Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Soupgoblin

Instead of attempting to school people on how to read (which they seem to be doing well enough) maybe you should stop acting like the review was a personal affront to you, who do not even play AoC.
 

The review was spot on about the community, this is proven by the reactions of every player posting in this thread, the accusations, the anger, the attempts to discredit jedijef by undermining his professionalism and his integrity.

But please, continue ranting and raving about how your feelings are hurt by a review of a game you don't play.

 This guy is speaking officially for this website, people who play AOC visit this website, it's very likely they are going to have some issue with being criticized by industry professionals.

This is basically the equivalent of the xbox mag, saying only yard apes play on xbox live. That may be funny for those who play playstation. However, those who play xbox are going to think twice before reading and trusting what that magazine has to say before spending their money on games it recommends. It could cause some to quit reading/posting here all together, which hurts no one but mmorpg.com.

This has nothing to do with how the game was scored, it has everything to do with the way you show respect to those who are visting your site.

As I said in my first post in this thread, I don't disagree with the game getting a 6-7( I'd go with a 7 personally, judged by the standards present in official reviews here), I take offence to being called a neanderthal however.

Take the forum war b.s. somewhere else, I'm sick and tired of arguing over ad hominem rehetoric.

 

 

Your major mistake was to expect any sort of professionalism from MMORPG.com.

Originally posted by Obee

Originally posted by Malickie

 This guy is speaking officially for this website, people who play AOC visit this website, it's very likely they are going to have some issue with being criticized by industry professionals.

This is basically the equivalent of the xbox mag, saying only yard apes play on xbox live. That may be funny for those who play playstation. However, those who play xbox are going to think twice before reading and trusting what that magazine has to say before spending their money on games it recommends. It could cause some to quit reading/posting here all together, which hurts no one but mmorpg.com.

This has nothing to do with how the game was scored, it has everything to do with the way you show respect to those who are visting your site.

As I said in my first post in this thread, I don't disagree with the game getting a 6-7( I'd go with a 7 personally, judged by the standards present in official reviews here), I take offence to being called a neanderthal however.

Take the forum war b.s. somewhere else, I'm sick and tired of arguing over ad hominem rehetoric.

 

 

 

Your major mistake was to expect any sort of professionalism from MMORPG.com.

 

 

You're probably right.. I mean hey, nge's a better game than aoc ,right? rofl!

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Obee

Originally posted by Malickie

 This guy is speaking officially for this website, people who play AOC visit this website, it's very likely they are going to have some issue with being criticized by industry professionals.

This is basically the equivalent of the xbox mag, saying only yard apes play on xbox live. That may be funny for those who play playstation. However, those who play xbox are going to think twice before reading and trusting what that magazine has to say before spending their money on games it recommends. It could cause some to quit reading/posting here all together, which hurts no one but mmorpg.com.

This has nothing to do with how the game was scored, it has everything to do with the way you show respect to those who are visting your site.

As I said in my first post in this thread, I don't disagree with the game getting a 6-7( I'd go with a 7 personally, judged by the standards present in official reviews here), I take offence to being called a neanderthal however.

Take the forum war b.s. somewhere else, I'm sick and tired of arguing over ad hominem rehetoric.

 

 

 

Your major mistake was to expect any sort of professionalism from MMORPG.com.

 

 

You're probably right.. I mean hey, nge's a better game than aoc ,right? rofl!

To be fair, the reviewer is only a random fan who writes about SWG when advertising that game as a correspondent (that has been how the correspondent program has been described every time the posters here complain that the correspondent posts read like advertisements), but he is an official part of MMORPG.com when he writes a review.  MMORPG.com doesn't let useless things like ethics get in the way.

Originally posted by Obee

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Obee

Originally posted by Malickie

 This guy is speaking officially for this website, people who play AOC visit this website, it's very likely they are going to have some issue with being criticized by industry professionals.

This is basically the equivalent of the xbox mag, saying only yard apes play on xbox live. That may be funny for those who play playstation. However, those who play xbox are going to think twice before reading and trusting what that magazine has to say before spending their money on games it recommends. It could cause some to quit reading/posting here all together, which hurts no one but mmorpg.com.

This has nothing to do with how the game was scored, it has everything to do with the way you show respect to those who are visting your site.

