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

Reader Comments (24)

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 4:05PM Thac0 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would totally go play AO if they updated it with AoC's Graphics and be super happy about F2P

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 4:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd love to see an AO2, personally. Although TSW looks intriguing.
Reply

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 1:09AM mysecretid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
RE: Upgrading Anarchy Online

This topic comes up randomly among my friends and I at regular intervals.

If Anarchy Online 2.0 were released -- or even just a modern graphics update for the original AO -- we'd all go back, and be happy to pay-to-play.

Some of us have tried to go back, but the primitive graphics make our collective eyes bleed.

But AO is still (after all these years) not quite like anything else out there in gaming: one-third science-fiction; one third post-apocalyptic; and one third something else entirely -- it really is its own thing.

If only I could stand to look at the graphics for more than fifteen minutes at a time ...
Reply

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 4:12PM arnavdesai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Their problem was never the game in itself but its lack of completion and polish. That coupled with horrible management has led to the demise of this game. I was a subscriber for the first 6 months and owned a Collectors Edition of the game. However, the severe lack of direction when it comes to gameplay screwed this game. That with a bug riddled game screwed their launch and with it the goodwill. Unfortunately, people dont realize that very few people come back to a MMO if they leave it in the beginning. They say WoW was messed up at launch and to that I say they are not competing with WoW of the past but WoW of the present which is a juggernaut and releases highly polished stuff. Although I dont play WoW I know enough people play it and enjoy it whereas the majority of folk on my server did not like AoC at launch.
If they launch Secret World in a similar fashion then they are screwed even more. I dont know why do they concentrate so much on MMOs. FunComm has a great track record with adventure game & I dont understand why they do not release something for the console in that genre which really has a dearth of high quality adventure titles.

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 3:27AM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Their problem was never the game in itself but its lack of completion and polish."

That would generally qualify as a problem with the game itself.
Reply

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 4:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
F2P stands for Fail-to-Play IMO. If it's going to follow the GW model, maybe. If it's going to follow the RoM model, forget it. MMOs going F2P are continuing to cheapen the market.

To the devs -- it is possible to develop a game worth paying for. Stop releasing crap!

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 5:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Obviously, I think the numbers will prove you wrong. Games that don't require subscriptions crush those who do charge in player numbers. And when you look at money being made, subscription only has one that works, WoW, all the others get crushed in profit by the RMT/Microtransaction games around the world.

So your opinion does not reflect reality. But then that's nothing new for the internet.
Reply

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 3:28AM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Got some hard numbers to back that up? Or are you just playing internet-economist?
Reply

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 5:08PM Valentina said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I doubt this will happen any time soon, many people have been re-subscribing, entire guilds on both servers I have played on are subscribing back to this game during the re-evaluation, and plan on sticking to it for a while, there is alot of new content and the bugs and performance issues are gone, all in just a year. New patch came out today with new adjustments and polish, and they will be revealing their expansion soon. This game has a good chance at making a huge come back, and I would love to see that happen. I strongly encourage everyone to take advantage of this re-evaluation offer.

This article was commented on by one of the developers, on the official forums. He said there are absolutely no plans for this any time soon, but it would be silly to say it absolutely will never happen. And I agree with him.

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 5:30PM Mr Angry said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They'd have to pay me to play this car wreck, and even then, I probably wouldn't.

The game is little improved over what it was a year ago, just bad bad bad sadly.....

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 7:49PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think they should lower the subscription price, to around 7 to 8 bucks, on all MMOs, it will keeps them up and running for a long while...my 2 cents

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 6:02PM AlamoeJones said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This game got such a bad rep on launch that I don't see it's subscriptions going up unless it turns f2p. Funcom should be watching ddo very closely, to see how successful it will be.

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 6:03PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They don't need to go F2P. People are coming back in droves. The naysayers who were forced from the game last year (me being one of them) are holding a bitter grudge against the game and either wont give it another shot or BS that they have had another go and it's exactly the same as when they left.

I took the step a couple of months back and have been a sub ever since. This is not the same game that was on release and IMO, now, the best MMO on the current market.

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 6:20PM Mr Angry said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Awww c'mon that really isn't true at all, surely?

I tried it again (nope not BS, I played for 5 hours on Saturday) and was quite surprised how similar it was, despite these regular news updates. What would you outline has indeed made this game better, as I was struggling to find content or real improvements? Given the low water mark set at the time of release, I'm thinking it would only really be those things broken or missing at the release of a triple AAA MMO these days.

What makes AoC so much better these days?

I do hold a grudge, because it was so bad at release. I remember going into an amazing pyramid dungeon at lvl 40ish, and it was basically empty, savagely disappointing, such a little to do after level 50, claustrophobic instanced zones, all held back from beta. I felt ripped off, so you can try to dismiss that, but it left a sour taste in many people's mouths.... I can't see this making a come back, if any game was going to do this, it was WAR, but that's faltered too, the only game that made some sort of comeback of note are EQ2 in my memory....
Reply

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 7:02PM TheJackman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I own this game and think its one of the better mmos out there for the moment!

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 7:54PM Cicadymn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hell I'd try it if they made it F2P. And I know I could get some friends to come with me. Though I can't say I'd probably stick around for long. Be neat to try something different out for a little while.

Posted: Jul 14th 2009 8:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My biggest issues with AOC on release were lack of content, bugs and no clear PVP direction.

Stability - Since my return I've yet to crash out of the game. I haven't fallen through the world, gotten stuck in a wall and am still yet to find a bugged quest.

PVE - I've been absolutely amazed with the dungeons, I mean before I left they looked stunning, whereas now they not only look amazing they are fully itemized, populated and pose quite a challenge. Nothing out there compares graphically to DX10 in this game. Quests, there's hundreds of them. Variations of the 'kill 10 rats' but enough variety not to become a grind. If they were to add anything to the game in this area some group public quest type ideas from Warhammer would be a good addition.

PVP-. The pvp level system has given 'some' substance to PVP in AOC . Sieges (I've only participated in 2 since coming back) are working and are quite epic when you get into the fray of the fight. This area though is something Funcom need to focus on, and from what Ive been reading they are. It's the one area of the game that needs the attention now. It's not that there isnt any PVP, they just need flesh out the PVP content. Funcom has the tools to become the greatest PVP MMO on the market.

I had a lvl 80 to come back to but decided to start over and am glad I did. I've experienced this game as it should have been on release. It's been a long time (10+ years in MMOs) where I have actually read / listened to quest storylines. I challenge anyone to get to Ymirs Pass, play all the content there, finnish the story arc and tell me it's not one of, or the, best MMO experiences of all time.

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 2:15AM Nadril said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm really starting to wonder what people see in Age of Conan now. Aside from putting things that should have been there at launch it's still a poor game and certainly not good enough to remove the foul taste the game left in my mouth after launch.

And yes, I tried it again with the 2 week thing.. ended up uninstalling within the hour.

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 6:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So you tried it for one hour? Little impatient aren`t we?
Reply

Posted: Jul 15th 2009 5:31AM Lamthara said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
if Funcom is going to make Age of Conan a F2P i'll stick with it for sure.
I like the way the game was when i have tried it (never gone that far btw... i just got a lvl 33 Priest of Mitra) and i like the "cut" of the quests, the combat system and so on.

Maybe they could look at DDO to get some inspiration.. :)

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW