Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Its just the way i see it in that it is a contractual service, you buy the service and bundled with that is 30 days free, as the contract is on a monthy basis.

If I sign someone up for Cable TV they pay that base line price and then on top of that they get free extra's for a month. Same thing in my eyes.

Sorry see it differently Malthros. Your not paying for that sub for the first month therefore I class it as a free month. The cost outlay is the client / box etc.

If that was true, there would be other ways of setting up accounts.  That you want to just go and nod 'ok' to really terrible marketing language is your call, however those first 30 days are not free in any way, shape, or form.  They are a part of the purchase, and written that way to give you a warm feeling, which you seem to have.

It's still market-speak.  The 30 days are in no way tied to the client, it's tied to the account key, which has 30 days by default in the coding itself.  To get an account key without 30 days, you'd have to create a different kind (trial, or whatever).

edit:  And saying that's how you see it is not the same as stating it as if it's a fact, because it's not.

What I have always found the most fascinating about Funcom and AoC is how in the heck they managed to get the Hyborian IP in the first place and how they managed to get funding and then MORE funding to work on it.

Anarchy Online was a total fail cascade of epic proportions; yeah it staggers on to this day, but only because the people at FunCom were incredibly stubborn, not because it was ever good or a "success" in any meaningful sense.

The load of utter BS that the sales, pr and investment people at FC must have been able to sling in order to get AoC off and running must have been collossal, rivalling the greatest scams of history. How/why anyone with even a room-temperature IQ would partner with, do business with or invest in FC is just astounding.

AoC's launch being similar in nearly every way to AO was no suprise (and why myself and many many others stayed far away from it)...I'm still sickened that the Hyborian world wasn't given to a more capable dev team.

Originally posted by Malthros

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Its just the way i see it in that it is a contractual service, you buy the service and bundled with that is 30 days free, as the contract is on a monthy basis.

If I sign someone up for Cable TV they pay that base line price and then on top of that they get free extra's for a month. Same thing in my eyes.

Sorry see it differently Malthros. Your not paying for that sub for the first month therefore I class it as a free month. The cost outlay is the client / box etc.

 

If that was true, there would be other ways of setting up accounts.  That you want to just go and nod 'ok' to really terrible marketing language is your call, however those first 30 days are not free in any way, shape, or form.  They are a part of the purchase, and written that way to give you a warm feeling, which you seem to have.

It's still market-speak.  The 30 days are in no way tied to the client, it's tied to the account key, which has 30 days by default in the coding itself.  To get an account key without 30 days, you'd have to create a different kind (trial, or whatever).

 

edit:  And saying that's how you see it is not the same as stating it as if it's a fact, because it's not.

It is the way I see it, like an opinion. Of course marketing comes into it, but it is sold just like most other services and especially the same set up in this genre. It is sold with the 30 days inclusive of the purchase price as a "bonus".

When you buy a car and they give you petrol card worth $100 still the same - it is an incentive to get you to buy the game.

When you get internet and you get the modem for free it is the same as part of that offer.

Difference is I don't feel ripped off either way it can be looked at, as I would get it anyway even if I knew nothing about the game. Same with many impulse mmorpg buys.

Originally posted by ericbelser  

What I have always found the most fascinating about Funcom and AoC is how in the heck they managed to get the Hyborian IP in the first place and how they managed to get funding and then MORE funding to work on it.

Some good reading...

Funcom on wiki

AO is not their only product.

Indeed they had a dismal launch with AO, but, it was then turned around (by Craig Morrison, the same man now on AoC), and was turned into a critics success.

Next the Longest Journey titles all critical successes as well as good sellers.

A multitude of backers entered the fray, along with a strong market presence (at the time) and funding from the country itself...all lend to a reputable company that was a supposed good pick for AoC.

Yes, they proved they cannot launch an MMO, but in long term operations, this company has a more reputable stand as a company that can "fix" an MMO.

Thats is why I am watching them and seeing how AoC performs long term.

Cheers

Sorry, I still don't buy it. Questionable success on one or two titles in another platform/format is hardly a big selling point. Describing AO as a "critics success" is totally meaningless, after their dismal launch they were left with what 10k diehard subscribers who stuck with them through everything and anything; that's hardly market success, regardless of how rabidly they post to defend it. That they kept the game open is a testament to their determination, but they never "grew" their player base until they threw in the free side.

Either way, I'm sure their investors are thrilled now...heh (If you don't know why, try doing some searches on their stock price and activity levels, lol. They've nosedived to less than 1/10th of their nominal value pre-AoC launch...just wish I'd had the money free to short it beforehand) Either way, suckers and their money....

I just wish Hyboria had been acquired by a better company, because now it is dead dead dead...Funcom will spend the next decade slowly making a playable game out it instead of letting it die and someone else taking a better shot at it.

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

I don't want to make excuses for bad typos, but had a bit of a rough morning finding out the wife has a tumor on her pituitary gland so I tried to type as fast as I had to go earlier.

I am not angry at all, infact I have been happy enough to pay for a service I think was worth it from the start in a polar switch from your angry mindset.

I don't have to claim anything, I can log in and see "Packed Servers" on 3 of the NA ones I have characters on. It is as simple as that. I completely disagree with your "info" here as I highly doubt you have logged in since the merges and seen for yourself.

I have the capacity to respect and appreciate your viewpoint based on your experiences. I can understand that from your persepective that going back a couple of times and not being impressed is something that happens to people. I keep reading the opposite 90% > your experiences, which makes me think that maybe the game wasn't for you from the start.

You can't re-write history, but people do have the capacity to forgive in the hope things are better and also not forgot the past. FC has done a decent job in many people's re-evaluation, of course there are the minor few (imo) that still are not pleased which is a shame.

It is not about defense it is about moving past this, if you want to be grumpy and cling on to it and not move on then thats your situation and there is nothing wrong with that.

Even the guy who registered the failcom website came back and is happy.

sorry to hear about the tumor, i hope its nothing and she gets well soon.

on topic, i wonder how funcom's subs would have been if they were honest with their game from start. They could have made an open beta, they could have said "we've printed dx 10 enhanced but its not there yet and sadly we cant give an eta." they could have started smaller probably that way but the sour taste we have now wouldnt have existed i guess. 800k boxes sold vs honest business. 

sad thing is the game is good (some one called it turd, dont know if it was in this topic, tribalwars timed attacks left me sleep deprived; if this game is turd, i dont know with what we've been playing all those years), if they had left it alone, the game would have sold itself just by word of mouth. shame on you funcom. the ppl who also bought AO, shame on you.

There is no use putting forward any arguments in this discussion. It just feeds the fanbois.

Bottom line, just look at the subscription numbers. End of story.

The truth hurts sometimes, I know from experience. 

Originally posted by openedge1

Indeed they had a dismal launch with AO, but, it was then turned around (by Craig Morrison, the same man now on AoC), and was turned into a critics success.

"Morrison swooped in and saved the day!" thing has become some what of an urban legend, and it gettin severely blown out of proportion..

He had was the "Famine" of the AO boards for a few years before he got hired on as the Head Dev, he didn't actually helm the game very long at all, 18 month - 2 years at the most, it had been running for 4-5 years already and had 3 expansions

I'll give credit where it's due, he listened to the community, he made  game changes that the players had been asking for since launch. He turned around a lot of the hard feelings many had about how FC treated it's customers. but thats about the bulk of it.

People make it sound like he came into a failing game with a magical defibrillator and brought it back from the brink of death. Sorry nothing remotely that heroic happened, I bet 95% of the folks here never even heard of Anarchy Online prior to the AoC dev announcements, or Morrison before Godager left the company. The reason being, neither were on many gamer's radar till now, a backwater dev house and a lucky fan who got to run a game he loved.

Try and keep the messianic legend of Craig Morrison savior of all things MMO a little more grounded in reality. He's just a nice guy working for a sh!tty company.

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

 

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

I think they more or less have scraped the idea of drunken brawling, while on paper it did sound loads of fun, I guess making it happen in reality is a whole different story. A bit sad really as I did look forward to it.

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

 

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

 

I think they more or less have scraped the idea of drunken brawling, while on paper it did sound loads of fun, I guess making it happen in reality is a whole different story. A bit sad really as I did look forward to it.

Do we even have to mention mounted combat? and i mean one that actualy works

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

 

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

 

I think they more or less have scraped the idea of drunken brawling, while on paper it did sound loads of fun, I guess making it happen in reality is a whole different story. A bit sad really as I did look forward to it.

Do we even have to mention mounted combat? and i mean one that actualy works

Mounted combat exists, problem is as you mentioned it doesn't really works very well. The coders and market department are 2 totally different things, the boxes was printed probably months before release. Hence some of the things they needed to scrap still was mentioned on the box, and you don't want to reprint boxes just weeks before a launch. Market departments task is to make sure the product reaches the masses, and they often promise more they they can deliver and then tell the coders they will have to get it to work. :P

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

 

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

 

I think they more or less have scraped the idea of drunken brawling, while on paper it did sound loads of fun, I guess making it happen in reality is a whole different story. A bit sad really as I did look forward to it.

Do we even have to mention mounted combat? and i mean one that actualy works

 

Mounted combat exists, problem is as you mentioned it doesn't really works very well. The coders and market department are 2 totally different things, the boxes was printed probably months before release. Hence some of the things they needed to scrap still was mentioned on the box, and you don't want to reprint boxes just weeks before a launch. Market departments task is to make sure the product reaches the masses, and they often promise more they they can deliver and then tell the coders they will have to get it to work. :P

 

Sorry they aren't really 2 different things, they are one company. They were launching rubbish and they knew it, imagine what the launch would've been like if they hadn't pulled that 'miracle patch'  out of their ass 1 week before launch. they knew the it wasn't even close to being a viable game on launch day, they saw those big pre-order sales and wanted them in their bank before customer got wise.

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Souldrainer

Don't worry though. By mid-2010, the game will have the features they advertised on the box at launch, provided it still exists.

 

Next month if all goes well with testing. February 2008.

 

I did not see drunken brawling in the patch notes for the next patch.

 

I think they more or less have scraped the idea of drunken brawling, while on paper it did sound loads of fun, I guess making it happen in reality is a whole different story. A bit sad really as I did look forward to it.

Do we even have to mention mounted combat? and i mean one that actualy works

 

Mounted combat exists, problem is as you mentioned it doesn't really works very well. The coders and market department are 2 totally different things, the boxes was printed probably months before release. Hence some of the things they needed to scrap still was mentioned on the box, and you don't want to reprint boxes just weeks before a launch. Market departments task is to make sure the product reaches the masses, and they often promise more they they can deliver and then tell the coders they will have to get it to work. :P

 

 

Sorry they aren't really 2 different things, they are one company. They were launching rubbish and they knew it, imagine what the launch would've been like if they hadn't pulled that 'miracle patch'  out of their ass 1 week before launch. they knew the it wasn't even close to being a viable game on launch day, they saw those big pre-order sales and wanted them in their bank before customer got wise.

Same company yes, but still the developers and marketing department is different things. Marketing has one purpose, and that is to sell the product. If a developer says there is mounted combat, but it isn't optimal that can make the market guy say mounted combat is good. If they always said the truth that mounted combat exists but it does kind of suck and not really viable option to PvP people would loose interest. So they keep people's hopes up and hopes for developer to be able to sort it. It's a bad thing to do, but during the hype of AoC it seemed like Gaute and Erling while marketing the game only wanted to hype the game the most rather then stick to the truth. Gaute knew the exact state of the game, but still he compared it to a steak and a Mcdonalds burger. There is one group of people you cannot trust 100% and that is people working with selling a product, their job is simple, sell as much as possible.

No matter if it is the gaming industry or any other majority of the people actually selling a product will avoid telling the full truth, they might not lie, they just won't mention the bad stuff. You do have some that are totally opposite tho, and those I do prefer over the ones too focused on selling the product. There are just not that many around of them :P

There are 2 kinds of people:

1. People who have morals and principles and will never again give money to a company they feel has lied to them and 'stole' their money.

2. People who don't have morals or principles, don't give a shit about anything but their own short term satisfaction, and will bend over and take in whatever the devs give them.

If more people would belong to group 1, we as customers would get much better MMO's and less BS.

If Funcom survives from their initial failure, it will send a message to all the developers: Treat your customers like crap, lie to them, take their money and in the end you will be rewarded for that.

This is a scary world we are living in.

Sorry but when I read this I couldn't help but respond.  The only problem with that statement is varying degrees of skill.  You see, if you lie to people and steal their money with enough skill, they call you 'Mr President'.  If you lack skill you're Funcom.

If you look at old AoC videos you can see the people working on it saying something like "this will be cool, players will get this" and so on. Funcom did a big misstake by talking too much. The hype was big and then the game comes out with bugs, and more then half of the game empty. Everything was under construction.

They then do same misstake again! They remove all the "trolls" from the forum and keep saying "this will come soon. Post after post trying to make all the angry players happy.

When they try hide the misstakes, they build there own grave. 

