I'm too lazy to read the review but the 6/10 sounds about right. I would give 7/10 for pve and 5/10 for pvp.

Originally posted by lugal

Funcom has to my knowledge, never claimed to be making a WoW killer. AoC was never going to compete with WoW. 2 different type of games. Also, the fact they never expected the 700k subs they had is proof of that. So, stop trying to spread that BS your spewing.

What about the comment that AoC would be Steak and Wine compared to wows gruel or whatever?

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Actually, if you'd bothered to take a look at the actual reviews themselves, you'd have noticed that we are now using a new format for our reviews, which is resulting in different scores.

Also, as I've said over and over again, it's important to look at the body of the review and not just the score. Reviews are more about what is said than the actual score.

Also, how is this not objective? Please point out to me the bias that you see there, and our lack of objectivity.

I remember many a post stating that you guys didn't use the normal 1-10 ratio when rating a game. I was unaware that had changed.

The objectiveness of this review went out the door when your reviewer admitted to having a bias against funcom. Not to mention decided it's fine to place a label on this player base. He also decided the game is no better than the worst of the worst out there. If that's his opinion fine, if he did it simply because he holds a grudge, that's a different story entirely.

As I said in another post, a reviewer should approach a game from a neutral point of view. 

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Malickie I enjoy your posts and find you to be objective

However Im confused ,you posted numerous times on the review of AOC that you never read the review after you saw the word "Neandethral " ..so how do you know the review isn't accurate ?

It is consistent to the state of AOC ....it actually talks about some good features in AOC .As I mentioned the only thing I would change about the review is AOC is a 5/10 ....not a 6/10

To all the people saying " the review is unacceptable "....my advice is "get over it ...reviews are subjective and most people here agree with it " ..sometimes reality hurts :)

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 Double Post :)

I was a fanboy until level 65 or so. Now at 70 I don't play anymore. There's nothing to look forward to....raiding? Well gear doesn't really matter in this game so why raid? Also since gear doesn't matter, there no loot to go after, nothing to achieve in PVE.

Also quests get tough and harder to find after 65. No one is around looking for group....probably because group xp sucks and again, there's not much in the way of loot to look forward to.

I just rolled a new char on tyranny like everyone else. That's my last kick at the can before cancelling.

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Malickie I enjoy your posts and find you to be objective

However Im confused ,you posted numerous times on the review of AOC that you never read the review after you saw the word "Neandethral " ..so how do you know the review isn't accurate ?

It is consistent to the state of AOC ....it actually talks about some good features in AOC .As I mentioned the only thing I would change about the review is AOC is a 5/10 ....not a 6/10

To all the people saying " the review is unacceptable "....my advice is "get over it ...reviews are subjective and most people here agree with it " ..sometimes reality hurts :)

I'm basing that on the reviewers own admission when replying about his review. He said himself he was harsh on them because of the launch of the game, IMO that's not an objective stance to take when reviewing a game (months later). His score on a 1-10 ratio is fine, I've never said otherwise, it's his comments and attitude I have a problem with (Neanderthal).

The second issue I have taken up with this review is the fact that at launch they gave it a decent score, now they lower it (after improvements have been made) that makes no sense to me.Where did the good score come from, considering they had such a horrible launch?

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Malickie I enjoy your posts and find you to be objective

However Im confused ,you posted numerous times on the review of AOC that you never read the review after you saw the word "Neandethral " ..so how do you know the review isn't accurate ?

It is consistent to the state of AOC ....it actually talks about some good features in AOC .As I mentioned the only thing I would change about the review is AOC is a 5/10 ....not a 6/10

To all the people saying " the review is unacceptable "....my advice is "get over it ...reviews are subjective and most people here agree with it " ..sometimes reality hurts :)

I'm basing that on the reviewers own admission when replying about his review. He said himself he was harsh on them because of the launch of the game, IMO that's not an objective stance to take when reviewing a game (months later). His score on a 1-10 ratio is fine, I've never said otherwise, it's his comments and attitude I have a problem with (Neanderthal).

The second issue I have taken up with this review is the fact that at launch they gave it a decent score, now they lower it (after improvements have been made) that makes no sense to me.Where did the good score come from, considering they had such a horrible launch?

