Well first I will start with the good before the bad.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
The Good:
To start off I would like to say that I was a devoted fan to AC1 for almost 4 years and some of my best video game memories are of AC1 with my friends on pvp darktide server. Ac1 was such a great game with depth, lore, exploration, items, and character creation. When you built your char you planned it from the get go and when you where done you where proud of your accomplishments unlike many of the games out there to day. Also AC1 was the best MMORPG PVP engine to date in my own opinion and nothing has even come close to there pvp engine where you can actually dodge spells and arrows :O really some developers need to crack open a dictionary and look up the word Dodge and figure out what it means again. Anyhow I had nothing but high praises for AC1 before it started getting stupid with bad patch after bad patch. This is where I think they went wrong with ac2. In AC 1 they almost never nurfed anything. They just kept on putting higher and higher content in. Stronger and stronger content until it was unbalanced as hell. Then instead of nurfing they just put STRONGER stuff in to balance it until it spiraled into the LVL 150+ range to compete or do anything, utterly destroying the game in my opinion. I think they went the reverse route with ac2 from what I hear with the nurf bat, but I never played it overly long to find out because it was horrible, which takes me to the bad.
The Bad:
Well the shutting down of AC2 only proves that there is a god. This game was such an incredible let down to me and all my friends from AC1, it was truly sad. The only good part of ac2 was the graphics, the rest of it could be flushed down the toilet. I really don't know what the developers where thinking but right from beta it seemed doomed to fail. They didn't stick to ANY of there AC1 roots other then some lore and some monsters. They changed the entire combat engine to some piece of crap engine. They changed the character building system to a cheap rip off Diablo 2's skill system. The game felt like Diablo 2 and EQ meshed together instead of AC2. Why would you create an entirely different game when you have something good as a predecessor, and then expect your fan basis to stay ? This just baffles me to this day. If they would of just taken the general game mechanics from ac1 down to the world / character template / depth and just put a new graphics engine with some new tweaks, ideas, stories, quests, races, ect, It would still be going today. After buying AC2 3 months later I discontinued my subscription and used the cd as a coster as it was the only thing I could think of that was worth the money I spent on the game. All though it does make a good coaster as I still use it to this day. The sad part is I took a few more cracks at AC1 and have NEVER EVER looked back at ac2.
Truly sad it is.
But I hope that Turbine has learned a lot from there mistakes and will use it to better there future up coming games. With that all said I can only feel for the devs as well as it would be hard to shut down such a project, and with the shutdown of AC2 I only hope that one day they will make AC3 and truly get it right.
Lessons learned
- With a good product a person may tell 1 other person about maybe 2 if your lucky. With A bad product the person will tell everyone he knows how much it sucks.
- Sequels only split your subscription / population basis when you create an entirely different game. Ive taken the liberty of posting a link where the definition of sequel can be found - http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sequel
- Listen to you community and try your best to stay on the fence as much as possible when it comes to the decision making time.
- Dont release an expansion then shutdown the game. This just angers the locals :P
Originally posted by hyperionjr Does no one else care that they dodged the question concerning the number of players at the time of shut-down? I am curious as to how many( or how little) players it takes to close down an MMO. That way I can keep my eyes open.
Similar story here. played AC for 2 years and loved it. Played AC2 for 6 months and finally quit when they nerfed the skill tree of my main class (defender) after lots of other annoying nerfing on each update before that. As i said in the exit survey, its the difference between viable toons grouping to complete a task, and unviable toons being forced to group to do anything.
For those of you who want a quick summary: WoW 2million, AC 37.5k, AC2 15k (at Jan 05)
Also of interest is the Lineage / Lineage 2 population flip. As L2 was massively increasing, its probably significantly because Lineage players were moving over to it. Maybe too early to tell but it does suggest that a sequel doesnt alienate your hardcore gamers by definition. Not having played either though, I couldnt make a call on how similar they are.
they should never have called it AC2, the number of people coming in appalled that it was nothing like AC1 shows people had an expectation for it to be exactly like AC1 and not being open to new ideas.
I am as open to new ideas as the next guy but when you change the entire game and the only things that stayed where some monsters name and a tiny portion or lore its not a "Squeal" its a new game. So agian I point to the squeal definition.
Lets look at some other games that are successfull that have Squeals
Might and Magic - Changed game features, added new idea's, but kept what original concept in tact.
EQ - Changed game features, added new idea's, but kept what original concept in tact.
