[quote]Originally posted by Azrile [AOC right now is slightly better than Warhammer.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Kind of like Lineage 2? Thats uber popular.
How about Archlord?
These games have A vs B. They must be selling like hotcakes.
Lets put it this way
Gorgeous visuals vs Muddy Graphics from 2004 (ala WoW)
Fast paced combat vs slow mo Hit hotkey and wait for Global Cooldown combat
Solo or Group play vs ONLY group play or get bored beyond belief
A real story in your game compared to ...No story, but WAR
I prefer the former, and this makes AoC more fun to play. But, there is no doubt Funcom has already ruined this game, and I see no coming back. Avery may be touting people coming back, but, the populations are still quite thin. Even though the game runs great now, and the Patch 2.0 fixes really made AoC an excellent MMO with room to progress as it is future proofed, this does not help it due to people still carrying an "attitiude" of the launch issues.
Gaute is not there anymore to ruin the game, and it has a chance to be great...just an MMO needs people to make this happen, and until server merges, the game will feel empty.
Funcom needs to get all they promised in before the end of the year and offer a free "return" time. This may work, as I came back after playing the slow boring WAR, and I realized it IS a better game than WAR.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
AoC is a good game now. The last five month saw them greatly reduce client OOM issues and crashes. They are balancing out flaws like gems, crafting and a lack of pvp system. Most of the endgame dungeons now work (although they are still very mundane). Seiging now works. All of these things are great updates to the game, but they all should have been done before the game launches. Because the game was launched unfinished, it lost the majority of it's players in the first 2 months. Why does it matter? 1. Most of the game is based around seiging or large Guild vs Guild activities. This is no longer possible since on most servers, there simply aren't enough players to do these things. If server mergers come within a month or two, then this will be solved. Yes, seiging does happen on a few servers, but it is a rare occurance and then you are left with very little to do at endgame. Seiging should be going on every night, it should be what people log on and do. Instead it requires a ton of organization and coaxing even to get one seige happening very infrequently. 2. (my opinion). Funcom as a company is in serious danger. They took on a lot of debt to launch AOC, and even with 800k box sales in May, the company was very unprofitable. Some of the money they borrowed is still in the bank, so they can keep operating the game, but probably not for more then 4 months. I highly doubt Funcom as a company will exist in February 2009. There is a possibility if they stabilize the game (which they mostly have) that the game will get sold off to another company, but because of their debt, it is unlikely Funcom will be sold directly. If you are interested in AOC, get a trial account and play it. The first 20 levels are really good (but be warned of a bit of a drastic dropoff). If you like the trial, then play the game. The only warning I would add is that the game might not be around in January. AOC right now is slightly better than Warhammer. The difference is that Warhammer has a more solid company behind it and doesn't have the possibility of being closed down for awhile.
This is what I would do if I was the new Game Director.
- first I would make sure the game is "ready".
- then I would publicly admit that FC FAILED and that AoC was released too early.
- I would apologize everyone who bought the game and introduce "Return to Hyboria" -program, where people who bought the game, get a new free 1 month subscription. (I stole this awesome idea from some guy on these forums)
I think FC believes that if they announce they were a failure, everyone would stop playing. Personally I don't think so. I think people respect honesty (which has been a strange concept for FC).
It's ok to fail if you are honest about it. People will usually forgive you. Failing is human, I know I've done it many times. What matters is that you are honest, get up and fix it.
FC made a concious decicion to lie in order to get more pre-order but then it backfired and they looked like liers and cheats that they are. If they had been open and honest at launch, yes they would have had less preorders but they would have kept a reputation of a respectable company. Right now the MMO community has almost zero respect towards FC.
This "Return to Hyboria" -program would get servers booming over night. And by "booming" I mean really booming, not the "servers are booming" hype BS by mr. Avery. During this free month many players would probably start paying for AoC again, given it's truly as good, after these new patches, that some people here insist. Personally I think AoC needs many more months before it's "ready".
Unfortunately I don't think FC is willing to admit failure and they will continue to go down until FC goes bankrupt, they sell AoC to a different company and AoC becomes a "could-have-been" niche game with 20k subscribers.
I agree do AoC is better than Warhammer. Even though WAR sounded awesome on paper, in reality it got really boring really fast. That said I do see more potential with WAR if they are able to fix all the issues. My problems with AoC are so fundamental that you'd have to pretty much re-code the wholething to fix it.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Future expansion will only add..... Wait what about the stuff that still is not in the GAME? I hope the sub numbers DEMONSTARTE , err demonstrate something, given the state of the world credit markets....
