Age of Conan feature discussion

mven wrote:

jowner, I don't think Warhammer's PvP will fail. I think it will be extremely popular (in terms of the game's population). A lot of people were really into DAoC's RVR and WoW's battlegrounds. This combines some of the best parts of both of these and I think a lot of people will be into it. It's simply not what I am into personally. I completely agree on hoping the M rating keeps the kiddos away at least some.

Right that's what I kind of meant. Sure people will like it love it worship it. People still play WoW BG's and Arena which I loathe. The sad part is that type of canned PvP has potential if the dev's would just stop stealing the scenarios FPS games were using 10 years ago like CTF or other simple variations and made maps that were more complex then squares that almost mirror each other on each side. The RvR needs some tweaking also even in the dev videos I was so let down when it was being explained something like "With the ultimate goal of sacking the enemy capital, then the server resets control and you can do it again for the 100th time!" isn't my vision of exciting gameplay that I want to replay many times.

Sorry, I have to reply, because I see progress in this argument. Yes, I realize nobody cares for it, however there isn't going to be anything personal here.

AnimeJ wrote:

I've explained the reasoning for the lack of scaling across everything; you're choosing to ignore that to pursue your own [...] argument.

Finally, we're getting somewhere. Now the remaining step is for you to realize that the WHY does not change the WHAT IS.

If I say "sky is blue", and you say "it's because of the phenomena known as Reyleigh scattering", it doesn't change the fact that the sky is blue. It only shows that you perhaps know more about the sky than I do, but no matter how much you explain it away, that still doesn't change my (and your) reality of it being blue.

Ok, this is as clear as I could possibly make it, so I'm done now. Thanks for bearing with me.

What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. And I don't like it any more than you men.

Strother Martin, Cool Hand Luke

I was interested to hear the opinion of the GFW guys on the last podcast, covering the E3 Conan stuff. Sounds like they were pretty underwhelmed, but there were some tech factors involved that may have sabotaged the devs (bad connectivity, overwhelmed hotel network). The Snake headed Oogaba spell effect was the most memorable thing.

Shiho - I can see that you are Beatles-deprived; here is a sample of some of their excellent lyrics:

"Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be."

jonnypolite wrote:

was interested to hear the opinion of the GFW guys on the last podcast, covering the E3 Conan stuff. Sounds like they were pretty underwhelmed, but there were some tech factors involved that may have sabotaged the devs (bad connectivity, overwhelmed hotel network). The Snake headed Oogaba spell effect was the most memorable thing.

Unfortunately I do most of my forum battling at work so I tend to avoid podcasts. A lot of the reviews I have read/heard about Age of Conan seemed pretty positive. None of the videos I have seen however leave me screaming for more. The graphics look soso though I do like the "style" (?) of the visuals, sorta how WoW looks really good even though the graphics aren't anything out of the ordinary. There really just seems to be so little about this game available and it is so close to release. Hopefully as more people get into the betas there will be more information and we will know more about the actual state of the game. I am trying to remain optimistic about what Funcom can potentially deliver. I guess if they fail at this one and end up with another AO they will get a 3rd shot with The Secret World or whatever they end up calling their H.P. Lovecraft-esque MMO.

As for guild names. Anything that isn't ridiculously bad/and fits somewhat in with the game lore/setting is cool with me. My usual tried and true guild name is "Jolly Pillagers" which leaves room for lots of drunken pirate roleplaying! I have joined a few guilds with goofy names like Wyld Stallyns (there was a good deal of /airguitar in guild chat!) and there are a few others that always amused me like "AFK With Your Sister". Guilds with ridiculous names I tend to only join with alts and characters I don't intend to play seriously. Anything I will stick with for the long term has to be somewhat normal.

Not trying to prejudice the crowd at all, i'm very much looking forward to AoC as well. I think the GFW guys are right when they say it's hard to demo an MMO, you really only get the feel of play over time and through personal experience, at least apart from eye candy and simple interface presentation.

mven wrote:

As for guild names. Anything that isn't ridiculously bad/and fits somewhat in with the game lore/setting is cool with me. My usual tried and true guild name is "Jolly Pillagers" which leaves room for lots of drunken pirate roleplaying! I have joined a few guilds with goofy names like Wyld Stallyns (there was a good deal of /airguitar in guild chat!) and there are a few others that always amused me like "AFK With Your Sister". Guilds with ridiculous names I tend to only join with alts and characters I don't intend to play seriously. Anything I will stick with for the long term has to be somewhat normal.