Now lets look at AC2
AC 2 - Kept a small portion of lore and a small portion of the creature data base. Rest of game changed to be a poorly made mesh of D2 and EQ 2
I played the game from Beta and got nerfed out of playing like so many others. It seems the biggest lesson they still have not learn't is to listen to the people that are paying your wages!!! I just cancelled my DDO preorder as I really have no faith in Turbines ability to manage a Mmorg.
One of the key lessons that we learned is the customer perception of sequels in the MMO space. They end up splitting your community more so than growing it. So they are counterproductive, unlike sequels in other game genres where they can be really successful.
L O L. They needed to actually release a game to learn THAT? ... *shakes head in disbelief*
------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Mandolin
Designers need to move away from the old D&D level-based model which was never designed for player vs player combat in the first place.
Yeah I wasn't criticizing. EQ2 is nothing like eq as well so it was also dismissed by a lot of players. Vanguard is in fact being seen as the true EQ2.
wow i really cant believe how many babies out there are crying over being nerfed, big freaking deal, i played AC2 from release and am still playing, and when my class got nerfed.....i learned to deal with it and not let it get to me, and the second they hit everyone else with a nerf it goes somthing like this WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA and they just never learn to make it better, never taking the time to go hey, i can do this...wow it works... how cares about a nerf...but meh, some ppl just dont like a challange
AC2 Hype way back when it first started to come out told me to forget it. Not sure what it was but something there didn't bite me. I predicted back then this would die a slow death and for a change ..... I was right.
I feel bad for the few people who bought the update only top have them cancel right after. This smells to me and it would seem a fair thing to do to refund all those that bought into it. I have been sitting patiently waiting for D&D but now with it being Turbine my feelings are skeptical of a company that deals thier people this way. I wonder did they add sand to the Vasaline before saying bend over sucka ?
If you bought the expansion you should all get your money back ... They just sold you a PIG in a Poke -- the oldest trick in the books ....
Sorry, but, NERF NERF NERF and you will eventually NERF your player base enough, that you have nobody left who gives a crap what you do to the characters....
You want to pick up on some Customers ?? world of warcraft is starting to swing the NERF bat also ... and, they are taking some Mighty Big swings at the characters PEOPLE LOVE .... Droves are leaving, and not looking back ... In my small world I have seen 8 people drop accounts in wow just this week... Nerf the Hunters .. nerf the rogues .. Nerf the warlocks ... Nerf the mage -- Nerf the Paladin ... horray smart WOW -- keep up the Nerfing you flaggin Nerfs ...
Are You Ready to pick up on the flow ?? HAVE you Listened to ANYTHING YOUR players have told you ??
SWG - - - NERF ,NERF, NERF, --- players flood away from the game, they knew and loved ---
STOP NERFING THE CHARACTERS ! ! GIVE better stats to the Weaker Characters to compensate for THE percieved weakness ....
THERE I SAID IT ! ! ! !
DID YOU READ IT ???
Did IT SINK IN ???
STOP NERF -- ADD to the WEAKNESS - DO NOT TAKE AWAY, but, ADD ! ! ! !
IT is such a simple concept for sucess, that I should charge you a few million dollars for that advice ---- and it would have been cheap at that ....
4 million monthly subscriptions and box sales -- you do the math --
BUT .... THEY Have started to NERF -- and when they do it more and more as they WILL ... Good BYE WOW millions of subscriptions --- HELLO new game waiting in the wings ...
Will it be DDO ?? MEO ? IT could be .... BUT YOU BETTER have your characters where you want them at release or start tweeking to the positive end if need be ....
Look to the stars to know HE is with us. HE hung them as markers, of times and of seasons.
I'm not sure if Turbine has said anything but I see no reason why they won't be transfering all AC2 players to AC1 for free. It will only add more players to AC1. So, the players aren't completely out of luck.
I really thought they would keep AC2 going, even on 1 server. Turbine can't afford to keep AC2 going on one server with no more updates? That's hard to believe. Sure the game would slowly die anyway but there wouldn't be half as much criticism. If they kept AC2 around, they could have offered it as part of an all access subscription plan like Sony's Station Pass. AC1, AC2, DDO, and LotRO for $21.95. Keeping AC2 would have made it a little more enticing and kept some of Turbine's credit up.
In Turbine's defense somewhat, I don't think closing AC2 is going to have a huge effect on the future players of DDO and LotRO. They are mostly a completely different group. Sure, there are a few people now who might say forget it, but the money they are saving by not keeping AC2 going in the long run I'm sure will be a lot more profitable. Especially if DDO and LotRO turn out good, watch how quickly AC2 is forgotten.
