Age of Conan going F2P

[Shatter]

Ill be shocked if anyone here actively plays AOC

[Nija]

I bought a 3 month sub last year when the expansion hit but I only played 5 weeks out of those 3 months. I saved up the offline levels and distributed them accordingly when they maxed out for the remainder of the time.

[Soukyan]

Ill be shocked if anyone here actively plays AOC

I still actively play AoC. Of course, I'm also one of the very few who also really loved Asheron's Call 2, so take that for what it's worth.

The engine does perform much better now. As for classes, I cannot speak to the F2P setup as I subscribe to the game. Between this and EvE, I get a pretty good fix of MMOG-style play.

Regarding Dark Templars, I'm with Lantyssa. I love my DT, gimp or otherwise.

[Threash]

Don't tell me they are STILL gimp?

[Soukyan]

Don't tell me they are STILL gimp?

I don't think they are, but I don't know how others feel about them because I don't really pay much attention to players who whine about classes in MMOGs. Call it selective hearing for an old, jaded MMOG player.

My guy, Rottcodd, plays just fine for me.

[shiznitz]

Well I guess that's it then...this is the way things are done with the current generation.  If your game fails to make a good first impression (and honestly, did anyone actually expect anything different from the same people that launched AO?), thus failing to retain a good chunk of people to justify a monthly subscription, then you go F2P in order to get back those you disappointed back and hope for the best.

This is how it should be done now, and I expect this to happen to FFXIV, Fallen Earth and even WAR before the year is out.  Older titles that are still alive probably wouldn't benefit as much, like DAoC or EQ, since development for them is essentially just monthly maintenance and balance tweaks.

It's not a bad philosophy, I mean..gotta make that money and put food on the table, but I'm sure it's gotta be disheartening to the devs to see all their work go to entertaining the internet bottom-feeders.

I think you are being overly judgmental.  This game wasn't launched 6 months ago.  It survived as subscription only for 2 years (or more?).  They have obviously recognized that it will never grow subs unless they open it up.

[luckton]

Well I guess that's it then...this is the way things are done with the current generation.  If your game fails to make a good first impression (and honestly, did anyone actually expect anything different from the same people that launched AO?), thus failing to retain a good chunk of people to justify a monthly subscription, then you go F2P in order to get back those you disappointed back and hope for the best.

This is how it should be done now, and I expect this to happen to FFXIV, Fallen Earth and even WAR before the year is out.  Older titles that are still alive probably wouldn't benefit as much, like DAoC or EQ, since development for them is essentially just monthly maintenance and balance tweaks.

It's not a bad philosophy, I mean..gotta make that money and put food on the table, but I'm sure it's gotta be disheartening to the devs to see all their work go to entertaining the internet bottom-feeders.

I think you are being overly judgmental.  This game wasn't launched 6 months ago.  It survived as subscription only for 2 years (or more?).  They have obviously recognized that it will never grow subs unless they open it up.

And it's the same realization that Turbine came to with LotRO and DDO, along with Cryptic with CO and (probably before the year is out) STO.  Cryptic just came to that realization a heck of a lot quicker than FunCom and Turbine did. 

Again, I'm sure all those devs would have loved to have seen their products stay as monthly subscriptions, as it provides job security, a devoted fan-base and if your lucky enough left over to make money-hats with.  But it all comes back to first impressions.  The game needs to WOW people on launch day.  Not a week later, not a month later, surely not a year later after you've already been asking people to pony up $50 + $15/month.  Launch day.  Preferably also the days/weeks leading up to launch day.

AoC failed that test.  Just like AO before it.  Granted, the game 'worked'...people weren't trudging around and falling through a half-built, half-rendered and zero-content world, but the bugs, balancing, lack of end-game and server performance are all coffin nail items that you shouldn't have in a GAME.  Let alone a MMO.  Especially in a post-WoW world.

Kudos to FunCom for lasting this long on subscriptions...yay...woot...fine, whatever.  Maybe they 'can' come back with freemium play along with tie-ins to the next Conan movie.  It's still not going to erase the memories from those that have been burned not once but TWICE now from FunCom's sillyness.

