Funcom has some truely brilliant people... unfortunately they also have some hardasses in the finance dept.
Most likely they are launching before the game is ready, having forgotten the hell which was AO.. or thinking that ANYTHING is better than an AO launch.
What is most certain and true is the fact that I HAVE learned my lessons, and I DO remember the AO launch. So I may buy Conan... after summer has come and gone.
my rig: e6600/2.4ghz/8800gts512/1600x900/2AA/bloom/all sliders maxed/everything checked.
2gb ram, have another 2 sticks waiting to be installed tonight for when i reinstall vista64. i'm running the latest nvidia beta drivers.
performance = extremely good.
i have a weird issue though when the sun is shining on my back (which is more often than not) the back of my char has weird jaggies on it that i haven't been able to get rid of no matter what i toggle, haven't exhausted the options, but not putting much effort into it at the moment since i'll be running the retail in vista64 (for the dx10). whereas right now i'm using my XP side. maybe its the beta drivers, maybe its the beta code, i'll find out in a week i guess.
I'm glad we have such expert game designers and coders here that they can enlighten us with their knowledge, no doubt based purely on facts.
I'm glad to be of service.
Some of us do infact make a living coding you know!
Some are even former Funcom employees that decided to work a place where quality of design and code matters more than textures...
And some of you apparently like to make vague statements that can be misconstrued to mean that you actually worked on the project and decided to leave it for greener pastures.
The game runs fine for me and the people that have judged the game by the open beta code, which has been patched twice all ready since some of you uninstalled, have made a premature decision about the game.
I like AoC and it kind of reminds me of old school SWG. I really enjoy the combat and the stories in the quest lines.
So for those of you that haven't played the game, don't jump on the cool guy bandwagon and hate on a game you've never played.
I'm not commenting on wheter it runs smoothly or not, the storyline/lore neither on the combat system, so stop trolling. I'm commenting on the poor code and choices of design in regards to having non-seamless zone traversal. It's poor design - regardless if you like/dislike/love/hate the game, it's still poor design.
How many MMOs have you worked on?
Oh that's right you're just some arm chair quaterback that has no idea what he's talking about.
You keep talking about this elusive "horrible code", but you don't use specifics. Your posts have been shallow drivel designed to try to make you look like you know what you're talking about when it's obvious that you don't.
There a few games that have "seamless zone traversal". If you're refering to WoW, they hide the loading really well, but it's still there. Vanguards "chunking" was and is a load of crap, instead of a loading screen your character just freezes there until the zone loads.
I timed my load screens the other day when I was reading people's post about how long the load times are. My longest time was 24 secs, but most of them were 10-14 secs.
I thought I would post a response a staff member for AOC put up on the IGN boards today forum name pasandra
"LOL. Where'd you get your information from? That's just so far off the mark it's untrue. I'm on this and CB forums every day, and i would guess at 5-20% of CB posters are saying they experience only has mild issues. About 1-2% say they have tiny issues, and i actually can't think of any (though i'm sure they exist), who say it's pristine, or close. The other 80% are saying how it is; buggy.
In fact, they'd be bullshitting, when funcom themselves admit to everyone (incl OB) that it isn't."
He went on to say
"It IS buggy. The client IS unstable. There's NO secret. There are posts on this front page from Funcom explaining just that. It's in beta. The devs are trying to work out the bugs. Where's the big mystery"
Also here is a link to what are the notes to the new patch for CB that someone in CB posted on the ign boards
"There are some larger known issues with the version, but we decided to release the version with them due to the greatly increased performance of the client"
I would say if they are pushing a patch with known larger issues inorder to increase performance of the client that contrary to some of the 'fanbois" in this thread there are major issues with the client casuing the problems and it is not the lack of ability of people to turn their rigs that are causing the issues.
Either way I am still hopefull that they can get this fixed intime to have a relativly clean launch as I do enjoy the game when i am able to play it
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
I'm commenting on the poor code and choices of design in regards to having non-seamless zone traversal. It's poor design - regardless if you like/dislike/love/hate the game, it's still poor design.
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable.
you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics".
just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
If AoC can provide solid performance on Vista and DX10 a few months after release, it will be a great boon for the game development industry as a whole, as it will prove that Vista and DX10 can in fact perform better than, or at least on par with, DX9 and XP (Crysis absolutely failed at this goal, with DX10 performance being absolute crap). And thats the point, isn't it?! Edit: Thought of one more thing. Crashes under Vista may not be the game's fault at all. The programmers may have followed the OS API perfectly to the tee, but if the code of the OS itself is buggy for certain aspects of the API, then utilizing those aspects will cause issues. The solution is either Microsoft fixes the problem (unlikely in a reasonable timeframe), or the developers try to workaround the issue, which may or may not be possible.Debugging these kinds of issues is particularly painful as development could have centered around one buggy aspect of the API, forcing that entire part of the software to be redeveloped.