 

But the high score initially was a common trend for many websites that reviewed the game .We all fell for it.The first 20 levels were polished and worth a high score....the glaring problems were after that .MMORPG released an initial review which didn't identify the issues that most realized later on.This new review reflects the reality more accurately to many  people who have played AOC.I appreciate that
 

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

Originally posted by Malickie

After reviewing the review section here, I'm actually amused by this. So according to MMORPG.com matrix online is a better game than AOC as is every Asian grinder out there and NGE SWG lmao, it's actually third from the worst only beaten by Scions of fate and dark and light, hows that for objective journalism! rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Malickie I enjoy your posts and find you to be objective

However Im confused ,you posted numerous times on the review of AOC that you never read the review after you saw the word "Neandethral " ..so how do you know the review isn't accurate ?

It is consistent to the state of AOC ....it actually talks about some good features in AOC .As I mentioned the only thing I would change about the review is AOC is a 5/10 ....not a 6/10

To all the people saying " the review is unacceptable "....my advice is "get over it ...reviews are subjective and most people here agree with it " ..sometimes reality hurts :)

I'm basing that on the reviewers own admission when replying about his review. He said himself he was harsh on them because of the launch of the game, IMO that's not an objective stance to take when reviewing a game (months later). His score on a 1-10 ratio is fine, I've never said otherwise, it's his comments and attitude I have a problem with (Neanderthal).

The second issue I have taken up with this review is the fact that at launch they gave it a decent score, now they lower it (after improvements have been made) that makes no sense to me.Where did the good score come from, considering they had such a horrible launch?

 

But the high score initially was a common trend for many websites that reviewed the game .We all fell for it.The first 20 levels were polished and worth a high score....the glaring problems were after that .MMORPG released an initial review which didn't identify the issues that most realized later on.This new review reflects the reality more accurately to many  people who have played AOC.I appreciate that
 

This is true, I wouldn't argue otherwise. It's just weird they didn't experience the issues everyone else was in the beginning. I think the problem is the same one that FC caused by having forum users become moderators, mmorpg has forum users doing reviews now. I'm not saying the guy doesn't deserve the position, I just think he's new to what a reviewers job entails. The objectivity involved in writing a review was obviously missing, as was professionalism. Even stradden admitted he would have used different words had he wrote it.

Let's look at it this way, had FC called those who quit a bunch of neanderthals, what would the reaction have been like?

I'd just like to know at what timeframe this review took place.  He complained about a few items that have been fixed for over a month. 

Originally posted by Umbral

 

Well I already said it in another post, but I will say it again...

Age of Conan has issues and still need at least one year/maybe an expansion to be great, it has good art, unique combat, a great lore, fantastic music, great graphics, but it need more balance, more content/zones, depth, fixes and polish.

But as someone said :  "This review is just the reflection of the state of the AoC-forums on this website. It's a coward article hiding behind the community."

The review is offensive, it lacks information and a subjective sense of judgment .

It is a personal and emotive review, not a profissional and informative review, the player base has the right to feel offended.

The lack of respect (for the player base) and perception ( about the "few emotes") showed this is not a serious review.

The funny thing is, now even the official content of MMORPG.COM matches the majority of parcial, offensive and misinformed posts of MMORPG.COM forums.

 

...
 

Just face it, the game sucks and it got the review it deserved. Its luckey to even get a rating of 6...

Originally posted by DthRevan

Originally posted by Umbral

 

Well I already said it in another post, but I will say it again...

Age of Conan has issues and still need at least one year/maybe an expansion to be great, it has good art, unique combat, a great lore, fantastic music, great graphics, but it need more balance, more content/zones, depth, fixes and polish.

But as someone said :  "This review is just the reflection of the state of the AoC-forums on this website. It's a coward article hiding behind the community."

The review is offensive, it lacks information and a subjective sense of judgment .

It is a personal and emotive review, not a profissional and informative review, the player base has the right to feel offended.

The lack of respect (for the player base) and perception ( about the "few emotes") showed this is not a serious review.

The funny thing is, now even the official content of MMORPG.COM matches the majority of parcial, offensive and misinformed posts of MMORPG.COM forums.

 

...
 

 

Just face it, the game sucks and it got the review it deserved. Its luckey to even get a rating of 6...

Did I said anything about the rating?

Personally I dont care about the rating, a lot of ingame issues were disapointed for me, read my post again.

But offenses and misinformation are totally unacceptable in a profissional review.

If the reviewer cant hold himself and has to be agressive and offensive, please, aim for the producers and not consumers, every MMO has nice/polite peole and offensive people, the reviewer just showed he is at the same level of the agressive people he found ingame (and the offensive people that usually post in these forums)... this could be just a server/occasion.