Whoa, an on-topic reply to my post! Thanks!

I am of several minds on guild names, but it all comes down to understanding in advance that there will be people who join a GWJ guild that aren't originally from GWJ; they will have met us inside the game, rather than through the website. Given that, a "normal, serious" name like "Hand of Crom" or "Knights of Abyssinia" might make sense, because some might not give much thought to "GWJ" - "GWJ" is something they don't understand. If you're a complete stranger, are you more attracted to "KRW" or "Death Knights"?

On the other hand, "Death Knights" might be a bit too serious, and it certainly doesn't reflect our personality. When I see a guild name like "Crusaders of Drunken Might", I figure they are a fun bunch of people with good senses of humor. So a somewhat funny name (like "Wyld Stallyns") might serve to both galvanize our self-image and to project an accurate idea of who we are to the rest of the gaming world.

And just in case anyone missed it earlier, and because I think it's that funny, I'll repeat that there's a Horde guild on Blackhand called "I Just Crit Myself". I assume those guys are awesome - which is why I'm talking about this subject.

It should be:

"I Just Crit My Pants"

fangblackbone wrote:

It should be:

"I Just Crit My Pants"

Winner.

AnimeJ wrote:
fangblackbone wrote:

It should be:

"I Just Crit My Pants"

Winner.

Dude, I was going to send up a suggestion, but it'll be hard to follow that.

Maybe these:

"Where's my Chainsaw"
"Knights under the Table"
"My Avatar pwns yours"
"Ask me why I'm not playing GoW"
"Army of Darkness" (I don't know if enough people will get the Raimi nod here and actually take this seriously), maybe "Bruce Cambell is our Lord and Savior"
"Crom's Cronies"

I think a guild called "Army of Darkness" would have to screen perspective members by asking them if they know the source of the name; those who think it's just a kickass name for a guild don't get in.

And I could totally join a guild called "Gimme Some Sugar Baby" or "Shop Smart Shop S Mart".

Fedaykin98 wrote:

I think a guild called "Army of Darkness" would have to screen perspective members by asking them if they know the source of the name; those who think it's just a kickass name for a guild don't get in.

And I could totally join a guild called "Gimme Some Sugar Baby" or "Shop Smart Shop S Mart".

I do like "Shop Smart Shop S Mart"

How about:

"Primitive Screwheads"
"Mister Fancypants" -- What he calls Henry the Red
"Clatto Verata Nicto"

jonnypolite wrote:

I was interested to hear the opinion of the GFW guys on the last podcast, covering the E3 Conan stuff. Sounds like they were pretty underwhelmed, but there were some tech factors involved that may have sabotaged the devs (bad connectivity, overwhelmed hotel network). The Snake headed Oogaba spell effect was the most memorable thing.

they seemed more put off by the M rated content than the game themselves. 3 of their guys were on 1ups WoW podcast and they were talking about upcoming MMO's and totally ignored AoC.

Put off by the content how? Upset that there were blood and boobies in game? Or upset that it wasn't mature enough after all the hype?

Well I am very excited for AoC and will help out in anyway I can. GWJ guild would be awesome but is going to take a lot of effort. AoC is the only MMO that I even have any interesting in!

Weiner Bombadiers?

wordsmythe wrote:

Weiner Bombadiers?

That was suggested for the Chromehounds clan, actually - though I would have expected you to spell bombardiers correctly!

mven wrote:

Put off by the content how? Upset that there were blood and boobies in game? Or upset that it wasn't mature enough after all the hype?

by the boobies... /shrug. i mean they're right it's hard to review a morpg watching someone else fight a few mobs. still they shouldn't just blow it off because they're not fans of the content.

There's way to many people out there that's a huge fan of R.E. Howard's worlds to let this one lie dormant. Plus with some of the mechanics they've put in for the end game which seems to combine the best parts DAOC and pre-NGE SWG they may even out last Warhammer. Of course we've got the THQ Warhammer 40k coming along as well. Now THAT one... i'll be loosing some drool over and possibly other bodily fluids.

Wow there is a lot to discuss on here. Several different points going back and forth.