As I said in my first post in this thread, I don't disagree with the game getting a 6-7( I'd go with a 7 personally, judged by the standards present in official reviews here), I take offence to being called a neanderthal however.

Take the forum war b.s. somewhere else, I'm sick and tired of arguing over ad hominem rehetoric.

 

 

 

Your major mistake was to expect any sort of professionalism from MMORPG.com.

 

 

You're probably right.. I mean hey, nge's a better game than aoc ,right? rofl!

 

To be fair, the reviewer is only a random fan who writes about SWG when advertising that game as a correspondent (that has been how the correspondent program has been described every time the posters here complain that the correspondent posts read like advertisements), but he is an official part of MMORPG.com when he writes a review.  MMORPG.com doesn't let useless things like ethics get in the way.

 

 

I didn't even realize it was the same person.

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

I think anyone who reads this (at least, i hope) would see that the review thinks anyone who players FPS games are some sort of mouth breathers (again, its on the internet), and decided to treat an entire player base with his own preconceived notions, and quite frankly dislike of that genre. I’m not even sure with this in mind that this person was even the right pick for the job, because he walked in with this notion before hand. This is where any comments about the community loose credibility. Like I said:
 

 

 

Ok, bloody well enough. Not just the poster quoted here (I'm not picking on you Bloodworth, no worries).  Nowhere in the article did he say that  "Everyone who plays Age of Conan is a neanderthal. he said that this was his overall impression of ther community at large. As I saw it, he was also pretty clear about the lkinds of behavior that he felt justified the remark. Please, just let it go.

Maybe he should not  have said Neanderthals.  More likely he should compared it to playing in a den of thugs, thieves and murderers who have next to no regard to anyone or anything beyond their own self centered enjoyment.  With no control over any griefing, AoC almost promotes this type of play.  Neanderthal no, juvenile most definitely.

At least he didn't mention the beginning month of racial epitaths which were so common in general chat.

 And he isn't alone in commenting about the community.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/138-Age-of-Conan

Originally posted by _Shadowmage

 

 

okay enough with the idiots thing - Steelrose made that up.

I didn't make anything up. I wrote there that I'm paraphrasing and changed the word neanderthals to idiots. Want to argue about who's more intelligent? Idiot is 0-25IQ and what do you think, how well would neanderthals score?

Anyone who has played on a PvP server will agree that the player base on these servers are Neanderthals...  There whole point of ganking is to grief players for no reason, for some reason they get a kick out of it, so I think the term "Neanderthal" definitely applies to them...

Now do all players on PvP servers gank?  Nope, but the majority do....  Thats why when developers try to put mechanics in place to help prevent ganking there is a huge out cry because gankers don't want to be punished for killing a person who is 60 levels below them....

God forbid if a new person tries to play on a pvp server 2 months after the game starts... They won't have a chance in hell of leveling..

Originally posted by monoth

Anyone who has played on a PvP server will agree that the player base on these servers are Neanderthals...  There whole point of ganking is to grief players for no reason, for some reason they get a kick out of it, so I think the term "Neanderthal" definitely applies to them...

Now do all players on PvP servers gank?  Nope, but the majority do....  Thats why when developers try to put mechanics in place to help prevent ganking there is a huge out cry because gankers don't want to be punished for killing a person who is 60 levels below them....

God forbid if a new person tries to play on a pvp server 2 months after the game starts... They won't have a chance in hell of leveling..

 

There's also people who play solely to take people like that out, that's my favorite thing to do on a pvp server. Soon we'll get rewarded for doing so.

I agree on the community comment but i don't believe it's entirely to be blamed on the "community". If you allow "human nature" and "anarchy" free reign in a game, this is what you will get. I have had 4 running subs of different MMOs in one month [WoW,AoC,WAR,CoX] , and must say everytime i logged into AoC it took me less than 20 minutes to feel utterly disgusted with the PvP antics of some of the players. And no, i do not believe it's anything to do with "not having a thick skin" or whatever, it is imho:

Funcom allowing

a] Smacktalk between opposing players [this alone breeds discontent and alot of "aggressive" chatter]

b] No rules, No factions , No objective, No sense to any PvP going on. [And no, Culture-PvP in it's current state is pathetically broken]

c] Too many abusive exploits [the way you can be spawn camped for one], which is not considered "abusive" or "griefing" at all by anyone playing the game it seems.

I can deal with a fair amount of PvP ganking and such, i can deal with people being competitive ,heck i can deal if some lvl 80 Ranger literally follows me around and kill me everytime i try to do a quest for no aparant reason once in a while..but if all of that happens -every- single time i log on, -everywhere- and -everyone- seemingly thinking it's how Free-for-all PvP must work, then i really start to wonder "is this really fun" ?

So when i decide "this is not fun" and every single AoC player telling me "go roll PvE noob" , guess what? I leave the entire game and go play Warhammer , which is also touted as a PvP centric game, but for some reason i never felt i'm on the receiving end of someone's inferiority syndrome...i wonder why? And no it's not the "community", it's all in the game design. In the end, who actually wins when half the playerbase feels similar and don't roll PvE but simple roll on another game where PvP works?

In fact, in WAR i literally die 7+ times every 15 minutes..alot of the time i die after i was outnumbered 3 to 1, or even 10 to 1. I die less than that in AoC! Yet i feel victimized in AoC and not in WAR , reason? In AoC 80% of my deaths are "had no fighting chance" + "no logical reason" .

I do not believe the WAR community is any different from the AOC community, i do however believe the game is configured to keep the community "in check" preventing this exact "slippery slope" from occuring.

It's even more amusing how Anarchy Online got LESS "anarchy" than Age of Conan. In fact, it's properly structured into 3 factions , all with nice checks and balances to keep things somewhat "humane". I actually loved the 3 faction system [vs. the 2 faction system in WAR/WOW], i'm just surprised AoC who obviously DO have 3 nations did not implement their own friggen faction system from AO....

Neanderthal playerbase sums it up nicely. Just read through this thread if you don't believe it.

Originally posted by bcrankshaw

A good review and accurate opinion for most of the AOC community

The only aspect of the  article I disagree with is the score ,I would give it 5/10

I couldn't agree more. I also agree with the person who posted about the middle of the road man, and sitting on the sidelines. I think there's just too many people who roam the AOC boards just looking for an argument. You can see it everyday. They will disagree with someone no matter who it is on a daily basis.

I also agree with the review, but I would do as bcrankshaw said and given it a 5.

Great review...

This review is flawed and just pure bad. As someone said this review is just a pore attemt to please the angry horde on MMORPG.com

Just an example on things that are wrong or twisted of the truth..

There is for instance voice overs after 20 that has been patched in game ..

The computer spec's mentioned for the game is simply exaggerated, I have never lagged in this game, not in the way that is mentioned in the review at least. You need a good computer, but not a monster computer, and that is if you care to play the game in it's highest modes.

The mages in the game has Spell Weaving in regards to the melee combat system wich is not mentioned. Instead the review sais mage classes are all the same as any other MMO, besides if you wan't a mage and still care to use the combat system try a Bear Shaman or a Herald Xlotli

/junker

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

Nice review, but what is with the constant jabs at the player base? I mean, no disrespect, but it could be you, not them, that’s the problem. I mean, shall we start including opinions on the player base of all games in official MMORPG.com Reviews? They would just about all read the same way. Do the writers here know about this thing called the internet? Its almost a pointless thing to include, as every single person will have a different experience. 9 times out of 10, most people that say "This community sucks", walked in and started pissing on the drapes.

As far as PvP consequences go, the system is on the test server. I understand you can’t review what you have not played on live. But it’s on the way, and I hope for all those that are not playing, you amend or re-review the game when it goes live.

Why didn't john do this review, seems every review on this site now is done by someone else, makes it hard to gauge anything in the articles. Review from internet user #36579241 is about as useful as an official review as the 5 threads in the games forums by the same title.

I agree with your point about the internet, but then again, the pvp rules were supposed to be in the game at release, not 6 months down the road, just like the directx 10 which isn't even on the test server yet,

The current pvp servers are notoriously known as huge gankfests, well I guess huge is not a good word to use any more, but still I agree the author should have pointed out the problems he sites with the playerbase lie with the pvp servers.

The basic fact is that Funcome knew the game was unfinished yet released it anyway, exactly like they did with AO.  When you reinforce a bad reputation with another fine example of it, you deserve every  bit of negative publicity that comes your way.

I really find it a shame, as I grew up reading the Conan books and so hoped they could provide us with a half decent game.  That may still come to pass, but the vast majority of us will never find out because we have just had enough from Funcom.

Originally posted by Aguitha
 

And you think that when they put that HUGE background AOC  wallpaper that they do it for free ?  I'm not saying they are paid to write review, but they are certainly paid by the game they are reviewing.  In my book you can't be credible if you get money from the same guy you review.

Ya know, I was trying to stay out of this thread. I really was, but this just takes the absolute cake and I just feel like I HAVE to comment on it.

We have LOTS of advertisers here at MMORPG.com. That's how we're actually able to offer you a service ironically so that you can come here and complain about it. These companie sbuy advertising space, not because they're buying positive press, but because we get a lot of daily hits from MMORPG players who might potentially see their ad and maybe check out their game. That's actually the principal of advertising.

Now, on to your accusation, or at least implication, that this particular review was bought...

Is that a joke? Seriously, I just need to knwo if you honestly think that a company would pay for a review score of 6.0. Even if we WERE the kind of site to offer our integrity for sale (which we are not), don't you think that someone paying for a review might want something a little bit better than a 6.0?

I am honestly tired of constantly hearing these kinds of accusations. MMORPG.com has always been a company that keeps advertisers and content separate but let me ask you this: If you go around throwing out these wild accusations, even when they're totally undeserved and in this case absolutely and totally ludacris, what motivation does a company have to actually continue to operate on the up and up?

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Fortunately, we here at MMORPG.com are gamers first and the idea of accepting money for a review is frankly repulsive.

STradden I'd like to ask at what point in time this review was written because a lot of your issues and things you said seem out of date or based upon word of mouth. 

Also, Do you actually spend any amount of time on these forums? The MMORPG.com forums are 10x worse than any game endorsed community I"ve seen (besides wow's)  It's full of angry, bitter people with nothing positive to say about anything.  The only feedback they can offer is "This game sucks because I said so"  or  "This game sucks because I played it 2 years ago and will go on the assumption that absoutely nothing has changed"

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Aguitha
 

And you think that when they put that HUGE background AOC  wallpaper that they do it for free ?  I'm not saying they are paid to write review, but they are certainly paid by the game they are reviewing.  In my book you can't be credible if you get money from the same guy you review.

Ya know, I was trying to stay out of this thread. I really was, but this just takes the absolute cake and I just feel like I HAVE to comment on it.

We have LOTS of advertisers here at MMORPG.com. That's how we're actually able to offer you a service ironically so that you can come here and complain about it. These companie sbuy advertising space, not because they're buying positive press, but because we get a lot of daily hits from MMORPG players who might potentially see their ad and maybe check out their game. That's actually the principal of advertising.

Now, on to your accusation, or at least implication, that this particular review was bought...

Is that a joke? Seriously, I just need to knwo if you honestly think that a company would pay for a review score of 6.0. Even if we WERE the kind of site to offer our integrity for sale (which we are not), don't you think that someone paying for a review might want something a little bit better than a 6.0?

I am honestly tired of constantly hearing these kinds of accusations. MMORPG.com has always been a company that keeps advertisers and content separate but let me ask you this: If you go around throwing out these wild accusations, even when they're totally undeserved and in this case absolutely and totally ludacris, what motivation does a company have to actually continue to operate on the up and up?

Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Fortunately, we here at MMORPG.com are gamers first and the idea of accepting money for a review is frankly repulsive.

 

 

Oh we support you Stradden. Nobody really thinks that MMORPG take money for reviews. BUT, you have to clean up this mess of an review though. Your reviewer seem to have had something equivalent to a late night out the day before making it. Patch 2.0 AoC could not have been researched very well, because Jef is very much wrong in many of his most important statements (I mentioned some before). Post launch word of mouth is simply not good enough for a review like this.

Originally posted by arimer

STradden I'd like to ask at what point in time this review was written because a lot of your issues and things you said seem out of date or based upon word of mouth. 

