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.
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.
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"
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."
Rage - Head Honcho of the Revilers "Ragemore and Whine Less"
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.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
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.
Let it be known that I hate WoW with a passion and will defend almost any MMORPG against it. Current: FFXI (PC/360) Want: FFXIV, Stargate Worlds, Star Trek Online Past: AC, AoC, AO, Atlantica Online, CoH/V, DAoC, Dungeon Runners, D&DO, EVE, Everquest I+II, FlyFF, GW (all), Lineage 2, LOTRO, Mabinogi, Maplestory, PSO (DC/Xbox/PC), PSU (PC/360), PlanetSide, RO, Shadowbane, SWG (Pre-NGE), SotNW, TR, UO, Warhammer Online, WoW, WWIIO
"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).
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.
Tin foil hats for everyone!
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
"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.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
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
if your bored, visit my blog at: http://craylon.wordpress.com/ dealing with the look of mmos with the nvidia 3d vision glasses
"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.
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.
--------------------------------------------- I live to fight, and fight to live.
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.
"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.
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
Originally posted by MightyJudge 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
-------------- Played: Age of Conan, DDO, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, DaOC, MxO, EQ2, and so on... Wish List: Jumpgate Evolution, Star Wars: TOR, Star Trek
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?
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.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
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.
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?
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.
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..
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 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.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
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 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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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"
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."
Rage - Head Honcho of the Revilers
"Ragemore and Whine Less"
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.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
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.
Let it be known that I hate WoW with a passion and will defend almost any MMORPG against it.
Current: FFXI (PC/360)
Want: FFXIV, Stargate Worlds, Star Trek Online
Past: AC, AoC, AO, Atlantica Online, CoH/V, DAoC, Dungeon Runners, D&DO, EVE, Everquest I+II, FlyFF, GW (all), Lineage 2, LOTRO, Mabinogi, Maplestory, PSO (DC/Xbox/PC), PSU (PC/360), PlanetSide, RO, Shadowbane, SWG (Pre-NGE), SotNW, TR, UO, Warhammer Online, WoW, WWIIO
"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.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
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.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
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
if your bored, visit my blog at:
http://craylon.wordpress.com/ dealing with the look of mmos with the nvidia 3d vision glasses
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.
---------------------------------------------
I live to fight, and fight to live.
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
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.
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
--------------
Played: Age of Conan, DDO, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, DaOC, MxO, EQ2, and so on...
Wish List: Jumpgate Evolution, Star Wars: TOR, Star Trek
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.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
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.
-Semper ubi sub ubi!
always wear underwear
"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.
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.
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
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.
MMORPG's w/ Max level characters: DAoC, SWG, & WoW
Currently Playing: WAR
Preferred Playstyle: Roleplay/adventurous, in a sandbox game.
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.
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.
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.