Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Worst Launch: Anarchy Online vs. Darkfall

124

Comments

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by Aviyur



     

    You said they shouldn't wait till "EVERYONE" is happy, apparently, according to you and some made up figures. EVERYONE wasn't happy. Yet they released the game. Which means, not EVERYONE wasn't happy. Meaning a majority - or enough people to swing AV's thoughts that the game was indeed ready, and decided to release. And like i said, this is the MMO genre, MMO's are rarely released 100% perfect, its how the developers handle and develop the game after release that counts.

    Do try and keep up. You aren't playing counterstrike.

     

    Hahahaha, counterstrike, please, if thats what you think is in my avatar your age is showing.

    You seem to think that it's being a perfectionist to suggest that perhaps they should delay the game when NINETY PERCENT (a majority is not 10% of people saying 'release it') of the beta testers say 'don't release it.' The fact that you have that mentality just goes all the way back to my first reply to you...You've conditioned yourself to low expectations and thats why you're not bothered by even the most screwed up launch in MMO history.

    By insisting on 'the majority' you actually prove yourself wrong. I don't even need to post, you just need to read what you're typing. Either that or you think that it shouldn't matter that AV takes self-defeating moves for a beta test...in any case, everything I've said is still right.

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by amish_farmer 
    You should get your facts straight.
    Development for Anarchy Online started in 1995, it was released in 2001 = 6 years.
    It had 70 developers.
    There don't seem to be any reports on initial subscriber count, or how much it cost to develop.
    Have a nice day.
     By the way, their release sucked too: http://pc.ign.com/articles/161/161500p1.html

     

    Initial subscriber rate came from MMOGcharts.com and actually, that might be a low estimate too because this link, written one year after release, states that the game ended up having 150,000 subscribers at one point: http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/237/Anarchy_Online_Turns_One.html - let me guess - you think DF is going to have anywhere near even 60,000? No. The fact is their intiial subs were no more than 10,000 - my statement was correct...and they can't even handle that. If that doesn't spell amateur out to you then I don't know what to say. If FC could even manage to release the game with 30,000, it would still make their launch better than DF's.

    As for the development schedule, so I was wrong on that, but it's still even 2 years shorter.

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by Lidane


    On a purely technical level, the Anarchy Online launch was easily the worst I've ever seen. There were memory leaks in Tir that were so bad, you could literally move to turn a corner, get up from your computer, make a sandwich, eat, watch some TV, and then come back and *maybe* you could move again. Other people couldn't activate the product keys that came with the discs they'd bought in the store, and others had CC billing problems where they were billed repeatedly for the game.


     

    The primary difference being that while the cities sucked ass, you could still leave them and play.

  • amish_farmeramish_farmer Member Posts: 53
    Originally posted by JPZ1987


    Initial subscriber rate came from MMOGcharts.com and actually, that might be a low estimate too because this link, written one year after release, states that the game ended up having 150,000 subscribers at one point: http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/237/Anarchy_Online_Turns_One.html - let me guess - you think DF is going to have anywhere near even 60,000? No. The fact is their intiial subs were no more than 10,000 - my statement was correct...and they can't even handle that. If that doesn't spell amateur out to you then I don't know what to say.
    As for the development schedule, so I was wrong on that, but it's still even 2 years shorter.

     

    Darkfall was never planned to be a large scale MMO, but rather a small niche game.  That being said, for you to say it will never have 60,000 people is pretty ignorant.  I'm not saying that they couldn't expand the availability of the game by adding more server clusters in, but I'm sure that if they could have they would have.  Most MMOs launch with too many servers and playerbases spread out which leads to a lackluster playing experience and wasted money when they have to take the servers offline.

    Aventurine has taken the opposite approach, with a low availability of the game to assure that the world is properly populated and their budget stays low.  It's easy to demand that they just add more servers, but have you considered that they might not be able to afford it?

    Two years shorter is fine and well, but the development team for Anarchy Online was also much larger.  I played Anarchy Online, and it was terrible, and it was supposed to be a large scale MMO.

    The problem with comparing Darkfall to games like Anarchy Online, World of Warcraft and other 'blockbuster' MMORPGs is that it's not a blockbuster MMORPG.  It was never meant to be one.  The only reason it's being compared as one is because popularity for the game exceeded expectations of just about everyone.

    A lot of MMORPGs sprouted up when Darkfall was concieved, and almost all of them have disappeared.  UO private shards took off during that time, World of Warcraft was concieved during that time, and a myriad of other things were certainly working against the realization of the game.  To call Darkfall a failure and to make comparisons like that just isn't fair, when you consider the small development team and the time that the game came out.

    You should also look at Eve Online, which bombed terribly at release, but has since recovered quite gracefully and is now a very successful and pretty game.  I wouldn't be surprised if Darkfall follows that route.   Once it picks up steam you'll probably see expansion of the development/support teams and things will probably get a lot better after that.

    Don't judge an MMO by it's release, since they all suck. 

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by amish_farmer

     

    Darkfall was never planned to be a large scale MMO, but rather a small niche game.  That being said, for you to say it will never have 60,000 people is pretty ignorant.  I'm not saying that they couldn't expand the availability of the game by adding more server clusters in, but I'm sure that if they could have they would have.  Most MMOs launch with too many servers and playerbases spread out which leads to a lackluster playing experience and wasted money when they have to take the servers offline.

    Aventurine has taken the opposite approach, with a low availability of the game to assure that the world is properly populated and their budget stays low.  It's easy to demand that they just add more servers, but have you considered that they might not be able to afford it?

    Two years shorter is fine and well, but the development team for Anarchy Online was also much larger.

    I played Anarchy Online, and it was terrible, and it was supposed to be a large scale MMO.

    The problem with comparing Darkfall to games like Anarchy Online, World of Warcraft and other 'blockbuster' MMORPGs is that it's not a blockbuster MMORPG.  It was never meant to be one.  The only reason it's being compared as one is because popularity for the game exceeded expectations of just about everyone.

    A lot of MMORPGs sprouted up when Darkfall was concieved, and almost all of them have disappeared.  UO private shards took off during that time, World of Warcraft was concieved during that time, and a myriad of other things were certainly working against the realization of the game.  To call Darkfall a failure and to make comparisons like that just isn't fair, when you consider the small development team and the time that the game came out.

    You should also look at Eve Online, which bombed terribly at release, but has since recovered quite gracefully and is now a very successful and pretty game.  I wouldn't be surprised if Darkfall follows that route.   Once it picks up steam you'll probably see expansion of the development/support teams and things will probably get a lot better after that.

    Don't judge an MMO by it's release, since they all suck. 

     

    FFS, there is one reason and one reason only why I bring up the subscribers, and that is because the fact that AV can't even handle 10,000 players at launch says something about their technical proficiency (in case you didn't catch on to that yet). Now the thread is about how that compares to Anarchy Online. And since AO had 60,000 initial subscribers and actually managed to launch the game and make it playable for anyone not in a city, then you can't say it had a worse launch.

    In any case, AV had plenty of warning and, if they had common sense, should have been able to know that more than 10,000 people are interested in a PvP MMO. But hey, they couldn't even get it right for that many either.

  • amish_farmeramish_farmer Member Posts: 53
    Originally posted by JPZ1987

    Originally posted by amish_farmer

     

    Darkfall was never planned to be a large scale MMO, but rather a small niche game.  That being said, for you to say it will never have 60,000 people is pretty ignorant.  I'm not saying that they couldn't expand the availability of the game by adding more server clusters in, but I'm sure that if they could have they would have.  Most MMOs launch with too many servers and playerbases spread out which leads to a lackluster playing experience and wasted money when they have to take the servers offline.

    Aventurine has taken the opposite approach, with a low availability of the game to assure that the world is properly populated and their budget stays low.  It's easy to demand that they just add more servers, but have you considered that they might not be able to afford it?

    Two years shorter is fine and well, but the development team for Anarchy Online was also much larger.

    I played Anarchy Online, and it was terrible, and it was supposed to be a large scale MMO.

    The problem with comparing Darkfall to games like Anarchy Online, World of Warcraft and other 'blockbuster' MMORPGs is that it's not a blockbuster MMORPG.  It was never meant to be one.  The only reason it's being compared as one is because popularity for the game exceeded expectations of just about everyone.

    A lot of MMORPGs sprouted up when Darkfall was concieved, and almost all of them have disappeared.  UO private shards took off during that time, World of Warcraft was concieved during that time, and a myriad of other things were certainly working against the realization of the game.  To call Darkfall a failure and to make comparisons like that just isn't fair, when you consider the small development team and the time that the game came out.