M for Mature rating is absolutely a good thing for AoC. Anyone who says it's not good for the industry obviously enjoys the Care Bear attitude that has taken hold amongst many MMORPGs. Of course we have the complete opposite aspect of utterly awful tools also running about. Competition seems to exist pretty heavily only in PVP while the rest of most MMORPGs seems to be lets take turns and share. I don't quite understand why being a mature player requires the complete castration of one's balls to be considered fun to play with. I personally like a little competition even in a PVE environment. Also for those that don't like AoC because of the blood guts and gore... I say don't play. Don't even look in our direction.

*For the weak of heart I have added this warning of an incoming rant section*

But to those who still wish to be obnoxiously vocal about it, obviously their carefully taught or brainwashed religiously supported moral values can not handle even the remote image of blood, guts or nudity regardless of the fact that most of them probably have some sort of pornography secretly stored someplace for their own personal attention time. It's your standard hypocritical public reaction. I honestly do think that these types of people are going to be up in arms over this game simply because it's an "M" rated game that shows nudity, not because it's a "M" rated game that shows violence or gore. Because obviously seeing jubblies is so powerfully detrimental to the future of this country; Morons!

So I praise AoC for the M rating. I say down with the Care Bears and the overly Politically correct nazi types in MMORPGs. It's Conan and so expect death to all that get in the way. The weak shall be crushed beneath the feet of the strong. Those that can't handle it are free to leave for if they do not we shall crush them over and over again until they weep craven tears of cowardice and make water in their armor. They shall cry for mercy and we shall do nothing but laugh at their puny cries as we crush their heads and tear out their throats.

*end of rant*

On the Graphics front some of those videos really don't do the game justice. If any of those in game screen shots are real and not altered some of the scenery on a top notch platform should be on Oblivion level as far as detail goes. I have seen some amazingly beautiful scenery shots.

Lastly on the Guild name issue. I personally hope they don't show Guild Names at all openly above character. If you click on a PC and you identify them and look at them specifically (Inspect) then I say that's where the guild name should appear. Suspension of disbelief is not all that needed once you are looking at specific armor of another PC in a little screen. Obviously it's an environmental disruption just having that window up so I don't think having a Guild name that is out of the ordinary really matters at that point. You could call your all woman guild, "Warriors of the Moon Blood", which honestly I would be quite amused at or "Massive Cleavage" or even "Bouncing Booties" and it won't matter because I won't see the guild name hanging over your head unless I actually, "Inspect" you.

kilroy0097 wrote:

load of crap

This was a rant that is pretty much entirely uneeded, IMO. Maturity has far, far more to do with how you act and carry yourself than it does of a love for exalting violence and the like.

AnimeJ wrote:
kilroy0097 wrote:

load of crap

This was a rant that is pretty much entirely uneeded, IMO. Maturity has far, far more to do with how you act and carry yourself than it does of a love for exalting violence and the like.

I guess I have had much worse experiences with so called mature players than you have. Also your perception of a mature player may be different than the Care Bears i am talking about. And what's wrong with actually roleplaying the genre of Conan? It's a much more violent world than people are used to in MMORPGs so acting more violent is indeed fitting yourself to the genre you are playing.

kilroy0097 wrote:
AnimeJ wrote:
kilroy0097 wrote:

load of crap

This was a rant that is pretty much entirely uneeded, IMO. Maturity has far, far more to do with how you act and carry yourself than it does of a love for exalting violence and the like.

I guess I have had much worse experiences with so called mature players than you have. Also your perception of a mature player may be different than the Care Bears i am talking about. And what's wrong with actually roleplaying the genre of Conan? It's a much more violent world than people are used to in MMORPGs so acting more violent is indeed fitting yourself to the genre you are playing.

Nothing's wrong with enjoying Conan. Nothing's wrong with RP in that setting. I'm easily old enough to remember and enjoy the setting for what it is. None of this changes the fact that ranting on and on about "care bears" was completely unneeded.

AnimeJ wrote:
kilroy0097 wrote:
AnimeJ wrote:
kilroy0097 wrote:

load of crap

This was a rant that is pretty much entirely uneeded, IMO. Maturity has far, far more to do with how you act and carry yourself than it does of a love for exalting violence and the like.

