PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:$19.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
Desktop Client | System Req:
Anatomy of a Launch - Part Two
New MMORPG.com writer Mathew Reuther pens this look back at the Age of Conan launch from his perspective.
Early Bird Gets the Shaft
With the logistical delays a new problem has arisen. There is a substantial group of pre-order customers who have been involved in the Early Access program yet did not receive a retail key in a timely manner. This has culminated in the freezing of an untold number of accounts on the 27th. Despite red flags going up two days prior to the end of the Early Access period (when people knew their copies would not arrive in time) it took until after access was actually denied before a single word was heard from Funcom. By the time European Early Access customers received word that they would be given until the end of May to enter retail keys many had already canceled their orders through their credit card companies (which can have an impact on future dealings with the pre-order retailers in question), some picking up retail games and others simply deciding not to play the game.
In point of fact as of the 31st when the grace period expired many pre-order customers lost access because the copies of the game had still not arrived. In my case both accounts in my household were shut down and we spent the weekend watching House M.D. season four. Even worse, in order to keep my pre-order items I have been forced to spend thirty minutes on the phone internationally and pay for an additional two copies of the game to be mailed to a guildmate who resides in the United Kingdom where my reseller is located. While some people would question my decision to order from a UK reseller it is important to note that the prices in my country are much higher per copy, and there are in general more issues with short supplies here. Half of the people I know who reside in my country chose to pre-order from international resellers due to price (which is literally King in this nation's culture) and supply issues.
(As of 11 days after my order was shipped I still do not have it. Our accounts have been activated via the two new keys I paid for to be shipped on Friday. I now get to wait 17 days to claim my original order as “lost” and will end up paying a second cycle of interest on my credit card as a result.)
This is just an example of how companies often fail to be proactive in dealing with issues, and it is particularly disruptive during a launch. Funcom is by no means the only guilty party here. The majority of MMO releases have been plagued by issues which it was possible to see approaching or where the players themselves sent up smoke signals. In general MMO developers need to begin to take a much more proactive role in solving problems. While it may be very difficult to avoid every issue which crops up, it become impossible to handle issues with a high quality of service if all you do is react to things which have already happened. Fallout is reduced massively if problems are nipped in the bud instead of letting them fester. Players can and will sit on top of an issue which is of personal import. Because of this the customer relations staff of an MMO needs to be prepared to react accordingly Communication and flexibility were the key in this situation, and both were a bit slow to arrive on scene.
Hello? Can Anybody Hear Me?
The current state of communication is pretty abysmal. The only thing the playerbase hears from Funcom are server downtime announcements, reports of banning exploiters, a short list (which accounts for a fraction of the problems in the game) of known issues, (incomplete) patch notes, and what amount to seemingly canned, PR-approved statements.
If Funcom took the time to properly document patches the notes would be three times as long as they are currently and the playerbase would not feel as if they were being stealth nerfed. If company representatives took two minutes to post when a topic on the forums was obviously of great interest to the userbase the players would feel as if they were at least not being shoved into a corner and ignored. A single line posted from the Senior Community Manager on the European forums was sufficient to reassure the players that one of the hottest post-launch issues (Early Access expiration) was being taken seriously. Unfortunately the general rule is silence, and only rare exceptions give the players any hope of being treated appropriately.
As if the main medium for mass communication (the forums) being underutilized were not enough, the situation with account support and in-game support is perhaps even more dire. Using the mail ticket system to contact Funcom's accounting department is futile. The vast majority of tickets go completely unanswered. Though in-game petitions are handled eventually the wait time for assistance is exceptionally long. In fact during American “night” petition handing slows to an absolute crawl, not resuming any speed at all until morning. It seems as if Funcom has staffed the support department with the majority of coverage outside of night in the US. When petition lines are hundreds of issues long and advancement is at most five petitions in an hour there is a serious problem with the amount of support being dedicated to the title.
In addition while it is well-documented that Funcom has a “no reimbursements” policy regarding lost items, one particularly major bug has been affecting entire guilds. The answer from Funcom's support department has been the standard hard line of “nothing we can do” up until now. But what needs to be realized is that entire guilds have put all of their available coin towards building up cities that mysteriously fail to build. This is not an issue of one player losing a quest reward or having destroyed their weapon. This is many people losing every resource and (most importantly) coin they have available due to a bug in a system which is a cornerstone of the game. While the hardened gamer in me can respect drawing a line in the sand as regards item replacements, the gamer who took every penny he had earned and handed it over to his guild leader only to see nothing in return believes that there are exceptions to every rule. In lieu of saving for a horse many people have backed their guilds and seen their dreams of cities turn to ashes. To date Funcom has remained utterly silent as regards the reimbursement of lost materials while whole guilds grumble in discontent. These are the kinds of issues which make a huge difference when a large portion of your playerbase are “trying out” your game while waiting for a major expansion from World of Warcraft. Good customer service even if it is an exception to your rule may prove the winning blow in retaining many of those customers.
While all MMO releases can be expected to fall short in terms of support, the truth of the matter is it is possible to hire short term support teams to cover launch needs. This was either not done, or it was done in insufficient numbers. Funcom is not the only game to ever release with seriously deficient customer support. It is, however, yet another thing holding the game back at this early stage. It remains to be seen how long this problem lasts. With how robust the customer self-help arm of Anarchy Online (ARK) has been over the years there is certainly hope for improvement if such an organization is introduced into Age of Conan.
Every Cloud Has a Silver Lining
With all the negative things said in this piece I think it is vital something be made perfectly clear. Age of Conan is absolutely not a game for every gamer. In particular it is less female-friendly than other games on the market, it is a game aimed at (and rated for) adults, and it offers a different kind of gameplay which may in some cases simply not appeal to certain gamers.
BUT . . . (notice the big but) Age of Conan is a game which plays relatively well. It is fairly stable and performs adequately assuming a relatively modern machine. With a cutting edge machine it runs amazingly well, something many past MMO releases still cannot claim due to poor optimization and code reliance on CPU instead of GPU. Crashes are to be expected in a new MMO but in general AoC is able to remain stable for a longer period than the average MMO I've played at launch. In addition it is obvious that the crash bugs are high on Funcom's list as almost every patch addresses fixing some.
In terms of gameplay and fun factor the game is a winner. It may take some players a bit of time to come to grips with the combat system, or to find the class which suits them, but once that has been accomplished it is truly a pleasure to play. Seldom have I enjoyed simply killing my way through a world more. Combat (as a melee class at least) is visceral and satisfying.
There are of course the issues which seem to plague all MMO releases. Classes with missing or broken skills, content which seems to dry up as you advance, and various irritating bugs. But all things considered Age of Conan is in fairly good shape. It is without a doubt on the way to becoming a success. The frequency of patching (which is often enough) and obvious attention to discovering the source of serious bugs shows that Funcom is on the right path.
One more thing of note is the attitude which Funcom has towards cheating. While not all gamers (or even a sizable number of them to be honest) have experience with Anarchy Online, it can be said that Funcom has absolutely one of the hardest lines against cheating in the industry. Their Bugs, Abuse and Exploits team for AO is a no-nonsense organization staffed by people who make Judge Judy look like Mother Theresa. The fact that Funcom banned a number of accounts and penalized others within the first week of play is proof that the company is well on the way to taking enforcement seriously in Age of Conan. The message was clear: don't cheat, we're watching.
