Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Breaking News: Age of Conan goes Free and Unrated!

1356

Comments

  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627

    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    @Vesavius: ? It should be obvious that not all people think like that, since DDO showed that going F2P got them 5 times as many players and a doubling of their revenues and LotrO gained a sortlike boost.

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    To me personally, I think a hybrid F2P model is the superior choice when done right, where you can adjust the amount you pay to the amount you intend to play. Sort of a paying and gaming a la carte.

    The fact is that the P2P model is pretty rigid: it's a yes/no switch situation. Either you pay in full regardless how much you'll play that month or you don't pay and then don't play at all. Most people won't pay multiple subs in the month, so in essence that means that you could only really play 1 MMO per month.

    Luckily there's also MMO's that use other models, like GW, LotrO, DDO and EQ2 and the ones that were F2P in the first place, so that means you can switch playing MMO's in the same months if you feel like it and don't need to be tied up to only 1 MMORPG, the situation you'd be in if all the MMORPG's would be P2P.

     

    How it'll go for AoC, will have to see that. I'm curious how they intend to make it work for AoC.

    See this is how I think F2P with item shop games should be - a la carte.    That way if you wish to have access to a better mount or more content you can purchase access to it.   The model Funcom is going with is to limiting and in my opinion no better than a free trial.

  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

  • angerbeaverangerbeaver Member UncommonPosts: 1,056

    Maybe they have a subscription to something else and couldn't budget in a second subscription based game (a whole other story on budgeting). I don't know if it is a download or you have to buy a box. Assuming it is a box, we'll say they got the box as a gift from someone.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,888

    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

  • ElidienElidien Member RarePosts: 1,378

    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    @Vesavius: ? It should be obvious that not all people think like that, since DDO showed that going F2P got them 5 times as many players and a doubling of their revenues and LotrO gained a sortlike boost.

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    To me personally, I think a hybrid F2P model is the superior choice when done right, where you can adjust the amount you pay to the amount you intend to play. Sort of a paying and gaming a la carte.

    The fact is that the P2P model is pretty rigid: it's a yes/no switch situation. Either you pay in full regardless how much you'll play that month or you don't pay and then don't play at all. Most people won't pay multiple subs in the month, so in essence that means that you could only really play 1 MMO per month.

    Luckily there's also MMO's that use other models, like GW, LotrO, DDO and EQ2 and the ones that were F2P in the first place, so that means you can switch playing MMO's in the same months if you feel like it and don't need to be tied up to only 1 MMORPG, the situation you'd be in if all the MMORPG's would be P2P.

     

    How it'll go for AoC, will have to see that. I'm curious how they intend to make it work for AoC.

    See this is how I think F2P with item shop games should be - a la carte.    That way if you wish to have access to a better mount or more content you can purchase access to it.   The model Funcom is going with is to limiting and in my opinion no better than a free trial.

    I agree with you Teala. I was, at first, very excited about this. I was a big AOC supporter and I am one of the hapless souls that even bought the CE. I played for a while and finally left and have tried coming back twice. I really WANT to like the game but I cannot. So when I heard about this, I thoguht....Why not?

    Well, then I looked at the model and read the free vs. premium in detail and  saw how very, VERY limiting the free model will be, I decided its not worth it. I cannot believe they are limiting classes because, to me, the interesting classes have always been one of AOC best features. Add that to weapons and armor in the shop, limited chat/message/communication function in game and it is a free trial, not a new model.

    Good for Funcom to try something new and I firmly believe AOC needs something like this but the current model they have is not going to make it successful. They should free up the game and let you play it, not limit it to the extent where you are basivally forced to subscribe. That is the true beauty and success of LOTRO and I do not think Funcom gets it.

  • PapadamPapadam Member Posts: 2,102

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by Teala


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

    Or maybe people want to pay, but not a monthly sub... A subscription creates a barrier that alot of us are not willing to cross. For people who dont have time to play 20 hours/week (most gamers) a freemium model is better.

    If WoW = The Beatles
    and WAR = Led Zeppelin
    Then LotrO = Pink Floyd

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,888

    Originally posted by Papadam

    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by Teala


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

     

    A subscription creates a barrier that alot of us are not willing to cross.

    Can i ask why?

    Do you really consider £2.50 a week too much for 20hours gameplay? Is a game that you though was too expensive to commit to at that price suddenly worth playing now it is £2.50 cheaper? What has become more 'fun' about it all to you thats it's now worth your time?

    Most new games costing £40 or whatever have around that or less these days. Why is a £2.50/ week sub a barrier to you?

  • thinktank001thinktank001 Member UncommonPosts: 2,144

    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Ah, just saw this list, nice one.

    I don't get this list though, what does it mean to people who already have an account with more than 4 characters and such, you'll not be able to play them in the F2P option, you have to sub to the game? Weird.

     

    I am pretty sure LOTRO did the same thing, and I would disagree that LOTRO switch was a success.  We got 1 press release right after the switch stating an increase in revenue, but nothing after that.   However, I think AoC is much closer to the situation that DDO was in, rather than LOTRO (population wise).  A switch to P2W might do it some good to increase the population.

  • inBOILinBOIL Member Posts: 669

    froob community + aoc = brutal tits mature roleplaying heaven gearscore epic purple.

    Generation P

  • PapadamPapadam Member Posts: 2,102

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by Papadam


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by Teala


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

     

    A subscription creates a barrier that alot of us are not willing to cross.

    Can i ask why?

    Do you really consider £2.50 a week too much for 20hours gameplay? Is a game that you though was too expensive to commit to at that price suddenly worth playing now it is £2.50 cheaper?

    Most new games costing £40 or whatever have around that or less these days. Why is a £2.50/ week sub a barrier to you?

    Beacuse I am forced to pay it upfront, the actual money is no concern for me, its the value. Maybe I just want o logg in an play for 3 hours this week... But still I have to pay the same as someone playing 40 hours this week.

    Why should one size fit all when it comes to MMOs? I want flexiblity and options to decide.

    Win/win for both players and devs.

    Sadly it seems like AoCs model is not very good. DDO and LotrO are the only good switches, why not copy them instead of doing it wrong like SOE and Cryptic.

    If WoW = The Beatles
    and WAR = Led Zeppelin
    Then LotrO = Pink Floyd

  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by Papadam


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by Teala


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

     

    A subscription creates a barrier that alot of us are not willing to cross.

    Can i ask why?

    Do you really consider £2.50 a week too much for 20hours gameplay? Is a game that you though was too expensive to commit to at that price suddenly worth playing now it is £2.50 cheaper? What has become more 'fun' about it all to you thats it's now worth your time?

    Most new games costing £40 or whatever have around that or less these days. Why is a £2.50/ week sub a barrier to you?

    I'd pay $30 US a month for a really good sandbox/hybrid MMORPG.  Not kidding.   I will not pay more than I need to for a game that is not worth it.  I like Age of Conan.   I do not like all of it.  I do not think it is worth what they ask people to pay to play it.   Now they come out with a free2play model and that model has pretty bad limitations(IMHO) and not all worth it...and it is free.    Give me the ability to actually chose what I wish to play and how I wish to play and I might consider it.   Limiting what I can have access to is not going to get me to play that game even if it is free.

  • ThorqemadaThorqemada Member UncommonPosts: 1,282

    So, the long awaited step to a new payment modell has come.
    But for me as a player who had played and payed AoC for more than 2 years it seem not to be a good offer.
    My main is a necromancer and i do not want play another class - yet the f2p accpunt would restrict me as necromancer is not a playable class.
    My storage is stuffed with items up to 90% - yet the f2p account only let me access 50%, what happens to my stuff, to what of it i would have access etc. ?
    This really is only an offer that may appeal to new players and its more of a trial than a f2p modell.
    Even if a would like to play AoC now and then and maybe spend some money on some cool stuff out of an item shop from time to time this offer as of now will not motivate me to do so as the restrictions cut me of the things i care for.

    I would have liked if they had taken a deep look at perfect world and their Guardian and Spirit Charm system which translates perfect into a pay per activity modell, selling adventure packs and expansions is ok to me and having a fluff item shop for mounts and cool special outifts also.
    The offer now is a nightmare to me and not an oportunity.

    One thing is set in stone, i will not again take a subscription on AoC, to play it again this modell is unusable for me so atm i still will stay away from it.

    As an long time old time gamer of AoC i can it only evaluate as FAIL!

    "Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"

    MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
    Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,500

    Originally posted by WSIMike

    Originally posted by therain93

    I actually just started reading Chronicles of Conan, which is a compilation of Howard's work -- it's been quite good thusfar and has actually piqued my interest enough to snag a cheapy copy of the game.  I'll probably still do it, even before this goes F2P.

    It's a very fun game and I'm genuinely enjoying myself in it.

    I just can not stomach a company saying "okay well you bought the game and we're getting your monthly sub as well... but hey, look, we have these exclusive weapons and other items in the cash shop that you'll have to buy if you want them as well".

    If it was purely non-consequential items like fluff things... even mounts and xp potions I can deal with. I don't care how much faster than me others level because I'm playing for my own experience, not theirs.

    But when it comes to actual gear that is beneficial to my character in some way and there's no in-game option to obtain it (through a quest, rare drop, etc)... that's when you lose me.

    Ugh.



    Exactly this.  Turbine has done the same thing, even though they lied through a bunch of half-truths and marketing speak.  They sell gear and items exclusively in their store that are better than what you can get in game.  Let's see if Funcom will be upfront and honest about this, or go Turbine's route to string subscribers along.

    "Freemium" and "Hybrid" are huge marketing lies that leave the hobby gamer out of the equation and appeal primarily to the churners.  Subscriptions (full P2P experience) and F2P cannot live together.

    I think this will be a problem with most "theme-park, group focused, raid at end game" titles as they age.  Population being too sparse to support the group grind the game will seem like a failure.  Big budget lofty goal production will have bean counters screaming for better returns so they will cave and go F2P.

    I'm going to stick with P2P games.  I like getting the full meal deal for $10 - $15/mo.

    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

  • AKASlaphappyAKASlaphappy Member UncommonPosts: 800

    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

     

    Ah, just saw this list, nice one.

    I don't get this list though, what does it mean to people who already have an account with more than 4 characters and such, you'll not be able to play them in the F2P option, you have to sub to the game? Weird.

     


    What happens if I go from Premium to free?


    After downgrading from Premium to free, any characters in the slots beyond the two default ones can not be played, unless enough additional slots have been purchased from the item shop to compensate. Your characters will be there, but any beyond your two slots will be unplayable. You get to pick which characters will be your included slots once you downgrade to free.


    Do free players gain Alternative Advancement (AA) points?


    Free players may not earn AA points, even if they are level 80. These are only available to Premium subscribers. Free players can however purchase items to enable AA point gain in the item shop.


     


     


     


    From the looks of the system the Free to play accounts will be able to unlock everything for the game through the item shop, just like LOTRO. Although it does not say if you can unlock the other classes, to me if Funcom fails to add that to the shop they have made a really stupid business decision.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,888

    Originally posted by Papadam

    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by Papadam


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by Teala


    Originally posted by vesavius


    Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

    Also, the content of those games doesn't suddenly change when they change payment model, the games don't suddenly turn to crap.

     

    no, but neither does it suddenly get better and become a game I want to play.

    If I didnt want to play it then, there is no reason i would want to play it now.

    My point was that I don't get why people will play a game simply because it's free when they didnt want to before.

    Because some games are not worth paying for to play.

     

    Exactly :)

    AoC obviously wasnt worth it for a stack of people before this, so i don't get at all why it now is for them.

     

    A subscription creates a barrier that alot of us are not willing to cross.

    Can i ask why?

