Ah, so it's about that the connection, or 'credit' as you see it, makes Funcom look good. Ok, that I can understand makes a hard pill to swallow for an FC 'hater'/critic. Not that I agree with such an attitude, but I can understand how not wanting to believe a connection between the FC team and the movie people (unless of course the movie fails) fits into someone's anti-Funcom stance.
Like I say if Funcom have been involved fair enough, but all of a sudden I am hearing about their involvement. When the film happens to be in a post-production phase, close to being released. I mean when they announced that Momoa was going to play Conan, we discussed it on the Funcom boards. There was no mention in any game news or any discussions or anything about Funcom playing even a tiny part in the new Conan movie. So in development and pre-production I heard nothing about the involvement of Funcom, during production I hear nothing. Then now it's about to appear on the big screen Funcom have been helping. So the skeptical me wonders why the announcement about any sort of collaboration/assistance has not been mentioned before? I mean it's hardly a secret that needs to be kept and it could of raised Funcom's profile way before now.
Look at the turn of events, Conan movie due to release in August. In July Funcom go free to play on AOC launching an online shop in the game and mention connections to the movie. I am just cynical by nature and especially where Funcom are concerned.
I think the movie will be a big success because it will appeal to a general audience. But I would imagine the majority of Conan fans have already checked out the game, a lot have not been happy with the game or Funcom's take on the lore. So apart from introducing some new fans to Conan I am not so sure the success of the movie will have much impact on the game. But I will scrutinize the credits of the movie for any Funcom references .
Funcom probably didn't mention their involvement with the movie simply because they weren't allowed to. They'd have to deal with the film production companies, the IP holder, etc. They can't go around saying whatever they want and blabbing all about the movie without getting in big trouble.
It is very obvious that one of these works influenced the other. There is a brief glimpse of what looks a lot like Tarantia to me, and there is what looks a lot like the big temple on Tortage. The armour and weapons look to be in the same style and some of the locations in the movie look like AoC dungeons.
How is it so hard to believe that the people who made the movie used the same assets used in the game? They're both based on a common work and AoC had been thouroughly researched for years at this point.
Ah, so it's about that the connection, or 'credit' as you see it, makes Funcom look good. Ok, that I can understand makes a hard pill to swallow for an FC 'hater'/critic. Not that I agree with such an attitude, but I can understand how not wanting to believe a connection between the FC team and the movie people (unless of course the movie fails) fits into someone's anti-Funcom stance.
Like I say if Funcom have been involved fair enough, but all of a sudden I am hearing about their involvement. When the film happens to be in a post-production phase, close to being released. I mean when they announced that Momoa was going to play Conan, we discussed it on the Funcom boards. There was no mention in any game news or any discussions or anything about Funcom playing even a tiny part in the new Conan movie. So in development and pre-production I heard nothing about the involvement of Funcom, during production I hear nothing. Then now it's about to appear on the big screen Funcom have been helping. So the skeptical me wonders why the announcement about any sort of collaboration/assistance has not been mentioned before? I mean it's hardly a secret that needs to be kept and it could of raised Funcom's profile way before now.
Look at the turn of events, Conan movie due to release in August. In July Funcom go free to play on AOC launching an online shop in the game and mention connections to the movie. I am just cynical by nature and especially where Funcom are concerned.
I think the movie will be a big success because it will appeal to a general audience. But I would imagine the majority of Conan fans have already checked out the game, a lot have not been happy with the game or Funcom's take on the lore. So apart from introducing some new fans to Conan I am not so sure the success of the movie will have much impact on the game. But I will scrutinize the credits of the movie for any Funcom references .
From Conan website:
Funcom is proud to announce the new content to ‘Age of Conan’ that will tie together the game and the upcoming movie, ‘Conan the Barbarian’. Set 20 years after the movie storyline, an epic new adventure pack – The Savage Coast of Turan finds players being sent by Conan, now King of Aquilonia, to aid his old ally Artus. The new adventure pack includes but is not limited to content from the movie, and allows players to follow epic storylines in Conan’s realm.
"We have worked closely with the Funcom creative team since 2003 and carefully crafted a unique look and feel for Conan's world," says Conan the Barbarian Producer and Paradox CEO Fredrik Malmberg. "Many of the concepts, locations and designs from the game development were utilized by the film team for consistency, and we are thrilled that many elements of the film, distributed by Lionsgate in the US and UK, will feel familiar to the Age of Conan players."
Slated for an August release, ‘Conan the Barbarian’ tells the tale of Conan and his adventures across Hyboria. The new adventure pack launches players on exciting adventures, as they help Artus unravel the conspiracy and plots surrounding the city of Ardashir in Turan. The pack adds all new encounters, the massive new area of Ardashir, new dungeons and raids as well as new armor sets and monsters that moviegoers can already observe in the recently released theatrical movie trailer.
"We're excited to see the movie and the game combined in this brand new content," says Executive Producer for Age of Conan, Craig Morrison. "Being able to draw upon the characters, storylines, weapons, and monsters from the movie is tremendously exciting, and it will definitely compliment the wealth of content that already exists within the 'Age of Conan' game world."
‘Conan the Barbarian’ is set for a wide release on August 19th. The film will be released in 3D and is set to star Jason Momoa in the lead role, being supported by Rose McGowan, Stephen Lang, Ron Perlman, Bob Sapp and Rachel Nichols, with Marcus Nispel directing.
Funcom probably didn't mention their involvement with the movie simply because they weren't allowed to. They'd have to deal with the film production companies, the IP holder, etc. They can't go around saying whatever they want and blabbing all about the movie without getting in big trouble.
Why wouldn't they be allowed to mention their involvement with the film? You normally hear about a game company and connections to films prior to games appearing. Sega announced a Thor game with connections to the movie a year prior to the movie being released. I don't think this sort of thing is stuff that is top secret. Though most games connected with movies suck big style.
It is very obvious that one of these works influenced the other. There is a brief glimpse of what looks a lot like Tarantia to me, and there is what looks a lot like the big temple on Tortage. The armour and weapons look to be in the same style and some of the locations in the movie look like AoC dungeons.
Yeah I have seen the trailers, can't say I saw what you lot are seeing. I see a re-imagining of the world of Conan that looks interesting, I didn't think of the game. I think a lot of people are seeing what they want to see quite frankly. A temple is a temple, a city is a city, a snake is a snake. The armour and weapons don't look like something out of AOC to me either. If everybody in the movie trailer had looked like clones, dull and dreary, then I would of immediately thought AOC.
How is it so hard to believe that the people who made the movie used the same assets used in the game? They're both based on a common work and AoC had been thouroughly researched for years at this point.
I would just like a bit more evidence of these so called facts. If Sega can announce a movie connection to a game a year beforehand am I honestly suppose to believe this has been top secret up until now? When the Paradox CEO mentions a connection to Funcoms creative team going back to 2003! Who does that benefit, I don't see that benefits anybody. Unless the film company are concerned that any connection with Funcom on their part is bad press - but that doesn't seem to be the case with the current announcements.
Also a major factor is the whole timing of this free to play, they had no plans to go free to play. They made that statement, even though it did pretty well in Korea - so we get a complete u-turn a month prior to the movie being released. Murmurs about their connections with the film. Overall it's a good business decision I think, but this is all I think it is overall.
It is very obvious that one of these works influenced the other. There is a brief glimpse of what looks a lot like Tarantia to me, and there is what looks a lot like the big temple on Tortage. The armour and weapons look to be in the same style and some of the locations in the movie look like AoC dungeons.
Yeah I have seen the trailers, can't say I saw what you lot are seeing. I see a re-imagining of the world of Conan that looks interesting, I didn't think of the game. I think a lot of people are seeing what they want to see quite frankly. A temple is a temple, a city is a city, a snake is a snake. The armour and weapons don't look like something out of AOC to me either. If everybody in the movie trailer had looked like clones, dull and dreary, then I would of immediately thought AOC.
Maybe. But maybe you don't see the similarities in design because of your hatred/dislike towards FC and AoC, ever think of that? That your aversion doesn't allow you to see anything that could be regarded to you as interesting or positive of AoC or FC? Honestly, I think that's far more the case, especially with that last sentence you show your overall desire to regard AoC negatively: the clones comparison is just dumb and was unnecessary because it makes no sense as argument.
As for personal opinions, I didn't get an AoC vibe with seeing trailers from a Clash of Titans or a Game of Thrones and not even the '80s Conan movie, while the trailer of the new Conan movie did have that vibe. So no, a temple isn't just the same temple no matter what movie and a city isn't just a city. If you didn't feel that vibe, that's alright too, maybe your connection or memories of the game aren't that thorough or are just different, viewpoints can be like that.
As for the connection between the movie and the game, I shouldn't make a big deal of it whatever the case may be, you know now what several people of those companies have said, whatever you do with that info is up to you, you can opt to believe those statements or not, or just check the credits after the movie, whatever suits you best.
edit: tbh, looking at your posts in this thread alone, I just have to wonder why with the depth of dislike that you have for FC and AoC, why you still keep following AoC, isn't that a bit masochistic? It's obvious at least to me and I'm surprised that it isn't to you that AoC isn't an MMORPG that gives you pleasure or MMO fun. It appears to me that there are surely other ones around that better suits your taste, don't you think?
