Why does everyone say its an old server? Yes maybe it is but why didnt they use the nice running server to show the game off? Why did they give us a CRAPPY server to search for bugs on? Why shuld we find bugs they already know of? Thats just stupid.. And after level 13 there will be 238467921 more loadscreens
Why didnt we get more levels to try? is the game oly freaking bad until level 13? No I dont think so..
And why where there a 7 hours delay on the beta launch at fileplanet?
If the company would be so good an run on an old server. Should it not be able to work perfekt without all the memoryloss and all other problems people where having?
Only because its old, should it make the game suck ass in every way?
Guildwars and Dungeons and dragons 1 are their concept and I cant see whats good with this pieace of crap game maybe in one year its interesting but not now
The fact is after all the hype and the so called next gen greta game, its a huge dissapointment, so many twats in the beta atm with there crap chat, the UI just sucks, and the gameplay is bloody awful, not to mention the loading screens everywhere. The game just feels so small.
What funcom promised was 10/10
Delivered 4/10
Result another big game hyped to the max with a poor result.
You cannot have good graphics and a good gameplay. I will stick with WoW "outdated" graphics, but with no loading screen when i die or enter a building. I just wish Warhammer doesnt aim for graphics but for gameplay.
AoC was never meant to be played on a "Commodore 64". My advice to you is buy another rig....yours suxass. As for gameplay and graphics, AoC has the best of both worlds. In fact I have seen none better in any game I have ever played.
Have you seen GUILDWARS? This game feels almost like thats right Guildwars. But AOC got loadingscreens WHEREVER the fuck you want to go. and the maps are small like a rats cage.. Want to do a 5 min quest? Loadscreen 1min. The town loadscreens are scary. Town aint even big
You cannot have good graphics and a good gameplay. I will stick with WoW "outdated" graphics, but with no loading screen when i die or enter a building. I just wish Warhammer doesnt aim for graphics but for gameplay.
AoC was never meant to be played on a "Commodore 64". My advice to you is buy another rig....yours suxass. As for gameplay and graphics, AoC has the best of both worlds. In fact I have seen none better in any game I have ever played.
We'll see how well your shiny new computer does when you're in a 40 versus 40 siege. Can you say details all the way to the minimum? I think this is one of the biggest issues, I can't see big Lineage 2 style sieges happening in this game.
It's kind of weird how the devs haven't even let the CB people test the sieging yet. Could a possible reason be because it just lags like a mofo? Or have they finally let you closed beta guys test it? If they haven't, you would think it would be any day now just to help get the kinks out of it.
The fact is after all the hype and the so called next gen greta game, its a huge dissapointment, so many twats in the beta atm with there crap chat, the UI just sucks, and the gameplay is bloody awful, not to mention the loading screens everywhere. The game just feels so small. What funcom promised was 10/10 Delivered 4/10 Result another big game hyped to the max with a poor result.
I would give this game a 9 out of 10...only becuase it's not my genre. Im more of a sci-fi fan.
For me Aoc falls into the "uncanny valley" for me... as did Eq2, vanguard I just canot play a game that goes for realisum. I think thats the only reason I stopped playing as soon as I got to the poorly animated gorilliers.
Ill wait for TCoS at least with that I can concentrate on the gameplay as I would not be gringing at the poor graphics every 5 seconds.
Its fun how every Gamers who does not know anything about games give this game like 9/10
only by playing to level 13.. Did you try the pvp? it was horrible
Did you try the cave at the right of the dock? It was the most shittiest cave ive ever seen.
The things they showed us in lvl13 did not impress me atleast..
If you liked AOC and gave it 9/10 what would Guildwars get then? 54/10?
In AOC you where limited to where you could go.... Its suposed to be an Explorer/Pvp game....
I could not explore a shit at level 13. There where invincible walls everywhere and you could not do much fun.
I give this 4/10 Mostly cause it sucks and feels like an old game with better graphic and horrible gameplay
and Loadingscreens everywhere spoiling the things that could be a nice gameplay. I do not feel free when I got to watch a loadingscreen whatever I want to do.. If I Want to pvp LOADINGSCREEN If I want to go down a dungeon LOADINGSREEN. If I want to leave the city with a boat LOADINGSCREEN. If I want to go and Die LOADINGSCREEN. IF I want to change into day and night LOADINGSCREEN......... They are everywhere WTF?
Diablo2 had less loadingscreens and that barbarian gameplay was fun
For me Aoc falls into the "uncanny valley" for me... as did Eq2, vanguard I just canot play a game that goes for realisum. I think thats the only reason I stopped playing as soon as I got to the poorly animated gorilliers. Ill wait for TCoS at least with that I can concentrate on the gameplay as I would not be gringing at the poor graphics every 5 seconds.
BTW did you read what Eurogamer wrote about TCOS ?
They said it has best graphic they ever seen on PC ! And its all in atmosphere and art style
Did he go back to Funcom to get more AoC training to learn how to handle a massive uprising. I guess his talks about features and nothing about playability is not working anymore. A few days ago he was giving one liners and now nothing.
I been meaning to ask, since its in the op's post. The loading screens in the minigames, are they longer than the rez cycles in WoW on average?
Id take a rez cycle and ghost form over a fuucking laoding screen any day of the year, the loading screens in PVP are about 20 seconds id say. But why the hell must i be confronted with loading screesn eevrywhere I go, for quests entering buildings, doing quests dieing. Next gen my bloody ass. Wow is more next gen and it was developed over 7 years ago.
I think it is the FPS approach which causes trouble, along with the realistic graphics.
In the near future we wont see an MMO-FPS that will have all the things we want to see in an MMO (see Lobos post above) but still has FPS that will run as smooth as in games like CoD, BF or CS:S
This is fact! And the problems are technological.
And no, Planetside is not what I'm talking about. Planetside is an FPS at heart but with some MMO elements added.
Hellgate? Tabula Rasa? Nope! They are hybrids which somehow brings the worst from both genres and mixes them into one gigantic pile of @#!%
Did I go offtopic again? *headdesk*
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
Or you know, ill just dont buy the game like everyone else.
I think this game has pretty good graphics, but excellent gameplay. I think WoW has bad graphics and horrible gameplay. Everyone has an opinion, but you don't see me trolling the WoW boards talking about how that game is a mindless item grind made for the lowest common denominator.
It isn't even a case of great graphics/poor gameplay. The graphics are not so hot either. Sure, they might have whiz-bang DX10 effects. but if the artists suck, what does that matter. The characters look awful because the proportions are way off, they move like marionettes, and the skin textures look like plastic. And even with no other players on screen, the performance isn't great. People who tell you this game has great graphics really mean "I am drooling over nipples".
The character models look fine in my opinion, but the graphics still aren't that good. Flowing water looks horrible, textures don't blend together properly, you have textures clipping through other textures (a hill covered in grass will end at a dirt path but the grass will continue under the path so that you get this weird foliage sticking up through the dirty path texture), and cloths don't fit on any of my characters properly (robes don't flow properly when running, my armbands clip through anything I try to put on under them). Everything else about this game is fine (gameplay, loading screens, performance), it's the graphical anomalies that kills it for me. I feel like as games progress they get exceedingly worse.
Oh and GTA4 was great, for the 2% that could play without it freezing up on them. < This was a joke
Now that after a few days of 'open beta' the fog of both fanboiism and hate has settled a bit, i can see more and more opinions coming from the 'average inbetween" gamer
-moaning on the loading screens everywhere
-dont like having multiple instances of the same zone, like i.e. Tortage 1, Tortage 2 etc.
-compare AoC to GuildWars, except for GW does a way better job with their zoning
-criticize clipping everywhere
-criticize the character's look and how they look out of place
-stating that the world is 'feeling' small regardless of the size of the actual land mass
-missing the opportunity to explore the world left and right off the path
-several technical aspects like i.e. the memory leak
.,,,
All these points are nothing new, but SO EXACTLY what was told to the devs month ago over and over again to not fit into a title which claims for the 'next gen' formula. Some of them (world design, zoning, instancing...) lead to heavy discussions in which at first Funcom defended their design decisions and later on even posters got offended by certain devs for pointing their fingers on these core flaws. Now it looks as if JUST THESE points fall back onto them and rightly so. Refering to the overall "next gen" thing, it's a good thing that the gaming crowd knocks on what was hyped to them and doesn't let the companies get away with it so easily anymore.
For the folks still saying "but they've got a couple more days to fix this and that and they'll provide a patch on release day": Do you really expect Funcom in a few days to fix things which they either a)defended to the bone or b) weren't able to fix even in several month of CB?
But joking aside, technically Vanguard at least has the benefit of an open (even if-not-so-)seamless world. In AoC, well... to an extend the early version of the combat system was an attempt to approach something on a new way. Later on it got simplified to not ask too much from the console kids with joypads in their tiny hands. Beside of that memory, i'm still trying to find anything "revolutionary" in AoC...oh wait, there is boobies for just the same kids.
Agree on the loading screens - really breaks immersion. I don't think the combat system is the quantum leap it is advertised as. I think some people wanted it to be Oblivion online. The fact that there is some much chat about PC specs detracts from discussing the game. From a commercial point of view open beta is an advertising nightmare. I can't remember fileplanet selling it as a newb zone stress test.
People continue to compare the graphics on WOW versus AoC - but a better comparison is with some of the current FPS online games - TF2, COD4.
I think a lot has been borrowed from other games without much effort on disguising - feats = talent system in WOW almost exactly (even kicks in at lvl10), combos aren't as strong as eq2 combos.
Now that after a few days of 'open beta' the fog of both fanboiism and hate has settled a bit, i can see more and more opinions coming from the 'average inbetween" gamer -moaning on the loading screens everywhere -dont like having multiple instances of the same zone, like i.e. Tortage 1, Tortage 2 etc. -compare AoC to GuildWars, except for GW does a way better job with their zoning -criticize clipping everywhere -criticize the character's look and how they look out of place -stating that the world is 'feeling' small regardless of the size of the actual land mass -missing the opportunity to explore the world left and right off the path -several technical aspects like i.e. the memory leak .,,, All these points are nothing new, but SO EXACTLY what was told to the devs month ago over and over again to not fit into a title which claims for the 'next gen' formula. Some of them (world design, zoning, instancing...) lead to heavy discussions in which at first Funcom defended their design decisions and later on even posters got offended by certain devs for pointing their fingers on these core flaws. Now it looks as if JUST THESE points fall back onto them and rightly so. Refering to the overall "next gen" thing, it's a good thing that the gaming crowd knocks on what was hyped to them and doesn't let the companies get away with it so easily anymore. For the folks still saying "but they've got a couple more days to fix this and that and they'll provide a patch on release day": Do you really expect Funcom in a few days to fix things which they either a)defended to the bone or b) weren't able to fix even in several month of CB?
yes this reminds me so much on eq2 release, looks like funcom is also falling into the too high graphics and to high required specs trap.
zoning, instancing and all this are needed cause of the graphics, and on other side we also get people locked out that don't have the computers to run the game. one of the biggest selling points for wow is that it can run on nearly every computer today, AoC won't have this advantage.
I am nearly sure that AoC won't get more than 200-300K subs on PC at start, the big question is how it will do on the console.
Whether people like it or not, many gamers don't have the financial resources to upgrade their rigs with 8 gb of Ram and the latest paired video card solution.
Now, its ok if a developer wants to target that audiance, but they (and the players) have to understand why the game only draws 200K+ users. (which is more than enough btw).
IMO, there were many key factors that lead to WOW's commerical success, and certainly in the top 5 was the fact it played well on almost any hardware when released, and now plays even better 3+ years later.
Sure, the eglitarian crowd here can scorn other folks hardware as being old and outdated, but they shouldn't complain when their game of choice doesn't draw the subs they had hoped for.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Reading some of the posts on these forums, it seems to me that people have really short memory spans. Speaking as someone who has beta tested most of the major MMOs, AoC has run smoother for me, with fewer problems, than 90% of them. The performance is especially impressive when you consider where Anarchy Online was when it was this close to release. I'll admit that I am an early adopter, and will be playing at release, but as a practical matter, it is virtually impossible to form a realistic opinion of an MMO, positive or negative, until at least a couple months after release. Declaring at this point either that the game has "failed" or that it is the best thing since sliced bread is very premature.