I can't understand why people bitch about this game so much jesus If you don't wana play the game please don't buy it . I have been in the Ob from the 1st and have had little issues with the client I run an Intel duel core 2.4 2mb ram 8800 GTS video card and I'm getting 54-64fps. Yes game has a few issues with shaders but I'm running it on med setting with a few tweaks and game looks nice. Love the quests and combat but the spells need work .
Stop fooling urself no game is ot of beta just look at wow I have been playing it for 4yrs and still get server lag and what not .. I stress if you don't like the game please don't play.
Haha and in the next post you advise someone to loose the WoW tone.
Did it occur to you that some people really like the game and really want to play? The fecked client of course makes this impossible for a large percentage. Maybe you think people enjoy spending hours trying different drivers different settings rather than playing? Have fun playing with yourself...sounds like you have had lots of practice.
Most of these answers to these questions were straight up lies!!! They are trying to sell a game that runs like vanguard did at release......vanguard is finally running decent now ,but guess what it's too late and they pissed off to many people for most to even try it again. The answer about graphics is nobody cares about graphics ex. diablo 2 still high sales numbers and world of warcraft, lol i can't even imagine a big pvp battle with the crap job of programming this game has...Turn down the graphics make it a seamless world a load screen here and there no biggie...And guess what nobody is gonna say AWWWW man these graphics suck i am not gonna play this game. Well enough ranting good luck funcom sorry your game is gonna fail and you wasted your funds. Well there is still Warhammer and Mythic will deliver hopefully.
I mean, none of these MMOs based on movie/book/tabletop franchises have done half as well as they were expected to. Why don't people start making some original stuff : /
I actually have 4 year old alienware that is slightly above minimum requirements and strangly on highest setietings with bloom not enabled just highest resolution my game seems to run much smoother. Beta convinced me this game willl be a blast , I cancelled my other MMO subcriptions in anticipation for this game.
Guys, the lastest patch rocks. No more FPS drop, no more slow loading screen. The only thing i'm now concerning with is "tweak the game so we can have High FPS for Massive Castle Seige"
( around 28fps with E8400 3GB duo core 2 CPU, 2gb Ram, 9600GT 512mb VGA at high quality graphic setting but i think it will drops in Castle Sieges)
Guys, the lastest patch rocks. No more FPS drop, no more slow loading screen. The only thing i'm now concerning with is "tweak the game so we can have High FPS for Massive Castle Seige" ( around 28fps with E8400 3GB duo core 2 CPU, 2gb Ram, 9600GT 512mb VGA at high quality graphic setting but i think it will drops in Castle Sieges)
well i hope you mean a patch for cb that has not made it to ob. Second 28fps is very low. I would exspect an fps around mid 60's but at this point would setting for your 28 if it ment no more freezes and crashes every 10 minutes. I will wait to see if they patch us untill then i am giving up on ob. It is to frustrating at the moment. monday after they brought servers up after maintance the game ran great. same with tuesday after maintance by wedn night i was strt to crash alot now on thrusday it is just unplayable. This would seem to point to a server side issue with the client and their servers.
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
That interview was so much spin and double-talk that my head is still reeling.
I especially liked the point that if you think the AoC launch could possibly be a bad as the AC launch, you weren't there for the AC launch....PRICELESS!
I'm commenting on the poor code and choices of design in regards to having non-seamless zone traversal. It's poor design - regardless if you like/dislike/love/hate the game, it's still poor design.
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable.
you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics".
just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
Jeezez, why would zoning improve the visuals unless the cache/setup engine is poorly designed/coded? There is NO link between those two - you can have seamless transition while having lush graphics if you want, polygon count has nothing to do with that.
I will bet you that Blizzard any day of the week can ramp up polygons and won't have to break the seamless transition, they won't do it because too many people have sub-standard computers (especially the graphics part), but that is a whole other debate.
Again, facts doesn't change with your misunderstanding of the subject - it's bad coding/design, nothing else.
