, you have no idea what hardware your users will have, not only when you start your project, but more importantly when it finishes. You are basically trying to hit a (sometimes quickly) moving target.
So what do you do? You do what engineers always do, you plan conservatively. You assume from the start that users will have the lowest-common-denominator PC with some reasonably average network speed, and you design towards that. If you have time, you add bells and whistles for the high-end customers. But only if you have time.
AoC made their assumptions years ago. Unfortunately for them, they guessed wrong. They assumed people would have hardware that it turns out they don't actually have. This is an easy mistake to make, because during the early adoption years of PCs, users really were willing to update their rigs at least once a year.
However, as the PC market has reached saturation point, users now have systems that are "fast enough" for 95% of their needs (which at this point is basically accessing the Internet.) Except for notable exceptions, most people are totally unwilling to upgrade their entire system for one game. Not all people, but most people. And as stated by others, the MMO market is all about "most" people. These games thrive or fail based on sheer volume of subscriptions.
But Funcom made a second, and more unforgivable, mistake. They ignored the feedback they were getting from their testers, and did not make adjustments accordingly. Software is unique in that it can be morphed relatively quickly to fix problems that are discovered much later. Funcom should've recognized that their new engine was not viable with current PC technology, and either redesigned it, or scrapped it altogether.
In the behind-the-scenes interviews with Blizzard developers, they talked about their first iteration of a 3D engine for WoW. It had realistic graphics and everything. And ran like a sloth. So they completely scrapped it for the simpler engine you see today. They admitted their mistake early, and solved the engineering problem. Funcom did not.
Which leaves them two options. Release now, and accept a smaller fan-base. Or wait til the year 2010 to release, when (maybe) everyone will have the hardware necessary to run this game.
I have to say, you and elvenangel did a good job with your posts and brought a new perspective into my train of thought on the MMO industry.
Playing the AoC OB has been nice, and it is definately very pretty, runs decently on my machine (Which is a beast by today's standards), and it seems like things won't be as bad as I once thought they would be...
I will have to see how the game plays on current WoW machines, and I think that will prevent the game from reaching huge numbers. <- Which is by no means a bad thing, your population might be smaller, but if it is enough to keep a game going, have a Good community, and provide a good experience... I will call it a success.
Provided they balance their servers right, they can still provide the "Huge PvP experience" that I keep hearing about and make the world seem populated.
Quoting your posts for others to read, adding my two cents, and I wanted to say: Good Posts!
Todays and past 2 years computers can run the game. Period. If your computer is older, then don't cry because they finally made a game for those who like to take advantage of the technology. You like cartoons, 3 feet tall ears and funny looking trolls, stay on WoW. But don't come shit on AoC because you can't afford it. The clan I am in will play this game. Only about 20% will change hardware. Not because they can't play the game but because they want to maximize performances. Only 1 didn't have requirements and it will cost him $150. lol 2010... I really hope we won't take WoW as example in 2 years. If you guys like WoW that much, why are you looking for another game? Unless you have more then 60 hours a week to put in gaming.... Anyways... TODAY'S COMPUTERS RUN THE GAME JUST FINE. So typewriter users please stop that!!!!
If WoW is a cartoon, then AoC is a comic book. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to understand the difference.
Don't get me wrong, comics are totally rad. But I don't want to play in one, one frame at a time.
However. When it comes to creating new content to MMO games. Blizzard releases new content very slowly, comparing how much they would able to effort. Even their expansions show it.
However if MMO game does not enough well. When people whine in that case that developers are not pushing new content enough fast and are lazy. Are those in games where content developing team is very small because it would otherwise cost too much to keep game up. In that case game has some factors what not encourage it make much more popular like it deserves. Like people who think their machine must be able to max game like in screenshot and not know how to use options and that why not buy game or leave it after first month.
If WAR can avoid the loading screen plague and have the game running on average machines, it will have a decent shot at success. If the gameplay and combat are good of course
No you were right.. if proved one thing.
That people can play the same game and have totally different experiences.
As to your last statement... I can't wait until they have their "open" beta with the NDA lift... Oh and Yes I can say that I am in that closed beta and have been for some time...
Why are people surprised by AoC's requirements? They make perfect sense if you look at the game and what Funcom is doing with it.
AoC is a guild-centric game. It always has been, even back when Funcom first described thier game design. They may have made concessions toward casual players but the real content is guild-vs-guild keep conflict and raids (which need guilds).
Guilds tend to be made up of more dedicated players. More dedicated players tend to have higher end systems. This is completely consistent with Funcom's game design and target market.
It's also one of the reasons I won't be playing AoC, but that's not to say the game won't find an audience. I'm just leery of developers who seem to be clinging to so much their graphics. It reminds me too much of developers who have spouted other catch-phrases like working 'realistic' ecosystems or single massive servers. Perhaps I'm wrong about Funcom, we'll see by the end of the month.
I start having feeling that all this crying about poor performance in AoC OB is caused by disappointment over one’s own PC. It is easier to blame the game than to admit, that one’s own rig is too weak to run it with desired level of details. Majority of people tries to run it on recommended spec, without paying attention to recommended resolution listed next to it. I have stability issues with the client, I even had to reinstall it already because I couldn’t pass the loading screen, but in-game performance never caused me any trouble: I have steady 40 fps almost all the time playing 1900x1200 No AA 4 AF bloom off.
Do these types of posts remind anyone else of the Vanguard fanboy post during its beta? So many people telling others that the game was great and they just needed a better computer.
And no, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of my 3P33N (my own system is well due for an upgrade) and everything to do with taking pleasure in seeing something new and beautiful rather than wallowing in the same ol' same ol'.
I would much rather the game play be moved forward BEFORE the graphics. The truth here is, all you are getting is a reskin of 'the same ol same ol' instead of something new and beautiful. IT sounds to me like you would find more entertainment from the pure art industry. That industry is founded around 'new' and 'pretty'. Gaming markets are based around gameplay and the entertainment therein. Instead, because of people like YOU, these smacktard developers have been wasting YEARS of progressive development time focusing on pretty instead of advancing the actual gameplay.
So, the REAL fans of this market are suffering because you art nuts only care about how nicely the boobies look on screen. This and this alone is the entire reason the console market has had the success it has. The hardware is limited graphically, so the teams working on those games have to put more stock in gameplay to win over its audience. Thanks, you've ruined my gaming medium. I suppose I'll just have to move to the xbox like everyone else that wants a decent game to play and leave the PC gaming to people like YOU who only wanna see something with bloom.
Wow, I musta touched a nerve! Heh heh thanks, that actually made me laugh out loud... imagining myself with a beret and monocle poring lovingly over the shiny pixels on my screen while toking off a gigantic opium pipe.
I guess if I were equally perverse I'd tell you that 99% of console games are likewise still the same old shit, that they too are trying to push the bleeding edge of graphics just like everyone else with the release of a new chassis every few years, and that if you're such a 'gameplay purist' perhaps you should go find a friend and play some chess and leave these futuristic pastimes to the rest of us.
But I'm not.
So I won't.
Clearly you haven't heard of the Wii; look it up. Right now it is blowing away consoles that thought they could repackage the same old crap with new graphics (PS3) and prooving that inovative game play wins every time.
My friend is getting War and i am getting AoC personally think AoC would be funner for me because it has lot's of cool stuff which is new and never seen in todays top MMO's while War is like WoW same which WoW coppied War but my point is not much has changed beside some new pvp system and stuff
My friend is getting War and i am getting AoC personally think AoC would be funner for me because it has lot's of cool stuff which is new and never seen in todays top MMO's while War is like WoW same which WoW coppied War but my point is not much has changed beside some new pvp system and stuff
there's nothing new except for the 80 level arcing storyline ... i've been waiting for someone to point out new from AoC other than combat (yes that counts spellweaving too) and graphics. Otherwise all the in game mechanics have been done be for right down to instanced pvp, borderlands type pvp, player cities, and pvpable player cities.
WAR may not have shiny over the top graphics or a unique combat system..but it does have several new things including living cities, guild banners that actually do something in a battle, etc etc whatever dude.
Take a look at Shadowbane, SWG pre cu, and a few other PvP heavy games and you'll see all of AoC's top features neatly packaged together came from other games. Nothing wrong with that of course since its the first game in a while to focus purely on the hardcore raider / guild sets.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
Originally posted by lordisac1 My friend is getting War and i am getting AoC personally think AoC would be funner for me because it has lot's of cool stuff which is new and never seen in todays top MMO's while War is like WoW same which WoW coppied War but my point is not much has changed beside some new pvp system and stuff
god...its funny when ppl say WoW copied WAR... in terms of franchise history maybe...in MMORPGs its the other way around :P
Comments
wow is full of instanced dungeons with load screen. Seamless world, funny..
This is just not true.
I've got an:
AMD 64 3800X2
2 GB Corsair Ram
GEforce 7600GT 256MB GPU
This was a pretty high end rig in November 2006, and less than 2 full years later I can't even play AoC.
Even with all graphics on low, all shadows disabled, and minimum distance, it's so choppy it can't even be played.
My wife has an old gaming rig from the same time, around the same specs, and she can't play Conan either. So bottom line is we're skipping this MMO even though we were originally considering it.
If we're in that boat, you can count on that others are as well.
Wow, I musta touched a nerve! Heh heh thanks, that actually made me laugh out loud... imagining myself with a beret and monocle poring lovingly over the shiny pixels on my screen while toking off a gigantic opium pipe.
I guess if I were equally perverse I'd tell you that 99% of console games are likewise still the same old shit, that they too are trying to push the bleeding edge of graphics just like everyone else with the release of a new chassis every few years, and that if you're such a 'gameplay purist' perhaps you should go find a friend and play some chess and leave these futuristic pastimes to the rest of us.
But I'm not.
So I won't.
The difference here is that, regardless of the chassis, the teams developing them are all equally limited to the same specs across all consumers. Therefore, they cannot be 'prettier' than anyone else really. They can only be as beautiful as the system allows and must offer up gameplay treats to overcome competition (where it even exists, since most people can buy and play more than one console game where most PC MMO players only have one at a time.).
As for your "futuristic pastimes"......
Well, I actually lost was I was going to say here because I glanced up to read over your beret and monocle section. That IS pretty funny, I guess. So funny, I wish someone here was doing a webcomic....because that is perfect material for it.
Anyway, the point is...this hungry for pretty is really causing the developers to ignore advancing mechanics because they know you people will eat it up regardless. It sucks realizing that I'm probably going to have to wait for Blizzard to lay out their new MMO to see any real change here. I was really looking to get AWAY from them, ya know? But, they are probably the only ones with enough pocket change to take some game play risks and move us out of this boring crap. Well...them or CoS. Spellborn is looking to do some neat things. So is Fallen Earth, I suppose.
Well, you are quite wrong.
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two.
2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok
. Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms. 
3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
You know that water is separating Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms?
You sir are an abuser of smileys!
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
I would argue that the `level playing field' that programming for console platforms creates makes writing the software a lot easier (since you can more or less predict any conceivable problem before release barring actual hardware failure), but I don't think it's limiting anyone's attempts to create more visually stunning material with the tools that are available. They're just having to be a little smarter about it.
Don't get me wrong, while I've been taking a pretty one-sided perspective on this particular thread I certainly would love to see more creative and original gameplay ideas appearing in MMO (or in fact any) games. However I disagree with your theory that it's some overriding obsession with graphics that is causing developers to pass over elements of 'substance', any more than is the case in the film industry, which has experienced a similar technological renaissance over the last decade or more.
As is the nature of all creativity, there is a limited pool of truly original ideas, yet we see that when they are properly implemented the market does reward them. That's why new releases from developers like Bioware, Valve and (once for the same reasons) Blizzard are so highly anticipated and economically successful. Sure there will always be a market for the EA's of the world, but don't think that their success is choking the life out of the industry. It just makes everyone else work a little harder to raise their standards so they'll be noticed in the crowd.
No offense Matt but your problem is that you think yea lets build this awsome cool shit..and then no one can play it...except for a small portion of the PC population...that doesn't FLY with investors in a world where Money is needed to build said awsomeness. A good developer lets its design team come up with awsome stuff thinking forward but when it comes time to solidfy the plans they have to take into account alot more things than being 'progressive' because beign 'progressive' for progresses sake...only ends up in major crash and burn.
In the MMO market its all about numbers..massivesness..you can't expect the entire world to just suddenly update from a 6 series to a 8 or a 9 series just to play a game..it won't happen. Trying to keep up with the speed in which hardware comes out is the dumbest way to run a business and game development is a business..a HUGE one. Expecting everyone to update everytime something new is out is incredibly limiting your game..and limits the money that people are willing to invest. If you can't prove that your software will be useable on a massive scale ... people won't give you money to survive.
Game Development is not an experimental market where you can just push the button without any sort of Marketing or Business sense anymore. Its also not an experimental market where you can' t think about the limitations & future probabilities..there are still parts of the world and even the US that don't even have broadband capability or where computers especially mid to high end ones are incredibly expensive.
