Sorry to have to school you, but if a game is not fun in open beta it wont be fun on release. my reasons for wanting a open beta are as follows:
1. Is the game fun.
2. Is the game playable.
3. Is it worth playing a monthly fee.
4. Will the game be exploited
5. Does the game have working content.
6. Is the game unstable.
7. Will the game every be playable.
You are stuck on the open beta being free. Open beta's are free to test loads, content, exploit's, compatable systems ect. I take it you are new to MMORPG's.
Most console games don't give a preview, most games never used to preview, a lot of good games never had an open beta.
The primary reason people play open-beta is because they want a head start on others and a free preview to test it. NOT TO FIX BUGS etc. What it is normally designed for. Don't try to tell me otherwise, that's usually all people want from a beta, that head start and free preview.
Well there's no reason AoC needs a beta, they have their own team they test with, don't like it? well go do something else in the mean time, no reason to get all upset and hatefull because you don't get your little preview.
Originally posted by spire23 I am absolutely shocked at how many people are complaining about there being no open beta. To such a degree, in fact, that I suspect all these recent posts to that effect to be little more than a campaign to try and embarass Funcom into opening it up for a public beta out of little more than impatience and a collective and over-developed sense of entitlement by the MMO community at-large. Maybe it's not a conspiracy involving everyone who posts in a given thread about AoC open beta (or the lack thereof), but the OPs probably harbor some secret hope that Funcom will react with a 180 to save face. I hope they don't. Open betas have ruined the last two games I played. I tore through all the content in DDO before it launched - ditto Vanguard. I hated both by the time they went live and cancelled each a couple of months in. I wonder how many others have done the same - obviously publishers can track that sort of thing and I wouldn't be surprised to see more devs follow in Funcom's footsteps in the future, keeping their games under wraps until they cost money to play. That would do two things: keep everyone on the edge of their seat, boosting "opening day" sales of the title (which will insure a lot of press, even outside of the MMO circuit) and increase the likihood that high-level content (always the least operational portion of the world in a new MMO) will be patched and added before most players have access to it, thus cutting down on the "this game sux" threads started by bored, min-maxing, powertrolls.
I realize you were directing this at Arawon, however I'm glad I was able to make it into Vanguard beta for the mere fact that had I bought the game I would have been extremely disappointed, not to mention that I would not have been able to return the game.
I don't think AOC or even Warhammer will suffer the same fate as Vanguard as their main developer(s) aren't going to abandon the project, but I have to admit being able to make it into beta helps clear up a lot of the subjective post/opinions people can make after an NDA is lifted.
Even if I don't make it into either of the betas I still think I may purchase both games, its a little soon to tell, but I like what I've read thus far.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
I admit that being around in the first few weeks after a MMORPG opens is a unique experience. But if you're willing to forgo that and with trying to 'compete' in MMORPGs (I gave up on this notion years ago), there's no reason not to wait for a couple of months after release before you buy. And to see what players have to say about a game after the initial euphoria wears off.
But sometimes even I can't seem to follow my own rules. Cough...Vanguard.
Sorry to have to school you, but if a game is not fun in open beta it wont be fun on release. my reasons for wanting a open beta are as follows: 1. Is the game fun. 2. Is the game playable. 3. Is it worth playing a monthly fee. 4. Will the game be exploited 5. Does the game have working content. 6. Is the game unstable. 7. Will the game every be playable. You are stuck on the open beta being free. Open beta's are free to test loads, content, exploit's, compatable systems ect. I take it you are new to MMORPG's.
Most of those things you listed are for a trial not a beta. LOL - the schooling was less than effective I guess. Perhaps getting out of kindergarten would help.
It'll end up like all the others but i'll still give it a go.
I most definitely agree. All the others (ie not WoW or complete flops such as Auto Assault) have experienced a moderate fanbase. Even Star Wars Galaxies and Vanguard keep a certain level of subscribers.
Nobody expects another Warcraft (at least not while WoW is going strong.) I think the game will see the 100k subscriber mark with no problems, and probably higher. I think the only restricting things on the gameplay will be the maturity level of the content, the time investment required, and hardware requirements.
I just meant it claims it does everything differently at launch and yet somehow it plays esactly the same as the others with the boring level grinds and eventually they'll patch it to crap and release expansions that ruin it. Theres nothing out there i wanna play atm tbh and doesn't help that i don't really like fantasy i mean lord of the rings return of the king was ok but thats cause my ex gave me a blowjob in the cinema.
