think he means it is more like guildwars, where there are places where people can gather but once the group leaves those areas it is them and no one else.
think he means it is more like guildwars, where there are places where people can gather but once the group leaves those areas it is them and no one else.
That would be just silly comparing aoc to guild wars.
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
think he means it is more like guildwars, where there are places where people can gather but once the group leaves those areas it is them and no one else.
That would be just silly comparing aoc to guild wars.
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
Um, since when does EQ2 make copies of a zone?
They do have instances, but as far as I have noticed its only for raids/group dungeons...
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
think he means it is more like guildwars, where there are places where people can gather but once the group leaves those areas it is them and no one else.
That would be just silly comparing aoc to guild wars.
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
Um, since when does EQ2 make copies of a zone?
They do have instances, but as far as I have noticed its only for raids/group dungeons...
EQ2 makes a copy of a zone when the population reaches 100, at least for the commonlands and Antonica. The day the pvp servers went live, there were at least 19 noob islands.
This review is based on potentials rather than current and actual game at this point. Any game released in this state other than MMO would be raited under 5.0. Imagine GTA 4 beeing released in this manner.
Sadly this is what the MMO genre has to tollerate atm. Even the gaming site are accepting such a horrible lack of respect towards the gamers of releasing MMO games that are half finished and considering AOC is pretty much nothing other than a game - driven by a single player storyline (all players are slaves that wash up on a beach from a ship - seriously.... how big can a ship be ? ) its a total discrace for anyone to accept such a horrendus release.
Any websites giving an unfinished game such a review raiting should be ashame of themselfs. And so should the fanbois that at this point dont realise what their acceptance of unfinished MMOs and direct talking down of ppl that are bringing out this point - is really doing to the whole of the MMO genre. Not only the single game.
"No mmo game has launched unfinished" "MMORPG games are never finshed " "(Put name here) was no better on release)" "(put name of company here) will fix the problems in next weeks and the game will become alot better".... "(put name of game here) is not for everyone " Really.... Get a grip and try to accept that AOC is a discrace - a direct insult to the gaming comunity. That doesn't mean its all bad. It means that its still miles off beeing finished, and polished enough to be released for paying public. And we actually have morons that are flaming ppl here for pointing this out.
Now - those fanbois can keep adding more lame excuses of justifying this horror after this post...
Its people like you that cause many to argue. a disgrace you say! do you not think you are going over the top? come to this adress.
52 Malvern crescent
Little dawley
Teflord shropshire.
England.
then just play on my average rig and show me these horrendous bugs that cripple gameplay etc. you will see that my system is average. you will see the game runs smooth on my rig and you will see the way the game runs for me. i give you my adress because there is no other way for any of us to prove anything in posts than for you to actually come and see for yourself. i offer it as a challenge to anyone who has the means to come to this adress.
I see my point as just an opinion but you really believe the game is a disgrace and i cant see why lol. whats so bad about this game? there are no gamebreaking bugs on my system and the game has plenty for me to do. i can group or solo i can read up on lore. i can follow quests and there are loads that are not just kill x of y mob. i havent tried crafting yet but i am on my way .
On the theme of objectivity: 8.5 is not awesome. Its a good review, certainly, but its not up there with the MMO-greats, according to Gamespot, and I happen to agree. Its a good game but its in the group behind the genre-greats, not a genre-great..and why that is necessary to say is because there seems to be merely "the game sucks donkey-eyeball" or "the game is the best ever made"...and, as always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
YOU tell me what these "MMO-greats" have over AoC? And name the MMO greats please? Compare them when they were 2 weeks old too..
have yet to play AoC, but the reason why even bad games get good reviews(see Vanguard and HG:L) is because the review companies are getting tons of cash in advertisement revenue and if they posted a bad review, that money would cease to come in.
you really have to take the reviews of games from major publishers with a grain of salt. they pour an assload of money into advertising on these sites and other places.
Yes you are right. This opinion is vindicated by WoW scoring a 9.5, a game that in reality is a steady 2.
All the instances have player caps, some of them are different. the hub instances are of course higher, but lower in graphics quality. the adventure instances are 48 players IIRC, the number comes from one of the dev journals, i don't recall which.
the "massive siege" instances are also 48x48... not very massive IMO...
