My Frustration with Funcom and Conan Exiles


Maybe Funcom are not the evil devils that we perceive them to be and maybe G-Portal or not the dodgy dealers that they are made out to be.

Maybe Funcom try to push the boundaries of what is possible to give us a great game and maybe the service offered by G-Portal is actually the best we could hope for.

Infact Conan Exiles is a constantly evolving game so maybe they have just pushed the Unreal Engine 4 passed the boundaries of what it is capable of delivering in their quest to bring us the ultimate survival experience. Don’t forget the Unreal Engine 5 now exists and that will most likely eat most of the bugs for breakfast.

Of course i could be just talking total BS who knows :rofl:

Also rendering issues could also be easily mistaken for lag when they could be any combination of the 3 (game devs, servers, game engine)

There’s server hosts that can run servers with 50, 60, 70, 80, and even 90 players online that run better than a G-Portal server with 20 online.

THAT is what is frustrating those who are stuck on G-Portal hosted servers.


I wouldnt use me as a rule, no. But for new customers, what fraction goes officials vs privates would determine the cost/benefit to add more. I’d honestly be surprised if officials were a net plus and it may be that they only are because of the conditions negotiated with gportal.

We will never have a mostly bugfre conan. I waited now over 1 year for a climbing fix and its still buggy and on another way buggy now after 2 ´´fixes´´. But who cared they will never change it.

There’s server hosts that can run servers with 50, 60, 70, 80, and even 90 players online that run better than a G-Portal server with 20 online.

Are these servers running Conan Exiles? If not then it could be difficult to compare them.

We can’t know for sure. Places I’ve rented from don’t make it easy to see. However, we can see that Official servers at G-Portal have 4 different Conan Exiles servers (instances) per IP address. This is a critical distinction: imagine my Nitrado server runs just great all day long until about 5 p.m. my time. After some research, I find another 50-slot Conan Server runs its raid time then, at which point we both start to suffer.

I can say for myself that I’ve identified many bugs just like we all have and can attest that server performance does give the mask of a bug when it is not.

I make a point to read the bug reports on the forum, one reason is to be proactive in case I run into that possibility and the other is to weed out those I’ve identified and determine if I need to submit a report. I have never submitted a bug report on this forum because I have not needed to, there are way more proactive members than I am in that regard XD

While I can appreciate that these bugs have been reported the fact remains is that some persist for months or years with no real resolution, whether they were addressed and new instance with the same issue presents itself or not.

We can sit here and discuss, debate and sling poop about Gportal and develop scenarios that Funcom has exercised but in reality we don’t know the details and this is all conjecture. Until and IF they decide to share information about their decisions we will not know. If I were to hazard a guess in changing providers, they’ll just announce it and that is it.

But yes, agreed. Funcom should do better in that department and Gportal needs to go afaic.

As for the lag itself it has markedly improved since 3.0 release and I am greatly pleased. If anything I find it a tad better than before. But I also haven’t joined a server with more than 20 people on per play so my opinion on this isn’t full scope.



Do you think that’s maybe why they culled all those official servers earlier?

It is not that simple. As a business (Funcom) they have a legally binding contract with a 3rd party company (G-Portal) to run their servers. To break said legally binding contract would put them in a position to face legal ramifications which could result in lawsuits which could, frankly, bankrupt them. So I ask you, would it be worth ANY cost? If that cost is no longer existing as a company, and all of your employees no longer having jobs, and all of your customers no longer having access to your products, I sincerely doubt that would be worth it.

Perceptions are irrelevant. Unless they are in a provable state of being in breach of contract there is little to nothing that Funcom can do until the contract is over.

There were options, but once you sign the dotted line on the contract there are no more options. Especially for a company that was, frankly, on the verge of bankruptcy when they signed the deal in the first place (which is likely why they made such a poor deal in my humble opinion). Now they are legally bound to abide by that contract.

