All Posts by Illyrian

 You and me both.

Originally posted by ProfRed

I wonder if even after official reports from mods and countless reports from testers that the CB version is more stable and updated, and even the PVP weekend client was a more current build, if Lobotomist feels a little stupid.  I guess based on his post history that's impossible.

Then again The Acolytes have to keep the dream alive at all costs, although that dream dropped from "revoultionary" to "could be worse".

Now, some already claim AoC endgame will be a variation on WoW endgame. I am curious to see how that plays out.

Originally posted by fantaros

 

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

Originally posted by SignusM

Open beta before the release IS the FINAL GAME. Accept it, its been that way for the past 6 some years, live with it. AoC will be buggy and laggy on release.

People need to accept the Closed Beta runs alot better and that the OB plays out completly different for the most part. Sure there are bugs, but nothing like some of major ones in OB.

 

Why?

Because it buys Funcom time and hopefully after you bought the game it keeps you paying even if the product is semi finished. Yadaa - yadda, the last step in the chain of brushing aside complaints is "no MMO's is ever finished, what did you expect?"

And this is just a tip of the iceberg - linear gameplay and raid or die endgame is bound to turn some people off. With current performance issues one has to wonder how endgame raids, sieges etc will function if they function at all.

Originally posted by Cabe2323

Originally posted by boomerangx

those folks claiming this game looks like eq2 or whatever ...LOL

 

1 word = UPGRADE

I am running an AMD 64 X2 4200+ 8800GTS (g92) 512MB Card and 4 gigs of PC6400 Ram all on Vista 64-bit Home Premium.  I am well beyond the specs for the game and should be able to run it just fine.  I can run LOTRO at Ultra High with DX10 and I get around 50-70 FPS. 

 

 

I made a new character again last night to try out a new guy and see if the changes they have made helped my performance.  It is running better but I can't help but feel boxed in. 

My favorite MMO of all time is Asheron's Call which was completely wide open.  If you saw a mountain and you wanted to climb it you could go and try.  Even games like Dark Age of Camelot, EQ2, and LOTRO have artificial walls but Age of Conan really feels more like Guild Wars then them.  (Remember we can only talk about 1-13)

Erm, the game is zoned and linear without free roaming world and that much has been made clear. Closer to GW zones as opposed to EQ II zones, not much exploration if any.

Originally posted by Death1942

Originally posted by Auzy

...Meh what MMO doesnt have bugs when its first out?

the MMO that these people expect to come out.  its a magical MMO that gets developed for 2 years and rushed to release when the hype builds up.  it has no bugs, lag and everyone is equal.  its a perfect world and everyone will love it

Yes, and that is why we get half baked WoW clones that are released unfinished.

Types like you will pay for it so there really is no need to push for quality or service.

Any new shiny will do if it is hyped up enough.

Originally posted by turnipz

Read reviews first once its released, dont give them the benefit of the doubt; teach these devs that only once a finished product as been made will they get our money.

 

No I am not a Warhammer fanboy, I just am getting sick of games being released half finished.  Give it a week and see what you hear.

Try before you buy.

It is amazing  you actually need to argue in favour of this idea.

Then again that is why standard MMO these days gets to the shelf in beta stage.

It will get better, cannot judge game before the launch, give it three more months, MMO is never finished... Yadda - yadda - yadda, I won't to try it before I buy it becasue I might not like it even if it is a finished product. I certainlly will not pay for the game's development.

Originally posted by DeadJester

I agree I dont understand the thinking here. but  there would still be all the haters no matter what build was offered. and yes the closed beta is alot and I mean  alot better.

Well, let us see. Majority dislikes open beta due to techincal issues, and that is not counting gameplay concepts. Those that claim to be in closed beta seem to be split on the issue, some claiming it is completely different while others claiming it is exactly the same.

I give more credit to the naysayers as they are stronger in numbers and their reports match.

And that is not to mention the fact that AoC is a horribly linear, zoned game aimed at ushering people endgame in big guilds for both PvE and PvP.

