Another blogger flees Age of Conan...
Filed under: Fantasy, Age of Conan, PvP, Endgame, Opinion
...and this time it's Peter Smith of the Dragonchasers blog.Citing a waning ability to have fun with the game, item statistics that really don't help with anything, and a lack of variance in armor and items, Smith is calling it quits with Age of Conan. His comments seem to mirror the comments of many others, but one particular subject stands out in his blog from the others: the much touted and praised player vs. player endgame.
Smith brings up the point that he feels like "another cog in the wheel" of his large guild. In order to see the content of the endgame cities and city sieges, he joined a very large guild and is expected to provide materials to help with the construction of the guild city. But, without player housing, any type of city mini-games, and lack of bonuses offered by the city itself, he just feels like another faceless voice instead of a heroic city builder.
His article touches on the ability to stand out inside of a game where a person may not be able to stand out in the world itself and how it links back to his decision to cancel the game. If you're interested, be sure to drop over by to the Dragonchasers blog and check it out for yourself.
_thumbnail.jpg "Aion Beta: Asmodian Ascension Quest")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Lethality said on 9:47AM 7-10-2008
The blogger hit it right on the head.
AoC isn't a game that can be fixed in the near or long term. It's a terrible game, even if it was bug-free. Poor design choices make this one to stay away from.
If you already subscribe be sure to cancel asap.
Vote with your wallet.
Reply
dspkable said on 1:35PM 7-10-2008
I went with 'Vanguard' for a fresh start, since they DID manage to fix their game. It looks good so far and the game seems to be really deep. A bit of a combination of UO, WOW, and EQ in many ways. Low population currently, but I see it blowing up soon.
crsh said on 12:24PM 7-10-2008
Classic. Who let you out of the AoC General Discussion forum?
Mercerfy said on 12:26PM 7-10-2008
Thanks for posting your opinion the first time on how much you dislike AoC for various reasons. I can respect that. However, this is now the 100th time I have seen you post your negative shit. We get it. Now do everyone a favor and move on to something that you enjoy. Your AoC bashing agenda is really sad and it is getting old. You place so much effort into pushing this Conan hate which is only your one, unimportant opinion. You are an angry, miserable nothing....find something to do with your life.
Lethality said on 1:01PM 7-10-2008
Seems to be I've achieved my goal and have pushed the right buttons.
Brainiacrk said on 10:40AM 7-10-2008
I'm at lvl 32 (Female Barbarian) on a PvE server.
I agree with Smith's assertion that the armor available at my current level is not really any more decorative/elaborate than the armor available to me in Tortage. However, I haven't had a problem finding armor that is more statistically desirable (slightly higher defensive ratings, higher health/stamina bonuses) as I progress... so far.
I do appreciate the realistic, pseudo-European look they are going for in-game. That said... I think the armor is, in general, ugly and the environments, while often beautiful, are repetitive and bland in many places.
I don't know much about end-game / guild city building / PvP. I am a player that doesn't care about that content. My interest is in playing the game because I enjoy exploring the environment, completing the quests, and experiencing the story/dungeons. Again, AoC's quests run from numbingly mundane to quite interesting. This is no different from any other MMO I've played so this game doesn't gain/lose any points in that category.
I'll play and pay for the game until I've peaked at lvl 80 and seen (mostly) all that there is to see. I guess my point is that I'm a casual player and I'm trying to represent the game from that perspective.
As Smith points out, I also think this game could really, really use a strong infusion of non-critical game play via mini-games, community events, etc.
Reply
Nadril said on 11:41AM 7-10-2008
My thoughts:
Dragonchasers:
----
""I finally realized what was missing from my enjoyment of Age of Conan: a sense of progress. The gear my character was wearing looked pretty much the same at level 30 as it did at level 5. The stats on that gear were essentially meaningless (+0.2 defense, woot!). So getting better gear didn’t make any difference to either immersion (the visuals) or gameplay (the stats).""
-----
Comparing level 30 gear to level 5 gear... ok? Playing in a guild that will often time have several various levels running together (like a 35, then a couple 50's, and 2 80's or something all apped) it is very easy to tell someone's level range by their gear. I don't think this blogger got high enough to realize that.
Dragonchasers:
------
""At level 1 I was fighting men and beasts such as crocodiles, which at the time seemed like a great idea. Too many MMOs have you fighting small snakes and insects at low levels. But at level 30, I was still fighting men and crocodiles (and bears and wolves) with very few ‘monstrous’ foes. Sure they were higher level, but so was I, so the fights felt about the same.""
------
Again with comparing level 1 to level 30 foes. However, at level 30 there are several pretty powerful looking mobs out there. The Dark Beasts (or w/e) in Wild lands, for example, are really menacing looking. Then you have all of the soldiers and such in conal's vally and there are equally interesting and unique monsters in Khopshef.
And again I don't think he's gotten to experience a lot of the game. Onyx chambers (lvl 78-80) has some wicked looking monsters in it, for example. Or another good one, in the egolyphic mountains (50-60) you're figthing giant yetis, mammoths, cannibals, giant ice worms...
Dragonchasers:
----
""From level 1-20 I fought in jungles, on desert islands and in ancient crypts. Since then I’ve fought in…jungles and ancient crypts. While there are 3 zones to hit after you leave Tortage, they don’t really feel all that much different.""
-----
Level 1-20 had you playing in a jungle, on white sands (a BEACH not a desert) and a ruins.
Level 20-40 has you leveling in a desert, a battlefield in the mountains and a much more open and flat landed plains. They all felt a lot different.
Dragonchasers:
----
""It boils down to the fact that whether I played a character that was level 32 (the max I got to, and to be fair that isn’t even half-way to cap, maybe things get better if you push past these doldrums) and then switched to a character that was level 12, the game didn’t really feel any different. So what’s the point of playing an rpg with progression levels if the levels all feel the same?""
-----
Christ this guy got up to level 32 and thinks that he can make a fair assessment of the game!? This really just boils down to a poorly done article, a lot of his points he hasn't even gotten a chance to partake in.
Dragonchasers:
------
""What’s worse, there are no ‘extras’ to help prop up the gameplay. I do enjoy crafting in these games, but here you have to be level 20 to start harvesting, level 40 to start crafting, and level 50 to harvest tier 2 materials. So you spend 20 levels gathering ore and wood to either donate to your guild (which will quickly bypass the need for low-tier materials) or try to sell them on the broker. Yawn.""
------
The cap on what you can gather and craft isn't a big deal, and I don't know what the blogger was trying to say here. Of course, he didn't even GET to the damn level where he could craft yet.
Dragonchasers:
------
""There are guild cities, but no personal housing. The guild buildings just kind of sit there. Eventually they’re supposed to give buffs but those aren’t in the game yet. I guess right now they’re just good for bragging rights. There are no ‘hobby’ activities like fishing, or gambling mini-games, or any of the other little ‘time-waster’ things to do that make a world feel more real.""
------
I wish people would do their homework first. The city buffs ARE there, they just don't show up yet and are fairly small. (they're going to get buffed).
Dragonchasers:
------
""Last item is a personal one, and not a problem with the game per se. Apparently the crux of the high-end game play is guild vs guild PVP, besieging player-built battle keeps and so forth. Which sounds fun, but which really require a fairly substantial guild. I’m generally the kind of MMO player that joins a small, intimate guild, or no guild at all. This time I joined a huge guild (400 characters, I think at one point 135 or so players). This meant we got to build a guild city really quickly and all that but…I never really got to know anyone in it. It was such a large guild that the chat channel might as well have been a public channel. My contributions to the guild city consisted of handing over materials and gold to someone who handed them up the chain to someone who did the actual building. Essentially I was just a cog in the wheel. And ya know, I’m a cog in the wheel in the real world. When I’m playing a game I want to matter.""
-------
This is another "I haven't read about basic game features yet". Smaller guilds can actually higher out members to larger guilds who want help with a siege. I have no idea if it is in the game yet, as not many sieges are going on, but it's there or is getting added soon.
The point is join a smaller guild , make a name for yourself if you want to matter. This blogger got to 34 and it seems like he wants everyone to gasp at him and know who he is.
Guess what, getting known takes time. My guild, [The Family Buisness], is a very small guild of maybe 10-15 active members. As such we HAVE to do good at PvP to be noticed, and we are. We've had a fairly larger guild (30-40 level 80's or so) put us on KoS and we've definitly got the attention of even large scale raiding guilds.
If you're outspoken and a good player you can get noticed.
