Age of Conan

sidthesexist said:
yeah so's mine on the page you get after signing up but if you go to the funcom site-->my account (and login)-->and then click on view payments on the right hand side of the screen it will show if you are pending or not?
Click to expand...

Oh got that - mine is pending still. I have started downloading my client already though - this shouldn't matter should it?
 
JBod said:
more depth than Ultima Online
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure I would agree with that.

It has more story, that I would agree with, but I wouldnt say that it has more depth than UO.

You could dye armour in UO, and furniture, and craft furniture which you could then sit on, and you could kill another player, loot his belongings, then hack his body to pieces (in fact in the early days you could even skin him, cook his flesh and eat it) , you could build your own house, decorate the house, have your own ship, sail the ship around, name the ship, name your horse, name your house, create your own designed house layout, collect resources in a non instanced world, have your own shop, sell items on your vendors who were actual characters at your buildings rather than an auction house, tame a variety of creatures to fight for you or just as pets, collect rare items and use those to decorate your house, build player run cities/towns and not just in preset positions, defend those towns/cities from player attacks...and on and on and on.

AoC beats UO for storyline and quests...but in terms of freedom for the player to do stuff and depth of gameplay it doesnt beat UO
 
Last edited:
You probably answered this question but I have little time at the moment to sift through the thread.

Is this out already? Or are you guys talking about Beta testing or something? Any info would be smashing :)

TIA :)
 
Thinking of ordering this game, played WoW for over 2 years consistently and haven't touched that for over a year now - something new would be nice!

I'm wondering how it'll run on my system, not expecting anything amazing! I'll be running it at 1280x1024 on my 17" LCD.

- AMD XP3800 Dual Core
- 1gb PC3500 ram
- 7800GT or 7900GT (at work atm so can't check!)

If not I'm guessing more ram and a boost in graphics would be the best and cheapest way to upgrade to run this. I think it'll be playable, but nothing pretty enabled?

Cheers.
 
^^ wont be to bad as you have a small screen, but dont exspect anything over low-med settings. As you said just turn the goodies down (shadows especially) and it will run fine.
 
JBod said:
Control interface of WoW, with the PvP of MxO and more depth than Ultima Online and Lord of the Rings online put together. In fact the newb section I played through at beta had more depth, storyline and what felt like useful quests (rather the pointless grinds) than any other MMO to date. I think I have just about played them all :p
Click to expand...


Wholeheartedly disagree with that statement.

Game is very linear at the beginning and extremely easy. Mashing forward or left right attack with the odd 'special' that, lets face it, are not that special.

Having tried the game at lvl 30+ it still feels lame and in fact has put me off buying totally.

Each to their own though :)
 
Saviola said:
Wholeheartedly disagree with that statement.

Game is very linear at the beginning and extremely easy. Mashing forward or left right attack with the odd 'special' that, lets face it, are not that special.

Having tried the game at lvl 30+ it still feels lame and in fact has put me off buying totally.

Each to their own though :)
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this fella.
 
JBod said:
Control interface of WoW, with the PvP of MxO and more depth than Ultima Online and Lord of the Rings online put together. In fact the newb section I played through at beta had more depth, storyline and what felt like useful quests (rather the pointless grinds) than any other MMO to date. I think I have just about played them all :p
Click to expand...

For some reason I hated AoC's interface. It just seemed awful to me :s
 
JBod said:
Control interface of WoW, with the PvP of MxO and more depth than Ultima Online and Lord of the Rings online put together. In fact the newb section I played through at beta had more depth, storyline and what felt like useful quests (rather the pointless grinds) than any other MMO to date. I think I have just about played them all :p
Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with this. The interface is horrid looking and clunky, messages spam across the entire screen, and as an assassin i simply spammed attack buttons and could take down +5 mobs at once with no skill. Animations are a bit weird, especially jumping, zones are minute, super minute in fact - and generally very linear and non-roaming. It can look pretty though.
Perhaps I'm about to be argumentative, but playing my lotro burgler requires a lot more skill then anything I've seen in AoC so far. After playing the beta, I'm going to hold off for a while. Especially since the latest news regarding end game sieging which was promised to be hundered against hundereds will now be 48vs48.
 
Well I always said that I wondered how they were going to do the hundreds of people against hundreds of people large scale pvp, given the graphics and slowdown when dozens and dozens of people are onscreen.

Looks like in the end, they simply arent. Thats a shame, as its huge large scale, hundreds against hundreds style PvP , like in Daoc, that I like. Thankfully I still have warhammer, but I can see the 48 v 48 news causing more than a few ripples amongst the community. Not just for the size of it, but also because its been left this late in the day to actually mention it
 
I could read that one of a few different ways,

1) Hurray ! Its going to go up eventually

2) Bah..PR , marketing spin to try and patch up the undoubted damage going on in most forums

3) Ok, so its not set in stone, but that doesnt mean it will change either, it just means that it "might" change, and why the hell wasnt this mentioned earlier than a week before release, and why havent they tested all this prior to this

Take your pick :)

Forgot option 4)

4) Ok ok. I can live with that, but how is this going to be enforced? How will the limit work, surely the only way to guarantee that it will be X number v X number is to make the sieges instanced? I thought the battlekeeps werent instanced, that they were in open world PvP?

Hmm...I think that covers the possible responses.
 
Last edited:
I'm not quite sure what to think of the 48 vs 48 battles atm. One thing that can be said is that it possibly stops larger guilds from dominating smaller guilds in sieges.
 
SS-89 said:
I'm not quite sure what to think of the 48 vs 48 battles atm. One thing that can be said is that it possibly stops larger guilds from dominating smaller guilds in sieges.
Click to expand...

True, but isnt that kind of part of being a larger guild, the numeric advantage in combat, all the more so in something like a siege where a defender generally has an advantage over the attacker.

Certainly I wouldnt want to be the guild leader of a guild of 60 people and have to explain to some of them that they cant join in tonights siege because theres already 48 people.

I dont know..I guess it might turn out fine, but god I had enough of even number , instanced combat with Alterac Valley in WoW. I miss the open , large scale combat of things like Daoc, huge epic armies crashing into one another as one stalwartly defends a keep, while the other pummels it with men and siege weapons. The defenders all the while keeping an eye on the horizon in case more enemies turn up. Kind of got the adrenalin going :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom