Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

"Other nominees for this award included: 'Warhammer Online', 'Hellgate: London' and 'Unreal Tournament 3'."

It would appear that someone decided to bash before reading. Surprise, surprise.

At any rate, I congratulate AoC on its win - I cannot take that away from it, and I hope it turns out well. I mean, I would love it to be a perfect game because I have nothing to gain by it failing, simply another option if it succeeds. However, I also do not put much trust in awards, no matter whom they are for or whom they are from. Vanguard won a few awards and it turned out to be a steaming pile of excrement.

Awards mean that a panel of a select few people, whose experience we do not know, enjoyed one game more for reasons that are often not revealed, and by a magnitude we are not told. It is too sketchy to put much faith in, and considering how stupid most reviewers are (I never cease to be amazed by reviewers doing reviews for genres they know nothing about, a big thing in MMOGs), I do not see this as much of a pro for AoC or con for WAR.

The only thing I rely on now are comments by people who play the games at conventions and such, since they tend to cut past the hype, speculation, and bias, and even those hold little water. The true test will be when I get to play the game in release form, at which point I will know which game is best for me.

Of course the first person shooter style MMO gets the award, it was voted on by a panel of Xbox / Playstation junkies.

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

coming out Q1 2008 so it still 8 months away from released.  All seige stuff are very simple, just copy them from daoc which can be done in 1 week.

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

As was mentioned before... WAR was a runner up.

Also AoC showed much more at the convention that has not been shown before. WAR has shown so much already they did not have anything really ground breaking to show except a few more classes. Until Leipzig AoC has never shown any PvP. Is it any wonder why the judges sat up and paid attention? Also I am sure it helped that FunCom is a EU company. Few mainstream MMOs have come out of EU that have the success AoC appears to be gathering.

It is apparent you took the news blurb about AoC being best online game and have not followed anything else that went on at Leipzig. They had PvP at Leip, They had in game displays of the new classes revealed at Leip, WAR is not about sieging so I don't see your point here. Mythic's PR is outstanding and the only problem they may have is the shear volume of information they release might get boring down the stretch. Hopefully they will lift part of the NDA in a few months so we get fans posting experiences about some of the fun moments in game.

Personally  I think the gameplay looked pretty decent there in that video. One thing I liked a lot was the opening attack the black orc used in that first video. It looked like he smashed the ground with his weapon and it opened up to hold the dwarves around him or something. Pretty cool if you ask me.

Also, I was really happy to see a lack of people jumping around. I hated that in WoW, you'd go to pvp and end up in a dunk competition with like 20 rogues.  

Originally posted by Sornin

 

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

Bzzt, wrong.

 

"Other nominees for this award included: 'Warhammer Online', 'Hellgate: London' and 'Unreal Tournament 3'."

It would appear that someone decided to bash before reading. Surprise, surprise.

At any rate, I congratulate AoC on its win - I cannot take that away from it, and I hope it turns out well. I mean, I would love it to be a perfect game because I have nothing to gain by it failing, simply another option if it succeeds. However, I also do not put much trust in awards, no matter whom they are for or whom they are from. Vanguard won a few awards and it turned out to be a steaming pile of excrement.

Awards mean that a panel of a select few people, whose experience we do not know, enjoyed one game more for reasons that are often not revealed, and by a magnitude we are not told. It is too sketchy to put much faith in, and considering how stupid most reviewers are (I never cease to be amazed by reviewers doing reviews for genres they know nothing about, a big thing in MMOGs), I do not see this as much of a pro for AoC or con for WAR.

The only thing I rely on now are comments by people who play the games at conventions and such, since they tend to cut past the hype, speculation, and bias, and even those hold little water. The true test will be when I get to play the game in release form, at which point I will know which game is best for me.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=27910

Funcom and Eidos are also very proud to have won the OMEGA award for "Best Online Game", presented by a German online games magazine association made up of the most important gaming media in Germany; including two of the largest gaming web sites. Other nominees for this award included: ´Warhammer Online´, ´Hellgate: London´ and ´Unreal Tournament 3´.

bzzt, that were the nominations for the omega magazine awards, and not the convention awards. it would appear that someone decided to bash before reading CAREFULLY! Surprise, surprise....

Originally posted by jor8888

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

coming out Q1 2008 so it still 8 months away from released.  All seige stuff are very simple, just copy them from daoc which can be done in 1 week.

 

 

 

While it is correct they could copy things from DAoC, I am going to assume you know not too much on gaming developement as it would take more than a simple week to do. It can be done though given enough time.

Originally posted by jor8888

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

coming out Q1 2008 so it still 8 months away from released.  All seige stuff are very simple, just copy them from daoc which can be done in 1 week. 

ROFLMAO

I am watching both AoC and Warhammer, but after seeing the most recent AoC PvP video that Warhammer's RvR-style will be the most fun.

There is no collision detection in AoC PvP.  This is bad for battle formations.  Also, it seems the big siege warfare will be limited to large guilds fighting over limited building spots.  Smaller guilds will fight over towers, and tiny guilds or unguilded players will be relegated to the lowest levels of PvP.  Again, that sounds bad to me.

AoC looks very good, nice graphics, but the reason it was pushed back was due to some very basic problems in their combat system -- which sounds eerily familiar, like a repeat of Anarchy Online.

DAoC's RvR system was widely hailed as some of the best PvP and had a very solid launch.  If I fault DAoC at all, it is only in their decision to expand the PvE areas rather than the meat-and-potatoes RvR part of the game.  Nevertheless, it was great fun.

I still tend to think at this point when looking at the track record of the two developing companies that Funcom will probably have a unique and innovative PvE game with elements of PvP, while Mythic will have the more solid RvR game with PvE elements.

Overall, I believe that Warhammer Online will offer the best PvP experience with its emphasis on Realm vs. Realm warfare.

Personally, I have full confidence in Warhammer giving me the most bang for the buck and I will preorder the game without hesitation (although I would wait until I see what they will offer for a Collector's Edition and any in-game gifts or bonus items which might be included).

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

They unveiled the Elves at Leipzig. If you've followed the game at all you know that that generally means proper in-game footage follows next month in the newsletter etc. Not to mention they did show some in-game footage of two of the elven classes. The in-game playing of elves will come in a month or so.

Also, they work on things one pairing at a time, so they are only working on the elves now. They have pretty much completed Orcs and Chaos.

We also see PvP all the time, ALL the time for WAR. It's hard to avoid videos of PvP.

And I don't think Conan looks much more polished at all. More polished than the elven areas yes, more polished than the Dwarf/Greenskin areas? Not really.

And need to work?  WAR has managed in two and a bit years what Conan has just about managed in 5. Yeah, "work harder Mythic"

Originally posted by mistermental

 

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

 

 

They unveiled the Elves at Leipzig. If you've followed the game at all you know that that generally means proper in-game footage follows next month in the newsletter etc. Not to mention they did show some in-game footage of two of the elven classes. The in-game playing of elves will come in a month or so.

 

Also, they work on things one pairing at a time, so they are only working on the elves now. They have pretty much completed Orcs and Chaos.

 

We also see PvP all the time, ALL the time for WAR. It's hard to avoid videos of PvP.

 

And I don't think Conan looks much more polished at all. More polished than the elven areas yes, more polished than the Dwarf/Greenskin areas? Not really.

 

And need to work?  WAR has managed in two and a bit years what Conan has just about managed in 5. Yeah, "work harder Mythic"

 

 

WAR looks great if you ask me. I am somebody who wil openly admit I will subscribe to AoC when it launches but as impressive as things have been with WAR I will likely give it a shot and maybe play both. Each game has something cool to offer and each attracts me in a different way. I want both games to succeed so that mmorpg genre as a whole can take a nice step forward and spark some ideas for future developement teams. Here is to both doing well. * Raises a glass * 

I agree, those videos are less than impressive. Although my hopes for WAR are still strong, I have confidence it will be a great game.

Originally posted by whitedelight

Originally posted by mistermental

 

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

 

 

They unveiled the Elves at Leipzig. If you've followed the game at all you know that that generally means proper in-game footage follows next month in the newsletter etc. Not to mention they did show some in-game footage of two of the elven classes. The in-game playing of elves will come in a month or so.

 

Also, they work on things one pairing at a time, so they are only working on the elves now. They have pretty much completed Orcs and Chaos.

 

We also see PvP all the time, ALL the time for WAR. It's hard to avoid videos of PvP.

 

And I don't think Conan looks much more polished at all. More polished than the elven areas yes, more polished than the Dwarf/Greenskin areas? Not really.

 

And need to work?  WAR has managed in two and a bit years what Conan has just about managed in 5. Yeah, "work harder Mythic"

 

 

WAR looks great if you ask me. I am somebody who wil openly admit I will subscribe to AoC when it launches but as impressive as things have been with WAR I will likely give it a shot and maybe play both. Each game has something cool to offer and each attracts me in a different way. I want both games to succeed so that mmorpg genre as a whole can take a nice step forward and spark some ideas for future developement teams. Here is to both doing well. * Raises a glass * 

I think it is definately fair that AoC won,  it  showed how some of the features they claimed to have would work ingame, it was a small letdown they used NPCs but hey, they have LOTS of time to work with so you cant be too critical. but to compare the quality of AoC to WAR based on this award would be rather foolish i think , WAR  has been steadily releasing new information so they didnt have as big of a 'bang' in store for Leipzig. also cheers to whitedelight for not showing so much bias as very few other members of that guild

Originally posted by Tambourine

You do realize they're playing premade characters, right? Of course there will be a pour display of character individuality/customization. And personally I think the gameplay looks splendid for a beta, stop setting your standards so high. WAR is not shooting for extreme innovation, they're shooting for a FUN RvR-based game.

Fun, fun, fun, fun, FUN! And so far feedback on the FUN factor, has been pretty much all positive.

What some people refer to as "fun" is actually "easymode" and not "fun" at all.  You get loot in pvp but not from the player?  Sounds pretty carebear to me.

Originally posted by mistermental  

And need to work?  WAR has managed in two and a bit years what Conan has just about managed in 5. Yeah, "work harder Mythic"

 

 

The crux of your previous discussion aside, 2.5 years is HARDLY enough to make a good solid MMOG with a lot of depth and complexity. I guarantee you that AoC will be loads more complex and deep specifically because they have been working on it for 4 and a half years.

That said, I think WAR didn't get nominated simply because they didn't really show much off. The Elves is HUGE for a fan thats been following the game for 2 years. But to the masses, it's like 'so what, every other MMOG has elves too.' Also the lighting system was significantly underwhelming IMHO. They've been hyping it for months, when all it is is a colored lightmap system, a technology nearly 10 years old.

I've never really been all that impressed by the combat videos from WAR as far as character animations and combat pacing go.  That said though, the combat does have some interesting elements that I think you have to play in order to appreciate....namely the morale system.  Even with that element left out though, I think that they have some work as far as pacing goes, there were too many moments where the characters were just standing there.  Although I appreciate that characters weren't bunny hopping around like idiots, I would like movement to be more like combat movement, rather than having characters simply run around one another using the exact same run animations as they would otherwise.

Funcom deserves congradulations for the award.   The judges were likely influenced by the innovative systems AoC is attempting to implement.     Now that they are finally showing more of the game to the public, it's a good sign that AoC will have time for development before its re-scheduled launch. 

Originally posted by Fion

The crux of your previous discussion aside, 2.5 years is HARDLY enough to make a good solid MMOG with a lot of depth and complexity. I guarantee you that AoC will be loads more complex and deep specifically because they have been working on it for 4 and a half years.

Developoment time is NOT an indication of either quality, developer comptence or good game design and using it is wholly flawed argument.  

Vanguard began development in early 2002, it had 5 years.   How many years has Darkfall been in development?

And making 'guarantees' about a game you've never even played doesn't do anything to strengthen your position.   We've heard developers like Brad McQuaid make those kind of 'guarantees' before and we all know what they're worth. 

There is one thing and one thing only that matters, the launch and release of the game.  

I'm interested in seeing how both WAR and AoC do at their launches.   But don't try to claim you can make guarantees about ANY game still in development. 

The only think I'm disappointed in is the background looked amazingly identical to DAoC. At the same time, I understand they are probably not even in the alpha stages of the game yet, so I won't make any judgement. I hope AoC and WAR are both the best games to come out in '08. Competition is a good thing.

Originally posted by sullivanj69

 

Originally posted by Tambourine

You do realize they're playing premade characters, right? Of course there will be a pour display of character individuality/customization. And personally I think the gameplay looks splendid for a beta, stop setting your standards so high. WAR is not shooting for extreme innovation, they're shooting for a FUN RvR-based game.

Fun, fun, fun, fun, FUN! And so far feedback on the FUN factor, has been pretty much all positive.

 

What some people refer to as "fun" is actually "easymode" and not "fun" at all.  You get loot in pvp but not from the player?  Sounds pretty carebear to me.

....If by "carebear" you mean "not retarded" then sure. You get useful loot for your own character, you don't get elf armour for your Orc. It would make no sense, and be lame. Not to mention that they want people to not fear death in the game, so people dive into it and have fun. You will already be fighting at your best  because you need to win for your realm.

You don't really get "easymode" in a good PvP game.

Originally posted by Rainyday

 

Originally posted by whitedelight

Originally posted by mistermental

 

Originally posted by huxflux2004

No wonder why the award went to AoC. Hell, WAR wasnt even nominated for Best Online Game.

 

They didnt show anything interesting. I guess they are far off from launching the game and a second delay is very possible. Conan looks so much more polished and playable, yet they pushed it back for 6 months. The fact is that if a developer cant show something really spectacular and interactive in a show, where everything is carefully planned and controlled, then there are serious problems behind. Where is PvP, where is Sieging, where is the in-game showing of the new races and classes? meh, the guys with the white sunglasses have to stop the crap and start working.

 

 

They unveiled the Elves at Leipzig. If you've followed the game at all you know that that generally means proper in-game footage follows next month in the newsletter etc. Not to mention they did show some in-game footage of two of the elven classes. The in-game playing of elves will come in a month or so.

 

Also, they work on things one pairing at a time, so they are only working on the elves now. They have pretty much completed Orcs and Chaos.

 

We also see PvP all the time, ALL the time for WAR. It's hard to avoid videos of PvP.

 

And I don't think Conan looks much more polished at all. More polished than the elven areas yes, more polished than the Dwarf/Greenskin areas? Not really.

 

And need to work?  WAR has managed in two and a bit years what Conan has just about managed in 5. Yeah, "work harder Mythic"

 

 

WAR looks great if you ask me. I am somebody who wil openly admit I will subscribe to AoC when it launches but as impressive as things have been with WAR I will likely give it a shot and maybe play both. Each game has something cool to offer and each attracts me in a different way. I want both games to succeed so that mmorpg genre as a whole can take a nice step forward and spark some ideas for future developement teams. Here is to both doing well. * Raises a glass * 

I think it is definately fair that AoC won,  it  showed how some of the features they claimed to have would work ingame, it was a small letdown they used NPCs but hey, they have LOTS of time to work with so you cant be too critical. but to compare the quality of AoC to WAR based on this award would be rather foolish i think , WAR  has been steadily releasing new information so they didnt have as big of a 'bang' in store for Leipzig. also cheers to whitedelight for not showing so much bias as very few other members of that guild

 

You are spot on when it comes to the information. While everyone who follows WAR understands and know when most information will be released and to the point they can predict what will be released on the next batch, it has been the opposite for AoC. While we understand we will continue to get updates every friday, we have no clue on what they will be about and half of the time it is something that is not that important, like our Spider update for instance. This makes me believe that what you say is true. Age of Conan's information was being held back so that it could be released in mass specifically for this event. And, if this is true, it definitely helped out in winning those awards.