Age of Conan servers merging, stock hits 2-year low
At one point Funcom announced that AoC had 700,000 players, but that was when the game first shipped and players had a free trial month with the purchase. It's not just the players leaving -- Funcom investors also seem to be looking for the nearest exit. The company's stock is currently trading at $5, which is $20 down from when we checked in late July and $50 down from before AoC shipped.*
*The downward trend was already occuring prior to the current global economic crisis.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
theturtle363 @ Sep 30th 2008 10:27AM
that's too bad, I kinda liked AoC, not as much as WoW, but I still liked it.
Christopher @ Sep 30th 2008 10:31AM
Played this game for a month.
Got tired of the buggy unfinished mess that it was.. PVP got old and very tiresome.. with high levels always greifing low lvl players.
Sold it on EBAY for 50 bucks to an unlucky sucker who doesnt read reviews.
I'll stick to WoW and WAR.
Good bye AoC... you wont be missed.
cuso26 @ Sep 30th 2008 10:33AM
Game had huge potential, but was brought down by the classic too early of a release and a director who couldn't see past his "master plan" and into what the players wanted, that man being Gaute Godinger.
Marcelo Abans @ Sep 30th 2008 11:03AM
HE was met with resistance, so he left. So maybe his plan was different that what someone else had who answered to stock holders.
samoon @ Sep 30th 2008 10:36AM
thats freakin sad!
Dirty @ Sep 30th 2008 10:44AM
Ouch, guess they cant all be winners. At least this game had boobies.
Friday_Knight @ Sep 30th 2008 6:42PM
Yeah and that's about all it had. And that grew old after a few minutes.
I mean seriously, who didn't see this one coming?
dark_inchworm @ Sep 30th 2008 10:53AM
I'm sure they'd see a sales boost if they introduced orcs as playable characters.
Sedako @ Sep 30th 2008 10:57AM
I stopped playing after the first month, before the monthly fee kicked in. The game was quite a mess after Tortage, and it's a good thing I bailed out when I did.
walther84 @ Sep 30th 2008 10:57AM
cancel it
phobic99 @ Sep 30th 2008 10:58AM
I played this game for about 2 weeks so I suppose I got my $50 worth. I'm really not surprised at all this was going to happen since the game really offers nothing new except a DDR-esque combat system.
Marcelo Abans @ Sep 30th 2008 11:03AM
Another WoW killer, dead.. LOL
B @ Sep 30th 2008 11:17AM
Wow, a sever merge already? afaik Star Wars Galaxies hasn't even had a server merge yet and the game has been dead for years
JPN @ Sep 30th 2008 11:22AM
I never got how they made an MMO out of this. Is Andy Richter in it? Do they do that driving thing with the blue screen, or "In the Year 2000"? I never really watch Conan anymore.
offday @ Sep 30th 2008 12:54PM
lol Obviously. Since Andy Richter left Conan like 7 years ago.
JoeTheBlow @ Sep 30th 2008 11:31AM
This will happen to Warhammer, and EVERY PC MMO EVAR!
The upcoming WoW expansion will pull everyone back, and no-one has time for more than 1 MMO.
Game over.
phobic99 @ Sep 30th 2008 12:26PM
Not pulling me back. I'm done with WoW although I wasn't really addicted to it like I was with EQ1.The new expansion look like more of the same.
Pass.
Brazell @ Sep 30th 2008 11:34AM
Y'know... not to undue the "trading at a 2 year low thing," but... yeah, the Dow going down 800points yesterday COULD be part of that... just a little...
borland502 (SDF Macross) @ Sep 30th 2008 11:36AM
Do think developing an MMO is like the mass rush to buy lotto tickets when the pot is 47kajillion? Most buyers know the chance is nonexistent to negative infinity, but play anyways because the idea of winning *that much* is too much temptation.
Damn, WoW is making more than my entire portfolio of games! We...must...create...MMO. Well, like that guy building Castles in Monty Python...one day a castle will stand on that swampy ground.
