A little competition isn't something to cancel a game over that has already spent a butt-load of money... let alone a game that shows great promise.
Anyone who has played MMORPGs long enough knows WAR is going to beat AoC in subscribers. AoC is the option for hardcore gamers... WAR is the option for the casual gamer... who do you think is the bigger population?
But measuring the amount of subscribers won't give you any knowledge on which game is "better". They both offer something different to the genre. As for myself I'm probably going to stick to AoC... as far as I can tell I'm having a really great time with it. But who knows, maybe WAR will blow me away.
But to say that EA will screw WAR over just because AoC is going according to plan is not something logical. Like I said, it's pretty obvious which will bring in more bacon. But that isn't something to use to judge a game by. WAR will be ahead but not by much, it will be enough to create a great competition. All I can say is that both of these games will be great simply because they'll be forced to improve until one obviously outbeats the other by a large enough margin... and I really don't see that happening.
First off regardless of the release version or whethers it's been fixed beyond the beta patches doesn't really matter, the fact funcom took their open beta only days before release and applied a heavy performance patch, has just done 2 things.
One, it crushed the Vanguard comparisons.
Two, it shows their product was built correctly the first time considering just modifying a game isn't going to fix it's serious engine issues, so even if that patch was a legit performance fix test for the retail client gameday patch, it still shows the engine and core structure was designed properly and is running either minorly flawed or flawless to allow all seeming major changes to be done with standard patching modifications.
Combine a solid game with detail oriented developers in the bug department, along with player cities/buildings, player guild pvp, minigame pvp, siege pvp, interesting quests pve, supposedly amazing endgame pve, countless hours of both pvp and pve involvement to advance whether individual or combined, an oblivionesque storyline, aswell as oblivion detailed graphics, the crazy sound quality (im guessing for assassins?), collision-based manual combat, auto combat, fatalties such as gutting and beheading, and one hell of a 3d landscape/world to look at, and well.. you have one hell of a tough competitor for market share.
I doubt EA would cancel WAR because of AoC, that is to say unless AoC conquers say 3mil subs by year1, although even that might just fuel EA to get WAR on tv commercials to try and get a piece of the apparently new money lol
"Sometimes, things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. People are basically good. Honor, courage, virtue mean everything. Power and money, money and power mean nothing. Good always triumphs over evil. Love, True Love Never Dies." Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
I am not a WAR fan by any means, never applied for their beta however if AoC's release turns out to be as bad as I think it will be then Mythic/EA is gonna kick Funcom right into the ground.
Originally posted by Celeras Originally posted by Crusher Funcom promised us something revolutionary, new and fresh, and they really kept there word. What do you think ?
I think you're on crack.
But as far as your question is concerned: There is no way Warhammer will ever be canceled. Legitimate chance of it being bad, yes, but canceled? Not at this stage.
I'll second (or third or whatever) the crack smoking comment. People ask the dumbest questions I swear.
Comments
A little competition isn't something to cancel a game over that has already spent a butt-load of money... let alone a game that shows great promise.
Anyone who has played MMORPGs long enough knows WAR is going to beat AoC in subscribers. AoC is the option for hardcore gamers... WAR is the option for the casual gamer... who do you think is the bigger population?
But measuring the amount of subscribers won't give you any knowledge on which game is "better". They both offer something different to the genre. As for myself I'm probably going to stick to AoC... as far as I can tell I'm having a really great time with it. But who knows, maybe WAR will blow me away.
But to say that EA will screw WAR over just because AoC is going according to plan is not something logical. Like I said, it's pretty obvious which will bring in more bacon. But that isn't something to use to judge a game by. WAR will be ahead but not by much, it will be enough to create a great competition. All I can say is that both of these games will be great simply because they'll be forced to improve until one obviously outbeats the other by a large enough margin... and I really don't see that happening.
If that is true, then it is something considering the number of stupid threads on this site!!!!!
First off regardless of the release version or whethers it's been fixed beyond the beta patches doesn't really matter, the fact funcom took their open beta only days before release and applied a heavy performance patch, has just done 2 things.
One, it crushed the Vanguard comparisons.
Two, it shows their product was built correctly the first time considering just modifying a game isn't going to fix it's serious engine issues, so even if that patch was a legit performance fix test for the retail client gameday patch, it still shows the engine and core structure was designed properly and is running either minorly flawed or flawless to allow all seeming major changes to be done with standard patching modifications.
Combine a solid game with detail oriented developers in the bug department, along with player cities/buildings, player guild pvp, minigame pvp, siege pvp, interesting quests pve, supposedly amazing endgame pve, countless hours of both pvp and pve involvement to advance whether individual or combined, an oblivionesque storyline, aswell as oblivion detailed graphics, the crazy sound quality (im guessing for assassins?), collision-based manual combat, auto combat, fatalties such as gutting and beheading, and one hell of a 3d landscape/world to look at, and well.. you have one hell of a tough competitor for market share.
I doubt EA would cancel WAR because of AoC, that is to say unless AoC conquers say 3mil subs by year1, although even that might just fuel EA to get WAR on tv commercials to try and get a piece of the apparently new money lol
"Sometimes, things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. People are basically good. Honor, courage, virtue mean everything. Power and money, money and power mean nothing. Good always triumphs over evil. Love, True Love Never Dies."
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
I am not a WAR fan by any means, never applied for their beta however if AoC's release turns out to be as bad as I think it will be then Mythic/EA is gonna kick Funcom right into the ground.
Just my opinion
I miss DAoC
But as far as your question is concerned: There is no way Warhammer will ever be canceled. Legitimate chance of it being bad, yes, but canceled? Not at this stage.
I'll second (or third or whatever) the crack smoking comment.
People ask the dumbest questions I swear.
(I'm sorry I couldn't resist)
I see broke people:
http://www.silkyvenom.com/forums/gallery/showimage.php?i=608
----------------------------
"Hero of Time! Face me!"