Originally posted by DrowNoble

Won't respond to everything but I will comment that swimming up a river is not a collision issue. 

Below is Wikipedia's definition for you:

In physical simulations, video games and computational geometry, collision detection involves algorithms for checking for collision, i.e. intersection, of two given solids. Simulating what happens once a collision is detected is sometimes referred to as "collision response", for which see physics engine and ragdoll physics. Collision detection algorithms are a basic component of 3D video games. Without them, characters could go through walls and other obstacles.

Now warping through a tree, walking across apparent flat terrain and gettiing stuck, those are examples of collision issues.  Swimming up a river is not, as it could possibly be done by someone in real life.  Salmon do it all the time when they go to spawn.

In your desperate attempt to be right (was this really worth necroing the thread?) you failed to realize your quote reinforces this as a collision issue.  We're not talking about swimming up river, we're talking about swimming up waterfalls.  There is a big difference.

You know how you're able to move up a slanted hill in a 3d game?  Collision is allowing for that.  Waterfalls and even rivers are no different.

Btw I really wish you would address the other points as you seemed to have missed the boat completely on what we were discussing(half of a fix rather than the whole).

Originally posted by markyturnip

Lets assume that all the bugs and so forth are just unfortunate side-effects of trying to make an advanced game. Missing content they wanted but simply ran out of time.

Even if true, Funcom made some very curious decisions IMO.

a) boast mounted combat as a feature of the game, but effectively deny it to anyone for months. (without a war mount, advanced riding etc - which are out of reach of 99% of players - its totally useless. no-one would ever engage in mounted combat and hope to win) They even removed instant dismount for players.

b) create no world pvp objectives beyond sieges, which are inaccessible to most anyway. Knowing how important world pvp would be, they went ahead and implemented absolutely no objectives to fight for in any zone. nothing at all for the vast mass of players who are there a large degree to enjoy world pvp.

c) One shot pvp. Stacking gems, which were factored into combo multipliers. Can it be possible no-one considered the impact of this? That it would lead to age of one-shots? Anyone could have worked that out in a moment. So the only other explanation is that they wanted to institute one-shot pvp. That seems a very curious design decision for an MMO.

d) mini games with no story, no connection to the game world. Why make mini games that many people cant even find on their ui. With no sense of any location of reason to exist? With no NPC pointing them to you, to save something or other? with no reward. weird.

e) Almost no mature content. A massive draw to AoC, in reality there is next to no mature content at all. Why boast it and not put it in? I have not ravished anyone, or been ravished by anyone, since I began. Afraid of censure? You must be nuts - the GTA series is one of the most popular video game franchises in history.

f) Complete lack of meaningful communication with players. How can any MMO - essentially a service industry - in this day and age expect to get by without any communication? It's mind-boggling. Add to this the continued lies. Why lie? You think people will believe the evidence of their own eyes?

These and other decision really make me scratch my head in confusion.

Other than your point in (f), and (e) to a lesser extent, the rest was explained by you:  "Missing content they wanted but simply ran out of time."

The communication thing is the biggest shock to me too.  There is a lot of evidence that they are just continuing their communication practices from AO and didn't learn anything from it.

Originally posted by talismen351

Originally posted by Nadril

I'm wondering what the OP's point was?

 

Prolly that we are all spoiled little WoW generation kids...=P

36 years old here btw.

Or that we're all old jaded gamers :)

28
 

I hate Funcom and feel that AoC is lacking in depth.

Man they really burned us didn't they?  I was discussing this with friends the other day; anything Funcom says comes out as spin.  They managed to squander any trust they had launching the game as they did. 

Hopefully they can prove us wrong and are truly sincere with this.

Originally posted by Drakkhen

Ahahaha

that made me laugh so hard I spit beer all over the monitor.

You owe me a new monitor btw.

I'm serious :)

http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=154357

http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=151576

This is a good thing.  What someone said above about the core system needing to be fixed first is absolutely right though.  The game's core mechanics should not have been released in the state that they are in.