That being said, I have managed to adjust my settings so that load times are virtually nil, and I would rather play a game with a great story and a dark fantasy atmosphere that has a few bugs and needs some polish, than an extremely well polished game with no soul and the graphics of a saturday morning cartoon.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Whether people like it or not, many gamers don't have the financial resources to upgrade their rigs with 8 gb of Ram and the latest paired video card solution. Now, its ok if a developer wants to target that audiance, but they (and the players) have to understand why the game only draws 200K+ users. (which is more than enough btw). IMO, there were many key factors that lead to WOW's commerical success, and certainly in the top 5 was the fact it played well on almost any hardware when released, and now plays even better 3+ years later. Sure, the eglitarian crowd here can scorn other folks hardware as being old and outdated, but they shouldn't complain when their game of choice doesn't draw the subs they had hoped for.
That's complete and utter BS. You can go pick up 2 gigs of DDR2 800 for about $60-$80. A half decent dual core for $150 and a GPU that runs the game on high between $150-$300. How about all these tax rebates we are getting? Don't give me this "Oh, people don't have the money BS". People have the money, they would rather complain than to put it to good use. How about Income tax that most of us got a couple months ago? If you wanted to play AoC and pissed away all of that money, it's your fault.
I'm sorry, but a computer with 1 gig of RAM, single core, and 256 meg GPU is way outdated, by about 5-6 years. Even my mother buys a new computer more often than that, and she's almost 60. How does it feel to have a crappier computer than my mom? hah.
Comments
Why does everyone say its an old server? Yes maybe it is but why didnt they use the nice running server to show the game off? Why did they give us a CRAPPY server to search for bugs on? Why shuld we find bugs they already know of? Thats just stupid.. And after level 13 there will be 238467921 more loadscreens
maybe in one year its interesting but not now
Why didnt we get more levels to try? is the game oly freaking bad until level 13? No I dont think so..
And why where there a 7 hours delay on the beta launch at fileplanet?
If the company would be so good an run on an old server. Should it not be able to work perfekt without all the memoryloss and all other problems people where having?
Only because its old, should it make the game suck ass in every way?
Guildwars and Dungeons and dragons 1 are their concept and I cant see whats good with this pieace of crap game
The fact is after all the hype and the so called next gen greta game, its a huge dissapointment, so many twats in the beta atm with there crap chat, the UI just sucks, and the gameplay is bloody awful, not to mention the loading screens everywhere. The game just feels so small.
What funcom promised was 10/10
Delivered 4/10
Result another big game hyped to the max with a poor result.
AoC was never meant to be played on a "Commodore 64". My advice to you is buy another rig....yours suxass. As for gameplay and graphics, AoC has the best of both worlds. In fact I have seen none better in any game I have ever played.
Have you seen GUILDWARS? This game feels almost like thats right Guildwars. But AOC got loadingscreens WHEREVER the fuck you want to go. and the maps are small like a rats cage.. Want to do a 5 min quest? Loadscreen 1min. The town loadscreens are scary. Town aint even big
We'll see how well your shiny new computer does when you're in a 40 versus 40 siege. Can you say details all the way to the minimum? I think this is one of the biggest issues, I can't see big Lineage 2 style sieges happening in this game.AoC was never meant to be played on a "Commodore 64". My advice to you is buy another rig....yours suxass. As for gameplay and graphics, AoC has the best of both worlds. In fact I have seen none better in any game I have ever played.
It's kind of weird how the devs haven't even let the CB people test the sieging yet. Could a possible reason be because it just lags like a mofo? Or have they finally let you closed beta guys test it? If they haven't, you would think it would be any day now just to help get the kinks out of it.
I would give this game a 9 out of 10...only becuase it's not my genre. Im more of a sci-fi fan.
For me Aoc falls into the "uncanny valley" for me... as did Eq2, vanguard I just canot play a game that goes for realisum. I think thats the only reason I stopped playing as soon as I got to the poorly animated gorilliers.
Ill wait for TCoS at least with that I can concentrate on the gameplay as I would not be gringing at the poor graphics every 5 seconds.
Its fun how every Gamers who does not know anything about games give this game like 9/10
only by playing to level 13.. Did you try the pvp? it was horrible
Did you try the cave at the right of the dock? It was the most shittiest cave ive ever seen.
The things they showed us in lvl13 did not impress me atleast..
If you liked AOC and gave it 9/10 what would Guildwars get then? 54/10?
In AOC you where limited to where you could go.... Its suposed to be an Explorer/Pvp game....
I could not explore a shit at level 13. There where invincible walls everywhere and you could not do much fun.
I give this 4/10 Mostly cause it sucks and feels like an old game with better graphic and horrible gameplay
and Loadingscreens everywhere spoiling the things that could be a nice gameplay. I do not feel free when I got to watch a loadingscreen whatever I want to do.. If I Want to pvp LOADINGSCREEN If I want to go down a dungeon LOADINGSREEN. If I want to leave the city with a boat LOADINGSCREEN. If I want to go and Die LOADINGSCREEN. IF I want to change into day and night LOADINGSCREEN......... They are everywhere WTF?
Diablo2 had less loadingscreens and that barbarian gameplay was fun
BTW did you read what Eurogamer wrote about TCOS ?
They said it has best graphic they ever seen on PC ! And its all in atmosphere and art style
Where is Avery anyway,
Did he go back to Funcom to get more AoC training to learn how to handle a massive uprising. I guess his talks about features and nothing about playability is not working anymore. A few days ago he was giving one liners and now nothing.
I been meaning to ask, since its in the op's post. The loading screens in the minigames, are they longer than the rez cycles in WoW on average?
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Id take a rez cycle and ghost form over a fuucking laoding screen any day of the year, the loading screens in PVP are about 20 seconds id say. But why the hell must i be confronted with loading screesn eevrywhere I go, for quests entering buildings, doing quests dieing. Next gen my bloody ass. Wow is more next gen and it was developed over 7 years ago.
I think it is the FPS approach which causes trouble, along with the realistic graphics.
In the near future we wont see an MMO-FPS that will have all the things we want to see in an MMO (see Lobos post above) but still has FPS that will run as smooth as in games like CoD, BF or CS:S
This is fact! And the problems are technological.
And no, Planetside is not what I'm talking about. Planetside is an FPS at heart but with some MMO elements added.
Hellgate? Tabula Rasa? Nope! They are hybrids which somehow brings the worst from both genres and mixes them into one gigantic pile of @#!%
Did I go offtopic again? *headdesk*
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
I think this game has pretty good graphics, but excellent gameplay. I think WoW has bad graphics and horrible gameplay. Everyone has an opinion, but you don't see me trolling the WoW boards talking about how that game is a mindless item grind made for the lowest common denominator.
It isn't even a case of great graphics/poor gameplay. The graphics are not so hot either. Sure, they might have whiz-bang DX10 effects. but if the artists suck, what does that matter. The characters look awful because the proportions are way off, they move like marionettes, and the skin textures look like plastic. And even with no other players on screen, the performance isn't great. People who tell you this game has great graphics really mean "I am drooling over nipples".
The character models look fine in my opinion, but the graphics still aren't that good. Flowing water looks horrible, textures don't blend together properly, you have textures clipping through other textures (a hill covered in grass will end at a dirt path but the grass will continue under the path so that you get this weird foliage sticking up through the dirty path texture), and cloths don't fit on any of my characters properly (robes don't flow properly when running, my armbands clip through anything I try to put on under them). Everything else about this game is fine (gameplay, loading screens, performance), it's the graphical anomalies that kills it for me. I feel like as games progress they get exceedingly worse.
Oh and GTA4 was great, for the 2% that could play without it freezing up on them.
< This was a joke
Now that after a few days of 'open beta' the fog of both fanboiism and hate has settled a bit, i can see more and more opinions coming from the 'average inbetween" gamer
-moaning on the loading screens everywhere
-dont like having multiple instances of the same zone, like i.e. Tortage 1, Tortage 2 etc.
