| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (55)

Posted: May 5th 2008 3:56PM Azazel28 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WoW was released mid November on the 23rd, I got it from walmart at midnight and before I could log in, I had to download a little patcher...WHICH TOOK FOREVER, becuase it was using their brand new torrent system. I remember clear as damn day when I had to sit there for an hour downloading an extremely small file.

I only had one out of 8 of my friends play the game that night, everyone else gave up after we created our characters. At launch all their servers were tabbed by region, and of course we all ended up picking Archimonde becuase it was the top server in our area....that was a mistake.

There are many small downloads that occurred that did not carry patch notes, because they addressed critical issues and need to be fixed immediately.
Reply

Posted: May 6th 2008 5:57PM full said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
first patch for wow was 1.1.1, released on nov 17th 2004

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/patchnotes/patch-11-17-04.html

next was 1.1.2 on dec 6th, then came the patch that was mentioned
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2008 4:07PM Triskelion said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Did you look at the patch notes? Those patches listed had bug fixes. I was in the WoW beta, I've been to both BlizzCons, I was in the BC beta, etc. I know almost every possible thing there is to know about WoW. The game did not have the level or amount of patches you claim. I'll stand by my initial statement "WoW's issues were related to too many people, the game was shipped in a finished state".

Change your name from Lurker to Troller please.

Posted: May 5th 2008 4:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Guys, I really appreciate the comments and discussion, but please try to keep things civil. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If it's going to get heated, I'd appreciate if you'd move it to PMs or IMs.

This thread isn't about the history of the WoW beta. It's about the AoC beta.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2008 6:00PM Azazel28 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am trying to be civil here. I enjoyed WoW, I am not knocking it at all. I played the game from launch for almost a year and a half. For me a little over 15-18 months in an MMO is a fairly long period of time.

I am just trying to say that games will have their issues and we should focus on what the bottomline gameplay really has to offer. Bugs and always be fixed, graphically glitches can be fixed, and yes understand that if they are too numerous they can become game breaking. However, AoC as it stands on my computer is not game breaking. I find the combat system the world, the story, the graphics, pvp and the accessibility an improvement compared to most MMOs today.

I know without a doubt there are going to be some issues at launch with the game, but it all depends on the response time of Funcom...that will make or break the game. The servers will crash, the load times will be long, and pvp balance will need to be constantly tweaked. However, I will give Funcom a few weeks to work out most of the kinks, but after that it should be pretty smooth sailing...if not I will go elsewhere.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2008 4:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm playing on the open beta, and I'm getting 35-60 fps with 2 gigs of ram and a 7900 GTX video card. Before I updated to the latest nvidia drivers the performance was very poor. After the update the game has been running very smooth. I played most of the day yesterday :) and the game was very stable.

Posted: May 5th 2008 4:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What I want to know is - technical issues aside - what is the world like after level 20? Right now it is very instanced and very linear. Does this change after level 20? Or does it continue to be like DDO/GW where there are multiple instances of every zone, city, etc?

Posted: May 5th 2008 5:12PM Azazel28 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
yes it does, it becomes very open just like any other MMO. The world becomes much more varied and of course the cities are just HUGE!!!!

Closed beta testers are still under NDA so I can not really go into specifics, but I will say that there is a lot of variation and there is plenty of stuff to do.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2008 6:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not worried so much about the size, more about the instancing. Take EQ2 for example - it was a pretty large world, but it was heavily instanced (before the population dwindled, of course). What ended up happening is was you'd have Commonlands 1, Commonlands 2, Commonlands 3, etc. All the same zone but different instances.

In WoW for example, there is no instancing of the "world", just of the dungeons. I really hope AoC is like this. Instancing the world really cheapens the MMO experience.
Reply

Posted: May 6th 2008 12:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Really I am so sick of reading the beta crap, What is the point to review a beta? A beta is a beta open/close or anything else.

Sure there are bugs and it may run really bad on some cards and pcs and so on. But that is the point of a beta!! I known people in this time think Beta is the same like early address or a stable preview of the game or even a demo....... Well people its NOT!

Everyone that say this game will suck/frame rate nightmare/cancel my pre order and so on. Stop it this game has not even come out... they got weeks left to fix everything.... And maybe they already did they will not loss time update a beta with stop that is working and tested in house. Also the beta open/close is not the gold client!

So keep your complaints to your self till the day the real final client is out and the game running. And even when your not will be able to play on day 1 like you had to download 10gb of patches it is not a bad thing :)

Patches are good!

Posted: May 15th 2008 12:06PM Brendan Drain said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I definitely agree with this. I'm in the closed beta right now (and interestingly never signed a written NDA since I won my key in a competition) and it's great. When I encounter bugs and problems, I ignore them. The point of the beta now that the game has gone gold is to collect data on those bugs and problems that will allow the release version to be patched when the servers go online. The beta will still be buggy right up until release because they need to collect as much info on the bugs as possible. Testing of fixes is likely to be largely in-house.

