Well, actually it proved several things:

1. 2008 video cards are just not powerful enough to run an MMORPG using "realistic" graphics engine. At least not in MMO mode. I mean look at the 88800 Ultra. A card released 18 months ago and still nothing can beat it. I remember times where you bought the best card only for it to be crap a year later. Sure Crysis looks great at full settings but only 0.1% of PC gamers have a rig that can run that decently (read MAX settings in DX10). And Crytek only had to deal with the engine and AI. No quests, no balancing, no crowded areas. In short, do the decent thing and stick to cartoony graphics as in WAR, LOTRO and WOW.

2. The best part in an MMO is the fact that you feel like you are a character in a parallel world. A seamless world just waiting for you to discover it. So what is the last thing you need in it? Loading screens. That is your greatest enemy. And AoC is basically a loading screen experience spiced up with some gameplay. I kid you not. That is why with all its shitty graphics people still play WOW. You can take a horse and run from Booty Bay to the Eastern Plaguelands without ever seeing a single loading screen. Try that in AoC.

3. Releasing a game that requires a high end computer to run at medium settings goes against the whole point of an MMO (FYI the first M stands for Massive). Anyone with a computer older than 2 years will not be able to play this game at all. Sure some people run dual 8800 GTS in SLI mode, but even them don't run the game very smoothly. These problems can be reduced after release, but a crappy game engine is a crappy game engine.

If WAR can avoid the loading screen plague and have the game running on average machines, it will have a decent shot at success. If the gameplay and combat are good of course :)

I've never understood why developers don't realize this is the reason consoles are eating their lunch. If your game can't run on commonly available hardware it's an overpriced coaster.

Originally posted by urbanmonkey

Well, actually it proved several things:

1. 2008 video cards are just not powerful enough to run and MMO using "realistic" graphics engine. At least not in an MMO. I mean look at the 88800 Ultra. A card released 18 months ago and still nothing can beat it. I remember times where you bought the best card only for it to be crap a year later. Sure Crysis looks great at full settings but only 0.1% of PC gamers have a rig that can run that decently (read MAX settings in DX10). And Crytek only had to deal with the engine and AI. No quests, no balancing, no crowded areas. In short, do the decent thing and stick to cartoony graphics as in WAR, LOTRO and WOW.

2. The best part in an MMO is the fact that you feel like you are a character in a parallel world. A seamless world just waiting for you to discover it. So what is the last thing you need in it? Loading screens. That is your greatest enemy. And AoC is basically a loading screen experience spiced up with some gameplay. I kid you not. That is why with all its shitty graphics people still play WOW. You can take a horse and run from Booty Bay to the Eastern Plaguelands without ever seeing a single loading screen. Try that in AoC.

3. Releasing a game that requires a high end computer to run at medium settings goes against the whole point of an MMO (FYI the first M stands for Massive). Anyone with a computer older than 2 years will not be able to play this game at all. Sure some people run dual 8800 GTS in SLI mode, but even them don't run the game very smoothly. These problems can be reduced after release, but a crappy game engine is a crappy game engine.

If WOW can avoid the loading screen plague and have the game running on average machines, it will have a decent shot at success. If the gameplay and combat are good of course :)

I almost wish AoC was done in the art style of WoW, but with the flare of a Savage Sword of Conan graphic novel.  That way it could be seamless like WoW and probably run way smoother than it does now.  

These graphics maybe cartoony, but these graphics don't drag a computer to its knees.

When I want a game with wow graphics, I play on my old Amiga =(

Originally posted by Kilmar

When I want a game with wow graphics, I play on my old Amiga =(

Yes you do that. The MINORITY of players would agree with you.

The rest play what they think is fun out there. WoW, if anything, has proved that.

Both these games are looking to blow chunks so far, and chunks is my dog, see yall in guildwars 2.

Originally posted by boognish75

Both these games are looking to blow chunks so far, and chunks is my dog, see yall in guildwars 2.

LOL, we'll see about guildwars 2..... that made me laugh.. guildwars.. hahahahah.

yeah, guildwars is so smooth....i really feel im a part of the world... hahahha

he was prolly being sarcastic about gw2 -.-

chunky chicken noodle plox

I dont agree at all.

Sure AoC pushes a bit, but it's nothing you cant overcome, in time, the hardware existent in the market will be far superior than the AoC reccomended.

If you want to stick with old crappy wow, by all means, just do that. No1 is forcing you to try other games, or even envolve in the MMORPG scenery. (i play wow since 3 years ago, and well.. i cant take it anymore, done most end game content, but simply feel the game is very casual and has nothing new to offer).

And well WoW graphics might be simple and need low spec system, but the game is normally very buggy in terms of system crashes, for example wow doesnt run at all with the new 9xxx and 8xxx Nvidia Graphics, normally will generate the BLACK SCREEN error from doom.

So, just because you can't be arsed to save some money for a new rig, must all the players be stuck with outdated graphics? no way. My machine is not very strong, but just from seeing AoC/Aion/War i feel compelled to start saving again for my new computer.

Rememnber, Game Technoloy can never stop envolving, if a game that comes out 3 years later than the other, and the Graphics aren't extremely better, that would be indeed something very wrong!

Regards (English not my main language)

katzu

I don't agree.  I don't have a super computer by any means.  Mine cost me less then 1000 to build.  It is an AMD 64 X2 4200+, 4 gigs of PC6400 ram, 8800GTS (g92) 512MB graphics card, and running Windows Vista 64-bit.  I get around 50-60 FPS on the game with it set to high graphics and then some tweaks to lower the graphics a bit.   (Like lower shadows, distance, etc) 

I personally have some major issues with AoC but performance definitely isn't a valid one.  Most people with performance issues are either a. playing on the open beta where they are stress testing the server or b.  don't have up to date drivers for their equipment. 

The open beta client is not the same as the closed beta client.  I know people seem to think this isn't true but I have both and they do not run the same for my PC. 

Also, keep in mind before you start shouting Fanboy.  I have a CE copy of Warhammer preordered from the first day that WAR went on Preorder, even though I have not gotten into the WAR beta yet (even though I signed up on June 1st for beta) yet I do not have any copy of AoC on pre-order and I am in the beta for that game. 

I start having feeling that all this crying about poor performance in AoC OB is caused by disappointment over one’s own PC. It is easier to blame the game than to admit, that one’s own rig is too weak to run it with desired level of details. Majority of people tries to run it on recommended spec, without paying attention to recommended resolution listed next to it.

I have stability issues with the client, I even had to reinstall it already because I couldn’t pass the loading screen, but in-game performance never caused me any trouble: I have steady 40 fps almost all the time playing 1900x1200 No AA 4 AF bloom off.

Well I have a very new, top end computer and I don't give a shit, because I have enough money that I don't care. You can't play the game either move on or upgrade, although I didn't mind WoW's graphics and it never bothered me it will soon become a thing of the past, AoC is merely pushing the envelope.

Originally posted by Vallador

I have stability issues with the client, I even had to reinstall it already because I couldn’t pass the loading screen, but in-game performance never caused me any trouble: I have steady 40 fps almost all the time playing 1900x1200 No AA 4 AF bloom off.

Cool, so some dude has a brand new system, optimized, defragged, using the latest beta drivers, running Vista 64 with 8gb RAM and AoC runs with everything full minus bloom/shadows at 40-60 frames. Freaking great. Maybe its just me, but the graphics are not that jaw-dropping. It's not Crysis. It looks good, but that's about it.

The same rig gets you 80-120 frames in LOTRO ,which has brilliant graphics (IMHO), with no LOADING SCREENS every 5 minutes!

A game engine is a very complex piece of software that can be either brilliantly built and optimized (LOTRO) where even on a medium system you get great results or very poorly implemented causing it to be a resource hog as in Vanguard. Unfortunately, as it stands, AoC is much closer to Vanguard.