Most of these answers to these questions were straight up lies!!! They are trying to sell a game that runs like vanguard did at release......vanguard is finally running decent now ,but guess what it's too late and they pissed off to many people for most to even try it again. The answer about graphics is nobody cares about graphics ex. diablo 2 still high sales numbers and world of warcraft, lol i can't even imagine a big pvp battle with the crap job of programming this game has...Turn down the graphics make it a seamless world a load screen here and there no biggie...And guess what nobody is gonna say AWWWW man these graphics suck i am not gonna play this game. Well enough ranting good luck funcom sorry your game is gonna fail and you wasted your funds. Well there is still Warhammer and Mythic will deliver hopefully.
to each their own, i completely disagree with you.
I don't know how vanguard went at launch, since i wasn't interested in EQ3, but i can tell you my rig is running AoC as smooth as butter with everything cranked up.
I DO care about graphics, I DO think WoW looks like shit, and I DID hate Diablo2 for the crappy graphics (last i touched it was the year it came out when they allowed max of 800x600, pixelated as hell on a 21" monitor). However, i thought the original Diable was one of the most brilliant games i have ever played in my life. Diablo2 didn't even get close to matching its predecessor in quality (as far as I'm concerned).
And I DEFINITELY DO say very frequently "AWWWWW man these graphics suck, i'm not going to play this game."
Exactly why I'll never touch WoW and Warhammer.
Don't confuse your lack of a good gaming rig with the sentiments of every other gamer out there.
Getting back on topic though, i've spent a total of about 4 hours in the AoC beta (in the last 2 days since i got in) and i can unequivocally say the game is fun as heck (for me), looks damn good (to me, on my rig) and i wouldn't change anything about it (other than making the mob fonts more readable for color blind nerds like me). My CE is still on preorder, and i'll be having a blast next weekend.
If you prefer some other game, all the more power to you, stay there and enjoy it, nobody said every game has to be like every other game, that'd be pretty boring.
i've been gaming since late 80's, so i can't be called a graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination, i prefer story first and foremost, but it just so happens that AoC has both, graphics AND a story. most other MMO's don't have both, or in some cases, have neither.
to each their own, i completely disagree with you. I don't know how vanguard went at launch, since i wasn't interested in EQ3, but i can tell you my rig is running AoC as smooth as butter with everything cranked up. I DO care about graphics, I DO think WoW looks like shit, and I DID hate Diablo2 for the crappy graphics (last i touched it was the year it came out when they allowed max of 800x600, pixelated as hell on a 21" monitor). And I DEFINITELY DO say very frequently "AWWWWW man these graphics suck, i'm not going to play this game." Exactly why I'll never touch WoW and Warhammer. Don't confuse your lack of a good gaming rig with the sentiments of every other gamer out there. Getting back on topic though, i've spent a total of about 4 hours in the AoC beta (in the last 2 days since i got in) and i can unequivocally say the game is fun as heck (for me), looks damn good (to me, on my rig) and i wouldn't change anything about it (other than making the mob fonts more readable for color blind nerds like me). My CE is still on preorder, and i'll be having a blast next weekend. If you prefer some other game, all the more power to you, stay there and enjoy it, nobody said every game has to be like every other game, that'd be pretty boring.
Well exactly. To each their own. Some people prefer looks over actual gameplay and thats fair enough. Other people are all about gameplay and don't care much about looks.
I personaly would think i am in the middle. I'd rather not have the highest end graphic settings, but actually a fun and enjoyable game that captivates me with other things than stunning looking.
Well exactly. To each their own. Some people prefer looks over actual gameplay and thats fair enough. Other people are all about gameplay and don't care much about looks. I personaly would think i am in the middle. I'd rather not have the highest end graphic settings, but actually a fun and enjoyable game that captivates me with other things than stunning looking.
i probably wasn't clear in my reply, i just thought it was funny that the post was all doom&gloom because he personally didn't like the game.
Originally posted by Miklos Originally posted by araczynski Originally posted by Miklos I'm commenting on the poor code and choices of design in regards to having non-seamless zone traversal. It's poor design - regardless if you like/dislike/love/hate the game, it's still poor design.
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable. you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics". just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
Jeezez, why would zoning improve the visuals unless the cache/setup engine is poorly designed/coded? There is NO link between those two - you can have seamless transition while having lush graphics if you want, polygon count has nothing to do with that. I will bet you that Blizzard any day of the week can ramp up polygons and won't have to break the seamless transition, they won't do it because too many people have sub-standard computers (especially the graphics part), but that is a whole other debate. Again, facts doesn't change with your misunderstanding of the subject - it's bad coding/design, nothing else.
Sorry Buddy, you are wrong in this..Btw..Don't you think FUNCOM did research on this before they chose to go with zones ?
