Age of conan - World of warcraft

Age of Conan PvP is crap compared to WoW's, so if you fancy fighting against others stay away from Conan.

coming from DAOC and having played both wow and AoC, imo both have crap PvP.. off the 2 wow will keep you playing longer
 
This is disappointing reviews from you lot. Was thinking about AoC after finding the playable cartoon WOW pretty much lacking anything of any real substance.

:(

Dont be a sheep. Try it for yourself, take on board what people say but make your own mind up.

Just remember most people raving about WoW are fan boys who just cant/dont want to beleve there are better things out there. Change is hard for them. ;)
 
After playing AoC, WoW just seems slow to the point of boredom. Zone design in AoC is much better. Itemisation in AoC like WoW at release is abit subpower. The higher end content in AoC at the moment is not there in its fullness.

I would say that anyone how could last a few more months in wow should wait then start AoC settles down. Its a great game now but will be better in a few months when they get ontop of a few issues and add somemore high end content.
 
This thread is going exactly as I predicted. :)

eiuruf.jpg


Anyone want to join me for some popcorn?
 
I enjoyed my time with WoW, but got bored after a while and cancelled. Was a fun game while it lasted me though.

Quick note on WoW's armour design. It was way too over the top for my tastes. You looked like a mix between the Legion of Doom and a Transformer. WoW's art direction was mostly good (environments), but silly character models and armour let it down. I prefer the 'real' art direction of Conan tbh.
 
Last edited:
during beta AoC devs said the game starts at 80 and leveling up is practice, in a few weeks/month or 2 we will start seeing the end game conent which is what will make or break the game. WoW 1-70 only takes up a small amount of your /played time, the same will be true of AoC so we need to wait a while for proper comparison imo. btw the leveling up in AoC is much easier/faster than WoW.
 
AoC is the best release of any MMO to date,

I would have said LOTRO had the smoothest release. WoW's was pretty good but the server queues were a problem, especially in America. WoW had the best beta model of any MMO I've ever been a part of, and it was due to that that they had a good release.

Other MMO developers take note. You want a smooth release? You need a highly optimised engine, you need to have a TRUE open beta, and have it for a long time. Only problem with that is, you need to be confident of your product, and know it's quality. Unfortunately, not many MMO's are. So they'll NDA for as long as possible.
 
Last edited:
AoC is the best release of any MMO to date, as for itemisation if your still using level 10 items at level 40 do some epic dungens.
I agree with you about items but I don't agree with you about the launch.

I thought that Lord Of The Rings Online probably had the smoothest launch I've seen.
 
AoC had a fine launch server wise, just the game is buggy and unbalanced PvP wise.

I also think Conan made a terrible choice with EVERYbody being a PvP target, it's much better to have 2 main factions.
 
Gah the MMO crowd is dire these days, I tried UO again but you're all there as well!

On topic/replies.

- It's silly to compare them, it would be like comparing a Wii and a PS3.

- No MMO has a trial at launch, that would be ****ing stupid.

- Make your own damn mind up, it's £20. Not exactly a bank breaker.

- AoC's launch is much, much better that WoW's for the amount of people they have playing. The game will be much better in a few months, there's so many feature that need tuning, and many more to come.
 
I also think Conan made a terrible choice with EVERYbody being a PvP target, it's much better to have 2 main factions.
You can join a culture war server which, as far as I know, is Cimmerians vs. Aquilonians vs. Stygians.

Speaking strictly from a lore point of view though, what you propose wouldn't actually make any sense in the Conan lore because there are no "good" and "evil" sides and even the good guys in Conan lore are not very good. Wars happen between any nations for various reasons.

Like I said though there is the culture war rule-set for people who want a similar experience, and you can still do guild vs. guild on any PVP server which is more than enough to suit plenty of PVPers.

Playing on a PVP-RP server I personally prefer combat to be FFA, it widens your options.
 
Last edited:
Playing on a PVP-RP server I personally prefer combat to be FFA, it widens your options.

So do I. The closer an MMO is to offering freedom for it's players, the better. I never liked WoW's pvp, it's far too rigid and contrived. An MMO should be about you making YOUR story, not somebody elses. You should have guidelines, but freedom of action is far more interesting and important.
 
- It's silly to compare them, it would be like comparing a Wii and a PS3.

Why?

They're both an MMO. They've both been released. DONT say because WoW has had 3 years to mature, because WoW hasn't always been 3 years old.

I cannot assertain the reasons why they cant be compared.
 
Speaking strictly from a lore point of view though, what you propose wouldn't actually make any sense in the Conan lore because there are no "good" and "evil" sides and even the good guys in Conan lore are not very good. Wars happen between any nations for various reasons.

There are no "good" or "bad" guys in WoW. The orcs have a very noble and proud story. The undead are only "bad" guys because the "Good" guys refused to accept them. The taurens are "bad" because they felt bad for the Orcs.

We consider the Alliance the "good" guys cause the faction contains the Humans, whom we obviously identify with. Funny though, the Human lore is the most corrupt, power hungry and generally damn mean.

Not dissagreeing with you about you AoC faction point, just thought i'd slip in that technically, the same could be said for WoW.
 
Back
Top Bottom