-----------------------------
SWG - PrePub9 Jedi mastered all professions - June 26th 2003 > Nov 15th 2005 EVE Online - 24 million SP - May 6th 2003 > Early 2005 PlanetSide - BR20 CR5 - May 23rd 2003 > Sept 2003
I am amazed so many people trying to break the fence to get into a beta. Why?
A beta is part of the production stage. Its work. Its work on the part of the developer to test, enhance and refine a game. Its work and hence all decision on who to involve in a beta is part of the developer's production decisions. Come on, do you shout at Citibank for not inviting you to beta test their in-house online banking system?
I sense that people are impatient. They want to play, and some want to play it free as long as possible. They want in beta as early as possible, to play for years without playing. That is not a good attitude as a beta tester. I do not feel people talking about joining beta b/c they have unique or strong background in certain aspects of testing. Any sane developer will have second thoughts about unrestricted acceptance of these players into the testing community.
Players so impatient and immature about the nature of beta will also most likely whine at the first encounter of a bug of incomplete features. They will also be more likely to break NDA, that will be more negative news than necessary, and not fair to a game still being tuned. Why would a developer want such a community in the game during the early days of finishing?
I am not surprised about Lotro opening up the game so early. Cos its completely polished, with enough content inserted, by mid closed-beta. I cannot say if AoC is close enough to that stage to open its doors to the hoard without restriction, but there is all the wisdom on earth for AoC to keep its door well guarded.
For those who are honestly trying to help beta test systems, go help develop the free online education programs for underdeveloped countries. All work, no playing. True development and beta work.
This game shows nothing innovative to me. They claim it to be heavily on PvP and warfare but I have read a lot of it and it seems the combat is instanced or only in certain parts of the world. That doesn't seem so hardcore PvP to me.
A.) The majority of the instances mentioned are for literally hundreds of players together, several guild's worth in fact. AKA, definitely not small team faceoff style instancing. the few exceptions are more minigames than anything meaningful, and are not intended to be a central point of gameplay.
B.) On a PvP or RPvP server, the only place you can't fight other players is in the spawning points.
By all means, if you have any other objections that might or might not be based on misinformation, let me know.
P.S. Phos, I don't know what led you to that last comment, but I'd bet you anything that your question has been answered somewhere, and that I could find said answer in only a few minutes.
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 am amazed so many people trying to break the fence to get into a beta. Why? A beta is part of the production stage. Its work. Its work on the part of the developer to test, enhance and refine a game. Its work and hence all decision on who to involve in a beta is part of the developer's production decisions. Come on, do you shout at Citibank for not inviting you to beta test their in-house online banking system? I sense that people are impatient. They want to play, and some want to play it free as long as possible. They want in beta as early as possible, to play for years without playing. That is not a good attitude as a beta tester. I do not feel people talking about joining beta b/c they have unique or strong background in certain aspects of testing. Any sane developer will have second thoughts about unrestricted acceptance of these players into the testing community. Players so impatient and immature about the nature of beta will also most likely whine at the first encounter of a bug of incomplete features. They will also be more likely to break NDA, that will be more negative news than necessary, and not fair to a game still being tuned. Why would a developer want such a community in the game during the early days of finishing? I am not surprised about Lotro opening up the game so early. Cos its completely polished, with enough content inserted, by mid closed-beta. I cannot say if AoC is close enough to that stage to open its doors to the hoard without restriction, but there is all the wisdom on earth for AoC to keep its door well guarded. For those who are honestly trying to help beta test systems, go help develop the free online education programs for underdeveloped countries. All work, no playing. True development and beta work.
Of course people want things free. Companies know this. Many companies offer incentives to take surveys, and many people who take these surveys wouldn't have without the incentives. It's sad, but true. Most of the time, if you want a large amount of people to give you feedback, you better be rewarding them with something.
Many people who will play in an open beta will have applied for the closed beta. Are they automatically turned into astute, intelligent, patient closed beta testers if they happen to be accepted into closed beta? No. It's the same guy, he just got in at an earlier stage. I guarantee after the release you'll see someone who played the closed beta bash the game. It won't make any difference.