It's about details in the outdoors and indoors, not only polygons and detailed faces and armor, also more animations and voices on NPC's all these things matter if you have a zone or not, you WOULD NOT get fluid gameplay without cutting down greatly ...
Vanguard is seamless and a good example of this, It's not even close to the level of detail as AoC, buildings for instance is mostly EMPTY with maybe one chair and an NPC standing silent in a corner...
Another example:
Until just recently EQ2 had VERY detailed ZONES, but as soon as they started with HUGE seamless zones it was very noteworthy that something in the brand had changed greatly for worse in the latest expansion Kunark..
Even thou I would prefer seamless world with the same level of details as AoC or EQ2, I have to wait for that a weee bit more...
I'm glad we have such expert game designers and coders here that they can enlighten us with their knowledge, no doubt based purely on facts.
I'm glad to be of service.
Some of us do infact make a living coding you know!
Some are even former Funcom employees that decided to work a place where quality of design and code matters more than textures...
And some of you apparently like to make vague statements that can be misconstrued to mean that you actually worked on the project and decided to leave it for greener pastures.
The game runs fine for me and the people that have judged the game by the open beta code, which has been patched twice all ready since some of you uninstalled, have made a premature decision about the game.
I like AoC and it kind of reminds me of old school SWG. I really enjoy the combat and the stories in the quest lines.
So for those of you that haven't played the game, don't jump on the cool guy bandwagon and hate on a game you've never played.
not to jump on the cool guy bandwagon; but i'm curious about something -- how many games gave players a craptastic experience in the OPEN beta (which more often than not is ONLY a combination stress test + free demo, rather than playtesting for bugs) and then turned around and had a GREAT experience in the actual retail game?
seriously, how many, and what were they? cuz none come to mind, at all.
i say this, because i'm sick and tired of reading about
how gods -n- heroes is a great game,
and how vanguard was having a so/so beta but would be great on release,
about how great potbs was going to be on release
and on and on and on,
and i think the only game that actually has had a GOOD release, was LOTRO. did they have a hellacious OPEN beta?
everyone sitting here talking up games that haven't been released -- historical data shows you're wrong. every post i'm reading here, i've already read a bazillion times while waiting for potbs, vanguard, hellgate:london and countless other games. and they were all WRONG.
i could care less if someone is talking like they work for/worked for whatever gaming company. let them be the queen of france online, for all i care. as long as they give me good information on games.
i don't care one whit for what anyone "believes" a game will magically transform into from open beta (not closed beta, not alpha, but OPEN BETA) to retail-- it's not going to happen. maybe there will be one exception that proves the rule; but so far, hasn't really happened. by the time open beta hits, the only real work left before release is tweaking the server load and hoping it can handle all the people they anticipate on opening day.
a craptastic play experience during OPEN BETA normally (read -- every time) means craptastic for the first few months of retail as gullible players, essentially, proceed to pay to play a beta game.
this post wasn't directed at anyone in particular (not even the quoted people); but, lose the fanboi glasses, lose the hater shades. there's no "us vs. them" in the player community. there's only players looking for a good game to play.
if you're a fanboi that can't objectively deal with criticism -- go tell mommy, cuz no one else cares. not even your dog.
if you're a blind hater (read - blind hater, not a hater that has actual facts backing up their complaints) - you're not doing anyone any good either.
if you're someone that's just tired of hearing people complain, people who have LEGITIMATE complaints -- again, go whine to mommy, cuz there's no one else that wants to hear you complaining about people complaining. no one. not ever. not even after you're dead.
if the game sucks in open beta, it'll suck on release, UNLESS it gets pushed back another 6 months, in which case, it wasn't REALLY an open beta, now was it?
the answer is "no. it wasn't."
so give me a good game, give me information on a good game, or warn me away from bug-filled launches, because i'm done shelling out $50-$200 for new games that are as fun as wallowing in a septic tank.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
not to jump on the cool guy bandwagon; but i'm curious about something -- how many games gave players a craptastic experience in the OPEN beta (which more often than not is ONLY a combination stress test + free demo, rather than playtesting for bugs) and then turned around and had a GREAT experience in the actual retail game?
seriously, how many, and what were they? cuz none come to mind, at all.
