Please don't instance* this game to bits like you did with AoC? Pretty please? Rule one of mmorpg club is; "Immersion > Eyecandy" Thanks! edit: * instancing as in; having multiple copies of the same public zones on the same server.
Yes, we clearly all want to spend 2 hours in a virtual plane going from Paris to London. Or 10 hours in train watching all the generic nature all around.
*sighs*
Read it again, Sam.
If you didnt notice yet let me be the first one to inform you. Secret World is using the same engine as Age of Conan. Hope that explains your instance dilemma.
and AOC used the same engine from AO (although upgraded, kinda like the TSW engine) and it didnt have channeling and the zones were immense.
@OP: and i agree, i hate channeling, it completely ruins the immersion factor for me. And i have been a huge promoter for immersion in video games, since i have seen the affects of a game with great immersion (Neverwinter nights 2), it was like a really good book, i couldnt stop playing, i had to know what came next. Lol i was even upset to take a break to go to sleep or get something to eat. I could only imagine how a MMORPG would do with that level of immersion
Hate to tell you, but AO sure as hell does have the same channeling. The fact is there's not enough population anymore to make it kick in. Otherwise you'd notice it. In fact, a good way to notice it is the newbie isle zone. Too many people in the zone, you get a different GS ( game server ). I've seen the newbie isle get up to GS 12. And how do you team with other people in a different GS? You team up throught lft and then zone to place you both in the same GS.
Aside from newbie island, the old orbital station, the backyard areas and some dungeons, there is no "channeling" or area instancing in AO, you can see the pictures of the massive invasions people have performed on the other faction's main cities via whom-pahs or the grid, hundreds of players zoning into a city, killing all they find, and then hundresds of players coming to stop the threat. Once Onmi people took Athens for some 4 hours untill FC had to send their RP-GM like characters to restore order.
Borealis have been crashed due to too many characters getting into it, no additional instances of the area generated, just lag and disconnections when the load was unbearable (for your system).
We shall see how this will wrk in TSW, the premise of the game is too good, but aside from that we know nothing for real. Wait and see is my approach, a world like AO's with zones for diferent (large) areas (as you need diferent whole zones for cities in different areas of the world, you can't walk from one to another seamlesly), instanced particular or special (team, group, raid, even solo) encounters as "dungeons", and no instancing in the open world, it's te approach of many games, is good, it's also the approach of one of the 2 FC MMOs.
Ragnar's work on TLJ and Dreamfall indicate a very solid and interesting story, and overall a good game, but we won't know till we see something, for real.
Oh for sure. It's the SOE syndrome... One slip up, and everything with their name on it will forever be slammed (not that SOE or Funcom didn't deserve the criticism...)
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
Oh for sure. It's the SOE syndrome... One slip up, and everything with their name on it will forever be slammed (not that SOE or Funcom didn't deserve the criticism...)
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
The marketing and PR BS from Funcom is already starting. Look at the Pub.. it's being spammed by TSW threads.
Funcom is the most shameless liars of all developers.. the same crap they pulled with AOC they are starting again.
All I can say is that if you have immersion high on your game feature wish list and tried AoC you probably wouldn't have written that. But *shrug*.
You don't know a whole lot about me then because immersion is a very important factor, however I don't equal seamless world with immersion. You can have a totally open world with serious immersion issues like Vanguard that utlimately fails to immerse me, as you can have a very 'instanced' and boxed in world like AoC or EQ2 and feel much more immersed due to the quality and high level of detail.
I don't expect everyone to agree, but to me I don't quite grasp the huge fuss some people will make over zoning and channels, channels that only exist when there's a very high population which was the case at release and is also something that happens in EQ2 on Antonia Bayle and possibly other MMOs you're not aware of. I think maybe it's because people expect the same gaming experience from previous mmos and can only accept what a 'true mmo' is according to past experience.
Things change, but not to worry other games are being made that will cater to the open world crowd. But like I said I don't care open world or not as long as the game is GOOD. That's much more important, to me anyway.
Please explain do people realy want world where everything is camped and full of people.
At worst think about AoC's Tortage's inn and if with physic there wouldn't be any copies of it? Packed full of people so no one could move around and do anything cool isn't it? On other hand non-instanced game play same spot of mobs needed to kill would be always camped and would take ages to get quests done, also cool. Non-instanced raids? You first gather go in and find that boss is killed propably with some nice long spawn-time like 9h our so, also cool.
I agree that "channeling" can be problematic, but this could be fixed, generaly some mechanic which allows you to change instance or on zoning moves you to right one, likely same as leader or majority of team. Also it's fine question quantity over quality. I agree that AoC's zones are too small, and should be less coridor like. On other hand AO's zones are vast and there are lot of empty space and certain intrest points, also these aren't instanced or channeled, only certain smaller zones like personal/team missions and new raid zones are instanced this also support gameplay, you don't have too many competitors in one zone.
I agree, zoning should be better than AoC where's there is always loading screen, amount of data needed might be too large, compared to AO where there is loading, but no screen and even if it takes a few seconds sometimes it still feels better. Ofc this could be helped by including certain mechanics for better computers like pre-loading inner zones while in main area.
BTW, I still think AO is best MMORPG around, on other hand I also agree that AoC was over hyped, and also had it's problems, and they shouldn't do that level of hype ever again.
Oh for sure. It's the SOE syndrome... One slip up, and everything with their name on it will forever be slammed (not that SOE or Funcom didn't deserve the criticism...)
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
I think you're confusing them with Aventurine and Darkfall? I don't specifically remember anyone pleading to give FC a chance 'cause they were just an indie company. However, people are still using the "indie" thing to excuse AV for DF.
Besides, they did fix up AO, it went on to win various awards and gained a very loyal playerbase.
The problems with AoC wouldn't have been so pronounced if their hyper-hyperbole spewing, spin-doctoring big mouth of a PR guy would have shut up. The launch was flawed as it was, yet the guy just kept talking them deeper into a hole. Believe me, I voiced more than my own share of criticism of FC for their handling of AoC. I'm no fanboy, believe me (at least not where their MMOs are concerned. Dreamfall/Longest Journey, on the other hand? Different story entirely :-p).
However... I am also not a believer that the past will always indicate the future. They could screw up again. Or, they can finally get their act together and do a better job. No matter how much one wants to believe so, or how strongly they feel it's the case, no one here can predict how it will turn out. Only time will tell.
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
Oh well, let me correct myself... 2 slip ups.
Better?
Your "correction" notwithstanding, my statement still stands.
The point is, once a company screws up, there's a certain group of people who declare everything else they ever do a "failure", even well before they have anything to support that conclusion. People are already doing it with this game.
Example:
There are people who have the SOE syndrome with Turbine. They call LoTRO a failure because of what happened with AC2. LoTRO, by all accounts, had a great launch and has been a stable game since then. Still, those people will insist AC2's failure proves that Turbine can't release a stable game, against all evidence to the contrary.
That's what I'm getting at.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I'm a grown adult. So, could you please get off the high-horse and stop talking down to me?
Thank you.
I'm not naive about anything. Again, I have given Funcom my share of flack over AoC; gone head-to-head with Avery, mocked their ludicrous PR spin... the whole nine. However, I'm not one of those people who believes that because something happened in the past means it will automatically happen again in the future.
This is a new game and they have a clean slate; another chance to get it right - or at least a lot better.
And if they don't... well, then I guess people can choose not to play it, right?
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
I agree. I'm excited about the PR only in as much as it's revealing what the game is about. I'm also excited about the main guy behind it (Ragnar Tornquist), being a fan of his other games.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Oh for sure. It's the SOE syndrome... One slip up, and everything with their name on it will forever be slammed (not that SOE or Funcom didn't deserve the criticism...)
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
The marketing and PR BS from Funcom is already starting. Look at the Pub.. it's being spammed by TSW threads.
Funcom is the most shameless liars of all developers.. the same crap they pulled with AOC they are starting again.
<sarcasm>
I know! Building interest and gathering a following for their next product...
No other company does that!
They have no *right* to talk about their next game!
I mean.. Who do they think they are?
</sarcasm>
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
You can build interest in a product without deliberately *lying* about what is going to be in it. If you have a hard time with that distinction, then I am not sure what to say to you.
FunCom has a demonstrated pattern of gross exaggeration when promoting their new projects, to such a degree that it makes nearly anything they promise about a new game suspect. This is not a coincidence or quirk, it's a deliberate business decision to try and boost initial sales - because as AoC showed amply, box sales can recoup dev costs even if the game is basically a failure. It's a nasty business model and not one I have any intention of playing along with.
You can build interest in a product without deliberately *lying* about what is going to be in it. If you have a hard time with that distinction, then I am not sure what to say to you.
And where are they "lying" about what's going to be in TSW? The game was *just announced* FFS. We're not even anywhere near beta yet. No one, except them, knows what will be in it at this point... So what the hell are you even talking about?
FunCom has a demonstrated pattern of gross exaggeration when promoting their new projects, to such a degree that it makes nearly anything they promise about a new game suspect.
They delivered on The Longest Journey, which was highly acclaimed and earned several awards. They delivered on Dreamfall, (see 'Press' section) which was also acclaimed and received awards. Though it was a mess at launch, they recovered and delivered on AO, which also went on to receive various rewards and a loyal playerbase. So, if you're going to talk about "demonstrated patterns", you need to include all their games, not only the one that fits your argument.
Yes, they way over-hyped, over-promised and spun like tops with AoC. No one denies that, except the most die-hard fans. I have said this myself and criticized them for it.
That does not forfeit their right to promote their next project and establish a fan-base ahead of the game's release - just like every other MMO company out there does.
It also does not automatically mean the next release will be the same, no matter how much you, or any other arm-chair pyschic here wants to believe so. It's a new game and a clean slate and they have the chance to prove that they learned from the train-wreck of AoC and will not do it again. Whether or not they will, no one knows at this point... so it's pointless, premature and presumptuous to speculate either way.
This is not a coincidence or quirk, it's a deliberate business decision to try and boost initial sales - because as AoC showed amply, box sales can recoup dev costs even if the game is basically a failure. It's a nasty business model and not one I have any intention of playing along with.
Then don't play along with it! That is 1000% your choice.
But what exactly are you trying to prove by coming here, beating the same drum over and over? You really think all of us here aren't aware of FC's history, particularly their recent history? At least speaking for myself, I most certainly am. I've been playing their games since the early Anarchy Online days, have played TLJ and Dreamfall, and followed and tried AoC. I didn't "discover" Funcom last week. So, I will follow the game, see how it develops, get into beta if I can, do my part in pointing out issues and such... and if they prove to be pulling the same crap, I will respond appropriately and with equal criticism as I did for AoC.
But to come on a forum barely a week after a game's been announced and start declaring "they're lying!" when no one knows anything about the game beyond what we've been told is, frankly, nothing more than gratuitous bashing for bashing's sake; another chance to "beat up on FC".
Go berate them for AoC all day long on those forums - they've earned it. Bashing them and accusing them of lying for a game they just announced, however, is completely unjustified.
Again, most people in these threads have demonstrated themselves to be pretty intelligent people. I'm sure we can all see what's happening and make our own decisions. We don't need people like yourself throwing "AoC! AoC! Funcom is teh Satan!" in our faces in every damn thread.
Let it go.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Given the fanboi swarm that defended every aspect of AoC right up until launch, no, no I don't believe the majority of posters are aware of FunComs history and past practices...or at least they certainly don't act like it.
Also, I don't "stalk" FunCom...I post, occasionally, here on MMORPG.COM because ya know, I like talking about the industry and watching new and upcoming MMOs.
If the period of initial announcement *isn't* the time to bring up the past history of the company in question and their previous misleading promos at best, when exactly is?
Clearly there is something criminal about wanting a dev team to focus more on actually delivering a product with features that work rather than focusing on a good PR show and empty claims.
Given the fanboi swarm that defended every aspect of AoC right up until launch, no, no I don't believe the majority of posters are aware of FunComs history and past practices...or at least they certainly don't act like it.
Yes.. the fanboi swarm defending AoC right up to... and well after launch, actually.
However... different game, different forums and from what I've seen, a largely different group of people following it; several of which have already shared the same sentiment as me: "It looks promising, but after what happened with AoC, we're proceeding with caution".
Again, you are not a shining beacon of truth in the dark here. People here *are* aware of what happened with AoC. And for those who weren't? Well I think, with all the posts from people like yourself who insist on bringing it up in nearly every thread, they certainly do by now.
Also, I don't "stalk" FunCom...I post, occasionally, here on MMORPG.COM because ya know, I like talking about the industry and watching new and upcoming MMOs.
I guess you're referring to another poster, because I never accused anyone of "stalking" anyone. Compulsively bashing them when ever it seems appropriate, even if irrelevant? Yes. "Stalking"? No. If the period of initial announcement *isn't* the time to bring up the past history of the company in question and their previous misleading promos at best, when exactly is?
Fair point... except...
... AoC is being used to paint a picture of FC that is exaggerated and disingenuous. They lied, and over-hyped and spun with AoC - 1 game. They delivered 3 other games quite successfully (AO was a mess at launch but recovered and did well afterward). So, if we're talking about a "track record", then AoC was the exception, not the rule - despite how much certain people want to ignore that fact.
The person mainly responsible for the hype, spin and PR damage is no longer at FC. TSW is a new game and a clean slate. They have an opportunity to prove that what happened with AoC was an anomaly and will *not* happen again.
People, like yourself, seem determined to insist that AoC proves that it will, and that they're "lying again" with absolutely no basis relevant to TSW itself (no, invoking AoC is not relevant to a just-announced game still a ways off from beta).
They might pull it off. They might botch it again. No one can say right now. We're all in a "wait and see" pattern for now, though apparently some refuse to accept that and think they've got it "all figured out".
Clearly there is something criminal about wanting a dev team to focus more on actually delivering a product with features that work rather than focusing on a good PR show and empty claims.
That statement has no basis on the conversation whatsoever. It's you simply projecting your own hatred of FC onto a new project which has yet to prove itself out either way.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I may be wrong on this observation but it seems that people in this forum not profusely hating on Funcom are people who are fans of their single RPGs first and foremost and fans of the type of in depth story these people can bring.
Maybe that's why it's far easier for us to not get so angry towards the AoC over hype and lack of timely delivery.
See part of my problem here is that you simply dismiss the negatives as irrelevent, while trumpeting "acheivements" that I would argue are totally hollow.
I also played Anarchy Online from launch and returned repeatedly to try it later. They never fixed some of fundamental bugs that plagued it from the begining. It never rose beyond being a very troubled game with a miniscule, although fanatical, player base. The "awards" it got had far more to do with the rabid dedication of that fan base than any improvement in FC performance.
Likewise, trumpeting an obscure game line with little relation to MMOs doesn't prove a whole lot. Winning a few nods from one or two of the bajillions of gaming sites doesn't prove a whole lot, other than you did a good job of directing your fans to register and vote there. It's about as meaningful as claiming an MMORPG.COM award means a whole lot.
If FunCom were actually taking more steps to pull a "mea culpa", make amends or fix things for those who purchased AoC, I might be willing to believe they are changing and cut them some more slack...but they aren't.
See part of my problem here is that you simply dismiss the negatives as irrelevent, while trumpeting "acheivements" that I would argue are totally hollow. I also played Anarchy Online from launch and returned repeatedly to try it later. They never fixed some of fundamental bugs that plagued it from the begining. It never rose beyond being a very troubled game with a miniscule, although fanatical, player base. The "awards" it got had far more to do with the rabid dedication of that fan base than any improvement in FC performance.
Likewise, trumpeting an obscure game line with little relation to MMOs doesn't prove a whole lot. Winning a few nods from one or two of the bajillions of gaming sites doesn't prove a whole lot, other than you did a good job of directing your fans to register and vote there. It's about as meaningful as claiming an MMORPG.COM award means a whole lot. If FunCom were actually taking more steps to pull a "mea culpa", make amends or fix things for those who purchased AoC, I might be willing to believe they are changing and cut them some more slack...but they aren't.
I just love when people take my posts, completely ignore objective facts, and attempt to spin it into something else entirely.
I'm not "directing" anyone to vote anywhere. There's nothing even there to vote for.. those are already established reviews and accolades I refer to, not active polls. Remove and step away from the tin-foil hat, please.
I was using *references* to back up my statements - unlike many people here who merely state something and expect it to stand on its own, because they "said so". That said, they won more than a "few nods" and not just from a "rabid fanbase" - IGN, Gamespot, Adrenaline Vault and Gamespy are not mere "rabid fans". Computer Gaming World is an actual publication, not "rabid fans". The awards given are no less valid than for any other game; your personal opinion of them being "hollow" notwithstanding. And you talk about dismissing things? Pot, meet kettle.
As a side thought:
As for awards based on reader polls... I just love how people spin the results of a given award. If it's a game they like, "it won because it's the better game". If it's a game they don't like "It only won because of the rabid fanboys"; and their favorite game lost because "all the haters voted against it". As though the idea that people simply like a different game more than theirs is beyond their comprehension. Sour grapes at its most blatant.
(end side thought)
As for me dismissing negatives as irrelevant... Umm.. I said they had a really bad launch with AO, didn't I? I said that they did an attrocious job handling AoC and that even I have criticized them for it... didn't I? I've said that I'm adopting "cautious optimism" in following TSW because of how AoC was handled, didn't I? Contary to your claims, I acknowledge and am proceeding based on the negatives I cited. I'm most definitely not "dismissing" them.
What the hell more do you want? You want me to dig through their history and cite every little mistake they might have made along the way, no matter how insignificant it is on balance? Shall I invent a few things, quote-mine and/or twist a few details out of context? You want me to dismiss the ratings their previous games have earned, just because you don't agree with them and think they're "hollow"? You want me to bash them for things that don't deserve it, just so it'll "sit better" with you? Should I behave like others here and disingenuously act as though AoC represents the entirety of their game catalog, ignoring the others they've released, so as to make them look as bad as possible?
Sorry. When addressing something objectively, I look at things for what they are, not for what I or anyone else would "like them to be".
Funcom's track record is what it is. It's all there, for all to see. I've made nothing up nor have I stated anything that can't be verified by anyone with the initiative to check for themselves. You, on the other hand, are speaking completely from your own bias and personal opinion. *Slight* difference.
In sum, as of right now, their track-record weighs more heavily for them than it does against them, the rants of the Anti-AoC/FC crew here notwithstanding.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Likewise, trumpeting an obscure game line with little relation to MMOs doesn't prove a whole lot. Winning a few nods from one or two of the bajillions of gaming sites doesn't prove a whole lot, other than you did a good job of directing your fans to register and vote there. It's about as meaningful as claiming an MMORPG.COM award means a whole lot.
What's to prove? Nothing, you're either looking forwards to the game, waiting on info and hanging out in a forum or you're not.
Simple really. I have no idea what you haters have against people enjoying a title for what it is and calling them rabid fanboys when in reality you are no different or better, you're just the polar opposite; rabid haters with heavy blinders of another kind.
Do yourself a favor and learn some perspective.
Also these obscure games aren't obscure at all and are very well done, lol, maybe you should play them before attempting to say anything.
Again it's obvious you're upset over one title, not that I can blame you it sucks with any company however Funcom isn't any better or worse then others in that respect. Everyone hates or loves SOE, NCsoft, Funcom, Blizzard. Think about it, each of these companies have people standing by them or rabidly upset at them for changing the game, for shutting down the game, for changing how people play an MMO, some who argue the worst fault of all...
If you are tentative about this title then don't hang around here, come back when it's released and you can see for yourself.
I just love when people take my posts, completely ignore objective facts, and attempt to spin it into something else entirely.
Funny, they are only "objective facts" in that the awards were given. What they were based on and if they have any meaning or relevance is entirely opinion. I'm not "directing" anyone to vote anywhere. There's nothing even there to vote for.. those are already established reviews and accolades I refer to, not active polls. Remove and step away from the tin-foil hat, please. Speaking of spin, that comment is really odd since I said nothing of the sort in my post.
As for awards based on reader polls... I just love how people spin the results of a given award. If it's a game they like, "it won because it's the better game". If it's a game they don't like "It only won because of the rabid fanboys"; and their favorite game lost because "all the haters voted against it". As though the idea that people simply like a different game more than theirs is beyond their comprehension. Sour grapes at its most blatant.
Fine use of a total strawman there, I have never (here or anywheres else) argued that website polls or awards have the slightest validity or relevance.
What the hell more do you want? You want me to dig through their history and cite every little mistake they might have made along the way, no matter how insignificant it is on balance? Shall I invent a few things, quote-mine and/or twist a few details out of context? You want me to dismiss the ratings their previous games have earned, just because you don't agree with them and think they're "hollow"? You want me to bash them for things that don't deserve it, just so it'll "sit better" with you? Should I behave like others here and disingenuously act as though AoC represents the entirety of their game catalog, ignoring the others they've released, so as to make them look as bad as possible? I don't *want* anything from you, aside from possibly getting off that awfully high horse you are on. This thread is a discussion of opinion, nothing more. You have chosen to forgive, dismiss, overlook or see past (use whatever term you like) FunComs past issues to be "cautiously optimistic" about their new project...fair enough, but that is an opinion not some objective fact.
Sorry. When addressing something objectively, I look at things for what they are, not for what I or anyone else would "like them to be".
Funcom's track record is what it is. It's all there, for all to see. I've made nothing up nor have I stated anything that can't be verified by anyone with the initiative to check for themselves. You, on the other hand, are speaking completely from your own bias and personal opinion. *Slight* difference.
In sum, as of right now, their track-record weighs more heavily for them than it does against them, the rants of the Anti-AoC/FC crew here notwithstanding. Again, that is entirely your opinion - you're welcome to it, but it's not an inarguable fact because you say so and point to some awards to claim that somehow makes up for all of FunComs bad points. You're clearly willing to cut FC some slack for whatever reason and I'm not...so be it, but that doesn't make you the master of objectivity and me a ranting loon just because I happen to disagree with you.
Added for the next poster: I'm not saying TLJ and its follow on were bad games, but they weren't MMOs and to the North American audience they were obscure. I never heard about them until their "award wins", never saw them once on a store shelf anyways and never heard a single friend, corp or guildmate talk about them...which anecdotally would argue that they were pretty far under the radar for most gamers.
PS Cynthe - while I admit I am biased against FunCom, that opinion is solidly based on their past performance and my past interactions with them. As for "gaining perspective", I have plenty thanks...I do see both sides of it and admit that FC could pull off a well done MMO, there are things I will even applaud them for - determination being one of them, they aren't as likely as say NCSoft to ditch a title and run off after launch, or fail to support it and leave it to stagnate ala SOE. I just don't happen to think it is likely...but I freely admit I could be wrong...
I just love when people take my posts, completely ignore objective facts, and attempt to spin it into something else entirely.
Funny, they are only "objective facts" in that the awards were given. What they were based on and if they have any meaning or relevance is entirely opinion.
You're really stretching here.
The point is... The games all won numerous awards, and those awards are every bit relevant as any similar award given to any other game. Because you don't like the company in this case does not make them any less.
I'm not "directing" anyone to vote anywhere. There's nothing even there to vote for.. those are already established reviews and accolades I refer to, not active polls. Remove and step away from the tin-foil hat, please. Speaking of spin, that comment is really odd since I said nothing of the sort in my post.
Okay.. I misread the statement I was referring to. I wasn't, however, "spinning" it.