    Do you really consider £2.50 a week too much for 20hours gameplay? Is a game that you though was too expensive to commit to at that price suddenly worth playing now it is £2.50 cheaper?

    Most new games costing £40 or whatever have around that or less these days. Why is a £2.50/ week sub a barrier to you?

    Beacuse I am forced to pay it upfront, the actual money is no concern for me, its the value. Maybe I just want o logg in an play for 3 hours this week... But still I have to pay the same as someone playing 40 hours this week.

    But it sounds like the actual money is really the concern for you, based on what you say... and what difference does it make to you that the other person gets 40hours of they want it? I don't get that.

    as for value...the sub model is amazing value, always has been, even if you might log in for 3hours the odd week. You really think, taken over the average week of 20hours (which was your figure after all) that value is an issue with a sub?

    But, tbh, even 3 hours a week for £2.50 looks pretty favourable stacked against other gaming (or entertainment) costs.

    Why should one size fit all when it comes to MMOs? I want flexiblity and options to decide.

    nah, you just don't want to part with £2.50 weekly and would rather play games that don't ask it, even if they arnt as enjoyable for you as some of the ones that do, otherwise you wouldnt switch to a game that you wouldnt play before (just because now it's free).

    Otherwise the £2.50 wouldnt even be an issue in your choice.

    it's such an an inconsequential sum to use as a basis for what game you choose to play imo, i would rather play the game I want to. I am careful how I spend my free time and that £2.50 is well spent if it allows me to access 100% of the content of the game that I want to play through actually playing it and earning the in game rewards for myself, rather then buying them with cash (I was never much of a shopper, even in RL... more of a maker tbh).

    I guess we are very different.

  • BarCrowBarCrow Member UncommonPosts: 2,195

    Originally posted by AmazingAvery

    I year or so ago I didn't want this to happen. However, in this competitive market, personally I think it is the right business decision. I think it will bring a lot of people to come back and check things out. Whether people like it or not it's now just a better option to get updated.

     You and me both.....but having now played LOTRO , DDO and even Vindictus to a certain extent....i've seen how free to play can be done right. I hope Funcom follows those models well and they will prosper greatly. As will we all. Curently I haven been playing much..but have been subscribed. It's nice to know I have an alternative. Still one of the best mmos imo.

  • BarCrowBarCrow Member UncommonPosts: 2,195

         Actually ...having read the comparison of free vs. premium...doesn't seem too exciting.. The main thing is the limited classes. If they offered a previous subscriber bonus for peopl who have subscribe a certain amount of time get a few added bonus at free 2 play. Lotro allows you original characters prior to a certain date before conversion...to keep some benefits...like bag slots..bank slots..and all its original classes were available for freeplay.

        I play an Assassin as my main. So if I choose to go free..I can;t even play the character I played when subscribing unless I purchase the class at the cash store. They should allow you any character class you played before the free to play announcement. Maybe with a stipulation..like you had to play until 40th level..or even..any classes you maxxed out as a subscriber.are allowed to be used. I already had to relearn Assassin when they changed the class abilities around..now I'd be forced to start a new alt altogether. Create a new main character.. Kinda lame. I understand there should be limitations..but still.

        Anyway...I'll give it a chance once my card time runs out..see how it goes. If it sucks then  I'd rather stick to my current mode of buying  timecards off of amazon or ebay and playing when I feel the urge.

  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564

    Originally posted by gobla

    Originally posted by WSIMike

    It's a very fun game and I'm genuinely enjoying myself in it.

    I just can not stomach a company saying "okay well you bought the game and we're getting your monthly sub as well... but hey, look, we have these exclusive weapons and other items in the cash shop that you'll have to buy if you want them as well".

    If it was purely non-consequential items like fluff things... even mounts and xp potions I can deal with. I don't care how much faster than me others level because I'm playing for my own experience, not theirs.

    But when it comes to actual gear that is beneficial to my character in some way and there's no in-game option to obtain it (through a quest, rare drop, etc)... that's when you lose me.

    Ugh.

    Are you sure it will play out this way?

    I mean F2P will have to pay to access raids that premium have included. What's the use in paying for raids if you can just buy superior gear directly? Likely the raids would even cost more. Pay 10 bucks for content to earn gear that costs 5 bucks?

    I'd say the smart decision would be to keep top-tier raid gear the best gear. Make all those F2P pay to buy every single raid ( with temporary passes, not permanent access ) to get profit. Selling the gear directly or superior gear would just cost them profit.

    I'm not commenting on anything beyond the fact that they say right in the press release that the cash shop will sell "exclusive items", including weapons.

    I don't know how they're going to treat raid instances or rewards that drop in them. Might be that the raids will drop better gear than what you can buy, and so the cash-shop gear might be intended for people who don't like raiding but still want a competitive edge over others who haven't bought them.

    We'll see how it plays out when they actually release the F2P/Cash Shop version of the game... That they're outright talking about selling "exclusive weapons" via the cash shop, however, is what throws me right from the get-go.

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • suffusesuffuse Member UncommonPosts: 31


    Originally posted by BarCrow
    I play an Assassin as my main. So if I choose to go free..I can;t even play the character I played when subscribing unless I purchase the class at the cash store. They should allow you any character class you played before the free to play announcement. Maybe with a stipulation..like you had to play until 40th level..or even..any classes you maxxed out as a subscriber.are allowed to be used. I already had to relearn Assassin when they changed the class abilities around..now I'd be forced to start a new alt altogether. Create a new main character.. Kinda lame. I understand there should be limitations..but still.

    Not accurate - from what I've read on the AoC forums, it sounds like if you've ever subscribed that you'll have the premium classes "unlocked" if you go F2P.


    The class restrictions for free players only apply for players who never have been a Premium player before. So if a player changes from Premium to free will get to choose from his existing characters even if they should not be from the four free classes.

    Example: Player Arnold is a Premium player and created a Herald of Xotli, a Guardian and a Necromancer. He then decides to become a free player and thus has to choose two from his existing three characters (as free players by default have 2 character slots available, if they don't purchased additional character slots). Player Arnold could then choose his Herald of Xotli and his Necromancer as his still active characters, even though these classes are not among the four free classes.



    http://forums.ageofconan.com/showpost.php?p=2945733&postcount=127

    Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat

  • ThorkuneThorkune Member UncommonPosts: 1,969

    If they adopt a good f2p model like Lotro, the player base should skyrocket.

  • WSIMikeWSIMike Member Posts: 5,564

    Originally posted by Papadam

     

    Beacuse I am forced to pay it upfront, the actual money is no concern for me, its the value. Maybe I just want o logg in an play for 3 hours this week... But still I have to pay the same as someone playing 40 hours this week.

    You're both paying for full access to the game. How much or how little you choose to play it compared to someone else is not the developers' concern. The point is, you're paying for full access to the game, 24/7 for a full month at a time, to play when ever you want, as much as you want. That's what the monthly sub is for.

    You'd pay a flat rate on a magazine subscription, the same as others. Does it matter if you read 1/5th of the articles while someone else reads it cover to cover? No. You both still pay the same thing because you're both being delivered the same amount of content in each issue. How muchor how little you read is not the publisher's problem. They're delivering the content you're paying a subscription for.

    Same thing with standard cable (not an a la carte setup). You have 100 channels (arbitrary number). Does it matter if you watch 20 of them while someone else watches 80? No. Point is you're both being given access to the same number of cable channels. How many or how few you choose to watch isn't the company's problem. They're delivering the service you're paying for.

    And so on...

     

    Why should one size fit all when it comes to MMOs? I want flexiblity and options to decide.

     

    Win/win for both players and devs.

    Sadly it seems like AoCs model is not very good. DDO and LotrO are the only good switches, why not copy them instead of doing it wrong like SOE and Cryptic.