Probably beating a dead horse but I have had not forum with which to voice my opinion.
I was playing AC2 when they dropped the axe and I read the interview Mmorpg.com had with that Hanna guy.
Give me a break, he side stepped the one question they posed to him that was burning in my mind.
Why release the expansion and then kill the game shortly after?
I bought 2 copies of the Expansion, one for me and one for my wife. There was not an indication that the game was going down. We got robbed by Turbine, no other word for it. They knew that game was going south and they wanted to sting us one more time. So they released that xpack, alot of people bought it, and now they are running away with the money, and we have CDs with a worthless set of files on it that, at best can be used to make mobiles out of at my son's elementary school.
I seriously hope D&D Online flops, along with everything Turbine touches. What you have done is wrong, just wrong .....and you know it, Hanna.
If you had any kind of conscience , you would refund everyone's money who bought that Xpack, yea, we got to play it for a while, but you got the subscription payment for that.
Give us back our money
You tried to boost the subscriber base with the Xpack and it didn't work. What did you have to lose? Nothing. What did you have to gain? The monthly subscriber charge X every player that was playing at the time. And you were collecting that all the way up to the last month it was running.
Perhaps they did advertise in magazines and websites. But they were websites for MMORPGs. Anyone at those sites are players of them already. Retired players probably don't surf those sites anymore, potential new players don't know about those sites.
In my book, Turbine has a black eye for what they pulled on AC2, no question.
Originally posted by hyperionjr Does no one else care that they dodged the question concerning the number of players at the time of shut-down? I am curious as to how many( or how little) players it takes to close down an MMO. That way I can keep my eyes open.
Well my little brother played earlier this summer, and think there was around 50 players online at a time normally on the kvk server.
Then think they merged with frostfell or something and there were 250 total online at peak time.
so those are soe pretty sad numbers.
you can find more people on a couple of random FPS servers for any game.
Wow. I love QAs where the creators never actually /answer/ the questions. They just give huge broad, and vague answers which really just skip around the topic. Essentially, this is what I got from all of that.
"Yeah, so we're shutting down the game right after releasing an expansion pack. We're not going to tell you the reasons /why/. And when asked if it bothers customers that we shut down, we'll use the excuse that it was because it was to boost sales. (Which it was, but it didn't show a concern for the gamer). What? Private servers? Just because /we/ can throw it away, doesn't mean /you/ can have it!"
I hate to see this with games. I bought Asheron's Call 2, and it seemed like a good idea at the time. I never played it. The game wouldn't run for me, for some reason. But this reminds me of the tragic ends of most games. You buy a game, you sink your time, and money into it and you retain no right to that game other than the fact you get to own a private copy of a game that you need /their/ server for to play. I understand there's a maintenence fee for these servers. I also understand you don't want to give out your subscriber base to the game you're going to shut down because some competitor might be like, "This is our chance to... Well, they're already shutting down the game. So what?" However, it seems to me that the spokesmen did not show any sort of gratitude or compassion for the most important factor; the players itself. When Earth And Beyond shut down it transfered everyone to EVE Online. MMOs offer very little security for their games. I agree that it's a bad idea to release a sequal for an MMO. I'm noticing the same problem wiht EQ and EQ2's member-bases. And I compliment games like Dark Age of Camelot, Ultima Online, the ones that just keep going. I believe some sort of compensation should be given to AC2 subscribers.
I bought this game when it first came out and was hugely disappointed. It wasn't even a fraction as good as the first Asheron's Call. It seemed to rely on having nice graphics and very, very little else. I played it for 1 day and then binned it. You may say that perhaps I didn't give it a chance but it really didn't grab me... at all.
I was one of the first few people to have a level 50 character. And I was probably the first to have two level 50 characters. Tactician and archer. Sold em on ebay for $1000 because I knew the game was headed for disaster even before I played retail I knew it wouldn't last.
""""You want the real reason AC2 tanked: Their Combat system did not work.""""
Armor didn't work in the game. If you tried to fight a monster that was 5 levels lower than you with melee, it could destroy you. But if you used a tactician with walls for armor, you could kill several monsters at once that were 25+ levels higher than you.
I warned them in beta that their game would fail, and they had to change combat. If armor mattered, and tactican walls weren't so powerful, the game could have done well.
You can't have a successful RPG if your combat system is broken. Combat is the one part of the RPG that computers can do well.
Originally posted by CrazyJim ... You can't have a successful RPG if your combat system is broken. Combat is the one part of the RPG that computers can do well.
I agree. I was hugely disappointed in beta and after a week of play I completely lost interest in it.
The whole game was overly simplified. I like ranged attacks, but they were all basically the same. My archer shooting flaming arrows was nearly identical to my mage throwing fireballs.
Comments
Well first I will start with the good before the bad.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
The Good:
To start off I would like to say that I was a devoted fan to AC1 for almost 4 years and some of my best video game memories are of AC1 with my friends on pvp darktide server. Ac1 was such a great game with depth, lore, exploration, items, and character creation. When you built your char you planned it from the get go and when you where done you where proud of your accomplishments unlike many of the games out there to day. Also AC1 was the best MMORPG PVP engine to date in my own opinion and nothing has even come close to there pvp engine where you can actually dodge spells and arrows :O really some developers need to crack open a dictionary and look up the word Dodge and figure out what it means again. Anyhow I had nothing but high praises for AC1 before it started getting stupid with bad patch after bad patch. This is where I think they went wrong with ac2. In AC 1 they almost never nurfed anything. They just kept on putting higher and higher content in. Stronger and stronger content until it was unbalanced as hell. Then instead of nurfing they just put STRONGER stuff in to balance it until it spiraled into the LVL 150+ range to compete or do anything, utterly destroying the game in my opinion. I think they went the reverse route with ac2 from what I hear with the nurf bat, but I never played it overly long to find out because it was horrible, which takes me to the bad.
The Bad:
Well the shutting down of AC2 only proves that there is a god. This game was such an incredible let down to me and all my friends from AC1, it was truly sad. The only good part of ac2 was the graphics, the rest of it could be flushed down the toilet. I really don't know what the developers where thinking but right from beta it seemed doomed to fail. They didn't stick to ANY of there AC1 roots other then some lore and some monsters. They changed the entire combat engine to some piece of crap engine. They changed the character building system to a cheap rip off Diablo 2's skill system. The game felt like Diablo 2 and EQ meshed together instead of AC2. Why would you create an entirely different game when you have something good as a predecessor, and then expect your fan basis to stay ? This just baffles me to this day. If they would of just taken the general game mechanics from ac1 down to the world / character template / depth and just put a new graphics engine with some new tweaks, ideas, stories, quests, races, ect, It would still be going today.
After buying AC2 3 months later I discontinued my subscription and used the cd as a coster as it was the only thing I could think of that was worth the money I spent on the game. All though it does make a good coaster as I still use it to this day. The sad part is I took a few more cracks at AC1 and have NEVER EVER looked back at ac2.
Truly sad it is.
But I hope that Turbine has learned a lot from there mistakes and will use it to better there future up coming games. With that all said I can only feel for the devs as well as it would be hard to shut down such a project, and with the shutdown of AC2 I only hope that one day they will make AC3 and truly get it right.
Lessons learned
- With a good product a person may tell 1 other person about maybe 2 if your lucky. With A bad product the person will tell everyone he knows how much it sucks.
- Sequels only split your subscription / population basis when you create an entirely different game. Ive taken the liberty of posting a link where the definition of sequel can be found - http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sequel
- Listen to you community and try your best to stay on the fence as much as possible when it comes to the decision making time.
- Dont release an expansion then shutdown the game. This just angers the locals :P
me
http://www.mmogchart.com/ is a useful reference for that info.
current market leaders: http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1.html
others including AC and AC2: http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart3.html
Similar story here. played AC for 2 years and loved it. Played AC2 for 6 months and finally quit when they nerfed the skill tree of my main class (defender) after lots of other annoying nerfing on each update before that. As i said in the exit survey, its the difference between viable toons grouping to complete a task, and unviable toons being forced to group to do anything.
For those of you who want a quick summary: WoW 2million, AC 37.5k, AC2 15k (at Jan 05)
Also of interest is the Lineage / Lineage 2 population flip. As L2 was massively increasing, its probably significantly because Lineage players were moving over to it. Maybe too early to tell but it does suggest that a sequel doesnt alienate your hardcore gamers by definition. Not having played either though, I couldnt make a call on how similar they are.
they should never have called it AC2, the number of people coming in appalled that it was nothing like AC1 shows people had an expectation for it to be exactly like AC1 and not being open to new ideas.
I am as open to new ideas as the next guy but when you change the entire game and the only things that stayed where some monsters name and a tiny portion or lore its not a "Squeal" its a new game. So agian I point to the squeal definition.
Lets look at some other games that are successfull that have Squeals
Might and Magic - Changed game features, added new idea's, but kept what original concept in tact.
EQ - Changed game features, added new idea's, but kept what original concept in tact.
Now lets look at AC2
AC 2 - Kept a small portion of lore and a small portion of the creature data base. Rest of game changed to be a poorly made mesh of D2 and EQ 2
me
I played the game from Beta and got nerfed out of playing like so many others.
It seems the biggest lesson they still have not learn't is to listen to the people that are paying your wages!!!
I just cancelled my DDO preorder as I really have no faith in Turbines ability to manage a Mmorg.
L O L. They needed to actually release a game to learn THAT? ... *shakes head in disbelief*
------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mandolin
Designers need to move away from the old D&D level-based model which was never designed for player vs player combat in the first place.
Yeah I wasn't criticizing. EQ2 is nothing like eq as well so it was also dismissed by a lot of players. Vanguard is in fact being seen as the true EQ2.
Neo-Damerus lvl 70 Zerk
Asherons Call 2
Playing from release to death
AC2 FOREVER
AC2 Hype way back when it first started to come out told me to forget it. Not sure what it was but something there didn't bite me. I predicted back then this would die a slow death and for a change ..... I was right.
I feel bad for the few people who bought the update only top have them cancel right after. This smells to me and it would seem a fair thing to do to refund all those that bought into it. I have been sitting patiently waiting for D&D but now with it being Turbine my feelings are skeptical of a company that deals thier people this way. I wonder did they add sand to the Vasaline before saying bend over sucka ?
If you bought the expansion you should all get your money back ... They just sold you a PIG in a Poke -- the oldest trick in the books ....
Sorry, but, NERF NERF NERF and you will eventually NERF your player base enough, that you have nobody left who gives a crap what you do to the characters....
You want to pick up on some Customers ?? world of warcraft is starting to swing the NERF bat also ... and, they are taking some Mighty Big swings at the characters PEOPLE LOVE .... Droves are leaving, and not looking back ... In my small world I have seen 8 people drop accounts in wow just this week... Nerf the Hunters .. nerf the rogues .. Nerf the warlocks ... Nerf the mage -- Nerf the Paladin ... horray smart WOW -- keep up the Nerfing you flaggin Nerfs ...
Are You Ready to pick up on the flow ?? HAVE you Listened to ANYTHING YOUR players have told you ??
SWG - - - NERF ,NERF, NERF, --- players flood away from the game, they knew and loved ---
STOP NERFING THE CHARACTERS ! ! GIVE better stats to the Weaker Characters to compensate for THE percieved weakness ....
THERE I SAID IT ! ! ! !
DID YOU READ IT ???
Did IT SINK IN ???
STOP NERF -- ADD to the WEAKNESS - DO NOT TAKE AWAY, but, ADD ! ! ! !
IT is such a simple concept for sucess, that I should charge you a few million dollars for that advice ---- and it would have been cheap at that ....
4 million monthly subscriptions and box sales -- you do the math --
BUT .... THEY Have started to NERF -- and when they do it more and more as they WILL ... Good BYE WOW millions of subscriptions --- HELLO new game waiting in the wings ...
Will it be DDO ?? MEO ? IT could be .... BUT YOU BETTER have your characters where you want them at release or start tweeking to the positive end if need be ....
Look to the stars to know HE is with us. HE hung them as markers, of times and of seasons.
I'm not sure if Turbine has said anything but I see no reason why they won't be transfering all AC2 players to AC1 for free. It will only add more players to AC1. So, the players aren't completely out of luck.
I really thought they would keep AC2 going, even on 1 server. Turbine can't afford to keep AC2 going on one server with no more updates? That's hard to believe. Sure the game would slowly die anyway but there wouldn't be half as much criticism. If they kept AC2 around, they could have offered it as part of an all access subscription plan like Sony's Station Pass. AC1, AC2, DDO, and LotRO for $21.95. Keeping AC2 would have made it a little more enticing and kept some of Turbine's credit up.
In Turbine's defense somewhat, I don't think closing AC2 is going to have a huge effect on the future players of DDO and LotRO. They are mostly a completely different group. Sure, there are a few people now who might say forget it, but the money they are saving by not keeping AC2 going in the long run I'm sure will be a lot more profitable. Especially if DDO and LotRO turn out good, watch how quickly AC2 is forgotten.
