Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

Buuuut, word of mouth is a powerful hell beast and in this case the Uninformed Fools are winning and probably ultimately will continue to win. Humans are a negative creature, they love being negative about things and in the circles of MMO nerds AoC is one of the prime targets of "Lets all be Negative about it!".

Unfortunately much of the negativity directed towards AoC is completely justified. I went back for the 14-day trial and didn't see much that would indicate the game has been revamped. The lesson that people should take from AoC (and WAR) is that no amount of pre-release hype will save your game if it's in bad shape at launch. AoC was a horrible game at launch and it's not a very good game now.

Originally posted by Thillian

This article tries to intentionally says some monstrous idiocy that NCSoft is behind the Funcom's 68% decline in revenues if we compare Q3 2009 and Q3 2008.

 

Holy crap, dude, did NCSoft knock up your little sister or something? The article says that the opening of two new games was a factor in the drop...not the sole reason.

Originally posted by Ibluerate

Originally posted by liberalguy

Originally posted by Ibluerate

I'm not sure who issues warning tickets, but every time I post something negative about this game, I get one.

So, is there a fanboi running that part?

It's very simple. This site is up and running thanks to advertising money it gets from mmorpg publishers and developers. Those companies don't like seeing their games talked about in a negative way so that's why you get a warning and your post gets deleted.

It's always the people paying the money that get to decide what gets posted.

 

Aion seems to be well protected then, but I don't think disliking a game is always trolling.

Well think about it for a minute...it actually costs mmorpg.com money to have you visit and post on the site but they make money from displaying ads from NCSoft and other game companies. Who do you think the forum moderators are going to side with?

Originally posted by Ibluerate

I'm not sure who issues warning tickets, but every time I post something negative about this game, I get one.

So, is there a fanboi running that part?

It's very simple. This site is up and running thanks to advertising money it gets from mmorpg publishers and developers. Those companies don't like seeing their games talked about in a negative way so that's why you get a warning and your post gets deleted.

It's always the people paying the money that get to decide what gets posted.

Originally posted by RendRegen

I mean the MMO community wants innovative and fun games, but at the same time we don't want to be ripped off by greedy companies.

Exactly. The only reason there is a "MMO" aspect to this game is to give Monte Cristo a reason to charge people money every month. There is no innovation here and the city builder genre as an MMO is a horrible idea. They are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and hoping nobody notices the unabashed greed.

Unfortunately the game is a huge mess. It shipped too early and Monte Cristo's greed is now getting in the way of the game being any fun at all.

My biggest problem is that the single-player game has been gutted to get people to pay the monthly fee for the Planet Offer online mode. Resource management in the single-player game is almost impossible once your city starts getting big. The tutorial even mentions that the single-player resource management is really expensive so you should sign up for Planet Offer and start trading with real people...

If you do fork over the monthly fee you don't really get anything beyond the single player game except for resource trading with other players and a chat box. There is no co-operative play, you can't watch or participate in another player's build process, connections to different cities don't really do anything so online play is pointless. Unfortunately Monte Cristo has stated that all future additions to the game (such as a mass transit system) will only be available for the online portion of the game so solo players who have no interest in onine gaming are screwed.

My other big beef is that Monte Cristo closed down their official forums at the end of the beta program when it became clear that the game was going to have a horrible launch. They are directing people to join the forums at simtropolis.com but the moderators and admins over there don't allow any negativity about the game to be posted and they are silencing and banning anybody who isn't a fanboy.

It's sad because the game engine is really nice. The structures look fantastic but there's just no real game there. After SimCity 4 no city builder should ever launch without things like region play, mass transit, budgeting tools, and a framework for community mods but Cities XL has none of these things. The fact that they have written off any players who paid for the game but don't want to pay a monthly fee is a huge reason to give this game a pass. Hopefully Monte Cristo comes to their senses and turns things around but I'm not holding my breath.

Originally posted by Silacoid

 The game is pretty great and it isn't impossible to sustain a city in Solo mode you just have to be smart about how you do it.  It is called strategy and having a brain.  The planet mode is a total waste of cash so just buy it for solo mode and enjoy

If you are playing in a region that doesn't give you all four resources it is impossible to go past a certain population level because you can't get enough of the missing resources by trading with Omnicorp.

Maybe you're playing one of the EZ-mode cities.

Originally posted by Wizardry

Originally posted by Aguitha

It's Simcity on steroid, why would i pay a monthly fee for a Simcity game ?

 

Does it have ongoing content,updates?That is the difference between a single player game and a MMO,that and the fact it needs servers to run,they are not free.

Sim City doesn't need those things because they provided an amazing core game and let the community make mods for the rest and EA didn't make us pay some BS monthly fee to provide the good core game in the first place.

Originally posted by Niblix

the Planet mode offers a lot of players what was missing in other games.

