Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Do you really trust funcom to make a good game after Anarchy-Online?
rznkain
Member Posts: 539
Just curious about this given funcoms widely known rep as a greedy company who half ass does everything and lies to there customers do you have faith they will be any different for AoC?
I played Ao for a number of years I am fully aware of how funcom works and how they handle there player base and have handled there player base for years.I have heard lie after lie after lie told to there customers,I have seen expansion packs released like AI with the main feature of the expansion pack(player shops) not even added into the game till 6 months after ppl paid them for the expansion.
Just curious to you AoC fans if you really think given Funcom's track record that they will somehow manage to do this game right and actually treat there customers better than they have the last 6 years.
Comments
Well but look at it from this point of view... they got AO running and generating revenue. They can pull AoC on their own due to knowledge, manpower and cash in house due to point one. Furthermore they got a strong IP and their own brand to take care of.
So, yes? Still a quite simple example I gave but then in doubt always remember to ask: Where's the money?
Bottom line is that they got all means to deliver a cashcow and more aspects to take care of. AoC might not appeal to some or many in the end but pulling a bad game as in for example unfinished? Heck no!
I played Anarchy Online for a very long time, and feel I had a lot of experience in it. I worked as an ARK (Customer Service rep) for 3 & a half years. So I spent a lot of time working with both Funcom employees working on the game, and customers playing the game.
IMO, Funcom has spent a lot of effort in AO ensuring it was a large game with a lot of different ways to reach end game. Whether you chose to run missions or grind mob camps around RK, or even running the higher missions and grinding hecklers in SL you still had choices. A lot of bugs were fixed over the years, some making the game better, some just making it work. But they sure did spend a lot of time fixing it, and I felt the expansions that I saw come to fruition were good. I was playing AO before Notum Wars, back when people were getting banned for duping creds. I played far into the game beyond Alien Invasion right until just before Lost Eden was released.
I think the OP's opinion is a bit rough, when you weigh into account how many player concerns were addressed by Funcom and that they not only had player-volunteer "Advisors" who brought issues to the attention of Funcom staff, but also players who were -class leaders- of their class within the game and spoke to developers on behalf of their class. I think you've got to consider that Funcom really did listen to their fan base, and made countless efforts to fix problems iwth the game.
Credit where credit is due, I think Funcom is a great company to build us Age of Conan, if for no other reason than their prior experience developing Anarchy Online.
I never played AO, but after looking at AoC' s website I'm looking forward to it more than Warhammer now.
One of the things that concerns me about WAR is that it will not have an official forum.
Yes if look at Funcom's past history you'd have to be wary of how they will go with AoC. First AO had one of the worst releases possible, luckily WWIIO released at nearly the same time with an even worse release and took some heat off Funcom. Now you could say it was just because it was the early days of MMORPGs but the problem still exists to this day, while VG wasn't nowhere near as bad as AO it is depressing that it still happens in this day and age. So Funcom could yet again launch a buggy nearly not running game like it did with AO, however I'm hoping with Funcom now being an established company with other revenue streams outside of MMOs that things like budget restraints won't force them to release early which was probably the case with AO and certainly the case for VG.
As for the gameplay aspect in AoC, it is a case of wait and see. Funcom has the habit of biting off more then it can chew, it is an innovator in the field of MMOs but often is the case that it doesn't implement it correctly the first time or has to hold off on implementing promised stuff cause they haven't ironed out the kinks.
But then, they also made "Anarchy Online" /shudder (I actually learned about AO being in development when I bought TLJ and became a huge fanboy for the game...until it released of course)
I guess if I were looking forward to Age of Conan, I would hope that somewhere deep within the bowels of Funcom is some glimmer of the company that designed TLJ all those many years ago.
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
but as with any game company, a lot of info that is released is pure marketing.
FC has been very good through this development process of letting community members know that some features will simply not be finished and not in at release.
and do not discount the fact that a lot can be learned from previous mistakes.
T.R.
Click here if you want to play 4Story and get a Newbie Package for free!
AO was a great game.
The game only had two substantial problems in my oinion:
(1) the learning curve made it hard for some to get into it (the learning curve was also a plus, as the complex nano etc system was pretty damn fun ONCE you got it); and
(2) the launch.