Funcom wont be able to lie to a lender to get more money the way they lie to the users.
i don't know anyone whos thing about re-subscribing....in fact the top guild on my old server decided to final call it quits so i'd say people are still un-subscribing.
i don't know anyone whos thing about re-subscribing....in fact the top guild on my old server decided to final call it quits so i'd say people are still un-subscribing.
You know I think you are correct. There are so many things wrong with this game that you cant really sum up why you hate it, save for writing 3 page essays on the topic. Most of us have already done this time and time again. I am, I think, still ebing counted as a subscriber due to having purchased a 6 month subscription.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
So are you resubscribed or not Mr Bloodsworth? Some posts you claim you havent and others you appear to indicate that you are playing actively - WHICH IS IT?
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number . Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
So are you resubscribed or not Mr Bloodsworth? Some posts you claim you havent and others you appear to indicate that you are playing actively - WHICH IS IT?
Hmm.. You confuse me, Mr Bloodworth is a FC dev. The guy in charge of the new crafting system.
Originally posted by Soupgoblin Do you even play AoC? There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse. AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market). I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming). And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
Let me explain.
Mr. CobraSolidus is a FC employee. His less than a month year old account was created with the sole purpose of telling people how awesome AoC is and how much WAR sucks.
Just look at his post history. The guy spends hours a day in AoC or WAR forums doing his propaganda. His posts are always bias and ridicilous.
Your question is a good one. People who like the game don't spend much time in forums because they are too busy playing the game. People who hate the game usually spend more time bitching about it because they are bored and disappointed and with AoC, they want the game to fail because they feel cheated.
It really is a shame that we have people like CobraSolidus and AmazingAvery on these forums. You really can't believe anything they say because you never know if they are talking the truth or lying to keep their job.
Mr. CobraSolidus is a FC employee. His less than a month year old account was created with the sole purpose of telling people how awesome AoC is and how much WAR sucks. Just look at his post history. The guy spends hours a day in AoC or WAR forums doing his propaganda. His posts are always bias and ridicilous. Your question is a good one. People who like the game don't spend much time in forums because they are too busy playing the game. People who hate the game usually spend more time bitching about it because they are bored and disappointed and with AoC, they want the game to fail because they feel cheated. It really is a shame that we have people like CobraSolidus and AmazingAvery on these forums. You really can't believe anything they say because you never know if they are talking the truth or lying to keep their job.
Do you have evidence to back any of this up? I could say the same exact thing about most haters here, they've made hundreds of posts in only a few months and only about AOC (with plugs about their favorite game). Regardless saying it doesn't make it true, now does it?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
Which is exactly why I didn't call his opinion laughable. Maybe the point eluded you, sorry my bad...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
Which is exactly why I didn't call his opinion laughable. Maybe the point eluded you, sorry my bad...
I agree he s entitled to his opinion, everyone is of course. The thing is one poster said why he feels WAR is better and another poster says in theory. This isn t true at all. He s right when he says a good guild or group of people, trying to achieve the same goal makes a big difference. The true fun in the game are imo anyways the tier3-4 keep takes with long battles, and many people involved. Win or lose when you re palying witha good group/guild, the constant battles are an absolute blast. All i can say for myself is i didn t once get even close to that feeling in AOC. So, in reality in theory he s wrong because the game plays just like he claimed as theory. Just go find some people to play it with i guess.
It really is a shame that we have people like CobraSolidus and AmazingAvery on these forums. You really can't believe anything they say because you never know if they are talking the truth or lying to keep their job.
Do you have evidence to back any of this up? I could say the same exact thing about most haters here, they've made hundreds of posts in only a few months and only about AOC (with plugs about their favorite game). Regardless saying it doesn't make it true, now does it?
Well, Avery is paid, that's common knowledge. He probably gets free subscriptions, steak dinners and maybe even cash money.
I have no hard evidence against CobraSolidus and I don't need it. Me and Cobra both know the truth. If you don't believe me, I couldn't care less. But before you make up your mind, go read his post history. Especially his comments about WAR.
Most people are naive and don't believe devs have accounts here and on other forums. Trust me, they read all the topics here and also participate in the discussion. What would you do if your job was on the line? It's free, easy and you can't get caught because there's no "evidence". Just write: "This is the bestest game eva!" and you'll get a couple of suckers to subscribe. Why wouldn't they do that?
You are right, I'm sure some of the haters here are employees of Blizzard or other companies. However, I haven't seen many plugs about other games. It's mainly just all hate towards AoC. I have plugged Guild Wars 2 myself but that's because I'm a huge fan of GW. It doesn't mean I work for them. Or maybe does it..
I agree he s entitled to his opinion, everyone is of course. The thing is one poster said why he feels WAR is better and another poster says in theory. This isn t true at all. He s right when he says a good guild or group of people, trying to achieve the same goal makes a big difference. The true fun in the game are imo anyways the tier3-4 keep takes with long battles, and many people involved. Win or lose when you re palying witha good group/guild, the constant battles are an absolute blast. All i can say for myself is i didn t once get even close to that feeling in AOC. So, in reality in theory he s wrong because the game plays just like he claimed as theory. Just go find some people to play it with i guess.
Then again that all depends on circumstance though, some servers are going to be different of course. I pretty much experienced what Azrile did in WAR, granted it was open beta and not much establishment had been made.
Personally I disliked WAR for other reasons. It's the PVP itself that has a serious flaw( at least IMO). The zerg mentality created by the world RVR design is just a huge turn off. Sure in a guild with vent you'd have a slight advantage due to cooperation. Regardless of that spawn points are to close to objectives IMO. Causing a never ending wave of reinforcements to the line. Very bad decision IMO, I understand why they did it, they want you to never stop fighting. However it offers no punishment for losing the battle and the victory is never complete.
One thing I like about AOC is that PVP usually comes on a one on one random basis. Meaning If I win, I continue on my journney, and the other guy has to start over or visa versa. That's only one aspect I enjoy in aoc though, there's much more I like and some things about WAR I liked.There's plenty in both I don't like, if not more than I actually like. The only thing I hate in any mmo is instanced scenario style pvp. Which both have..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Provided the frequency of yourself claiming other people being "employees" of whatever companies, and provided that you generally sound as an intelligent person, who apparently should have more important things in his life beyond kicking dead horses, I can not help the impression that you are an employee of some MMO company yourself.
This looks like a regular FUD skirmish from the marketing/fan department of some (upcoming?) competing MMORPG. Let me guess... Darkfall?..
Scared, Provided the frequency of yourself claiming other people being "employees" of whatever companies, and provided that you generally sound as an intelligent person, who apparently should have more important things in his life beyond kicking dead horses, I can not help the impression that you are an employee of some MMO company yourself. This looks like a regular FUD skirmish from the marketing/fan department of some (upcoming?) competing MMORPG. Let me guess... Darkfall?..
True, I have more important things in life than kicking a dead horse, aka FC. But sometimes people use their time unwisely. Some people watch tv, some people like to see AoC fail.
I see FC kinda like as an ex-girlfriend who stole my money and cheated on me for months before getting caught. Of course I will break up with her and move on, but deep inside I get pleasure if she suffers and is unhappy, because I feel she deserves it. It's evil but that's human nature. We like it when bad things happen to bad people.
At work, I have a couple of minutes a day to visit these forums and I do my part in putting FC's lying, amateur management out of a job. These people should have no place in MMO industry. I hope Erling goes next.
Unfortunately I don't work for any MMO company, but if I did, I would hope it would be better than Darkfall If ArenaNet needs more people for marketing, I might apply.
It will be a glorious day when FC goes bankrupt, and I will be here the day it happens.
I see FC kinda like as an ex-girlfriend who stole my money and cheated on me for months before getting caught. Of course I will break up with her and move on, but deep inside I get pleasure if she suffers and is unhappy, because I feel she deserves it. It's evil but that's human nature. We like it when bad things happen to bad people.
Or this analogy..
She cheated on ya, and then realized what she got was not that good, and decided to come back...only now she is going out of her way to pleasure you even moreso...She is twice as wild in the bedroom, cooks for you all the time or even will eventually pay for your meal to show you how much she feels she messed up...
Might at well use that to my advantage and take her back...and if she screws up again dump her (you should see how she jumps when I tell her to get me a beer)
Comments
[quote]Originally posted by Azrile
[AOC right now is slightly better than Warhammer.
Warhammer is 1000 times better that AoC...Conan isnt even in the same ballpark. The one thing that you need in warhammer to get its full potencial is a good guild or a good group of people to play with. The biggest difference in the 2 is that that there is a "good vs bad" aspect of the game which means you have to team up with people on your side to be victorious. In AoC, its all about kill or be killed. No reason to help others (in pvp)to achieve a certain goal. If AoC had side A vs side B, it would be alot more popular.
