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.

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....

Mr. Unfinished, take a step back and look what you are defending. Let me list a few things from the review that was just plain out wrong. These issues are not about opinion, they are just plaing out wrong. We can label them TRUE or FALSE in a quite matematical/logical way in fact.

1. Jef say there is no PVP reward system in AoC.   FALSE

PvP reward has been in AoC since patch 2.0 that came out 6 weeks ago!!

2. There are poor possibilities for RP in AoC, few emoticons. FALSE

There are more emoticons in AoC than any other game (Ctrl+Y) for emoticon UI. This hase been in place since launch.

3. Performance of AoC is low on a 3K $ Rig. FALSE

A 2 K $ Rig as of today runs AoC (high) with FPS 30 or higher in the most graphics intensive places in the game (Like the Villas). This change also came like 6 weeks back. it was a dramatic change from pre patch 2.0!!

There are other things as well, but I purposely leave them out so that you can look on something as apriori as MMORPGs FUps above. There is absolutely no way he could say what he said unless he has not played AoC in more than 6 weeks. My question is now, how can you defend something like this? This review is a joke. Do you really want to support BS like this in a Gamereviewing forum like MMORPG? I would think NO, so put down your AoC war hatchet for a while and let right be right. It is our job to tell MMORPG when they FCK it up. As a reviewer it is MMORPG's responsibility to have done the necessary research. Otherwise the whole review is just BS from beginning to end. Right now I don't even belive anybody backstabbed him. I just think he pulled a big steaming pile of DODO from his hiney so that he could fill 2 pages with text.

Originally posted by Transporter

1. Jef say there is no PVP reward system in AoC.   There are only the very basic PvP elements ( the XP & leveling mechanism wich was running in the open beta) "rewards" (armor sets) aren't live, as well as no consequence system at the time of the review.

2. There are poor possibilities for RP in AoC, few emoticons. Emoticons yes, enforced RP rules and a player base dedicated to RP, No

3. Performance of AoC is low on a 3K $ Rig. See the Official Tech Forums, the claims that all the performance isues are solved is a fallacy. Lag spkes are still a big problem sys reqs aside. and 30ish FPS with a high end rig is certainly nothing to brag about in a game engine.

 There is absolutely no way he could say what he said unless he has not played AoC for more than 6 weeks.

He certainly could say it and did, just like you and yours say 'Patch 2.0 fixed all the games issues, everybody can come back now'.

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by Transporter

1. Jef say there is no PVP reward system in AoC.   There are only the very basic PvP elements ( the XP & leveling mechanism wich was running in the open beta) "rewards" (armor sets) aren't live, as well as no consequence system at the time of the review.

2. There are poor possibilities for RP in AoC, few emoticons. Emoticons yes, enforced RP rules and a player base dedicated to RP, No

3. Performance of AoC is low on a 3K $ Rig. See the Official Tech Forums, the claims that all the performance isues are solved is a fallacy. Lag spkes are still a big problem sys reqs aside. and 30ish FPS with a high end rig is certainly nothing to brag about in a game engine.

 There is absolutely no way he could say what he said unless he has not played AoC for more than 6 weeks.

He certainly could say it and did, just like you and yours say 'Patch 2.0 fixed all the games issues, everybody can come back now'.

 

1.  PVP levels are rewards  Just because you choose to downplay the system that was put in doesnt make it any less of a reward.

2. Actually there are enforced RP rules.  Perhaps you should read the RP rules sticky on the forums.  Or check out the RP servers.

3. Lag spikes are an issue. But anyone who has a high end system getting 30 fps has other problems besides the game.  I run a midrange system right now and get around 80 FPS on high settings.

It reads like he said well time to review AoC.  Lets see what the people on our forums are saying.  Copy/Paste  well there I'm done.  Nobody will know the difference.  Oh and lets throw some insults in also.    And anyone from MMORPG calling any other community is bad is like Charles Manson calling someone crazy.

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.

Wrong.

"Compete with WoW" doesnt have to mean "getting 12 million subs". It can simply mean "the subscribers coming to AoC will be taken from WoW player base". 

Funcom stated that they were indeed going after Wow's subscribers. Thats why so many features are so strikingly similar in AoC compared to WoW. Funcoms idea with AoC was something like this:

"Lets make as many features in AoC similar to WoW as possible. With one exception - fighting. That way we will give all the WoW-refugees an easy transition over to AoC."

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alright, so AoC was kind of crappy in execution... but I don't know that it's THAT bad.  I mean... SWG is pretty lame... and I thought AoC was better than that.  I'm not saying it was great, but I think people allowed their discontent to what they wanted AoC to be, rather than what it was, get the better of their judgement.

This is why I think there should be more than one person reviewing a game.  It's like this, we all know not everyone is going to like a game.  If you don't like the game... then you don't like it - period.  That's a lot to wager on a review that could be the deciding factor as to whether a game succeeds or not.  Not to mention, sometimes you have to deal with obvious fanboi reviews - like every review for WoW that ever existed.  And this doesn't just happen in MMO's either.

If the game has Grand Theft Auto in the title - it won't reveive anything lower than an 8.5, and probably 9, whether the game deserves it.  If a game is made by Bethesda - they'll completely ignore any problem the game has, and tout it as the best game ever... even though it will have more bugs and lack of polish than your average game.  If the game is made by Ubisoft, they won't give it higher than a 8.5.  Why?  Because Ubisoft consistently releases good games that people enjoy, with some of the best IP's in the business... they don't need the extra press.

AoC was a major let down for sure, but it's not as bad as half of the games that beat it out.  Not by a long shot.

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....

I'll ask you the same question I asked before, had funcom called everyone who quit neanderthals, what would the reaction be like here?

It's not about his score, it's really not about when he played last. It's about comments like that. Neanderthal is a code word for what exactly? I'd read it as morons or idiots, I'm sure others have as well. You're surprised people have a problem with that?

You think that's just bitching over small nonsensical issues, I disagree. If expecting a reviewer to show some tact, when addressing people who may very well help pay the bills around here. Is out of bounds or off limits, what does that say about people still bitching about issues from months ago?

It's rather funny though, the same people who bitched about the game having to high a score, are bitching about those who think they scored it to low this time around. The same people who bitch daily about how funcom treats their players are bitching about people having issues with how MMORPG insulted players here, lets not forget this guy was speaking officially for this site.

Originally posted by Unfinished

Your point was made 3 threads ago, now you are just playing a broken record. Repeating something ad nauseam isn't going to magically make it the giant rallying issue you would hope it is.

 

I'm only defending my point, I really don't give a crap if you agree with it or not. Who is that keeps busting in calling people cry babies for daring to place a complaint? There would be no reason to repeat my point, if I didn't have to defend myself or explain my point to someone who didn't quite understand it, now would there?

Complaining about the discussion that took place as you are, is only adding to what your complaining about, it's really not rocket science, you want the conversation to end you stop bringing it UP.

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.

this is correct. funcom never expected to be top dog in subscriptions. they were quite comfortable with the niche they would appeal to. i think they unfortunately cut an even thinner slice of pie than they intended.

 Originally posted by ardohain

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.

 

this is correct. funcom never expected to be top dog in subscriptions. they were quite comfortable with the niche they would appeal to. i think they unfortunately cut an even thinner slice of pie than they intended.

For the last time. Everyone who followed the making of AoC should know that Funcom were after wow-subs. That is why they didnt make a true next gen game. Funcom chasing wow-subs does not mean that they tried to kill wow, they didnt have enough talent or money to try that...

 Right now I don't even belive anybody backstabbed him. I just think he pulled a big steaming pile of DODO from his hiney so that he could fill 2 pages with text.

I think these two sentences are much better than the whole two pages of what Jedi Jeff wrote.