[Threash]

The game needs to WOW people on launch day.  Not a week later, not a month later, surely not a year later after you've already been asking people to pony up $50 + $15/month.  Launch day.  Preferably also the days/weeks leading up to launch day.

AoC did exactly that.  Tortage is still the best start to any mmo ever.  It was in the weeks and months after launch that it failed.

[Spiff]

AoC did exactly that.  Tortage is still the best start to any mmo ever.  It was in the weeks and months after launch that it failed.

Days after launch really, few people take weeks to burn through the first 20 levels in a fresh MMO.
No objections to Tortage though, it certainly was one of the most impressive first, uhm impressions I've had.

I'd say it's not so much the first days that are pivotal though (plenty of half-baked MMO's looked good for the first week) as it is the first month, which is usually included in the box.
A non-subscription AAA title can (read: is expected) to make most of it's return within those first 30 days, for an MMO on the other hand retention is as much a measure of success as box-sales (for me anyway, whatever that's worth  ) and that counter only really starts after the first month.

Bit of a semantic discussion I s'pose, but how long 'till it isn't a 'first impression' any more? For an MMO I tend to take 2-3 weeks at least to make up my mind unless it's truly a pile of shite (as opposed to about 2-3 hours for a regular game).

AoC is the only MMO besides LoTRO I ever went back to after giving up on it before the first month was up btw.
The combat being almost the sole reason I felt the itch to revisit it; I still feel, despite all the imbalance & convoluted/broken implementation, FC deserves a gold star for trying that out, it was interesting and I hope it doesn't just get written off as a failure along with the rest of the game.

[Lantyssa]

It also ignores the fact that Turbine stated opening their MMOs up to f2p doubled their revenue.  It's not a sign of a failing MMO, it's a realization that a game can produce more money by letting people pick their price point.

Now it doesn't guarantee the game will do well.  But it doesn't represent failure either.

[luckton]

Is this the part where the thread derails into the "Pay to Win" argument?

[Sky]

No, it's not. Is this someone's gimmick account?

Anyway, f2p got me downloading the client again. So there's something.

[luckton]

No, it's not. Is this someone's gimmick account?

Anyway, f2p got me downloading the client again. So there's something.

No gimmick...just bored and being more vocal as of late...I'm sure I'll disappear again soon.

[Venkman]

Put aside hindsight and think of all the games that launched subs and then went f2p. At the moment they announced going f2p, did anyone really think that was because the game was doing fine and the publisher was just iterating on a business plan?

Exactly.

These games at these budgets were not designed as actual f2p games. Those have much lighter budgets and way more major marketing pushes to get the millions of accounts needed to convert the 3-5% of people to paying at all and deep into it. These traditional MMOs were designed to sell boxes and collect a steady monthly fee, and had the huge budgets to go along with them.

The move to f2p was in recognition of flat growth/decline. It has worked out for some, which is great. And there's a fringe benefit as well:

The industry has been pushing on this in the West for awhile, but they couldn't get the traditional Western MMO audience to care about the style of games made specifically for f2p. However, they have been able to convert the traditional MMO audience from an lapsed subscriber to a free player who'll eventually pay something (ironically probably many of the same people who'd fall on a sword before RMTing for something back in the day ;) ). And it gives them a way to attract new users who may have been trained by then to think "free" means Flash games.

So kudos to them for a) keeping the games alive with a new model; and, b) retroactively proving there's a way to convert an established audience into a new one by lowering the barrier of entry to free.

This could be a harbinger of things to come for MMOs. There aren't enough people in the genre who'll flock to a big huge ($70mm+ budget) MMO for the company to make the revenue they need from the meager percent of people willing to pay. However, if you can get enough of them to buy the box, pay to beta for a year or two, work out all the kinks, build some awesome tools, get really efficient to reduce recuring dev/QA costs, then you could go f2p/freemium for lapsed users and put strong dollars into marketing to attract new free users.

[Lantyssa]

Put aside hindsight and think of all the games that launched subs and then went f2p. At the moment they announced going f2p, did anyone really think that was because the game was doing fine and the publisher was just iterating on a business plan?

Oh, I'm not going to claim the moves were a sign of increasing growth, but that's something very few games have enjoyed, and many of them were wrong to think they could price themselves at $15 a month for what they delivered.  Shoe-horning a sub game into a f2p one isn't without its difficulties either.

However I don't think it's been a losing proposition for any game that has done so.  People that subbed before are still going to spend that money, whether it's a premium subscription or on in-game items.  New players are going to get interested.  If they don't pay, they at least provide more bodies, which helps with social stickiness.  If they do pay, even for just a few items, it's income the company wouldn't have had otherwise.  Then there are the people who throw in more than what they would have under a monthly plan only.  A tiny fraction of the players, but they're worth several people each.

[Ingmar]

Put aside hindsight and think of all the games that launched subs and then went f2p. At the moment they announced going f2p, did anyone really think that was because the game was doing fine and the publisher was just iterating on a business plan?

For LOTRO, yes, absolutely. The only reason it went F2P is because DDO already did and Turbine saw what happened there and thought "holy shit."

[Amaron]

Oh, I'm not going to claim the moves were a sign of increasing growth, but that's something very few games have enjoyed, and many of them were wrong to think they could price themselves at $15 a month for what they delivered. 

Actually if they are going to freemium that means they think they can get at least $15 a month from their players for what they deliver.    The advantage of freemium is that you get more customers who pay a monthly fee.   You also get customers who buy "lifetime" subscriptions to content chunks they'll never use for the amount of time it takes to be cheaper than simply subscribing.

If they don't have a product that people will pay $15 a month for then there is absolutely no reason at all to go freemium.   A game that bad can only switch to pay 2 win and enable gambling for loot.

[Modern Angel]

For LOTRO, yes, absolutely. The only reason it went F2P is because DDO already did and Turbine saw what happened there and thought "holy shit."

Yeah, LOTRO is really a different animal here. The others, sure. Make a grab to keep cash flow coming in* to keep things open. For LOTRO, it was about money hats. Which they got.



*Remember that AO has been doing this for years now, long before it was fashionable.

[luckton]

*Remember that AO has been doing this for years now, long before it was fashionable.

Free was the only way they could get people to play it after, well, ok, I'll stop beating the dead horse. 

[Sky]

Been trying to play on and off for a couple days now. Patcher keeps downloading GBs of data than hanging on the loading screen. Exit the program, downloads more GBs, hangs on loading screen. Nice.

[Malakili]

Put aside hindsight and think of all the games that launched subs and then went f2p. At the moment they announced going f2p, did anyone really think that was because the game was doing fine and the publisher was just iterating on a business plan?

With the possible exception of Champions Online I'd say, I'd bet Star Trek Online isn't far behind.

[UnSub]

There's a limited number of strategies to make money in business (and I'm doing this quickly, so apologies if I over-generalise / forget something):

1) Attract more customers to buy from you.
2) Sell more to the customers you have.
3) Increase the profit margin on what you currently sell.

Pure sub fees don't allow for (2). F2P does (as do cash shops) while also greatly expanding on the potential customers in (1). Arguably the entire Western market is so heavily subs-based because it worked for UO, while at the same time everyone handily forgets the rampant eBaying of characters / items from that title that showed what customers were willing to pay for on top of their sub fee.

[Tannhauser]

F2P makes me want to come back and I never ever thought about that.  I think F2P is the future of MMO's.  You can play a game for free and if it sucks you in you start paying.  World of Tanks is doing this to me.  I am buying gold ammo because of the better damage.  
You can even buy a gold tank and the xp you get you can convert.

LOTRO has done a good job of offering items for sale.  STO not so much; the items they offered weren't good enough, maybe that's changed.

Edit:  Spelling

[Amaron]

I am buying gold ammo because of the better damage. 

I was not aware anyone actually bought the ammo.  Isn't it worth a couple THOUSAND silver per shot?

[FatuousTwat]

I am buying gold ammo because of the better damage. 

I was not aware anyone actually bought the ammo.  Isn't it worth a couple THOUSAND silver per shot?

