Haha, here is the new trend from the haters: "If the review is not totally negative, the reviewer was obviously on the payroll" Right ... In other words: "No positive reviews are allowed" Objectivity right out of the window.
That is because there is NO perfect and 100% positive game on the market today. Not even wow.
If a reviewer is not going to post a games NUMEROUS bugs and negative aspects, and only praise it....
What the hell is the point of reviewing it.
Not one single player of AoC will deny the damn thing has issues, (that they all want to be fixed asap) but tons of issues none the less, from ATi cards, to 50+ content, to trades being screwed to itemization. You name it and AoC has it.
But you will notice the review didn't mention those things....
So yeah, I would say Funcom tossed these guys some money on the side to keep it more in the positive light, and veer away from anything negative they could.
If you think these kinda things don't happen on mainstream sites.... you would be wrong.
Let's take some of the guesswork out of this review.
The Gamespot Review, using only excerpts:
Good:
"the sights are impressive and striking, and the vivid backstory that supports this sprawling paradise is mature and, appropriately enough, barbaric."
"The cosmetic side of character creation is delightfully robust, letting you tweak nose length, pick tattoos, and play with a host of other options"
"The combat impressively remains gripping enough to push you forward, even when you're pursuing tasks that could qualify as grinding. ... These varied abilities mean that not only do group dynamics feel fresher than in most other online RPGs, but that the majority of classes offer highly successful solo play."
"if you'd rather avoid the unfriendliness of such (PVP/FFA) realms, you still have options. Instanced PVP battles are the most immediate outlet"
"Age of Conan is the most attractive and technically impressive MMOG now on the market, though it requires a rather beefy system to see Hyboria at its most splendid, and even then it is prone to weirdness."
Bad:
"But this is a flawed paradise. Funcom has been quick to handle the most egregious blemishes since the launch of its massively multiplayer online game, but a number of frustrating bugs remain ... Launch imperfections are common enough in the genre, but while Age of Conan's release was hardly disastrous, it has been less stable than we should expect."
"You have your own shielding arcs, and you can adjust them during battle, though you'll probably ignore the option, simply because any potential defensive benefit is too small to make futzing with the control and numeric keys worth the trouble."
"not every adjustment is as successful as others. For example, you can only learn crafting skills once you hit level 40. While the focus on combat is deliberate, crafting activities would have been a welcome way to mix up the early levels, especially given that you can gather resources before you can craft."
"the limited inventory space (even after buying an extra bag) can make dropped items more of a nuisance than a pleasure"
"Should you choose to play on a free-for-all player-versus-player server, be prepared for frustration ... you will be killed--often--by archers camping spawn points and "griefers" who get their jollies from punishing new players"
" At this point, it's unclear how well the game's most touted PVP component, guild siege battles, will function."
"If you'd rather continue your travels at later levels than invest in siege battle, you'll unfortunately find that the flow of new content gets noticeably slower as you progress toward the maximum level of 80."
" The sound design is essentially flawless."
Other/Neutral/Parts of Both:
"You'd do well to look past these imperfections, though, because Age of Conan is the most brutal and immediately satisfying MMOG on the market, thanks to its unique slant on combat, resonant quest writing, and uncompromising maturity"
(This quote is "neutral" because the bold highlighted sentence is HIGHLY subjective to your opinion)
"It's also paced much differently than its competition, ushering you into Hyboria slowly by juxtaposing a story-driven, single-player quest against the more standard team-oriented exploration and traditional questing."
"It's unfortunate that most post-Tortage quests lack the voice-over, but the tasks themselves are superbly written"
"The prospect of new loot, often a major reason to push forward, isn't as exciting as you'd hope, either"
("Neutral" because the quality of loot drops is another subjective thing -- the reviewer's standards of the quality of loot drops may not match yours)
""The flow of new abilities is also inconsistent, since rather than bringing brand-new spells, new levels more often reward you with more powerful versions of existing spells and combos. Fortunately, the feat points you begin to earn at level 10 can be spent on new abilities and upgrades from one of three specialization trees."
"It's a shame that there aren't more maps available for these (Instanced PVP) games, but the flexibility of Age of Conan's classes and the sheer bloody violence of the matches mean that every visit is a unique, and occasionally breathless, experience."
(neutral because it's too highly opinionated; not enough substance backing this up, meaning you may well disagree)
"The voice acting, though limited mostly to the first 20 levels, is excellent."
The "Bottom Line"
"Age of Conan has plenty of room to grow and a number of issues that need fixing, but even now, it offers a rewarding adventure abundant with character and fascinating backstory."
You notice how I moved an awful lot of quotes from Good or Bad to Neutral because of lack of supporting details to the statements? There was a lot of emotion, but not as much in substance -- which points to a somewhat incomplete amount of playing experience involved.
The reviewer tried to replace this substance with extra opinion, but I don't want someone to tell me it's fantastic -- tell me in-depth WHY it's fantastic and let me be the one to decide.
Taken from these quotes, one would wonder how the game scored an 8.5. It scored that high because the reviewer -- despite acknowledging the game's realistic flaws, formed his opinions on the theoretical basis of the game's design. Essentially it was, "Nevermind the technical flaws, the combat is great!"
In short, most of us -- rightly so -- would accuse the reviewer of not playing past the "honeymoon" period that ends around the late 30s/early 40s.
Haha, here is the new trend from the haters: "If the review is not totally negative, the reviewer was obviously on the payroll" Right ... In other words: "No positive reviews are allowed" Objectivity right out of the window.
That is because there is NO perfect and 100% positive game on the market today. Not even wow.
If a reviewer is not going to post a games NUMEROUS bugs and negative aspects, and only praise it....
What the hell is the point of reviewing it.
Not one single player of AoC will deny the damn thing has issues, (that they all want to be fixed asap) but tons of issues none the less, from ATi cards, to 50+ content, to trades being screwed to itemization. You name it and AoC has it.
But you will notice the review didn't mention those things....
So yeah, I would say Funcom tossed these guys some money on the side to keep it more in the positive light, and veer away from anything negative they could.
If you think these kinda things don't happen on mainstream sites.... you would be wrong.
Bugs never come into the rating of an MMORPG except if they are outrageous and make the game unplayable. This is the way Gamespot and other mainstream game sites have reviewed MMOs. They take bugs into consideration, but expect devs to be in control a few weeks later.
Claiming FC has all of Gamespot, Gamespy, Gamezone, G4, Atomicgamer, IGN, Metalcritic on their payroll is a bit premature, keeping in mind that the user reviews of the game on these sites are in about the same range of the sites score. I guess FC has also payed some thousands reviewrs for this? I think not.
Can you tell the difference between: 1. Wanting something to fail and, 2. Something being a failure? Some people want this game to fail so bad, it's unhealthy.
Well said!
I don't understand it either. The whining and crying that goes on. I honestly believe that some of these "children" really like absolutely nothing. They find fault with EVERY game and game company.
Well... Nothing is perfect. To be honest, AOC has LOTS of bugs. No question about it. Most of them are small and quite repairable, but annoying none the less. But... The game is fun and will improve over time.
Let's take some of the guesswork out of this review. The Gamespot Review, using only excerpts:
Good: "the sights are impressive and striking, and the vivid backstory that supports this sprawling paradise is mature and, appropriately enough, barbaric." "The cosmetic side of character creation is delightfully robust, letting you tweak nose length, pick tattoos, and play with a host of other options" "The combat impressively remains gripping enough to push you forward, even when you're pursuing tasks that could qualify as grinding. ... These varied abilities mean that not only do group dynamics feel fresher than in most other online RPGs, but that the majority of classes offer highly successful solo play." "if you'd rather avoid the unfriendliness of such (PVP/FFA) realms, you still have options. Instanced PVP battles are the most immediate outlet" "Age of Conan is the most attractive and technically impressive MMOG now on the market, though it requires a rather beefy system to see Hyboria at its most splendid, and even then it is prone to weirdness."
