5. Vanguard had a hardcore following of Vanboys who would give their life in defense of the vision. After all the support this following had given Sigil and Brad McQuaid, they were shafted on at least one or two occasions. Age of Conan has a loyal following of closed beta testers who have been shafted by Funcom's decision to partner with File Planet in a paid lottery system to get "Open" beta keys.
4. Late in development, Sigil started using financial motives for the creative and technical decision making process. Late in development, Funcom started using financial excuses for the methods of digitial distribution for Open Beta and Early Release.
3. Towards the end of technical beta and well into open beta, many game breaking bugs were reported to Sigil which were ignored and subsequently were present in live release which contributed to the eventual downfall of the game. In the AoC PVP beta, game breaking bugs such as wall hacking, dropping through the world and other similar bugs to Vanguard appeared. Many fans report that they had told Funcom about these bugs long before the PVP weekend, but the bugs were not fixed before opening the game to the masses.
2. Vanguard had an intellectual vision that did not match the actual product. The "Vision" was always present in marketing and hype, but never materialized in the game and the vision often got in the way of the actual game itself. Age of Conan's has a vision to stay true to the lore of Conan. The vision of blood, guts, gore and boobs seems to take precedence over technical issues and gameplay.
1. Prior to Vanguard's release, everyone knew the game was not ready. When the story broke that Sigil was in deep shit financially , Sigilhad to release the game prematurely at all costs in Kamikazee like fashion. There are rumblings across message boards that Age of Conan does not appear to be a product ready to release in less than 30 days. There has also been hints and undertones that the current release date for Age of Conan cannot be pushed back or delayed because of financial / investor concerns.
While I'm not saying AoC is doomed like Vanguard, I am saying that there are some striking similarities, though not as drastic and apparent as they were in Vanguard.
It will be fun to see how things transpire over the next few weeks before release. Will Funcom be the first MMO publisher to attempt to mend their relationship with t he community or will they continue to stand on the higher ground as many mmorpg developers before them have stood, defiantly shunning what the industry calls... The Vocal Minority.
User Comments
Eh, good points, but I think that AoC is being handled all together in a more professional manner than Vanguard was. Plus, they have showed us a lot more game play footage up to this point in development than Vanguard ever did. Secondly, even if all of these bugs materialize and cause problems, and the pve aspect of the game doesn't hook you, it still has PvP. What we know about PvP is that gamers will play a game with PvP no matter how crappy the bugs or other elements of the game are (ala Shadowbane). So, I think the game will hold.
Hopefully the release will be solid and not riddiled with bugs. They already had Anarchy Online which released in horrible fashion, so I don't see Funcom making the same mistake. I could be wrong though.
I think someone is just a little angry because they didn't get into the Fileplanet beta.
I played Vanguard in beta about a month before release, I played in the PvP Weekend beta and am all set to play in the May 1st AoC open beta...
The similarities are so FEW and far between, I really don't know where you are coming from zergwatch.
I am NOT an AoC fanboi. At all. I'm a WAR fanboi. I had VERY little hope and a lot of doubts about AoC before I played it in the PvP Weekend beta.
I am now a fan of AoC and look forward to the May 1st beta. Depending on how that goes, that'll be my decider as to whether or not I purchase the game.
You give a lot of doom and gloom based off of forum posts and rumors? Seems like very weak rational for such naysaying.
Just my 2 cents, I respect your opinion and appreciate you giving it to us..
But opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one, and they generally stink.
Good post zergy...
I'm in agreement with Almuderas a bit. I think FunCom isn't as bad as Sigil.
I fear the release. I have a feeling the 3 day early access period will be "3 days of server crashes and downtime".
At least Mythic knows how to launch a game properly.
Bugs in beta is NOTHING new, everything you say is like that in every game I have ever beta tested(some worse than others), ALL OF THEM. Let's see, Starting out with AO, EnB, WoW, Dark Seas of Space, Fighting Fury, some mech game I can't remember the name of from Nexxon, Hostile Space, WoW, Auto Assault, EQ 2, CoH/V should I continue?