What remains to be seen is how much Funcom can improve. Improvement is needed more in how and how fast they handle customer issues and communicate with the playerbase than anything else. Granted fixing bugs in the game is very important, but for the vast majority of players who seem to be genuinely enjoying themselves, being treated better when they have a concern is paramount. The lines of communication need to be opened up wide and support needs to improve. If these things can be done in a rapid time frame then Age of Conan my just exceed anyone's expectations.
As it stands now I can think of no reason not to go out and buy Age of Conan assuming your PC is fairly modern. The game is well worth the price of admission, and within the first month you should have a fairly good idea if the game is something you personally will enjoy continuing to play.
This is the End (My Friend)
MMO gamers have perhaps allowed companies to treat them poorly in the past. (For this we have nobody to blame but our MMO-addict selves.) As a result it seems that companies believe no matter how badly things go wrong in the beginning there are always more customers where the ones who got away came from. While this is true to a point it is worth noting that when a game comes along which truly caters to a need that gamers have, more of them will play it and the market of gamers in this genre will grow. World of Warcraft is the largest example of a game which truly pushed the boundaries of the market of course but other titles have contributed to the growth as well. Age of Conan is a game that could truly help the market expand if Funcom can manage to rapidly address that ever-growing pile of issues that has stacked up in the inbox. If they can't the game will wind up being another Anarchy Online: wasted potential due to a flawed release and mismanagement of the customer base.
In closing I'd like to note that many MMO gamers would gladly pay more to get more. If there is simply not enough money to pay sufficient staff the retail or subscription prices of MMOs should be adjusted. If part of what we are paying for is service, then many of us are perfectly happy to choose eating at a restaurant with waiters instead of going through the drive thru. We accept that it costs more, but we like the quality that we get. I'd like to see a company start to hire good staff in sufficient numbers from day one. That's something I'd pay for.
I'm rooting for you Funcom. Keep those heads rolling.
Read Part One here.
Both parts of this editorial are well-written, but seem to focus on the negative aspects. I feel a tenseness about the writers trials and tribulations and that's the only thing I pick up from reading both parts. While i'm sure there are other people that have had problems, I on the other hand, have not had one single blue screen, crash, freeze or error. The launch for me was as smooth as butter. Probably one of the smoothest launches i've bore witness too. Also, it's noteworthy that this was from a EU perspective and not a US perspective so bear that in mind when reading both articles.
[quote]In closing I'd like to note that many MMO gamers would gladly pay more to get more. If there is simply not enough money to pay sufficient staff the retail or subscription prices of MMOs should be adjusted. If part of what we are paying for is service, then many of us are perfectly happy to choose eating at a restaurant with waiters instead of going through the drive thru. We accept that it costs more, but we like the quality that we get. I'd like to see a company start to hire good staff in sufficient numbers from day one. That's something I'd pay for.[/quote]
I've shut down all my other games to move to this one and have no regrets so far. There are certain features that I do sort of miss, like independent and guild city personal housing, and other personal structures for trade skill. If there were certain extras like that made available for additional charges i know i would be willing to pay out higher subscription fees. They should have a first class account thats gives more in the game at a higher price to help increase money for customer service maybe.
i too ran into the CE delay issue (amazon), fortunately my copy arrived a few days after they extended the cut off date. I don't blame funcom for amazon's issue however.
gameplay wise i've been having a blast, short of a couple strange quest bugs that seems to always get resoled sooner than later. i'm 42 on my main (and only) character and still have a ton of quests to go through. combat is a blast for me. i prefer this combat system to any other i have ever experienced in past mmos.
stealth patching i have a problem with however, if you've fixed something in a patch, let us know, its not that difficult.
You should actually... blame Funcom I mean. Funcom is Amazon's supplier. But that's beside the point. The problems occured, they are being fixed. The real point of the article posted here iFuncom's lack of communications skills with their customers. This is an ongoing problem and has not been addressed as far as I can tell. How hard can it be to a have a couple of Funcom eployees acting as moderators in their forums? Ablue post here and there can go a long way in allaying people's ire and fears.
Even if the blue post says "We are aware of this problem, its is being investigated" its enough to make people think they are not screaming into a vacuum like currently.
I think the tone set by this article is one of desperate hope... exactly right IMO
Ok, just to make it clear: there is no problem with reading both US and EU forums!
Please stop repeating the nonsense that's floating around and actually check it for yourself:
http://forums-eu.ageofconan.com/index.php
http://forums.ageofconan.com/index.php
There's a nice big "US FORUMS" button at the top of the EU forum page. The ONLY issue is that you can't read the "Voice of Crom" section on the US forum, as you can't login there.
I have used my mystical editor powers to delete the offending section.
For me, everything went perfect!
I got my early access, played that, got my pre-order, no problem.
The Game pas level 20 is pathetic.
Demos "were" broken, now fixed, so I am a happy camper!
Seriously, I live in New Zealand...And had 0 problems.
Amazing? Or what...
This is more like it... An article that actually allows to critisise the game. Many good points made but the solution is not the right one in my opinion.
"Players can and will sit on top of an issue which is of personal import" This is so true. And thats the reason that any gaming developer should try to minimise the chance of individual problems. In terms of servers and clients this is done by testing, fixing, testing again and then polish and finally test it once more. And if game needs more fixing after that then u keep fixing it and testing it.
In terms of supply, pre-orders and other issues - Thats more down to how compident the ppl in charge of distribution are and management of that factor. And if there are some new ways of doing things (like EA was) then you need alot of tests before. This was NOT done. The game was distributed all over the world. The reseller and online distribution is used to handle these big realse games. There is no hiding that almost all problems are coming from EA and Pre-order - Thats a system that Funcom is fully responsible for.
The OP gives us insight into his individual problems with the game. Some others have had those problems. Others have had client problems. Some have FPS problems and others have lag problems. And we are not even gonna be talking about the lack of features and content problems that most players will start to find out after first 25 lvls. In total the game has a whole bunch of diffrent individual problems that need special support. And its for all to see that the customers service and technical support simply can't handle that amount of issues. And we can not see a game launch with 10 K ppl in customer support cause thats unrealistic. So how to prevent this ? Easy ... very, very very easy ..... Launch a game that has gone through more testing, more polishing, fewer issues in diffrent departments. But first and formost - try everything possible to stay away from any unnessisery issues that could arise. Like the EA turned out to be. Like client issues that many players are having. Its all there based on the fact it wasn't tested and wasn't up to the standard acceptable for release.
Thats the whole problem of this game. It simply wasn't and isn't ready for launch. There are so many issues that need not just abit more work - but a huge amount of work to be acceptable to paying customers. The game is unfinished - and untested. And thats not acceptable. Even tho the OP is chearing for the devs....
What can the MMO gamers do to try to raise the standards of new MMO releases ? Just so that we will have games that are at acceptable state on release ? Is that done by cheering on a gaming company and hoping for more support and comunications after the game has been out for 3-4 weeks ? Or is it to demand a game with less issues at launch so you simply will not have all these issues piling up ? I would say the answer is obvious.
The MMO gamers should not cheer for a gaming developer that is launching an unfinshed game - even tho it still can be enjoyed to some extend. And they sure should not cheer for gaming companies that dont deliver the featuers and content that was said to be in the game. And NO gaming site should cheer or "root" for that kinda behaviour.
Silence is also a way of comunications. Its often the only way to react when things go out of hand. And we have to ask ourselfs. Why has it gone out of hand now ? Is it because of lack of support - or is it because the game simply was not ready to be sold to 100s of 1000s of customers?