Here's the statement I was referring to:
"Winning a few nods from one or two of the bajillions of gaming sites doesn't prove a whole lot, other than you did a good job of directing your fans to register and vote there."
That said.. what you did actually say isn't much better. It's the classic "I don't like the outcome, so I'm going to dismiss the opinions of all who voted in one broad stroke". In this case, by implying that somehow they only voted because they were "directed to".
As though they wouldn't have on their own initiative, because they wanted to. Of course not. People thinking and behaving on their own initiative? Preposterous. "They were all directed there" sounds much more reasonable.
And that doesn't account for the Editor's Choice awards and other awards received that weren't voter-driven. But wait... let me guess.. FC paid people off to get those, right? That's the other popular tin-foil hat theory.
As for awards based on reader polls... I just love how people spin the results of a given award. If it's a game they like, "it won because it's the better game". If it's a game they don't like "It only won because of the rabid fanboys"; and their favorite game lost because "all the haters voted against it". As though the idea that people simply like a different game more than theirs is beyond their comprehension. Sour grapes at its most blatant.
Fine use of a total strawman there, I have never (here or anywheres else) argued that website polls or awards have the slightest validity or relevance.
Umm... lol. Wow. Are you serious? Talk about blatant, unabashed dishonesty.
I notice you eliminated the two bits that enclosed that paragraph. Here's that bit in its entirety as it was in my post:
**As a side thought:**
As for awards based on reader polls... I just love how people spin the results of a given award. If it's a game they like, "it won because it's the better game". If it's a game they don't like "It only won because of the rabid fanboys"; and their favorite game lost because "all the haters voted against it". As though the idea that people simply like a different game more than theirs is beyond their comprehension. Sour grapes at its most blatant.
**(end side thought)**
Relevant parts enclosed in **
See... I specifically book-ended that paragraph with "As a side thought" and (end side thought) so that it would be clear that the paragraph in-between was not directly addressing your post, but... well... a side thought.
So what do you do, trying to be all "sneaky"? You *removed* those bits in your response, thereby changing its context, so you could accuse me of using a strawman argument.
Pretty pathetic that you have to stoop to such a lame tactic to try and win a point. Weak. Very weak.
It's one thing to be disingenuous. It's another thing entirely to be shamelessly and blatantly dishonest. And you, sir, have earned the distinction. Good job.
'Strawman' my ass. I don't *want* anything from you, aside from possibly getting off that awfully high horse you are on. This thread is a discussion of opinion, nothing more. You have chosen to forgive, dismiss, overlook or see past (use whatever term you like) FunComs past issues to be "cautiously optimistic" about their new project...fair enough, but that is an opinion not some objective fact.
First, the paragraph you're replying to there was entirely facetious.
That said...
I'm not on a high horse. Both my feet are firmly on the ground, thank you.
I'm merely citing facts; sorry if they don't sit well with you.
I never said you couldn't share your opinion. Have I told you to shut up, leave, GTFO or anything similar? Nope. You've stated opinions. I responded to them with factual, verifiable statements.
Again, that is entirely your opinion - you're welcome to it, but it's not an inarguable fact because you say so and point to some awards to claim that somehow makes up for all of FunComs bad points. You're clearly willing to cut FC some slack for whatever reason and I'm not...so be it, but that doesn't make you the master of objectivity and me a ranting loon just because I happen to disagree with you.
I'm not offering opinion on anything. I'm relaying actual, verifiable facts gathered from other valid sources.
Your insistance to frame it as "my opinion" notwithstanding, it *is* inarguable fact that they've had 3 releases that have each won their share of recognition and accolades, even with one of them having had a rough launch. It's all on record, available for all to see. That they've won myriad accolades for previous games is *objective fact*. Your personal opinion of the validity of those awards does not change that.
I'll let Cynthe respond to the other statements.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Apologies, I wasn't removing anything to change context...just trying to snip things down to size a little from a massive wall of text...but as usual you choose to spin it your way. Your "side thought" or whatever was totally relevent as it was clearly inserted to attribute those sentiments to me...you haven't been going back and forth with anyone else...so suddenly inserting a "some people...." comment clearly *was* directed at me, which is the classic purpose of a strawman..
As for the rest, I'll just walk away and drop it because this stopped being anything resembling a civil discussion long ago.
Apologies, I wasn't removing anything to change context...just trying to snip things down to size a little from a massive wall of text...but as usual you choose to spin it your way. Your "side thought" or whatever was totally relevent as it was clearly inserted to attribute those sentiments to me...you haven't been going back and forth with anyone else...so suddenly inserting a "some people...." comment clearly *was* directed at me, which is the classic purpose of a strawman.. As for the rest, I'll just walk away and drop it because this stopped being anything resembling a civil discussion long ago.
You post that.... and then accuse me of spinning? You're a goldmine of irony, ain't ya.
I put that in there as an aside, because it occured to me - as a side thought - while I was typing my post. It's a behavior I've seen all over these forums, not specifically in this thread, thus why I separated it as a "side thought". Get it?
So, no... it wasn't "about you". Sorry to burst your bubble. If I intended to specifically address you, I would have specifically addressed you. Do not presume to know my intentions better than I do. Thank you.
Though, apparently you took it very personally... so maybe I hit a nerve?
And seriously... you removed *two* tiny statements to "trim down" a "wall of text", but left everything else intact? Those 7 words really pushed my post over the threshold and needed to go, eh? Riiiiiiiight. You should have stopped at "Apologies" and left it there, 'cause I'm smelling some amateur league bullshit in the rest of your post.
And, yeah... you walking away from it is a good idea. Perhaps come back when you've learned to debate more honestly and we'll try again.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
You just can't let anything drop can you? "debate honestly" my ass, I do applaud your manipulation skills though...I could waste some more time answering your last round of spin, but there really isn't a point....I'm sure you'd just answer with another spew "refuting" me. (Enjoy that last word I am sure you will get in)
Don't mischaracterize what I say, accuse me of spinning or make baseless accusations like above, and I'll let it drop. Keep doing so, and I'll continue to call you on it. Very simple, really.