So, my personal opinion? The blogger got up to level 34. What would you guys say if someone played World of Warcraft up to level 30, or LoTRO up to 20 (or w/e) and just dismissed it?
Either way the blogger just commented on a bunch of stuff he has no idea about. Really, massively, can you kind of read the article a bit instead of posting anything in regards to AoC? If you're going to post about a person leaving AoC at least make it significant, not just some mid 30 player.
Reply
Tasogare said on 1:48PM 7-10-2008
The point is that a lot of the stuff you said is "small, but there and will be buffed to be more meaningful," should've been meaningful in the first place, like they said. And up until you start getting gear from Sanctum and higher end dungeons you're gear doesn't change at all in appearance, nor does the gear really seem to be much of an upgrade. I got a leg piece out of the sanctum and replaced it with a quest green as soon as I hit the Fields of the Dead...it really seems to me like that shouldn't happen.
The biggest point would be that it's rediculous to suffer through what you consider boredom just because you're a low level and people keep assuring you "it's going to get better." Developers should do a better job at making the game more engaging for people who are on the path to the top instead of saying "Get to 80 quick then you can play the game!"
The game has potential to be something really cool if it can weather out the coming storm of patch fixes, player loss, and new MMO release, and then maybe some of those people who threw in the towel will start trickling back. Me, on top of how mundane and trivial everything felt, coupled with low framerates (sorry I'm a college student, I can't afford a new machine to play a game) and enormous glaring defects, I think it's left a bad taste in my mouth. Not to mention I think the combo system is an abysmal monstrosity that never should've graced the MMO world with it's presence....but that's just me.
Nadril said on 2:00PM 7-10-2008
The thing is is that 1-20 takes like 5 and a half hours. 20-30 "maybe" would take you another 5 or 6 hours to do.
My point is that if you compare Age of conan's 1-30 game to, say, World of Warcrafts 1-30 game it's about the same. WoW gives you more zones to level in (although I enjoyed AoC's zones much better) but gear wise they are a lot of the same.
I.E most of the 1-30 gear in WoW looks very noobish in appearance, as does AoC. Once you hit the sanctum you really start to get a lot better looking loot, and as long as you don't just try and speed through levels and take time with instances your character will look good.
Also you can replace some sanctum items with FoTD greens, maybe. Some of the stats on gear is admittedly a bit off but, because gear isn't AS LARGE as a deciding factor as WoW is, you can just wear the cooler looking gear.
Hell, my 57 conq is still wearing a chest from Sanctum.
Anyways I'm not trying to say he HAD to like the game. People have different opinions, obviously. I don't like WoW so I don't play it (raided @70 for a bit, but PvP was stale).
My point was that a lot of the issues he had seem to be blown out of water, and I just wanted to clarify them as such.
And sorry if I seem like a fanboy, I do try very hard to keep an objective look at the game. Also I am in no way recommending rushing to 80. Fuck, I would recommend AGAINST it. Spend time enjoying the game (PvPing on a PvP server and such) and you'll have more fun then just rushing through stuff.
Brian! said on 12:26AM 7-11-2008
Er... wait until you get to level X and the game gets better?
Maybe the game should just start at that level then. If the game sucks until you reach that point, let us skip it if we want.
Frankly, I think MMOs need to trash the concept of levels all together. When you have a MMO with levels, you are forced to design 2 games, the leveling game and the end-game. it seems to be that building one kick-ass end game would be a winner.
After all, isn't that really what MMOs are. Just a race to get to that end-game where we can start "really" playing?
Pingmeister said on 12:38PM 7-10-2008
I think AoC is getting a bit more bad press than it deserves right now. Although I quit playing I think it still has a lot of potential.
Their goal of massive PvP battles (not of interest to me hence my departure) is something that will make it stand out if they ever perfect it.
When I think of how each new MMO's endgame changed as it matured I think it's a bit premature to write off AoC.
Granted, MMOs should be learning from each other and someone should consider releasing a POLISHED game instead of a rough game with potential.
But I do hope they manage to tweak this game into greatness. There's much unique potential here.
Reply
Helbender said on 1:34PM 7-10-2008
Can we have an article everytime someone starts AoC?
Reply
ghiest said on 1:55PM 7-10-2008
Never heard of the blog or the blogger, so why is this news again?