I can't cheer or root for Funcom at this point. And noone should. They launched a game knowing they didnt have it at an acceptable state. They knew they would not be able to support the game with all those issues. Thats not just sign of incompitent group of gaming developers. Its sign of things to come. Cheering or rooting for such a behavior only calls for more of the same. And thats what Funcom will be doing. - Sadly
I agree 100% with the OP about paying for quality. Im ready to pay more for good and enjoyable game. But that doesn't mean I or anyone else should accept paying one dime for somethng that is far from the acceptable standard. So I can't belive that the OP who is working for a gaming site is telling ppl that they should pay for this product. Thats simply not acceptable.
AOCTester,
I agree. I read this one review, which was 8 pages, I am sure you read it too. Someone posted a link to it in a thread on the AOC mmorpg.com forums. I like the school of thought he subscribed to, which says that a game should be released in a finished state. The only issues that should come up, are issues that were unforseen and couldn't possibly be caught during Beta. We all know that games, as all software, will have bugs that pop up and other problems that cannot be seen in beta, but it is time for the MMORPG community to say "Enough is Enough!" We want a complete and quality product at release, because we freakin' paid for a complete and quality product. If your box says it offers this feature or that feature, or your website promises this or that, it better be there by God! We wouldn't expect any less from any other product, so we shouldn't expect any less from games, just because they are a hobby and we can't wait 2 darn months to send a signal to the companies that are releasing these bug ridden and unfinished games.
Well what do you expect, it is Funcom we are talking about with the worst customer service in the business and you expected it to change?
There are a lot more issues than what he covered. Funcom made a major mistake in permitting fast leveling as their post 50 content is abysmal. Most of my guild was there within two weeks of open game play. Major mistake in my opinion.
Linear play, expecially in the early levels does not help either. Over done instanc\ing is also badly done, we had to postpone guild activities at times because not everyone could get in the specific instance.
We all enjoy pvping and expect to get griefed, but the pvp servers are ridiculous at present, big high level groups going around ganking lower levels and because of the limited places you can level it removed the fun factor completely.
Full servers is not something Funcom will have to worry about long, this game will set a record for number of players that fail to renew after the first 30 days.
Out entire guild has decided not to continue playing, we have 34 active members right now, most of us ex-wow players. Wow has nothing to fear from this game, it is going to take years to provide the needed content to make AoC a player in MMO arena.
When War comes out, AoC servers will be desolate.
So basically the reviewer trashes the launch, and then at the end says this gem "I see no reason not to buy this game." Uhhh, how about all those negative things covered in your article? How about that Funcom is totally unresponsive to guild cities not being built correctly? Or any of the other reasons you listed.
Sorry, that was a good article that went bad. You see no reason to not buy this game.
Are you serious?
This wasn't a review. There was no reviewer. This article, as was clearly stated int he description, talks about one writer's experience with launch.
This wasn't a review? Pardon me, I believe he just "reviewed" several of the launch problems . It may not be a proper "review," but when an MMORPG.com writer describes positive and negative thing about the game in an article it is enough of a review for me, and, I'm sure, for everyone else commenting on it. I could go back and change "reviewer" to "writer" but I won't. I'll just provide you with this.
Review:
1. To look over, study, or examine again. 2. To consider retrospectively; look back on. 3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings. 4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example).
It would appear this article, err, launch review, meets those definitions.
Since we are on the subject, would you care to comment on the writer's assertion that he sees no reason to not buy this game?
So this whole two part article was nothing but the writers personal problems with the game. It was completely one-sided only talking about the negatives of the launch. Nothing about any of the positive features. The writer is clearly biased by his personal experience, which is fine and completely valid, however that turns this into an editorial not a news article. You might want to post this piece under a blog and not your front page section mmorpg.com.
Anyway I knew that this game would be huge so I made sure I pre-ordered from a reputable company. Any time you order from a compnay other than EB games/Gamestop you take a risk. They specialize in hot games and have the best success at fulfilling pre-orders. Even then they mess up somtimes. Thats why you have to follow up on yoru order and be prepared for a limited quantity being available. I made sure I logged in all keys (pre-order, early acccess etc) in a timely manner. I even pre-ordered at two retailers just in case. I got my copies and had no problems.
Worst article I have ever read on here.
Theres alot of truth to the article though, this is why to someone who likes it will say this. Where were all you guys when the reviews were out after just the starter area. They were all good reviews, where were all you guys saying oh well it s not really a fair article it s not a full review. Instead all i saw was thats bang on this game is awesome, etc. I can understand it seems biased but theres no difference with this one as there are with the glaringly obvious paid by FC ones.
This was a bashing by a unhappy customer you let some one vent who had a problem, why not let some vent who had no problems. This site has become a big negative site as launches go I still say this was the best one I have been in.
It was hardly a bashing. While he did bash the game, he also stated some of the good points about AoC. The fact is AOC had a crappy, unprepared, unfinished launch, and you really expect them to get away without being bashed? That makes no sense, and if we gamers were to do that, then we would have to go through more launches like this. I think it was good how MMORPG.com posted this, since this [crappy] launch is not something that should be ignored...after all, this IS a gaming website
Also, if this is the best launch you have ever been in.,...then you must not have been in many launches....
For others---
It was an EDITORIAL, where someone posts their opinions on the matter. He was not reviewing the game, just sharing his opinion on how poorly the launch was. As you can see, he did not go over the whole detail about the game, just briefly went over it. Mr. Reuther was only going over his opinion on the matter.
You have to have positives to type positives.
This writer didn't "review" on things or rant on things that could only plague certain people. He spoke about things that plague ALL of AoC's players.
Just because you "Have no issues" doesn't mean that IF you did, it would fall on deaf ears. The things he is talking about are REAL issues to A LOT of REAL GAMERS. He is trying to back them up and reinforce the issue that when you release shit, you need have to have customers in mind, and not a dollar bill.
You guys can praise Funcom all you want and Bash the writer all you want.
He gave a highly negative overview of a release because that is EXACTLY what it is, highly negative.
It doesn't matter what poll or site you go to across the web.
Take the Pepsi Challenge and you will find this game isn't being as accepted as all of you think.
Every poll conducted here on MMORPG is usually a 50/50 split. Every poll out on the other sites are usually a 50/50 split.
Go look up the pictures posted on the MMORPG homepage. Click on the AoC pics. You will see the majority get WAY buried compared to bumped.
People just aren't feeling this game, people are feeling like they have been lied to, people are feeling like they have been shafted. They feel as though no one is listening to them when they need help in regards to AoC bug ridden ass game.
Then a writer comes along with the balls enough to write THIS GAME HAS PROBLEMS THAT NEED ADDRESSED, and you accuse him of being one sided.
Well when a game has as many issues as AoC it usually is one sided.
Screw that I am glad this dude had the balls to say funcom screwed the pooch on the launch, I'm glad he stood up for the consumers who play MMO's in the world today, I'm glad someone finally said what the majority of us are thinking.
Mr. Wood, you be sure you let your team know, Mathew is a writer with balls, and he needs to stick around. That was the most intelligent review of a screwed up game I ever read.
Yeah, id just like to say, that paying $15 a month is already very very expensive for gaming, there is no way in hell id pay more then that to play an online game. id rather go to a free MMO like Shaiya or last Chaos. You can make good quality games for cheaper monthly subscriptions, everquest used to charge 9.99 a month to play then it went up to 12.99 then 14.99 In the end, just to point out, EQ 1 was a great great game and it had a very low sub fee, you can easily say times change...which is true, however since no one is getting paid much more given the market fluctuating, then we shouldnt be paying more for subscriptions.
*edit* My point is basically, if a company can make a great game, and its free. why the hell should the gamers be forking out 15 a month when the companies end up screwing up what they initially released? Good example is how the WoW expansions have been going lately. 1-60 sounds good, 60-70 boom new grind new time to waste...yey everyone looks the same. Now its 70-80 rinse repeat. Sub fees should either stay at 14.99 or go to completely free to play, with purchases at a store for certain in game upgrades.
I think an important omission in the article is that the bank/mail system was locked for what, a week? If you can describe the launch as anything but rocky, missing a key feature due to exploits is certainly part of that description. What about the folks rerunning quests that hit level 80 in the first few days? I think some discussion of how broken certain systems were is reasonable.
Yes - where were we ?
We tried and tried to get our points across on diffrent sites. The closed beta testers tried to get out he word that +30 content was buggy and incomplete. And it was very obvious that ALL fixing for the last 2-3 weeks was for lvl 20 and lower.
Thats why Im so frustrated now.. Funcom kept ppl under NDA. They kept all forums locked. They made no clear announchment of the state of the game at launch. But they STILL knew that there would be huge problems. They knew they would be unable to support the game in this state. They knew and the testers knew. And thats why many of the testers will never ever be able to trust Funcom ever again. The fooled ppl infront of the noose of the testers and made sure we were not allowed to talk.
And then we come to the part of gaming sites like MMORPG.COM. I tried my very best to inform ppl without breaking NDA. I was banned tho - just to make sure I would not be around when the game launched. I know of ppl who were banned for up to 14 days for offence that is talked about on these forums as one day offence.
I saw MANY constructive posts stating the true and correct picture of the game beeing deleted on MMORPG.COM. And when ppl asked why those posts were deleted they were slammed with a ban. Even ppl that were just wondering why in hell MMORPG.COM was deleting those in the first place.
MMORPG.COM did not stay truthfull to the gamers on the relseas of AOC. And for players that knew the state of the game and tried to bring up those point - those ppl can not do anything against websites that are independent and acutally have no obligations to the gamers. And dont even follow their own forum rules just to prevent players talking about other things than what the MODs liked to see at that stage.
There is a reason Im not very happy with MMORPG.COM during the launch of AOC. They became the fanbois instead of beeing neutral and allowing diffrent opinions - many of them showing proofs of what was really going on.
Thankfully a new emploee is now all of a sudden in. Thats a good way to push the MOD fanbois away for now. And it also gives MMORPG.COM abit more credibility - but then ... that was really needed.
Im stil waiting for Mathew Reuther to hit high end lvl 40+ in the game and then see the other problems that are now for all to see that didnt give up before that stage. You can still play through it and it doesn't mean its not enjoyable to a degree. The question is - how little is needed to please ppl ? Very little is needed to please some. While others get frustrated and annoyed playing through things that obviously are not like they should be.
Its all a question of what we - the games want. Should a gaming company like Funcom be forgiven for knowingly launching a game that was unfinished and knowing they would have zero chance of actually supporting all the issues that thousend of ppl would have ? I dont think so. And the sad thing is that its NOT good for Funcom in the longrun. Launching new servers for overhyped PR game is coslty when ppl actually realise whats really going on. Ask devs of Vanguard... And take a look at what it meant for that game. Limited support, limited fixes, limited staff, limited expanstions. And now we are yet again told to belive Funcom and their PR talk. Isn't it obvious now what is going on ? Are ppl really gonna be fooled again by the same company? How naive can we all be...
I suggest every single customer of AOC goes now and chancels his AOC account. Thats the best way to tell the MMORPG gaming companies that this is NOT acceptable. If it means that Funcom goes bankrupt and AOC will fail - then so be it. Let that be a lesson to what happens to MMORPG games that are launched without showing the gamers the respect of an acutal working and playable end product.
second part was indeed about his trials, but again, why not? this kind of thing needs to hit mainstream to include carbon copies sent to funcom regardless of the tone of the review, honesty and common sense rule the day, not sublime quiet coverups as funcom tried to do, and failed miserably.
as for the fun factor, i will wait and see, i for one am certainly glad i didnt go throught the shit thousands did and then were simply blown off.
funcom? no, fun-con.
Stable? that is pretty funny, maybe the author should read the AoC forums some more.
The writer that wrote this article knows 100x more than you do on just about anything pertaining to this mmo. You should seriously consider actually reading both articles before thinking this guy is calling the game "stabe" or "unstable"
I will only chancel my acccount when every other subscriber has chancled there account. Whats is the point in making a speech if only 1 man will read it? What is the point in canceling a subscription if it makes no difference? What is the point in having a mass suicide if only 1 man kills himself?
See what im getting at? if a chain reaction cannot get everyone to do something, its pointless to do it yourself if you think it will get everyone else to follow those foolish footsteps to doom.
Ok ill start the chain, Cancelled my account wont be going back. Ill wait on Stargate and a few others and see if they learn the lesson that Funcom did not.
Old adage: Dont tick off paying customers, keep em happy and they will go the mile or in this case $15 a month.
you reread it mr troll, he called it stable, im not going to dig through the damn article to find it so you can go troll it up yourself.
After reading this I kind of chuckled to myself, you could replace the AoC with WoW, and in almost every complaint, it was the same thing seen during the WoW launch, in fact now that I think about it, Vanguard, SWG, and Asherons Call 2 too.
I dont remember hearing anything bad about the DaoC, or City f Hereos Launch.
I think the OP should change the name of his article, it has nothing to do with the anatomy of a launch, just rename it too "I didn't like AoC Launch, and here is why."
Nah, the title is fitting because hes talking about the AoC launch and the game itself. Sure it would also fit an overall article on the genre, but it fits here as well.
Great... now if Matt had only been writing for MMORPG.com 6 years earlier, he would've killed almost every major MMO out there before they took off.
Seriously, can I say he's wrong in what he says? No. However, there are nicer ways to put things than to write 3000 words about how bad a game is. With the number of people writing about how they disagree with these articles, I'm surprised that the managing editor hasn't written to say that they don't support nor deny the editorials and explain their purpose. That's one way to reaffirm that it's an opinion section and not a rant.
Though I decided to research Matt a little. Based off what I've researched about Matt so far is, he's a very nice person who lives near Funcom's home offices. My theory is he was looked over for a job and this is how he's getting his revenge.
"In particular it is less female-friendly than other games on the market,"
Matt - you can take that comment, tear it into large sections and stuff bits of it into every hole you have that's almost big enough for a piece, you 20th century relic piece of chauvanistic jerk.
The fact of the matter is that a large number of the women that I know from my various WoW guilds (which have hovered for the last couple of years at being around 20% being 'chick-gamers') have purchased Age of Conan, and they're loving the **** out of it.
What the he** makes you think that AoC isn't "female friendly" - the (hopelessly, hopelessly outdated) thought that girls don't want to kick ass? What, you think that girls only want to play crap like Hello Kitty online?
News Flash, my wife (who is hardly an exception) is all over Fatalities. She's picking up Brutal Gear every chance she gets - nothing makes her night more than jumping a higher level player and ending the fight with a Fatality. (heck, even if she loses, if the other guy scores a fatality, she /salutes him via tell).
"less female-friendly..."
Pft.
Neanderthal.
