given people seam to leaving age of conan in droves with only a minority staying on past thier first month and lots of criticsism that  age of conan was released before it was ready ( although mmos are unfinnished by thier nature there is a point where they are of merchandisable quality) . people are now comparing it to vanguard . which game in your opinion had the most problematic release ?

Neither of these games holds a candle to the launch of dark and light lol so i vote neither because you didnt include dark and light which was so hyped up and such a letdow n for a lot of people as well i do think the company was stealing from people or something? add dark and light in yer poll dude.

I don't like AoC but I'll defend it here. AoC is very polished and fun for a while, namely about the first half of the game. The bugs are there but Funcom seems to be patching them rather quickly. Though Funcom management, in all areas, is a little lacking, the game itself had a pretty stable launch considering all the false hype. Vanguard...was worse.

Anyone who votes for AoC either didn't play Vanguard at launch, or is a current Vanguard player trying to rewrite history.

VGs release was worse than AoCs.  But the difference isnt sooo big.

I believe because of the Hype by Funcom they new there game was not gonna be what was promised and decided to take advantage of that. Because of this i believe they will pay a bigger price.

My worst release top 5 is:

Shadowbane

Anarchy online

Asherons Call 2

Vanguard

Starwars galaxies or World of Warcraft, can't decide.

Age of Conan is frankly miles ahead in terms of lacking content, game breaking bugs and general downtime. Not that Age of Conan is the perfect game, and I can definetly see how the relatively high system requirements, and how they ultimately put players on low end machines off the game, can be compared to vanguard.

Originally posted by anduz

My worst release top 5 is:

Shadowbane

Anarchy online

Asherons Call 2

Vanguard

Starwars galaxies or World of Warcraft, can't decide.

 

Age of Conan is frankly miles ahead in terms of lacking content, game breaking bugs and general downtime. Not that Age of Conan is the perfect game, and I can definetly see how the relatively high system requirements, and how they ultimately put players on low end machines off the game, can be compared to vanguard.

Conan had a better release than WoW? oooook

Vanguard had an open beta so people knew how buggy the game was going to be.  AoC did a great job of stealthing it's crap so it got more people to sign up.  Funcom has lied cheated and deceived its way to 700K in box sales.

  In actual playability both are equal.

In vanguard, the crafting actually worked on release. And it was  a much deeper crafting system

In Vanguard, I didn't run out of quests after 10 days

In vanguard, the stats on you armor actually worked.

---

Originally posted by Shoju
Anyone who votes for AoC either didn't play Vanguard at launch, or is a current Vanguard player trying to rewrite history.

---

Anyone who votes for vanguard either didn't play AOC at launch, or is a AOC player trying to rewrite history.

Vanguard was in better shape content wise and with more features working than AoC, but AoC's launch was smoother over all.   So because of that I give them a tie. 

I rank them pretty much the same - both damn smooth launches compared to the majority.