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by shukes33
Its people like you that cause many to argue. a disgrace you say! do you not think you are going over the top? come to this adress. 52 Malvern crescent Little dawley Teflord shropshire. England. then just play on my average rig and show me these horrendous bugs that cripple gameplay etc. you will see that my system is average. you will see the game runs smooth on my rig and you will see the way the game runs for me. i give you my adress because there is no other way for any of us to prove anything in posts than for you to actually come and see for yourself. i offer it as a challenge to anyone who has the means to come to this adress. I see my point as just an opinion but you really believe the game is a disgrace and i cant see why lol. whats so bad about this game? there are no gamebreaking bugs on my system and the game has plenty for me to do. i can group or solo i can read up on lore. i can follow quests and there are loads that are not just kill x of y mob. i havent tried crafting yet but i am on my way .
Same as you mate. Takes ages to get this through to people, bit like a trek up the Wrekin
As for Dirtknap go link your review with your limits, if you cant it looks like you got confused. In every regular zone in age of conan you can have more than 48 people...
On the theme of objectivity: 8.5 is not awesome. Its a good review, certainly, but its not up there with the MMO-greats, according to Gamespot, and I happen to agree. Its a good game but its in the group behind the genre-greats, not a genre-great..and why that is necessary to say is because there seems to be merely "the game sucks donkey-eyeball" or "the game is the best ever made"...and, as always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
YOU tell me what these "MMO-greats" have over AoC? And name the MMO greats please? Compare them when they were 2 weeks old too..
Why should it be MY job to compare the MMO-greats and AoC when the discussion-topic is the marks that Gamespot've put on the game? The MMO-greats..what I mean by that are the MMOs that've gotten the highest marks by Gamespot, historically..wich games that'ld be is pretty easy to discover on their website.
Furthermore, I dont think WoW or Guildwars got their reviews when they were a year old, so offcourse the reviews of AoC are comparable to WoW and GW, for example. Why the h*** it should be "unfair" to rate an actual released game thats two weeks old is totally beyond me..feel free to elaborate why the "rules" for when games should be allowed to get reviewed, be it by professional gamesites or the ordinary customer.
If a game's released, its released.
AoC got a grade close to LoTRO and I think thats a fair assumption and I THINK thats where the subs-amount will land in after a couple of months. Par with LoTRO.
Gamespot are more like a advertising agency. Funcom paid a lot of money for ads for Age of Conan. Gamespot dont dare give them a bad review, Remember it is THE Gamespot that fired one of their reviewers after he gave Kane and Lynch a fair score that it deserved.
Its people like you that cause many to argue. a disgrace you say! do you not think you are going over the top? come to this adress. 52 Malvern crescent Little dawley Teflord shropshire. England. then just play on my average rig and show me these horrendous bugs that cripple gameplay etc. you will see that my system is average. you will see the game runs smooth on my rig and you will see the way the game runs for me. i give you my adress because there is no other way for any of us to prove anything in posts than for you to actually come and see for yourself. i offer it as a challenge to anyone who has the means to come to this adress. I see my point as just an opinion but you really believe the game is a disgrace and i cant see why lol. whats so bad about this game? there are no gamebreaking bugs on my system and the game has plenty for me to do. i can group or solo i can read up on lore. i can follow quests and there are loads that are not just kill x of y mob. i havent tried crafting yet but i am on my way .
You can lol all you like and tell ppl to come to your home - Kinda shows how naive you are in your argument - but it still doesn't make the game half of what it needs to be worth 8.5
They game isn't half finished. I played the beta and I dont have to be told by a person with "avarage rig" what gaming is about. If it would be just about able to run on your "avrage rig" then wohoo. You can finish to lvl 5. It doesn't say anything about the other 75 lvls of the game. Thats what this is about. You are yet another person bringing out endless excuses for a game to launch unfinished. Keep on playing to lvl 60 and see whats actually going on. Try to play tempest of set who now has disabled spellweaving cause it got launched untested. Try to do few quests and find out that many maps are unfinished and some even dont have the NPCs up. Go ahead and then make up all the excuses you like.
You know as well as me that if this was a game of any other genre than MMORPG it would have got horrific raiting. Not because you can't play it first 10 lvls. But because of the rest of the game. The features that you do expect to be there cause the developer SAID it would be there. And we are not talking about small features totally lacking like DX10 (witch I dont think that Gamespot is even mentioning)
The fact is that Funcom is bankrupt. They had to launch the game now or never. That doesn't make it all bad. Im happy we got to see it. But it doesn't mean that this is how every game should be at launch. And yes - it is a disgrace to expect ppl to pay for this. And yes - its a disgrace to see a game that would be getting probably about 5.0 if launched as normal RPG with all the features and current classes get 8.5 - JUST because its a MMORPG.
You do realise that Funcom was unable to hire ppl to support the game at start cause they couldn't play them any salarys? You do realise that a company that is bankrupt is now trying to fix as many things before ppl have to start paying subs cause at this point in time there is absolutly nothing - I repeat NOTHING to hold ppl playing and PAYING sub for it over any other normal single player RPG. Thats how things stand atm.
The developers of AOC have directly lied numerious times and use all the PR skills to sell more copies of an unfinished game. Thats why NDA was not lifted. Thats why the game was launched with closed forums. To get more money from ppl to finish making some kinda content worth paying for in the first place. That is a disgrace to me. Maybe you and Gamespot do not agree with me on that. But that doesn't make me wrong.
I tested AOC beta. Now Im testing and reporting exactly same bugs as I reported before. Now.... that doesn't mean Funcom hasn't been fixing things. It just means alot is still broken and unfinished. And still the company released the game. Not because it was in acceptable state for release. Rather because if not then there would be no company called Funcom atm. Only huge pile of debts. Now... Usually the past tells us alot about the future. And I think this is the case for Funcom and AOC. We will get more of the same. But I doubt ppl will be paying subs for that... So we are back to bankrupt stage - only now we have half-empty (or full if you want to be positive) servers played out as a single player RPG game.
Gamespot are more like a advertising agency. Funcom paid a lot of money for ads for Age of Conan. Gamespot dont dare give them a bad review, Remember it is THE Gamespot that fired one of their reviewers after he gave Kane and Lynch a fair score that it deserved.
EXACTLY which is why anyone with an Ounce of sense will just ignore Gamespots 'Review'.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
Comments
think he means it is more like guildwars, where there are places where people can gather but once the group leaves those areas it is them and no one else.
playing eq2 and two worlds
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
Um, since when does EQ2 make copies of a zone?
They do have instances, but as far as I have noticed its only for raids/group dungeons...
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Yes you have several instances of the same zone, but in gw every player gets their own instance.
So EQ2 isn't a proper mmorpg either since it spawns a new instance of a zone when it gets overpopulated?
Um, since when does EQ2 make copies of a zone?
They do have instances, but as far as I have noticed its only for raids/group dungeons...
EQ2 makes a copy of a zone when the population reaches 100, at least for the commonlands and Antonica. The day the pvp servers went live, there were at least 19 noob islands.
This review is based on potentials rather than current and actual game at this point. Any game released in this state other than MMO would be raited under 5.0. Imagine GTA 4 beeing released in this manner.
Sadly this is what the MMO genre has to tollerate atm. Even the gaming site are accepting such a horrible lack of respect towards the gamers of releasing MMO games that are half finished and considering AOC is pretty much nothing other than a game - driven by a single player storyline (all players are slaves that wash up on a beach from a ship - seriously.... how big can a ship be ? ) its a total discrace for anyone to accept such a horrendus release.
Any websites giving an unfinished game such a review raiting should be ashame of themselfs. And so should the fanbois that at this point dont realise what their acceptance of unfinished MMOs and direct talking down of ppl that are bringing out this point - is really doing to the whole of the MMO genre. Not only the single game.
"No mmo game has launched unfinished" "MMORPG games are never finshed " "(Put name here) was no better on release)" "(put name of company here) will fix the problems in next weeks and the game will become alot better".... "(put name of game here) is not for everyone " Really.... Get a grip and try to accept that AOC is a discrace - a direct insult to the gaming comunity. That doesn't mean its all bad. It means that its still miles off beeing finished, and polished enough to be released for paying public. And we actually have morons that are flaming ppl here for pointing this out.
Now - those fanbois can keep adding more lame excuses of justifying this horror after this post...
Go ahead....
Its people like you that cause many to argue. a disgrace you say! do you not think you are going over the top? come to this adress.
52 Malvern crescent
Little dawley
Teflord shropshire.
England.
then just play on my average rig and show me these horrendous bugs that cripple gameplay etc. you will see that my system is average. you will see the game runs smooth on my rig and you will see the way the game runs for me. i give you my adress because there is no other way for any of us to prove anything in posts than for you to actually come and see for yourself. i offer it as a challenge to anyone who has the means to come to this adress.
I see my point as just an opinion but you really believe the game is a disgrace and i cant see why lol. whats so bad about this game? there are no gamebreaking bugs on my system and the game has plenty for me to do. i can group or solo i can read up on lore. i can follow quests and there are loads that are not just kill x of y mob. i havent tried crafting yet but i am on my way .
YOU tell me what these "MMO-greats" have over AoC? And name the MMO greats please? Compare them when they were 2 weeks old too..
Yes you are right. This opinion is vindicated by WoW scoring a 9.5, a game that in reality is a steady 2.
i see a few free copys of the games being handed out
Vanguard got a 7.5 at release.
Lord of the Rings Online got 8.3, same as AoC
All the instances have player caps, some of them are different. the hub instances are of course higher, but lower in graphics quality. the adventure instances are 48 players IIRC, the number comes from one of the dev journals, i don't recall which.
the "massive siege" instances are also 48x48... not very massive IMO...
Same as you mate. Takes ages to get this through to people, bit like a trek up the Wrekin
As for Dirtknap go link your review with your limits, if you cant it looks like you got confused. In every regular zone in age of conan you can have more than 48 people...
YOU tell me what these "MMO-greats" have over AoC? And name the MMO greats please? Compare them when they were 2 weeks old too..
Why should it be MY job to compare the MMO-greats and AoC when the discussion-topic is the marks that Gamespot've put on the game? The MMO-greats..what I mean by that are the MMOs that've gotten the highest marks by Gamespot, historically..wich games that'ld be is pretty easy to discover on their website.
Furthermore, I dont think WoW or Guildwars got their reviews when they were a year old, so offcourse the reviews of AoC are comparable to WoW and GW, for example. Why the h*** it should be "unfair" to rate an actual released game thats two weeks old is totally beyond me..feel free to elaborate why the "rules" for when games should be allowed to get reviewed, be it by professional gamesites or the ordinary customer.
If a game's released, its released.
AoC got a grade close to LoTRO and I think thats a fair assumption and I THINK thats where the subs-amount will land in after a couple of months. Par with LoTRO.
wow, nice. im sure ign will score it similar. gamespot is alot more strict with there reviews.
I respectfully disagree,they are not they go with the money, a very bias review
Gamespot are more like a advertising agency. Funcom paid a lot of money for ads for Age of Conan. Gamespot dont dare give them a bad review, Remember it is THE Gamespot that fired one of their reviewers after he gave Kane and Lynch a fair score that it deserved.
They game isn't half finished. I played the beta and I dont have to be told by a person with "avarage rig" what gaming is about. If it would be just about able to run on your "avrage rig" then wohoo. You can finish to lvl 5. It doesn't say anything about the other 75 lvls of the game. Thats what this is about. You are yet another person bringing out endless excuses for a game to launch unfinished. Keep on playing to lvl 60 and see whats actually going on. Try to play tempest of set who now has disabled spellweaving cause it got launched untested. Try to do few quests and find out that many maps are unfinished and some even dont have the NPCs up. Go ahead and then make up all the excuses you like.
You know as well as me that if this was a game of any other genre than MMORPG it would have got horrific raiting. Not because you can't play it first 10 lvls. But because of the rest of the game. The features that you do expect to be there cause the developer SAID it would be there. And we are not talking about small features totally lacking like DX10 (witch I dont think that Gamespot is even mentioning)
The fact is that Funcom is bankrupt. They had to launch the game now or never. That doesn't make it all bad. Im happy we got to see it. But it doesn't mean that this is how every game should be at launch. And yes - it is a disgrace to expect ppl to pay for this. And yes - its a disgrace to see a game that would be getting probably about 5.0 if launched as normal RPG with all the features and current classes get 8.5 - JUST because its a MMORPG.
You do realise that Funcom was unable to hire ppl to support the game at start cause they couldn't play them any salarys? You do realise that a company that is bankrupt is now trying to fix as many things before ppl have to start paying subs cause at this point in time there is absolutly nothing - I repeat NOTHING to hold ppl playing and PAYING sub for it over any other normal single player RPG. Thats how things stand atm.
The developers of AOC have directly lied numerious times and use all the PR skills to sell more copies of an unfinished game. Thats why NDA was not lifted. Thats why the game was launched with closed forums. To get more money from ppl to finish making some kinda content worth paying for in the first place. That is a disgrace to me. Maybe you and Gamespot do not agree with me on that. But that doesn't make me wrong.
I tested AOC beta. Now Im testing and reporting exactly same bugs as I reported before. Now.... that doesn't mean Funcom hasn't been fixing things. It just means alot is still broken and unfinished. And still the company released the game. Not because it was in acceptable state for release. Rather because if not then there would be no company called Funcom atm. Only huge pile of debts. Now... Usually the past tells us alot about the future. And I think this is the case for Funcom and AOC. We will get more of the same. But I doubt ppl will be paying subs for that... So we are back to bankrupt stage - only now we have half-empty (or full if you want to be positive) servers played out as a single player RPG game.
EXACTLY which is why anyone with an Ounce of sense will just ignore Gamespots 'Review'.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981