As I've said before, many a dev these days will tell you that open betas are a lot more about hype than they used to be. I'd say Blizzard would be one of the first to tell you this. Their open beta was nowhere near perfect, yet it, among many other tactics, did wonders for them.
My question is, what's to lose with an open beta? If you're game is truly unique (And I'll hold judgement on whether or not AoC is until after release. It definitely has my attention, as does WAR.), what is there to lose by giving players that taste a couple weeks before release? You get a little more testing and a lot more exposure. What, exactly, are those of you that are glad there's no open beta hoping the game will gain from its absence? Bad reviews from idiots without patience? Believe me, they'll be shouting all the harder once they've thrown down 50 bucks and didn't like it. Funcom still gets their 50 bucks, but what exactly do you get by making those idiots wait and spend extra cash? The satisfaction? Seems sort of malicious to me.
It's true that console games don't have open betas, but in the MMO industry, it's become very common and to be honest if your game is ready, it's only an upside for the developer.
It doesn't take away from release day at all if it is a good game. WoW's open beta generated a lot of positive word of mouth for the game and it blew the doors off on release day. Also, it doesn't have to be a "head start" open beta either -- WoW's wasn't.
Sure it's not really a "bug testing beta" it's more of a preview, but in a genre like an MMO where the game carries a subscription fee, requires a credit card to even play, and is a much, much more significant time investment than games of most other genres, it's natural that people want to try before they buy. Again, if there is nothing wrong with the game, it's a great opportunity to market the game to people who will buy it. GIve people a 14 day open beta/trial, or give them a level cap or something like that so that they can't burn all the content, and make it so that they can't take the characters with them. If the game is good, this will generate a lot of positive buzz right before release and make the release work very well.
It's become so common in the industry now that the fact of not having one definitely raises concerns. What are they hiding? Why not let people preview the game, if only for a couple of weeks? Again, there really is no downside to this if the game is a good one.
All I know is that the game appears to deliver the most in-depth and complex MMO since SWG (I don't really count Vanguard). For that very reason I'll buy it whether it ends up good or not. I guess I'm just one of those dumb consumers now, considering that I seem to get burned with game after game. But oh well. I'm bound to find a gem one of these days. Hopefully AoC will be it.
There is a gross generalization that players wanting to get into beta are simply looking for a free ride. Of the games I've had the good fortune to Beta test I genuinely tested the product and provided feed back.
I will admit there are inherent advantages to having been a beta tester yet there are also down sides. I'm very glad I was able to beta test Vanguard (as mentioned in an earlier post) had I purchased the game I would have been pretty disappointed then annoyed because I wouldn't be able to return the software.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
So, analyzing the poll after 216 votes now we come to the following figures...
People who voted think AGE OF CONAN WILL BE A GOOD SOLID GAME: 64.3%
People who voted that think Age of Conan WILL SUCK BIG TIME: 24.0%
People who voted who don't know what it is DON'T CARE: 11.5%
:::::::::::::::::::::
That's almost 2 out of every 3 voters that think Age of Conan will be a great game.
..I think I am going to agree and go with the voters and go ahead and pre-order this game. Expect a review of this game a day or two after release day from myself right here in these forums. I'm sure I won't be the only one giving their opinion of it VERY soon after its release however. :-)
Well looks like it was all a missunderstanding. Funcom will have an open beta. Smack in the face to all the nay-sayers and the people screaming "They are only not having one because they are trying to hide something!". I'm looking forward to the game regardless of the beta-tester opinions once NDA is lifted.
Why?
Because there has not been a decent non-grindfest MMO in recent years, or the decade. L2 comes to mind but it has been a grind fest. I'm one of the people who does not enjoy doing quests and killing Mob X 5001 times to get the 8th piece of my uber epic sweet looking armor piece so I have a matching fest and can go to a fashion show.
I want for-the-most-part unrestricted gameplay, an attempt at player-skill rather than your toons skill points and levels. (And by all looks and intents AoC seems to be at least delivering this partially with their hit-box system and directional swings. I want blood and gore and feeling like I actually achieved something by killing someone else. This may at least temporarily alliviate the fact that I know that the player will respawn in 10 seconds about 200 feet from where he died. The PvP servers for AoC definetly sound like a blast, somewhere where you will find opportunity to kill anyone anywhere, while also having to fear for your own life anytime anywhere.