I want to see this game improve, and this is definitely a step in the right direction.  Now Funcom just has to follow through (I won't hold my breath, admittedly).

I don't know if anyone has noticed but the new guy helping Famine is going into the class forums and compiling all the known issues and having a good discussion with the players on what they would like see changed/balanced in their class.

Yeah this should have been happening in beta and I'm not cutting them any slack by any means but it does show they are actually making an effort.  Something I hadn't seen since launch in this area of the game.  Jayde was doing a terrible job in my opinion.

Too little too late?  I hope not.

Edit: examples:

http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=154357

http://forums.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=151576

If I had to guess I don't think we'll see one until the PvP update rolls in. 

Hyping.  They spent too much time and money hyping the game.  There is a subtle difference.  Advertising is promoting something that is in your game and working.  Hyping is twisting the facts so you can make as much money as possible without any moral or ethical qualms.

Originally posted by Jasz

I'm not an AoC fanboy and I understand why a lot of people feel like they have been ripped off by Funcom. I also do believe that AoC is probably doomed to fail.

I still like the game though. The PVP is fun in groups and it is getting better. Funcom has came up with a way to discourage ganking that I believe will work.

Those of us who have played a lot of games on launch know that endgame content will come. Until then join me on a pvp server and have some fun.

When there is a bunch of room for improvement, the improvements made are more noticeable. (ie:Vangaurd)

Give it a chance. Its not as bad as you might think and I believe it will get better.

More power to ya!  I think the game is complete crap and the company behind it is a sham but there's enough there to play with if you're willing to put up with its faults.  Hell, I played Ryzom for a year and was a staunch supporter for that game even though the development company had no money to fix anything and there was barely anything to do.  I kept playing because the world was interesting and my guild was a bunch of great people.  AoC can have the same appeal.

Mark Jacob's explanation is straight up and a breath of fresh air.  This is exactly what we wanted from Funcom all along.  An indication that they are aware of our discontent and an explanation for it.  Mythic provided exactly that.

I wasn't sure about trying Warhammer but now I'm even more convinced.  That's a good company and I will gladly support them with my money.

Meh I'm not surprised, mediocre games are easily forgetable.  Their claim to hype fame was the "1 MILLION DOLLAR PVP CONTEST" that was spammed all over the net last year.

The million dollars ended up being prizes, with the most expensive thing being some laptop though.

Originally posted by Imjin

I did infact read your thread, and the reason I locked it was as I stated. The purpose of the thread was good, but the outspoken community in that thread was debating wether or not to pay for "a beta state game". Basicly debating wether or not the community should still stay subscribed. I hope you understand me when I say that I have to close those kinds of threads. ? If FunCom would allow those kind of debates, it would be like saying "Yes, we are infact in beta, and you are paying for a unfinished product". Which is not the case. I really dont wish to insult you, or any other parts of the community by locking the thread. I am locking it because the threads cause more harm then good. And because this thread is questioning moderation publically instead of PMing it to me directly. I am now closing it, any responses could be sent to me in a PM, and I will read and respond to it when I come home tomorow.

__________________ Sekhmet - Age of Conan Forum Moderator. My interest is the well being of the Age of Conan Community Always read over the Social Guidelines before posting on the forums.

 

 

I had along comment but I delted it. This speaks for itself

Hah I guess his though process stopped short of "If it's not the case why are people debating it?"  Everyone at Funcom must be delusional, blind, and deaf.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/54034

I think the folks at Funcom should take a close look at what overhype and a shoddy programmed product will net you.

It didn't help that the Fury developers didn't acknowledge the faults in their game, even to the end. 

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Forsure, I was browsing some Fan websites such as IGN and the story was on the front page, the chart I also just sourced out from a blog which is not to friendly to the game if people read. As FC haven't put out any numbers, A month old chart was the best I could find from someone I though collated the numbers in an ok fashion. Whether the news was  1 month old or not, i thought it was relevant and had not been posted here, considering all the "sub" posts, I simply thought would make good for friendly chat on the topic.

I did state that the chart from from one month ago, I also thought the Fury message was recent and it wasn't - sorry about that. However, I still feel its a good topic for discussion - I also didn't set put with anything misleading being the intention - I even posted that chart from someone who has anything but nice smelling roses for FC to balance any "PR Spin" comments out.

I posted stuff like this over the last couple of years, if I missed some news first time I would still post it if I thought relevant, in this case as we can see many people are interested.

I am big enough to put my hand up and say I didn't fully look at the date of the Fury server picture, but then again it more directly ties in with the chart and makes correlation more interesting, dont you think? I also didn't come out praising and foaming out the mouth - just asked some questions wondering what you guys though in the original post.

Bull.  So add an edit: to your original post and make it clear. 

This is more than not checking the date. You're spreading mis-information:

"The server reached its max yesterday, and is increasing next week. The poll was done a month ago yes, but was only one I could recently find. Was looking for how popular Fury Server was in the past for comparison.

The server full notice just went up."

When you register your CC you'll see a "next billing date" which will be after your 30 days free.  You can cancel before the 30 day trial to not get billed the next month.

Unfortunately as some have said the billing system has a tendency of billing you after you cancel.  It happened to my wife.  I suggest you delete your cc info when you cancel.

Originally posted by Chill_Factor

Originally posted by ethion

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by Die_Scream

Originally posted by TheSheikh

What do I think?

I think that was more than a month ago.

 

Wow, good point.

"The polling was done between July the 1st and July the 3rd, 2008"

I'd be interested in seeing current numbers.

 

The server reached its max yesterday, and is increasing next week. The poll was done a month ago yes, but was only one I could recently find. Was looking for how popular Fury Server was in the past for comparison.

The server full notice just went up.

 

hmm that screen shot you posted from the ign forums is not from yesterday but from 6/30....  Look at the date on that message thread? vnboards.ign.com/age_of_conan_general_board/b22995/107797667/p1/

And even the comment is exactly the same. Proof here that an AoC correspondent is indeed not telling the truth.

Hah!  I didn't notice the date or comment.  Crazy.  Does that mean Pasanda, a staff member for Age of Conan on IGN is Avery?  Maybe I took my tin foil hat off way too soon.

Originally posted by FC-Famine

I think we are seeing that with our current moderation policies and of course our guidelines we have followed before the launch of the Age of Conan forums. I think it's perfectly normal myself to have those concerns and it should be up to the community team as a whole to address those concerns to better fit it to the community.

You should be a politician.  This was an answer without answers.

Originally posted by Malickiebloo

Originally posted by talismen351

The rest of the graph...32254 grand total ppl in Europe playing at primetime...guessing that Americas would be close to that number as well....far cry from the 700k number we keep hearing about eh?

That 700k was around launch , by now it's probably in between 150k-350k active subs .Which is still in terms of MMO retention, considered a success . As long as they hold between 150k-200k they will be fine , And AOC will keep putting along.

As for the topic in hand , SWG was never considered a huge success ,Considering it had a huge I.P. backing it up .You can kinda say the same for AOC , and LOTOR . They both have a core group of fans to pool from , yet seem to not only fail at capturing them , But they also fail at garnering many from the overall pool of MMO enthusiats.SWG had servers with large populations , even with a believed to be failed product(Their own words).I'm sure LOTOR does as well , It's nothing out of the ordinary.

I'm in agreement with the 150-200k number.  I do however believe a lot of people who are paying the monthly fee simply aren't playing the game.  I know guilds of 60+ people just waiting to see what the PvP update will bring but are playing other games in the meantime.

Admin, you're awesome and this site is awesome.  I've been glad to be a part of it the last 3 years (though I didn't post much).  I've never felt censored here and I'm happy about the job you guys are doing.  I've always checked the forums for an MMO here before I even try it.

The guys at Funcom have got major balls to come in here and try and pull the PR spin on us.  As long as we counter their spin with facts about the failings of the game we can make sure that anyone who is interested in the game gets the balanced truth.

Despte my vitriol I want the game to get better, that's all I'm hoping for.