People playing in the clan wars use gold ammo.

[Tannhauser]

Not to derail, but this weekend I'm paying for premium and using gold ammo both to evaluate their worth and to more quickly grind up to my T-34.  Which I now have and is awesome!

Back to AoC, I always thought a good way for them to go forward is to have another focused leveling experience like Tortage.  It starts after Tortage and takes you from 20 to 30 and then have another 10 level experience.  You can still have the free range zone quests currently offered.  In an homage to the books, you can call each 10 level experience a "short story" or "Tale".  Conan and the Tale of Tortage, Conan and the Tale of the Poorly Itemized Zone, etc.

[Ashamanchill]

Conan and the tale of the No Quest Valley.

[Sky]

All my characters seem to be available to play, plus two slots I had open.

Forgot my Conqueror was in his fifites. Played my DT for a few and got rolled, probably need to re-learn. Rolled a Barb to relearn.

[Modern Angel]

Conan and the Single Player Game Labeled as MMO?

[Tannhauser]

Isn't that what SWTOR is doing?

[DLRiley]

There's a limited number of strategies to make money in business (and I'm doing this quickly, so apologies if I over-generalise / forget something):

1) Attract more customers to buy from you.
2) Sell more to the customers you have.
3) Increase the profit margin on what you currently sell.

Pure sub fees don't allow for (2). F2P does (as do cash shops) while also greatly expanding on the potential customers in (1). Arguably the entire Western market is so heavily subs-based because it worked for UO, while at the same time everyone handily forgets the rampant eBaying of characters / items from that title that showed what customers were willing to pay for on top of their sub fee.

There is no rule that says paying a sub fee makes you allergic to cash shop purchases. It may be more successful to allow f2p supported by cash shop, but there is no rule that says niche games with small hardcore player bases aren't willing to pony up more cash if the game sold more things besides a subscription.

[Sky]

All my characters seem to be available to play, plus two slots I had open.

Forgot my Conqueror was in his fifites. Played my DT for a few and got rolled, probably need to re-learn. Rolled a Barb to relearn.

Ahh...account was reopened for May, so they're up through today. Kind of fun to tool around with my lowbie alts but not sure I want to jump back into a game I left so completely, because the f2p would've been a lot easier to get into if I hadn't been playing a few nights with the full features available.

I do have to say, an unlocked month followed by f2p restrictions is kind of a good business idea, though. I'm ambivalent about the game and I considered a month sub.

[Job601]

All my characters seem to be available to play, plus two slots I had open.

Forgot my Conqueror was in his fifites. Played my DT for a few and got rolled, probably need to re-learn. Rolled a Barb to relearn.

Ahh...account was reopened for May, so they're up through today. Kind of fun to tool around with my lowbie alts but not sure I want to jump back into a game I left so completely, because the f2p would've been a lot easier to get into if I hadn't been playing a few nights with the full features available.

I do have to say, an unlocked month followed by f2p restrictions is kind of a good business idea, though. I'm ambivalent about the game and I considered a month sub.

I remember people saying that the first 20 levels of this game were really high quality.  Would it be worth jumping in to play them for free planning to drop the game afterwards?

[palmer_eldritch]

All my characters seem to be available to play, plus two slots I had open.

Forgot my Conqueror was in his fifites. Played my DT for a few and got rolled, probably need to re-learn. Rolled a Barb to relearn.

Ahh...account was reopened for May, so they're up through today. Kind of fun to tool around with my lowbie alts but not sure I want to jump back into a game I left so completely, because the f2p would've been a lot easier to get into if I hadn't been playing a few nights with the full features available.

I do have to say, an unlocked month followed by f2p restrictions is kind of a good business idea, though. I'm ambivalent about the game and I considered a month sub.

I remember people saying that the first 20 levels of this game were really high quality.  Would it be worth jumping in to play them for free planning to drop the game afterwards?

I would say so, yeah. If you have a fairly good PC then you also get the bonus of some very pretty graphics too.

[Sky]

Would it be worth jumping in to play them for free planning to drop the game afterwards?

Tortuga is a must if you enjoy mmo, though it's heavy on solo play.