    You should also look at Eve Online, which bombed terribly at release, but has since recovered quite gracefully and is now a very successful and pretty game.  I wouldn't be surprised if Darkfall follows that route.   Once it picks up steam you'll probably see expansion of the development/support teams and things will probably get a lot better after that.

    Don't judge an MMO by it's release, since they all suck. 

     

    FFS, there is one reason and one reason only why I bring up the subscribers, and that is because the fact that AV can't even handle 10,000 players at launch says something about their technical proficiency (in case you didn't catch on to that yet). Now the thread is about how that compares to Anarchy Online. And since AO had 60,000 initial subscribers and actually managed to launch the game and make it playable for anyone not in a city, then you can't say it had a worse launch.

    In any case, AV had plenty of warning and, if they had common sense, should have been able to know that more than 10,000 people are interested in a PvP MMO. But hey, they couldn't even get it right for that many either.

    If there were only 10,000 people trying to play the game, I'm willing to bet that there wouldn't be any problems with preordering, billing and logging in.  The reality is that there are more than 10,000 people trying to do those things.  The highest number I've seen so far has been 25,000 accounts created.  Out of those 25,000 people, how many of them were hammering the server with multiple tabs being refreshed every 2 seconds?  How many of them were using third party apps to auto refresh the page?  You don't know what kind of load is being put on the servers right now, so don't instantly assume its incompetence because you think you're a genius.

    Aventurine can anticipate the demand for their services all day, but in the end of the day when they can only afford so much hardware it means nothing.  I don't know why you have this idea in your head that servers grow on trees and Aventurine should just be adding servers in at the drop of a hat. 

    Yes, there is an issue with syncing right now.  No, that does not mean that the infrastrucutre can't handle 10,000 people.  If you want to split hairs for the moment, I suppose it does mean that.  What it really means though is that there is a software issue right now and when it's fixed you might be surprised to see 10,000 people playing on the server.

    So, EFF EFF ESS, quit comparing Aventurine to a well funded high staffed game company and chill out. 

    As a final thought: Just because YOU want Darkfall to be populated with 60,000 shit heads doesn't mean it's part of THEIR plan to have 60,000 shit heads playing their game.  They could very well be happy only ever having 10,000 subscriptions.  It's not about what YOU think is successful, it's about what THEY think is successful.

  • LidaneLidane Member CommonPosts: 2,300
    Originally posted by JPZ1987

    Originally posted by Lidane


    On a purely technical level, the Anarchy Online launch was easily the worst I've ever seen. There were memory leaks in Tir that were so bad, you could literally move to turn a corner, get up from your computer, make a sandwich, eat, watch some TV, and then come back and *maybe* you could move again. Other people couldn't activate the product keys that came with the discs they'd bought in the store, and others had CC billing problems where they were billed repeatedly for the game.


     

    The primary difference being that while the cities sucked ass, you could still leave them and play.

    True. I could get out of Tir and play in the wilderness, but the cities themselves were awful. To me, that was game-breaking, since what's the point of a futuristic sci-fi world if you can't experience the futuristic sci-fi parts of it? If I wanted to play in the wilderness, there are plenty of fantasy games that offer that.

    Still, I played AO for 2-3 months at launch, so I toughed out many of the initial problems just because it was a sci-fi game, and it wasn't EverQuest. After a while, I just couldn't deal with it anymore, so I quit.

    Compared to other games I've played at launch, AO was terrible, though. Just awful. Tir literally was *that* unplayable for me. I think I even had a bunch of ranty threads on their official forums at the time demanding they fix the memory leaks in the city because people were paying money and there was no more beta to hide behind. I know I wasn't the only one who felt that way, either.

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by amish_farmer



    As a final thought: Just because YOU want Darkfall to be populated with 60,000 shit heads doesn't mean it's part of THEIR plan to have 60,000 shit heads playing their game.  They could very well be happy only ever having 10,000 subscriptions.  It's not about what YOU think is successful, it's about what THEY think is successful.

     

    Point out to me right now where I said I want 60,000 people to play darkfall. You said that, not me.

     

    As for the rest of your post, the fact that there is more than 10,000 people trying to play is irrelevant. Why? Because there are three categories of customers AV has right now:

    1.) Pre-orders that were successful and could play

    2.) Pre-orders that weren't successful and couldn't play

    3.) Prospective gamers who can't get an account because the pre-orders sold out.

     

    Group 1 is the only one causing their servers any stress. The fact you have all these people posting on these boards, or even refreshing the df forum page for updates (thats what the website is there for!!) does not make them contributors to the technical woes plaguing the game. Group 1 is also VERY small compared to the other 2.

  • orlacorlac Member Posts: 549
    Originally posted by JPZ1987

    Originally posted by Zinzan

    Originally posted by orlac


    One more time. It's apples and oranges. DFO has not launched. It is in a pay-to-play beta stage. Probably to avoid what happened to AO.
    Launch means anyone can play. That is not the case with DFO so the question is moot.



     

    What a crock of crap.

     

    Yeah honestly I think he's just trying to be funny. Wasn't sure before though.

    I'm not trying to be funny. How can you say the game is released when only those that pre-ordered it can play? That is basically a beta. So any comparison to AO etc., which allowed anyone to sign up and play is irrelevant.

  • TheNinjaboyTheNinjaboy Member Posts: 243
    Originally posted by Fomy12


    dude darkfall wasn't even that bad, wow was worse, anarchy was A LOT worse, swg was worse.... dfall wasn't that bad really...
     
    www.youtube.com/watch

     

    You're comparing a 2004 and 2003 MMO launch to a 2009 MMO launch.

    These problems should be greatly reduced with newer MMOs.

     

     

     

     

  • junzo316junzo316 Member UncommonPosts: 1,712
    Originally posted by orlac

    Originally posted by JPZ1987

    Originally posted by Zinzan

    Originally posted by orlac


    One more time. It's apples and oranges. DFO has not launched. It is in a pay-to-play beta stage. Probably to avoid what happened to AO.
    Launch means anyone can play. That is not the case with DFO so the question is moot.



     

    What a crock of crap.

     

    Yeah honestly I think he's just trying to be funny. Wasn't sure before though.

    I'm not trying to be funny. How can you say the game is released when only those that pre-ordered it can play? That is basically a beta. So any comparison to AO etc., which allowed anyone to sign up and play is irrelevant.

    Umm, the game was officially released on the 25th.  Did you not get the memo?

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by TheNinjaboy

    Originally posted by Fomy12


    dude darkfall wasn't even that bad, wow was worse, anarchy was A LOT worse, swg was worse.... dfall wasn't that bad really...
     
    www.youtube.com/watch

     

    You're comparing a 2004 and 2003 MMO launch to a 2009 MMO launch.

    These problems should be greatly reduced with newer MMOs.

     

     

     

     

     

    No.

    Even longer...Anarchy Online was released in June of 2001.

  • HoldMeHoldMe Member Posts: 99

    As another poster already said the two really aren't comparable since Funcom acknowledged the problems AO had at launch and chose to reverse billing/not charge any of us a single dime to play it while they worked on it.

    To be more exact Funcom actually asked all media to hold off on reviews of the game until they felt they had resolved the more serious issues.  During that time the game was free to play until Funcom decided it was ready to accept subscription fees and be reviewed. 

    Note the RATS also did this same thing with World War 2 Online.  It's been a long time but seems like I remember close to 2 months of free play in WW2 before they literally apolgized to us about HAVING to start charging or the game would be shut down.

     

    PS - My Doc was like level 70 something by the third day...you just had to get the hell out of the cities.

  • amish_farmeramish_farmer Member Posts: 53
    Originally posted by JPZ1987

    Originally posted by amish_farmer



    As a final thought: Just because YOU want Darkfall to be populated with 60,000 shit heads doesn't mean it's part of THEIR plan to have 60,000 shit heads playing their game.  They could very well be happy only ever having 10,000 subscriptions.  It's not about what YOU think is successful, it's about what THEY think is successful.

     

    Point out to me right now where I said I want 60,000 people to play darkfall. You said that, not me.

     

    As for the rest of your post, the fact that there is more than 10,000 people trying to play is irrelevant. Why? Because there are three categories of customers AV has right now:

    1.) Pre-orders that were successful and could play

    2.) Pre-orders that weren't successful and couldn't play

    3.) Prospective gamers who can't get an account because the pre-orders sold out.

     

    Group 1 is the only one causing their servers any stress. The fact you have all these people posting on these boards, or even refreshing the df forum page for updates (thats what the website is there for!!) does not make them contributors to the technical woes plaguing the game. Group 1 is also VERY small compared to the other 2.

    You're twisting my words.  I never said I wanted 60,000 people to play Darkfall.  You are saying that Darkfall is a failure because they can't handle 10,000 players, let alone 60,000 players without considering the financial limitations they face.  You're dismissing that Darkfall was never intended to be played by 60,000 people.  You're assuming that Aventurine's determination of success is that they can serve every single person that wants to play that game.  You're not considering that it may not be part of their plan to serve every single person that wants to play the game.

    You also are, for some reason, saying that because of a software issue the game is entirely incapable of handling 10,000 people.  Once that issue is fixed and more people are on the servers will your statement still be true?  A temporary issue doesn't mean that they can't handle the load.

    You listed the preorder fiasco in your very first post as one of the contributing reasons that Darkfall's launch was a faulire.  Now you're saying that it has nothing to do with it?  That only the people who can actually log into the game are the only contributors to the problem now?  This is why the Darkfall launch was the worst launch?  

    Have you used the account management page?  It sure works a lot better now that everyone and their mother aren't hammering the server anymore.  I'm willing to wager that without the ridiculous amount of load that was being put on the servers by everyone with 10 tabs open autorefreshing that preordering would have gone fine, since the server is doing a lot of work on the backend. 

    I'll accept that you agree with me now that the financial limitations of the company are contibuting to part of the problem.  You think that all of the people hammering a forum page that redirects to one page means that the forums are working fine?  Consider how many database queries run with a default message page compared to fully functional forums.  Yes, of course the forums are working fine now.  It's not rocket science.

    You're pissed because you can't play the game. Get over it. It's a video game. Trashing it isn't going to help your cause, either. If you want to sabotage the game by turning away potential customers then keep doing what you're doing. Then you'll never get to play.

    Use some common sense instead of instantly trashing a game because you wern't among the lucky few who have been able to get in and play so far.  If you truly want to play the game and see it succeed, making threads like this is only going to work against you.

     

  • AlbeeAlbee Member Posts: 1

    Are people still playing AO?       might be worth heading back there   havent been there in years

  • HodoHodo Member Posts: 542

    Darkfall vs Anarchy Online vs WWIIOL....

     

    those were THE worst launches MMO history.

     

    But on the up side... two of those have lasted longer than hundreds other games that had near perfect launches.

     

    Anarchy online... what 7 to 8 years now.

    WWIIOL/Battleground Europe- 8 years (this June)

    So much crap, so little quality.

  • amish_farmeramish_farmer Member Posts: 53
    Originally posted by Hodo


    Darkfall vs Anarchy Online vs WWIIOL....
     
    those were THE worst launches MMO history.
     
    But on the up side... two of those have lasted longer than hundreds other games that had near perfect launches.
     
    Anarchy online... what 7 to 8 years now.
    WWIIOL/Battleground Europe- 8 years (this June)

     

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/37720

  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by amish_farmer 
    You're twisting my words.  I never said I wanted 60,000 people to play Darkfall.  You are saying that Darkfall is a failure because they can't handle 10,000 players, let alone 60,000 players without considering the financial limitations they face.  You're dismissing that Darkfall was never intended to be played by 60,000 people.  You're assuming that Aventurine's determination of success is that they can serve every single person that wants to play that game.  You're not considering that it may not be part of their plan to serve every single person that wants to play the game.
    The MMO market is 16 million strong, and most of those players at least play a game that has a PvP element to it. There is just no excuse for not being able to handle less than 10,000 players at launch. I am aware of what you're saying - it was 'never meant' to have that many people. Well, obviously that's a screw-up on their part given the type of game their making isn't it? In any case, before you hammer this point anymore I'd be interested in seeing some sort of evidence that AV planned to have a small customer base. That doesn't make sense from a gaming point of view nor a financial point of view and that's why I'm so dismissive of that concern which you keep on bringing up.
    You also are, for some reason, saying that because of a software issue the game is entirely incapable of handling 10,000 people.  Once that issue is fixed and more people are on the servers will your statement still be true?  A temporary issue doesn't mean that they can't handle the load.
    You listed the preorder fiasco in your very first post as one of the contributing reasons that Darkfall's launch was a faulire.  Now you're saying that it has nothing to do with it?  That only the people who can actually log into the game are the only contributors to the problem now?  This is why the Darkfall launch was the worst launch?  
    I don't know what you're talking about here really. I never once brought up the synch issues, not here or any other thread. I'm not playing Darkfall right now, the majority of the game's fanbase isn't either, and the reason for that is because the launch was so bad that you can't even get the game. It doesn't get any worse than that. On the contrary, what my post WAS about was the fact that in AO, the effects felt from the bad launch were far worse than anything seen here.


    Have you used the account management page?  It sure works a lot better now that everyone and their mother aren't hammering the server anymore.  I'm willing to wager that without the ridiculous amount of load that was being put on the servers by everyone with 10 tabs open autorefreshing that preordering would have gone fine, since the server is doing a lot of work on the backend. 
    You mean the one they said new sales would be up on two days in a row? Do you seriously think I am unaware of the means to get the game? Why do you think I am here?
    I'll accept that you agree with me now that the financial limitations of the company are contibuting to part of the problem.  You think that all of the people hammering a forum page that redirects to one page means that the forums are working fine?  Consider how many database queries run with a default message page compared to fully functional forums.  Yes, of course the forums are working fine now.  It's not rocket science.
    Well you accept wrong. AV has had enough examples they could have learned from in the 8 years of development they had.
    You're pissed because you can't play the game. Get over it. It's a video game. Trashing it isn't going to help your cause, either. If you want to sabotage the game by turning away potential customers then keep doing what you're doing. Then you'll never get to play.
    Use some common sense instead of instantly trashing a game because you wern't among the lucky few who have been able to get in and play so far.  If you truly want to play the game and see it succeed, making threads like this is only going to work against you.
     Those are two funny paragraphs. If you were on here yesterday you would see I was telling people to stfu and wait until they give us updates on what to do. I posted this here for one reason only and that was because the fanboys actually believed that this is not a bad launch and came up with every excuse imaginable, including mentioning 'AO' which is a very weak defense to the fact that the game's launch was a borderline to borderline total failure.


  • JPZ1987JPZ1987 Member Posts: 179
    Originally posted by Albee


    Are people still playing AO?       might be worth heading back there   havent been there in years

     

    It's not complete shit if you're the explorer/pvm type especially since they got a new booster pack.

    But if you like PvP, forget it, it's been battlegrounded and the tower wars are ruined there. The playerbase is also suffering big time from what I hear.

  • RastonRaston Member Posts: 438

    I actually logged in and played for about an hour today.

  • fyerwallfyerwall Member UncommonPosts: 3,240
    Originally posted by Kvatch


    The answer is simple neither AO or DF had the worst launch ,,it is WoW that had the worst launch. People forget wow was down every day for almost a month.



     

    Which WoW were you playing?

    There are 3 types of people in the world.
    1.) Those who make things happen
    2.) Those who watch things happen
    3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"


  • meadmoonmeadmoon Member UncommonPosts: 1,344
    Originally posted by fyerwall

    Originally posted by Kvatch


    The answer is simple neither AO or DF had the worst launch ,,it is WoW that had the worst launch. People forget wow was down every day for almost a month.



     

    Which WoW were you playing?

    It was, but not for long each day. Of course, you would have thought Blizzard had shoved a dagger into each and every players back.

    It was a whinefest.

  • fyerwallfyerwall Member UncommonPosts: 3,240
    Originally posted by cfurlin

    Originally posted by fyerwall

    Originally posted by Kvatch


    The answer is simple neither AO or DF had the worst launch ,,it is WoW that had the worst launch. People forget wow was down every day for almost a month.



     

    Which WoW were you playing?

    It was, but not for long each day. Of course, you would have thought Blizzard had shoved a dagger into each and every players back.

    It was a whinefest.

    Aye I was there, It was down at most like an hour at that per day for about a week and that was usually in the early part of the day.

     

     

    There are 3 types of people in the world.
    1.) Those who make things happen
    2.) Those who watch things happen
    3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"


  • SeytanSeytan Member Posts: 653
    Originally posted by Fomy12


    dude darkfall wasn't even that bad, wow was worse, anarchy was A LOT worse, swg was worse.... dfall wasn't that bad really...
     
    www.youtube.com/watch



     

    AO launch may have been bad but the game was full of content. You tripped over it. Its a shame AO never did manage, while I played at any rate to control duping and other exploits. Much of what WAS fucked up about the game wasnt central to my experience except for server downtime and not bieng able to zone.

    Theres a lesson in that for AV as well. I quit AO because of the duping and other exploits. And considered myself very fortunate to get a good price for my agent account when I sold it since the rep of the game as a result quickly nosedived.

Sign In or Register to comment.