Funcom/Failcom will now have problems with MMORPG for a long time.

Myself, I'm not going to buy games made by them for a very loooooong time.

 First of all i`m not into that who is menagers ,director etc. .....I`m more considered what would product that they got theyres respective names on it bring to me and AOC has dissapointed me very hard.Was reading few topics about how game is good optimised now and how people are all hapy and active nice comunity and on the other hand I thought are we talking about same game that needs a super computer and owr 30Gb of free space to be installed I didnt had anyproblems with it but I know pwople who bought new computers just to play the damn game .
I guess that i`m dissapointed in Aoc more because that game wrealy had potential but with lousy patching etc I didnt saw that game has mowed from point zero some 2 -3 months after release so i quited it guess they can rewrite history but dont wrealy care reputation is build with years and if they screw me with things like AOC I wrealy dont know why should I even bother now....

Originally posted by cpoustie

There are 2 kinds of people:

1. People who have morals and principles and will never again give money to a company they feel has lied to them and 'stole' their money.

2. People who don't have morals or principles, don't give a shit about anything but their own short term satisfaction, and will bend over and take in whatever the devs give them.

If more people would belong to group 1, we as customers would get much better MMO's and less BS.

If Funcom survives from their initial failure, it will send a message to all the developers: Treat your customers like crap, lie to them, take their money and in the end you will be rewarded for that.

This is a scary world we are living in.

 

Sorry but when I read this I couldn't help but respond.  The only problem with that statement is varying degrees of skill.  You see, if you lie to people and steal their money with enough skill, they call you 'Mr President'.  If you lack skill you're Funcom.

Oh, that is SOOooooo going in my sig.

Originally posted by Bafucin

If you look at old AoC videos you can see the people working on it saying something like "this will be cool, players will get this" and so on. Funcom did a big misstake by talking too much. The hype was big and then the game comes out with bugs, and more then half of the game empty. Everything was under construction.

Funcom/Failcom will now have problems with MMORPG for a long time.

Myself, I'm not going to buy games made by them for a very loooooong time.

What I (and others) found astounding is that this is EXACTLY what they did with Anarchy Online. The template was identical. The pre-launch hype and hysteria, right down to the rabid fanbois and the belief in the "magic patch" that was about to fix everything.

The lesson here is that when Funcom manages to latch onto the next IP, swindle the next batch of investors and churns out the next piece of garbage MMO in 6-10yrs = most people won't remember how bad it was or will forgive and forget...the cycle of hype and fanbois falling to bitter disappointment will repeat again.

Funcom is living proof that you don't need to *make* a good game so long as your sales, marketing and investment reps can *talk* a good game.  

Originally posted by ericbelser

Originally posted by Bafucin

If you look at old AoC videos you can see the people working on it saying something like "this will be cool, players will get this" and so on. Funcom did a big misstake by talking too much. The hype was big and then the game comes out with bugs, and more then half of the game empty. Everything was under construction.

Funcom/Failcom will now have problems with MMORPG for a long time.

Myself, I'm not going to buy games made by them for a very loooooong time.

 

What I (and others) found astounding is that this is EXACTLY what they did with Anarchy Online. The template was identical. The pre-launch hype and hysteria, right down to the rabid fanbois and the belief in the "magic patch" that was about to fix everything.

The lesson here is that when Funcom manages to latch onto the next IP, swindle the next batch of investors and churns out the next piece of garbage MMO in 6-10yrs = most people won't remember how bad it was or will forgive and forget...the cycle of hype and fanbois falling to bitter disappointment will repeat again.

Funcom is living proof that you don't need to *make* a good game so long as your sales, marketing and investment reps can *talk* a good game.  

The only difference is that the Game Director responsible for the 2  failed launches is no longer there and finally parted the company.

With Gaute G. gone I already have a lot more faith in Funcom getting this game around (wich already showed in the shocking quality improvement in patches since Craig took over) and that they actually will do better with The Secret World.

Gaute G. had probably great vision and great ideas, but he was just plain unfit for the job of Game Director. It clearly showed with Anarchy Online and it showed again with Age of Conan.

He had no sense of direction, no sense of priorities, no sense of planning and lacked any people skills.

4 VERY VERY important qualities you NEED to posess to be a succesful game director.

4 important qualities Craig M. clearly does have and it shows.

I won't resub just yet. I want to wait 1 - 2 more game updates. But I have regain faith that Funcom will be able to pull it off and turn this game around.