Funcom responds to concerns following first instances of AoC's "Massive PvP"
by William Dobson 
Jun 19th 2008 at 2:15PM
Filed under: Fantasy, Age of Conan, Bugs, Events, in-game, Game mechanics, Patches, PvP
Funcom has posted on the official forums (with the actual message being penned by Gaute Godager) in the hopes of reassuring the community that the problems that have been experienced with these battles are being looked at. The main issues are identified as those of client performance, and those of content and collision. Client performance is apparently the biggest problem being reported, and even before people started to get into massive PvP, some fixes to do with this have been worked on behind the scenes.
Some of the ways in which Funcom hopes to improve the performance in these battles is to tone down some particles, stylize the view distance to a shorter setting, and change how some spells and abilities propagate. In the feedback thread to do with this announcement, quite a number of people are upset that the eye-candy they currently enjoy may take a hit for the sake of playability in massive PvP, but it is undeniable that this will be the quickest way to improve the situation at this point.
The collision detection issues are not really elaborated on in the official post, but reading through the feedback thread gives you some idea of the sort of things that are going on -- bugged walls, gaps in walls, for instance -- fairly game-breaking stuff when it comes to defending a keep. We also notice at least one reported case of the first siege time on a guild's keep being set randomly, not at the guild's choosing, putting the keep at serious risk due to real-life commitments keeping guild members from defending at the allotted time.
Perhaps the only good thing in all of this is that Funcom has realized that this is a huge deal for its players, and have let us know that they will do their best to fix as much as they can as soon as possible -- they hope that some of the massive PvP fixes will go in with the next scheduled update on Monday. The beginning of Godager's letter reaffirms the company's pledge to deal with issues like this in an honest and open manner, meaning they will not attempt to sweep problems under the rug -- rather, they will share their plans on how they hope to tackle them, and what sort of a time-frame they will require to get the job done. In this particular case, they are "doing a strong push to address all issues immediately".
If you've had first-hand experience in sieging and massive PvP, we'd be very interested to hear from you in the comments section below. As emphasized in the official response post, only a small percentage of players will have actually been involved in this yet, so let us know how it went for you!
The collision detection issues are not really elaborated on in the official post, but reading through the feedback thread gives you some idea of the sort of things that are going on -- bugged walls, gaps in walls, for instance -- fairly game-breaking stuff when it comes to defending a keep. We also notice at least one reported case of the first siege time on a guild's keep being set randomly, not at the guild's choosing, putting the keep at serious risk due to real-life commitments keeping guild members from defending at the allotted time.
Perhaps the only good thing in all of this is that Funcom has realized that this is a huge deal for its players, and have let us know that they will do their best to fix as much as they can as soon as possible -- they hope that some of the massive PvP fixes will go in with the next scheduled update on Monday. The beginning of Godager's letter reaffirms the company's pledge to deal with issues like this in an honest and open manner, meaning they will not attempt to sweep problems under the rug -- rather, they will share their plans on how they hope to tackle them, and what sort of a time-frame they will require to get the job done. In this particular case, they are "doing a strong push to address all issues immediately".
If you've had first-hand experience in sieging and massive PvP, we'd be very interested to hear from you in the comments section below. As emphasized in the official response post, only a small percentage of players will have actually been involved in this yet, so let us know how it went for you!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Laocorne said on 2:57PM 6-19-2008
"The beginning of Godager's letter reaffirms the company's pledge to deal with issues like this in an honest and open manner, meaning they will not attempt to sweep problems under the rug -- rather, they will share their plans on how they hope to tackle them, and what sort of a time-frame they will require to get the job done."
They've hardly been up-front about anything to date. Very few serious bugs are acknowledged by devs in the forums; every patch brings stealth nerfs to multiple classes...not to mention breaks something in the process.
Reply
Nadril said on 3:08PM 6-19-2008
(1) Numerous stealth nerfs the only two were the change to OverReach and the nerf to one of the bear shamans abilities. This isn't "stealth nerfs to multiple classes each patch" this is two nerfs over all the patches that have come out so far.
(2) I think the devs have more to worry about FIXING serious bugs other than saying what everyone else already knows.