    "If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road,
    and the cash shop selling asphalt..."
    - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops

    image

  • ariestearieste Member UncommonPosts: 3,309

    Originally posted by vesavius

     "whatever makes the most money is the best"... I didnt say that at all, despite your use of quote marks, but it does underline your misinterpretation of my point.

    Right, you didn't say that, but you did say (and i quote DIRECTLY now): "If it was good enough to pay for it would have been ... profitable ..."

     

    I'm sorry i'm misreading it, but it's pretty clear that the meaning there is that: if a game is good enough, it is profitable, therefore if it is not profitable, then it is not good.

     

    If you meant something else, that's fine.  But THAT is what you wrote.

     

    AO and LoTRO are two of the best games in the genre and went F2P.  Wanting to make more money as a business is not an indication of quality, it's an indication of business direction.  EQ2 is another game that is a landmark in the genre and recently added an F2P model.   (Let's leave out the fact that EQ2's model is terribad).  

     

    I get that you pay for the games that you want to play rather than waiting for them to go F2P, so do I.  But at the same time, I'm currently subbed to Rift and EQ2, so I don't really want to pay a third sub.  However, some of my friends play AoC and it would be great to jump back into it on my HoX and see what's new.  I bought the game, I played it, I just didn't like the PvP.  Has that changed? No.  But if it's free, then I can afford another game that cateres to my PvE taste PLUS AoC which has the best graphics and good story. 

     

    Also, plenty of people are less fortunate than you and I and for them affording a sub (while still cheap) is still something they have to think about.

    "I’d rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."

    - Raph Koster

    Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
    Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
    Currently Playing: ESO

  • BarCrowBarCrow Member UncommonPosts: 2,195

    Originally posted by suffuse

     




    Originally posted by BarCrow

    I play an Assassin as my main. So if I choose to go free..I can;t even play the character I played when subscribing unless I purchase the class at the cash store. They should allow you any character class you played before the free to play announcement. Maybe with a stipulation..like you had to play until 40th level..or even..any classes you maxxed out as a subscriber.are allowed to be used. I already had to relearn Assassin when they changed the class abilities around..now I'd be forced to start a new alt altogether. Create a new main character.. Kinda lame. I understand there should be limitations..but still.



     

    Not accurate - from what I've read on the AoC forums, it sounds like if you've ever subscribed that you'll have the premium classes "unlocked" if you go F2P.

     




    The class restrictions for free players only apply for players who never have been a Premium player before. So if a player changes from Premium to free will get to choose from his existing characters even if they should not be from the four free classes.

     

    Example: Player Arnold is a Premium player and created a Herald of Xotli, a Guardian and a Necromancer. He then decides to become a free player and thus has to choose two from his existing three characters (as free players by default have 2 character slots available, if they don't purchased additional character slots). Player Arnold could then choose his Herald of Xotli and his Necromancer as his still active characters, even though these classes are not among the four free classes.



     



    http://forums.ageofconan.com/showpost.php?p=2945733&postcount=127

     Great..I missed that somehow. Thanks for the correction...now i must go and start on the big plateful of crow i have to eat. lol.

    Well...I plan on giving it a go anyway.... Great news all around..regardless. Options are always a good thing.

  • FaynthFaynth Member Posts: 237

    hmm with AoC beein F2P i guess its teim to check if thers a new version of shadowmate around on curse, and the other tools like quickstart and so on. Gotta update my playsuite for it. :)

  • MMO.MaverickMMO.Maverick Member CommonPosts: 7,619

    I found this on Massively:

     

    1) If you were/are a subscriber at any time, you have no class restrictions. From Silirrion himself, "Any users who has at any time been a subscriber, or a premium member, will have the class restrictions 'unlocked' as it were."

    2) The F2P is not as limited as some think. Go read the official sources. Everything from 1-80 is open, minus a few of the instances, and the new xpack areas. However, again, all of this is "unlocked" if you are or ever where a subscription holder with that content, ei: the RotGS xpack.

     

    It answered some of the questions I had about this new system.

    The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's

    The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
    Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."

Sign In or Register to comment.