i say this, because i'm sick and tired of reading about how gods -n- heroes is a great game, and how vanguard was having a so/so beta but would be great on release, about how great potbs was going to be on release and on and on and on, and i think the only game that actually has had a GOOD release, was LOTRO. did they have a hellacious OPEN beta? everyone sitting here talking up games that haven't been released -- historical data shows you're wrong. every post i'm reading here, i've already read a bazillion times while waiting for potbs, vanguard, hellgate:london and countless other games. and they were all WRONG. i could care less if someone is talking like they work for/worked for whatever gaming company. let them be the queen of france online, for all i care. as long as they give me good information on games. i don't care one whit for what anyone "believes" a game will magically transform into from open beta (not closed beta, not alpha, but OPEN BETA) to retail-- it's not going to happen. maybe there will be one exception that proves the rule; but so far, hasn't really happened. by the time open beta hits, the only real work left before release is tweaking the server load and hoping it can handle all the people they anticipate on opening day.
a craptastic play experience during OPEN BETA normally (read -- every time) means craptastic for the first few months of retail as gullible players, essentially, proceed to pay to play a beta game.
this post wasn't directed at anyone in particular (not even the quoted people); but, lose the fanboi glasses, lose the hater shades. there's no "us vs. them" in the player community. there's only players looking for a good game to play.
if you're a fanboi that can't objectively deal with criticism -- go tell mommy, cuz no one else cares. not even your dog. if you're a blind hater (read - blind hater, not a hater that has actual facts backing up their complaints) - you're not doing anyone any good either. if you're someone that's just tired of hearing people complain, people who have LEGITIMATE complaints -- again, go whine to mommy, cuz there's no one else that wants to hear you complaining about people complaining. no one. not ever. not even after you're dead.
if the game sucks in open beta, it'll suck on release, UNLESS it gets pushed back another 6 months, in which case, it wasn't REALLY an open beta, now was it? the answer is "no. it wasn't." so give me a good game, give me information on a good game, or warn me away from bug-filled launches, because i'm done shelling out $50-$200 for new games that are as fun as wallowing in a septic tank.
i'm not sure if i got the point of your post, other than that you need to take some calgon (sp?) as for the open beta experience in aoc, you seem to think that because the vocal minority is spewing doom&gloom then that speaks exclusively on the state of the client. which is a joke, the ones that aren't having problem are buys enjoying the game and not dry humping the forums and bitching.
by your logic, if i had issues with my aoc client, then i should just assume that aoc sucks crap for me and everyone under the sun and will bomb as soon as it gets released?
then by the same logic, since my aoc client is running smooths as butter and i'm having a blast, then aoc will have a brilliant launch and is the second coming.
or maybe i'm just not getting what you're talking about at all.
either way, there's no such thing as a bug free game release. especially with mmo's. some people will have issues, some people won't.
funny thing is that i've always been building my own computers, and i've NEVER had a single problem with any mmo i've ever played, and i've always played the clients from opening day, when there would be an abundance of issues. but by the same token i'm sure there's people out there that have had nothing BUT problems on every client. can't put all the blame on the software all the time, there's plenty of people that are either stupid and don't know what they're doing with their computers, or have overlooked something accientally and either don't want to look for it or don't know TO look for it and just assume it's not their problem.
Comments
I'm glad we have such expert game designers and coders here that they can enlighten us with their knowledge, no doubt based purely on facts.
Funcom has some truely brilliant people... unfortunately they also have some hardasses in the finance dept.
Most likely they are launching before the game is ready, having forgotten the hell which was AO.. or thinking that ANYTHING is better than an AO launch.
What is most certain and true is the fact that I HAVE learned my lessons, and I DO remember the AO launch. So I may buy Conan... after summer has come and gone.
my rig: e6600/2.4ghz/8800gts512/1600x900/2AA/bloom/all sliders maxed/everything checked.
2gb ram, have another 2 sticks waiting to be installed tonight for when i reinstall vista64. i'm running the latest nvidia beta drivers.
performance = extremely good.
i have a weird issue though when the sun is shining on my back (which is more often than not) the back of my char has weird jaggies on it that i haven't been able to get rid of no matter what i toggle, haven't exhausted the options, but not putting much effort into it at the moment since i'll be running the retail in vista64 (for the dx10). whereas right now i'm using my XP side. maybe its the beta drivers, maybe its the beta code, i'll find out in a week i guess.
Some of us do infact make a living coding you know!
Some are even former Funcom employees that decided to work a place where quality of design and code matters more than textures...
Some of us do infact make a living coding you know!
Some are even former Funcom employees that decided to work a place where quality of design and code matters more than textures...
And some of you apparently like to make vague statements that can be misconstrued to mean that you actually worked on the project and decided to leave it for greener pastures.
The game runs fine for me and the people that have judged the game by the open beta code, which has been patched twice all ready since some of you uninstalled, have made a premature decision about the game.
I like AoC and it kind of reminds me of old school SWG. I really enjoy the combat and the stories in the quest lines.