Also, Do you actually spend any amount of time on these forums? The MMORPG.com forums are 10x worse than any game endorsed community I"ve seen (besides wow's)  It's full of angry, bitter people with nothing positive to say about anything.  The only feedback they can offer is "This game sucks because I said so"  or  "This game sucks because I played it 2 years ago and will go on the assumption that absoutely nothing has changed"

First question: The review was writtenapproximatey two weeks ago and was based on current gameplay.

Actually, I do spend quite a bit of time on these forums, but this wasn't a review of the MMORPG.com forums. We're not going to hesitate to criticize any aspect of a game simply because something here at the site doesn't match up. That would be like not criticizing a game's graphics because the images here at the site don't match up. It's apples and oranges, friend and to be clear, I'm not sure he was talking about the forum community in his review, but rather the community in-game.

This was a review of Age of Conan and any MMO review that doesn't include something about the community is probably missing something. In this case, the reviewer had a difficult experience with the in-game community. Whatever the reason, that was his experience. While I personally may not have chosen the wording that Mr. Reahard did to make his point, this was how he chose to make his point and I, nor he, will make any apologies for that. My job as editor isn't to censor out aspects of a review that I think that our community won't like any more than it is my job to filter out things that the game companies won't like. This is how we remain objective.

I am truly sorry if your opinion differs from that expressed in the review. No one is saying that you have to fully or even partially agree with what was written in the review, but Jef was given this project with the understanding that he would give his opinions of his play experience. Despite what some people will tell you, that is what a review is. Reviews are opinion based. You, as the reader are free to agree or disagree with as much of what was said as you like. That's your perogative.

Originally posted by Stradden

First question: The review was writtenapproximatey two weeks ago and was based on current gameplay.

...

I am truly sorry if your opinion differs from that expressed in the review. No one is saying that you have to fully or even partially agree ...

Sorry Stradden, but I think this is not exacly a matter of just opinions.

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.

Are you OK with this kind of offensive and elitist posture around here?

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.

I dont care about the rating, I was disapointed with a lot of ingame issues, but there are a couple of serious issues in this review aswell.

...

Originally posted by thark

This review is flawed and just pure bad. As someone said this review is just a pore attemt to please the angry horde on MMORPG.com

Just an example on things that are wrong or twisted of the truth..

There is for instance voice overs after 20 that has been patched in game ..

The computer spec's mentioned for the game is simply exaggerated, I have never lagged in this game, not in the way that is mentioned in the review at least. You need a good computer, but not a monster computer, and that is if you care to play the game in it's highest modes.

The mages in the game has Spell Weaving in regards to the melee combat system wich is not mentioned. Instead the review sais mage classes are all the same as any other MMO, besides if you wan't a mage and still care to use the combat system try a Bear Shaman or a Herald Xlotli

/junker

 

I am totally agreed with you on this. This review is a discrace. This game blows lots of others mmo's right back to the scratch table. How the hell can AOC get a lower score than for an example Matrix Online ????? Come on, Who the hell bought this review ? After this, mmorpg.com have dropped  some stepes on my ladder. 

You can't just ignore the playerbase.

It doesn't matter if "not all of them are like that" because the majority of them are.  When you take a look at the community, you can't walk up to every person and say "Hello sir/madam, I'm working on a review for MMORPG.com about Age of Conan; I would like to talk to you for about 15 minutes to get to know you better;" it just doesn't happen.  When you judge a community, you have to look at it as a whole group: not by every single person that logs into the game.

Take RuneScape for example (best example there is, really): when you log on RS you will get blown away with the rediculous crap that floods the public chat. Now, not everyone in RS is immature and talks about the crazy relationships of eight year old dating over the interwebz; but that is the impression you get after playing awhile.  A large amount of how you base the community comes off what you hear in general chat and discussions that take place (as they very well should be), who you met while grouping, and the discussions that go on in the forums.  Vanguard is a good example of a helpful community: as mature discussions usually take place and people are very helpful; while RS is the perfect example of a bad.  You have to realize that the community is a big part of the game and has to be looked at in general: not by certain people that you meet.

Just because you're not a bad part of the community doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  The majority of the community is pretty bad (and that you cannot deny), and it should not be overlooked in a review.

'nuff said