Probably beating a dead horse but I have had not forum with which to voice my opinion.
I was playing AC2 when they dropped the axe and I read the interview Mmorpg.com had with that Hanna guy.
Give me a break, he side stepped the one question they posed to him that was burning in my mind.
Why release the expansion and then kill the game shortly after?
I bought 2 copies of the Expansion, one for me and one for my wife. There was not an indication that the game was going down. We got robbed by Turbine, no other word for it. They knew that game was going south and they wanted to sting us one more time. So they released that xpack, alot of people bought it, and now they are running away with the money, and we have CDs with a worthless set of files on it that, at best can be used to make mobiles out of at my son's elementary school.
I seriously hope D&D Online flops, along with everything Turbine touches. What you have done is wrong, just wrong .....and you know it, Hanna.
If you had any kind of conscience , you would refund everyone's money who bought that Xpack, yea, we got to play it for a while, but you got the subscription payment for that.
Give us back our money
You tried to boost the subscriber base with the Xpack and it didn't work. What did you have to lose? Nothing. What did you have to gain? The monthly subscriber charge X every player that was playing at the time. And you were collecting that all the way up to the last month it was running.
Hahahaha,
Perhaps they did advertise in magazines and websites. But they were websites for MMORPGs. Anyone at those sites are players of them already. Retired players probably don't surf those sites anymore, potential new players don't know about those sites.
In my book, Turbine has a black eye for what they pulled on AC2, no question.
Well my little brother played earlier this summer, and think there was around 50 players online at a time normally on the kvk server.
Then think they merged with frostfell or something and there were 250 total online at peak time.
so those are soe pretty sad numbers.
you can find more people on a couple of random FPS servers for any game.
-In memory of Laura "Taera" Genender. Passed away on Aug/13/08-
|
RISING DRAGOON ~AION US ONLINE LEGION for Elyos
Wow. I love QAs where the creators never actually /answer/ the questions. They just give huge broad, and vague answers which really just skip around the topic. Essentially, this is what I got from all of that.
"Yeah, so we're shutting down the game right after releasing an expansion pack. We're not going to tell you the reasons /why/. And when asked if it bothers customers that we shut down, we'll use the excuse that it was because it was to boost sales. (Which it was, but it didn't show a concern for the gamer). What? Private servers? Just because /we/ can throw it away, doesn't mean /you/ can have it!"
I hate to see this with games. I bought Asheron's Call 2, and it seemed like a good idea at the time. I never played it. The game wouldn't run for me, for some reason. But this reminds me of the tragic ends of most games. You buy a game, you sink your time, and money into it and you retain no right to that game other than the fact you get to own a private copy of a game that you need /their/ server for to play. I understand there's a maintenence fee for these servers. I also understand you don't want to give out your subscriber base to the game you're going to shut down because some competitor might be like, "This is our chance to... Well, they're already shutting down the game. So what?" However, it seems to me that the spokesmen did not show any sort of gratitude or compassion for the most important factor; the players itself. When Earth And Beyond shut down it transfered everyone to EVE Online. MMOs offer very little security for their games. I agree that it's a bad idea to release a sequal for an MMO. I'm noticing the same problem wiht EQ and EQ2's member-bases. And I compliment games like Dark Age of Camelot, Ultima Online, the ones that just keep going. I believe some sort of compensation should be given to AC2 subscribers.
But, then again, who listens to us?
We're just the customers.
Proudly,
Ryan Tullis.
I was one of the first few people to have a level 50 character. And I was probably the first to have two level 50 characters. Tactician and archer. Sold em on ebay for $1000 because I knew the game was headed for disaster even before I played retail I knew it wouldn't last.
""""You want the real reason AC2 tanked: Their Combat system did not work.""""
Armor didn't work in the game. If you tried to fight a monster that was 5 levels lower than you with melee, it could destroy you. But if you used a tactician with walls for armor, you could kill several monsters at once that were 25+ levels higher than you.
I warned them in beta that their game would fail, and they had to change combat. If armor mattered, and tactican walls weren't so powerful, the game could have done well.
You can't have a successful RPG if your combat system is broken. Combat is the one part of the RPG that computers can do well.
I agree. I was hugely disappointed in beta and after a week of play I completely lost interest in it.
The whole game was overly simplified. I like ranged attacks, but they were all basically the same. My archer shooting flaming arrows was nearly identical to my mage throwing fireballs.