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
@ Reillan actually your lvl 80 guard should still be there, my lvl 36 assasin that I had at launch was still there after not logging in to the game for a few years now.
Wow, finaticd just hit a new low. "temple is a temple". By this logic there is no way to catch AoC wibe anyway, since a temple is a temple no matter how you present it.
This is not even the worst of your post. Let me get this straight (it is so stupid I have to get a confirmatimation). What you are saying is that Funcom lies about their involvement in the movie? Ok, possible (hmmm more like impossible - Paradox would drop a lawsuit on their ass in a moment this would be press released if untrue), but what about Paradox stating they worked closely with FC?
well aside from all the other discussion...I just got off of Tortage and am in Stygia now. I joined a guild and have been getting some help with them. I haven't learned the gathering skills, and most of the monsters are above my level..but it's good so far.
I don't usually care for a bunch of PvE but it's ok so far. I need a mount but that will come in time. I strongly dislike the 2 gold limit but if it keeps RMT out, whatever.
I will be deciding soon whether I will sub or not. If you are reading this and trying to decide to sub or resub..do Tortage and see for yourself. Make your own decision. It looks great, and runs fine. Combat is interactive, but it's auto aim. Try it out and see if you like it.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die Hiatus: EvE Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh) Interested in: better games in general
Maybe. But maybe you don't see the similarities in design because of your hatred/dislike towards FC and AoC, ever think of that? That your aversion doesn't allow you to see anything that could be regarded to you as interesting or positive of AoC or FC? Honestly, I think that's far more the case, especially with that last sentence you show your overall desire to regard AoC negatively: the clones comparison is just dumb and was unnecessary because it makes no sense as argument.
It is quite probable that my dislike for Funcom shades any opinion I have. This is company that took what could of been an historic game and screwed it up by not focussing on what mattered. To me this is worse than releasing a rubbish game, contrary to what people believe I think AOC is a good game. But it has faults, and there has never been any concerted attempt to rectify those faults. In my perfect world Funcom go bust and somebody else takes on AOC, or Funcom go bust and somebody else takes the rights and produces a game equal to the magnificent stories that were created.
As for my comment about clones. In AOC you very much look like everybody else until you get to 80 and start getting some decent gear. In one breath they state realism as the cause for this in the game, yet you have undead pets walking around and magic users on every corner. Either you are dealing in fantasy as your main motivation or realism. Age of Harry Potter doesn't fit with the lore or the stories.
As for personal opinions, I didn't get an AoC vibe with seeing trailers from a Clash of Titans or a Game of Thrones and not even the '80s Conan movie, while the trailer of the new Conan movie did have that vibe. So no, a temple isn't just the same temple no matter what movie and a city isn't just a city. If you didn't feel that vibe, that's alright too, maybe your connection or memories of the game aren't that thorough or are just different, viewpoints can be like that.
When I saw the 80's Conan film, to me it was great. It was how I had imagined Conan to be and I thought the film was spectacular. It was hindered by the available effects at the time and I know it wasn't the vision Oliver Stone had first imagined. But overall it was the character I had read about. The AOC game would of been better if it had focussed on melee combat and kept magic users to a druid type healing role, with main bosses being demons or whatever. Pretty much like the 80's film.
As for the connection between the movie and the game, I shouldn't make a big deal of it whatever the case may be, you know now what several people of those companies have said, whatever you do with that info is up to you, you can opt to believe those statements or not, or just check the credits after the movie, whatever suits you best.
As mentioned I find it strange I am only hearing about this connection now. I am just cynical and I will check the credits.
edit: tbh, looking at your posts in this thread alone, I just have to wonder why with the depth of dislike that you have for FC and AoC, why you still keep following AoC, isn't that a bit masochistic? It's obvious at least to me and I'm surprised that it isn't to you that AoC isn't an MMORPG that gives you pleasure or MMO fun. It appears to me that there are surely other ones around that better suits your taste, don't you think?
I dislike Funcom for many reasons, they wouldn't give me a refund on my sub when the game wouldn't run after a patch they applied. They produced an entire expansion based on a few minor references in a couple of stories, which if it wasn't bad in itself was only done to appeal to the Korean market. Total disregard for existing fans and their own user base. I could go on and on.
I tried AOC again because the game is good and I heard about the new game engine update, going free to play made me curious. AOC was my first MMO, I had a great time and have fond memories but we are going back to 1.5/1.6 era. Since that date I have never agreed with the direction and I predicted a lot of things that came true. It's infuriating that Funcom as a company don't appear to have any interest in their own game, or even play that game. All they are concerned with is money. There was passion at the beginning but it's just business now. To my mind that in a way dishonors the memory of Robert E Howard, would he approve of AOC? I don't think so. So although I have no interest or care for Funcom, I actually do have an interest in anything Conan related.
I have more or less given up on MMO's I think to be honest they have had their time. I want to see how The Secret World (TSW) turns out, but only because I 'purchased' a beta invite. Which again I feel I was misled, sub for year get the expansion and an invite to the TSW beta. They forgot to mention the beta wasn't happening any time this century. When game companies have mentioned beta invites as incentives, they normally happen within a few months. Another reason I don't like Funcom, I think they use dodgy marketing tactics.
Free to play comes across to me a cynical move to make some money. If they had any faith in the AOC game, they wouldn't have gone free to play. They would have waited until after the movie to see what reaction it caused.
Well, LotrO went F2P too, I didn't notice any lack of faith in their product from Turbine as well, merely a sense that going hybrid F2P would be more successful for LotrO after seeing how it did positively for DDO.
Personally I agree with the choice, an MMO world only comes to live when it's filled with a large amount of players, and (for the moment) the AoC servers are brimming with life and players.
As for the TSW beta, yeah, I feel sceptical about that too, I don't see how having maybe 100k+ players with a guaranteed beta access can make it exclusive for them, if you also want to invite other people for beta as well. Sounds odd to me.
But I think it would have been a bad mistake to just wait when the movie launched and do nothing, forge the iron while it's hot as a saying goes, it's far better to have ingame content coincide with the movie, even better when the movie has a similar feel to it as AoC and if ingame content is recognisable from the movie.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
It's not Funcom's fault you have an old/crappy computer.
Out of interest I checked and I can get good performance out of AOC, but not without resorting to a lot of old tricks. Which to my mind is something I shouldn't have to do and didn't think I would need to do with the new game engine. These problems have been known about for ages, people have even written third party applications to compensate for the problems. Yet the problem continue to exist, performance has never been an interest of Funcom's and they have lost customers because of it.
It's not Funcom's fault you have an old/crappy computer.
Out of interest I checked and I can get good performance out of AOC, but not without resorting to a lot of old tricks. Which to my mind is something I shouldn't have to do and didn't think I would need to do with the new game engine. These problems have been known about for ages, people have even written third party applications to compensate for the problems. Yet the problem continue to exist, performance has never been an interest of Funcom's and they have lost customers because of it.
May I ask what kind of "old tricks" do you need to do to get good performance.
I am playing everything on max setting with all sliders fully open and don't know or need any "old tricks" to make that happen, but I can understand every system can be different.
Well, LotrO went F2P too, I didn't notice any lack of faith in their product from Turbine as well, merely a sense that going hybrid F2P would be more successful for LotrO after seeing how it did positively for DDO.
Personally I agree with the choice, an MMO world only comes to live when it's filled with a large amount of players, and (for the moment) the AoC servers are brimming with life and players.
As for the TSW beta, yeah, I feel sceptical about that too, I don't see how having maybe 100k+ players with a guaranteed beta access can make it exclusive for them, if you also want to invite other people for beta as well. Sounds odd to me.
But I think it would have been a bad mistake to just wait when the movie launched and do nothing, forge the iron while it's hot as a saying goes, it's far better to have ingame content coincide with the movie, even better when the movie has a similar feel to it as AoC and if ingame content is recognisable from the movie.
Personally if I had faith in the game I would of obviously played on the movie connection, but I would of held the sub model with decent deals. Funcom did state they had no plans to go free to play even when it did fine in Korea. So I see the sense of the decision in one way, but in another way I just get a sense they are trying to squeeze the last penny/cent out of the game. They are in a negative cash flow situation - so what prompted this change in policy? Basically I would like to think they made the change for the good of the game as well as themselves. Not sure about that at the moment, because I have no faith that Funcom have any sort of true investment in the future of AOC.
One thing I noticed with AOC and the new game engine is that the visual quality actually seems to have declined. Playing before with all my tweaked graphics options, apps and hacks. I almost saw thread in the capes, definition in the armor - all of which made AOC stand out from the crowd. Now things don't look defined, stuff like npc's at a distance are grey and don't seem to render properly until you get close. Considering the only thing to change since my last encounter with the game is the new engine, seems a bit like a step backwards to me. But then if they can fix bugs in the new engine, perhaps a backwards step in terms of visual quality is a forwards step in terms of the future of TSW.
It's not Funcom's fault you have an old/crappy computer.
Out of interest I checked and I can get good performance out of AOC, but not without resorting to a lot of old tricks. Which to my mind is something I shouldn't have to do and didn't think I would need to do with the new game engine. These problems have been known about for ages, people have even written third party applications to compensate for the problems. Yet the problem continue to exist, performance has never been an interest of Funcom's and they have lost customers because of it.
I wouldn't mind knowing some of these old tricks. No matter how I tweak the graphics my performance is crappy. I seem to be able to run every other game out on high(mostly high) settings and get acceptable performance but not AoC. It's actually what kept me from staying subbed to the game.
I am playing a caster. You do have to click on your opponent..sorry if that "auto aim" comment is incorrect. It's just like CoH, LOTRO, etc...but that's ok. It's a nice break from politics in EvE and killing mofos in FPS's. It looks great and runs smooth on my old gaming rig.
With all the complaints about stability etc, it must be some sort of compatiablity issue. I have an old pc and it runs fine, 1440x900. I have everything maxed since i'm not worried about PvP...yet it runs great.
There is combos for melee characters and I believe they are timed. I would care more about all of this if I was killing other human meatbags, but as it's all AI..I don't care much.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die Hiatus: EvE Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh) Interested in: better games in general
I am playing a caster. You do have to click on your opponent..sorry if that "auto aim" comment is incorrect. It's just like CoH, LOTRO, etc...but that's ok. It's a nice break from politics in EvE and killing mofos in FPS's. It looks great and runs smooth on my old gaming rig.
With all the complaints about stability etc, it must be some sort of compatiablity issue. I have an old pc and it runs fine, 1440x900. I have everything maxed since i'm not worried about PvP...yet it runs great.
There is combos for melee characters and I believe they are timed. I would care more about all of this if I was killing other human meatbags, but as it's all AI..I don't care much.
As caster you get spellweaving at lvl50, which is similar to the melee combos. Furthermore you can doubletap strafe or back to avoid a knockdown or stun. You can time it because those skills are clearly visible when executed because of the castbar. So there is a twitch element in AoC combat.
It's not Funcom's fault you have an old/crappy computer.
Out of interest I checked and I can get good performance out of AOC, but not without resorting to a lot of old tricks. Which to my mind is something I shouldn't have to do and didn't think I would need to do with the new game engine. These problems have been known about for ages, people have even written third party applications to compensate for the problems. Yet the problem continue to exist, performance has never been an interest of Funcom's and they have lost customers because of it.
May I ask what kind of "old tricks" do you need to do to get good performance.
I am playing everything on max setting with all sliders fully open and don't know or need any "old tricks" to make that happen, but I can understand every system can be different.
He won't post the specs to his computer. Big thread he posted awhile back about how his ATI video card and AOC don't get along. Since he won't post the specs he will continue to rant on AoC performance rather than try to get help from the community. BTW I still run AoC on max settings in DX10 with a ATI HD 5700 and it is most awesome. After the update the performance improved.
May I ask what kind of "old tricks" do you need to do to get good performance.
I am playing everything on max setting with all sliders fully open and don't know or need any "old tricks" to make that happen, but I can understand every system can be different.
Well easiest thing to do is download AOC Quick Start (AOCQS) there are some options within this that can impact on performance. Now CPU affinity I don't know the current status, being banned from the forums and all, but at one time AOCQS allowed you to utilise multiple cpu's. But this stopped working with the expansion, around the time I left. So it may not impact if you have multiple cpu's I don't know, the game itself may be able to take advantage of more than one cpu now but I doubt it (one of the reasons AOC can work better on slightly older machines). But even though cpu affinity stopped working things like process thread priority and the multimedia timer adjustment/hack can still improve performance as far as I know.
Running in window mode can improve performance. Switching settings to high and switching off ambient occlusion, shadows and particles can be better than utilising the preset low/medium settings. Still seems to improve my performance anyway.
Running DX9 shader model 2.0 can also help a 32bit OS.
I could go on and on, but being out of the loop on AOC now I wouldn't like to mention some of the more involved things. Like you I have no issue with running any other game, even games in DX11 etc on high settings. AOC is the only game I have a problem with but then AOC seems to be the only game that has significant issues with ATI cards.
I played AoC for 6 months and actually loved the game but that was from launch so a lot of pain and drops in subs made it hard to go long term. Then due to RL circumstances I have hardly any time to play MMO's so it wasn't worth subbing.
I think its a great move what they have done. I can see a very clear benefit of being a premium subscriber but there is still a way for others to play and enjoy the game. I downloaded the game the minute I saw it has gone free and I will be playing all over again. Overtime I may resub but I am pretty sure I will purchase an odd item from the shop etc.
So this move will:
Bring back old players like me
Generate more cash (before they had 0% chance of getting anything out of me and now they will)
Increase pop and we all know that an MMO with greater pop will always be successful.
I am really looking forward to entering the world once more and roaming the landscape. However why didn't you make Assassins free!!! booooo... lol
I am trying it now and i am enjoying the story line. they did a decent job with the free to play membership I am playing a demonologist and quite liking it.
Games I will be playing are: TES V, SWTOR, ME 3, TSW
I'm really back into it and the best thing is i can play casually now and not feel guilty if I don't play for a while. The only thing that I disagree with is the inventory limit. I feel that the reduction in classes you can play and everything else is about right. Reducing inventory is going to be a major pain in the arse and will take away from the enjoyment a lot. Free to play isn't about making players suffer when they play your game.
Until I get a bag to increase inventory size, its going to be painful and it will also stop people going on group missions as you will just not get anything as you have so few spaces.
In saying all that, I am glad to be back in.
Not sure if its just me but the graphics looks like its been reduced a tiny bit. I remember it being a lot more detailed and deep. Maybe I got used to seeing too many single player games since I took a break... dunno.
Comments
Funcom probably didn't mention their involvement with the movie simply because they weren't allowed to. They'd have to deal with the film production companies, the IP holder, etc. They can't go around saying whatever they want and blabbing all about the movie without getting in big trouble.
Have you watched the Conan the Barbarian trailer yet?
It is very obvious that one of these works influenced the other. There is a brief glimpse of what looks a lot like Tarantia to me, and there is what looks a lot like the big temple on Tortage. The armour and weapons look to be in the same style and some of the locations in the movie look like AoC dungeons.
How is it so hard to believe that the people who made the movie used the same assets used in the game? They're both based on a common work and AoC had been thouroughly researched for years at this point.
actually, please delete. self mod.
From Conan website:
Funcom is proud to announce the new content to ‘Age of Conan’ that will tie together the game and the upcoming movie, ‘Conan the Barbarian’. Set 20 years after the movie storyline, an epic new adventure pack – The Savage Coast of Turan finds players being sent by Conan, now King of Aquilonia, to aid his old ally Artus. The new adventure pack includes but is not limited to content from the movie, and allows players to follow epic storylines in Conan’s realm.
"We have worked closely with the Funcom creative team since 2003 and carefully crafted a unique look and feel for Conan's world," says Conan the Barbarian Producer and Paradox CEO Fredrik Malmberg. "Many of the concepts, locations and designs from the game development were utilized by the film team for consistency, and we are thrilled that many elements of the film, distributed by Lionsgate in the US and UK, will feel familiar to the Age of Conan players."
Slated for an August release, ‘Conan the Barbarian’ tells the tale of Conan and his adventures across Hyboria. The new adventure pack launches players on exciting adventures, as they help Artus unravel the conspiracy and plots surrounding the city of Ardashir in Turan. The pack adds all new encounters, the massive new area of Ardashir, new dungeons and raids as well as new armor sets and monsters that moviegoers can already observe in the recently released theatrical movie trailer.
"We're excited to see the movie and the game combined in this brand new content," says Executive Producer for Age of Conan, Craig Morrison. "Being able to draw upon the characters, storylines, weapons, and monsters from the movie is tremendously exciting, and it will definitely compliment the wealth of content that already exists within the 'Age of Conan' game world."
‘Conan the Barbarian’ is set for a wide release on August 19th. The film will be released in 3D and is set to star Jason Momoa in the lead role, being supported by Rose McGowan, Stephen Lang, Ron Perlman, Bob Sapp and Rachel Nichols, with Marcus Nispel directing.
Maybe. But maybe you don't see the similarities in design because of your hatred/dislike towards FC and AoC, ever think of that? That your aversion doesn't allow you to see anything that could be regarded to you as interesting or positive of AoC or FC? Honestly, I think that's far more the case, especially with that last sentence you show your overall desire to regard AoC negatively: the clones comparison is just dumb and was unnecessary because it makes no sense as argument.
As for personal opinions, I didn't get an AoC vibe with seeing trailers from a Clash of Titans or a Game of Thrones and not even the '80s Conan movie, while the trailer of the new Conan movie did have that vibe. So no, a temple isn't just the same temple no matter what movie and a city isn't just a city. If you didn't feel that vibe, that's alright too, maybe your connection or memories of the game aren't that thorough or are just different, viewpoints can be like that.
As for the connection between the movie and the game, I shouldn't make a big deal of it whatever the case may be, you know now what several people of those companies have said, whatever you do with that info is up to you, you can opt to believe those statements or not, or just check the credits after the movie, whatever suits you best.
edit: tbh, looking at your posts in this thread alone, I just have to wonder why with the depth of dislike that you have for FC and AoC, why you still keep following AoC, isn't that a bit masochistic? It's obvious at least to me and I'm surprised that it isn't to you that AoC isn't an MMORPG that gives you pleasure or MMO fun. It appears to me that there are surely other ones around that better suits your taste, don't you think?
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
@ Reillan actually your lvl 80 guard should still be there, my lvl 36 assasin that I had at launch was still there after not logging in to the game for a few years now.
Wow, finaticd just hit a new low. "temple is a temple". By this logic there is no way to catch AoC wibe anyway, since a temple is a temple no matter how you present it.
This is not even the worst of your post. Let me get this straight (it is so stupid I have to get a confirmatimation). What you are saying is that Funcom lies about their involvement in the movie? Ok, possible (hmmm more like impossible - Paradox would drop a lawsuit on their ass in a moment this would be press released if untrue), but what about Paradox stating they worked closely with FC?
well aside from all the other discussion...I just got off of Tortage and am in Stygia now. I joined a guild and have been getting some help with them. I haven't learned the gathering skills, and most of the monsters are above my level..but it's good so far.
I don't usually care for a bunch of PvE but it's ok so far. I need a mount but that will come in time. I strongly dislike the 2 gold limit but if it keeps RMT out, whatever.
I will be deciding soon whether I will sub or not. If you are reading this and trying to decide to sub or resub..do Tortage and see for yourself. Make your own decision. It looks great, and runs fine. Combat is interactive, but it's auto aim. Try it out and see if you like it.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die
Hiatus: EvE
Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh)
Interested in: better games in general
@poster above me:
Auto-aim combat? Are you playing a caster?
Well, LotrO went F2P too, I didn't notice any lack of faith in their product from Turbine as well, merely a sense that going hybrid F2P would be more successful for LotrO after seeing how it did positively for DDO.
Personally I agree with the choice, an MMO world only comes to live when it's filled with a large amount of players, and (for the moment) the AoC servers are brimming with life and players.
As for the TSW beta, yeah, I feel sceptical about that too, I don't see how having maybe 100k+ players with a guaranteed beta access can make it exclusive for them, if you also want to invite other people for beta as well. Sounds odd to me.
But I think it would have been a bad mistake to just wait when the movie launched and do nothing, forge the iron while it's hot as a saying goes, it's far better to have ingame content coincide with the movie, even better when the movie has a similar feel to it as AoC and if ingame content is recognisable from the movie.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Out of interest I checked and I can get good performance out of AOC, but not without resorting to a lot of old tricks. Which to my mind is something I shouldn't have to do and didn't think I would need to do with the new game engine. These problems have been known about for ages, people have even written third party applications to compensate for the problems. Yet the problem continue to exist, performance has never been an interest of Funcom's and they have lost customers because of it.
May I ask what kind of "old tricks" do you need to do to get good performance.
I am playing everything on max setting with all sliders fully open and don't know or need any "old tricks" to make that happen, but I can understand every system can be different.
Personally if I had faith in the game I would of obviously played on the movie connection, but I would of held the sub model with decent deals. Funcom did state they had no plans to go free to play even when it did fine in Korea. So I see the sense of the decision in one way, but in another way I just get a sense they are trying to squeeze the last penny/cent out of the game. They are in a negative cash flow situation - so what prompted this change in policy? Basically I would like to think they made the change for the good of the game as well as themselves. Not sure about that at the moment, because I have no faith that Funcom have any sort of true investment in the future of AOC.
One thing I noticed with AOC and the new game engine is that the visual quality actually seems to have declined. Playing before with all my tweaked graphics options, apps and hacks. I almost saw thread in the capes, definition in the armor - all of which made AOC stand out from the crowd. Now things don't look defined, stuff like npc's at a distance are grey and don't seem to render properly until you get close. Considering the only thing to change since my last encounter with the game is the new engine, seems a bit like a step backwards to me. But then if they can fix bugs in the new engine, perhaps a backwards step in terms of visual quality is a forwards step in terms of the future of TSW.