-compare AoC to GuildWars, except for GW does a way better job with their zoning
-criticize clipping everywhere
-criticize the character's look and how they look out of place
-stating that the world is 'feeling' small regardless of the size of the actual land mass
-missing the opportunity to explore the world left and right off the path
-several technical aspects like i.e. the memory leak
.,,,
All these points are nothing new, but SO EXACTLY what was told to the devs month ago over and over again to not fit into a title which claims for the 'next gen' formula. Some of them (world design, zoning, instancing...) lead to heavy discussions in which at first Funcom defended their design decisions and later on even posters got offended by certain devs for pointing their fingers on these core flaws. Now it looks as if JUST THESE points fall back onto them and rightly so. Refering to the overall "next gen" thing, it's a good thing that the gaming crowd knocks on what was hyped to them and doesn't let the companies get away with it so easily anymore.
For the folks still saying "but they've got a couple more days to fix this and that and they'll provide a patch on release day": Do you really expect Funcom in a few days to fix things which they either a)defended to the bone or b) weren't able to fix even in several month of CB?
But what about what Brad said, "Were working really hard to provide you a great game at release"
MAGA
Gaute's hype fades pale compared to "TheVision"
But joking aside, technically Vanguard at least has the benefit of an open (even if-not-so-)seamless world. In AoC, well... to an extend the early version of the combat system was an attempt to approach something on a new way. Later on it got simplified to not ask too much from the console kids with joypads in their tiny hands. Beside of that memory, i'm still trying to find anything "revolutionary" in AoC...oh wait, there is boobies for just the same kids.
Agree on the loading screens - really breaks immersion. I don't think the combat system is the quantum leap it is advertised as. I think some people wanted it to be Oblivion online. The fact that there is some much chat about PC specs detracts from discussing the game. From a commercial point of view open beta is an advertising nightmare. I can't remember fileplanet selling it as a newb zone stress test.
People continue to compare the graphics on WOW versus AoC - but a better comparison is with some of the current FPS online games - TF2, COD4.
I think a lot has been borrowed from other games without much effort on disguising - feats = talent system in WOW almost exactly (even kicks in at lvl10), combos aren't as strong as eq2 combos.
zoning, instancing and all this are needed cause of the graphics, and on other side we also get people locked out that don't have the computers to run the game. one of the biggest selling points for wow is that it can run on nearly every computer today, AoC won't have this advantage.
I am nearly sure that AoC won't get more than 200-300K subs on PC at start, the big question is how it will do on the console.
Whether people like it or not, many gamers don't have the financial resources to upgrade their rigs with 8 gb of Ram and the latest paired video card solution.
Now, its ok if a developer wants to target that audiance, but they (and the players) have to understand why the game only draws 200K+ users. (which is more than enough btw).
IMO, there were many key factors that lead to WOW's commerical success, and certainly in the top 5 was the fact it played well on almost any hardware when released, and now plays even better 3+ years later.
Sure, the eglitarian crowd here can scorn other folks hardware as being old and outdated, but they shouldn't complain when their game of choice doesn't draw the subs they had hoped for.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Reading some of the posts on these forums, it seems to me that people have really short memory spans. Speaking as someone who has beta tested most of the major MMOs, AoC has run smoother for me, with fewer problems, than 90% of them. The performance is especially impressive when you consider where Anarchy Online was when it was this close to release. I'll admit that I am an early adopter, and will be playing at release, but as a practical matter, it is virtually impossible to form a realistic opinion of an MMO, positive or negative, until at least a couple months after release. Declaring at this point either that the game has "failed" or that it is the best thing since sliced bread is very premature.
That being said, I have managed to adjust my settings so that load times are virtually nil, and I would rather play a game with a great story and a dark fantasy atmosphere that has a few bugs and needs some polish, than an extremely well polished game with no soul and the graphics of a saturday morning cartoon.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I'm sorry, but a computer with 1 gig of RAM, single core, and 256 meg GPU is way outdated, by about 5-6 years. Even my mother buys a new computer more often than that, and she's almost 60. How does it feel to have a crappier computer than my mom? hah.
For everyone that actually wants to know if the whole stalling / loading screen/ shader issue is something that is being looked into, here's the link:
http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=79173
Keep forming your opinions without properly looking up information, kids!