Er, I do have to take your word for it...I only counted 50 people in the video you linked to.
I think the instance cap is a soft cap so friends don't get locked out from each other, I'm sure you'll find some instances with 43 and others with 61 etc. But the general idea remains the same, you'll never seen 200 or more in the same instance like you do in Guild Wars or City of Heroes.
I haven't even played AoC (nor do I intend to), so go ahead and treat what I say with some skepticism. But this game not only seems like a step back to me, but a large step back.
You apparently have rote classes with what little input you can make either broken or just plain meaningless (there goes getting involved with your character build). A small number of generic armor and weapons types available whose mods are also either broken or meaningless. A lack of the traditional RPG damage types (there goes a good part of variety and strategy in battle). A meager and restricted crafting system with plain vanilla resources that always spawn at the same locations (think of how well an old game like Pre-NGE SWG did it). And a game hobbled by excessive and immersion breaking instancing to allow for maximum eye candy, and UI downgrades to let the console tards pay (er, play).
I actually think that the boobs, the blood, and the school break release date of AoC was probably all part of a plan. And that plan was to aim the title squarely at teenagers and the under 105 I.Q. set. Or as the games project manager himself put it-
"We are putting a tremendous amount of effort into making...Age of Conan something...easy to understand."
Well good luck Funcom, you may indeed be talented businessmen. However I can't help but wish that there were a few more 'gamers' calling the shots in the industry these days. But I do admit that this opinion purely reflects my own self interest, and my own personal tastes in MMORPGs.
However as gamers we demand that each MMO that is launched to be so mind blowing so revolutionary that anything which does not match this level of uberness is utter crap and not worth playing.
Basically it's a mindset that wants only 2% to be able to enjoy a game or any entertainment for that matter. It's a path that cannot succeed no doubt due to the cost to maintain these games. Not to mention that only few having access can be considered wrong to some.
While I can't form a full opinion yet I'm enjoying what I'm playing in my 12 levels so far.
While I'm usually playing more than one MMO at a time lately, I'm having trouble enjoying myself with the combat aspect of other MMOs after playing AoC. There are plenty of things that could have been done better, but this part is an important fun enchancing factor for me. It's not for everyone though. Others seem to be more attached to the auto attack system and can't derive as much fun.
MMOs is about balance. They will have good aspects, average aspects and bad aspects. As long as the balance tips towards the good aspects, people will stay no matter the problems. When the balance starts tipping towards the bad aspects, that's the time when people decide to move on.
What is this big consern about the number of people in the same zone anyway? When TBC was released for WoW, the biggest gripe on the forums was that there were to many people trying the new areas and to few spawns. People had to wait in line to get their quests done. And now that they dont have to, the gripe is about that there are to few people in the zones? WoW the 3 year old game actually lagged on new computers in those zones.
Can you imgaine haveing all players on the same zone lagging all over the place trying to kill the quest spawns as quickly as possible before the crowd of 10-20 people standing around also waiting gets them? Or actually haveing to spend 10mins of PvP fighting just to get a quest done?
Thank god for instances that saved us from lag hell.
I hear a lot of people upset about the 48vs48 siege battles. However I for one have never seen 96 avatars fighting in the same spot and like a lot of features we all scream for having more than 48vs48 will be utilised hardly ever or never at all. Also I like the fact it is capped at 48vs48 so a guild with 60 players can still defend against a guild with 300 players. Otherwise all that will happen is a few massive guilds will destroy almost everyone. This way it comes down to tactics, planning and balance in combat.
I also realise loading screens are not the best option but other games like Vanguard tried to have one massive open world and it flopped because it can't be done...not yet anyway. I am up to level 22 now in AOC and just finished the main single player storyline. It was very immersive and felt like I was playing the main character in a fantasy book. Its a great game for RPG gamers going back to the D&D tabletop way of gaming but I can see how its also not Darkfall which will be open world and almost fully PvP centric.
I got used to instancing and unlike some games that only allows you or your group its still public so really the only issue is the loading screen. They could have created a loading screen showing the door opening so its barely noticeable but hey, its a small issue for me.