So for those of you that haven't played the game, don't jump on the cool guy bandwagon and hate on a game you've never played.
I'm not commenting on wheter it runs smoothly or not, the storyline/lore neither on the combat system, so stop trolling.
I'm commenting on the poor code and choices of design in regards to having non-seamless zone traversal.
It's poor design - regardless if you like/dislike/love/hate the game, it's still poor design.
Oh that's right you're just some arm chair quaterback that has no idea what he's talking about.
You keep talking about this elusive "horrible code", but you don't use specifics. Your posts have been shallow drivel designed to try to make you look like you know what you're talking about when it's obvious that you don't.
There a few games that have "seamless zone traversal". If you're refering to WoW, they hide the loading really well, but it's still there. Vanguards "chunking" was and is a load of crap, instead of a loading screen your character just freezes there until the zone loads.
I timed my load screens the other day when I was reading people's post about how long the load times are. My longest time was 24 secs, but most of them were 10-14 secs.
I thought I would post a response a staff member for AOC put up on the IGN boards today forum name pasandra
"LOL. Where'd you get your information from? That's just so far off the mark it's untrue. I'm on this and CB forums every day, and i would guess at 5-20% of CB posters are saying they experience only has mild issues. About 1-2% say they have tiny issues, and i actually can't think of any (though i'm sure they exist), who say it's pristine, or close. The other 80% are saying how it is; buggy.
In fact, they'd be bullshitting, when funcom themselves admit to everyone (incl OB) that it isn't."
He went on to say
"It IS buggy. The client IS unstable. There's NO secret. There are posts on this front page from Funcom explaining just that. It's in beta. The devs are trying to work out the bugs. Where's the big mystery"
Also here is a link to what are the notes to the new patch for CB that someone in CB posted on the ign boards
http://msgs.ageofconan.com/patchnotes.php?UniverseName=GeneralBeta2&Language=en
one line that is interesting from those notes:
"There are some larger known issues with the version, but we decided to release the version with them due to the greatly increased performance of the client"
I would say if they are pushing a patch with known larger issues inorder to increase performance of the client that contrary to some of the 'fanbois" in this thread there are major issues with the client casuing the problems and it is not the lack of ability of people to turn their rigs that are causing the issues.
Either way I am still hopefull that they can get this fixed intime to have a relativly clean launch as I do enjoy the game when i am able to play it
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable.
you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics".
just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
Turbine seem to have it sorted out with LoTRO
Haha and in the next post you advise someone to loose the WoW tone.
Did it occur to you that some people really like the game and really want to play? The fecked client of course makes this impossible for a large percentage. Maybe you think people enjoy spending hours trying different drivers different settings rather than playing? Have fun playing with yourself...sounds like you have had lots of practice.
Most of these answers to these questions were straight up lies!!! They are trying to sell a game that runs like vanguard did at release......vanguard is finally running decent now ,but guess what it's too late and they pissed off to many people for most to even try it again. The answer about graphics is nobody cares about graphics ex. diablo 2 still high sales numbers and world of warcraft, lol i can't even imagine a big pvp battle with the crap job of programming this game has...Turn down the graphics make it a seamless world a load screen here and there no biggie...And guess what nobody is gonna say AWWWW man these graphics suck i am not gonna play this game. Well enough ranting good luck funcom sorry your game is gonna fail and you wasted your funds. Well there is still Warhammer and Mythic will deliver hopefully.
My advice:
Pickup collectors edition.
Get a buddy key
Test
Sell collectors on eBay
Play Mount & Blade/HL2 Mods until the next MMO
Rinse and Repeat
I mean, none of these MMOs based on movie/book/tabletop franchises have done half as well as they were expected to. Why don't people start making some original stuff : /
(Uzik ibnYaraq in game. Always willing to help.)
http://www.youtube.com/user/UzikAlJhamin
"new level of immersion..." "load times between the zones..." "end result was an easy choice. Quality won!"
I actually have 4 year old alienware that is slightly above minimum requirements and strangly on highest setietings with bloom not enabled just highest resolution my game seems to run much smoother. Beta convinced me this game willl be a blast , I cancelled my other MMO subcriptions in anticipation for this game.
Guys, the lastest patch rocks. No more FPS drop, no more slow loading screen. The only thing i'm now concerning with is "tweak the game so we can have High FPS for Massive Castle Seige"
( around 28fps with E8400 3GB duo core 2 CPU, 2gb Ram, 9600GT 512mb VGA at high quality graphic setting but i think it will drops in Castle Sieges)
well i hope you mean a patch for cb that has not made it to ob. Second 28fps is very low. I would exspect an fps around mid 60's but at this point would setting for your 28 if it ment no more freezes and crashes every 10 minutes. I will wait to see if they patch us untill then i am giving up on ob. It is to frustrating at the moment. monday after they brought servers up after maintance the game ran great. same with tuesday after maintance by wedn night i was strt to crash alot now on thrusday it is just unplayable. This would seem to point to a server side issue with the client and their servers.