My biggest worry at the moment is that carebears will sceam so loud and hard at some point where they will restrict gameplay and that would suck. But oh Well March will tell, that is if they don't postpone further which may at all not surprise me.
Has Conan really been hyped that much? I don't see a lot of fanatic Conan fans on different forums, and I don't see Funcom's developers talk about how they'll revolutionize the genre.
The Conan community seems rather matter-of-fact about the game being similar to other MMOGs in many ways, but having some distinct features that while not unique combine into making Conan a game that will have a solid following.
The Conan developers are naturally attending all the fairs and shows, and speaking about their game live, on gaming sites and their own community site. If they didn't they'd be stupid. I haven't seen them running some kind of a super-hype though, but of course they should be excited about their game.
Then again, maybe I just haven't followed the game closely enough, or maybe I don't detest all existing games (or the business in general) enough to be waiting for a new holy cow of MMOGs (or for one more game to trash because it makes me feel good).
To answer the question: it will be a real deal to some. It will be a let down to some. Those who will fall into the latter group, please shut up, move ahead to the next game and leave the former group alone.
What is positive is that the game is taking its time. Hopefully this will mean it will be of higher quality and therefore be a key player. The problem it might have however, is that it could be quite niche so it might not get break any records or anything. I'm looking to this and I personally have a feeling it might do better than the other big launch of the year; Warhammer.
Comments
Sorry to have to school you, but if a game is not fun in open beta it wont be fun on release. my reasons for wanting a open beta are as follows:
1. Is the game fun.
2. Is the game playable.
3. Is it worth playing a monthly fee.
4. Will the game be exploited
5. Does the game have working content.
6. Is the game unstable.
7. Will the game every be playable.
You are stuck on the open beta being free. Open beta's are free to test loads, content, exploit's, compatable systems ect. I take it you are new to MMORPG's.
Could you guys stop whining about an open-beta.
Most console games don't give a preview, most games never used to preview, a lot of good games never had an open beta.
The primary reason people play open-beta is because they want a head start on others and a free preview to test it. NOT TO FIX BUGS etc. What it is normally designed for. Don't try to tell me otherwise, that's usually all people want from a beta, that head start and free preview.
Well there's no reason AoC needs a beta, they have their own team they test with, don't like it? well go do something else in the mean time, no reason to get all upset and hatefull because you don't get your little preview.
I realize you were directing this at Arawon, however I'm glad I was able to make it into Vanguard beta for the mere fact that had I bought the game I would have been extremely disappointed, not to mention that I would not have been able to return the game.
I don't think AOC or even Warhammer will suffer the same fate as Vanguard as their main developer(s) aren't going to abandon the project, but I have to admit being able to make it into beta helps clear up a lot of the subjective post/opinions people can make after an NDA is lifted.
Even if I don't make it into either of the betas I still think I may purchase both games, its a little soon to tell, but I like what I've read thus far.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
I admit that being around in the first few weeks after a MMORPG opens is a unique experience. But if you're willing to forgo that and with trying to 'compete' in MMORPGs (I gave up on this notion years ago), there's no reason not to wait for a couple of months after release before you buy. And to see what players have to say about a game after the initial euphoria wears off.
But sometimes even I can't seem to follow my own rules. Cough...Vanguard.
Most of those things you listed are for a trial not a beta. LOL - the schooling was less than effective I guess. Perhaps getting out of kindergarten would help.
Nobody expects another Warcraft (at least not while WoW is going strong.) I think the game will see the 100k subscriber mark with no problems, and probably higher. I think the only restricting things on the gameplay will be the maturity level of the content, the time investment required, and hardware requirements.
I just meant it claims it does everything differently at launch and yet somehow it plays esactly the same as the others with the boring level grinds and eventually they'll patch it to crap and release expansions that ruin it. Theres nothing out there i wanna play atm tbh and doesn't help that i don't really like fantasy i mean lord of the rings return of the king was ok but thats cause my ex gave me a blowjob in the cinema.
-----------------------------
SWG - PrePub9 Jedi mastered all professions - June 26th 2003 > Nov 15th 2005
EVE Online - 24 million SP - May 6th 2003 > Early 2005
PlanetSide - BR20 CR5 - May 23rd 2003 > Sept 2003
I am amazed so many people trying to break the fence to get into a beta. Why?
