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

Reader Comments (24)

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 10:21AM RanWitScissorz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wired fails, Dead Space was awesome.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 10:24AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"We'd have to agree to a certain extent, but we'd be remiss to note that Funcom is far from the only company to roll out an MMO this year that couldn't have used just a wee bit more polish."

---

AoC didn't ship with content that required "polish." It shipped with content that wasn't even present.

I'm sorry but it pisses me off how much retrospective love AoC is getting now for how great it is and how it wasn't that bad at launch. No, Funcom LIED to us about the content and shipped something knowing FULL WELL it wasn't what they'd promised.

I've used this analogy before elsewhere but it works: imagine you went into your electronics retailer and bought an HD, colour TV with 400 channels. You get it home, plug it in and discover it's a black and white, standard def TV with 3 channels. And it only works for 30 minutes at a time before it breaks down. You complain and the guy who sold it to you admits - months later - that maybe it wasn't what you ordered but hey, keep paying your subs and it'll be there!

Six months later and your non-HD, black and white TV now has 8 channels, but only 5 of them work all the time and the other 3 are subject to randomly switching off your TV. You complain but the guy who sold you it says it's not the case at all and they'll be doing channels 9-400 "soon" but in the meanwhile, here's another channel you can have but to receive it you have to watch the other channels for 100 hours...

Now, if somebody sold me a TV like that, I could take it back for a refund. So how are Funcom getting away with it?

I'm not talking about them saying, "An awesome MMO experience TM." I'm talking about them LYING about features they KNEW weren't in the box yet saying nothing until we'd all coughed-up.

This is the reason Funcom will NEVER get another penny from me and I take my stance against the PR BS they keep vomiting across the Internet.

Don't buy into it people.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 5:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
All the wow kiddies who didn't get their cartoon game are still pissed at Funcom, lol. BAd rap, this is an excellent game and I haveeen in since beta. Don't be fooled by the children, try it, you will like it!
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 8:38PM Kamokazi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@John

How can you defend Funcom at this point?

The game is buggy, unfinished, and unbalanced. The only other game I played that bad was SWG at launch. I would go into details, but I really don't have time to write that much.

And I am far from a WoW kiddie. I've been playing MMOs since EQ, when Kunark launched. I played WoW but haven't played since before BC launched. I played AoC far longer than I should have, because there were many components I loved and had so much potential, and I was hoping they could bring out that potential. But so far, they have failed miserably. If the game is still alive in a year, maybe I'll give it another shot.
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 10:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In before david

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 12:47PM Rollins said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
lol aoc will fail. failcom ripped off its customrers.

AOC = FAILCOM
FAILCOME SUCKS

!!!

---

How'd I do?
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 11:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
the whole list reeks of being one mans thought, and is a complete failure all over. I don't get why 20 internetsites are quoting them.

These articles makes it to the top 10 journalism failures of 2008!

Besides that, I'd have to agree AoC really failed . Dead Space, and a few of the other games on that list however did not.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 12:03PM Idle said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
AoC failure really disappoints me. I'm a huge fan of the lore behind the Conan universe. It's amazingly rich and complex, the game could round it all out nicely.

I've resubscribed to AoC and the game really has come along nicely. Its technical issues appear to have been resolved and it's really fun to play. Some of its features are still outstanding. If it had its population back, it'd be a lot of fun.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 12:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The biggest failure of AoC, in my humble opinion, is that at launch, even having the recommended system specs did not guarantee that you could run the game at a decent frame rate, even with everything turned to low. It was for this reason that I canceled my sub. That was a huge waste of $60.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 4:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I had everything at max and ran at 100 fps.

Come on. get a new computer then... It only costs you 5$.

The only thing I found to be a bit retarded about people's whine over AoC was the system req's
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 5:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually there were many many top of the line computers that still had problems with the game. The coding was so spotty that even systems that only had a different sound card seemed to kill frame rates. So you had one of the magical systems where everything worked and you got high framerates, congrats, have a cookie.

But only like 1 out of the 10 real life people I knew that had computers that would blow crysis away had good frame rates in Conan.
Reply

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 2:03AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Bob

I'm so happy for you that you could run everything maxed at 100fps. Fact of the matter is, though, that the game did not (and still doesn't from what I understand) run properly as advertised. Defend Funcom all you want. Call me a whiner all you want. That still doesn't change the fact that the company misled me, and several others. This may be one of the many reasons that the game didn't do nearly as well as Funcom hoped it would. Server merges this early in a game's life cycle are never a good sign.
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 1:59PM Nadril said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They seriously put dead space on there, which was one of the best games to come out in years? Wow they have no clue.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 2:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yep... AOC = Fail

FAILCOM!

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 4:29PM TheJackman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I like to point out that Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (Xbox 360, PS3) is on the number 2 spot!

LucasArts sunk a bunch of development time into the physics and animation engines that powered what was supposed to be the awesomest Star Wars game ever. The brief glimpses of fun that it offered were drowned out by a host of poor design decisions!

Lets see of Bioware make it to the list the next time with there starwars mmo!

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 4:49PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh, COME ON!

You should know as much as anyone that the IP has allmoust nothing to do with a good game these days.

Its 95% about the studio making the game.

In fact, the IP sometimes makes it harder.
Same that is making movies out of computergames so hard. Its a completely new medium, and therefore was not written for this.

However, with Bioware's story approach, that should make the difference between the genre's alot smaller.
So this might just work.
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 5:39PM TheJackman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The sad part is that some people still give the game a free ride base on the IP. The studio making the game never did make a mmo before I do love Bioware games and they do make some of the best rpgs of the PC.

But so far Bioware was all talk and no action even the so called video preview did not show any thing but some fight screens no UI was showed and no Battle system in action noting but talk and no action all to hype up a game! LucasArts did make the same mistake with Star Wars: The Force Unleashed!

I only read Bioware's story approach talk did not see it in action still and stuff may look good on paper but we need see it in action before we can see how it really works.
Reply

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 6:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
point being: there is no reason to judge SW:TOR based on star wars: force unleashed.

Even in a game such as Call of Duty, where they are somewhat building on the same arc, there is huge differences between treyarch and Infinity Ward.

Posted: Dec 15th 2008 6:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Anyone notice their top 5 picks for each platform? Any reviewer that puts Fable 2 at the #1 spot is clearly not capable of sound judgment.

Posted: Dec 16th 2008 4:08AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No John, it's nothing to do with it not being "for kids" (although any game that sells itself on Mortal Kombat gore and "teh boobiez" is hardly mature, IMO). It's about Funcom LYING to its customers and not delivering on its promises.

Like I said above, I don't mean "not delivering on their PR BS." I mean LYING about CONTENT they'd promised. Not spinning it, polishing it or hyping it up. I mean telling us A, B and C were live, working features and then not including them.

If you're having fun with AoC, more power to you. My brother still plays and enjoys it. But consider this: the MAJORITY of players who bought AoC haven't continued to subscribe. Even by Funcom's "official" figures, over 75% of people who bought the game are no longer playing.

That speaks volumes.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW