I'm a current player, with a more or less uniterrupted sub. I still play and enjoy playing it.. but I supsect it won't last as long as AO for a number of reasons.

- the majority of MMO players these days have quite short attention spans and AOC is still lacking in content at endgame (albeit much improved from launch). Unless they can feed the players new content at an increased rate (or create an endgame that is self sustaining e.g. get the pvp / sieging working to the point that the majority of players can participate and continue to play just for the fun of large scale warfare) numbers will dwindle in the long term and even the hardcore will look for a new game because there are just not enough people to fight..

- conan is a fantastic looking / sounding game, but thats a double edged sword re longevity - it still looks fresh now (a plus) but graphics like that take a lot of people / cash to create new content for - as subs decline as the game ages, it becomes harder to justify the costs / resources involved..

- Funcom, though not quite as dead as many on these forums said (:-)), is still not in the greatest of financial positions - the game could well get shutdown for external factors e.g. Funcom goes belly up.

-Conan is a licenced property (c.f. AO, which is Funcoms IP) - I don't know the ins and outs of the deal but there are likely royalties / licence fees to pay / time based renewal options for the IP, all of which cost money - again, as subs decline, justifying the cost of renewing / meeting minimim payments becomes more difficult. OR, the licence holder could revoke the licence if Funcom fail to meet contractual targets on royalties etc (all speculation on my part but comparing to licences for IP that my company develops, not unrealistic).

So, no, I don't see AOC being around in 8 years... but having said all that, I do want to end on an upbeat note - Craig hasdone a good job of turning things around after the bad days post launch - 6 months ago, I was concerned that AOC wouldn't actually last a year and that I was wasting my time / subs and that my favourite albeit flawed MMO was going to die quickly like Tabula Rasa. Now, 6 months later I'm more bullish - it'll never be a 500K population again, and probably isn't an EVE that nearly died and was then totally reborn. But the population seems healthy enough to group play on most servers (not all - expect more mergers in the next 6-12 months), word of mouth is slowly getting more good than bad, and I'm still having a blast on my server with a good, friendly guild. If they can introduce more content / improvements* over the next 6 months and launch the expansion in a reasonable time frame (HAS to be in the next 12 months MAX imho), it will continue as an enjoyable, slightly different, niche MMO that will celebrate a few more birthdays before the servers close.

Scott

*I'm less worried about the current balancing issues post 1.05 patch - classes ebb and flow power wise - However others are more concerned and that could be a problem if they take too long

Originally posted by nicols

-Conan is a licenced property (c.f. AO, which is Funcoms IP) - I don't know the ins and outs of the deal but there are likely royalties / licence fees to pay / time based renewal options for the IP, all of which cost money - again, as subs decline, justifying the cost of renewing / meeting minimim payments becomes more difficult. OR, the licence holder could revoke the licence if Funcom fail to meet contractual targets on royalties etc (all speculation on my part but comparing to licences for IP that my company develops, not unrealistic).

I didn't think of that, I heard a lot of speculation that Matrix Online's plug was pulled  for that reason.

Some sort of periodic royalty / licence fee for the IP is likely UNLESS Funcom paid through the nose (ie paid a lot of cash) up front to avoid ongoing licence / royalty costs. Licence fees are likely fixed cost per year, royalties will obviously vary depending on profits / customer base (possibly with minimum / maximum cut off points dependiong on the deal).

Conan Properties Inc are unlikely to pull the plug as long as funcom meet their contractual requirements and as long as CPI are getting income from it... unless they feel the game is hurting the property (which was a more plausible excuse a year ago during the lauch problems than it is now). 

The flip side is it may cost Funcom money just to retain the licence (on top of support / server costs), let alone continue to develop the game / add new content. They may well have added a get out clause to return the ip at a certain point in time 'just in case' but thats a big decision for them to take this far down the line.

LOTRO, D&D online and Warhammer are in similar situations (IP wise).. I suspect LOTRO will not have a problem at all (I remember a Dev bragging about their option to renew in about 2013? and they were already considering it early on when the game was launched to some success), Warhammer might if EA are particularly hard nosed about it in terms of bottom line but I doubt it,  but D&D is interesting - it had low numbers of players and Hasbro / Wizards / TSR has a history of whipping the IP away from one developer / licence holder to another for maximum cash return. Now D&D is going sort of free to play.. i'd be interested in seeing how that works within the contract / licence fees. Obviously if the paying shop thing is a great success then Hasbro are happy / get their money but I could see D&D being shutdown sooner than you might expect if they don't pull this off succesfully.

Having read all of the above, I remembered Star Wars and the New KOTOR mmo thats coming... Lucasarts can't have been happy with the subscriber numbers for SWG but as long as the cash was coming in, no point in pulling the licence as its not as if anyone else was going to make a Star Wars MMo.. except now of course someone is - now is KOTOR seen as a completely separate IP or does it tread on SWGs toes?.. has Sony made any announcements about the future of SWG since KOTOR was announced? Or has it been strangely quiet? Its possible that the two won't overlap ie when KOTORs ready for launch, SWG will close.. neither party will say this too early as it will deprive them both of subs (announcing an MMO will close in 9 months time will discourage anyone new from trying the game / encourage burnt out hard core players to finally pull the plug on their sub). Thats all speculation though obviously but again, having KOTOR does give Lucasarts more of an incentive to find 'problems' with their contract with sony - Having an old, maligned* SWG mmo licenced to another company running in parralell to their new shiny, KOTOR might be seen as a problem - splitting the fan base, damaging the brand etc. Or they might decide that SWG is now so niche that its unlikely to have much impact / fighting Sony over the contract is not worth the effort.

NB, all of the above is speculation  - I haven't trawled through the financial reports of any of the above companies looking for nuggets about the deals - if anyone can throw more light on the specifics of any of the above, I'm happy to stand corrected

Scott

 *Never played SWG so just going on what I've read - I'm sure the current players will defend it and good luck to them if they enjoy playing it - no offence intended

Scott

Funcom had the license from Conan Inc. from early 2003 (license holders were in Scandinavia too), in 2006 they extended it to 2018 with option for another 5 years to 2023.

I suspect they paid upfront and may pay again in 10 years.

They also pay a small fee to the Publisher of AoC out of every individual subscription per month.

They also licensed out AoC to board game makers, Apparel and LARP gear too and many other things too such as Korean publishers.

*EDIT posting issues. Website error lol.

Originally posted by nicols

Some sort of periodic royalty / licence fee for ...

I thought I remembered when AOC was announced, hearing people say it was a 'good get' financially. The Howard descendants lost the rights to his works by not renewing their claim (making it default to public domain). A 3rd party stepped in and registered trademarks on the name 'Conan' and some of the other characters. In theory getting a license from them was probably very inexpensive (you are just renting the name, not the lore) by comparison than to say the works of Tolkien. I am sure the Wachowski's probably charge big for the Matrix IP useage.

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by nicols

Some sort of periodic royalty / licence fee for ...

I thought I remembered when AOC was announced, hearing people say it was a 'good get' financially. The Howard descendants lost the rights to his works by not renewing their claim (making it default to public domain). A 3rd party stepped in and registered trademarks on the name 'Conan' and some of the other characters. In theory getting a license from them was probably very inexpensive (you are just renting the name, not the lore) by comparison than to say the works of Tolkien. I am sure the Wachowski's probably charge big for the Matrix IP useage.

Howard descendants ended with Howards father. Robert's father hid his will when he died because all of Robert's work was to go to his friend. Once it was found out the friend didn't contest it and Robert's father tried to get what was owed to Robert from the various pulps.

His father than stuck all of that stuff in a trunk and moved to Ranger, TX. I think after Robert's father died De Camp and Glenn Lord had stuff Conan.

This is according to Mark Finn. I'm sure I got some of it wrong along the way.

Originally posted by Sevenwind

Originally posted by Unfinished

Originally posted by nicols

Some sort of periodic royalty / licence fee for ...

I thought I remembered when AOC was announced, hearing people say it was a 'good get' financially. The Howard descendants lost the rights to his works by not renewing their claim (making it default to public domain). A 3rd party stepped in and registered trademarks on the name 'Conan' and some of the other characters. In theory getting a license from them was probably very inexpensive (you are just renting the name, not the lore) by comparison than to say the works of Tolkien. I am sure the Wachowski's probably charge big for the Matrix IP useage.

 

Howard descendants ended with Howards father. Robert's father hid his will when he died because all of Robert's work was to go to his friend. Once it was found out the friend didn't contest it and Robert's father tried to get what was owed to Robert from the various pulps.

His father than stuck all of that stuff in a trunk and moved to Ranger, TX. I think after Robert's father died De Camp and Glenn Lord had stuff Conan.

This is according to Mark Finn. I'm sure I got some of it wrong along the way.

I started looking up the public domain listings of his work, and now i wish i hadn't. The company that has licensed the rights to FC are serious assh*les. They sue fans you use the public domain works to try to strengthen the position of the rights they do control. Gotta love a buncha assh*le lawyers who start a corporation register a trademark on a property they dont own and screw over fans to make a couple bucks. Might wanna think about the fact if you support AoC you are supporting those f*ckfaces too.

I'm kind of doubting it. Maybe if they eventually go to an f2p model like Anarchy Online did...

THere is difference between owning the material , and owning the name.

"Intellectual Property

CONAN® and/or CONAN THE BARBARIAN® and related logos, characters, names, and
distinctive likenesses thereof are trademarks of Conan Properties
International LLC unless otherwise noted. All Rights Reserved.
"

They just own the name, you can go online and download R. E. Howard's books for free.

Originally posted by solareus

THere is difference between owning the material , and owning the name.

"Intellectual Property

CONAN® and/or CONAN THE BARBARIAN® and related logos, characters, names, and
distinctive likenesses thereof are trademarks of Conan Properties
International LLC unless otherwise noted. All Rights Reserved.
"

They just own the name (see above .. and likeness), you can go online and down R. E. Howard's books for free.

Yes and they use their position holding the copyright on the name to sue people into not being able to use the public domain material because it contains the name.  I am guessing if these jackasses held those rights in the 70's none of the incomplete stories that were finished by people like DeCamp could not have been written (dunno if thats a bad thing personally, I was never a fan of his versions).

From what I can find, only reason these guys have the IP is no one held copyright so they registered it and now own it, it's a cheap way to get control of the material. It's Vultures playing lawyer tricks. it's lame.

So what Morrison is essentially saying is that AOC will last longer than AO because FC as a company know how to run the games cost effectively in the long term... Which essentially is a BS statement, makes no sense other than: "AO lasted 8 years, so we expect AOC to live longer than that.", which doesn't make sense at all too. Compare the innovations AO brought to the MMO genre with the ones AOC did and draw your own conclusions.
 

No it won't...unless they add a bunch of sandbox aspects, and I'm saying this as someone that isn't a sandbox fanboi.

AoC isn't deep or interesting enough to keep peoples' attention that long.  AoC's biggest plus is its' graphics, which in 8 years will be a joke.

I'm seeing a lot of people getting red lag disconnects and then subsequent problems logging back in since Tuesday's patch.  Maybe they should have waited until a few more 1.05 fixes before they launched the winback program.

I can see Funcoms next board room meeting now when the question comes up about AOC lasting as long as Anarchy.

This will be led by the CEO:

Shall we gather at the river,
Where bright angel feet have trod,
With its crystal tide forever
Flowing by the throne of God?

Refrain

Yes, we’ll gather at the river,
The beautiful, the beautiful river;
Gather with the saints at the river
That flows by the throne of God.

On the margin of the river,
Washing up its silver spray,
We will talk and worship ever,
All the happy golden day.

Refrain

Ere we reach the shining river,
Lay we every burden down;
Grace our spirits will deliver,
And provide a robe and crown.

Refrain

At the smiling of the river,
Mirror of the Savior’s face,
Saints, whom death will never sever,
Lift their songs of saving grace.

Refrain

Soon we’ll reach the silver river,
Soon our pilgrimage will cease;
Soon our happy hearts will quiver
With the melody of peace.
 

Let the subscriptions flow.

Originally posted by Darth_Osor

No it won't...unless they add a bunch of sandbox aspects, and I'm saying this as someone that isn't a sandbox fanboi.

AoC isn't deep or interesting enough to keep peoples' attention that long.  AoC's biggest plus is its' graphics, which in 8 years will be a joke.

I'm seeing a lot of people getting red lag disconnects and then subsequent problems logging back in since Tuesday's patch.  Maybe they should have waited until a few more 1.05 fixes before they launched the winback program.

I think Tuesday's 1.05.3 patch was rushed. Most likely to fix the complaints about pvp balancing in 1.05.

Originally posted by Darth_Osor

AoC's biggest plus is its' graphics, which in 8 years will be a joke.

 

8 years ago, Anarchy Online was the top of the line for graphics in an mmo, same as AoC.

So I think one determining factor for AoC lasting 8 years will be if Funcom is willing to consider the 20k current AO players after 8 years a "success" and therefore are willing to keep AoC running with the same amount of players in 2016.

They should really just shut up and focus on fixing the game, fixing the immediate problems. Their predictions are worth just as much as the predictions of the official economists who can't predict an economic recession for 1 day ahead. Funcom knowing what will happen in 8 years? Yeah, right!

So, Avery's function here is just copy & paste every single thought of any Funcom employee, regardless of its shortcomings?

Originally posted by Zorvan

Originally posted by Darth_Osor

AoC's biggest plus is its' graphics, which in 8 years will be a joke.

 

 

8 years ago, Anarchy Online was the top of the line for graphics in an mmo, same as AoC.

So I think one determining factor for AoC lasting 8 years will be if Funcom is willing to consider the 20k current AO players after 8 years a "success" and therefore are willing to keep AoC running with the same amount of players in 2016.

i think the intended statement was that funcom isnt going to abondon a game.

if you love or hate the game, its going the same route anarchy did, horrible launch, followed by lots of patches, followed by expansions, and probably a free part of the game afterwards. you cant argue with that even if you hate the game.

zorvan has it right, that funcom may keep their games up and running even if most ofther developers would scrap those very games as failures.  i dont think thats a negative thing.

so love it or hate it, funcoms going to keep this game running, and keep investing in it.

i think a true sign of funcoms willingness to keep a game running will be if they actually impliment that new engin in anarchy online.  if they do that, best bet is they will rehaul aoc to look modern if need be.

so i think its safe to say that funcom knows from experience, how to keep a game going, now if only someone could teach them how to launch a game, i think they would have had some pretty big hits on their hand.

i think it would make a lot of scorned players very happy, however, if funcom shut down aoc. 

2 years max as P2P. 

8 years would seem reasonable as a F2P game though.

There simply too many new titles coming out this year for AoC to survive as a AAA P2P MMORPG.

Originally posted by Dis_Ordur

2 years max as P2P. 

8 years would seem reasonable as a F2P game though.

There simply too many new titles coming out this year for AoC to survive as a AAA P2P MMORPG.

Uh...Aion and Champions Online are the only two guaranteed releases this year...and believe me...those are sad in their own rights.

I am not of the camp that thinks AoC can survive that long...but, I also am of the camp that ALL MMO's have a life expectancy of 1 year to a player before it becomes a job.

I would prefer AoC last 2-3 years for now.

Cheers

It realy depens howmany subs they consider worth keeping the servers up. If they had 5k subs in 2017 and that somehow is enough for them then AoC may live long. I doubt it tho because it lacks complexity.