Reply
ienjoyit said on 3:45PM 7-10-2008
A couple of others have commented on this, but it seems like Massively has a special hate on for AoC. Lots of articles getting posted about how it sucks, etc. Everytime someone quits who has a blog (whether their readership is 50 or 5000) there's a feature article about it. Then in the comments section the usual same people will post about how much they think AoC sucked.
To be honest I have noticed over the last while that Massively's balance seems very, um, unbalanced - fanboi-ish about some MMOs, flaming haters of others, and many many games never even get mentioned here. This is to say nothing of the presence of Second Life which was the foundation of this blog and isn't even an MMO....
I am having a hard time taking this 'blog' seriously as a neutral site for discussion and commentary on MMOs. Much of the aggregate content and commentary reeks of propaganda.
Reply
Syme said on 4:22PM 7-10-2008
The difficulty that Age of Conan is having holding player interest, not even considering the bugs, is very interesting. It's not just the bloggers mentioned here; I'm aware of a lot of folks who tried AoC and have quit. While many do stick around for the coolness factor and such, a fair number of players seem to feel there is no carrot to be had.
Basically, it would seem Funcom has not quite mastered the art of reinforcement schedules to keep a lot of players interested. Having a collection of cool ideas isn't really enough.
Reply
Jeromai said on 1:59AM 7-11-2008
Let's keep reinforcement schedules in World of Warcraft where they belong. I could never play WoW for long because it was too predictable. Oh look, here's another carrot. I just leveled, I need me some candied carrots. I killed something, ground something, collected something and thus -must- be entitled to something cooler than what I currently own...
That's a fairy-tale cookie trail leading into the witch's cottage... Read any basic psychology text. Creating too much extrinsic motivation removes any joy from performing the actual activity. It will no longer be performed without that motivator pushing you forward, even if you originally liked doing it for fun.
A lot of the complaints out of AoC that I'm seeing are from people who have played WoW and other similar MMOs too heavily. They expect a nice polished Habittrail machine, marked out with candy and breadcrumbs for their 'sense of progress' stimulation, and cannot adapt to something different.
Heaven forbid they touch a green or grey quest. Why not? In WoW, it might have been worthless. In AoC, there is a slight xp penalty but the absolute amount awarded is still nothing to sniff at. Habit. Too well trained by a prior MMO.
Learn to smell out the endgame. AoC's is guild and group-focused. It makes sense that as you progress higher and higher, you're going to be "gently" encouraged to get along together and learn to play as a group. PvP will be a part of it, even on a PvE server. Hate that? Don't play AoC.
Reply
dbanner said on 8:52AM 7-12-2008
"Heaven forbid they touch a green or grey quest. Why not? In WoW, it might have been worthless. In AoC, there is a slight xp penalty but the absolute amount awarded is still nothing to sniff at. Habit. Too well trained by a prior MMO."
Er.. didn't they just change that, so that you will no longer be awarded xp for grey quests in AoC?
http://forums-us.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=128019
Jeromai said on 3:57AM 7-15-2008
Yeah, they did just change the 'grey quest = no xp' thing. I read the patch notes barely a few hours after I typed that, and I was mildly miffed.
Why, I'm not sure. I'm not amused nor pleased by that change. It's not like there's a lot of quest content to begin with - why take away more options until you have some meatier stuff in there?
Call me spoiled by the level of interaction of City of Heroes' current design team, but I do wish Funcom would share some kind of rationale behind their odd changes. Oddly enough, I'm still scoring xp on greyed out crafting quests that were in my quest log. So I'm not even sure the implementation was successful.
Well, Funcom has until WAR releases to get their act together and push out patches that show they're working toward some kind of unified vision of the game. They've got the quantity of patching down pat, the quality, though, has been up and down.
(The core combat is still enjoyable for me, I like stuff more visceral and immediate in action than autoattack, so the journey has been fun. Couple that with new MMO smell and the fun of exploring unpolished nooks and crannies that aren't filed for posterity on some third-party wiki, I've personally gotten a lot out of AoC.)
We'll see what the destination looks like in a few months, and if it looks schizophrenically undecided, AoC will haemorrhage yet another player.
Ixliam said on 2:32PM 7-13-2008
I vote with my wallet on this game (and a few others I was playing) and drank the SOE coolaid. Having a blast in EQ2 right now.
Reply
Kaiallard said on 2:25PM 7-10-2008
So you went from one shitty company to another?
Yes I am a "Disgruntled Vet"