Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
dont compare this game to vanguard
TheGreyMan
Member Posts: 325
vanguard was made by soe.....and they cant fix a thing......EQ2.....4 years old and the game still runs like crap....swg.....they killed......planet side...they killed........MO.....they killed........BOTBS.......flopped....
funcome will fix this game.....they are a great company,,,,,dont go compareing it to some sh***y company....
remember WoW.....that had a crappy beta and release.....look at it now...
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Sigil made Vanguard, Tilt game over.
MAGA
Brother- it was made by Sigil. SOE purchased vanguard after it was released. SOE was just the publisher at the time. It now operates on a skeleton crew.
To rush to the Aid of SOE they didn't actually create Vanguard. Not that it matters, but just wanted to clarify that.
Secondly though, I think I'm totally going to compare this game to Vanguard... ya.. that sounds about right.
First off there is nothing wrong with the way EQ2 runs, been playing since launch and never had any problems with it. Why do you feel the need to bash SoE here instead making an actual point where people shouldn't compare AoC to Vanguard? Get a life bro.
I'm CHUNKING alot in game and it isn't video settings. It happens regardless of what graphics settings i've got on.
However it is minimal, but my friends are CHUNKING alot more than me, and crashing far more frequently. One of them is even having flashbacks to VG.
I must say though, Vanguard is in amazing condition right now. Very pretty, very wide open, fewer bugs and very nice PvE wise. Good game for those who can stomach it, have tolerance, and enjoy exploring.
So if AoC can match Vanguard... Hey I would still say they did a good job!
i get 20-30fps on eq2...with my system...i have a 3870x2 , 4gb of memory and a q6600 and 3.6ghz....
i played vanguard on release...so...i need to check it out....but the forums are still filled with people say it sucks.....
Explain to me how WoW had a crappy beta and release. I was there, and I hardly call that crappy.
it was...you just forgot...
There was a lot of quest/looting bugs where you get stuck, it crashed for me a lot as well. I have been playing the AoC beta, and have had only one crash issue which happened when I was exiting the game once and didn't matter since I was lol.
--------------------
-Currently playing FFXIV, and BDO.
There is and their isnt. EQ2's engine was built around a faulty assumption. SOE assumed processors and GPUs would simply get more powerful on single chips. Instead, CPUs and GPUs have gone multi-core and/or people are using the SLI/CF configs. EQ2 isn't optimized by any means for multi-core/multi-GPU platforms. Thus, someone like me who has a damned good machine with newer tech doesnt get the best possible gaming experience. That is a major fault and it honestly pisses me off a bit given their stance back at launch of "We want tech to catch up to our engine, which is why the game is so demanding", yet they havent done anything to remedy the fact that tech evolved differently than they first thought.
it was...you just forgot...
I was there, and...umm...no it was pretty awesome for a beta and a release. Best of its time, easy. Lord of the Rings had a better Beta and Launch...but before then it was WoW all the way. You live in a dream world. Somehow you people equate having a bug or two to having a bad launch. No one is shouting down AoC because of a bug or two...they are hating on it for its abysmal performance at this stage.
Maybe they are wrong...I don't really care. But there isn't really a point to saying things that are obviously, and historically proven to be, untrue.
Comparing vanguard to this is fair as well. Maybe Funcom is tons better, and maybe they have made some changes (I hear they have actually). But, the first beta impression was very similar to a lot of people here. I can objectively see why, and understand it.
There is and their isnt. EQ2's engine was built around a faulty assumption. SOE assumed processors and GPUs would simply get more powerful on single chips. Instead, CPUs and GPUs have gone multi-core and/or people are using the SLI/CF configs. EQ2 isn't optimized by any means for multi-core/multi-GPU platforms. Thus, someone like me who has a damned good machine with newer tech doesnt get the best possible gaming experience. That is a major fault and it honestly pisses me off a bit given their stance back at launch of "We want tech to catch up to our engine, which is why the game is so demanding", yet they havent done anything to remedy the fact that tech evolved differently than they first thought.
Good post, I did not know this. Make sence when EQ2 plays the same on my old single AMD processer and my Dual core. Same video card in each and ram.
Back to topic, ....I have seen the beta for AoC. Funcom has money. If they want AoC to succed they will invest more $ into the game. If not, it will not get the subs they want.
Simple as that.
i get 20-30fps on eq2...with my system...i have a 3870x2 , 4gb of memory and a q6600 and 3.6ghz....
I have to second this. I kept on upgrading my system over the last couple years since EQ2 launch, I noticed that there was no performance increase after reaching 2 gig RAM and adding a 250 meg VC (I now have a 512 8700).