I take my impressions of the game from a number of different factors:
- The graphic style and general look and feel of the world.
- How true to the original source the graphic style is.
- The character creation process.
- How interesting and distinct the class variations are.
- How fun the combat system is.
- How much the world meets with my expectations from the source material.
- The quality of the game's animations and how playing it feels.
- The quest system, quest design etc.
- The quality of the voice acting and how true it is to the source material.

Overall, I'd give Age of Conan a 9.5/10 on those measures. The quests are most of the same kind of thing you'd find in other MMOs like world of warcraft but they feel more immersive and instead or running around grabbing quests and completing them by bashing all the native monsters, I found myself doing one at a time and being led on a series of interconnected quests toward a final goal. It's more reminiscent of singleplayer RPGs than MMOs and that's something that the market has been severely lacking in.

Another thing I was apprehensive about was the fact that they made heavy use of voice acting. After the shameful voice acting in Everquest 2, I've become quite averse to voices in MMOs as in EQ2 they do tend to be extremely overacted, lack any kind of voice direction and don't fit the game world at all. Age of Conan did voice acting and they did it well. Every NPC you talk to has a voice and all of them sound right. Unlike in EQ2 where one human sounds scottish and another polish, the accents in AoC are true to the source material and consistent. Everyone sounds how you'd expect them to sound and there's no overacting in any of it.

I don't even know where to start with the graphic style. It's stunning. It's a more realistic style than I was expecting and fitted with the world and source material very well.

Character creation is very nice, I must say. I tried to make a pretty female character to see what the creation process would allow me to work with. I was pleasantly surprised with how they maintained the world's design ethos with the character creation process. Unlike every other major MMO, I couldn't create a skinny blonde supermodel type character. I ended up with a slimmish, nimble-looking, dark-skinned woman with a few battlescars and tatoos. And that's exactly what I'd expect of the game world.

In most MMOs I've played, the female characters are essentially dolls that can be dressed up like pretty blonde supermodels. Guys make female characters to be something pretty to look at while they play. With Age of Conan, it feels less like my character is a doll and more like she's a woman. All characters look studier and more real than I expected, which was a pleasant surprise.



I've only had a few real issues so far apart from bugs and performance issues which will be ironed out by the end of the month if they aren't fixed at release. The lack of documentation and the complete lack of a tutorial makes the game a little confusing to start. The advantages of the different attack types in the combat system are never fully explained, though I'm sure they will be at launch or shortly thereafter. Sometimes things happen in the game and you aren't exactly sure why they've happened or even if you caused them to happen.

My only other gripe is with the instancing and wondering how many players a single server will hold and how the population will be spread over. Group play is also in significant question as almost all beta players go solo. Ignoring PvP for the moment, it's important that I be encouraged meet and play with a lot of other people. Otherwise we could be looking at the first Massively Singleplayer Online Role-Playing Game.




Overall, I'm impressed enough to part with my money for it and spend time playing it and if most people have the same experience as I do of the game, that makes it a massive success just on the horizon. I think other MMO companies should take a look at what Funcom have managed to produce with Age of Conan and then shit themselves. They should shit themselves right in their pants.
Reply

Posted: May 6th 2008 10:04AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
for the general noob, wow is better than Aoc, but its just dumb to compare them at this stage even:P thats like when i went around saying wow gonna suck because of all the bugs....

if aoc even get close to wow, its the players who should be happy, cuz bottom of the line its the producer that fucks up or make a new gen game.

Aoc looks amazing, got some hardcore lvl 80 content aswell, these guys REALLY know what theyre doing, they made anarchy online... but theyre not used to the fame, like blizz may be, so i would expect some server crash bugs ect, but dosnt those always get fixed?:)

made a char when wow came, got some errors about reinstall, no servers up and going ect for the first whole week, and still i played after that week.... the game was just too good there and then, just like i consider aoc, wich takes u 2 the real fucking mmo without those goldspammers and the poor lvl of playing experience wow has become...

Posted: May 6th 2008 5:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hail FunCom, Embrace Age of Conan. Lose yourself to Temptation beyond reckoning.

Posted: May 12th 2008 11:40AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hi, I also pre-ordered the game! The first mmo i've played was anarchy online, so really hoping to get my hands on this one.

One thing i would like to comment is the combat system, it would have been much better if you mouse-clicked to attack, and then do the direction of attack with mouse movement, leaving you space for quick combos, near (w, a, s, d), some ppl dont like the click click style, but like everyone knows, diablo was like this and i loved it!

That would really improve the game in my opinion.

Posted: May 14th 2008 3:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well people are getting mixed reviews about this game good and bad. Also most games that do release such as MMO's are very buggy in first few months until big patches get released. Though the problems people encounter aren't the same for everyone.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW