| 83 posts found | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
given people seam to leaving age of conan in droves with only a minority staying on past thier first month and lots of criticsism that age of conan was released before it was ready ( although mmos are unfinnished by thier nature there is a point where they are of merchandisable quality) . people are now comparing it to vanguard . which game in your opinion had the most problematic release ?
|
|||
|
7/12/08 7:56:08 AM#2
Neither of these games holds a candle to the launch of dark and light lol so i vote neither because you didnt include dark and light which was so hyped up and such a letdow n for a lot of people as well i do think the company was stealing from people or something? add dark and light in yer poll dude. playing eq2 and two worlds |
|||
|
Ascension08
8.jpg) Novice Member
Joined: 3/12/08
"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver, but the White Border of Darkfall rules over all!" |
7/12/08 7:56:28 AM#3
I don't like AoC but I'll defend it here. AoC is very polished and fun for a while, namely about the first half of the game. The bugs are there but Funcom seems to be patching them rather quickly. Though Funcom management, in all areas, is a little lacking, the game itself had a pretty stable launch considering all the false hype. Vanguard...was worse. -------------------------------------- Order of the White Border. |
||
|
7/12/08 7:57:39 AM#4
Anyone who votes for AoC either didn't play Vanguard at launch, or is a current Vanguard player trying to rewrite history. |
|||
|
7/12/08 8:14:40 AM#5
VGs release was worse than AoCs. But the difference isnt sooo big. |
|||
|
Elsabolts
 Advanced Member
Joined: 10/03/06
Life Liberty and the Pursuit of those that would threaten It |
7/12/08 8:18:01 AM#6
I believe because of the Hype by Funcom they new there game was not gonna be what was promised and decided to take advantage of that. Because of this i believe they will pay a bigger price. |
||
|
7/12/08 8:18:12 AM#7
My worst release top 5 is: Shadowbane Anarchy online Asherons Call 2 Vanguard Starwars galaxies or World of Warcraft, can't decide.
Age of Conan is frankly miles ahead in terms of lacking content, game breaking bugs and general downtime. Not that Age of Conan is the perfect game, and I can definetly see how the relatively high system requirements, and how they ultimately put players on low end machines off the game, can be compared to vanguard. |
|||
|
7/12/08 8:22:01 AM#8
Originally posted by anduz
|
|||
|
Ghist
 Novice Member
Joined: 10/21/06
Paid MMORPG subscriptions are the ONLY valid rating meters because people have to pay to vote." |
7/12/08 9:20:05 AM#9
Vanguard had an open beta so people knew how buggy the game was going to be. AoC did a great job of stealthing it's crap so it got more people to sign up. Funcom has lied cheated and deceived its way to 700K in box sales. In actual playability both are equal. Waiting for the next thing |
||
|
7/12/08 9:23:42 AM#10
In vanguard, the crafting actually worked on release. And it was a much deeper crafting system In Vanguard, I didn't run out of quests after 10 days In vanguard, the stats on you armor actually worked.
|
|||
|
7/12/08 10:11:58 AM#11
Anyone who votes for vanguard either didn't play AOC at launch, or is a AOC player trying to rewrite history. |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:22:59 AM#12
Vanguard was in better shape content wise and with more features working than AoC, but AoC's launch was smoother over all. So because of that I give them a tie.  |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:25:02 AM#13
I rank them pretty much the same - both damn smooth launches compared to the majority. |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:29:18 AM#14
Wow, I can't believe how many people have forgotten how bad the vanguard release really was. Really it's sad. AOC was disappointing, but Vanguard was insulting. |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:34:54 AM#15
The worst release? Roma Victor Edit: |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:38:06 AM#16
i saw some people making some stupid points in the previous posts, so here it is
vanguard barely ran on a tiny percent of computers, and i dont mean in the world, i mean out of the ones that met the minimum reqs, only a tiny percent could play it without those noted cpu-related hardcore frameskips aoc was boring and felt empty, oh no lol war is apparently doing the same thing aoc did, so im guessing the trolls are having lots of fun finding new ways to defend their garbage since content just went out the window
vanguard is the worst, when war comes out i think it'll be aoc/war equally unfinished, but vanguard still sucked worse lol "Sometimes, things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. People are basically good. Honor, courage, virtue mean everything. Power and money, money and power mean nothing. Good always triumphs over evil. Love, True Love Never Dies." |
|||
|
7/12/08 10:43:44 AM#17
Originally posted by Vosen
Well yes. I ended up on a popular server in world of warcraft and aside from the 40 minute login queue it was a terrible lag and crash fest. And don't forget that it also took blizzard several months to implement their pvp system and how little endgame content WoW featured at release. Shit, WoW players are STILL waiting for siege weapons and player housing. |
|||
|
Cymdai
 Novice Member
Joined: 6/05/05
It''s my job to be objective, it''s my right to have an opinion. |
7/12/08 11:39:18 AM#18
Vanguard was the worst launch I have ever been a part of in all my years. While AoC is definitely starting to walk the same road as Vanguard with time, at launch, I just don't think there's any comparison. At least with AoC, the first 30 levels were nearly flawless, playable, and enjoyable. I could hardly even play Vanguard. |
||
|
7/12/08 11:40:44 AM#19
Originally posted by anduz
Well yes. I ended up on a popular server in world of warcraft and aside from the 40 minute login queue it was a terrible lag and crash fest. And don't forget that it also took blizzard several months to implement their pvp system and how little endgame content WoW featured at release. Shit, WoW players are STILL waiting for siege weapons and player housing.
Most of what you mention are not specifically "launch" issues. The login queue was bad but you have to admit that Blizzard did what they could to handle the amount of people wanting to play. Everyone knows and admits that WOW was immensely popular, moreso than Blizzard expected. Queues sucked and weren't fun but they did go away eventually on most servers. The worst thing by far was the loot bug and I hated it. It was, to me, almost a game breaker. I agree with Teala. My friends and I who have played AOC and Vanguard were having this talk last night. Vanguard's launch was horrible because of lag, performance and bugs. But the content was there as were the basic design systems. Age of Conan has problems with basic design philosophy with major systems broken. I think it will take Age of Conan longer to "right the ship". Vanguard, to me, was broken at launch. Age of Conan is incomplete. I think incomplete will be harder to address and fix than broken. Just my opinion. 2. Dark and Light (Anyone remember the issues with the Internet based launcher and the LACK of content?) You think Conan had no content - Horizons was beyond empty. But AO takes the cake. If you do not believe me, look at subscriber numbers and the severe dropoff they had in the first month. |
|||
|
7/12/08 11:59:55 AM#20
Originally posted by templarga If this excuses Blizzard from all the horrible connection problems, then doesn't it also excuse Funcom? Age of Conan did sell somewhere around double the expected amount after all. |
|||