Plus what good does it do your game to look like a fantastic beautiful theme park if there's nothing to do other than stand around and look at it? Balance is necessary and developers that can't balance between graphics, good game play, realistic user capabilities, realistic broadband capabilities in major market areas, and expected needed income from users ... will fall flat on their face.
I'm not saying games like AoC will suffer this...but I think the numbers they Need in order to make back the costs may severly hurt them in the end. It definitly hurt Everquest 2 they had to struggle and redesign and constantly release expansions in order to make up the money they were not able to recieve from the hopeful expected user numbers. EQ2 expected masses of people but only got a respectable amount instead due to the heavy hardware requirements. Yea you could play it on mid to low in spec'd computers but it looked like ultra crap and who wants to pay 50 dollars for a game plus an additional 15 to play on the lowest crappiest settings...it didnt' work for me thats for sure and I loved Everquest (i had a mid end spec'd pc for that game). I ended up loving the look and world of WoW enough to play it..but in the end their inability to make a balanced endgame killed it for me.
btw .. making a game with crazily awsome graphics is NOT in any shape or form some awsome original idea or even a creative Move at all. In Games ... Original Ideas & Creative game play innovations are from games like Spore...or Portal. THOSE are true innovations in the market for games. Graphics are just the shiny extras that SHOULD be reigned in adn heavily controlled so that games look good but dont' BOG down & destroy what a game is...A Game.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
This is just not true.
I've got an:
AMD 64 3800X2
2 GB Corsair Ram
GEforce 7600GT 256MB GPU
This was a pretty high end rig in November 2006, and less than 2 full years later I can't even play AoC.
Even with all graphics on low, all shadows disabled, and minimum distance, it's so choppy it can't even be played.
My wife has an old gaming rig from the same time, around the same specs, and she can't play Conan either. So bottom line is we're skipping this MMO even though we were originally considering it.
If we're in that boat, you can count on that others are as well.
Dude, fire your tech... My computer has a AMD64 3200xp, 4 gigs of ram (useless I know but that is a mistake of the tech
) and a 6800 and can run the game at low without lags.... 
Yeah, I'll second all that, and add a little more. (Okay, maybe a lot more.)
Without getting too pedantic about it, all engineering/software problems have to fall within given constraints. In some cases, you don't know ahead of time what all the constraints are. In the case of a PC-based game, you have no idea what hardware your users will have, not only when you start your project, but more importantly when it finishes. You are basically trying to hit a (sometimes quickly) moving target.
So what do you do? You do what engineers always do, you plan conservatively. You assume from the start that users will have the lowest-common-denominator PC with some reasonably average network speed, and you design towards that. If you have time, you add bells and whistles for the high-end customers. But only if you have time.
AoC made their assumptions years ago. Unfortunately for them, they guessed wrong. They assumed people would have hardware that it turns out they don't actually have. This is an easy mistake to make, because during the early adoption years of PCs, users really were willing to update their rigs at least once a year.
However, as the PC market has reached saturation point, users now have systems that are "fast enough" for 95% of their needs (which at this point is basically accessing the Internet.) Except for notable exceptions, most people are totally unwilling to upgrade their entire system for one game. Not all people, but most people. And as stated by others, the MMO market is all about "most" people. These games thrive or fail based on sheer volume of subscriptions.
But Funcom made a second, and more unforgivable, mistake. They ignored the feedback they were getting from their testers, and did not make adjustments accordingly. Software is unique in that it can be morphed relatively quickly to fix problems that are discovered much later. Funcom should've recognized that their new engine was not viable with current PC technology, and either redesigned it, or scrapped it altogether.
In the behind-the-scenes interviews with Blizzard developers, they talked about their first iteration of a 3D engine for WoW. It had realistic graphics and everything. And ran like a sloth. So they completely scrapped it for the simpler engine you see today. They admitted their mistake early, and solved the engineering problem. Funcom did not.
Which leaves them two options. Release now, and accept a smaller fan-base. Or wait til the year 2010 to release, when (maybe) everyone will have the hardware necessary to run this game.
/Agree/
"If only a small % of people can even play the game, you already started off wrong."
Yes. That's why Wow is a success and that's why VG is a disaster.
Well, you are quite wrong.
1. 88800 Ultra doesn't exist yet and if you are referring to 8800 Ultra that is a overpriced card and you can buy HD3870X2 for half the cost of Ultra and also HD3870X2 performance is around 25% better then that of Ultra. Also there is 9800GX2 and both HD4XXX cards that are just about to be released and 99XX cards that are probably going to hit the market in a month or two.