I guess I have had much worse experiences with so called mature players than you have. Also your perception of a mature player may be different than the Care Bears i am talking about. And what's wrong with actually roleplaying the genre of Conan? It's a much more violent world than people are used to in MMORPGs so acting more violent is indeed fitting yourself to the genre you are playing.

Nothing's wrong with enjoying Conan. Nothing's wrong with RP in that setting. I'm easily old enough to remember and enjoy the setting for what it is. None of this changes the fact that ranting on and on about "care bears" was completely unneeded.

Granted it wasn't needed I admit that but it was very therapeutic. I added a rant warning to my original post for the weak of heart.

Well I think there is a big difference between "mature" players and a "mature" setting. They are not even really describing the same thing. I think the point of the rant is that people are ridiculous in the way that they feel that people should cater to their individual sensibilities. Seeing a few breasts here and there is pretty unlikely to kill anyone or completely destroy their moral fibre. The game is set in a more mature, violent world. While I don't think it is 100% necessary to have bare breasts in game to stick to the essence of the Conan lore I do feel that any attempt to simply make the game world a more harsh and adult setting is commendable. Too many MMOs are catering to the "kiddie" audience. Most other genres have plenty of "mature" games I don't see why having it in an MMO is a crime.

I don't see how parents who would let their children play an MMO without supervision anyway could get upset about them seeing a few breasts. I have yet to play an MMO without encountering a good number of people talking about things that are far more disgusting and sexual than anything that is likely to be encountered in Age of Conan. I honestly don't see how any game that allows for online play and doesn't have some sort of built in net nanny system could get anything but a mature rating. Just reading some of the stuff people encounter on XBL is crazy enough. Regular conversations in MMOs are even worse. *shrug*

The "kiddie" toned MMO's is obviously to keep a much broader consumer base with the perceived perception that its safe for children. The funny part is I totally agree with you mven that any parent who freely lets their 10-14 year old play a game like WoW unsupervised especially using voice coms has no clue what they could potentially be exposing their children too.

I do think tho that the M rating is something that will help the game sell as there seems to be a growing demand for a more edgier adult oriented MMO. Not that I think all 14 year olds are immature people I would never want to play a game with and that people over 18 magically become more tolerable polite gamers but associating with people to your own age group and life style can make a gaming experience more enjoyable. For example when I played WoW I had much more interesting conversations with other College students and was more understanding when finals rolled around and we had to slow down raiding. On the flip side running into guild members who turn out to be in high-school with bedtimes and not much to talk about outside the frame of the game were less enjoyable.

I agree. I have met plenty of younger folks even in the 12-14 range who were more mature than the majority of adults I have encountered in MMOs. I am not making any assumptions that the Conan community will magically become more mature simply because they give the game an M rating. Any public game of Gears of War or Rainbow Six: Vegas on XBL will give you all the fuel you need to prove that a M rating doesn't necessarily mean you will have a mature playerbase. If anything extreme violence and nudity will probably attract a less mature playerbase.

My thing is that I want to play a darker, more violent, and more "mature" themed MMORPG. WoW may as well be Walt Disney compared to what is offered in single player games these days. To me a harsh violent world is what I find most believable where fantasy is concerned. Age of Conan seems to be the first MMORPG that really has the potential to offer something of this nature. If they manage to pull it off I think it could be a game I could play for a long time. It may even be hard to give other games a chance if I have to step back from a brutal uncaring gameworld to the happy times of elves and pie delivery quests. Most of the MMORPGs from the last 8-10 years don't offer much new and exciting. Given that they are all relatively the same I would much prefer one that at least had a dark and somewhat believable world.

The fallacy in the argument comes in the fact that it's extrodinarily biased against anyone who doesn't want AoC, regardless of the reason. It's far too easy to fall back on the whole 'You're some religious right nutjob hypocrit who can't handle blood and skin'. I can handle both just fine; I have no issue with anyone who finds it desirable in a game, movie or book. The fact that I or anyone else finds it unneeded is just that; our personal choice, just as it's yours and anyone elses to play the game. There is absolutely no call for a broad based ad hominem attack in the manner kilroy undertook.

As to whether or not the M rating will sell AoC, I don't know. I don't think there's as great a call for what AoC will offer content wise if the game itself isn't easily accessible on the same level that WoW is. Further, I think that the FFA PvP nature of the game will also drive players away, not towards. FFA PvP is a VERY niche category in the MMO genre that historically underperforms all other categories on the occasions that a game is released that even begins to approach it.

