Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
if this game had gone for the guild wars approach do you think it would have done/been better.
SgtFrog
Member Posts: 5,001
if this game had gone for the guild wars approach do you think it would have done/been better?
So the world is instanced (to you and your party) except for towns
so Buy to play and semi mmorpg like guildwars
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
Comments
GW is a PoS.
uggg...I don't want THAT much instancing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys! I'm hopelessly lost in a mountain of mole hills! Them damn moles!
As much as I like what they've done w/ GW, I do not think it would apply well to Age of Conan. Age of Conan already has a lot of instancing, when it was supposed to be about open pvp. The two things that made AoC go sour, were their inability to make a stable game compatable with the majority of their playerbase, and a lack of game design to revolve around an open pvp setup. GW worked great for stability, but was never meant to have an open pvp setup.
GW is a PoS.
lol im with this guy GW is most definitely a piece of shit and no i think it would have been horrible and i never would have played it
I think the question the OP asks...begs the main issue..Funcom flat out lied about what they were selling and the state of the game.Flat out lied...and continued that lie even after they were exposed.Many subscribers quickly realized that and left the game....some clung to the hope that FC promises would eventually be kept . For me...that trust is broken and FC is far from reestablishing it. Coulda...woulda.....shoulda have no relivance.
No, I think it would have dramatically failed to be honest.
The reason why AoC is doing so badly is the mindless PvP, I've just went back onto it to see how things are going, and to test out dx10 and test live. I've not been so dissapointed in quite some time. The game has this bad approuch to PvP, mass PvP kill anyone you want. It spells a huge gank fest at the spawn point by guilds and zerg partys. Not to mention how on PvE servers PvP mini games are practically non existent, and even on PvP servers they can be a struggle getting into.
Honestly no matter what approuch AoC took, they failed epically on the PvP aspect where I'm concerned, and that seems to be the winning aspect in most games. Take WoW for an example, it's hugely populated, it's faction based PvP. The annoying part is I payed £10 to give it a go again, and I do honestly feel robbed of it >.< normally I wouldn't care less.......OK, I'm done QQing now.
I like cookies.
GW is a PoS.
lol im with this guy GW is most definitely a piece of shit and no i think it would have been horrible and i never would have played it
So bad that it sells more accts every year than this game ever had? Your silly. Hell I think it adds more every quarter lol.
-Almerel
Hello my old friend.
Man for me the whoel reason this game SUCKED was because all the zones were instanced. Making it like GW would of just given it less of a chance to succeed. They should of made it open world with areas capturable by guilds/factions. Instead they made a big instanced mess.
I would have liked to see some of the easy access pvp in AoC (cross server) but in AoC theres no reason to have that much instancing. They really need to do something though, and since launch people have been asking for cross-sever pvp.
Raid Raid and Raid some more.
1.05 my class is being nerfed into Oblivion and I've been playing the class exlusively since EA. They are offering a one-time level 50 character creation to anyone with a lvl50+ character so I may take advantage of that but not sure, so much time put into my current main.
Aion should hit the spot, but not until Q4.
Even with all the changes in 1.05, its going to be the same game. They needed to add substance, and I think some competitive cross-server pvp would have been the way to go. I did enjoy the pvp in GWs, but that was all I liked.
If Guild Wars has sold 6 million copies over 4 years at say average box price $25 then Anarchy Online has made more money over that term with a rough 20k concurrent subs. So from successful from a financial premise not to sure there. As for the game itself, as a vet of both I prefer AoC with having more than just you / or your party in a playfield.
Something like that with faction and a Pk's system.Right now it's just a big insta gratification contest(Ganking) .Some people believe it's PVP but it's not.It's ganking,ganking and ganking.It's like playing a red in ultima online with no penality .
Age of Conan feel like this.You enter a new counter-strike server and there's 10 people camping the spawn point with Sniper.You spawn and you're insta killed and the *super pvp'er* are having fun (Insta gratification).It's basicly the same in Age of Conan.On the so Hardcore pvp server it's just a big camping and slaughter fest . It's not PVP . It's just ganking with the only motivation of grinding pvp level.
It's not hardcore.It's just retarded.Hardcore would be fighting a pre-made group on a competitive level.There's nothing competitive in age of conan.
Than there's the whole* go to a pve server ,my insta gratification server ain't for you.Well you guessed it.It's mostly only for loser that seek fast archievement so they can feel big in their pants.
GW is a PoS.
Guild Wars a "PoS" ?
One of the most unique, polished, original, beautiful online games ever made a "PoS"?
See, I think AoC has some really nice aspects and I belive it can be a fantastic game after some improvement but I understand when some people say Funcom is a PoS, but to call GW a PoS is not fair, you may not enjoy Guild Wars, but Funcom has a lot to learn with Arena Net.
...
If Guild Wars has sold 6 million copies over 4 years at say average box price $25 then Anarchy Online has made more money over that term with a rough 20k concurrent subs. So from successful from a financial premise not to sure there. As for the game itself, as a vet of both I prefer AoC with having more than just you / or your party in a playfield.
As I said, Age of Conan has some great details, but to belive Funcom made more money in 4 years with Anarchy Online than Arena Net with Guild Wars is very, very unrealistic.
Success is not always an indicative of a good game, but worldwide, Guild Wars is much more succesful (in all aspects) than AO and AOC together.
I understand you enjoy more Age of Conan than Guild Wars and I really can understand the reasons (as I said, I like AOC), but...
...
Quit being so dramatic. Majority of my friends who had tried to game had no clue about lies or false advertising. They merely quit the game because it did not suit their tastes, or they had more friends still playing WoW.
Hell I know about the promises that fell short and false advertising on the box, yet I still don't care. I quit the game because it just wasn't for me.
Now I know that sort of stuff is a breaking point for some gamers, and that is completely fine, but I doubt the majority followed the game so closely to be let down by false promises.