Boy are you narrow-minded. I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself and think of the other reasons that makes this game lean towards catering to men. The reason you assumed isn't even a reason at all as you've already stated. The answer is so obvious that I cannot believe you assumed it was combat that "could" turn women away.
i didnt like the part about paying higher subscription fee
i think the 14$ mark/month is alreaddy to high
how come guildwars can do without any fee if they also have support staff and server costs ?
imho the support demand was self inflicted by releasing the game in a to early state.
when people get stuck in geometry or their client crashes because of the gemcutting bug should they pay an extra 2$ because the company needs gms to fix that ??
other then that: i loooooooooooooove conan
I think he's more referring to the fact that the women are depicted in a chauvanistic way. You know the whole, "watch how realistically the boobs jiggle" kind of thing. I highly doubt he's referring to the combat or the fatalities.
I mean if you watched any of Funcom's interviews they had two scantily clad women sitting on either side of the person being interviewed for no other reason besides eye candy.
Your reason for attacking someone is an assumption. You might find that your assumption isn't quite right.
EDIT: To Craynlon. Guild Wars does it because they have a nearly entirely instanced game, which means that most of the weight is on the client and not the server, therefore they need less server maintenance and things of that nature.
Personally i would have to agree with other people saying this is a very bad article. When you review something you shouldn't only look at the bad things, through some stuff that you liked about the game in there also. Don't just bash it straight into the ground and tell people its worth to buy, because you just destroyed all acredability of that game. This is just my opinion though, which really wont matter.
PS: I do agree with most of the negative things in which he talked about.
LOL...Game Over man, Game Over
Agreed, had nothing to do with combat or gore. Also the fact you got offended on behalf of the females of the world and took it upon yourself to fight for their honor is just as out-dated. Last I heard the ladies can speak for themselves.
He also he didn't write "isn't famale friendly" he wrote "less female friendly than other MMO's on the market" which considering the content is a fair call. In the world of Conan all women were refered to as wench. Call your wife that and see how long you would last
I understand why the reviewer made the statement, but quite frankly I don't buy games based off of "female friendliness" level. GTA4 is as female unfriendly as you can get and I'm having a blast in that game.
For most women who enjoy MMO gaming, this will mostly likely be a non-issue. I can create a character on CoH/CoX with bigger boobs and skimpier clothing than AoC. In many asian MMOs my female characters are practically naked. I don't know what other MMOs he's basing this on.
Now excuse me while I go incinerate a Pict with my HoX
Stik, you need to read it again and think on this:
Age of Conan is a phenominal game, a true milestone in MMOs but, as all closed beta testers knew and as everyone now knows (or should know), Age of Conan is still A Not Ready For Prime Time (MMO Game) Player.
After many months of playing the beta, I didn't buy the game at release because of this.
I won't delineate all my reasons, because they've all be identifed. It makes no sense at all to me to spend $50 to buy a completely and totally pre-release, still-needs-a-lot-of-testing game and then also pay FunCom $15/month to beta test it after release.
A large part of what the OP is saying here is that Age of Conan has potential, so it's worth buying and then pray FunCom can get their arms around their lack of support and the game's many issues. What many of us who know the game well are saying is that until FunCom actually has a release-quality game in place and a real, qualified Customer Service/Community Support Team to support it, we advise potential customers to keep playing their current game(s) and to pass on playing Age of Conan for now.
My estimate is that Age of Conan will be ready to play in 3-6 months.
Whenever I watch the game over the shoulder of my friends I dont see anything special about it, in most places its rather conservative and has less of everything. *shrug* Its way overhyped.
Anyhow, whatever one says about the game, altering the game content via patches and NOT notify it in the patch-notes, letting players guess what was nerfed, is the UNFORGIVABLE sin in MMOs! Period. If you change someting in your game you TELL your customers, or you're a culprit, its that easy, and there is no way any decend company does that. Its just utter disrespect towards the customers, as is their ENTIRE customer support. They treat their own paying customers like dirt, and I dont play games of companies like that, even if they invent a donkey who shits gold. A line if decency must be drawn somewhere.
Yep, lots of sizzle ... but the steak? Not so much. Yet, anyway.
intresting article and not good that funcom messed up again still imo aoc launch is still a lot better than ao launch in every ways so thats an improvement..
Right hnow im playing for the included 30days after that ill see ahev to get up tp lvl 30 or so before i can make a solid call if i want to continue im having a blast so far.
"MMO gamers have perhaps allowed companies to treat them poorly in the past. (For this we have nobody to blame but our MMO-addict selves.) As a result it seems that companies believe no matter how badly things go wrong in the beginning there are always more customers where the ones who got away came from."
Which is why we should all pull our funds out of this game and send a message to these greedy scumbags.
I was one of the suckers that pre-ordered the game to get early access only to be told they had stopped handing out keys when I tried to register online.
I canceled my pre-order and haven't looked back they want to screw with their base fans they deserve to fail and they should not be given a second chance they don't deserve it.
We learned from the disgusting mess that was Sigil that these companies care nothing for their game or the customers.
if we don't support these failures in the future these companies will be sure their game works the way it's supposed to and when they say you get early access for pre-ordering you get it with no BS.
I wish everyone that had the problems I had or the problem the author had would just walk away taking their money with them.
Oh yeah, lets all stop paying for any MMO which doesn't launch in a perfect state.
Well if that's the case then I'd never have continued playing WoW for years when my server had a 48+ hour outage right after launch, and multiple further outages for a two week period. I wouldn't have played EQ2 on and off for years because I was lucky to last more than 30 mins before a CTD at launch. Maybe I would never have tried DDO due to the insane graphical lag and stuttering at launch. EVE would be right out the window due to the constant disconnects from the server every hour that I experienced. Lets not even go into the mess that was Vanguard, the awful Auto Assault, the fatally flawed SWG etc, etc, etc.
I've played just about every MMO since EQ1, not a single one of them has had a perfect launch. Sometimes it is a genuine problem with a game not having enough high level content, sometimes it is stability issue's with the servers, and sometimes it is just a bit of bad luck in that there is a particular problem with something in your machine that causes crashes.
This whole issue of bitter people that insist on posting negative rubbish on forums like this is pathetic, pick any MMO you like and look over the forums and they are invariably full of people just spouting utter garbage, yet for some reason they can't just walk away from a game, they have to stay around and constantly put negative spin on stuff.
The only thing stuff like this accomplishes is to hurt the MMO industry imho, I'm surprised anyone even bothers to make any MMO's anymore given the amount of rubbish spouted at launches with some of the games over the last couple of years. I hear a lot about how the MMO industry needs to stop treating customers like idiots and provide more polished products, well I think it works both ways and sometimes customers need to grow up and give them a break.
AoC has been out less than a month, in my opinion it had a fantastic launch and I'd personally rate the launch a 9/10, but I do find it disheartening that people these days seem like they just aren't prepared to give a company a break. What if it was a simple case that finances demanded that AoC got released when it did. Maybe it was a case of either release now and start getting some money in, or cancel the whole thing. There are plenty of people playing and enjoying the game, who are happy it was released despite some of the problems, I think this justifies the fact the game was released.
I think we are pretty much in agreement, I didn't write that much in my first post, so I can see that it may seem we are in opposition.
All I'm saying is that, with all the problems pointed out by the OP, I find it hard to accept that "there is no reason not to buy this game." (That is a bit confusing, was just trying to quote OP) I do recognize that AoC does have a new feature or two, which does give it some value, but not enough to pay 15/month to beta test.
Anyway, just wanted to point out we are in agreement (I think) =) I think you just said it a lot better..
carry on =)
I think more realistic people are saying that a game shouldn't be released until it is actually ready. Meaning, all of the features they promised are in the game, everything has been tested, the servers stress tested, and whatever was found was actually fixed before release. Does this mean the launch won't have problems? No, because there will be compatability issues that cannot be forseen, bugs that crop up through intensive gameplay and etc. Problems like that are ironed out within the first month. Introduction of more content, balancing and etc. should be focused on the months thereafter.
That is what people are saying should happen. This is not unrealistic and companies who respect their customers would follow this. How many companies so far has released a product due to their funds running short? Many, so why haven't any of them learned from their predecessors and budgeted in more money? The running out of money excuse was fine their first few times, but now it just sounds like another lame excuse to released a product unfinished. If a company cannot secure appropriate funding, they should wait until they can or don't even bother.
That is the school of thought I subscribe to. Subscribe to whatever school of tought you want. But I believe quality is important and what I ask for isn't unrealistic.
I agree with what you have said, however about the budgeting subject this is something seen across the board in all industries. Costs always blow out, sometimes companies fudge the cost to not scare off investors, many companies run on a "optimum environment" costing, which rarely happens. However to pull it back to the review as the OP stated I also believe many customers would be willing to pay more in subscription fees for a superior product, I have always believed MMO's are a cheap form of entertainment. For the first 18 months of WoW I spent far less on the game and subs then I would have going from game to game like I normally did/do.
The tired old excuse of naming an MMO released 5 years prior that had a bad launch is getting beyond a joke. Since when does someone use a bad past performance to excuse a present bad performance. Many AoC die hard fans use the worst MMO releases in history to prop up this very average release. Funny thing is one of the worst MMO releases always mentioned is Funcom's only other MMO...
>>> TO BE CLEAR: I AM THE AUTHOR OF THIS ARTICLE <<<
This continues my attempt to address the comments you have all been so kind as to leave. As with my first set (found in the discussion thread for part 1 of the article) I have tried to keep my replies orderly and segregated by user name. Please let me know if anything I mention below is unclear. I'm glad to clarify at any time.
Here are my responses to your comments:
@drarkanex - While there is certainly tension in the piece it reflects the combined experiences of many gamers during the launch period. I drew from the experiences of those I play with and members of the community as well as my own when penning the article. While it may be written from a perspective outside of the US, the issues are not by any means exclusive to one region.
@puffmouse - There have been other games which have successfully charged premium fees for enhanced service and options. I think that there are any number of ways in which games could integrate this in the future. Either that or simply raise the base fee to enable the company to provide adequate service at all times. Sometimes you eat at a fast food joint, but I'd be lying if I said I enjoyed that more than a classy restaurant. ;)
@araczynski - I do place the blame on Funcom for all the issues encountered with the launch with the exception of obvious failures within the reseller or postal systems. Funcom made all the decisions which led up to the shortages and shipping delays. While it is noble of you to want to "let them off the hook" I don't think gaming companies deserve to be given more consideration than any other sort of company. Good to hear you've been enjoying the game. It's a lot of fun to be sure.
@impulsebooks - Thanks for the comments. While we do see blue names, I find too many of them belong to the volunteer moderators. It is a shame that the Community Relations staff seem to be unable to respond quickly enough. Even more disappointing is that when an actual dev chooses to comment it usually means that they are simply explaining away another stealthy adjustment, while not responding to the issues being raised by the playerbase. Communication has improved since launch but it is still lacking.
@Asherett - There was, and it caused a lot of issues during the launch phase. As I said in my other comment post (part 1) there are delays to publication so the opening of the forums did not happen until after I last touched this piece. The major problem was the initial separation, and within the scope of this article it is extremely relevant.
@BogSvarog - Glad you've had positive experiences. I hope they continue to enhance the later game so you can enjoy it even more.
@AOCtester - You are of course entitled to your opinions, but I'm going to have to continue to hope Funcom comes out on top after they've dug in and fixed the pile of glaring issues still siting in the inbox. Why? Because in the grand scheme of things the company has done a good job. While this piece highlights a lot of issues with the launch I believe that the game itself is in a fairly decent state. Having played as many MMOs as I have there is a sliding scale in my head. AoC comes out above average for a released product. And yes, that is a sad commentary on this genre, and I believe it can and should be improved upon. The largest problem we face is the fact that unlike a movie (they are also expensive) the ROI for an MMO is long term. A movie will enter production, shoot, go through editing and post production, and then release within the span of two or three years. Almost no MMO will manage that tight of a time schedule. It will also take more time to recover the initial investment money, as a movie runs for a few months in theaters while an MMO is expected to keep people engaged for years. Because of this economic reality we are forced to deal with people who have (usually) very little understanding of the genre making the decision to launch. On one hand if AoC does well it encourages the premature release of software. On the other, it reassures investors that putting out a better quality product increases your chances of seeing a good return. I'll keep rooting for developers who manage to make it to release, because failed products do nobody any good . . . except perhaps as a cautionary tale most people would rather forget about.
I have two characters that are higher than your arbitrary level of 40+ at this time. My article has nothing to do with issues outside of the launch itself, so it is relatively unimportant how high a level I was when it was written (I wasn't that far off 40) since I avoided talking too much about gameplay. As it stands I am still (in my 50's) enjoying the game and will continue to pay for it after the initial 30 days. I agree that there are serious issues which need to be addressed, particularly in terms of class bugfixing (as opposed to nerfing) and the addition of content. However as the veteran of far too many MMOs I can't say that I didn't expect this issue, and I can't say that I've not encountered it in any other game. It is, sadly, an inherent part of the industry because we are so hungry for the new worlds that we tolerate a bit too much. I'd like to see quality rise in released products, but as I've said elsewhere in my comments, economic factors are hard to fight as a game developer. Maybe an MMO gamer will win a massive lotery jackpot and finance a game that does get the rights to stay in Beta as long as it needs to. I've got my fingers crossed. (And my resume in an open window, so let me know if it happens, ok?)
@JK-Kanosi - Sometimes it takes a long time to get the winds of change blowing. I think that by expressing dissatisfaction we continue to send messages to companies which may eventually get through. Believe me when I say that those game developers love the product they are working on and would like nothing better than to give us perfection. The realities of economy dictate that they are fighting against the tide of money in order to keep the game from releasing too soon. Keep speaking out against the problems you see in released games. Fight the good fight, so to speak. :)
@Ozmodan - Since I covered the launch there are of course more issues with the game than what I wrote about. As to your assertion that most people will not continue past 30 days I can only say that I don't think you're right. What actually happens remains to be seen, of course.
@Stikato - Yes, I'm serious. I still play and will continue to do so after the first 30 days. Many of the launch pains have been resolved and Funcom has regularly updated the game in the past weeks. More importantly: I'm having fun. If you have to choose between eating and buying AoC, eat. But if you have the disposable income it won't hurt you to take a look.
As to your assertion that I reviewed the game, it's inaccurate as Stradden pointed out. If I reviewed anything it was the launch. I did not touch on the gameplay or content in any meaningful way in this article. As a result if you are looking for an actual game breakdown you'll need to look somewhere else.
@galad2003 - I did not experience all of the issues that I illustrated in the article. I had my own subset of problems during the launch period. Other issues were experienced by my guildmates or other members of the AoC community. The article is by no means a laundry list of my personal grievances. I believe it is vital to note that the largest resellers available were having issues with the game during early access (code problems) through release. Choosing to believe that by selecting a "superior" reseller you would somehow become immune to launch issues is simply the equivalent of sticking your head in the sand. The faulty handling of the launch in the distribution and resale arena all comes back to Funcom eventually. If multiple people who ordered the game from different reputable sources have an issue your entire premise becomes null and void. I am sorry you feel the piece was so poor.
@Leucent - Considering I gave a factual account of what happened during the release I don't believe it is possible for me to have been biased. The piece relates the experiences of myself and other players during the launch period. Unless people believe that I have actually lied about what occurred it is simply a recounting of historical fact. Aside from that, I am an AoC customer still, and if I were trying to rip the game up I'd have done a much better job. ;)
@ajax7 - No, this was a recouting of events during the launch of AoC. I never made any assertion as to the the quality of this launch as compared to any launch aside from that of Funcom's last game. How each individual feels the launch went is up to them.
@mike470 - The article has a focus on the launch. It would be inapprorpiate to run too far off on a wild tangent to address issues outside of that specific subject matter. As a result some thing you and other readers may have wished to see in the piece were not included. The ability to stay focused on the task at hand is important, and is often what differentiates a professional piece from amateurish ramblings. I a glad you liked the article, despite it not going further into the game itself.
I too appreciate Stradden's decision to run my piece. The original article received exactly one rewrite by myself. The only things I changed were ones I believed needed adjustment or explanation. As result I added some small bits to the whole (perhaps 10% more words in total) but the soul of the piece remained a critical look at the launch itself. This article was shopped to MMORPG.com because I believe the site is capable of taking a critical look at issues in the industry. My beliefs have ben sustained by the publication of this piece, which is not an attack on Funcom, but an evaluaton of what went wrong when AoC launched.
@neonaka - Thanks for the positive feedback. While I personally am enjoying playing AoC, I think it is only fair to look at the flows within a game (in this case the game's launch) and see if there isn't a lesson to be learned. If one game company can do a better job of launching a MMO as a result of MMO players speaking out about how AoC hit the streets it will make our beloved industry that much better.
@Wakygreek - The quality of F2P MMOs is lacking. Mark Jacobs (From EA Mythic) had a good take on the F2P market in a recent article over on Gamasutra. He asked the F2P developers to "show me the money" . . . because you don't engage in years of backbreaking work without hope of making a profit. He also pointed out that it is far easier to provide service to a smaller number of paying cstomers than a larg number of users, of which only some are subscribers. In F2P games you often (in almost every case actually) have inferior service when compared to P2P. While you may not wish to pay more for an MMO, I personally have no problem paying for a steak instead of a hamburger. To each their own. ;)
@woalCE - I was trying to steer clear of too many in game examples of issues. The article was already long enough, after all. It was certainly a big negative to have the traders turned off for an extended period of time. On that we agree. :)
@tinywulf - I'm on them enough. As far as a release game goes it has been relatively stable, yes. Par for the course I think. ;)
@denshing - There is really only one reason o cancel your account to any game. You're not going to play. That can be for any reason you feel appropriate, but it remains simple. If you play subscribe, and if you don't . . . don't. :)
@Ragemore - So because it is possible for two different game companies to make the same mistakes my recount of the AoC launch is meaningless? We should, instead, simply ignore the fact that it happened? Or are you simply offended that I didn't write an article for every single launch in the past decade? The article could have been written about any title. The point is evaluating what happened. The rest is simply factual information used to populate the piece. Had WAR launched and AoC delayed you would have very likely seen a piece on that game instead.
@BlueCadwal - I'm flattered you gave me so much credit. I must have written some very influential words to have you believe I am capable of hurting a title which has shipped over a million copies. :) By your own admission you can't dispute the factual account I've given of the AoC launch. You appear to be upset simply because I had the audacity to write candidly about these issues. Further you expect Stradden to state the obvious: that this piece is written by a single author, and as a result other writers here at MMORPG.com may feel differently. Why should he bother? Finally, Amsterdam and Oslo aren't anywhere near each other. I don't work for Funcom nor have I applied to them for a position at any time, though if you'd actually done your homework you'd be able to see who I did work for. (My name, by the way, is Mathew, so shortening it and using a "t" too many isn't really something I appreciate.)
@jonaylward - So you believe that Coke Zero is a genderless product? That Sex in the City's target audience is the same as The Sopranos? That Band of Brothers and Roots are equivalent pieces of television? All products have an audience. I am at peace with the differences between men and women. I can accept that I am more likely to be interested in technology than the average woman. I am also able to accept that there are plenty of women out there who know more than I do about beer, football (soccer for you in North America), and cars. The fact that my own wife sits next to me playing Age of Conan does not negate the fact that compared to other games in the genre AoC is less female-oriented.
@craynlon - My point is that many people will gladly pay more to get more. It's the reason we have hundreds of different choices when it comes to cars. While not everyone may buy a BMW or Audi, many of those people are happy they aren't stuck with a KIA. In the past higher levels of service have been available to those who paid a premium. Think of it like an extended service contract on a new laptop. You may not need it, but it's there when you do. Some people will buy it and use it a lot while others may not end up using it much at all. Those who choose to go with standard service simply pay for the basics and receive the standard level of customer care as a result.
@Gondis - I didn't review the game. I evaluated the launch. I gave a balanced look at the issues involved in releasing AoC to market. Hard to say anything glowing about something that either works or it doesn't. As a result I pretty much found myself limited (by the self-imposed scope of the article at least) to addressing the issues which cropped up. Perhaps even more importantly, you agree with me in many ways. Hardly cause to think I've written a bad article. :D
@voodookhan - EverQuest, Everquest II, World of Warcraft, EvE Online, Asheron's Call, Dungeons and Dragons Online . . . need I go on? The majority of MMORPGs are going to be more friendly to female gamers for many different reasons. Skimpy Clothes are not female unfriendly. I know alot of women who like them. But the general atmosphere of those games is one of equality. In AoC the first woman you meet is a whore who has been chained up by a scavenging pirate.
@Lizante - I'm also one of those gamers with no patience. I have to play a game as soon as I think I want to. Because of this I see no reason not to wait out the initial growing pains. SOME people should definitely not buy the game at this time. I agree 100% that it is better for folks to wait if they can't handle the flux of a newly launched MMO. With the number of titles out on the market I am sure you can find a way to kill a few months. :D
@Elikal - The lack of complete patch notes is a nightmare from all directions. In many cases someone at Funcom has simply failed to properly document, and in others they have made a mistake and merged changed code into the patch tree when they did not intend to. I believe it is unlikely that too many stealth changes are meant to be hidden from the players. But the sad fact is they ARE being hidden. I agree with you that it needs to stop. I'd rather seen ten pages of relatively mundane notes as long as it included that one change vital to my class.
@mindmeld - 100% agreement. They vastly improved on the AO launch. :)
@Dento - To be fair I think that Sigil employees cared very much. The economic realities (which I've touched on already) are what doomed Vanguard. Well, that and a couple of key decision points which went wrong. :( I hope you're able to come back and play AoC when it is in a better state.
@markt50 - I don't buy tat we need to accept that bad things are going t happen and stick our heads in the ground to avoid having to deal with them. I can guarantee you that any game company worth a damn has meetings to come up with reports telling them what went wrong after major events like game launches. Pieces like this article are critiques, so of course the will be negative in nature. But we need to not be afraid to stand up and say something when we think there are improvements to be made. The gaming industry is young and tis genre even younger. There will be painful experiences as advancements are made and the processes mature.
