well with my track record of playing really poor releases i'm kind of getting used to it..but i think this time we might be pleasantly suprised..well one can hope..i was there at Vanguard release,trust me AOC  had nothing on that game.i remember on one occasion in Vanguard that when i logged in with my char ,all that was their was 2 eyeballs.every quest was just about bugged,the list was endless.and i'm sure some of the other peeps that post on this forum have their own horror stories.

Having a little caution is never a bad thing with FUncom.

Historically, they have horrible launches.  To say they've learned from their mistakes, has been said before.  And, they were wrong.  Will they have learned for this time?  Maybe, but I'm not willing to put money on it.

AO is on life support and still charging subs.  The team on it is small and stretched too thin.   They've been pulling the same carrots on a tattered string for the better part of a decade(engine/rebalance).  An innovative and deep/complex game left to rot by FUncom well before even those promises.  Bad support, balance, and QA.

AoC..  I didn't touch it because of how things went in AO and I'm still happy with that choice.  If AO is any indicator, AoC will suffer from TSW in the resources department(people/money).  FUncom likes to only play with it's shiny new toys.

FUncom IS the reason I stopped jumping at MMORPGs.  Everything after them that I've tried has just been reinforcement.

If you like it that's fine with me.  I'm not going to say to not buy their products.  I have friends who still play AO and AoC.  But, they aren't for me after past experiences.  It's too easy to wait and see.  Being able to say "first" is too important these days.   I think too many people are paying to play just to be first.  Then what?  Boredom.   Stop caring about others and only play what YOU find fun.

Buying bad MMOs is like giving your dog a treat for pooping on the floor.  You are sending the wrong message. 

Originally posted by TheYear1500

 You explicitly said the game was bad 

Uhm..  that is what you said.. about my post, which said:

Originally posted by arieste

Originally posted by L0C0Man

Have a really bad launch, and even if months later the game becomes the best and most polished ever, it will be a ghost town by then and still forever be known as a buggy and lousy game because of launch

/shrug.  

 

Like i said, TOR and LoTRO and Rift all had amazing launches.  LoTRO went nothing but downhill from there, revived only by its amazing F2P system.  This despite the fact that it's probably the best AAA themepark MMO ever made.  TOR has had a nearly flawless launch and it doesn't help the game suck any less, it somehow managed to be a total ghost-town even with a reported 2 million people playing.  Rift had an amazing launch and is actually quite a good game, but 90% of the people I know didn't last past a month.  

 

What i'm saying is, a good launch doesn't really mean anything either.  A good game with a good launch obviously has the best chance to succeed.  But in the long term, it's a really fickle market and things can go either way.  

 

I was playing MMOs long before EQ2 and WoW set a new standard for polished launchs, so I'm fully used to working through a few bugs and lag and something not working.   A good MMO will entertain me for 3-10 years, so in the grand scheme of things, I don't care how the first 2-4 weeks of it go as much as I care about their being enough potential in it to keep me around for a long time.

You are implying the game failed or is bad in some way.  Try reading all of your post.  

Originally posted by TheYear1500

Originally posted by arieste

Originally posted by L0C0Man

Have a really bad launch, and even if months later the game becomes the best and most polished ever, it will be a ghost town by then and still forever be known as a buggy and lousy game because of launch

/shrug.  

 

Like i said, TOR and LoTRO and Rift all had amazing launches.  LoTRO went nothing but downhill from there, revived only by its amazing F2P system.  This despite the fact that it's probably the best AAA themepark MMO ever made.  TOR has had a nearly flawless launch and it doesn't help the game suck any less, it somehow managed to be a total ghost-town even with a reported 2 million people playing.  Rift had an amazing launch and is actually quite a good game, but 90% of the people I know didn't last past a month.  

 

What i'm saying is, a good launch doesn't really mean anything either.  A good game with a good launch obviously has the best chance to succeed.  But in the long term, it's a really fickle market and things can go either way.  

 

I was playing MMOs long before EQ2 and WoW set a new standard for polished launchs, so I'm fully used to working through a few bugs and lag and something not working.   A good MMO will entertain me for 3-10 years, so in the grand scheme of things, I don't care how the first 2-4 weeks of it go as much as I care about their being enough potential in it to keep me around for a long time.

You are implying the game failed or is bad in some way.  Try reading all of your post.  

/facepalm.

i am implying, that despite a good launch and despite being a good game, people still quit Rift in droves.  this was a response to the OP saying that the quality of he launch is the most important thing.  i'm not implying anything about the game.

I dont feel like there is enough information out there (at lest not easy to get to) for how close it is to launch. If I get a chance to try or even beta the game, I will jump on it because I am curious. There is just not enough information yet to say if it is going to be good or bad. 

Btw, this is the first post I made about this game, and I will not make anouther till I know more.. otherwise I am just talking out of my ass.

I really, REALLY want to pre-order this game, but like people are saying, I don't want to pay for a game that launches broken.

Also, I disagree with their "If you want to beta test, give us your money" stance as well.  Funcom, you haven't EARNED that type of trust from your community yet.  Your games end up ok, but so far you're batting a big fat 0 for launches.  First impressions can make or break your game.

I WANT THIS GAME TO WORK! It had three sided pvp.  It's skill based.  It's something different from what's out there.  It looks great. Short of flying ships/planes and Mechs, it has EVERYTHING I want in a game!!!

I really, REALLY hope this game does well because I think it can change the industry if it does what it claims to do.  But no, I think I'm going to wait for either: a) launch and see how the game does or; b)see if I get a beta invite before launch so I can see how the game is holding up.  I don't mind queues, that just means the game  is popular.  I want to see if they're releasing an ultimately unplayable game or not.

If there is any justice in the world, this game will launch smoothly.

---

Originally posted by MindTrigger

---

Originally posted by TheYear1500
I have been waiting for some time to play this game.  Just the idea of it is cool.  That being said its Funcom and well....  So even though i am very much looking forward to this game and hope its greate.  I fully expect for it to be bad.  I have to say its kind of a nice feeling.  Even if the game is just OK it will be more than i expected, and will still be fun to play.  

---

I think you have no clue how it's going to be, but if you want to assume the worse, then go for it.  I'm going to wait and see how it is and then discuss it. 
I personally have to believe that game companies must have learned by now that a crappy launch can turn their game from potential blockbuster hit, to a niche game.  They are either doing it on purpose now to just make a profit from box sales, or they are too stupid to have jobs.  Funcom learned from the AoC launch as had been said hundreds of times now, and the team developing this game isn't even the same team.  AoC wasn't Ragnar's project, and he's found himself in the unfortunate position of having to appologize for it for a very long time now.  If Ragnar turns around and delivers the same problem to us, he will be damaging his career and losing the respect of a lot of followers.  I'm personally gambling my money on Ragnar, not Funcom.
Also as gamers, we need to realize that a completely smooth launch is more of a fluke than it is reality as has been proven time and time again.  It would be nice if all the bugs could be worked out before launch, but anyone who works in software knows that many bugs show up while software is getting hammered by real world use.  If there are hidden bugs, the gamers will find them.  If shit is broken, they should let us know they are fixing it, and deliver regular updates and patches.  I'll be ok with that assumings things are getting better and they show that they care.
To me, the biggest problem wasn't the bugs in AoC, or even the lack of content.  It was the arrogant way in which Funcom completely ignored the users who were expressing serious game-breaking problems.  We all sat their for weeks waiting for Funcom to give us some information, but they failed to communicate or to even remotely seem like they cared about their paying customers.
This drove people away in the beginning more than anything did.  All they had to do was say "We're sorry about this, and we are fixing it now, and here is what we are working on first and here's how we're going to repay you for the trouble".  Had they done this, I might have stuck around, but instead I felt brushed off.  I left before the first month and never paid them another dime for that game.  SWTOR suffered the same fate but for different reasons.  
 

---

No offence, but you tell someone they have no clue when they expressed their opinion based on historical facts and tack records that speak for themselves. Anyone who says they doubt Funcom can properly launch a game due to mismanagement, in fact does have a clue. The clue is that it's happened 2x before, It's an indicator.....a clue.

Then you express an opposing opinion that is based on your own personal assumptions and desires.

Also, smooth launches aren't a fluke. Trion did it. You can also say what you want about SWTOR as an MMORPG, but it's launch went pretty well. I haven't been following the game, but I'm not hearing a forum full of launch issues surrounding Tera either.

Next you say that your issue with AoC was the lack of communication from Funcom. But that's Funcom, not AoC. And I can tell you, that is one of the biggest reasons I quit AO last year. Among lack of new content and polish, Communication was all but absent and when it was there, it was the "It's coming, we are working on it" message over and over.

Originally posted by TheYear1500

Originally posted by arieste

Originally posted by L0C0Man

Have a really bad launch, and even if months later the game becomes the best and most polished ever, it will be a ghost town by then and still forever be known as a buggy and lousy game because of launch

/shrug.  

 

Like i said, TOR and LoTRO and Rift all had amazing launches.  LoTRO went nothing but downhill from there, revived only by its amazing F2P system.  This despite the fact that it's probably the best AAA themepark MMO ever made.  TOR has had a nearly flawless launch and it doesn't help the game suck any less, it somehow managed to be a total ghost-town even with a reported 2 million people playing.  Rift had an amazing launch and is actually quite a good game, but 90% of the people I know didn't last past a month.  

 

What i'm saying is, a good launch doesn't really mean anything either.  A good game with a good launch obviously has the best chance to succeed.  But in the long term, it's a really fickle market and things can go either way.  

 

I was playing MMOs long before EQ2 and WoW set a new standard for polished launchs, so I'm fully used to working through a few bugs and lag and something not working.   A good MMO will entertain me for 3-10 years, so in the grand scheme of things, I don't care how the first 2-4 weeks of it go as much as I care about their being enough potential in it to keep me around for a long time.

Sorry just because the people that you know left Rift does not mean the game is failing.  Its doing very well, and has a stable population.  

Then you should take your own comment back about AO and AOC being a failed game. AO has been going for years, and AOC is still around. I would think if both games are fail then they wouldn't be up and running after all these years.

I got a CBI in e-mail today, I did'nt pre-order. May have increased chance of invite if you do pre-order i guess. Log in tomorrow :). Check your mails peeps

Originally posted by stragen001

I agree that the launch will almost certainly be bad, because its funcom. They dont do launches well. It seems like someone higher up keeps rushing them to release games that arent ready. Boooo to the board of directors.

In the past, Funcom's biggest investors are Norwegian subsides from their government. When the subsides dry up the government demands a return on it's investment.

Originally posted by TheYear1500

Originally posted by arieste

i think you mean to say that launch will be bad.  Since both of Funcom's previous MMOs are some of the best MMOs available.  They just had the worst launches.  I mean, if it's the game that is bad.. you (by definition) will not enjoy playing it.  

That is fair.  Problem is that fixing the game after the fact really does not count.  Its just far too late.  

says who?? Anarchy online does very well so your statement is false, AOC of would of done better if there PVP was worth it, but it was NOT, also there PVE was way to instant which also messed the game up..

So bad releases do not make bad games, Oh did we forgot how bad WOW release was, and how well the game did , I guess we did.....

Rift had an awesome release and looked its  noty doing well, SWTOR had a good release and there losing people... So your statement  means nothing..

Originally posted by protoroc

Originally posted by stragen001

I agree that the launch will almost certainly be bad, because its funcom. They dont do launches well. It seems like someone higher up keeps rushing them to release games that arent ready. Boooo to the board of directors.

In the past, Funcom's biggest investors are Norwegian subsides from their government. When the subsides dry up the government demands a return on it's investment.

Originally posted by Nethriil

Originally posted by protoroc

Originally posted by stragen001

I agree that the launch will almost certainly be bad, because its funcom. They dont do launches well. It seems like someone higher up keeps rushing them to release games that arent ready. Boooo to the board of directors.

In the past, Funcom's biggest investors are Norwegian subsides from their government. When the subsides dry up the government demands a return on it's investment.

 

WrOng funcom is a public company traded on the stock exchange. Subsidies Are in fact free money from the government and has no implications of return on investment.

Exactly so Norway is bascily keeping failcom from bankruptcy

If AOC was anything close to a "good game" it wouldn't be a F2P ghost town.

Rofl, you can't get more delusional than that.

If TSW has a rocky launch, it's small community will grow and gain others. Funcom isn't BioWare; they don't take silly risks and make major mistakes twice. 

First, I give them credit for bringing AOC from trash to 'great' in a short amount of time. I never judge a game based on it's being. I judge the developers. FC may have made big errors with AOC, but at least they patched up the sinking ship instead of abandoning it. That dedication will follow to TSW. I think the Lifetime sub was a smart move. Lifetimers are basically people who plan to play this game regardless of anything else. (I being one of them). They alread have a solid base.

Originally posted by Sora2810

If TSW has a rocky launch, it's small community will grow and gain others. Funcom isn't BioWare; they don't take silly risks and make major mistakes twice. 

First, I give them credit for bringing AOC from trash to 'great' in a short amount of time. I never judge a game based on it's being. I judge the developers. FC may have made big errors with AOC, but at least they patched up the sinking ship instead of abandoning it. That dedication will follow to TSW. I think the Lifetime sub was a smart move. Lifetimers are basically people who plan to play this game regardless of anything else. (I being one of them). They alread have a solid base.

AO had a extremely bad launch. Did they learn from it? Wouldn't say so, because AoC had an extremely bad launch.

Way to many untested patches that needed hotfixes where implemented through AoC's life. Wouldn't say they learned from that either after the nth time it happened. 

Calling AoC great is also highly debatable, saying it only took a short amount of time is just a straight up lie. Unless your definition of short is measured in years. I call it a Gear Grind POS. Nothing great about it and I played for almost 3 years when it launched. I just didn't stick around for the game, but for the community I was in.

So what are we seeing now with TSW. Extreme lack of information across the board. People being held to a NDA even with only weeks before the official launch. Limited access in public events. All of this we saw with AoC as well. I'd say no, they haven't learned at all.

NDA is lifted this weekend m8 no idea what your on about lol..

It's going to be alright, I think. The skill system and story will definitely be interesting enough to keep people playing till they get bored.

Originally posted by Caldrin

NDA is lifted this weekend m8 no idea what your on about lol..

Don't mistake a no NDA limited access weekend event with the closed beta NDA. I've not seen any word on a general NDA lifting.