Funcom's Craig Morrison

Age of Conan - one year later.

Yesterday, Funcom launched a re-evaluation campaign granting all previous Age of Conan players 2 weeks' free play if they reactivate before 22nd July. It's also offering 1000 free copies of the game to new players through yours truly this Friday, and you can watch a developer video on Eurogamer explaining what's changed and improved in the MMO since launch. We caught up with game director Craig Morrison to find out what's behind the sudden flurry of confident activity from the Norwegian developer.

Last time I spoke to Craig Morrison, the MMOG veteran who was tapped to take over Age of Conan after its troubled launch, he was just settling into the new job - arguably one of the toughest in the game business.

He inherited a game that had sold bucket-loads of copies at launch, but quickly lost its subscribers when teething troubles failed to get sorted out quickly and what should have been minor issues snowballed into months of development, delays and false starts. Along with it came a community that had lost faith in the development team, a totally sceptical press and forums full of disgruntled people cancelling their accounts.

This week, over nine months after taking the helm, Morrison seems much more comfortable with his role. The team's latest and most ambitious update to Age of Conan shipped a few weeks ago, bringing many new features but also changing the entire underlying fabric of the game.

It's perhaps the most ambitious change that a developer has made to a launched game in recent history, and it firmly places Morrison's stamp on Age of Conan. No longer is he clearing up a mess created by others - this is his game now, and he's proud of it.

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 1

Thanks to Conan's new itemisation system, those fancy swords and helmets are actually useful now.

The big news, in Update 5, is that the game's itemisation has been completely overhauled - and with it, all of the statistics and mathematics that make up the game's RPG nervous system. What this means for players is that finally, Age of Conan's items and armour sets are meaningful - with easily understood figures attached to each item, and a noticeable effect on your power and ability from equipping new gear.

"It ties into a lot of the feedback that the game got early on after the launch," Morrison explains. "One of the key things that a lot of players keyed in on was the fact that the item system and the RPG stats didn't really give them a feeling of progression."

"That came through time and time again - I think it's well-documented that Age of Conan had a fantastic launch and sold a lot of boxes, but didn't keep the players interested. I think that the itemisation and the RPG system as a whole is one of the key things that we could see in the feedback from those players who didn't continue, who didn't like the game. The stats were a bit too obtuse and they couldn't figure out how they affected their character."

The reason for that, Morrison says, is that the company wanted to make sure that the game focused on player skill rather than on what armour you're wearing. It was a fine principle. The problem was that the team went too far in their pursuit of this ideal, and ended up making items practically useless.

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 2

DirectX 10 support has been a big success, since it finally arrived - a host of new effects make everything very pretty.

"We had a very thin power scale," he continues. "Even if you had everything maxed and all the best items in the game, in the original design, items only added a maximum contribution to your character of 20 to 25 per cent. In the scale of an RPG system, that's very very narrow. Players didn't see any difference when they actually equipped an item. They thought that a new item was 20 levels higher so it should be better, but they didn't actually see a quantifiable difference in their character's performance."

Morrison pauses to think for a moment. "You know," he continues, "it's important to point out that it wasn't even a mistake. It was very intentional. When we did our analysis last summer and went through what was and wasn't working, we spoke to the original guys who made the system - everything had been done perfectly. All the percentages worked out. Yep, it was meant to be 20 per cent contribution... It was all exactly on the game direction.

"So on a fundamental level, it was just the original creative decision that we didn't get quite right. That's one of the risks that you take when you're making a game on this scale, for this number of people. You believe in something and you try it, and on this occasion, unfortunately, it just didn't work out."

Fixing the item system isn't just about giving players shiny new toys to play with, however. As I talk to Morrison, it becomes clear that the mistakes the team made with itemisation have impacted every part of the game - causing knock-on problems and headaches that have dogged Age of Conan for a year.

Take, for example, the other major problem with the game's items - the common criticism that they all look the same, with players at level 50 barely distinguishable from players at level 30.

"That was exasperated by the fact that the items didn't do much, so there was no real motivation for the player to change their items," Morrison explains. "There were many more items out there, which players had to look a little bit more deeply to find, but there was no motivation for them to do so. They all ended up using the generic armour because it did the job."