2. WoW is not seamless and if you are talking about riding your horse around those mountains that you can't climb which COMPLETELY surround every area then ok
. Also try riding your horse from Kalimdor to Eastern Kingdoms. 
3. Again you should check req. for AoC as it does not require a High end PC. Ofcourse it does for High end graphics but on Low the game still looks amazing and is playable on almost every piece of crap PC there is.
You sir are a troll!
You know that water is separating Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms?
You sir are an abuser of smileys!
Nooo, actually it's loading screen that separates the two.This is abusing a smiley ->
I buy a new rig each 3rd year. And I dont think thats expensive for a worker like me.
AOC dont focus on people that are younger then 18 years and play games on mamas laptop.
So my conclusion is if you are younger then 18, play wow on your mamas laptop or a cardgame on your cellphone.
/LV
Todays and past 2 years computers can run the game. Period.
If your computer is older, then don't cry because they finally made a game for those who like to take advantage of the technology. You like cartoons, 3 feet tall ears and funny looking trolls, stay on WoW. But don't come shit on AoC because you can't afford it. The clan I am in will play this game. Only about 20% will change hardware. Not because they can't play the game but because they want to maximize performances. Only 1 didn't have requirements and it will cost him $150. lol 2010... I really hope we won't take WoW as example in 2 years. If you guys like WoW that much, why are you looking for another game? Unless you have more then 60 hours a week to put in gaming....
Anyways... TODAY'S COMPUTERS RUN THE GAME JUST FINE.
So typewriter users please stop that!!!!
AMEN
Yeah, I'll second all that, and add a little more. (Okay, maybe a lot more.)
Without getting too pedantic about it, all engineering/software problems have to fall within given constraints. In some cases, you don't know ahead of time what all the constraints are. In the case of a PC-based game, you have no idea what hardware your users will have, not only when you start your project, but more importantly when it finishes. You are basically trying to hit a (sometimes quickly) moving target.
So what do you do? You do what engineers always do, you plan conservatively. You assume from the start that users will have the lowest-common-denominator PC with some reasonably average network speed, and you design towards that. If you have time, you add bells and whistles for the high-end customers. But only if you have time.
AoC made their assumptions years ago. Unfortunately for them, they guessed wrong. They assumed people would have hardware that it turns out they don't actually have. This is an easy mistake to make, because during the early adoption years of PCs, users really were willing to update their rigs at least once a year.
However, as the PC market has reached saturation point, users now have systems that are "fast enough" for 95% of their needs (which at this point is basically accessing the Internet.) Except for notable exceptions, most people are totally unwilling to upgrade their entire system for one game. Not all people, but most people. And as stated by others, the MMO market is all about "most" people. These games thrive or fail based on sheer volume of subscriptions.
But Funcom made a second, and more unforgivable, mistake. They ignored the feedback they were getting from their testers, and did not make adjustments accordingly. Software is unique in that it can be morphed relatively quickly to fix problems that are discovered much later. Funcom should've recognized that their new engine was not viable with current PC technology, and either redesigned it, or scrapped it altogether.
In the behind-the-scenes interviews with Blizzard developers, they talked about their first iteration of a 3D engine for WoW. It had realistic graphics and everything. And ran like a sloth. So they completely scrapped it for the simpler engine you see today. They admitted their mistake early, and solved the engineering problem. Funcom did not.
Which leaves them two options. Release now, and accept a smaller fan-base. Or wait til the year 2010 to release, when (maybe) everyone will have the hardware necessary to run this game.
I have to say, you and elvenangel did a good job with your posts and brought a new perspective into my train of thought on the MMO industry.
Playing the AoC OB has been nice, and it is definately very pretty, runs decently on my machine (Which is a beast by today's standards), and it seems like things won't be as bad as I once thought they would be...
I will have to see how the game plays on current WoW machines, and I think that will prevent the game from reaching huge numbers. <- Which is by no means a bad thing, your population might be smaller, but if it is enough to keep a game going, have a Good community, and provide a good experience... I will call it a success.
Provided they balance their servers right, they can still provide the "Huge PvP experience" that I keep hearing about and make the world seem populated.
Quoting your posts for others to read, adding my two cents, and I wanted to say: Good Posts!
If WoW is a cartoon, then AoC is a comic book. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to understand the difference.
Don't get me wrong, comics are totally rad. But I don't want to play in one, one frame at a time.
However. When it comes to creating new content to MMO games. Blizzard releases new content very slowly, comparing how much they would able to effort. Even their expansions show it.
However if MMO game does not enough well. When people whine in that case that developers are not pushing new content enough fast and are lazy. Are those in games where content developing team is very small because it would otherwise cost too much to keep game up. In that case game has some factors what not encourage it make much more popular like it deserves. Like people who think their machine must be able to max game like in screenshot and not know how to use options and that why not buy game or leave it after first month.
That people can play the same game and have totally different experiences.
As to your last statement... I can't wait until they have their "open" beta with the NDA lift... Oh and Yes I can say that I am in that closed beta and have been for some time...
Why are people surprised by AoC's requirements? They make perfect sense if you look at the game and what Funcom is doing with it.
AoC is a guild-centric game. It always has been, even back when Funcom first described thier game design. They may have made concessions toward casual players but the real content is guild-vs-guild keep conflict and raids (which need guilds).
Guilds tend to be made up of more dedicated players. More dedicated players tend to have higher end systems. This is completely consistent with Funcom's game design and target market.
It's also one of the reasons I won't be playing AoC, but that's not to say the game won't find an audience. I'm just leery of developers who seem to be clinging to so much their graphics. It reminds me too much of developers who have spouted other catch-phrases like working 'realistic' ecosystems or single massive servers. Perhaps I'm wrong about Funcom, we'll see by the end of the month.
How's Vanguard doing now?
And no, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of my 3P33N (my own system is well due for an upgrade) and everything to do with taking pleasure in seeing something new and beautiful rather than wallowing in the same ol' same ol'.
I would much rather the game play be moved forward BEFORE the graphics. The truth here is, all you are getting is a reskin of 'the same ol same ol' instead of something new and beautiful. IT sounds to me like you would find more entertainment from the pure art industry. That industry is founded around 'new' and 'pretty'. Gaming markets are based around gameplay and the entertainment therein. Instead, because of people like YOU, these smacktard developers have been wasting YEARS of progressive development time focusing on pretty instead of advancing the actual gameplay.
So, the REAL fans of this market are suffering because you art nuts only care about how nicely the boobies look on screen. This and this alone is the entire reason the console market has had the success it has. The hardware is limited graphically, so the teams working on those games have to put more stock in gameplay to win over its audience. Thanks, you've ruined my gaming medium. I suppose I'll just have to move to the xbox like everyone else that wants a decent game to play and leave the PC gaming to people like YOU who only wanna see something with bloom.
Wow, I musta touched a nerve! Heh heh thanks, that actually made me laugh out loud... imagining myself with a beret and monocle poring lovingly over the shiny pixels on my screen while toking off a gigantic opium pipe.
I guess if I were equally perverse I'd tell you that 99% of console games are likewise still the same old shit, that they too are trying to push the bleeding edge of graphics just like everyone else with the release of a new chassis every few years, and that if you're such a 'gameplay purist' perhaps you should go find a friend and play some chess and leave these futuristic pastimes to the rest of us.
But I'm not.
So I won't.
Clearly you haven't heard of the Wii; look it up. Right now it is blowing away consoles that thought they could repackage the same old crap with new graphics (PS3) and prooving that inovative game play wins every time.
My friend is getting War and i am getting AoC personally think AoC would be funner for me because it has lot's of cool stuff which is new and never seen in todays top MMO's while War is like WoW same which WoW coppied War but my point is not much has changed beside some new pvp system and stuff
Got Milk?
I don't have too much hope for any MMOs so far. Except for one.
World of Starcraft FTW!
there's nothing new except for the 80 level arcing storyline ... i've been waiting for someone to point out new from AoC other than combat (yes that counts spellweaving too) and graphics. Otherwise all the in game mechanics have been done be for right down to instanced pvp, borderlands type pvp, player cities, and pvpable player cities.
WAR may not have shiny over the top graphics or a unique combat system..but it does have several new things including living cities, guild banners that actually do something in a battle, etc etc whatever dude.
Take a look at Shadowbane, SWG pre cu, and a few other PvP heavy games and you'll see all of AoC's top features neatly packaged together came from other games. Nothing wrong with that of course since its the first game in a while to focus purely on the hardcore raider / guild sets.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
haha ye
Got Milk?
god...its funny when ppl say WoW copied WAR... in terms of franchise history maybe...in MMORPGs its the other way around :P