I am suprised this thread still didn't erupt into the flame war.

To simply answer OP's question - LOTRO is polished and working - AoC has issues on technical and gameplay level.

I would go with the working one, you can always swich later and you got nothing to lose from trying LOTRO's free trial.

Originally posted by Dracus

Early afternoon to early evening shows, 3 Moderates, and 8 Nones (the rest Lights).

Well, there is some increase from 1 Moderate to 3 Moderates, but there is one more None.

 

So anyone want to make some bets of seeing those Red Heavies to show up after the merge?

Any takers?

Basically the "none" servers are those people are transfering from and thus influx the "light" servers that becaem "medium". Simple reshuffling of the player base as all but 4 servers are closed at the end of the month.

That is the growth explanation.

Red heavies - only if they drop to one server and even then it is iffy. They already tweaked the threshold a few times so medium is now anything about a hundredish players.

As for AoC recoil helping this game, it might to some very limited degree although the disgruntled suporters are more likely to try a safe and polished product for the time being. My beleif is that majority of PvP community will fled AoC (which is actually designed as PvE game first) for WAR buti n the meantime will chose a placeholder game - I would bet on titles like WoW, EQ2, GW, LOTRO.

Still, there is a slight chance of POTBS getting new blood if their devs pull their act together. That is however unlikely having in mind their previous record.

Originally posted by afoaa

He he Moon in your last points you showed what your agenda really was with your attacks on AoC.

You want people to come play the game YOU like and hope by downtalking AoC and adding a little peptalk about Vanguard that might happen.

Its easy to attack AoC right now. Funcom has been really either unlucky or stupid with the OB and that give people with a different agenda free oportunity to try and promote their agenda.

That was not my impression as I felt that Moon's post was mentioning AoC's issues and pointing out that if you are ready to work with them you might as well play VG.

Anyways, it is easy to attack AoC because it is overhyped and does not deliver on multiple levels.

In my opinion OP listed good points, thank you.

The game, as is, has at least two layers of issues.

Layer one are technical issues and bugs, something FunCom is known for, and those issues are unlikely to be resolved by the launch. There is also possiblity they will nto be resolved to a satisfying degree in a near future.

Second layer is simple gameplay, or to be more precise that lack of substance to justify the whole "second comming" hype. Except the combat system, that is less then ti was advertised and might appeal to some, there is really nothing new in AoC - 80 levels to grind, funneling towards endgame PvP and PvE raids, simplistic crafting. The game has no free roaming, is heavily instanced and lacks small groups / solo content by design.

To top it off AoC has rather high hardware demands and only few months ago the game was supposed to be Vista only.

I would prefer a decent to mediocre but polished game to a great game full of bugs.

Matter of utility all around.

As things are going now AoC is certainly isn't polished and its quality is at best debatable.

WAR will more likely have better polish and thus less bugs due to longer development period. Not to mention the hardware demands are much lower, only few motnhs back AoC was supposed to be Vista only.

I signed this thread but it got burried somwhere among the posts.

Oriignally I intended on playing AoC and not touching WAR, one game as I have limited time.

Let us jsut say that after gathering more data on both options I am retracting my statement and if time permits I will try WAR.

Flopping might be a bit too strongly worded.

That being said they are not doing well and instead of great first impression AoC is failling back onto the old excuses - wait a (or 3, 6, 9, 269) month(s) for the game to get better, no MMO is ever finished, all the negative comments are made by haters / idiots / people that lack taste etc.

All in all if it was a race with two horses I would bet my money on WAR. If for no other reason then for the extra polish time.

Eh, in my opinion OP has a good point.

However being labeled as a hater is really, really easy. All you need to do is point out a flaw and shortcomming and you are a hater. On the opposite side of the spectrum a rabid fan is supported by game's propaganda machine and is allowed to blaze out the most outlandish praises.

Fanboi vs Troll is not an even match as the former usually has the extra leverage of game's advertisement:)

Originally posted by Realm-Reaper

It's only $49.99 usd...WTF people!