The difference is, are they fixed at release? So save your judgements till at maximum 3 months after release. I say 3 months because "Live" is a totally different environment than any beta can simulate and believe it or not, programming takes time.
Well said KaltesHerz, WELL SAID.
You could say this for every game. Whether it's a MMO or not. Vanguard only advertised 'hardcore' MMO. Age of Conan is advertising much much more. Whether it's new PvP, Siege, Bar fighting, sex, DX10. Every game has their similarities, but I think Age of Conan has been pushed back enough and it has mainly been for bugs. Vanguard had to release because they were running out of money.
How were people shafted in number 5?? because no one wasnt im afraid.
Number 4: how much for bandwidth? some decisions had to be made.
Number 3: AoC PvP weekend was on an older client which at the time was more stable I believe than the regular one. It was older but tuned up a bit and ran from a different server than the general beta. Its bugs has no bearing on the main game. Its was stress test more than anything.
Number 2: At least AOC doesnt actively market its beta / board subscribers at every opportunity. It doesnt have a ticker on the front website. And only 3 reports/ interviews that state numbers in the past year. AoC has been marketed as a mature game, marketing is in the public eye correct - bugs are for fixing behind closed doors and not neccessarily public and its a work in progress. It might seem like how you say it, but judge at release.
Number 1: The only rumblings across the web originate from one particular website thats information is 4 months out of date, its founding members banned from beta long time ago, all they do is rehash the old stuff prentending its new and then the chinese whispers happen from forum to fourm.
I can tell you how the vanguard followers were shafted, first hand. We were promised a very specific game, and McQuaid delivered us a steaming pile of crap.
In beta our every attempt at helping sigil turn this game into something of value was thwarted with excuses of time and money. Excuse me? Game development is always about time and money, and if the time is taken to make a good product then the money will be made.
What scares me is that when new reported bugs in Anarchy Online (FuncCom's first MMO offering) right up to the day before launch, bugs that were major and game breaking. The game launched anyway. This concerns me more than what SIGIL did because, this is the same company. Vanguard feels nothing to me like Conan does, nothing about the launch appears the same to me. It is apples to oranges in my mind. Two different companies, and two totally different issues.
Vanguard was a game that was not finished. Areas not populated, game features not in game at launch.
AoC is done, populated, and ready to roll. They need to bug fix the hell out of some aspects of the game, and that is a process that will continue well after go live. So it does not shock me, and I do expect there to be rough spots because like it or not it is an industry standard and one I accept as a fan of the genre as reality. My concern again is game breaking issues being included at launch. Such as instability.
Falling through the world? It still happens in WoW. FOUR years later. Wall hacking? In WoW too. Exploiting? Yep, exploits in WoW. It did in beta too, the game has done fine even with the minor hiccups.
This is a rant plain and simple and one I do not agree with, and one that has little basis in reality. Again if you want to be concerned because of FunCom's track record that is fine, but why worry about what Sigil did?
Avery, why would they stress test something on an older client when they could put things in a more up-to-date version of the client which will cause unforeseen lag? Seems kind of dumb to me, but maybe I'm not an expert on such things. Lol.
Basically I'll wrap it up. Good post, thanks for your input, you're not alone, you'll be swamped down by fanbois, and most importantly, wait 'till release.
lol at this, all I have to say, is wait till you play the game. ;-)
I am now laying in wait for War Hammer Online myself ;-)
"I think someone is just a little angry because they didn't get into the Fileplanet beta. "
I have no interest in beta testing Age of Conan. So close, but yet so far away.. I'm actually not sure if I have any interest in playing the released game either. So, my obeservation is 100% neutral based on what I've been reading and hearing from people who have played the PVP test and off the cuff comments about the beta itself.
Thronwolf hit the nail on the head. Nothing else to say.
Cheers Thornwolf
Oz
Login or Register to post a comment