A beta is part of the production stage. Its work. Its work on the part of the developer to test, enhance and refine a game. Its work and hence all decision on who to involve in a beta is part of the developer's production decisions. Come on, do you shout at Citibank for not inviting you to beta test their in-house online banking system?
I sense that people are impatient. They want to play, and some want to play it free as long as possible. They want in beta as early as possible, to play for years without playing. That is not a good attitude as a beta tester. I do not feel people talking about joining beta b/c they have unique or strong background in certain aspects of testing. Any sane developer will have second thoughts about unrestricted acceptance of these players into the testing community.
Players so impatient and immature about the nature of beta will also most likely whine at the first encounter of a bug of incomplete features. They will also be more likely to break NDA, that will be more negative news than necessary, and not fair to a game still being tuned. Why would a developer want such a community in the game during the early days of finishing?
I am not surprised about Lotro opening up the game so early. Cos its completely polished, with enough content inserted, by mid closed-beta. I cannot say if AoC is close enough to that stage to open its doors to the hoard without restriction, but there is all the wisdom on earth for AoC to keep its door well guarded.
For those who are honestly trying to help beta test systems, go help develop the free online education programs for underdeveloped countries. All work, no playing. True development and beta work.
A.) The majority of the instances mentioned are for literally hundreds of players together, several guild's worth in fact. AKA, definitely not small team faceoff style instancing. the few exceptions are more minigames than anything meaningful, and are not intended to be a central point of gameplay.
B.) On a PvP or RPvP server, the only place you can't fight other players is in the spawning points.
By all means, if you have any other objections that might or might not be based on misinformation, let me know.
P.S. Phos, I don't know what led you to that last comment, but I'd bet you anything that your question has been answered somewhere, and that I could find said answer in only a few minutes.
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
It will be a super hyped real deal game
Many people who will play in an open beta will have applied for the closed beta. Are they automatically turned into astute, intelligent, patient closed beta testers if they happen to be accepted into closed beta? No. It's the same guy, he just got in at an earlier stage. I guarantee after the release you'll see someone who played the closed beta bash the game. It won't make any difference.
As I've said before, many a dev these days will tell you that open betas are a lot more about hype than they used to be. I'd say Blizzard would be one of the first to tell you this. Their open beta was nowhere near perfect, yet it, among many other tactics, did wonders for them.
My question is, what's to lose with an open beta? If you're game is truly unique (And I'll hold judgement on whether or not AoC is until after release. It definitely has my attention, as does WAR.), what is there to lose by giving players that taste a couple weeks before release? You get a little more testing and a lot more exposure. What, exactly, are those of you that are glad there's no open beta hoping the game will gain from its absence? Bad reviews from idiots without patience? Believe me, they'll be shouting all the harder once they've thrown down 50 bucks and didn't like it. Funcom still gets their 50 bucks, but what exactly do you get by making those idiots wait and spend extra cash? The satisfaction? Seems sort of malicious to me.
This is one game that i'm actually looking forward to. Lets see if it lives up to the hype.
Final conclusion: People wanna try the game first before they'll pay for the game.
It's true that console games don't have open betas, but in the MMO industry, it's become very common and to be honest if your game is ready, it's only an upside for the developer.
It doesn't take away from release day at all if it is a good game. WoW's open beta generated a lot of positive word of mouth for the game and it blew the doors off on release day. Also, it doesn't have to be a "head start" open beta either -- WoW's wasn't.
Sure it's not really a "bug testing beta" it's more of a preview, but in a genre like an MMO where the game carries a subscription fee, requires a credit card to even play, and is a much, much more significant time investment than games of most other genres, it's natural that people want to try before they buy. Again, if there is nothing wrong with the game, it's a great opportunity to market the game to people who will buy it. GIve people a 14 day open beta/trial, or give them a level cap or something like that so that they can't burn all the content, and make it so that they can't take the characters with them. If the game is good, this will generate a lot of positive buzz right before release and make the release work very well.
It's become so common in the industry now that the fact of not having one definitely raises concerns. What are they hiding? Why not let people preview the game, if only for a couple of weeks? Again, there really is no downside to this if the game is a good one.
I will toss in some quick comments...
#1 AOC had 100K beta testers to choose from, and used what they needed.
#2 They delayed the game twice based on beta feedback.
This shows that they have used the process effectively to some degree.
