I thought the last thing in the interview was the best. "This is the first time I've heard of this". That there are people saying they are taking out sex and violence to make it more friendly to someone. How can someone there say they haven't heard that complaint? It would be impossible.
I would like to know why people are so blindly defending Failcom.
Heck, even the BBB has this to say:
"Based on BBB files, this company has an unsatisfactory record
BBB Definition:
unsatisfactory record - A company has an "unsatisfactory business performance record" with the BBB is based on the experiences reflected in BBB files. This file condition results when the company has failed to resolve or respond to complaints, repeatedly failed to respond or resolve issues in a timely manner, failed to resolve the underlying issues for a pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints, failed to honor their commitment to mediate or arbitrate disputes or honor mediated agreements or arbitrated decisions, failed to substantiate, modify or discontinue false advertising claims
BBB Definition:
advertising claims - The BBB reviews business advertising, (newspaper, magazine, TV, radio, internet) routinely to ensure that it is truthful and ethical. Claims in advertising are measured against basic advertising principles of the BBB Code of Advertising which was developed to guide advertisers, advertising agencies and advertising media.
that are challenged by the BBB, or failed to discontinue unauthorized use of the BBB name and logo, a Federally protected trademark.
with the BBB due to a pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints and failure to correct the underlying reason for the complaints.
On May 15, 2008 the company was invited to meet with the BBB to discuss the pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints concerning access problems at a game site and the inability to contact anyone from the company about customer service issues
BBB Definition:
service issues - Claims of alleged delay in completing service, failure to provide promised service, inferior quality of provided service, or damaged merchandise as a result of delivery service.
BBB Definition:
customer service issues - Claims alleging unsatisfactory customer service, including personnel's failure to provide assistance in a timely manner, failure to address or respond to customer dissatisfaction, unavailability for customer support, and/or inappropriate behavior or attitude exhibited by company staff.
. The company has not accepted the BBB offer."
Oh, and here is the U.S. phone number for Failcom . I remember someone asking at some point what it was.
You aren't competing with WoW in 2004. You're competing against WoW in 2008 (and forward). Many new MMO players don't care that AoC may have launched with more content than WoW did at launch - they only know WoW as it is now - not what it was (or rather, wasn't). You aren't competing with WoW polish circa '04, you're competing against WoW circa '08.
If you build a game for 2008, you have to compete with games as they stand in 2008. Not as they stood in 2004.
What happened then does not matter; it's only what happens now and moving forward. However, if you don't learn from the past, you're doomed to repeat it in the future.
Alot of fanbois use the stupid excuse that WoW have problem and is lacking this and that when launch... sign....... wake up pls......
He's got a good point but I don't fully agree with it . Yes it's irrelevant whether WOW had bugs at launch , however it's unfair to compare the state of a game with 4 years of added content and polish to a recently released game.
A better comparison to make would be the quality of patches both games have received since their launch . Which company has the more stable releases and which company truly uses feedback and quality assurance to please their fans.
Saying their game should be as good as wow in 08 is just as irrelevant as saying wow had bugs at launch , Given 4 years of live development it very well may be , We'll know in about 4 years.
I dont agree, you have to see that a new game have a future. The polish and game content is not only what makes people stay, it is what they expect will happen to the game in the future. Bugs and lack of content in the starting phase, is NOT what makes a MMORPG fail. To make a MMORPG fail, you have to make it so that players dont see how improvements in the future will make the game any better. This is why Funcom failed so badly. There was no future for AoC, people could see this.
Some old games had soul, the soul in the game is what will eventually make people see the light for an even more improved future.
So please do not say that any game has to be just as finished as WoW to be sucessful. Even a Pacman MMORPG could be better than WoW, but it needs the soul, creativity and underlying understanding of elements from the developers to make it better. What is turning people on in MMORPGs? What gives them the good feeling when they play? So many questions, and only the most intuitivly creative persons will be able to answer those in a true way.
Thank you for the time to read my post, there you have it right from my spine.
You aren't competing with WoW in 2004. You're competing against WoW in 2008 (and forward). Many new MMO players don't care that AoC may have launched with more content than WoW did at launch - they only know WoW as it is now - not what it was (or rather, wasn't). You aren't competing with WoW polish circa '04, you're competing against WoW circa '08.
If you build a game for 2008, you have to compete with games as they stand in 2008. Not as they stood in 2004.
What happened then does not matter; it's only what happens now and moving forward. However, if you don't learn from the past, you're doomed to repeat it in the future.
Alot of fanbois use the stupid excuse that WoW have problem and is lacking this and that when launch... sign....... wake up pls......
He's got a good point but I don't fully agree with it . Yes it's irrelevant whether WOW had bugs at launch , however it's unfair to compare the state of a game with 4 years of added content and polish to a recently released game.
A better comparison to make would be the quality of patches both games have received since their launch . Which company has the more stable releases and which company truly uses feedback and quality assurance to please their fans.
Saying their game should be as good as wow in 08 is just as irrelevant as saying wow had bugs at launch , Given 4 years of live development it very well may be , We'll know in about 4 years.
I dont agree, you have to see that a new game have a future. The polish and game content is not only what makes people stay, it is what they expect will happen to the game in the future. Bugs and lack of content in the starting phase, is NOT what makes a MMORPG fail. To make a MMORPG fail, you have to make it so that players dont see how improvements in the future will make the game any better. This is why Funcom failed so badly. There was no future for AoC, people could see this.
Some old games had soul, the soul in the game is what will eventually make people see the light for an even more improved future.
So please do not say that any game has to be just as finished as WoW to be sucessful. Even a Pacman MMORPG could be better than WoW, but it needs the soul, creativity and underlying understanding of elements from the developers to make it better. What is turning people on in MMORPGs? What gives them the good feeling when they play? So many questions, and only the most intuitivly creative persons will be able to answer those in a true way.
Thank you for the time to read my post, there you have it right from my spine.
Agreed. The underlying design of AoC is flawed to the core. Instead of focusing on immersion and content they chose the superior graphics route and crapped out the whole game. Just look at the crafting for instance, it's a pathetic afterthought that has NO future potential. And the end game content is silly, there's just so little to build on, nothing to hang around and pay money to wait for.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Exactly, what people want in a new MMORPG is the CORE to be well done. I was in the open beta, and could see where AoC was going already then. I wrote Funcom a mail, adressing all the core issues that was mostly too late to fix.. no answer. You would think that any MMORPG company would pay you for such great information, or at least thank you. But it seems like they are just ignoring you, which also gives the customer an idea of how Funcom handles things. It just shows how they handled the patches, nerfing stuff is a sign of weakness and little to no understanding. They build a game core that is too hard to work with, thats why we see delayed PvP system patch and working sieges etc. The core was too heavy to work with, to static, and overly focused on the graphic area which makes it even more heavy.
What is missing from this game is going to be trivial very soon. There is one thing this game is missing that Funcom can't patch in, subscribers. I frequently keep tabs on my old server since I quit, and everyone I used to play with or group with are all gone. Guilds are folding their tents up on a daily basis, and with WAR coming in a month the show will be over. If there is nobody else to play with, it doesn't matter what they do.
I personally feel this is what many people are not realizing. It seems to me that Funcom feels that as the game progresses they can recapture some of the lost subscriptions. To an extent this is true as people tire of other games and give AoC another shot. Unfortunately if I had to guess statistically they might regain 20% on the high end of the subscriptions they've lost. AoC is going to become another niche MMO in its first year of release because of poor management and development. Maybe Funcom is okay with this as right now their main goal really needs to be developing a 3 year plan to recoup their initial investment costs. This game is failing faster than SWG did and I really thought that game was poorly developed.
As for WAR, I think the game is going to have issues when it come out as all MMO's do. What I find comfort in with WAR is that they have been willing to delay the game launch to continue improving the game. That alone is tells me that they are trying to put quality above making money. The other thing is they seem to be more willing to honestly communicate with the public about what to expect when the game launches. It is always better to under hype and over deliver than to do the opposite.
What is missing from this game is going to be trivial very soon. There is one thing this game is missing that Funcom can't patch in, subscribers. I frequently keep tabs on my old server since I quit, and everyone I used to play with or group with are all gone. Guilds are folding their tents up on a daily basis, and with WAR coming in a month the show will be over. If there is nobody else to play with, it doesn't matter what they do.