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
That interview was so much spin and double-talk that my head is still reeling.
I especially liked the point that if you think the AoC launch could possibly be a bad as the AC launch, you weren't there for the AC launch....PRICELESS!
You have been warned, people.
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable.
you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics".
just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
Jeezez, why would zoning improve the visuals unless the cache/setup engine is poorly designed/coded? There is NO link between those two - you can have seamless transition while having lush graphics if you want, polygon count has nothing to do with that.
I will bet you that Blizzard any day of the week can ramp up polygons and won't have to break the seamless transition, they won't do it because too many people have sub-standard computers (especially the graphics part), but that is a whole other debate.
Again, facts doesn't change with your misunderstanding of the subject - it's bad coding/design, nothing else.
to each their own, i completely disagree with you.
I don't know how vanguard went at launch, since i wasn't interested in EQ3, but i can tell you my rig is running AoC as smooth as butter with everything cranked up.
I DO care about graphics, I DO think WoW looks like shit, and I DID hate Diablo2 for the crappy graphics (last i touched it was the year it came out when they allowed max of 800x600, pixelated as hell on a 21" monitor). However, i thought the original Diable was one of the most brilliant games i have ever played in my life. Diablo2 didn't even get close to matching its predecessor in quality (as far as I'm concerned).
And I DEFINITELY DO say very frequently "AWWWWW man these graphics suck, i'm not going to play this game."
Exactly why I'll never touch WoW and Warhammer.
Don't confuse your lack of a good gaming rig with the sentiments of every other gamer out there.
Getting back on topic though, i've spent a total of about 4 hours in the AoC beta (in the last 2 days since i got in) and i can unequivocally say the game is fun as heck (for me), looks damn good (to me, on my rig) and i wouldn't change anything about it (other than making the mob fonts more readable for color blind nerds like me). My CE is still on preorder, and i'll be having a blast next weekend.
If you prefer some other game, all the more power to you, stay there and enjoy it, nobody said every game has to be like every other game, that'd be pretty boring.
i've been gaming since late 80's, so i can't be called a graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination, i prefer story first and foremost, but it just so happens that AoC has both, graphics AND a story. most other MMO's don't have both, or in some cases, have neither.
Well exactly. To each their own. Some people prefer looks over actual gameplay and thats fair enough. Other people are all about gameplay and don't care much about looks.
I personaly would think i am in the middle. I'd rather not have the highest end graphic settings, but actually a fun and enjoyable game that captivates me with other things than stunning looking.
i probably wasn't clear in my reply, i just thought it was funny that the post was all doom&gloom because he personally didn't like the game.
it's poor design to those who don't like the zoning aspect of the game. from what i've read, it was done to provide better visuals/graphics for the game, rather than having to 'dilute' the visuals so that things are generic enough that less loading of textures is necessary and seamless zoning is viable.
you prefer seamless to eye candy, i prefer extra eye candy to seamless, ANY DAY.
TO ME, the poor design would have been "yet another mmo with lackluster graphics".
just because YOU as a programmer like one thing over another, DOESN'T mean 100% of your audience agrees with you. Last i checked you're a person like everyone else, your likes are your own, not anyone else's.
Jeezez, why would zoning improve the visuals unless the cache/setup engine is poorly designed/coded? There is NO link between those two - you can have seamless transition while having lush graphics if you want, polygon count has nothing to do with that.
I will bet you that Blizzard any day of the week can ramp up polygons and won't have to break the seamless transition, they won't do it because too many people have sub-standard computers (especially the graphics part), but that is a whole other debate.
Again, facts doesn't change with your misunderstanding of the subject - it's bad coding/design, nothing else.
Sorry Buddy, you are wrong in this..Btw..Don't you think FUNCOM did research on this before they chose to go with zones ?
It's about details in the outdoors and indoors, not only polygons and detailed faces and armor, also more animations and voices on NPC's all these things matter if you have a zone or not, you WOULD NOT get fluid gameplay without cutting down greatly ...
Vanguard is seamless and a good example of this, It's not even close to the level of detail as AoC, buildings for instance is mostly EMPTY with maybe one chair and an NPC standing silent in a corner...