Bad: "But this is a flawed paradise. Funcom has been quick to handle the most egregious blemishes since the launch of its massively multiplayer online game, but a number of frustrating bugs remain ... Launch imperfections are common enough in the genre, but while Age of Conan's release was hardly disastrous, it has been less stable than we should expect." "You have your own shielding arcs, and you can adjust them during battle, though you'll probably ignore the option, simply because any potential defensive benefit is too small to make futzing with the control and numeric keys worth the trouble." "not every adjustment is as successful as others. For example, you can only learn crafting skills once you hit level 40. While the focus on combat is deliberate, crafting activities would have been a welcome way to mix up the early levels, especially given that you can gather resources before you can craft." "the limited inventory space (even after buying an extra bag) can make dropped items more of a nuisance than a pleasure" "Should you choose to play on a free-for-all player-versus-player server, be prepared for frustration ... you will be killed--often--by archers camping spawn points and "griefers" who get their jollies from punishing new players" " At this point, it's unclear how well the game's most touted PVP component, guild siege battles, will function." "If you'd rather continue your travels at later levels than invest in siege battle, you'll unfortunately find that the flow of new content gets noticeably slower as you progress toward the maximum level of 80." " The sound design is essentially flawless."
Other/Neutral/Parts of Both: "You'd do well to look past these imperfections, though, because Age of Conan is the most brutal and immediately satisfying MMOG on the market, thanks to its unique slant on combat, resonant quest writing, and uncompromising maturity"
(This quote is "neutral" because the bold highlighted sentence is HIGHLY subjective to your opinion) "It's also paced much differently than its competition, ushering you into Hyboria slowly by juxtaposing a story-driven, single-player quest against the more standard team-oriented exploration and traditional questing." "It's unfortunate that most post-Tortage quests lack the voice-over, but the tasks themselves are superbly written" "The prospect of new loot, often a major reason to push forward, isn't as exciting as you'd hope, either"
("Neutral" because the quality of loot drops is another subjective thing -- the reviewer's standards of the quality of loot drops may not match yours) ""The flow of new abilities is also inconsistent, since rather than bringing brand-new spells, new levels more often reward you with more powerful versions of existing spells and combos. Fortunately, the feat points you begin to earn at level 10 can be spent on new abilities and upgrades from one of three specialization trees." "It's a shame that there aren't more maps available for these (Instanced PVP) games, but the flexibility of Age of Conan's classes and the sheer bloody violence of the matches mean that every visit is a unique, and occasionally breathless, experience."
(neutral because it's too highly opinionated; not enough substance backing this up, meaning you may well disagree) "The voice acting, though limited mostly to the first 20 levels, is excellent."
The "Bottom Line" "Age of Conan has plenty of room to grow and a number of issues that need fixing, but even now, it offers a rewarding adventure abundant with character and fascinating backstory." ===================================================
You notice how I moved an awful lot of quotes from Good or Bad to Neutral because of lack of supporting details to the statements? There was a lot of emotion, but not as much in substance -- which points to a somewhat incomplete amount of playing experience involved. Taken from these quotes, one would wonder how the game scored an 8.5. It scored that high because the reviewer -- despite acknowledging the game's realistic flaws, formed his opinions on the theoretical basis of the game's design. Essentially it was, "Nevermind the technical flaws, the combat is great!" In short, most of us -- rightly so -- would accuse the reviewer of not playing past the "honeymoon" period that ends around the late 30s/early 40s.
This is probably the single best post out of this entire 3 pages of garbage.
Thank you Grim for posting it. Now when I read these snippets you took from the review. I read them all, and everything you have as a neutral I would equate to a negative, nothing in that neutral area to me is a positive. I see 5 Positives, 8 Negatives and the majority of the Neutral as negative, and yet it still gets a 8+ on the rating? Hmmmm.
Anyway, everything in your post seems right to me, Your last 2 paragraphs are exactly what should have been stated.
In the first month after release (and just prior to release) you get a stack of "professional" reviews telling you how great the game is.
These are supported by hordes of Fanbois who post 10/10! player reviews.
In a month the reviewers who have had time to play the game properly will start to publish and many of the fanbois will have moved on to the next game.
It's always the same. In the first month after release (and just prior to release) you get a stack of "professional" reviews telling you how great the game is. These are supported by hordes of Fanbois who post 10/10! player reviews.
In a month the reviewers who have had time to play the game properly will start to publish and many of the fanbois will have moved on to the next game.
Gee, not a bad review from Gamespot, who would have thunk it!
Of course gamespot is going to give AoC a good review. Besides, THEY BOTCHED FUNCOM'S PVP EVENT THEY WERE HANDLING. They owe'd Funcom something. The last time Gamespot gave a bad review to an EIDOS game, we all know what happened. Gamespot has proven their loyalty lies with those that pay for advertising on their site. There loyalty isn't to the people who read their reviews.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
Originally posted by grimmbot In short, most of us -- rightly so -- would accuse the reviewer of not playing past the "honeymoon" period that ends around the late 30s/early 40s.
the reviewer did state that he was writing the final review soon after he made level 40
Originally posted by grimmbot In short, most of us -- rightly so -- would accuse the reviewer of not playing past the "honeymoon" period that ends around the late 30s/early 40s.
the reviewer did state that he was writing the final review soon after he made level 40
For some reason people presume that MMo has nothing to do with community and that a game only qualifies as a mmo if the content needs forced grouping. If you can solo then it's not an mmo..even if it has thousands of online players running around.
Oh ye and to all the players that solo all content..how the hell do you guys manage to solo these epic dungeon boss'es? they rip me apart in seconds. i must be doing something wrong.
You do play the epic dungeons right? i mean it would be pretty lame to shout out how the game is bad because its a single player game when you chose to play the solo dungeons
"Age of Conan is one of the finest online RPGs available." Spot on, online RPG it is, but not a real MMO.
So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
it does, but it does it by splitting them all up into < 48-man instances. like i said, that's not an MMORPG, it's an ORPG.
Still dreaming in your little bubble thinking 48 is the limit of an instance? That's funny for most but you are spouting wrong info for those who are trying to get to know more of the game from these forums.
The "48" number comes from sieges being 48vs48, and it has NOTHING to do with the limit of an instance lol!
AoC uses the same instance system as EQ2 after lvl20.
Still dreaming in your little bubble thinking 48 is the limit of an instance? That's funny for most but you are spouting wrong info for those who are trying to get to know more of the game from these forums.
The "48" number comes from sieges being 48vs48, and it has NOTHING to do with the limit of an instance lol!
AoC uses the same instance system as EQ2 after lvl20.
So whats the limit? You seem awfully sure that its not 48, but do you have an actual number to give us? Personally when i was playing through up until 48 it felt like there were no more than 2 dozen others in the same instance at the most. Compared to other mmos ive played it was rare I ran into anyone at all.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence. Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
Still dreaming in your little bubble thinking 48 is the limit of an instance? That's funny for most but you are spouting wrong info for those who are trying to get to know more of the game from these forums.
The "48" number comes from sieges being 48vs48, and it has NOTHING to do with the limit of an instance lol!
AoC uses the same instance system as EQ2 after lvl20.
So whats the limit? You seem awfully sure that its not 48, but do you have an actual number to give us? Personally when i was playing through up until 48 it felt like there were no more than 2 dozen others in the same instance at the most. Compared to other mmos ive played it was rare I ran into anyone at all.
Limit is dependent on the size of the zone, there isn't a FIXED number.
Check this out and tell me if it's 48people you see there:
"Age of Conan is one of the finest online RPGs available." Spot on, online RPG it is, but not a real MMO.
So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
it does, but it does it by splitting them all up into < 48-man instances. like i said, that's not an MMORPG, it's an ORPG.
Yes it is :P
It's persistent and supports thousands of players, therefore a mmorpg.
And when you speak orpg, I assume you mean games like neverwinter nights, where the worlds are non-persistent and does not support hundreds of players in the same world.
Comments
Play the game, don't like it? Don't play it.
That is because there is NO perfect and 100% positive game on the market today. Not even wow.
If a reviewer is not going to post a games NUMEROUS bugs and negative aspects, and only praise it....
What the hell is the point of reviewing it.
Not one single player of AoC will deny the damn thing has issues, (that they all want to be fixed asap) but tons of issues none the less, from ATi cards, to 50+ content, to trades being screwed to itemization. You name it and AoC has it.
But you will notice the review didn't mention those things....
So yeah, I would say Funcom tossed these guys some money on the side to keep it more in the positive light, and veer away from anything negative they could.
If you think these kinda things don't happen on mainstream sites.... you would be wrong.
Let's take some of the guesswork out of this review.
The Gamespot Review, using only excerpts:
Good:
"the sights are impressive and striking, and the vivid backstory that supports this sprawling paradise is mature and, appropriately enough, barbaric."
"The cosmetic side of character creation is delightfully robust, letting you tweak nose length, pick tattoos, and play with a host of other options"
"The combat impressively remains gripping enough to push you forward, even when you're pursuing tasks that could qualify as grinding. ... These varied abilities mean that not only do group dynamics feel fresher than in most other online RPGs, but that the majority of classes offer highly successful solo play."
"if you'd rather avoid the unfriendliness of such (PVP/FFA) realms, you still have options. Instanced PVP battles are the most immediate outlet"
"Age of Conan is the most attractive and technically impressive MMOG now on the market, though it requires a rather beefy system to see Hyboria at its most splendid, and even then it is prone to weirdness."
Bad:
"But this is a flawed paradise. Funcom has been quick to handle the most egregious blemishes since the launch of its massively multiplayer online game, but a number of frustrating bugs remain ... Launch imperfections are common enough in the genre, but while Age of Conan's release was hardly disastrous, it has been less stable than we should expect."
"You have your own shielding arcs, and you can adjust them during battle, though you'll probably ignore the option, simply because any potential defensive benefit is too small to make futzing with the control and numeric keys worth the trouble."
"not every adjustment is as successful as others. For example, you can only learn crafting skills once you hit level 40. While the focus on combat is deliberate, crafting activities would have been a welcome way to mix up the early levels, especially given that you can gather resources before you can craft."
"the limited inventory space (even after buying an extra bag) can make dropped items more of a nuisance than a pleasure"
"Should you choose to play on a free-for-all player-versus-player server, be prepared for frustration ... you will be killed--often--by archers camping spawn points and "griefers" who get their jollies from punishing new players"
" At this point, it's unclear how well the game's most touted PVP component, guild siege battles, will function."
"If you'd rather continue your travels at later levels than invest in siege battle, you'll unfortunately find that the flow of new content gets noticeably slower as you progress toward the maximum level of 80."
" The sound design is essentially flawless."
Other/Neutral/Parts of Both:
"You'd do well to look past these imperfections, though, because Age of Conan is the most brutal and immediately satisfying MMOG on the market, thanks to its unique slant on combat, resonant quest writing, and uncompromising maturity"
(This quote is "neutral" because the bold highlighted sentence is HIGHLY subjective to your opinion)
"It's also paced much differently than its competition, ushering you into Hyboria slowly by juxtaposing a story-driven, single-player quest against the more standard team-oriented exploration and traditional questing."
"It's unfortunate that most post-Tortage quests lack the voice-over, but the tasks themselves are superbly written"
"The prospect of new loot, often a major reason to push forward, isn't as exciting as you'd hope, either"
("Neutral" because the quality of loot drops is another subjective thing -- the reviewer's standards of the quality of loot drops may not match yours)
""The flow of new abilities is also inconsistent, since rather than bringing brand-new spells, new levels more often reward you with more powerful versions of existing spells and combos. Fortunately, the feat points you begin to earn at level 10 can be spent on new abilities and upgrades from one of three specialization trees."
"It's a shame that there aren't more maps available for these (Instanced PVP) games, but the flexibility of Age of Conan's classes and the sheer bloody violence of the matches mean that every visit is a unique, and occasionally breathless, experience."
(neutral because it's too highly opinionated; not enough substance backing this up, meaning you may well disagree)
"The voice acting, though limited mostly to the first 20 levels, is excellent."
The "Bottom Line"
"Age of Conan has plenty of room to grow and a number of issues that need fixing, but even now, it offers a rewarding adventure abundant with character and fascinating backstory."
===================================================
You notice how I moved an awful lot of quotes from Good or Bad to Neutral because of lack of supporting details to the statements? There was a lot of emotion, but not as much in substance -- which points to a somewhat incomplete amount of playing experience involved.
The reviewer tried to replace this substance with extra opinion, but I don't want someone to tell me it's fantastic -- tell me in-depth WHY it's fantastic and let me be the one to decide.
Taken from these quotes, one would wonder how the game scored an 8.5. It scored that high because the reviewer -- despite acknowledging the game's realistic flaws, formed his opinions on the theoretical basis of the game's design. Essentially it was, "Nevermind the technical flaws, the combat is great!"
In short, most of us -- rightly so -- would accuse the reviewer of not playing past the "honeymoon" period that ends around the late 30s/early 40s.
That is because there is NO perfect and 100% positive game on the market today. Not even wow.
If a reviewer is not going to post a games NUMEROUS bugs and negative aspects, and only praise it....
What the hell is the point of reviewing it.
Not one single player of AoC will deny the damn thing has issues, (that they all want to be fixed asap) but tons of issues none the less, from ATi cards, to 50+ content, to trades being screwed to itemization. You name it and AoC has it.
But you will notice the review didn't mention those things....
So yeah, I would say Funcom tossed these guys some money on the side to keep it more in the positive light, and veer away from anything negative they could.
If you think these kinda things don't happen on mainstream sites.... you would be wrong.
Bugs never come into the rating of an MMORPG except if they are outrageous and make the game unplayable. This is the way Gamespot and other mainstream game sites have reviewed MMOs. They take bugs into consideration, but expect devs to be in control a few weeks later.Claiming FC has all of Gamespot, Gamespy, Gamezone, G4, Atomicgamer, IGN, Metalcritic on their payroll is a bit premature, keeping in mind that the user reviews of the game on these sites are in about the same range of the sites score. I guess FC has also payed some thousands reviewrs for this? I think not.
That is all.
Well said!
I don't understand it either. The whining and crying that goes on. I honestly believe that some of these "children" really like absolutely nothing. They find fault with EVERY game and game company.
Well... Nothing is perfect. To be honest, AOC has LOTS of bugs. No question about it. Most of them are small and quite repairable, but annoying none the less. But... The game is fun and will improve over time.
I'm enjoying it so far.
This is probably the single best post out of this entire 3 pages of garbage.
Thank you Grim for posting it. Now when I read these snippets you took from the review. I read them all, and everything you have as a neutral I would equate to a negative, nothing in that neutral area to me is a positive. I see 5 Positives, 8 Negatives and the majority of the Neutral as negative, and yet it still gets a 8+ on the rating? Hmmmm.
Anyway, everything in your post seems right to me, Your last 2 paragraphs are exactly what should have been stated.
For electriceye.... here is your spoon.
It's always the same.