"debate honestly" my ass, I do applaud your manipulation skills though...
So, now I'm manipulating? Hardly.
I didn't make you alter my previous post so you could take it out of context. You did that all by yourself. As for not debating honestly...
Altering a direct quote from me to change its context so you can then attack it is not honest. As for your "excuse"... Saying that removing a mere 7 words out of an entire post, particularly ones establishing context, was to "trim a wall of text" is pretty weak. I'm amazed you'd expect anyone to be at all credulous of that explanation.
So, if the shoe fits...
I could waste some more time answering your last round of spin, but there really isn't a point....I'm sure you'd just
answer with another spew "refuting" me. (Enjoy that last word I am sure you will get in)
Well, since I'm not spinning in the first place... you're right, you would be wasting your time answering it. Your actions are as discrete as an airhorn in a church.
Want me to stop replying? That's easy. Stop giving me a reason to. Want me to continue? Also easy. Just continue as you've been. Ball's in your court.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
-no 80 levels, it took WoW 5years to get to that point, don't you do it.(just learned no levels..good) There will be no levels. Ragnar also says this.
-don't add a ridiculous amount of classes in game if you don't know what to do with them all.(no classes good) Again.. no classes in the game.
You know when I actually go back to correct myself before you can, as eager as you may be in the effort correcting others because I know this feeling is organsmic for some, don't do stuff like this unless you want to seem like some overly opinionated self-righteous fanboi....
Ever heard of the saying a "No need to preach to the choir," learn it!...0o
Comments
Yes, we clearly all want to spend 2 hours in a virtual plane going from Paris to London. Or 10 hours in train watching all the generic nature all around.
*sighs*
Read it again, Sam.
If you didnt notice yet let me be the first one to inform you. Secret World is using the same engine as Age of Conan. Hope that explains your instance dilemma.
and AOC used the same engine from AO (although upgraded, kinda like the TSW engine) and it didnt have channeling and the zones were immense.
@OP: and i agree, i hate channeling, it completely ruins the immersion factor for me. And i have been a huge promoter for immersion in video games, since i have seen the affects of a game with great immersion (Neverwinter nights 2), it was like a really good book, i couldnt stop playing, i had to know what came next. Lol i was even upset to take a break to go to sleep or get something to eat. I could only imagine how a MMORPG would do with that level of immersion
Hate to tell you, but AO sure as hell does have the same channeling. The fact is there's not enough population anymore to make it kick in. Otherwise you'd notice it. In fact, a good way to notice it is the newbie isle zone. Too many people in the zone, you get a different GS ( game server ). I've seen the newbie isle get up to GS 12. And how do you team with other people in a different GS? You team up throught lft and then zone to place you both in the same GS.
Aside from newbie island, the old orbital station, the backyard areas and some dungeons, there is no "channeling" or area instancing in AO, you can see the pictures of the massive invasions people have performed on the other faction's main cities via whom-pahs or the grid, hundreds of players zoning into a city, killing all they find, and then hundresds of players coming to stop the threat. Once Onmi people took Athens for some 4 hours untill FC had to send their RP-GM like characters to restore order.
Borealis have been crashed due to too many characters getting into it, no additional instances of the area generated, just lag and disconnections when the load was unbearable (for your system).
We shall see how this will wrk in TSW, the premise of the game is too good, but aside from that we know nothing for real. Wait and see is my approach, a world like AO's with zones for diferent (large) areas (as you need diferent whole zones for cities in different areas of the world, you can't walk from one to another seamlesly), instanced particular or special (team, group, raid, even solo) encounters as "dungeons", and no instancing in the open world, it's te approach of many games, is good, it's also the approach of one of the 2 FC MMOs.
Ragnar's work on TLJ and Dreamfall indicate a very solid and interesting story, and overall a good game, but we won't know till we see something, for real.
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
I just can't trust Funcom after AOC!!!
Meh, I'll definately beta test the game if I can.
Gotta say though sometime about this title I like, how ever the game turns out well, that's up to funcom to proove MMoers wrong.
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
The marketing and PR BS from Funcom is already starting. Look at the Pub.. it's being spammed by TSW threads.
Funcom is the most shameless liars of all developers.. the same crap they pulled with AOC they are starting again.
All I can say is that if you have immersion high on your game feature wish list and tried AoC you probably wouldn't have written that. But *shrug*.
You don't know a whole lot about me then because immersion is a very important factor, however I don't equal seamless world with immersion. You can have a totally open world with serious immersion issues like Vanguard that utlimately fails to immerse me, as you can have a very 'instanced' and boxed in world like AoC or EQ2 and feel much more immersed due to the quality and high level of detail.
I don't expect everyone to agree, but to me I don't quite grasp the huge fuss some people will make over zoning and channels, channels that only exist when there's a very high population which was the case at release and is also something that happens in EQ2 on Antonia Bayle and possibly other MMOs you're not aware of. I think maybe it's because people expect the same gaming experience from previous mmos and can only accept what a 'true mmo' is according to past experience.
Things change, but not to worry other games are being made that will cater to the open world crowd. But like I said I don't care open world or not as long as the game is GOOD. That's much more important, to me anyway.
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
Please explain do people realy want world where everything is camped and full of people.
At worst think about AoC's Tortage's inn and if with physic there wouldn't be any copies of it? Packed full of people so no one could move around and do anything cool isn't it? On other hand non-instanced game play same spot of mobs needed to kill would be always camped and would take ages to get quests done, also cool. Non-instanced raids? You first gather go in and find that boss is killed propably with some nice long spawn-time like 9h our so, also cool.
I agree that "channeling" can be problematic, but this could be fixed, generaly some mechanic which allows you to change instance or on zoning moves you to right one, likely same as leader or majority of team. Also it's fine question quantity over quality. I agree that AoC's zones are too small, and should be less coridor like. On other hand AO's zones are vast and there are lot of empty space and certain intrest points, also these aren't instanced or channeled, only certain smaller zones like personal/team missions and new raid zones are instanced this also support gameplay, you don't have too many competitors in one zone.
I agree, zoning should be better than AoC where's there is always loading screen, amount of data needed might be too large, compared to AO where there is loading, but no screen and even if it takes a few seconds sometimes it still feels better. Ofc this could be helped by including certain mechanics for better computers like pre-loading inner zones while in main area.
BTW, I still think AO is best MMORPG around, on other hand I also agree that AoC was over hyped, and also had it's problems, and they shouldn't do that level of hype ever again.
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
I think you're confusing them with Aventurine and Darkfall? I don't specifically remember anyone pleading to give FC a chance 'cause they were just an indie company. However, people are still using the "indie" thing to excuse AV for DF.
Besides, they did fix up AO, it went on to win various awards and gained a very loyal playerbase.
The problems with AoC wouldn't have been so pronounced if their hyper-hyperbole spewing, spin-doctoring big mouth of a PR guy would have shut up. The launch was flawed as it was, yet the guy just kept talking them deeper into a hole. Believe me, I voiced more than my own share of criticism of FC for their handling of AoC. I'm no fanboy, believe me (at least not where their MMOs are concerned. Dreamfall/Longest Journey, on the other hand? Different story entirely :-p).
However... I am also not a believer that the past will always indicate the future. They could screw up again. Or, they can finally get their act together and do a better job. No matter how much one wants to believe so, or how strongly they feel it's the case, no one here can predict how it will turn out. Only time will tell.
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
Oh well, let me correct myself... 2 slip ups.
Better?
Your "correction" notwithstanding, my statement still stands.
The point is, once a company screws up, there's a certain group of people who declare everything else they ever do a "failure", even well before they have anything to support that conclusion. People are already doing it with this game.
Example:
There are people who have the SOE syndrome with Turbine. They call LoTRO a failure because of what happened with AC2. LoTRO, by all accounts, had a great launch and has been a stable game since then. Still, those people will insist AC2's failure proves that Turbine can't release a stable game, against all evidence to the contrary.
That's what I'm getting at.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I'm a grown adult. So, could you please get off the high-horse and stop talking down to me?
Thank you.
I'm not naive about anything. Again, I have given Funcom my share of flack over AoC; gone head-to-head with Avery, mocked their ludicrous PR spin... the whole nine. However, I'm not one of those people who believes that because something happened in the past means it will automatically happen again in the future.
This is a new game and they have a clean slate; another chance to get it right - or at least a lot better.
And if they don't... well, then I guess people can choose not to play it, right?
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
I agree. I'm excited about the PR only in as much as it's revealing what the game is about. I'm also excited about the main guy behind it (Ragnar Tornquist), being a fan of his other games.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
But that's just it, it's NOT "one" slip up. It's a repeated pattern now.
They totally botched Anarchy Onlines development and launch...and everyone said, "aww they are poor indies, give them a pass..."
So they get one of the biggest IPs in the genre....and launch Age of Conan...again rushed, unfinished and with massive design flaws and bugs. So now you say, "one slip up"?
Please.
I'm not saying they might not some day release something decent, but their record *sucks* and their record of utter BS from their PR flacks and hype people is astounding. If you don't take anything that Funcom "says" about a game before it launches with a huge grain of salt, you are being incredibly naive.
I would love to see this game done right and be a huge hit, but I will believe it when FC delivers the product...not based on their PR.
The marketing and PR BS from Funcom is already starting. Look at the Pub.. it's being spammed by TSW threads.
Funcom is the most shameless liars of all developers.. the same crap they pulled with AOC they are starting again.
<sarcasm>
I know! Building interest and gathering a following for their next product...
No other company does that!
They have no *right* to talk about their next game!
I mean.. Who do they think they are?
</sarcasm>
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
You can build interest in a product without deliberately *lying* about what is going to be in it. If you have a hard time with that distinction, then I am not sure what to say to you.
FunCom has a demonstrated pattern of gross exaggeration when promoting their new projects, to such a degree that it makes nearly anything they promise about a new game suspect. This is not a coincidence or quirk, it's a deliberate business decision to try and boost initial sales - because as AoC showed amply, box sales can recoup dev costs even if the game is basically a failure. It's a nasty business model and not one I have any intention of playing along with.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Given the fanboi swarm that defended every aspect of AoC right up until launch, no, no I don't believe the majority of posters are aware of FunComs history and past practices...or at least they certainly don't act like it.
Also, I don't "stalk" FunCom...I post, occasionally, here on MMORPG.COM because ya know, I like talking about the industry and watching new and upcoming MMOs.
If the period of initial announcement *isn't* the time to bring up the past history of the company in question and their previous misleading promos at best, when exactly is?
Clearly there is something criminal about wanting a dev team to focus more on actually delivering a product with features that work rather than focusing on a good PR show and empty claims.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I may be wrong on this observation but it seems that people in this forum not profusely hating on Funcom are people who are fans of their single RPGs first and foremost and fans of the type of in depth story these people can bring.
Maybe that's why it's far easier for us to not get so angry towards the AoC over hype and lack of timely delivery.
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
See part of my problem here is that you simply dismiss the negatives as irrelevent, while trumpeting "acheivements" that I would argue are totally hollow.
I also played Anarchy Online from launch and returned repeatedly to try it later. They never fixed some of fundamental bugs that plagued it from the begining. It never rose beyond being a very troubled game with a miniscule, although fanatical, player base. The "awards" it got had far more to do with the rabid dedication of that fan base than any improvement in FC performance.
Likewise, trumpeting an obscure game line with little relation to MMOs doesn't prove a whole lot. Winning a few nods from one or two of the bajillions of gaming sites doesn't prove a whole lot, other than you did a good job of directing your fans to register and vote there. It's about as meaningful as claiming an MMORPG.COM award means a whole lot.
If FunCom were actually taking more steps to pull a "mea culpa", make amends or fix things for those who purchased AoC, I might be willing to believe they are changing and cut them some more slack...but they aren't.
I just love when people take my posts, completely ignore objective facts, and attempt to spin it into something else entirely.
I'm not "directing" anyone to vote anywhere. There's nothing even there to vote for.. those are already established reviews and accolades I refer to, not active polls. Remove and step away from the tin-foil hat, please.
I was using *references* to back up my statements - unlike many people here who merely state something and expect it to stand on its own, because they "said so". That said, they won more than a "few nods" and not just from a "rabid fanbase" - IGN, Gamespot, Adrenaline Vault and Gamespy are not mere "rabid fans". Computer Gaming World is an actual publication, not "rabid fans". The awards given are no less valid than for any other game; your personal opinion of them being "hollow" notwithstanding. And you talk about dismissing things? Pot, meet kettle.
As a side thought:
As for awards based on reader polls... I just love how people spin the results of a given award. If it's a game they like, "it won because it's the better game". If it's a game they don't like "It only won because of the rabid fanboys"; and their favorite game lost because "all the haters voted against it". As though the idea that people simply like a different game more than theirs is beyond their comprehension. Sour grapes at its most blatant.
(end side thought)
As for me dismissing negatives as irrelevant... Umm.. I said they had a really bad launch with AO, didn't I? I said that they did an attrocious job handling AoC and that even I have criticized them for it... didn't I? I've said that I'm adopting "cautious optimism" in following TSW because of how AoC was handled, didn't I? Contary to your claims, I acknowledge and am proceeding based on the negatives I cited. I'm most definitely not "dismissing" them.
What the hell more do you want? You want me to dig through their history and cite every little mistake they might have made along the way, no matter how insignificant it is on balance? Shall I invent a few things, quote-mine and/or twist a few details out of context? You want me to dismiss the ratings their previous games have earned, just because you don't agree with them and think they're "hollow"? You want me to bash them for things that don't deserve it, just so it'll "sit better" with you? Should I behave like others here and disingenuously act as though AoC represents the entirety of their game catalog, ignoring the others they've released, so as to make them look as bad as possible?
Sorry. When addressing something objectively, I look at things for what they are, not for what I or anyone else would "like them to be".
Funcom's track record is what it is. It's all there, for all to see. I've made nothing up nor have I stated anything that can't be verified by anyone with the initiative to check for themselves. You, on the other hand, are speaking completely from your own bias and personal opinion. *Slight* difference.
In sum, as of right now, their track-record weighs more heavily for them than it does against them, the rants of the Anti-AoC/FC crew here notwithstanding.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
What's to prove? Nothing, you're either looking forwards to the game, waiting on info and hanging out in a forum or you're not.
Simple really. I have no idea what you haters have against people enjoying a title for what it is and calling them rabid fanboys when in reality you are no different or better, you're just the polar opposite; rabid haters with heavy blinders of another kind.
Do yourself a favor and learn some perspective.
Also these obscure games aren't obscure at all and are very well done, lol, maybe you should play them before attempting to say anything.
Again it's obvious you're upset over one title, not that I can blame you it sucks with any company however Funcom isn't any better or worse then others in that respect. Everyone hates or loves SOE, NCsoft, Funcom, Blizzard. Think about it, each of these companies have people standing by them or rabidly upset at them for changing the game, for shutting down the game, for changing how people play an MMO, some who argue the worst fault of all...
If you are tentative about this title then don't hang around here, come back when it's released and you can see for yourself.
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
Added for the next poster: I'm not saying TLJ and its follow on were bad games, but they weren't MMOs and to the North American audience they were obscure. I never heard about them until their "award wins", never saw them once on a store shelf anyways and never heard a single friend, corp or guildmate talk about them...which anecdotally would argue that they were pretty far under the radar for most gamers.
PS Cynthe - while I admit I am biased against FunCom, that opinion is solidly based on their past performance and my past interactions with them. As for "gaining perspective", I have plenty thanks...I do see both sides of it and admit that FC could pull off a well done MMO, there are things I will even applaud them for - determination being one of them, they aren't as likely as say NCSoft to ditch a title and run off after launch, or fail to support it and leave it to stagnate ala SOE. I just don't happen to think it is likely...but I freely admit I could be wrong...
I'll let Cynthe respond to the other statements.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Apologies, I wasn't removing anything to change context...just trying to snip things down to size a little from a massive wall of text...but as usual you choose to spin it your way. Your "side thought" or whatever was totally relevent as it was clearly inserted to attribute those sentiments to me...you haven't been going back and forth with anyone else...so suddenly inserting a "some people...." comment clearly *was* directed at me, which is the classic purpose of a strawman..
As for the rest, I'll just walk away and drop it because this stopped being anything resembling a civil discussion long ago.
You post that.... and then accuse me of spinning? You're a goldmine of irony, ain't ya.
I put that in there as an aside, because it occured to me - as a side thought - while I was typing my post. It's a behavior I've seen all over these forums, not specifically in this thread, thus why I separated it as a "side thought". Get it?
So, no... it wasn't "about you". Sorry to burst your bubble. If I intended to specifically address you, I would have specifically addressed you. Do not presume to know my intentions better than I do. Thank you.
Though, apparently you took it very personally... so maybe I hit a nerve?
And seriously... you removed *two* tiny statements to "trim down" a "wall of text", but left everything else intact? Those 7 words really pushed my post over the threshold and needed to go, eh? Riiiiiiiight. You should have stopped at "Apologies" and left it there, 'cause I'm smelling some amateur league bullshit in the rest of your post.
And, yeah... you walking away from it is a good idea. Perhaps come back when you've learned to debate more honestly and we'll try again.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
You just can't let anything drop can you? "debate honestly" my ass, I do applaud your manipulation skills though...I could waste some more time answering your last round of spin, but there really isn't a point....I'm sure you'd just answer with another spew "refuting" me. (Enjoy that last word I am sure you will get in)
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
You know when I actually go back to correct myself before you can, as eager as you may be in the effort correcting others because I know this feeling is organsmic for some, don't do stuff like this unless you want to seem like some overly opinionated self-righteous fanboi....
Ever heard of the saying a "No need to preach to the choir," learn it!...0o