It was really the latter that hurt AO ... people never "forgot" that atrocious launch. With a good launch, AO could have been the EQ killer at the time.
Spooooon!!!!
You are of course free to pass on any Funcom products, no worries about that. But out in the real world, except for the really chaotic launch, AO has one of the best reputations on the MMO market. It is THE one game of ALL MMOs that can claim to be the next step in evolution of MMOs (EVE as well, but that is shipbased), that actually did something more than just a bland copy of EQ. Funcom has tons of respect among developers and players alike, and that you cry over some microscopic pet peeve you and you alone whine about does not change the real world.
Both game designers and player audience are extremly curious what Funcom will add to the genre this time. So yes... Please, stay away. Its all up to you, and I really think some dork that want to cry before he even knows what he cries about would just help the game a lot by not being anywhere near it.
May I suggest Vanguard for you? You should fit in perfectly with those people. Bye bye, now.
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"
Hmm, I'll go with a short answer for once:
Hell yes!
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
Considering the company backing them up would not allow them to release a terrible and unfinished game it wont be anything but a well polished and complete product. I'm looking forward to it.
My theme song.
If you are concerned about getting information from devs there are ways that can be handled: When you login, you get a news page to read of new features, bugs and etc. Emails can be sent out. RSS feeds can be used. A website sans forums can be used to pass out the information.
Now about reporting bugs and other issues: You can have ingame tools for that. You can include email addresses for that.
If people need to bitch and moan about a game, there are many forums on the net for that.
Now without forums, you won't get the people with the loudest voice who seem to feel they are entitled to direct access and feedback from devs on their pet demands. They won't be able to stir up people on the forum to use them as tools in their little pet project. Most official forums are POS as far as I am concerned. Naturally they will say they are the consumer and customer servers and all that jazz.
I can see why game companies are moving towards a forumless community. And lets face it, how many game players have the balls to just not purchase a game on the basis of not having a forum. And by that I don't mean players who posture about not buying the game, but those who say they won't then post frequently their pet issue on lack of forums. They keep pounding away at the issue of not having forum and how they won't play the game, but obviously they are so wrapped up in it they will purchase it. And it will be quick to see who these type of fake posers are just by how they respond to certain posts.
Its still one of the game i had a lot of fun ( from beta till SL) with a shit load of different stuff to do and a very intersting and complex twinking system.
IF something is to remember from FUNCOM its not the mistakes the support system might have done ( at least you had someone to speack with and knew what you were talking about.. point at incompetents support in WoW) but the shitload of inovatives ideas they bring to the market.
my main concerns is mostly about the fact they are like a "showroom" for directx10 capacities... i hope they dont fell on that trap and the game is still enjoyable even with lower PC configs.
If you are concerned about getting information from devs there are ways that can be handled: When you login, you get a news page to read of new features, bugs and etc. Emails can be sent out. RSS feeds can be used. A website sans forums can be used to pass out the information.
Now about reporting bugs and other issues: You can have ingame tools for that. You can include email addresses for that.
If people need to bitch and moan about a game, there are many forums on the net for that.
Now without forums, you won't get the people with the loudest voice who seem to feel they are entitled to direct access and feedback from devs on their pet demands. They won't be able to stir up people on the forum to use them as tools in their little pet project. Most official forums are POS as far as I am concerned. Naturally they will say they are the consumer and customer servers and all that jazz.
I can see why game companies are moving towards a forumless community. And lets face it, how many game players have the balls to just not purchase a game on the basis of not having a forum. And by that I don't mean players who posture about not buying the game, but those who say they won't then post frequently their pet issue on lack of forums. They keep pounding away at the issue of not having forum and how they won't play the game, but obviously they are so wrapped up in it they will purchase it. And it will be quick to see who these type of fake posers are just by how they respond to certain posts.
I disagree, forums, including gaming forums, can be very usefull aside from reporting issues. AoC's official forum for example has a collection of fairly mature likeminded individuals, including a rather healthy RP population. Of course, there are "bad apples" in every forum.
The composition and demeanor of a game's forum population can tell a potential player a lot about the composition and demeanor of the ingame population, and the issues going on with it, not to mention learning valuable information about the status of the game. For example, while it is safe enough to ignore nerfing cries of almost any kind, problems with customer service, game breaking bugs/exploits, parts of the game that might have sounded neat but aren't implemented/fixed yet(or, more rarely, the other way around), can all be brought to light by taking a close look at what posters are saying.
The only real way you can benefit from having no official forum, is if you fully expect your game's population to give visitors a bad impression.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
I liked AO. It just had a bad start.
If AO had updated graphics, more people would play I think. I was fine with the graphics though.
I just found it hard to find groups. The people that still play have known each other for years and they stick together. I found it hard to join them. And when I did, I fely like an outsider.
A fresh FunCom game will be a great game.
If you are concerned about getting information from devs there are ways that can be handled: When you login, you get a news page to read of new features, bugs and etc. Emails can be sent out. RSS feeds can be used. A website sans forums can be used to pass out the information.
Now about reporting bugs and other issues: You can have ingame tools for that. You can include email addresses for that.
If people need to bitch and moan about a game, there are many forums on the net for that.
Now without forums, you won't get the people with the loudest voice who seem to feel they are entitled to direct access and feedback from devs on their pet demands. They won't be able to stir up people on the forum to use them as tools in their little pet project. Most official forums are POS as far as I am concerned. Naturally they will say they are the consumer and customer servers and all that jazz.
I can see why game companies are moving towards a forumless community. And lets face it, how many game players have the balls to just not purchase a game on the basis of not having a forum. And by that I don't mean players who posture about not buying the game, but those who say they won't then post frequently their pet issue on lack of forums. They keep pounding away at the issue of not having forum and how they won't play the game, but obviously they are so wrapped up in it they will purchase it. And it will be quick to see who these type of fake posers are just by how they respond to certain posts.
I disagree, forums, including gaming forums, can be very usefull aside from reporting issues. AoC's official forum for example has a collection of fairly mature likeminded individuals, including a rather healthy RP population. Of course, there are "bad apples" in every forum.
The composition and demeanor of a game's forum population can tell a potential player a lot about the composition and demeanor of the ingame population, and the issues going on with it, not to mention learning valuable information about the status of the game. For example, while it is safe enough to ignore nerfing cries of almost any kind, problems with customer service, game breaking bugs/exploits, parts of the game that might have sounded neat but aren't implemented/fixed yet(or, more rarely, the other way around), can all be brought to light by taking a close look at what posters are saying.
The only real way you can benefit from having no official forum, is if you fully expect your game's population to give visitors a bad impression.
Well, to clear the first point up. I didn't say they were not useful.
Yes it can tell you a bit about the players who are actively involved in the forums which may not fully represent who player meet in games. My experience with the EQ2 forums prior to release ended up being vastly different than the people I experienced in the game.
The only? Well perhaps or perhaps not. The issue is about generating money. And the industry is not blind to how the money is actually spent by consumers. If a game becomes a major hit and doesn't have forums, the industry will take notice. They don't want to spend money which they feel is not needed. I am sure someone will come back and say blah blah forums act as advertisment and other game do it so this game should. Well things change.
If you are concerned about getting information from devs there are ways that can be handled: When you login, you get a news page to read of new features, bugs and etc. Emails can be sent out. RSS feeds can be used. A website sans forums can be used to pass out the information.
Now about reporting bugs and other issues: You can have ingame tools for that. You can include email addresses for that.
If people need to bitch and moan about a game, there are many forums on the net for that.
Now without forums, you won't get the people with the loudest voice who seem to feel they are entitled to direct access and feedback from devs on their pet demands. They won't be able to stir up people on the forum to use them as tools in their little pet project. Most official forums are POS as far as I am concerned. Naturally they will say they are the consumer and customer servers and all that jazz.
I can see why game companies are moving towards a forumless community. And lets face it, how many game players have the balls to just not purchase a game on the basis of not having a forum. And by that I don't mean players who posture about not buying the game, but those who say they won't then post frequently their pet issue on lack of forums. They keep pounding away at the issue of not having forum and how they won't play the game, but obviously they are so wrapped up in it they will purchase it. And it will be quick to see who these type of fake posers are just by how they respond to certain posts.
I disagree, forums, including gaming forums, can be very usefull aside from reporting issues. AoC's official forum for example has a collection of fairly mature likeminded individuals, including a rather healthy RP population. Of course, there are "bad apples" in every forum.