***
Thanks again for all your comments. Please reply if you have anything further to discuss. I'll do my best to watch the threads.
I dont care how bad any MMO launch has gone before. Earlier MMO games are no excusies for new games to launch a) incomplete b) bugged c) without features. If something then the MMO companies should be LEARNING what not to do. Instead comments like from you are exactly telling them they dont have to bother. Its perfectly fine to throw things out about a year before its actually at any state to be released.
Its not my fault that Funcom has bad managment team. And its defenetly not my fault that other MMO games didn't launched unfinished. What I can say that when I played GTA 4 witch in many ways is way more complicated game in ALL departments, then Im just ashamed that the MMO comunity is trying to make up excuses for what AOC stands for. And don't bring up the argument that one is single player and other is MMO. Cause thats not valid. Just compare the bugs on its own and then tell us why ppl should be paying simulare amount for those two games....
"@Dento - To be fair I think that Sigil employees cared very much. The economic realities (which I've touched on already) are what doomed Vanguard. Well, that and a couple of key decision points which went wrong. :( I hope you're able to come back and play AoC when it is in a better state."
There were and I'm sure there still are some employees that cared for VSOH no doubt but that fact is over shadowed and outweighed by the horrible management which is really what causes most of these problems with bad launches and upset customers.
Poor decisions and even worse communication.
I don't know who you are but if you are a funcom rep and you're looking to try and calm the mob why not step up and take responsibility for the screw ups and give us some clear communication of whats being down to fix the issues instead of hollow and meaningless BS
In about 2 minutes you could google me and find out. No, I don't work for Funcom. I have no desire to calm the mob. I'm part of the mob.
"Why should a MMO company have to win a jackpot while other gaming companies can launch games without much problems ? Is it because its online and that automaticly means it doesn't have to be ready ? Just because it has the chance to download it l8ter ? Sorry but Im not buying that. You can say its unrealistic but as long as you and others MMO gamers think its unrealistic - then we keep gettting bad releases. You go on and compare GTA 4 and AOC. Potentials should count for NOTHING when it comes to any games. You send it out in the box and thats it. If MMO companies can't finance the whole production then they DON'T advertise those features on the Box and they DONT talk about those features week before release knowing it wont be in.
I dont care how bad any MMO launch has gone before. Earlier MMO games are no excusies for new games to launch a) incomplete b) bugged c) without features. If something then the MMO companies should be LEARNING what not to do. Instead comments like from you are exactly telling them they dont have to bother. Its perfectly fine to throw things out about a year before its actually at any state to be released.
Its not my fault that Funcom has bad managment team. And its defenetly not my fault that other MMO games didn't launched unfinished. What I can say that when I played GTA 4 witch in many ways is way more complicated game in ALL departments, then Im just ashamed that the MMO comunity is trying to make up excuses for what AOC stands for. And don't bring up the argument that one is single player and other is MMO. Cause thats not valid. Just compare the bugs on its own and then tell us why ppl should be paying simulare amount for those two games.... "
/applauds
Right on
"BUT . . . (notice the big but) Age of Conan is a game which plays relatively well. It is fairly stable and performs adequately assuming a relatively modern machine. With a cutting edge machine it runs amazingly well,..."
I keep reading people say this, but I don't agree. I crashed 6 times getting to level 20. Not little crashes but blue screen crashes. I'm running a Quad Core with 8800GTS. There are better computers out there, but percentage wise not that many.
Crashing repeatedly is normal in a new game of any type. Compared to other games, MMOs included, the stability issues which affected AoC at launch were average. For you it may seem to be worse than other titles, but for others it seems better. It averages out in the end to being a wash.
"Skimpy Clothes are not female unfriendly. I know alot of women who like them. But the general atmosphere of those games is one of equality. In AoC the first woman you meet is a whore who has been chained up by a scavenging pirate."
You lost me at this point. Some women would disagree with you. I don't...it doesn't bother me and I am among those that like some of them, but it has bothered other women I've played with. Just because you "know women who like them" doesn't mean that skimpy clothing should not be considered to be female unfriendly content. Some women don't mind it, other's do...however if you consider saving an NPC whore on a beach to be unfriendly, then having my player character run around in a thong fits the same mold I think.
**bit a spoiler game info below read at your peril**
If you know anything about Conan (and you probably do) is that it's a brutal world full of wenches, whores, and warrior women. The general atmosphere is "kill or be killed" and survival of the fittest to a fierce degree (re: the books and the comic books in particular).
Funcom is following the lore, they didn't just throw in that random whore on the beach for no reason as a slap in the face to women (and she's actually used, not for sex purposes people, to further your destiny quest). Also, later you go off (in Tortage) and can do quests for the town "madame", on the other hand you fight in a destiny quest with a former warrior-pirate queen (a strong female role) trying to take back her city. Unfriendly to women? I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
I think maybe your standards are too low.
I agree that many mmo had horrible problems at launch. Anarchy Online and World War II Online stand out in my mind. However, I don't remember crashing during the launch of City of Heroes or Lord of the Rings Online. Guess which games I played for more than a month, and which ones I didn't.
I agree entirely with what AOCtester said. As such, my cash is going elsewhere.
I have read the article, and just would like to point out one thing. Even though the author is right in most (probably all) points, I feel like some of them are a little exagerated and I doubt ALL of these things happen to anyone (and if so, then maybe handful of people). I am probably one of the luckier people out there, as I pre-ordered, got the Early Access, got the retail copy on time (even though residing in not very logistics friendly country) and have fun ever since. And even if there are some problems with the game, the fun I have there more than outweights them...
I think people considering the game should know this and don't refuse AoC just based on this fairly negative article...
On really major issues involving MMORPG's (specifically related to billing or false advertising), I've found that when the companies will not reply to you that they will reply to Better Business Bureau complaints filed through www.bbb.org. However, I found with SOE, they respond by canceling your account and refunding 30 days worth of fees without addressing the issue about which they were contacted. Another place to turn, which I had to do again with SOE, was refer the matter to your state Attorney General consumer fraud hotline. Most states are very proactive in resolving issues with online companies, and game companies do NOT want the media catching wind of any state attorney general investigating them.
As for part 1, this was another good dissection of the launch and the issues that surrounded it. Players forget the details of a MMO launch, saying it simply had a 'good' launch or a 'bad' launch and such things get passed on by reputation (e.g. that WoW had a good launch, despite many comments to the contrary).
Although I agree that AoC appears to be content-light on launch, I think a lot of posters miss the point if they claim they want a 'finished' MMO at launch. MMOs shouldn't ever be finished, unless they are turning the servers off. MMOs are meant to be built on, expanded and evolved over time. The fact that AoC, PR problems and bugs aside, had a relatively stable launch is actually a massive step up for Funcom.
Also, all MMOs are going to have bugs due to how complex they are. If people are looking for finished, bug-free gaming experiences, they really need to stick to single-player games (and even then, good luck).
If I were another MMO dev looking at this launch, the key things I'd take away is that 1) be prepared to see greater demand for your product than you expect, and 2) have prepared and informed customer service, including those who can post on official forums.
Very well written and I agree with a lot you stated. I hope people will give the game another try in the future as it is a very fun game to play the further you get into it. I don't feel the dread of having to level a toon anymore.
The game stability has gotten a lot better with every patch and watching FC make an attempt at making the game better is a huge PLUS!@!!!!