Some of you are debating this thing as if were your childs education. Get over it people! It's 50 bucks and a monthly sub of 14.99....That's a tank of gasoline, not a morgage payment. I spend $60 on lunch every day. Live a little and I doubt you will burn through your life savings

If you spend $60 on lunch every day I would say you probably need to lose weight or cut down on caviar.

I know this might come as a shock but it is about principle, little subscriptions for garbage product adds up. They encourage next product to be the exact same crap because the first one made $$$. The only way a customer can show its position is by NOT shelling money in advance. Alterantivelly if product is not satisfactory the only option is to stop paying.

In short, if I shell out $60 to ever Tom, Dick and Harry who has an overhyped product I will be left with no money at all, even if I have millions.

Yes, I might (and that is a big might after VG, TR, POTBS etc.) give money in advance if the product looks promising - Conan does not, from technical problems to gameplay.

All in all, wait and see before buying what is for now an overhyped and underperforming product.

Originally posted by miagisan

Originally posted by Illyrian

 

Originally posted by miagisan

ummm i have yet to see anything in the 1-13 level to tell me it ISNT instanced. The island itself is a single player instance, all the taverns/shops are instance. The nighttime is a single player instance, tortage itself is instanced when the load is high enough....so what's not instanced?

No, no, no, it is NOT instanced you damn hater. It is ZONED, there is a HUGE difference!

 

The difference is really lost to me as there is a loading screen for everything and at best it is the difference in size.

where did i post that i hated the game? other than technical bugs...i stated i liked aspects of it, but didnt like the gameplay so much. thats a hater? and your telling me the island itself, nighttime, and shops are not instanced...then buddy....you need to get a dictionary and look it up The sheer fact it is a single player night time, with a single player island instance, and tortage thats dependant on load and loads a seperate instance for higher traffic is the very definition of instanced

That was my weak try at sarcasm actually :) I agree with you, you just reminded me of a discussion a few weeks ago where anyone who dared say the world is instanced was sniped at. The proper term was zoned or somethign along those lines.

AoC has no free roaming world by design and is heavily instanced.

Hey, after all, it is intended for the console and the game design shows it.

Originally posted by miagisan

ummm i have yet to see anything in the 1-13 level to tell me it ISNT instanced. The island itself is a single player instance, all the taverns/shops are instance. The nighttime is a single player instance, tortage itself is instanced when the load is high enough....so what's not instanced?

The difference is really lost to me as there is a loading screen for everything and at best it is the difference in size.

 Overal the impressions can be labeled as mixed blessing, a fair cry from AoC being the second comming of MMO's.

Funny thing is that somebody mentioned  how AoC was first and foremost designed as PvE game. Good luck Funcom, there is a lot of competition in that department although I suspect 80 levels to grind and a dozen 24 men instances will keep some WoW hamsters happy. That is those hamsters that feel like starting from zero and whos computers can handle the AoC software mammoth.

PvP wise, well, there is a PvP title comming later this year and methinks it has better chances then AoC in PvP department.

We will see how this pans out, it can still prove to be a decent game (at least for some) but the second comming of MMO's has been debunked.

Originally posted by Bountytaker

 

Originally posted by 77gms

This in no way addresses the ganking of low level players just trying to do quests. This is damage control pure and simple. They know they have a reputation as being a ganker's paradise and they know they have lost subscriptions because of it.

 

This little statement changes nothing.

 

And is about three months too late.

 

Funny enough..I found as much, if not more, wording in that document was directed towards gold farmers/sellers as griefers/gankers.

 

They still can't let go of that one, eh.

Pretty much, it should have been there at the launch and it is a no brainer.

The introduced policy really is nothing but the lip serivice to the issue. Not to mention that the group responsibility really doesn't sit too well with me in any surroundings.

Societies will be punished as a whole for the acts of its individual members?

It is vague and probably uninforcable, but it is now officially posted so POTBS has griefing policy. It is a dead letter but it is here.