Comments
Er, I do have to take your word for it...I only counted 50 people in the video you linked to.
I think the instance cap is a soft cap so friends don't get locked out from each other, I'm sure you'll find some instances with 43 and others with 61 etc. But the general idea remains the same, you'll never seen 200 or more in the same instance like you do in Guild Wars or City of Heroes.
Mne eto nado kak zuby v zadnitse.
I haven't even played AoC (nor do I intend to), so go ahead and treat what I say with some skepticism. But this game not only seems like a step back to me, but a large step back.
You apparently have rote classes with what little input you can make either broken or just plain meaningless (there goes getting involved with your character build). A small number of generic armor and weapons types available whose mods are also either broken or meaningless. A lack of the traditional RPG damage types (there goes a good part of variety and strategy in battle). A meager and restricted crafting system with plain vanilla resources that always spawn at the same locations (think of how well an old game like Pre-NGE SWG did it). And a game hobbled by excessive and immersion breaking instancing to allow for maximum eye candy, and UI downgrades to let the console tards pay (er, play).
I actually think that the boobs, the blood, and the school break release date of AoC was probably all part of a plan. And that plan was to aim the title squarely at teenagers and the under 105 I.Q. set. Or as the games project manager himself put it-
"We are putting a tremendous amount of effort into making...Age of Conan something...easy to understand."
Well good luck Funcom, you may indeed be talented businessmen. However I can't help but wish that there were a few more 'gamers' calling the shots in the industry these days. But I do admit that this opinion purely reflects my own self interest, and my own personal tastes in MMORPGs.
Basically it's a mindset that wants only 2% to be able to enjoy a game or any entertainment for that matter. It's a path that cannot succeed no doubt due to the cost to maintain these games. Not to mention that only few having access can be considered wrong to some.
While I can't form a full opinion yet I'm enjoying what I'm playing in my 12 levels so far.
AC2 Player RIP Final Death Jan 31st 2017
Refugee of Auberean
Refugee of Dereth
While I'm usually playing more than one MMO at a time lately, I'm having trouble enjoying myself with the combat aspect of other MMOs after playing AoC. There are plenty of things that could have been done better, but this part is an important fun enchancing factor for me. It's not for everyone though. Others seem to be more attached to the auto attack system and can't derive as much fun.
MMOs is about balance. They will have good aspects, average aspects and bad aspects. As long as the balance tips towards the good aspects, people will stay no matter the problems. When the balance starts tipping towards the bad aspects, that's the time when people decide to move on.
What is this big consern about the number of people in the same zone anyway? When TBC was released for WoW, the biggest gripe on the forums was that there were to many people trying the new areas and to few spawns. People had to wait in line to get their quests done. And now that they dont have to, the gripe is about that there are to few people in the zones? WoW the 3 year old game actually lagged on new computers in those zones.
Can you imgaine haveing all players on the same zone lagging all over the place trying to kill the quest spawns as quickly as possible before the crowd of 10-20 people standing around also waiting gets them? Or actually haveing to spend 10mins of PvP fighting just to get a quest done?
Thank god for instances that saved us from lag hell.
I hear a lot of people upset about the 48vs48 siege battles. However I for one have never seen 96 avatars fighting in the same spot and like a lot of features we all scream for having more than 48vs48 will be utilised hardly ever or never at all. Also I like the fact it is capped at 48vs48 so a guild with 60 players can still defend against a guild with 300 players. Otherwise all that will happen is a few massive guilds will destroy almost everyone. This way it comes down to tactics, planning and balance in combat.
I also realise loading screens are not the best option but other games like Vanguard tried to have one massive open world and it flopped because it can't be done...not yet anyway. I am up to level 22 now in AOC and just finished the main single player storyline. It was very immersive and felt like I was playing the main character in a fantasy book. Its a great game for RPG gamers going back to the D&D tabletop way of gaming but I can see how its also not Darkfall which will be open world and almost fully PvP centric.
I got used to instancing and unlike some games that only allows you or your group its still public so really the only issue is the loading screen. They could have created a loading screen showing the door opening so its barely noticeable but hey, its a small issue for me.