Overall, I have a feeling that individuals of age who truly want to play a 'mature' MMO aren't going to play AoC. They've already found an MMO suited to them; Second Life.

Actually I would like to point out one very important line in my rant that demonstrates exactly who I am ranting about.

"But to those who still wish to be obnoxiously vocal about it..."

I didn't say it was wrong for people to not like AoC due to it's content. What I said, all be it in a colorful and non-politically correct manner, was I didn't appreciate people saying it was wrong for everyone else to play the game due to it's Mature rating. Hence those that disapprove of the game and yet are still obnoxiously vocal about it. So unless you are part of this group AnimeJ then I have shown no ill will towards you directly. If members of this vocal group happen to be people you are close with then I apologize for my colorful statement but not for it's meaning.

Animej wrote:

As to whether or not the M rating will sell AoC, I don't know. I don't think there's as great a call for what AoC will offer content wise if the game itself isn't easily accessible on the same level that WoW is. Further, I think that the FFA PvP nature of the game will also drive players away, not towards. FFA PvP is a VERY niche category in the MMO genre that historically underperforms all other categories on the occasions that a game is released that even begins to approach it.

Well first off AoC isn't really FFA PvP. They are supposedly offering server choices similar to WoW. The rest of the servers will be like DAoC or Warhammer where they will have a sort of frontier area where PvP takes place. Secondly I don't think there is really all that much supporting the fact that FFA PvP is a niche only market. Only a few games have ever really offered it outside of specialized servers (UO, Shadowbane, and EVE) and only two of those were built with that in mind. I don't really like to count EVE as it is more like TW2002 w/ a shiny GUI than a "traditional" MMORPG. Shadowbane is the only semi-modern regular MMORPG with FFA PvP and as a whole it sucked hardcore. The fact that it even maintained a playerbase would seem to indicate to me that there is a market for real PvP. EVE which isn't really the same type of game but does offer a lot of PvP freedom has a growing playerbase last I checked. The problem w/ FFA PvP is that most games that offer it as a side option are not built with it in mind and as such they don't take things far enough. Either way, some people like it, some people don't. AoC is supposed to have options for both sides assuming they can get their ducks in a row and get the game out the door.

Animej wrote:

Overall, I have a feeling that individuals of age who truly want to play a 'mature' MMO aren't going to play AoC. They've already found an MMO suited to them; Second Life.

You are bashing someone for ridiculous generalizations and then you say that? Second Life is like the Sims for furries. When I am referring to mature content I am referring to the same content you find in GoW, The Darkness, Fallout, GTA, etc. Brutal, gore-filled goodness, with a nice dose of human nature. A dark vulgar world where I feel like my character who spends his/her life killing things for personal gain actually fits in. If they want to throw in a little nudity, sex, innuendo, drug use, alcohol, etc... Well last I checked most humans I know are into one or more of those things. People who are offended by these things have plenty of options in the MMO world. I don't expect everyone to want this type of game. That being said there are plenty of people who would like to see something like it (well technically neocron was similar but the game was so terrible).

I agree with you that the game will still have to be somewhat accessible (which is why neocron wasn't very popular despite offering the mature content). This is not to say that it should cater completely to the WoW crowd. If they toss out a Shadowbane or Vanguard it won't matter how "mature" the game's content is. Not many people want to play a clunky, buggy, laggy, or unplayable game no matter what it might offer or how nifty its lore and/or concepts are. Personally I would prefer if it wasn't as accessible as WoW. I would like a bit more challenge in my MMO game. Unfortunately watching gameplay videos leads me to believe that it will be pretty easy as far as these things go so I think I will be a bit disappointed here. *shrug*

Too bad I still have my doubts that Funcom can even pull this game off.

mven wrote:

Too bad I still have my doubts that Funcom can even pull this game off.

My god, listen to everyone! Sheesh!

Aren't we forgetting one simple, simple fact of AoC that everyone seems to be glossing over? Yeah, Bill Gates' little company is backing this game to be its showcase game, ergo, he's not going to sign off on some trashy product a la Vanguard. If Funcom keeps their Windows 'partnership' then I have no doubt that this game will be huge. I think that, above all things, is the barometer for measuring its potential.