Slim Pickinz96 @ Sep 30th 2008 11:39AM
AoC has potential, but WoW will continue to dominate with its forgiving graphics engine, and constant evolving gameplay amongst other things. It is after all an MMoRPG, hence for those of us enjoy many aspects of a game and not just ,levels, weaopons, power...We'll be here in WoW...Still...
offday @ Sep 30th 2008 12:52PM
I don't know why more people don't understand this. A game can look great, and still allow a lot of people with various computers to run it. If you don't think that has something to do with WoW's success then you're crazy. Most people can't afford 4,000 dollar computers that can run these type of games.
borland502 (SDF Macross) @ Sep 30th 2008 1:07PM
"Most people can't afford 4,000 dollar computers that can run these type of games."
I know you're exaggerating for effect, but my machine is less than 6 months old and rings in under $500. You can't run Crysis at Ultra, but by God you can play any game with sweet graphics.
The $2k,$3k,$4k, etc figure is a myth unless you have tons of money or you're stupid. I doubt the relative graphical prowess of AoC has much to do with its decline.
PS Don't get me wrong, if you offered to buy me $4k worth of beast comp I'd take it; but it's no longer necessary or prudent to spend that much.
John @ Sep 30th 2008 1:28PM
plus I Saw the 8800 ultra on newegg or tigerdirect for 199 today
Kael @ Sep 30th 2008 1:58PM
It's a little annoying to see that figure tossed around as often as it is. Great gaming-centric computers don't cost thousands -- or even one thousand. I'm not trying to say they're cheaper than consoles (so your objection stands, I guess), just that it's frustrating to see people's perception so off target. Last year, I bought a whole new computer and went for very high-end stuff, and it cost a lot of money -- 700 dollars. I'm very happy with it and can max out every game I've thrown at it, even Crysis.
(Well, I run maxed-out Crysis at 1024x600. Yeah, it's the game's fault, really. Unlike, well, every other game I know of, it's not coded right and is much, much more taxing than it needs to be. Even Warhead, despite the improvements in that regard. It's really not fair to use Crysis as a benchmark, 'cause if you do, all computers suck.)
Nutchos @ Sep 30th 2008 11:40AM
So many lame MMO's on the market these days. WAR is just too much of a wow clone for me (after 2-3 years, I need a change).
I miss FFXI.
borland502 (SDF Macross) @ Sep 30th 2008 1:15PM
"I miss FFXI."
What did FFXI do differently? Isn't everything MMO just a western RPG with less story? I haven't played FFXI so I have no idea if did anything tremendously better than WoW. I do know that it deserves a nod for being the only console MMO to live past birth.
Jason @ Sep 30th 2008 3:05PM
FFXI did a lot of things differently. It's the best time I've had in an MMO, (im currently playing wow cause my friends are there)
For starters, it has some of the most dramatic animation and fx for your skills. Why should a level 70 crazy skill not look crazy.
Party members have to time things better and work together a little more rigidly to achieve max dps, as weapon skills 'chain' off of each other for more crazy effects. (you have to know which ones to use to get the bursts).
When someone in your group is destroying in dps, you don't need a mod to notice.
You are actually rewarded for killing mobs that should be unkillable to you. You don't get an xp reward that slaps you in the face and says (why don't you do something easier? it's more xp efficient!!!)
Futhermore, you get even MORE xp for chaining those crazy mobs together, the faster you can kill them, the more xp you will get. This challenges your group and rewards you.
Monsters have actual skills that do things other than cast animations, and they are slow enough to counter.
You're not casting the same spell with the same animation at level 4 as level 70. When a level 4 is out playing and sees a level 70 come by and destroy something, it's a lot more dramatic. (in wow: he just casted frostbolt! just like me! i cant wait to be 70!)
There is not much soloing in FFXI, this promotes the MMO aspect of an MMO. People should play together, I don't pay a subscription fee to play by myself.
ohhh this is a biggy, i played the pc version, but i still opted to use a gamepad, was so relaxing not having to use mouse and keyboard.
And lastly, it had subjobs. and the ability to train up all jobs on one character.
All of that said, it is missing things WOW has. But I still liked it more.
zlickrick @ Sep 30th 2008 11:56AM
I want to be Conan!
No, I wanna be Conan!
Let's both be CONANS! If only there were such a game where we could all be Conan together!
Lame.
Emceay @ Sep 30th 2008 12:15PM
None are Conan, fail.
mocax @ Sep 30th 2008 11:56AM
They should make this game free to play, like Guild Wars
Emceay @ Sep 30th 2008 12:14PM
I would've kept playing if only I could've been a Stygian barbarian. :\
egoant @ Sep 30th 2008 12:39PM
Hahaha, well... This figures. I just finally broke down last night and thought, "They should have worked past a bunch of the launch bugs by now. I should give it a go."
I downloaded it on Steam and had some problems with registration, and then the download was going to take all night. This morning I thought I'd give a try and found the servers offline. Talk about bad timing!
I hope it lasts long enough for me to get my free month ;)
offday @ Sep 30th 2008 12:49PM
It's stupid to even go up against WoW. Ambitious, but stupid. But it's even more stupid to release a MMO that would be competing with WoW that obviously still needs work.
Xelloss @ Sep 30th 2008 12:56PM
Me and two other friends are still playing this, but only a on some weekends, since he works in the USAF. I have to say this game is really fun, and it was pretty buggy at launch, but if you have a good pc the game runs great and is a lot of fun.
Also there were no free trials when the game came out, that feature was disabled when the game shipped and wasn't activated until about 2 or so months after the game shipped.
But anyway, I just have a lot of fun playing this game with my two friends that the game just has so much to offer, especially with the combat and art style make it an awesome game. If you want to start playing I would suggest finding a few friends to join you, or just make some in game.
Nonentity @ Sep 30th 2008 1:14PM
This game was a trainwreck from the start. Maybe things will start to turn around now that they fired that terrible project manager.
gaddes @ Sep 30th 2008 1:26PM
"An MMOG's health is indicated by its server numbers"
Is that actually true? If so, then FFXI is doing a LOT better than I thought it was, lol.
Kael @ Sep 30th 2008 1:29PM
If they had 700,000 players buy Age of Conan, not even paying a monthly fee, isn't that thirty-five million dollars? Anyone know about how much they spent to make the game? 'Cause it sounds like that should have already made them a couple million dollars profit.
Maybe all these MMO-crazed companies aren't in it for the long haul, and just want to be the MMO flavor of the month, and then cash out. It's not unusual after all, that's how all other kinds of games go, too, and it works for them.
sldsmkd @ Oct 1st 2008 8:14AM
Not even. The devhouse will see $5-10 back on a retail $50, so that's $3.5 - $7 million they got back. Current estimates on making a MMO is $20m minimum, more like $100m.
It's a shame, wish they'd stop fucking around making MMOs and get back to the Longest Journey.
Bought a copy of Conan, played the newbie island and never renewed. Same thing is happening with me and WAR.
tmacairjordan87 @ Sep 30th 2008 11:57PM
Ah and yet again I was right, this game is going to collapse. I tried to tell some of the people on WoW (for some reason, the warcraft haters that say every upcoming MMO is going to crush wow...play wow) but they wouldn't listen. Same thing with warhammer.
Just watch, 2-3 months from now warhammer will be in a similar situation.
James Lockwood @ Oct 1st 2008 8:18AM
"An MMOG's health is indicated by its server numbers"
EVE must be in trouble, then.
Tyrannius @ Oct 1st 2008 3:08PM
Sweeping generalizations are clearly ftw, therefore Sliwinski=epic win.
Ahma @ Oct 14th 2008 9:34AM
Give Planetside 2 or summin :o