The composition and demeanor of a game's forum population can tell a potential player a lot about the composition and demeanor of the ingame population, and the issues going on with it, not to mention learning valuable information about the status of the game. For example, while it is safe enough to ignore nerfing cries of almost any kind, problems with customer service, game breaking bugs/exploits, parts of the game that might have sounded neat but aren't implemented/fixed yet(or, more rarely, the other way around), can all be brought to light by taking a close look at what posters are saying.
The only real way you can benefit from having no official forum, is if you fully expect your game's population to give visitors a bad impression.
Well, to clear the first point up. I didn't say they were not useful.
Yes it can tell you a bit about the players who are actively involved in the forums which may not fully represent who player meet in games. My experience with the EQ2 forums prior to release ended up being vastly different than the people I experienced in the game.
The only? Well perhaps or perhaps not. The issue is about generating money. And the industry is not blind to how the money is actually spent by consumers. If a game becomes a major hit and doesn't have forums, the industry will take notice. They don't want to spend money which they feel is not needed. I am sure someone will come back and say blah blah forums act as advertisment and other game do it so this game should. Well things change.
I agree.And I think that Forums are never good for advertisment. No game will be perfect ever. So since there will be problems in any game that's what will be discussed on the forums. And it's not only that, everytime someone doesn't like the playstyle of the game they'll go there and bitch about it. Actually I'd bet that there will never be any feature in any MMO that wouldn't have someone bitching about it on it's forums. MMO veterans might very well be able to tell what is baseless crap even if they don't play the game, BUT your average new guy that stumbles into the forum will think that the game must be rubbish. You could of course hire a staff of 50-100 moderators, who will delete the baseless complaints, but then you'd get a reputation for censorship.
So from a company standpoint you have a potential negative effect on marketing and you have the costs vs the potentially positive effects for the community and and a positive marketing effect on a few people who consider forums a crucial feature. I'd say if your game can pull the community together ingame you'll never need a forum.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
~J. Krishnamurti
If you are concerned about getting information from devs there are ways that can be handled: When you login, you get a news page to read of new features, bugs and etc. Emails can be sent out. RSS feeds can be used. A website sans forums can be used to pass out the information.
Now about reporting bugs and other issues: You can have ingame tools for that. You can include email addresses for that.
If people need to bitch and moan about a game, there are many forums on the net for that.
Now without forums, you won't get the people with the loudest voice who seem to feel they are entitled to direct access and feedback from devs on their pet demands. They won't be able to stir up people on the forum to use them as tools in their little pet project. Most official forums are POS as far as I am concerned. Naturally they will say they are the consumer and customer servers and all that jazz.
I can see why game companies are moving towards a forumless community. And lets face it, how many game players have the balls to just not purchase a game on the basis of not having a forum. And by that I don't mean players who posture about not buying the game, but those who say they won't then post frequently their pet issue on lack of forums. They keep pounding away at the issue of not having forum and how they won't play the game, but obviously they are so wrapped up in it they will purchase it. And it will be quick to see who these type of fake posers are just by how they respond to certain posts.
If you're referring to Sigil's not having official forums for Vanguard...believe me, it's done nothing but fragment the community and drive away customers. I'm not surprised that Mythic wants to go with the no forums approach since they did the same with DaoC. I really think in 2007 forums are much more important to the average gamer. Probably wasn't the case in 1999 and not in 2002, but today it is.
I admit I played AO the first month and never looked back (except a quick look at the game when they made the vanilla game free). There were many gameplay issues with Anarchy Online that I just didn't enjoy...90% of buildings being worthless stand-ins, the randomized instances, etc. etc. I think the game got better after Shadowlands though which is a good sign for Age of Conan. Funcom has experience and hopefully have learned from past mistakes (though I don't like this no single-player game policy they have now, those scandinavian bastages)
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
seeing how I was a die hard SWG fan pre-cu, i doubt funcom could be worse then SOE.
as far as im concerned, i never played Anarchy Online, but i can't even begin to tell you how many people have raved that game to be awesome. the biggest killer of the game that i have heard of was time. it just grew old, new systems and way newer games kept being released and the game was so old it had problems competing.
as far as im concerned, you can't trust any company. its all about money, some are nowhere near as bad as others. but i think funcom can pull off another great game.