I thought the game was supposed to evolve with hardware advancements, but it still runs poorly compared to CoX, WoW and others. Must be sloppy coding. For a zoned game, it is sure laggy.
it was...you just forgot...
I was there, and...umm...no it was pretty awesome for a beta and a release. Best of its time, easy. Lord of the Rings had a better Beta and Launch...but before then it was WoW all the way. You live in a dream world. Somehow you people equate having a bug or two to having a bad launch. No one is shouting down AoC because of a bug or two...they are hating on it for its abysmal performance at this stage.
Maybe they are wrong...I don't really care. But there isn't really a point to saying things that are obviously, and historically proven to be, untrue.
Comparing vanguard to this is fair as well. Maybe Funcom is tons better, and maybe they have made some changes (I hear they have actually). But, the first beta impression was very similar to a lot of people here. I can objectively see why, and understand it.
lol, queue lines anyone? sorry, but waiting in line to play an mmo? rediculous.That wasn't a problem at release. It was a problem several months later when floods of people came to the game. I did not once deal with a line to log in during the games initial months.
Also, they had only prepared their hardware to deal with around double EQ's numbers. No game company in the world could have projected what they got instead. So, yeah, dealing with the lines was pretty damn fair in my book. When you think you can project things better, shoot Blizzard a line. I'm sure they'd love a psychic.
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
how? the game is in beta.....you cant judge a game in beta
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
how? the game is in beta.....you cant judge a game in beta
Dude it goes live in 8 days. From the looks of it, they have 2 years of development left. I don't think they will make it. It may keep enough peeps to keep it running like Vanguard. They will have 1-2 servers by the end of the year.
The game is a major failure. Maybe not as big a failure as Vanguard be it is very close.
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
how? the game is in beta.....you cant judge a game in beta
Dude it goes live in 8 days. From the looks of it, they have 2 years of development left. I don't think they will make it. It may keep enough peeps to keep it running like Vanguard. They will have 1-2 servers by the end of the year.
The game is a major failure. Maybe not as big a failure as Vanguard be it is very close.
the open beta is an old client...the closed beta is mush better
Bzzzt, wrong. Try Sigil.
Try again!
http://www.greycouncil.org/
Bzzzt, wrong. Try Sigil.
Try again!
ok...i know already,,,,read before you post....
Ok, we'll compare it to PotBS then.
Nah I'm just kidding. Don't know much about AoC but it does give off a similar oder as VG and PotBS did in beta.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
how? the game is in beta.....you cant judge a game in beta
Dude it goes live in 8 days. From the looks of it, they have 2 years of development left. I don't think they will make it. It may keep enough peeps to keep it running like Vanguard. They will have 1-2 servers by the end of the year.
The game is a major failure. Maybe not as big a failure as Vanguard be it is very close.
the open beta is an old client...the closed beta is mush better
you are joking right ?
allthough "mush" would be a suitable word for it
i know a man who knows a dog that has the closed beta client installed right now and played tonight!
it still runs like a dog FACT!
shame coz games fairly solid,just performance and bugs are killing it!
needs another few months of fixes end of story
and as for the OP
yes we have to compare it to VsoH in fact i played that at beta and release and trust me bro,even that mess ran better than this does "from what the dog told me"!
also soe didnt kill Vsoh or MxO thay were damaged goods way before soe got their hands on em!
and eq2 have you even played it ?
its the one thing they have done right!
next time you wanna post shi*e get yer facts right first!
The only difference between AoC and Vanguard is that AoC has loading screens. Everything else is and will be the same outcome. This game is pitiful.
how? the game is in beta.....you cant judge a game in beta
Dude it goes live in 8 days. From the looks of it, they have 2 years of development left. I don't think they will make it. It may keep enough peeps to keep it running like Vanguard. They will have 1-2 servers by the end of the year.
The game is a major failure. Maybe not as big a failure as Vanguard be it is very close.
the open beta is an old client...the closed beta is mush better
you are joking right ?
i know a man who knows a dog that has the closed beta client installed right now and played tonight!
it still runs like a dog FACT!
shame coz games fairly solid,just perfomeance and bugs are killing it!
and as for the OP
yes we have to compare it to VsoH in fact i played that at beta and release and trust me bro,even that mess ran better than this does "from what the dog told me"!
also soe didnt kill Vsoh or MxO thay were damaged goods way before soe got their hands on em!
and eq2 have you even played it ?
its the one thing they have done right!
next time you wanna post shi*e get yer facts right first!
TROLLand you refer to me twice....look who your talking to