As for WAR, I think the game is going to have issues when it come out as all MMO's do. What I find comfort in with WAR is that they have been willing to delay the game launch to continue improving the game. That alone is tells me that they are trying to put quality above making money. The other thing is they seem to be more willing to honestly communicate with the public about what to expect when the game launches. It is always better to under hype and over deliver than to do the opposite.
The release date for Warhammer couldn't be better. They are going to grab most of the AoC fans are are angry, and at the same time they are going try to get into the market before the next WoW expansion. If the game is actually decent, they stand to make a killing.
I recall a press release where Funcom stated they shipped 1 million copies, but it did not say that 1 million copies were purchased.
Woody, I think your link misread something or just flat out bad journalism. Perhaps I am wrong and maybe someone can find the Funcom press release where they say 1 million copies sold 3 week after launch?
Comments
I thought the last thing in the interview was the best. "This is the first time I've heard of this". That there are people saying they are taking out sex and violence to make it more friendly to someone. How can someone there say they haven't heard that complaint? It would be impossible.
That also breeds a rather funny thought. How can you take anything out of AoC as it is?
---------------------
Sniper is another term for unorthodox surgeon.
I would like to know why people are so blindly defending Failcom.
Heck, even the BBB has this to say:
"Based on BBB files, this company has an unsatisfactory record
BBB Definition:
unsatisfactory record - A company has an "unsatisfactory business performance record" with the BBB is based on the experiences reflected in BBB files. This file condition results when the company has failed to resolve or respond to complaints, repeatedly failed to respond or resolve issues in a timely manner, failed to resolve the underlying issues for a pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints, failed to honor their commitment to mediate or arbitrate disputes or honor mediated agreements or arbitrated decisions, failed to substantiate, modify or discontinue false advertising claims
BBB Definition:
advertising claims - The BBB reviews business advertising, (newspaper, magazine, TV, radio, internet) routinely to ensure that it is truthful and ethical. Claims in advertising are measured against basic advertising principles of the BBB Code of Advertising which was developed to guide advertisers, advertising agencies and advertising media.
that are challenged by the BBB, or failed to discontinue unauthorized use of the BBB name and logo, a Federally protected trademark.
with the BBB due to a pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints and failure to correct the underlying reason for the complaints.
On May 15, 2008 the company was invited to meet with the BBB to discuss the pattern
BBB Definition:
pattern - More than 2 complaints involving the same allegations usually within 12 months that are significant in relation to the company's size and volume of business.
of complaints concerning access problems at a game site and the inability to contact anyone from the company about customer service issues
BBB Definition:
service issues - Claims of alleged delay in completing service, failure to provide promised service, inferior quality of provided service, or damaged merchandise as a result of delivery service.
BBB Definition:
customer service issues - Claims alleging unsatisfactory customer service, including personnel's failure to provide assistance in a timely manner, failure to address or respond to customer dissatisfaction, unavailability for customer support, and/or inappropriate behavior or attitude exhibited by company staff.
. The company has not accepted the BBB offer."
Oh, and here is the U.S. phone number for Failcom
. I remember someone asking at some point what it was.
(919) 806-0707
"(919) 806-0707"
A phone number to tell us they don't have phone support. Nice.
Hahaha!
"If you need account or technical support please email us ..."
That is total crap.
Funcom reminds me of Enron.
He's got a good point but I don't fully agree with it . Yes it's irrelevant whether WOW had bugs at launch , however it's unfair to compare the state of a game with 4 years of added content and polish to a recently released game.
A better comparison to make would be the quality of patches both games have received since their launch . Which company has the more stable releases and which company truly uses feedback and quality assurance to please their fans.
Saying their game should be as good as wow in 08 is just as irrelevant as saying wow had bugs at launch , Given 4 years of live development it very well may be , We'll know in about 4 years.
I dont agree, you have to see that a new game have a future. The polish and game content is not only what makes people stay, it is what they expect will happen to the game in the future. Bugs and lack of content in the starting phase, is NOT what makes a MMORPG fail. To make a MMORPG fail, you have to make it so that players dont see how improvements in the future will make the game any better. This is why Funcom failed so badly. There was no future for AoC, people could see this.
Some old games had soul, the soul in the game is what will eventually make people see the light for an even more improved future.
So please do not say that any game has to be just as finished as WoW to be sucessful. Even a Pacman MMORPG could be better than WoW, but it needs the soul, creativity and underlying understanding of elements from the developers to make it better. What is turning people on in MMORPGs? What gives them the good feeling when they play? So many questions, and only the most intuitivly creative persons will be able to answer those in a true way.
