Age of Conan

To start off lets go back to SWG's launch. The term incomplete would be a terrible understatement here. Nothing that was talked about feature wise was working in the game (excluding the skill trees and crafting). Actually the first day the game didn't work at all. Anyway, down to the point. Jedi, the fabled alpha class. Not implemented, yet they swore to us it was.

Leap forward a little bit in time, the combat upgrade. The "CU" at first it was supposed to be a simple revamp bringing "great new features" to certain professions, instead they scrapped the whole thing, came up with a WOW clone, tacked levels on to players and mobs. Not to mention broke most professions. The worst part, sold a bunch of falsely promoted pre-orders. Under the premise it was the same game we had all been paying for.

A little further ahead ( not even a year later ), they scrapped that whole plan and started a new, on the NGE of all abominations. Same bait and switch tactics with an expansion. Except this time they went even further across the line, forcing them to offer refunds. Reason being, they completely gutted the game in secret tried to create the worst shooter in history and succeeded.

This is all over the course of a single game's short lifespan, at the time two years.

EQ2 is another prime example of SOE's development cycle, they can never even decide how they want their games to play. Not to mention, the froglock lie. Another example that they won't even admit somethings not in the game,  when people know it's not. Planetside is the same story as well as EQ1.

 What I'm seeing here (AOC) doesn't seem as severe ,but very similar. I think that's because through development they seemed to be following SOE's handbook (not literally). Over hype, spin, deception even fear. I think they may have been thinking, hey they got away with it.... 

This is no excuse for what funcom did, I'm not trying to portray it as such. With that said, do you feel funcom might have looked to SOE when making the decision to release in such a horrible state? I don't know many other companies that release games like this, (unfinished). Where else would they get the idea they could get away with it?

Yes Funcom is responsible, they are their own keepers. No one forced them to release in this shape, however they did. I'd just like to know whether you feel they looked else where for reassurance before making such a bad move ?

Edit- Since people were getting the wrong idea.

Not even close. I thought I had seen it all in these forums, but this post takes the cake.

I can see EE now.. Hey guys, Smed did this a few years ago, I'm going to go ahead and follow in his footsteps.. Give me a break.

EQ2 is more of an MMO than AOC will ever be. That game can at least keep steady subs.

They lied about SWG, big time, but you and I don't know all the facts. I have a feeling LA had more to do with that than SOE. They wouldnt stab themselves in the foot like that, and they havnt on their own games.

This thread is pathetic.

Originally posted by Malickie

There is a strong connection between the two companies. Let's look at SOE first, after all they are by and large the worst company I've dealt with.

To start off lets go back to SWG's launch. The term incomplete would be a terrible understatement here. Nothing that was talked about feature wise was working in the game (excluding the skill trees and crafting). Actually the first day the game didn't work at all. Anyway, down to the point. Jedi, the fabled alpha class. Not implemented, yet they swore to us it was.

Leap forward a littel bit in time, the combat upgrade. The "CU" at first it was supposed to be a simple revamp bringing "great new features" to certain professions, instead they scrapped the whole thing, came up with a WOW clone, tacked levels on to players and mobs. Not to mention broke most professions. The worst part, sold a bunch of falsly promoted pre-orders. Under the premise it was the same game we had all been paying for.

A little further ahead ( not even a year later ), they scrapped that whole plan and started a new, on the NGE of all abominations. Same bait and switch tactics with an expansion. Except this time they went even further across the line, forcing them to offer refunds. Reason being, they completely gutted the game in secret tried to create the worst shooter in history and succeeded.

This is all over the course of a single game's short lifespan, at the time two years.

EQ2 is another prime example of SOE's development cycle, they can never even decide how they want their games to play. Not to mention, the froglock lie. Another example that they won't even admit somethings not in the game,  when people know it's not. Planetside is the same story as well as EQ1.

 What I'm seeing here (AOC) doesn't seem as severe ,but very similar. I think that's because through development they seemed to be following SOE's handbook. Over hype, spin, deception even fear. I think they may have been thinking, hey they got away with it.... 

At some point they realized they didn't (SOE). Then made an attempt to be open, it was to late. It was launch day, now they had a crap load of issues and complaints to respond to. That's when fear took over, they got vicous (gaute anyway).

I also think it shows a lesson learned, referring to what became of Gaute. SOE fans would love to have the same happen over there. Smedly walk away? There would be block partys. The lesson they learned is definitely don't do what SOE does, unless of course you're owned by sony. To bad for them the first lesson they learned was that SOE gets away with it, but not why.

 

 

Uh that's rather farfetched though...

If the game doesn't live up to the hype, which AoC didn't, the company in charge have the responsability.

I prefer playing AoC, and although you could say that haters gave AoC bad press, both fair and unfair, at the end it's still up to the company to have success or not.

So state of the game would be all Funcom's job.

I've played EQ2, and I've noticed SOE has it's fair, or unfair, amount of haters. But this is just too farfetched

Originally posted by Malickie

There is a strong connection between the two companies. Let's look at SOE first, after all they are by and large the worst company I've dealt with.

To start off lets go back to SWG's launch. The term incomplete would be a terrible understatement here. Nothing that was talked about feature wise was working in the game (excluding the skill trees and crafting). Actually the first day the game didn't work at all. Anyway, down to the point. Jedi, the fabled alpha class. Not implemented, yet they swore to us it was.

Leap forward a littel bit in time, the combat upgrade. The "CU" at first it was supposed to be a simple revamp bringing "great new features" to certain professions, instead they scrapped the whole thing, came up with a WOW clone, tacked levels on to players and mobs. Not to mention broke most professions. The worst part, sold a bunch of falsly promoted pre-orders. Under the premise it was the same game we had all been paying for.

A little further ahead ( not even a year later ), they scrapped that whole plan and started a new, on the NGE of all abominations. Same bait and switch tactics with an expansion. Except this time they went even further across the line, forcing them to offer refunds. Reason being, they completely gutted the game in secret tried to create the worst shooter in history and succeeded.

This is all over the course of a single game's short lifespan, at the time two years.

EQ2 is another prime example of SOE's development cycle, they can never even decide how they want their games to play. Not to mention, the froglock lie. Another example that they won't even admit somethings not in the game,  when people know it's not. Planetside is the same story as well as EQ1.

 What I'm seeing here (AOC) doesn't seem as severe ,but very similar. I think that's because through development they seemed to be following SOE's handbook. Over hype, spin, deception even fear. I think they may have been thinking, hey they got away with it.... 

At some point they realized they didn't (SOE). Then made an attempt to be open, it was to late. It was launch day, now they had a crap load of issues and complaints to respond to. That's when fear took over, they got vicous (gaute anyway).

I also think it shows a lesson learned, referring to what became of Gaute. SOE fans would love to have the same happen over there. Smedly walk away? There would be block partys. The lesson they learned is definitely don't do what SOE does, unless of course you're owned by sony. To bad for them the first lesson they learned was that SOE gets away with it, but not why.

 

 

Are you sure that Funcom has learned it's lesson?

I mean, they do have a "Combat Upgrade" scheduled to be released in the next month, right?

AO was my second 3D MMO, and that was a nasty launch, with months of lag in cities and poulated zones, I'm not sure if Funcom is even capable of learning from it's own mistakes, let alone, mistakes made by SOE.

Don't get me wrong, I want AoC to "make it" I have dreamed of playing in a 3D version of REH's creation, I played the Conan Pen&Paper RPG for years, but Funcom has dissapointed me with all the lying (twice) and the lack of upper end content. The "invisible walls" didn't help my perception of them either.

Originally posted by convict

Not even close. I thought I had seen it all in these forums, but this post takes the cake.

I can see EE now.. Hey guys, Smed did this a few years ago, I'm going to go ahead and follow in his footsteps.. Give me a break.

EQ2 is more of an MMO than AOC will ever be. That game can at least keep steady subs.

They lied about SWG, big time, but you and I don't know all the facts. I have a feeling LA had more to do with that than SOE. They wouldnt stab themselves in the foot like that, and they havnt on their own games.

This thread is pathetic.

I'm referring to launching incomplete products over hyping them and succeeding in doing it.

Besides I don't hate SOE, I'm just comparing their buisness practices to funcoms. I was hoping for imput on their past (didn't play AO) guess that's to much to expect, instead I get insults.

I'm not excusing anyone, maybe I was light on FC here as I said after going through all of that in SWG then EQ2 this really isn't all that bad in terms of tactics IMO. I guess I'm immune to it at this point. The new person in charge seems to be veering away from these tactics, which is good. People get so personal over opinions jeesh, I never said it was fact SOE was a role model which was bacically my point in a nutshell.

SOE had nothing to do with the failure of AoC. What happened with AoC is really simple really.

They had a vision. A vision that todays technology and FC's incompetent devs couldn't deliver. They made AoC a bad game.

When lauch day was getting closer, FC management realized they had a crappy product and they panicked. They started to lie like crazy an hope they would sell many preorders and maybe fix the game before players saw the truth.

Only problem is, you cannot fix the game if the game core is bad code. Turd is a turd no matter how much you polish it. Olny thing that can save FC now is format c:/ and start all over again.

No need to start making conspiracy theories about how this happened. AoC failure is nothing special. Same thing has happened with many MMO's.

Formula of failure:

Bad product = FAILURE

Originally posted by Soupgoblin

 Are you sure that Funcom has learned it's lesson?

I mean, they do have a "Combat Upgrade" scheduled to be released in the next month, right?

AO was my second 3D MMO, and that was a nasty launch, with months of lag in cities and poulated zones, I'm not sure if Funcom is even capable of learning from it's own mistakes, let alone, mistakes made by SOE.

Don't get me wrong, I want AoC to "make it" I have dreamed of playing in a 3D version of REH's creation, I played the Conan Pen&Paper RPG for years, but Funcom has dissapointed me with all the lying (twice) and the lack of upper end content. The "invisible walls" didn't help my perception of them either.

It could be a case of listening to the wrong people, it could be a case of ignoring everyone and dumbing things down. I really don't know to be honest. I'll admit my point about FC was wild speculation. I was comparing the similarities in how they handled this launch, I didn't play AO so I really have no prior experience with FC, Like I said in my last reply, I want the full story on FC and everyone else's wild assumptions as well.

They launched prematurely, they did so thinking they could pull it off. Maybe it was AO that made them think they could get away with it. They had to look at some product or company that pulled it off otherwise there would be no reason to think you could. SOE has quite a few times, that doesn't mean their the devil it just means they don't care.

I'm starting to think people just skimmed through my post, The thread title doesn't always sum up a point.

Easy mode- Basically what I'm asking is do you think it's possible funcom saw that SOE gets away with launching incomplete games and thought they could to. SOE's methods have always be