Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I thought the game was supposed to be busier after the PvP Patch?
Libertasplz
Member Posts: 221
Because it absolutely is not. I play on Deathwhisper and minus the first day where there was a good population it is even worse than it was two weeks ago. I counted 38 level 80's on on Saturday night at 10 PM EST.
So ya...i finally cancelled. I posted this on the general forums and had it deleted in 3 minutes. Really sad Funcom I hope they enjoy their dead game.
Comments
Yeah I never really noticed an increase on DW either.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
i'm from Tyranny, the pvp patch doesn't make the game better but worst. It might make more new player quit. WHY? But now even normal player have a reason to kill player (7lv below worth some PVP point) So everywhere you goes you will get kill.. Normal player will think it doesn't hurt them, they just have to spawn in other rez point.
How to fix this? Funcom should make only gain PVP Xp from Mini PVP game. But then AOC might turn into Counterstrike..
Crom has a bit increase in population and minigames are 10 times as popular now...
The patch to fix the ganking is the next patch with the notority system... The PvP servers will probably be hard to play on until then... but the PvE servers seems more busy.
Hmm so they introduced the reward system, then are going to wait a while before introducing the punishment system..... bravo Failcom
This game is dead, let's face it and move on, ok...Warhammer, AIon, now we're talking, this game was FUN, it was great, it had the backbone, but no PvP...unacceptable.
Most of the MMO PVPers are in WAR. Funcom are foolish if they thought this PVP patch would suddenly revive the player numbers. Funcom should move along and focus on a the xbox360 version where the game belongs.
FC screwed it up by not addressing the class and gameplay bugs faster also missing content didn't help and people lost faith and went to play WAR instead.
Im not suprised tbh. What does suprise me is that anyone still plays the game at all. They must have a very limted mmo experience or just a lower threshold of expectations.
Also not suprised your thread got removed. Funcom still havn't realised if you take away peoples freedom of speech over any negative comments, it just looks bad for them. They want only positive threads on the forum...which will eventually end up in no posts to moderate.
Was talking to an old guild member who still plays and he said what was the busiest pvp server on EU is now a ghost town. Yet certain people keep making threads saying everything is rosy on here. Thats what peed me off most about AoC, the blatent lies.
I too am surprised anyone still plays this game. Companies like Funcom don't listen to the subscribers, they listen to numbers, so if you wanna teach em a lesson, and the whole industry for that matter, unsubscribe. Why give money to liars steering a ghost ship of a game into oblivion? Where is the righteous indignation that should've unsubscribed you a long time ago? Don't you deserve value for your money in the form of a working game with the features it promised present? Don't you deserve honest discourse and decent customer service? Don't you at least deserve the freedom to rant about how snookered you've been? Either way, it probably doesn't matter who remains subscribed or unsubscribes, I think the point has been made, don't lie, just deliver or die.
"Although estimates for these types of games are notoriously hard to make, it is a fair assumption that the number is nowhere near 200,000. Although boasting 49 servers/gameworlds Age of Conan would be fortunate to have more than 1000 active players on half of these. The high end requirements seem to have struck the European playerbase especially hard. Overall, using all the empirical data histories from other games and an admittedly subjective analysis of the game's current health, the number of subscriptions from initial box sales is going to be ~90,000, +- 40,000.
Given our estimate range of 50,000 to 130,000 subscriptions a price target is hard to formulate. In such cases a range is more appropriate. Eitherway, it is very hard to validate Funcom's current stock price. It is recommended that current investors should sell Funcom stock and future investors should short Funcom stock until a justifiable market cap is reached.
50,000 subscriber 6 month target $8.50
90,000 subscriber 6 month target $11.20
130,000 subscriber 6 month target $16.60"
originally posted by ABLitigator
Considering its stock price is $7.73 ,and decreasing, they could have less than 5% of sold units represented as subscribers, in just 4 months!
"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." -Edmund Burke
Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?"
(Psalm 94:16)
There was a slight bump in players for about 3 days surrounding the launch of the first part of the pvp patch. It's just like launch day all over again.. a lot of hype and then it was just a letdown.
In a few months, Funcom will have all the pieces in place for a solid game. The problem is that most of advanced parts of the game require a fairly high population. Who cares if seiging finally works in November if there aren't two guilds on your server who have 20+ players online.
AOC's reputation is shot... players simply are not going to come back to an average game with such a small population and limited development team. Let me rephrase that.. enough players will come back to make this like AO2 or Vanguard2.
Funcom took a gamble and launched AOC about 6 months too early to get ahead of Warhammer. In hindsight, they totaly failed, but I'm not sure if waiting would have mattered either. Warhammer is a decent (if boring) game, but I do think a November launch of AOC would have sucked way more players away from Warhammer than what AOC will have in November now.
Everyone I know has quit and gone to Warhammer (3 guilds worth of people) and we are having a great time. I cant see anything that would get us to come back to AoC.
Good that you finally made a choice to stop taking anymore crap from Funcom. I dont know how long youve been playing, but it does not take long to notice how deluded oneself gets in AoC.. living in hope of "just the next patch"..
Ya I guess I just got sick of it. I'm not really playing anything at the moment I was going to play WAR but I figured I'll take a break from MMO's for a bit.
Was interesting though that yesterday was the worst day on XFire for Age of Conan ever. Maybe they are getting what they deserve now.
I too am surprised anyone still plays this game. Companies like Funcom don't listen to the subscribers, they listen to numbers, so if you wanna teach em a lesson, and the whole industry for that matter, unsubscribe. Why give money to liars steering a ghost ship of a game into oblivion? Where is the righteous indignation that should've unsubscribed you a long time ago? Don't you deserve value for your money in the form of a working game with the features it promised present? Don't you deserve honest discourse and decent customer service? Don't you at least deserve the freedom to rant about how snookered you've been? Either way, it probably doesn't matter who remains subscribed or unsubscribes, I think the point has been made, don't lie, just deliver or die.
"Although estimates for these types of games are notoriously hard to make, it is a fair assumption that the number is nowhere near 200,000. Although boasting 49 servers/gameworlds Age of Conan would be fortunate to have more than 1000 active players on half of these. The high end requirements seem to have struck the European playerbase especially hard. Overall, using all the empirical data histories from other games and an admittedly subjective analysis of the game's current health, the number of subscriptions from initial box sales is going to be ~90,000, +- 40,000.
Given our estimate range of 50,000 to 130,000 subscriptions a price target is hard to formulate. In such cases a range is more appropriate. Eitherway, it is very hard to validate Funcom's current stock price. It is recommended that current investors should sell Funcom stock and future investors should short Funcom stock until a justifiable market cap is reached.
50,000 subscriber 6 month target $8.50
90,000 subscriber 6 month target $11.20
130,000 subscriber 6 month target $16.60"
originally posted by ABLitigator
Considering its stock price is $7.73 ,and decreasing, they could have less than 5% of sold units represented as subscribers, in just 4 months!
Wow when was this posted this would suggest that Age of Conan has less than 50,000 subscribers now!
I too am surprised anyone still plays this game. Companies like Funcom don't listen to the subscribers, they listen to numbers, so if you wanna teach em a lesson, and the whole industry for that matter, unsubscribe. Why give money to liars steering a ghost ship of a game into oblivion? Where is the righteous indignation that should've unsubscribed you a long time ago? Don't you deserve value for your money in the form of a working game with the features it promised present? Don't you deserve honest discourse and decent customer service? Don't you at least deserve the freedom to rant about how snookered you've been? Either way, it probably doesn't matter who remains subscribed or unsubscribes, I think the point has been made, don't lie, just deliver or die.
"Although estimates for these types of games are notoriously hard to make, it is a fair assumption that the number is nowhere near 200,000. Although boasting 49 servers/gameworlds Age of Conan would be fortunate to have more than 1000 active players on half of these. The high end requirements seem to have struck the European playerbase especially hard. Overall, using all the empirical data histories from other games and an admittedly subjective analysis of the game's current health, the number of subscriptions from initial box sales is going to be ~90,000, +- 40,000.
Given our estimate range of 50,000 to 130,000 subscriptions a price target is hard to formulate. In such cases a range is more appropriate. Eitherway, it is very hard to validate Funcom's current stock price. It is recommended that current investors should sell Funcom stock and future investors should short Funcom stock until a justifiable market cap is reached.
50,000 subscriber 6 month target $8.50
90,000 subscriber 6 month target $11.20
130,000 subscriber 6 month target $16.60"
originally posted by ABLitigator
Considering its stock price is $7.73 ,and decreasing, they could have less than 5% of sold units represented as subscribers, in just 4 months!
This is pretty much what Ive been saying all along?