Can you expand on this a little? From what I've seen the only thing it offers is trading resources with other players (instead of having a system of region play like SC4 did). You can't cooperatively build a city with another player, you can't join cities together to form a nation. It seems like the PO is just a way for Monte Cristo to milk people for money every month by taking parts of the core game out of single player and moving them to planet play.

If I'm missing some amazing features in PO I'd love to know about it.

Originally posted by Aguitha

It's Simcity on steroid, why would i pay a monthly fee for a Simcity game ?

It's really not Sim City on steroids. Sim City 4 was a complete game when it was released and EA didn't expect people to cough up money every month for basic things like mass transit and region play. Cities XL is a massive step backward from SC4.

This game is bad it's laughable. First of all it's so intentionally gimped in single player that it's impossible to have a successful city with any kind of large population because of the resource system. In the single player game there is one option for getting resources: Omnicorp. It's the AI company the only way to buy resources that your city is lacking. The problem is that the exchange rate is ridiculous (like you have to give them 4 tokens to get 1 in return). The game's tutorial even makes a comment about how expensive it is so you better fork over money to Monte Cristo so you can trade with other people.

There is no mass transportation in the game. None. Nothing. If they do ever end up putting mass transit in the game it's only going to be available to the people who pay them every month so basically the only thing you get by paying a monthly fee is the ability to trade resources with other players (when the trading system even works) and you'll get access to buses and trains if MC ever gets around to putting them in the game.

It's seriously like Sim City: Societies and Hellgate: London got together and spawned a horribly disfigured hybrid baby that needs to be put out of its misery.

This game is Hellgate: London all over again. City building games are single-player games and they always have been. The appeal is to lock yourself in a room and tinker over your empire for months on end. Nobody who likes city builders has *ever* wanted a multiplayer aspect to the genre.

What MC has done, though, is sheer greed. For the moment there is no mass transit in the game...no buses, no rail, nothing but car traffic. There will be mass transit in the game but only for those people willing to pay monthly for the privilege. The whole idea is just insulting.

I just hope when the game tanks the guys at MC realize why it was a failure and don't blame it on piracy or some other crap.

Originally posted by Letsinod

Dunno...looks like a success to me if they got everyone moved and getting things in line.  Sounds like your a bitter old SWG vet who can't let go.

I'm not bitter at all. I just found it amusing that SOE is saying that having to close half the servers because of lack of population is a success.

So I just got an email from SOE:

---

Dear Star Wars Galaxies™ Account Holder,
Due to the overwhelming success of the recent Free Character Transfer Service, we want to inform you that on October 15, 2009, at 5:00 PM PDT, Sony Online Entertainment (SOE) will close the following 12 Star Wars Galaxies servers:
Corbantis
Europe-Infinity
Intrepid
Kauri
Kettemoor
Lowca
Naritus
Scylla
Tarquinas
Tempest
Valcyn
Wanderhome

---

Too bad about Intrepid, though, my home server will be no more.
 

Pre-CU SWG should have made the list somewhere but only if it was remade by somebody other than SOE.

Originally posted by Gutboy

Originally posted by Darth_Pete

So let me get this straight. SWG fanboy is saying that character movement in SWG is better than in some other game? Nice one!

 

Yep thats what I am saying, a game that came out in 2003 vs a brand new game and SWG movement is far superior. It will be interesting if TOR allows larger than 2 man groups as well.

You must be trolling if you think the Benny Hill amped up methed out movement in SWG is good in any way.

Originally posted by SkeeSkee

Originally posted by BadgerSmaker

SWG wont be shutting down, we're doing rather actually.

 

Link please.

Don't hold your breath waiting.

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Potbs failed because they diden't lissen enough in development and went about all the things involved the wrong way.

It could be the next eve But it will take a lot more work.

It's not that they didn't listen but rather they listened to the wrong people. The game was pretty good during the beta and "preboarding" but then FLS started listening to the griefers and gankers (remember "no crying in the red circle"?) and it all went downhill very quickly. By the time they realized their mistake it was too late and the servers were too empty.

Originally posted by Taram

Damn guys... bitter much?  It's seriously time to move on.  It's been over 4 years since the CU and almost 4 since the NGE

 

At this point if you're still subbed to Star Wars Galaxies updates and such you're just a troll who has no life.  Only reason I even saw this thread is it was listed as most recently active.  Frankly if you're still hating on this game 4 years later you seriously need something to do with your time. 

 

Don't get me wrong.  I hate the NGE too but it's old news.  Get over it already.

Why do you care?

Originally posted by ArcAngel3

Yeah, at this point it seems like a no-win situation for players and devs.  Both have inherited a post-apocalyptic virtual world.  It's hard to tell who is more bitter at this point. 

Wouldn't you be bitter if you had to work on the NGE all day long? At least when I get off work every day I can be proud of what I've accomplished but the SWG devs don't even have that...