Kind of like Lineage 2? Thats uber popular.
How about Archlord?
These games have A vs B. They must be selling like hotcakes.
Lets put it this way
Gorgeous visuals vs Muddy Graphics from 2004 (ala WoW)
Fast paced combat vs slow mo Hit hotkey and wait for Global Cooldown combat
Solo or Group play vs ONLY group play or get bored beyond belief
A real story in your game compared to ...No story, but WAR
I prefer the former, and this makes AoC more fun to play. But, there is no doubt Funcom has already ruined this game, and I see no coming back. Avery may be touting people coming back, but, the populations are still quite thin. Even though the game runs great now, and the Patch 2.0 fixes really made AoC an excellent MMO with room to progress as it is future proofed, this does not help it due to people still carrying an "attitiude" of the launch issues.
Gaute is not there anymore to ruin the game, and it has a chance to be great...just an MMO needs people to make this happen, and until server merges, the game will feel empty.
Funcom needs to get all they promised in before the end of the year and offer a free "return" time. This may work, as I came back after playing the slow boring WAR, and I realized it IS a better game than WAR.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is what I would do if I was the new Game Director.
- first I would make sure the game is "ready".
- then I would publicly admit that FC FAILED and that AoC was released too early.
- I would apologize everyone who bought the game and introduce "Return to Hyboria" -program, where people who bought the game, get a new free 1 month subscription. (I stole this awesome idea from some guy on these forums)
I think FC believes that if they announce they were a failure, everyone would stop playing. Personally I don't think so. I think people respect honesty (which has been a strange concept for FC).
It's ok to fail if you are honest about it. People will usually forgive you. Failing is human, I know I've done it many times. What matters is that you are honest, get up and fix it.
FC made a concious decicion to lie in order to get more pre-order but then it backfired and they looked like liers and cheats that they are. If they had been open and honest at launch, yes they would have had less preorders but they would have kept a reputation of a respectable company. Right now the MMO community has almost zero respect towards FC.
This "Return to Hyboria" -program would get servers booming over night. And by "booming" I mean really booming, not the "servers are booming" hype BS by mr. Avery. During this free month many players would probably start paying for AoC again, given it's truly as good, after these new patches, that some people here insist. Personally I think AoC needs many more months before it's "ready".
Unfortunately I don't think FC is willing to admit failure and they will continue to go down until FC goes bankrupt, they sell AoC to a different company and AoC becomes a "could-have-been" niche game with 20k subscribers.
I agree do AoC is better than Warhammer. Even though WAR sounded awesome on paper, in reality it got really boring really fast. That said I do see more potential with WAR if they are able to fix all the issues. My problems with AoC are so fundamental that you'd have to pretty much re-code the wholething to fix it.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Future expansion will only add..... Wait what about the stuff that still is not in the GAME? I hope the sub numbers DEMONSTARTE , err demonstrate something, given the state of the world credit markets....
Funcom wont be able to lie to a lender to get more money the way they lie to the users.
-Lum
i don't know anyone whos thing about re-subscribing....in fact the top guild on my old server decided to final call it quits so i'd say people are still un-subscribing.
You know I think you are correct. There are so many things wrong with this game that you cant really sum up why you hate it, save for writing 3 page essays on the topic. Most of us have already done this time and time again. I am, I think, still ebing counted as a subscriber due to having purchased a 6 month subscription.
-Lum
This game is a Total Epic Fail!!!
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
So are you resubscribed or not Mr Bloodsworth? Some posts you claim you havent and others you appear to indicate that you are playing actively - WHICH IS IT?
-Lum
Well 1000 times... Good that you could come up with such an accurate and mature number
. Another thing, you say AoC is about kill or being killed only? What you mention is only one of the facets of this game which is called minigame. You have 48vs48 sieges (happening much more often than what you are aware of. Speak with Avery on this one), you have PvP as in the notority system (a very advanced version of Lineage II system), you have a fanastic PvE content and an unmatched atmosphere (LotRO is very close though) which gives awesome possibilities for RP. WAR is about Kill as you say, thats pretty much the only thing you can do. And do not pretend that you are not aware of that. The chat in WAR is totally dead. There is no lateral communication going on between gamers. PvE is a joke (at least to AoC gamers), and the RP environment just totally absent.
Finally, god forbid AoC taking a step back into a A vs B diplomacy type of conflict. AoC offers the full complexity of multiple nations in war or at least in strained relations with eachother. Future expansions will only add to this beutifull complex plot more nations and more intrigues (like Khitai in next expansion pack). Bottom line is, I think you just do not like the game. Have insight enough though, to understand that is just your oppinion. There is in fact an increasing population which really likes AoC, and I think subnumbers will demonstarte that once they get published later this year.
Do you even play AoC?
There is not "in fact" an increasing population which realy likes AoC, the population is in decline (albeit slower than it has been). AoC does not offer "multiple nations in war". Any expansion packs are at least a year away, heck, the next update is at least 2 months away, and that is needed just to staunch the flow of players leaving en masse.
AoC was fun to play for a couple of months, but when you realise that the only "complex" idea in the entire game is the melee combo system, and that to Funcom "community relations" means an occasional post in the EU forums (scroo the US forums), you get bored and re-play all your single play games (due to a lack of decent MMOs on the market).
I have been playing off and on for awhile, hoping that Funcom could pull it's head out just long enough to be honest with it's customers, and to make an effort to fix the game before it is too late. I am quickly realizing that Funcom bit off more than it could chew, they have proven their incompetence on almost every level of development (excluding graphical programming).
And please stop standing behind everyone blowing smoke, if you truly enjoy AoC, why do you spend the majority of your time on other forums trying to make believe it is great instead of playing AoC, or posting on the AoC forums?
See culture servers please.
The rest if just a users opinion, and no facts, please treat them as such.
So are you resubscribed or not Mr Bloodsworth? Some posts you claim you havent and others you appear to indicate that you are playing actively - WHICH IS IT?
Hmm.. You confuse me, Mr Bloodworth is a FC dev. The guy in charge of the new crafting system.
Let me explain.
Mr. CobraSolidus is a FC employee. His less than a month year old account was created with the sole purpose of telling people how awesome AoC is and how much WAR sucks.
Just look at his post history. The guy spends hours a day in AoC or WAR forums doing his propaganda. His posts are always bias and ridicilous.
Your question is a good one. People who like the game don't spend much time in forums because they are too busy playing the game. People who hate the game usually spend more time bitching about it because they are bored and disappointed and with AoC, they want the game to fail because they feel cheated.
It really is a shame that we have people like CobraSolidus and AmazingAvery on these forums. You really can't believe anything they say because you never know if they are talking the truth or lying to keep their job.
Do you have evidence to back any of this up? I could say the same exact thing about most haters here, they've made hundreds of posts in only a few months and only about AOC (with plugs about their favorite game). Regardless saying it doesn't make it true, now does it?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
Which is exactly why I didn't call his opinion laughable. Maybe the point eluded you, sorry my bad...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You are talking about the 'theory' of warhammer. The problem is that this theory is just not reflected in gameplay.
In warhammer, very few people are goind RvR on a massive scale. Instead, people are joining groups to do PQ's and then disbanding them as soon as they get their reward. But the majority of the players are doing nothing but grinding scenerios. Overland objectives are not being fought over, all you have is people running around doing solo pve-quests until they get into a scenerio mini-game. The people who are doing RvR aren't meeting player resistence, they only have to overcome the NPCs. There was already a city captured after 2 weeks (endgame pvp), and in order to accomplish the ultimate pvp event, they had to overcome NO player resistence...everyone was in scenarios.
The theory of Warhammer is that you have this big " us vs them' game going on... that you were a foot soldier in a war against 'the enemy'. But the gameplay just has not worked out like that.. instead it's about everyone just trying to play scenerios and get as much bling as quickly as possible.
The theory of the game of Warhammer is great, but the actual MMORPG isn't.
This is laughable. AOC isn t slightly anything over WAR. First of all have you seen end game in WAR? It exsist at release where AOC might have some of it functioning. Second people are trying to level to get to the meat of the game, and guess what theres content all the way. You see where i m going. Now if you have seen tier 4 and what it has to offer, you wouldn t say theres noopen rvr happening, and AOC is better, because that simply isn t true for most people. WAR is 2 weeks old, AOC is 5 months old and WAR is ahead in literally all aspects. I ll tell ya what in 4+ months come back and see where AOC is now in customer appreciation and subs and WAR will be then.
I completely agree with him, I feel AOC is a better game. However that doesn't make it so, it's called an opinion.
As did the poster previous, he had an opinion that WAR is better.
Which is exactly why I didn't call his opinion laughable. Maybe the point eluded you, sorry my bad...
I agree he s entitled to his opinion, everyone is of course. The thing is one poster said why he feels WAR is better and another poster says in theory. This isn t true at all. He s right when he says a good guild or group of people, trying to achieve the same goal makes a big difference. The true fun in the game are imo anyways the tier3-4 keep takes with long battles, and many people involved. Win or lose when you re palying witha good group/guild, the constant battles are an absolute blast. All i can say for myself is i didn t once get even close to that feeling in AOC. So, in reality in theory he s wrong because the game plays just like he claimed as theory. Just go find some people to play it with i guess.
Do you have evidence to back any of this up? I could say the same exact thing about most haters here, they've made hundreds of posts in only a few months and only about AOC (with plugs about their favorite game). Regardless saying it doesn't make it true, now does it?
Well, Avery is paid, that's common knowledge. He probably gets free subscriptions, steak dinners and maybe even cash money.
I have no hard evidence against CobraSolidus and I don't need it. Me and Cobra both know the truth. If you don't believe me, I couldn't care less. But before you make up your mind, go read his post history. Especially his comments about WAR.
Most people are naive and don't believe devs have accounts here and on other forums. Trust me, they read all the topics here and also participate in the discussion. What would you do if your job was on the line? It's free, easy and you can't get caught because there's no "evidence". Just write: "This is the bestest game eva!" and you'll get a couple of suckers to subscribe. Why wouldn't they do that?
You are right, I'm sure some of the haters here are employees of Blizzard or other companies. However, I haven't seen many plugs about other games. It's mainly just all hate towards AoC. I have plugged Guild Wars 2 myself but that's because I'm a huge fan of GW. It doesn't mean I work for them. Or maybe does it..
Then again that all depends on circumstance though, some servers are going to be different of course. I pretty much experienced what Azrile did in WAR, granted it was open beta and not much establishment had been made.
Personally I disliked WAR for other reasons. It's the PVP itself that has a serious flaw( at least IMO). The zerg mentality created by the world RVR design is just a huge turn off. Sure in a guild with vent you'd have a slight advantage due to cooperation. Regardless of that spawn points are to close to objectives IMO. Causing a never ending wave of reinforcements to the line. Very bad decision IMO, I understand why they did it, they want you to never stop fighting. However it offers no punishment for losing the battle and the victory is never complete.
One thing I like about AOC is that PVP usually comes on a one on one random basis. Meaning If I win, I continue on my journney, and the other guy has to start over or visa versa. That's only one aspect I enjoy in aoc though, there's much more I like and some things about WAR I liked.There's plenty in both I don't like, if not more than I actually like. The only thing I hate in any mmo is instanced scenario style pvp. Which both have..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Scared,
Provided the frequency of yourself claiming other people being "employees" of whatever companies, and provided that you generally sound as an intelligent person, who apparently should have more important things in his life beyond kicking dead horses, I can not help the impression that you are an employee of some MMO company yourself.
This looks like a regular FUD skirmish from the marketing/fan department of some (upcoming?) competing MMORPG. Let me guess... Darkfall?..
True, I have more important things in life than kicking a dead horse, aka FC. But sometimes people use their time unwisely. Some people watch tv, some people like to see AoC fail.
I see FC kinda like as an ex-girlfriend who stole my money and cheated on me for months before getting caught. Of course I will break up with her and move on, but deep inside I get pleasure if she suffers and is unhappy, because I feel she deserves it. It's evil but that's human nature. We like it when bad things happen to bad people.
At work, I have a couple of minutes a day to visit these forums and I do my part in putting FC's lying, amateur management out of a job. These people should have no place in MMO industry. I hope Erling goes next.
Unfortunately I don't work for any MMO company, but if I did, I would hope it would be better than Darkfall
If ArenaNet needs more people for marketing, I might apply.
It will be a glorious day when FC goes bankrupt, and I will be here the day it happens.
Or this analogy..
She cheated on ya, and then realized what she got was not that good, and decided to come back...only now she is going out of her way to pleasure you even moreso...She is twice as wild in the bedroom, cooks for you all the time or even will eventually pay for your meal to show you how much she feels she messed up...
Might at well use that to my advantage and take her back...and if she screws up again dump her (you should see how she jumps when I tell her to get me a beer)