#3 The game has had about a $55million production budget. The last game to have those production numers was... guess which game?
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
All I know is that the game appears to deliver the most in-depth and complex MMO since SWG (I don't really count Vanguard). For that very reason I'll buy it whether it ends up good or not. I guess I'm just one of those dumb consumers now, considering that I seem to get burned with game after game. But oh well. I'm bound to find a gem one of these days. Hopefully AoC will be it.
There is a gross generalization that players wanting to get into beta are simply looking for a free ride. Of the games I've had the good fortune to Beta test I genuinely tested the product and provided feed back.
I will admit there are inherent advantages to having been a beta tester yet there are also down sides. I'm very glad I was able to beta test Vanguard (as mentioned in an earlier post) had I purchased the game I would have been pretty disappointed then annoyed because I wouldn't be able to return the software.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Word from the beta testers of AoC is simple. Game is not ready for release for March, simple as that.
Care to post a link to back your words on this?
So, analyzing the poll after 216 votes now we come to the following figures...
People who voted think AGE OF CONAN WILL BE A GOOD SOLID GAME: 64.3%
People who voted that think Age of Conan WILL SUCK BIG TIME: 24.0%
People who voted who don't know what it is DON'T CARE: 11.5%
:::::::::::::::::::::
That's almost 2 out of every 3 voters that think Age of Conan will be a great game.
..I think I am going to agree and go with the voters and go ahead and pre-order this game. Expect a review of this game a day or two after release day from myself right here in these forums. I'm sure I won't be the only one giving their opinion of it VERY soon after its release however. :-)
- Zaxx
real deal. take tat blizzard
Well looks like it was all a missunderstanding. Funcom will have an open beta. Smack in the face to all the nay-sayers and the people screaming "They are only not having one because they are trying to hide something!". I'm looking forward to the game regardless of the beta-tester opinions once NDA is lifted.
Why?
Because there has not been a decent non-grindfest MMO in recent years, or the decade. L2 comes to mind but it has been a grind fest. I'm one of the people who does not enjoy doing quests and killing Mob X 5001 times to get the 8th piece of my uber epic sweet looking armor piece so I have a matching fest and can go to a fashion show.
I want for-the-most-part unrestricted gameplay, an attempt at player-skill rather than your toons skill points and levels. (And by all looks and intents AoC seems to be at least delivering this partially with their hit-box system and directional swings. I want blood and gore and feeling like I actually achieved something by killing someone else. This may at least temporarily alliviate the fact that I know that the player will respawn in 10 seconds about 200 feet from where he died. The PvP servers for AoC definetly sound like a blast, somewhere where you will find opportunity to kill anyone anywhere, while also having to fear for your own life anytime anywhere.
My biggest worry at the moment is that carebears will sceam so loud and hard at some point where they will restrict gameplay and that would suck. But oh Well March will tell, that is if they don't postpone further which may at all not surprise me.
Will be marginally better than VGSoH, and will by and large suck.
Has Conan really been hyped that much? I don't see a lot of fanatic Conan fans on different forums, and I don't see Funcom's developers talk about how they'll revolutionize the genre.
The Conan community seems rather matter-of-fact about the game being similar to other MMOGs in many ways, but having some distinct features that while not unique combine into making Conan a game that will have a solid following.
The Conan developers are naturally attending all the fairs and shows, and speaking about their game live, on gaming sites and their own community site. If they didn't they'd be stupid. I haven't seen them running some kind of a super-hype though, but of course they should be excited about their game.
Then again, maybe I just haven't followed the game closely enough, or maybe I don't detest all existing games (or the business in general) enough to be waiting for a new holy cow of MMOGs (or for one more game to trash because it makes me feel good).
To answer the question: it will be a real deal to some. It will be a let down to some. Those who will fall into the latter group, please shut up, move ahead to the next game and leave the former group alone.
After being burnt a few times i am not holding my breathe.
An MMO can fail in so many areas, graphics, content, stability, population etc....
I dont think it logical to expect big things from anything until they come and out and prove me wrong.
However who is so logical that they don't get carried away by the hype, not me i am afraid
What is positive is that the game is taking its time. Hopefully this will mean it will be of higher quality and therefore be a key player. The problem it might have however, is that it could be quite niche so it might not get break any records or anything. I'm looking to this and I personally have a feeling it might do better than the other big launch of the year; Warhammer.