(3) bugs introduced in patches. No, really? They are releasing two patches a week, of course there are bound to be small things here and there.
I hate to make the inevitable World of Warcraft comparison, but seriously : they go into a good 2 month PTR testing for a patch the size of what is going on in Conan twice a week, and there is still bugs in them. (some which are major and which Blizzard doesn't mention)
Pirate Penguin said on 3:07PM 6-19-2008
Reading the update, it seems as if their short term solution is going to be to automatically disable graphic candy and view distance in order ot help the problem. That approach would have me worried if I hadn't already stopped playing the game as my computer struggled even when I had already lowered most of the graphic settings.
It is disappointing that such a prominent feature is having such issues, since it was one of the things a lot of people were looking forward to. There are a lot of things to like about Age of Conan but in my opinion the game was not truly ready for release.
Reply
Nadril said on 3:19PM 6-19-2008
From what I understand, they simply ran out of money. Funcom is not a huge developer and simply didn't have funds to continue on going through beta.
It's sad that they couldn't, but I am perfectly fine with supporting a Developer I love and a game that will be great. That's why I think they should really tell people that if they don't like the problems that may crop up then simply come back in 4-5 months and give your opinions then.
Rubin said on 11:37AM 6-20-2008
In response to Nadril, they didn't run out of money and still have around 50 something million in the bank, it was along those lines and because of that they extended not shortened the beta.
"Funcom would also like everyone to know that its financial position remains strong, and it has a cash balance of $52.4 million as of the end of December."
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6185639.html?tag=result;title;6
Brian! said on 3:23PM 6-19-2008
AoC is an interesting game. It is a shame they have so many odd bugs still in the game.
MMOs are tricky. In the case of AoC, they have developed 3 games. A single player game, a multiplayer game, and an "end game". I wish developers could figure out how to drop us all into "end game" and just focus on that only because I have a feeling that it would be the best MMO ever.
Personally, I was hoping for more from AoC. I dislike the trend of MMOs adding more and more single player play. In AoC I feel as though I am playing my game along side of thousands of others... but alone really.
On the other end, City of Heroes (even in it's aging state) allows for easy grouping. The whole sidekick system lets you stick with your friends or find a PuG rather quickly.
Anyway. I digress. AoC has a cool look, but the gameplay is not really thought out that well. Sometimes I think it would be a better single player game. They released to take advantage of the gap since so many other MMOs are launching this fall, but in the long run they might suffer the same fate as Sigil's Vanguard.
Reply
Soma-X said on 5:39PM 6-19-2008
It saddens me to see how seriously messed up the graphics options are, disable one thing it breaks another.
fresh install I started playing and no particles, water was all messed up, also advanced graphics options are horribly man handled by some weak developers.
The game is fun, but it has some serious technical issues. I spent 50usd got a broken game, it was in closed beta for how long??!?!? I can see why they would release it when they did, with WAR coming out and all (That game has been pushed back again and again)
Think of this game as the first Star Wars movie, a trukload of technical problems / limitations, but still one of the greats.
Reply
ED_Jorus said on 6:17PM 6-20-2008
@ Soma-X
Please tell me you are not likening AoC to Star Wars Episode 1
Furthermore...PLEASE tell me you are not calling Star Wars Episode 1 "one of the greats"
If you're referring to Ep4 then I'll let you off :P
http://onemorequest.blogspot.com/
Reply
Grimjakk said on 8:37PM 6-20-2008
I think its pretty safe to say that he was referring to "THE FIRST" Star Wars movie. Which would in fact be "Episode 4".
And I have to agree with the general tone of the article.
I've played a bit on both the FFA PvP and the normal servers and I just find it a bit... lacking.
Normal play feels like a single player game with multiplayer chat.
And FFA PvP is seldom a good thing in MMORPG's... level-based power curves and classes that are balanced for group play instead of PvP competition, just doesn't make for good skill-based PvP.
I'd try the "cultural" pvp ( I spent 3 years on Tallon Zek, one of EQ's "TeamPvP" servers), but having to share one starting city where you're locked in until level 20 just sounds like a train wreck waiting to happen.
Reply