Another area which is changed significantly by the new patch is those guild cities - player-built towns which provide benefits to the guilds who have the resources and manpower to construct them. Along with player-versus-player sieges, which have improved in leaps and bounds in the past six months thanks to the attentions of a dedicated team within Funcom, guild cities are the apex of Conan's endgame. In Update 5, the cities have developed a whole cast of new NPCs and exclusive new retailers for players to use.

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 3

The big push with PvP, Morrison says, is to give players more goals and objectives - so they're not just brawling outside the city gates.

"We wanted to give the players more rewards for being part of a guild and taking the time and resources to build up a guild city," says Morrison. "Communities are very important to MMOs - they're the fabric that knits it all together. We wanted to make sure that guilds have goals and objectives of their own as well, and that's something that will carry on with a great deal of focus in the next update cycle, with some systems that are coming there. This was the first step."

Of course, for many players, sieges and guild cities will remain out of reach. They're available to players involved in the largest, most organised guilds - are there any plans to open up this kind of experience to the rest of us, letting those who don't play several hours each day still try out the sieges that feature so prominently on the back of the box?

"Yes and no," is Morrison's answer. "I think there are some things we can do there, and some things we're looking at. We've been batting around things like a mercenary system where players can recruit to fill gaps in their siege forces, so players can volunteer themselves to be hired. We will continue to look at that, but so far, it's been slightly down the list of priorities."

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 4

Conan's caster classes are overpowered right now, Morrison admits. They're planning to issue a fix shortly.

That's not to say, of course, that he's not thinking about the average player - the guy who only plays six to eight hours a week, which Morrison reckons is the norm for an MMORPG.

"[We are] looking more at how we can get people involved in PVP - encouraging people to be open to the idea of playing PVP, and giving it a real meaning," he tells me. "I think that's the biggest barrier to people taking part in PVP, is them not having a reason to do so.

"Last year the PVP levels were a first step in that direction, they gave people a reason and goals and rewards, so they could get into PVP. Now we want to take it a stage further and give more meaningful goals, based around social activities - community activities that don't require you to be in a 50 to 100 person guild to take part in."

That's all coming in the next patch - but first, there are a few problems with this patch to be ironed out. For a start, there's a clamour being raised on the game's forums at the moment over class balance - with casters, it seems, having being favoured a bit too much by the recent changes, and melee classes in uproar. It's a concern, given the game's heavy focus on its innovative melee system.

"We haven't got it quite right, on that specific issue," Morrison admits. "Some of it is inherent, because the spell using classes in our game don't use the combo system. It is inherently easier - well, maybe easier isn't the right word, but it's more forgiving to play a spell-using class in Conan than it is a melee class. Once an experienced player is at the controls of those classes, the way we would like it is that there wouldn't be that much difference between the two. Right now it's not quite right."

"We don't expect to get something so complex completely right straight out of the gate," he says, somewhat apologetically. "We knew that we would have to do some updates, and we certainly will have to make some adjustments to the relative power between the spell users and the melee users. The players' comments are fair. We know that that's an area that we need to work on over the next couple of weeks - the guys are already working on it."

On the scale of the problems Morrison has had to deal with since taking over Age of Conan, however, this is a minnow. It's very telling that itemisation is only being fixed now, having been noted as a problem right from day one - but although that fix took a long time (largely because it's such a fundamental part of the game), Morrison reckons that the team is near the end of the to-do list from launch.

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 5

New zones like Ymir's Pass and Xibaluku have given players lots more content to try out. There's more on the way, Morrison says.

"We're getting very close," he says. "We're now in the region of adding features that weren't necessarily missed from launch. I think the other stuff we've addressed - the PVP systems that didn't make it for launch, we added those. The content gap that people identified, where there wasn't enough content at certain level ranges, that's exactly where we targeted the content over the last year, to fill those gaps.

"The performance and the stability of the client was an issue early on, and that was one of the first priorities that we had. We improved that to make sure that people could play the game smoothly and that there were no memory leaks - we resolved that. The itemisation and the statistics were the last of those major feedback results that we had from the launch. That was the last of the major ones that we had to address, because that was obviously a little bit more complex and took a little bit more time."

Still, the game faces an uphill struggle to win back the faith of MMOG players - and Morrison knows it. "You've got to be pragmatic and honest," he says. "When a game goes through a period like ours did, when there were issues with retention of players... Well, obviously the sales figures for the game are widely available and there aren't that number of subscribers still playing the game.

'Funcom's Craig Morrison' Screenshot 6

Some of Conan's content is still exclusively for groups - even high-level players can't solo it. That's deliberate, and won't be changing.

"There are players whose only impression of Conan is the time they spent in May, June and July last year, when there were more significant problems for them to play through. I don't blame anybody for feeling burnt. They invested money in a game, they buy it retail, they pay a subscription fee - and if they don't like it, or there are technical issues that stop them from playing... I think we shouldn't kid ourselves and say oh, well, they're just internet trolls. Those people had very valid points, and that's why we spent the last year working hard, addressing those issues.

"All we can do is keep working hard, and keep focusing on hopefully the right things. Hopefully we'll start to see that our players appreciate it. In the MMO genre, that word of mouth is everything. It's the experience that a player has in a game, so that when his friend says, 'Age of Conan? I'm not touching that again!', someone who's playing it responds and says, 'Actually, they've improved it quite a bit and I'm having fun with it now'. Any amount of me talking to you or doing other press interviews, or advertising the game, can't beat that kind of feedback from players."

Comments (54) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • UncleLou #1 3 years ago

    I'll definitely try the 2-weeks offer for old subscribers, I've heard nothing but good things recently, and I had always liked the game in the first place.
  • DFawkes #2 3 years ago

    I only just played this for the first time last night, and it's quite good. I'm not sure how bad it was, but in it's current state it's worth a try at least. I do like the directional attack system, though I'd like to see how it fits in later.

    It's have been wiser to spend more time on some issues before launch though, but they're getting there at least.
  • Gaol #3 3 years ago

    Eurogamer, please find a new MMO to give us daily updates on. After the last year I feel like I'm on speaking terms with half the Funcom staff.
  • iokthemonkey #4 3 years ago

    Fawksie - have you left Tortage yet? Tortage is brilliant. The first three times you play it. But once you leave or have to do it again, the game becomes a massive pain. And despite these claims of "fixing" stuff, it's still played in horrible instanced little pokey grotholes of zones and it just doesn't feel like an MMO.
  • Darkjinxter #5 3 years ago

    Good ol' Craig Morrison, still deaf as a post to the wishes of existing players, still ignoring their pleas. 'Mr. not a priority right now' is now gearing up to thrust his expansion pack into our bellies and run off with our purses.
    I believe that he believes the new 'adventure' system is the best thing to happened to AoC since he came on the scene. It is not. The old system was, if nothing else, fair and more in keeping with Conan's Hyboria than this WoW pretence he has concocted.
    Still, even Mr. Morrison and his team's dislike for the barbarian class will not take away the fun I have playing AoC, at least not for now.
  • Vistrix #6 3 years ago

    The game has improved greatly since I last played (4 months back?). Ive already bought a few months time.

    @Gaol We should be supporting European developers more so than the other American MMO developers!
  • iokthemonkey #7 3 years ago

    @Gaol We should be supporting European developers more so than the other American MMO developers!

    ----

    Why? Because we like to play shit games?
  • DFawkes #8 3 years ago

    iok - Not out of Tortage yet, but I'll still reserve judgement until I've played a few days. If it really is all about instances though, I'll just go back to the cheaper Guild Wars. If fact I'll probably go back to GW anyway.

    I know that I can't see me hating the game though, I generally stick with an opinion after 10 minutes. I can see me just getting bored like I do with most MMOs, just depends how long it takes.
  • Vistrix #9 3 years ago

    @DFawkes What server Fawkes?

    From my experience, leaving Tortage and entering Aquilonia was awesome. Probably the most impressive city I've ever seen in an MMO. Very beautiful.
  • iokthemonkey #10 3 years ago

    Ah, well be prepared for a drop-off in quality, despite what Vistrix says. Yes, it looks nice but the use of instances and zones is shocking. It makes GW look like a full open-world and it's horribly fragmented.
  • Vistrix #11 3 years ago

    @iokthemonkey You're right about the instances / zones stuff, although its in all modern MMOs its done pretty badly with the zone layout.

    Which is funny because Anarchy Online is the complete opposite, it feels huge with almost no instances.
  • iokthemonkey #12 3 years ago

    although its in all modern MMOs

    -----

    LOTRO uses instances and some zones, yes, but you can ride from one side of the game world to the other without a load. In AoC you have that stupid "talk to NPC to travel to a zone then walk to another zone line and sit through another loading screen" every time you want to go anywhere. And the zones themselves are hideously constrained and boxed-in.

    Sorry but a modern MMO should feel like a real world, not a bunch of badly inter-connected game levels.
  • Vistrix #13 3 years ago

    @iokthemonkey LOTOR is still instanced everywhere. I had real troubles finding a mate until I learned how to change instance...

    It does feel much larger and open though, than most other modern MMOs.

    Zones / instances are something I would love to see atotally removed from all MMOs.
    Edited by 1 at 09/07/09 @ 09:51
  • DFawkes #14 3 years ago

    I'm on server... first one I saw. Possibly Battlefield or Battlescar or something like that.

    I have to admit I prefer starterzones to be open. seeing a bunch of new characters like me running about as we all level up bit by bit is one of my favourite parts of MMOs, and you can make good friends for life. Not that I mind the AoC approach, but to me it's more of an alright game rather than an alright MMO.
  • Shinji #15 3 years ago

    DFawkes - You do actually get that, to a degree. Once you're in the town, when you talk to the barman, you can switch between Day and Night - during the day, you're in an MMOG zone, with everyone else running around levelling up around you. At night, it switches into single-player mode to do the story quests.

    The singleplayer stuff is what disappears after level 20, once you strike out into the rest of the gameworld.
  • iokthemonkey #16 3 years ago

    LOTOR is still instanced everywhere.

    ----

    Aside from the specific quest instances, LOTRO isn't instanced like AoC is, where you can be standing next to your mate but - because you're in different instances - you can't see each other.

    Story Instancing is fine, as it means you can play your specific quest without worrying about some git stealing your quest mobs or disrupting the story. But AoC's instanced WORLD is just wrong and isn't a design decision at all: it's a technical bodge because the engine isn't up to scratch.



  • Shinji #17 3 years ago

    No accounting for personal preference, iok? While the way AoC does it could be massively improved upon, I prefer the idea of having bigger server populations and instanced world zones to having loads of smaller servers that are walled off from each other, like WoW and almost every other MMOG does. Neither is an ideal solution, but that's a technological constraint.

    Then again, I guess if you're going to spend 12 months moaning bitterly about having a bad experience in a game, you probably aren't the type to account for personal preference :)
  • DFawkes #18 3 years ago

    Some of the classes are quite novel. The class I am (monster morphing dude of some description) is different to anything I've in other MMOs, enough to keep me hooked for the trial at least.

    But to be honest, when it gets to the end, and I have that subscription money in my account, I'm not going for AoC. I still prefer WAR, and it's open PvP areas.
  • iokthemonkey #19 3 years ago

    But AoC doesn't have either - the zones themselves are hideously cramped, narrow little channels. The cities never feel populated anyway, due to the ridiculous use of instances and it simply doesn't feel like a real world. You can't walk from one place to the other without having to go through the rigmarole of talking to the transport NPC, clicking, "yes, I would like to travel, really, honestly, I would" and then sitting through a loading screen, arriving at a "city" and then having to go through ANOTHER hard-zone line and out into a very cramped "adventure zone."

    It makes EQ look like an open-world game.

    And back on the "moaning" thing, I've said it time and time again - if I bought a CD of 12 songs, got it home and found it only had 3 but the others would be available to buy "soon" for an additional fee, I'd be within my rights to return it for a full refund. So why is this different? I paid for a service/product that wasn't fit for purpose and so if I'm not able to get a refund, it's my right to complain and complain I will.
  • Shinji #20 3 years ago

    While we differ on the instancing, I do agree with you about the transport between zones - it's restrictive and makes the game feel much less open than its competitors. That said, I don't see it as a game-breaker - not compared to some of the genuine game-breakers that have been fixed in the past 12 months. Yes, I can't walk from zone to zone - but what actually happens in those zones is a hell of a lot more enjoyable, consistent and well-crafted than it was previously.

    I'm not saying you should stop complaining - far from it! You and Gaol are the Statler and Waldorf of every AoC comment thread on the site - the sheer level of bitterness is pure gold! The threads wouldn't be the same without your double act :)
  • Nasty #21 3 years ago

    I'm not saying you should stop complaining - far from it! You and Gaol are the Statler and Waldorf of every AoC comment thread on the site - the sheer level of bitterness is pure gold! The threads wouldn't be the same without your double act :)

    :D

    Agree about he transport but then it really is there to keep the scale of things semi-believable. For me, this trade off is better than being able to run across an entire continent in < 30 minutes.

    The instancing really isn't an issue for me. Every mini dungeon is my own with no-one spawn camping a boss, the larger zones are populated enough to make it feel busy without it being crowded and the capital cities are not instanced at all so they are always packed with folk going about their bunsiness.
  • iokthemonkey #22 3 years ago

    Other games do it in a much better manner. AoC feels cramped and artificial, not like a real world at all. It's just too fragmented. But hey, if you like that, more power to you.

    Personally I prefer good MMOs though.
  • Gaol #23 3 years ago

    I'm not bitter, I just think the continued positive press EG gives this lemon should be countered with some reality. The 8/10 launch review is still, in my mind, the most inaccurate EG review to date and people spent real money on this shit.

    I got the 14 day thing the other day; which is a good gesture but the fact that the guy admits his classes are totally imbalanced doesn't fill me with confidence.
    Edited by 1 at 09/07/09 @ 11:04
  • iokthemonkey #24 3 years ago

  • Nephirion #25 3 years ago

    People still play Conan? ^^

    No but seriously this game runs like a three legged dog, once you get inside huge cities the game crawls almost to a halt. The engine is badly written and no number of tweaking is going to make things better.
    Edited by 1 at 09/07/09 @ 11:26
  • DFawkes #26 3 years ago

    I'm going to enjoy the heck out of this out of spite now. I'll subscribe and play it 24/7, until I get fired and/or go (more) mental from sleep deprivation. Take that haters!

    I think the only thing that I really thing is wrong is it feels very much like a free-to-play MMO. I've tried lots of those in an effort to get away from subscriptions, but they always lack that spark that makes me itch to play again. It feels a bit cheeky to ask us for money to play such a heavily instanced game with seperate zones, without maiking the effort to try and hide this from you with load areas or some other techniques.

    Even the likes of Archlord manage one persistant world, even if it's so generic it hurts my head to play it.
  • curtlikesmeat #27 3 years ago

    I followed AoC through beta and before, but as soon as it came out that there were zones in the style of Everquest (and perhaps worse since they weren't geographically connected) I never had any intention of playing it.

    I know we all moan about WoW but after playing in a fully open world there's no way I can go back to EQ style zoning, I just can't. Someone said about realism - yes the WoW world is geographically small in that you can run across it in an hour or whatever, but despite this (and massive credit to Blizzard) it still feels massive.... to me anyway.

    If you're taking the MMO technology backwards, rather than forwards, you need to be punished!
    Just kidding.
    But seriously, yeah.

    I've got some chains in the back if you're into that sort of thing.
  • moshegy #28 3 years ago

    I still havn't upgraded my hardware to the point where I think I'll be able to run AoC to my satishfaction, but once I do I definitely intend on giving it anoter looksie. AO basicly went from one of the worst MMO releases ever, several times worse than AoC really, to become one of the better MMOs out, well in my opinion anyways, so I'd say that AoC definitely deserves another look by me. :)

    But despite my rusty old pc I'm still going to download it and look into this 14 day business since they're talking about a free level 50 in the "come back to us" email and I'd sure hate myself for having passing up on that should I ever return.

    @curtlikesmeat
    Blizzard sure have some nice technology with their ability to send you to different instances without you ever noticing because there isn't a load screen. Makes up for some great possibilities like the Hodir quest line where the world actually changes as you progress. I sure hope more MMO companies pick it up.

    That being said I remember entering old Azeroth for the first time and feeling pretty confined by the mountain regions which made it feel like every area was a new ride in a themepark, leaving little room for exploration. Not that it ever bothered me much, much like the zoning in eve-online, AO and AoC never bothered me either, but none of them ever made me feel like I was part of a real open world in the sense games like Asherons Call or Shadowbane would. That changed a bit in TBC and WOTLK though where flying mounts ment you wouldn't get cut off by mountains full of dancing trolls.

    But to each their own. ;)
    Edited by 2 at 09/07/09 @ 11:56
  • Kerome #29 3 years ago

    Seriously, if they wanted to grow the userbase quickly they should have converted it to a micropayments scheme. Relaunching a subscription product with a "please come back" note is an exercise in futility, they might get a small bump in numbers but that's about it.
  • Slabbathepave #30 3 years ago

    ''I don't blame anybody for feeling burnt. They invested money in a game, they buy it retail, they pay a subscription fee - and if they don't like it, or there are technical issues that stop them from playing... I think we shouldn't kid ourselves and say oh, well, they're just internet trolls.''

    Still not allowed to acknowledge the fact that the game was released a full year too early, that they lied about game content and upcoming updates and stole peoples money.

    I feel for Craig Morrison, tough job the man has.

    Much love and big up da props to ma man morrisons. west side. innit.

    Werd.
  • Gurgeh #31 3 years ago

    "I'm not bitter, I just think the continued positive press EG gives this lemon should be countered with some reality. The 8/10 launch review is still, in my mind, the most inaccurate EG review to date and people spent real money on this shit. "

    This man speaks the truth. The only gold in this game is the stuff in Funcom's pockets that they gained from woefully inaccurate reviews. Once thousands of people could see for themselves what the beta testers had seen, but somehow the professional reviewer missed, then the bottom fell out of the game.

    Why should people trust this company again?
  • Rubarack #32 3 years ago

    I might give it another go, honestly though I'm more likely to just play through Tortage again, hit the brick wall of zero content at 21 and give up. From what I hear they didn't even touch this point, the 3 quests per seven levels was their target for "plenty of content" and they were working on getting the 40-50 ranges up to that lofty goal.
  • iokthemonkey #33 3 years ago

    ''I don't blame anybody for feeling burnt. They invested money in a game, they buy it retail, they pay a subscription fee - and if they don't like it, or there are technical issues that stop them from playing... I think we shouldn't kid ourselves and say oh, well, they're just internet trolls.''

    ----

    Funny then that he registered on another site just to post some rather curt "well, that's as may be, but..." replies to my comments there.

    If he wants people to be happy with AoC, give us a full refund.
  • Dizzy #34 3 years ago

    "Zones / instances are something I would love to see atotally removed from all MMOs. "

    Early MMOs were like this (AC for example had no instances and a fully streamed world) but it also has problems. Too many players "doing" the same dungeon and mob for example. Imagine the dungeons in WoW being non-instanced.... 1000 players would stream into Ulduar and kill every boss in 10 minutes. Maybe there should be some games like that... it certainly is more realistic (why would I attack a big dragon with 25 people when I can do it with an army?)
  • iokthemonkey #35 3 years ago

    There's a difference between zones and instances though Dizzy. You can barely walk a mile in AoC before you're penned in to a funnel to a zone line. And not into a dungeon either.
  • Atropos #36 3 years ago

    I'm giving this a go again, I actually enjoyed the game at launch, despite it being broken - I remember how screwed up WoW was for the first year (though Conan was worse, tbf).

    @iokthemonkey: I'd be interested - have you played the game since the latest fixes, or are you just moaning about stuff that happened to you a year ago? If not, the whining is slightly... disturbing - like you became traumatised after FunCom touched you in your bathing suit area rather than made a game you didn't like. I'd like to know what you honestly think of the 'fixed' version. Even some of my most bitterly disappointed mates have been giving it the thumbs up.
  • iokthemonkey #37 3 years ago

    Oh yawn. No, Funcom didn't sexually abuse me.

    They just lied to the people who bought this piece of shit and continue to do so to this day. But if you can't see that this "game" is a second-class, sub-standard piece of shit and that Funcom's statements and promises are horseshit, then bigger fool you.

    I have a new PC now and it's untainted by shit like this, so no, I won't be taking them up on their offer, as I don't want to have to go through the pain of manually removing files they didn't bother coding their uninstaller to deal with.

    Oh and the level of Fanboyism in the down-voting here is hilarious.
  • Slabbathepave #38 3 years ago

    My boy monkey hates this game quite a bit.

    To be fair though monkey you should have another look. I just spent a few hours on it and enjoyed myself very much. I cant vouch for all the changes, but the new player stats/equipment alterations are very nice. It appears (at least so far) that FC are finally making good on some their promises, even if it is a little late.

    I have always thought that on a moment to moment basis AoC is by far the most fun of the current crop of MMO's it just lacked cohesion, which they seem to be well on theier way to fixing.

    Certainly worth a look.
  • Wendelius #39 3 years ago

    @iokthemonkey

    I paid money for AOC and was underwhelmed by it and, just like you, really love LOTRO. That game really shows what polishing your game and lovingly crafting the world can do for it. That being said, I don't hate AOC for it. And I'll give it another try if I can get a key tomorrow. Is a game really worth hating with a passion? *shrug*

    Wendelius
  • zoban #40 3 years ago

    Nice article and big ups for Funcom which is trying to fix the game as much as it can... Thank you
  • DFawkes #41 3 years ago

    I've fell out with this game already, and that 2 hours in. "Go to this gate!" "You need the key for this gate, go somewhere else!" "Now you're though one gate, get through another!" "No way with those shackles, get them off!" "Sure I'll help, get some bricks!"

    No. No I won't get brick. In WoW, I could start a character and go wherever I like, straight off. Might be suicide, but I can do it. I'm not jumping through your hoops anymore :p
  • bluefunk #42 3 years ago

    AoC is really good now. If you have any tech issues, fps issues, it's your rig. The game is rock solid these days. It has zero bugs and expliots. It has a few balance isues at least the PVP'ers will have you believe (as they tend to squeel in all mmo's).

    AoC still has by far the best viseral combat system and GFX if your PC can handle it cranked to the top.

    For me the only issue is the somewhat slow development rate.
    Edited by 1 at 10/07/09 @ 05:16
  • Slabbathepave #43 3 years ago

    I have to agree with bluefunk. My PC has'nt changed spec since the last time i played it and now i get a solid 50+ FPS (drops to 40+ in crowded areas) with the settings as high as they can be on xp.

    Its all very stable and very busy, how it should have been a year ago. It could do with its chat channels being sorted out. Right now the chat window suffers from a constant stream of shit being spouted through its only global channel. It needs a Global Looking for group channel to help filter the twats out.

    Right now that is my only quibble, a good sign i think.
  • iokthemonkey #44 3 years ago

    I'm just ahead of the curve, basically. Trust me on this.
  • DFawkes #45 3 years ago

    I wish I'd trusted you iok. I wish I had. Sorry for doubting.

    I did get a good 20 minutes of enjoyment out of AoC before I came to the realisation I was only playing because I was too lazy to quit out and just play Guild Wars. It's not a bad game though, it's just not worth a subscription, based on how much it feels like a single-player game. If it was, I'd have bought it knowing I could pop in every now and then. But I'll pass.

    It does have some nice classes, and I could see why people that play it enjoy it, but being forced to play certain missions early on was enough for me to be put off. It's not broken though, it's functional at least.
    Edited by 1 at 10/07/09 @ 10:48
  • Geminosity #46 3 years ago

    I actually liked the idea that you would be able to fight people of a higher level covered in glittering gear and stand a chance, I think they simply went about it the wrong way; they made a game that wasn't about itemisation yet copied all the systems and play mechanics of an itemisation game :/

    e.g. Hiding away higher stat things in hard to reach places. Why would anyone bother if it doesn't make a difference?

    If they wanted to have items people would go after but not 'overpower' them, they really should've focussed on adding new abilities or gameplay to the player with the items. Look at things like metroid or zelda for example; hookshots, boomerangs, grappling beams, morph balls and the like don't make you more powerful but they do give you more options and even some new unexpected tactical manouvers (e.g. in zelda there's creatures with metal masks that you normally have to get behind to hurt but once you get the hookshot you can use it to tear the mask off them and even beat them to death with their own mask :p ).

    The problem with strengthening the difference between levels and equipment and all that is that you end up splitting the pool of PvP opponents. Look at WAR; if you're in one of the tiers that everyone else has moved from then you're gonna be awfully lonely. This is why games like CS, TF2 and Call of Duty do so well; you can come in and play at any level so there's always a pool of people to play with. Sure, some might not be up to snuff skill-wise but they help pad out the numbers so everyone's not twiddling their thumbs and not only can they get the occasional surprise attack on you but by playing with higher skill players they learn and pick up advanced tactics quicker.

    I think I might be one of the very few who didn't like tortage either :o
    I don't play MMOs to be locked away from others... there's plenty of single player games I own that do it a million times better. MMOs is about playing with other players to me :3

    On that same note I've never understood the obsession with linking guilds to 'community'. I've played a good many online games and I'll quite happily point out that those that didn't have any guild mechanics had much stronger communities overall. Guilds are merely divisive and segregate the gaming population into little cliques. I'm also of the opinion that the majority of players don't play in guilds (I don't have any research to back this up but I can give you plenty anecdotes ;D ).
    The mercenaries thing peaks my interest as I think that may be a better idea, if the Guilds bother to use it much.

    Anyhoo that's my rant against some of the things I think about Age of Conan's new direction or direction in general :p
  • iokthemonkey #47 3 years ago

    I wish I'd trusted you iok. I wish I had. Sorry for doubting.

    ----

    I forgive you. :)

    The problem is AoC is very front-heavy and initially appears really good, excellent in fact. However, it very quickly becomes clear that the game is very, VERY shallow and there's a massive nose-dive in terms of the game's quality, interest and appeal very quickly.

    As a single-player, offline action RPG it would probably (almost) work, but as an MMO - a genre people generally spend more time playing and progress in a slower fashion - it fails utterly.
  • DFawkes #48 3 years ago

    "As a single-player, offline action RPG it would probably (almost) work, but as an MMO - a genre people generally spend more time playing and progress in a slower fashion - it fails utterly"

    I agree with that entirely. it's not bad, it's just not very massively multiplayer. It is online though, so it's a good enough ORPG, not so much MM.
  • iokthemonkey #49 3 years ago

    But by no means good enough to pay money to play.
  • DFawkes #50 3 years ago

    Well no, you don't pay subscriptions for single player games. That'd just be crazy talk!
  • Slabbathepave #51 3 years ago

    I disagree with you both.

    So there.
  • iokthemonkey #52 3 years ago

    Well no, you don't pay subscriptions for single player games. That'd just be crazy talk!

    ----

    And AoC isn't a single-player game... So yeah.
  • BruntFCA #53 3 years ago

    DOn't beleive the small zone crap. Some of the zones are massive when compared to the WOW "Mountain Basins", the draw distance is also not like your short sighted.

    There's also plenty of polish now. One of the best zones takes place on a glacier up the mountain (eiglophian mountains). You start off deep in the valley, as you climb up its amazing. There's four different sound effects depending upon the type of snow your walking on, and about 15 different types of snow...how's that for detail. Go and load up Winterspring and WoW and your eyes will bleed! The devs are from Norway so they understand snow I guess.

    Another thing you notice is how the tiny mountain scales up to the full glacier. There are annoying "channels" in some of the zones, however this is not a game engine limitation but a retarded idea the devs have it would be fun if hey we forced everyone to cross this bridge and PvP!

    Once you get used to the terrain though, you can find the hidden paths or sprint jump. Another nice feature, there's not a fixed jumping area...I've jumped accross many a cavern with gankers following me, only to see them fall to their deaths..lol.
  • shinyhalo #54 3 years ago

    PvP balance is a "minnow compared to other problems?" LOLOL omg AOC is doomed if they really believe that. And it appears they do...how many friggin years has this game been worked on? And they are STILL trying to balance caster vs melee? OMG
    I haven't heard a damn thing in these reviews about PvP fight duration and that is why I left. It's no fun to get pwned in 5 seconds at level 80 in 1 vs 1. Even if they "balanced" it so that it takes 10 seconds to kill someone it wouldn't win me over. At this point, if I am even going to go through the hassle of re-installing this game, I want funcom to f-ing guarantee me that I can just stand there and it will take another level 80, at least 30 seconds to kill me WITHOUT a dam healing potion either. If I actively defend I want an epic 1 minute long fight 1 vs 1.