I wouldn't mind knowing some of these old tricks. No matter how I tweak the graphics my performance is crappy. I seem to be able to run every other game out on high(mostly high) settings and get acceptable performance but not AoC. It's actually what kept me from staying subbed to the game.
No signature, I don't have a pen
@Nihce
I am playing a caster. You do have to click on your opponent..sorry if that "auto aim" comment is incorrect. It's just like CoH, LOTRO, etc...but that's ok. It's a nice break from politics in EvE and killing mofos in FPS's. It looks great and runs smooth on my old gaming rig.
With all the complaints about stability etc, it must be some sort of compatiablity issue. I have an old pc and it runs fine, 1440x900. I have everything maxed since i'm not worried about PvP...yet it runs great.
There is combos for melee characters and I believe they are timed. I would care more about all of this if I was killing other human meatbags, but as it's all AI..I don't care much.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die
Hiatus: EvE
Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh)
Interested in: better games in general
As caster you get spellweaving at lvl50, which is similar to the melee combos. Furthermore you can doubletap strafe or back to avoid a knockdown or stun. You can time it because those skills are clearly visible when executed because of the castbar. So there is a twitch element in AoC combat.
He won't post the specs to his computer. Big thread he posted awhile back about how his ATI video card and AOC don't get along. Since he won't post the specs he will continue to rant on AoC performance rather than try to get help from the community. BTW I still run AoC on max settings in DX10 with a ATI HD 5700 and it is most awesome. After the update the performance improved.
No old tricks required.
Link to his first rant on performance: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/3774961#3774961
.. .... .- - . - .-. --- .-.. .-.. ... .-- .... --- .-. . .--. --- .-. - .-.-.-
--------------------------------------------------------
Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate.
Well easiest thing to do is download AOC Quick Start (AOCQS) there are some options within this that can impact on performance. Now CPU affinity I don't know the current status, being banned from the forums and all, but at one time AOCQS allowed you to utilise multiple cpu's. But this stopped working with the expansion, around the time I left. So it may not impact if you have multiple cpu's I don't know, the game itself may be able to take advantage of more than one cpu now but I doubt it (one of the reasons AOC can work better on slightly older machines). But even though cpu affinity stopped working things like process thread priority and the multimedia timer adjustment/hack can still improve performance as far as I know.
Running in window mode can improve performance. Switching settings to high and switching off ambient occlusion, shadows and particles can be better than utilising the preset low/medium settings. Still seems to improve my performance anyway.
If you have a 32bit OS you can utilise an out of memory workaround that impacts on performance, I think this page should still be available http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=218777
Running DX9 shader model 2.0 can also help a 32bit OS.
I could go on and on, but being out of the loop on AOC now I wouldn't like to mention some of the more involved things. Like you I have no issue with running any other game, even games in DX11 etc on high settings. AOC is the only game I have a problem with but then AOC seems to be the only game that has significant issues with ATI cards.
Couple of points from me...
I played AoC for 6 months and actually loved the game but that was from launch so a lot of pain and drops in subs made it hard to go long term. Then due to RL circumstances I have hardly any time to play MMO's so it wasn't worth subbing.
I think its a great move what they have done. I can see a very clear benefit of being a premium subscriber but there is still a way for others to play and enjoy the game. I downloaded the game the minute I saw it has gone free and I will be playing all over again. Overtime I may resub but I am pretty sure I will purchase an odd item from the shop etc.
So this move will:
Bring back old players like me
Generate more cash (before they had 0% chance of getting anything out of me and now they will)
Increase pop and we all know that an MMO with greater pop will always be successful.
I am really looking forward to entering the world once more and roaming the landscape. However why didn't you make Assassins free!!! booooo... lol
i'd like to know if ones old characters will be on the servers when f2p because ive read about multiple server merges.
I am trying it now and i am enjoying the story line. they did a decent job with the free to play membership I am playing a demonologist and quite liking it.
Games I will be playing are: TES V, SWTOR, ME 3, TSW
I'm really back into it and the best thing is i can play casually now and not feel guilty if I don't play for a while. The only thing that I disagree with is the inventory limit. I feel that the reduction in classes you can play and everything else is about right. Reducing inventory is going to be a major pain in the arse and will take away from the enjoyment a lot. Free to play isn't about making players suffer when they play your game.
Until I get a bag to increase inventory size, its going to be painful and it will also stop people going on group missions as you will just not get anything as you have so few spaces.
In saying all that, I am glad to be back in.
Not sure if its just me but the graphics looks like its been reduced a tiny bit. I remember it being a lot more detailed and deep. Maybe I got used to seeing too many single player games since I took a break... dunno.