In the first month after release (and just prior to release) you get a stack of "professional" reviews telling you how great the game is.
These are supported by hordes of Fanbois who post 10/10! player reviews.
In a month the reviewers who have had time to play the game properly will start to publish and many of the fanbois will have moved on to the next game.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
LOL Gyrus, you gave up on PotBS already?
LMAO...
Gee, not a bad review from Gamespot, who would have thunk it!
Of course gamespot is going to give AoC a good review. Besides, THEY BOTCHED FUNCOM'S PVP EVENT THEY WERE HANDLING. They owe'd Funcom something. The last time Gamespot gave a bad review to an EIDOS game, we all know what happened. Gamespot has proven their loyalty lies with those that pay for advertising on their site. There loyalty isn't to the people who read their reviews.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
For electriceye.... here is your spoon.
After everything I wrote, THIS is all I get?Well thanks!
www.gamespot.com/news/blogs/review-blog/909185210/26410977/age-of-conan-final-adventure-entry.html
I am quite proud that I hit level 40.
Look for a review on Monday!
EQ2 fan sites
"Age of Conan is one of the finest online RPGs available."
Spot on, online RPG it is, but not a real MMO.
www.gamespot.com/news/blogs/review-blog/909185210/26410977/age-of-conan-final-adventure-entry.html
I am quite proud that I hit level 40.
Look for a review on Monday!
Ugh, so I did miss that.
I was trying to give the reviewer the benefit of the doubt, but... now he has no excuse to lack substance in the review.
2k reviews from people who like hack n slash diablo games doesnt make AoC a good mmorpg.
Its not. It barely qualifies as one, in my opinion
Your opinion is noted, but is obviously not shared by the majority of aoc players. :P
i didn't even notice this - even gamespot calls it an ORPG, not a MMORPG. interesting detail.
So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
For some reason people presume that MMo has nothing to do with community and that a game only qualifies as a mmo if the content needs forced grouping. If you can solo then it's not an mmo..even if it has thousands of online players running around.
Oh ye and to all the players that solo all content..how the hell do you guys manage to solo these epic dungeon boss'es? they rip me apart in seconds. i must be doing something wrong.
You do play the epic dungeons right? i mean it would be pretty lame to shout out how the game is bad because its a single player game when you chose to play the solo dungeons
it does, but it does it by splitting them all up into < 48-man instances. like i said, that's not an MMORPG, it's an ORPG.So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
ofc.. you will post some links to prove this,
it does, but it does it by splitting them all up into < 48-man instances. like i said, that's not an MMORPG, it's an ORPG.So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
Still dreaming in your little bubble thinking 48 is the limit of an instance? That's funny for most but you are spouting wrong info for those who are trying to get to know more of the game from these forums.The "48" number comes from sieges being 48vs48, and it has NOTHING to do with the limit of an instance lol!
AoC uses the same instance system as EQ2 after lvl20.
anyone else notice the sponsored links? seems like such a dumb thing to put at the bottom of a well respected website
(i removed the links so i wont get banned)
Sponsored Links
Visit Web Site Instant access to cheats, bots and macros ($19.99).
Visit Web Site Age of Conan Gold,Super Cheap! The No1 fast delivery AOC service
Visit Web Site Step by step leveling guide 1-50 Quests & maps included. Order NOW
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence.
Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
Limit is dependent on the size of the zone, there isn't a FIXED number.Check this out and tell me if it's 48people you see there:
www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/191/view/forums/thread/181978
I hate it when people take numbers out of their a**es and state them as facts.
it does, but it does it by splitting them all up into < 48-man instances. like i said, that's not an MMORPG, it's an ORPG.So AoC does not support thousands of player in a persistent world?
Yes it is :P
It's persistent and supports thousands of players, therefore a mmorpg.
And when you speak orpg, I assume you mean games like neverwinter nights, where the worlds are non-persistent and does not support hundreds of players in the same world.