Another example:
Until just recently EQ2 had VERY detailed ZONES, but as soon as they started with HUGE seamless zones it was very noteworthy that something in the brand had changed greatly for worse in the latest expansion Kunark..
Even thou I would prefer seamless world with the same level of details as AoC or EQ2, I have to wait for that a weee bit more...
Age of Conan is GREAT..
/Junker
Some of us do infact make a living coding you know!
Some are even former Funcom employees that decided to work a place where quality of design and code matters more than textures...
And some of you apparently like to make vague statements that can be misconstrued to mean that you actually worked on the project and decided to leave it for greener pastures.
The game runs fine for me and the people that have judged the game by the open beta code, which has been patched twice all ready since some of you uninstalled, have made a premature decision about the game.
I like AoC and it kind of reminds me of old school SWG. I really enjoy the combat and the stories in the quest lines.
So for those of you that haven't played the game, don't jump on the cool guy bandwagon and hate on a game you've never played.
not to jump on the cool guy bandwagon; but i'm curious about something -- how many games gave players a craptastic experience in the OPEN beta (which more often than not is ONLY a combination stress test + free demo, rather than playtesting for bugs) and then turned around and had a GREAT experience in the actual retail game?
seriously, how many, and what were they? cuz none come to mind, at all.
i say this, because i'm sick and tired of reading about
how gods -n- heroes is a great game,
and how vanguard was having a so/so beta but would be great on release,
about how great potbs was going to be on release
and on and on and on,
and i think the only game that actually has had a GOOD release, was LOTRO. did they have a hellacious OPEN beta?
everyone sitting here talking up games that haven't been released -- historical data shows you're wrong. every post i'm reading here, i've already read a bazillion times while waiting for potbs, vanguard, hellgate:london and countless other games. and they were all WRONG.
i could care less if someone is talking like they work for/worked for whatever gaming company. let them be the queen of france online, for all i care. as long as they give me good information on games.
i don't care one whit for what anyone "believes" a game will magically transform into from open beta (not closed beta, not alpha, but OPEN BETA) to retail-- it's not going to happen. maybe there will be one exception that proves the rule; but so far, hasn't really happened. by the time open beta hits, the only real work left before release is tweaking the server load and hoping it can handle all the people they anticipate on opening day.
a craptastic play experience during OPEN BETA normally (read -- every time) means craptastic for the first few months of retail as gullible players, essentially, proceed to pay to play a beta game.
this post wasn't directed at anyone in particular (not even the quoted people); but, lose the fanboi glasses, lose the hater shades. there's no "us vs. them" in the player community. there's only players looking for a good game to play.
if you're a fanboi that can't objectively deal with criticism -- go tell mommy, cuz no one else cares. not even your dog.
if you're a blind hater (read - blind hater, not a hater that has actual facts backing up their complaints) - you're not doing anyone any good either.
if you're someone that's just tired of hearing people complain, people who have LEGITIMATE complaints -- again, go whine to mommy, cuz there's no one else that wants to hear you complaining about people complaining. no one. not ever. not even after you're dead.
if the game sucks in open beta, it'll suck on release, UNLESS it gets pushed back another 6 months, in which case, it wasn't REALLY an open beta, now was it?
the answer is "no. it wasn't."
so give me a good game, give me information on a good game, or warn me away from bug-filled launches, because i'm done shelling out $50-$200 for new games that are as fun as wallowing in a septic tank.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
i'm not sure if i got the point of your post, other than that you need to take some calgon (sp?)
as for the open beta experience in aoc, you seem to think that because the vocal minority is spewing doom&gloom then that speaks exclusively on the state of the client. which is a joke, the ones that aren't having problem are buys enjoying the game and not dry humping the forums and bitching.
by your logic, if i had issues with my aoc client, then i should just assume that aoc sucks crap for me and everyone under the sun and will bomb as soon as it gets released?
then by the same logic, since my aoc client is running smooths as butter and i'm having a blast, then aoc will have a brilliant launch and is the second coming.
or maybe i'm just not getting what you're talking about at all.
either way, there's no such thing as a bug free game release. especially with mmo's. some people will have issues, some people won't.
funny thing is that i've always been building my own computers, and i've NEVER had a single problem with any mmo i've ever played, and i've always played the clients from opening day, when there would be an abundance of issues. but by the same token i'm sure there's people out there that have had nothing BUT problems on every client. can't put all the blame on the software all the time, there's plenty of people that are either stupid and don't know what they're doing with their computers, or have overlooked something accientally and either don't want to look for it or don't know TO look for it and just assume it's not their problem.