The reviewer is not in the position of lable an entire comunity, it is just bad for MMORPG as a serious site.

The information about the emotes is just wrong, is not a matter of opinion.

...

Tbh i'm glad i'm not a reviewer (based on previous 1st hand exp. in the game I probably would have given it a 2 or 3), I started playing the game on release and loved the graphics and the demands the game placed on my computer as well as the new technology used (such as dx10) ... however after subing for several months, raising a assassin to lvl 80, a demo to lvl 78 and a guardian to lvl 36 and realising all the floors as I went along, below I have listed some of the major issues I can still remember (not to mention more quest bugs than any game I have ever played before)

• End of game raids were so badly planned they could be glitched with a minimum amount of people and farmed over and over again. (meaning larger guilds were completing content quicker than expected, farming complete sets - at one stage the guild I was in was the largest on the server and alought I never glitched killed were very aware that many did). I only ever received 1 piece of my set even though I attended 95% of all guild raids (but would rather earn items than cheat for them).
• No person that glitched that I knew glitched was ever banned, (we use to joke in guild that this was because the company could not afford to lose more players).
• Dx 10 i believe only started in game (i stopped playing when war was released even though i had a week or so sub remaining). - at times i was tempted to return my game due to it not being as described on the box.
• Crafting was the biggest joke as gemcutting was one of the only useful professions until all the gem nerfing that was suppose to be happening. (though if the company had properly thought out the process of the average mmo'er they would have realised that people will always go for the "pure" killer or "highest damage" they can deal build (especially when this means you can effectively 1 combo kill an opponent).
• Items promised on the companies website such as "power points" which would be available end of July never happened (and if you asked a gm about this they would deny all knowledge of it).

Now I play War, and am enjoying the game (even though there are several bugs I have come across), the game seems to be about 400% more polished than what AoC was at the end of my time there, I will keep subing to War until im bored with it.

For those aoc fans that want to remain in aoc I wish you every luck, but from my own previous experience the company never seemed to listen to it's own players, and with what I went through the first time I will never be going back (my time there felt very much like being a pay to play beta tester).

Originally posted by arimer

I'd just like to know at what timeframe this review took place.  He complained about a few items that have been fixed for over a month. 

A better question would be when was the last time the reviewer played. Doesn't seem it was post 2.0.. In his cons he listed no reward for PVP.

Oh well maybe we'll see another review in 6 months.

In light of recently discoveries about Neanderthals I think the article is insulting to that now sadly extinct species of intelligent artistic and well adapted humanoid.  If they had become the dominant strain of humanoid then the planet would probably be somewhat cleaner and biodiversity much higher.

Some of the Kiddies in AOC were proper wa*kers and are only worthy of the term typical immature humans.  Sadly I dont think the 18 rating did much to stop the kids getting in.  A PVP server should not be treated like a game of HL2 Deathmatch.

Personally I give AOC  a reasonable 7.5 / 10 on the PVE servers and 4 / 10 on PVP 

Originally posted by chriswsm

In light of recently discoveries about Neanderthals I think the article is insulting to that now sadly extinct species of intelligent artistic and well adapted humanoid.  If they had become the dominant strain of humanoid then the planet would probably be somewhat cleaner and biodiversity much higher.

Some of the Kiddies in AOC were proper wa*kers and are only worthy of the term typical immature humans.  Sadly I dont think the 18 rating did much to stop the kids getting in.  A PVP server should not be treated like a game of HL2 Deathmatch.

 

Personally I give AOC  a reasonable 7.5 / 10 on the PVE servers and 4 / 10 on PVP 

 

The problem is this is true for any game, not just PVP games mind you. There's always some leet speaking nut job to deal with in any online gaming experience.

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by arimer

I'd just like to know at what timeframe this review took place.  He complained about a few items that have been fixed for over a month. 

A better question would be when was the last time the reviewer played. Doesn't seem it was post 2.0.. In his cons he listed no reward for PVP.

Oh well maybe we'll see another review in 6 months.

OMG you are right. I did not notice that first. It's 6 weeks since patch 2.0 came out, and here you sit end of October making up a review out of thin air based. MMORPG are you FaCking insane you can't do that!!!

MMORPG and poor Stradden this just have to be so embarrasing.

The first 20 or so levels were pretty fun despite some of the obvious glitches.

But then it started getting real weak real fast. No pvp ruleset not enough quests, ect ect....

One thing that bothers me is when a game company tries to do the same patch for PVE and PVP servers. It never comes out right.  To do it right..you need to have 1 patch for the PVE servers, and a different patch for the PVP servers.  Without this your gonna piss off one side or the other , and in this case both.

Originally posted by Umbral

 

Well I already said it in another post, but I will say it again...

Age of Conan has issues and still need at least one year/maybe an expansion to be great, it has good art, unique combat, a great lore, fantastic music, great graphics, but it need more balance, more content/zones, depth, fixes and polish.

But as someone said :  "This review is just the reflection of the state of the AoC-forums on this website. It's a coward article hiding behind the community."

The review is offensive, it lacks information and a subjective sense of judgment .

It is a personal and emotive review, not a profissional and informative review, the player base has the right to feel offended.

The lack of respect (for the player base) and perception ( about the "few emotes") showed this is not a serious review.

The funny thing is, now even the official content of MMORPG.COM matches the majority of parcial, offensive and misinformed posts of MMORPG.COM forums.

 

...
 

great post.  I also lashed out at some blatant lies or plain incorrect comments.  I know a lot of players say that there is no end content but I also saw guild members level to 80 in 1 week then moan about nothing to do.  I have been playing since launch and still enjoy it because I take my time.  I have 5 characters and the highest being level 71.  Mini games give some alternative gameplay and with the next large patch they are addressing crafting and adding faction armour.  Plus a new PvP element which allows players to be become outcasts and live outside cities and use the black market only.  All going in the right direction and there are more zones being built.

Am I saying AoC is amazing and just the best thing going? No. I am saying the game has a huge amount of gameplay for solo or group combat and the day I finish I will look back and have a lot of great memories and wont forget some of the best scenes I have seen in any MMO and the music also stands out above and beyond anything I have heard.

For me the game is around 7.5.  Solid with tons of content but has huge potential if handled right.

Originally posted by BearShammy

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by arimer

I'd just like to know at what timeframe this review took place.  He complained about a few items that have been fixed for over a month. 

A better question would be when was the last time the reviewer played. Doesn't seem it was post 2.0.. In his cons he listed no reward for PVP.

Oh well maybe we'll see another review in 6 months.

 

OMG you are right. I did not notice that first. It's 6 weeks since patch 2.0 came out, and here you sit end of October making up a review out of thin air based. MMORPG are you FaCking insane you can't do that!!!

MMORPG and poor Stradden this just have to be so embarrasing.

Next time they should tell the truth and give this game its true score  NEGATIVE 2/10 ! IMHO

you guys are missing the point...keep the 6.0 score who cares.

what we are saying is the reviewer is reviewing the "OLD" state of the game and not the current.

i have huge doubts he hasnt played AoC in months

Sounds like a lot of folks here feel they are much better qualified to review games and run / edit / manage a gamer's forum than the members and staff of MMORPG.com.

Purchasing a domain name and bandwidth for such endeavors are reasonably cheap these days, I suggest you seriously consider taking up the task of setting up your own sites and doing it better than they have here.

Unless your only true talents are b!tch spamming about minutiae....

Originally posted by Unfinished

Sounds like a lot of folks here feel they are much better qualified to review games and run / edit / manage a gamer's forum than the members and staff of MMORPG.com.

Purchasing a domain name and bandwidth for such endeavors are reasonably cheap these days, I suggest you seriously consider taking up the task of setting up your own sites and doing it better than they have here.

Unless your only true talents are b!tch spamming about minutiae....

That is a great word, yet we so rarely find a good reason to use it! TOUCHE' Sir!

AOC is way better then a 6 !

The guy that made this review has to have some problems.

First there are stuff that are wrong in that review, i am taking this review as a joke, hopefully they will make a new fair review, very soon.

Anyway new patch 3.0 is coming tomorrow !

( OP i too have a lvl80 on soulstorm, but some time ago i made a alt on Fury and i am having alot of fun there, Fury is a much better server with alot of players ! my advice to you make a alt on Fury or Wildsoul )

I have to agree with the comments about the first twenty levels.

Despite the odd bug Tortage was the best 20 levels of any game I have played and including beta I have completed Tortage a total of 12 times and loved it every time. 

Best char for Tortage IMO  is the HOX     Make them BURN

If they opened it up to a 1 week free trial I might go back and do it again a couple of times.