Thank you for the time to read my post, there you have it right from my spine.
He's got a good point but I don't fully agree with it . Yes it's irrelevant whether WOW had bugs at launch , however it's unfair to compare the state of a game with 4 years of added content and polish to a recently released game.
A better comparison to make would be the quality of patches both games have received since their launch . Which company has the more stable releases and which company truly uses feedback and quality assurance to please their fans.
Saying their game should be as good as wow in 08 is just as irrelevant as saying wow had bugs at launch , Given 4 years of live development it very well may be , We'll know in about 4 years.
I dont agree, you have to see that a new game have a future. The polish and game content is not only what makes people stay, it is what they expect will happen to the game in the future. Bugs and lack of content in the starting phase, is NOT what makes a MMORPG fail. To make a MMORPG fail, you have to make it so that players dont see how improvements in the future will make the game any better. This is why Funcom failed so badly. There was no future for AoC, people could see this.
Some old games had soul, the soul in the game is what will eventually make people see the light for an even more improved future.
So please do not say that any game has to be just as finished as WoW to be sucessful. Even a Pacman MMORPG could be better than WoW, but it needs the soul, creativity and underlying understanding of elements from the developers to make it better. What is turning people on in MMORPGs? What gives them the good feeling when they play? So many questions, and only the most intuitivly creative persons will be able to answer those in a true way.
Thank you for the time to read my post, there you have it right from my spine.
Agreed. The underlying design of AoC is flawed to the core. Instead of focusing on immersion and content they chose the superior graphics route and crapped out the whole game. Just look at the crafting for instance, it's a pathetic afterthought that has NO future potential. And the end game content is silly, there's just so little to build on, nothing to hang around and pay money to wait for.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Exactly, what people want in a new MMORPG is the CORE to be well done. I was in the open beta, and could see where AoC was going already then. I wrote Funcom a mail, adressing all the core issues that was mostly too late to fix.. no answer. You would think that any MMORPG company would pay you for such great information, or at least thank you. But it seems like they are just ignoring you, which also gives the customer an idea of how Funcom handles things. It just shows how they handled the patches, nerfing stuff is a sign of weakness and little to no understanding. They build a game core that is too hard to work with, thats why we see delayed PvP system patch and working sieges etc. The core was too heavy to work with, to static, and overly focused on the graphic area which makes it even more heavy.
I personally feel this is what many people are not realizing. It seems to me that Funcom feels that as the game progresses they can recapture some of the lost subscriptions. To an extent this is true as people tire of other games and give AoC another shot. Unfortunately if I had to guess statistically they might regain 20% on the high end of the subscriptions they've lost. AoC is going to become another niche MMO in its first year of release because of poor management and development. Maybe Funcom is okay with this as right now their main goal really needs to be developing a 3 year plan to recoup their initial investment costs. This game is failing faster than SWG did and I really thought that game was poorly developed.
As for WAR, I think the game is going to have issues when it come out as all MMO's do. What I find comfort in with WAR is that they have been willing to delay the game launch to continue improving the game. That alone is tells me that they are trying to put quality above making money. The other thing is they seem to be more willing to honestly communicate with the public about what to expect when the game launches. It is always better to under hype and over deliver than to do the opposite.
As for WAR, I think the game is going to have issues when it come out as all MMO's do. What I find comfort in with WAR is that they have been willing to delay the game launch to continue improving the game. That alone is tells me that they are trying to put quality above making money. The other thing is they seem to be more willing to honestly communicate with the public about what to expect when the game launches. It is always better to under hype and over deliver than to do the opposite.
The release date for Warhammer couldn't be better. They are going to grab most of the AoC fans are are angry, and at the same time they are going try to get into the market before the next WoW expansion. If the game is actually decent, they stand to make a killing.
TwitchTV Partnered Streamer
MMORPG.com Spotlight Blog Writer
Co-Leader of Inquisition
Youtube Channel
I recall a press release where Funcom stated they shipped 1 million copies, but it did not say that 1 million copies were purchased.
Woody, I think your link misread something or just flat out bad journalism. Perhaps I am wrong and maybe someone can find the Funcom press release where they say 1 million copies sold 3 week after launch?