Nope, they are not right at all. That is just a group of people who do not understand what they are talking about and are trying to push a narrative to make themselves feel better. As I have already stated, they are legally bound by the contract they have signed and unless they can PROVE that G-Portal has violated that contract then they must abide by it. And I highly doubt that G-Portal signed a contract that stated “you are free to walk away if at any time our servers become laggy” because they knew full well their servers were garbage.

Does this help you at all @Firecrow ?

1 Like

I mean, lets be honest here, are you going to tell me they thoroughly tested 3.0 and said yep its good, and released the op thunderstorm effect that one shots bases in pvp, invisible thralls, trees, buildings and issues loading mods? I don’t know but from an outside view it seems like a rushed content patch to get sales earlier with the new cash shop.


A bit maybe.

Uhhh… tell that to the entire marketing industry.

No see I think this is wrong. Business contracts aren’t “legally binding” in that way at all. You can’t go to jail or pay a fine to the state simply because you break a business contract before it’s up. You just have to pay a penalty stipulated in the contract to the company you contracted with. Now you might face legal penalties if you refuse to do that, but it’s not illegal simply to leave a contract early. Otherwise no-one would ever be able to break leases or change ISPs without breaking the law!

So that means the penalty stipulated in the contract for leaving early is one FC is not willing to pay. Or that they can’t afford. We can’t and won’t ever know which. So no, of course they shouldn’t break the contract if the penalty would bankrupt them. But it seems to me there are pretty damn good reasons to break it if they possibly can.


Yes well, we weren’t talking about marketing. :stuck_out_tongue:

No, you would not go to jail. And no, you would not pay a fine to the state. I never suggested that. However yes, they are legally binding. If Company A and Company B have a legally binding contract and Company A breaks that contract then Company B is well within their rights to take Company A to court and sue them for A). the financial loss of the remainder of that contract and B). damages caused by the breaking of that contract. In total that could amount to substantially large sums of money. But neither of those things have anything to do with “the state” or “jail”.

You cannot equate a contract between a consumer and a company (IE a civilian and their internet provider) with a legally binding business contract. They are highly different things and both sides have entire legal departments which make sure that neither side can just “walk away” from the contract without facing serious legal ramifications.

It is the same with all industries. If Company A signs a contract with Company B to run their warehousing for them for a term of 5 years (a typically standard length) they cannot legally break that contract early without facing lawsuits unless Company B can be proven beyond doubt to be in breach of said contract. Even if Company B is, frankly, not every good unless they are well beyond certain metrics and causing so much loss to Company A then they cannot legally break their contract. They simply have to wait out the 5 years and refuse to re-sign them and sign on with another warehousing company.

No, we will not know because they will not ever publish their contracts. Neither Funcom nor G-Portal will ever publish such contracts.

1 Like

But bad publicity for Funcom caused by G-Portal could be used as justification for exiting the contract.

But that’s what legally binding means? That you face penalties from the judicial system (the state) if you transgress. If the penalties aren’t being applied by the state but by some other company as per a contract, that’s not the law we’re talking about, that’s business negotiations right? I’m honestly not trying to be nitpicky I just want to be clear.

I think I get what you’re saying now though. And also what Taemien said. Most contracts are something like “I’ll pay $X per month for 5 years, and if I exit the contract before then I have to pay whatever would have been remaining plus $Y extra as a penalty.”

You’re saying Funcom has maybe signed a contract that says something like “$X per month for 5 years, and if I exit before then you can take me to civil court and sue me for whatever you can get.”

If so, that seems like a reckless sort of thing to agree to…


No need to worry :grin:

A legally binding contract means that

A contract is a legally binding document between two or more parties which defines and governs the rights, duties and responsibilities of all parties involved in an agreement. It becomes legally binding when all parties sign on to the agreement. It can involve an exchange of goods or services and will provide legal remedies to either party that is impacted by a breach of contract.

In other words, if either party of the legally binding contract breaches the contract the other party can legally take them to court and sue them for damages and the like. Not legal in the sense of “Country X” can fine them or jail their CEO or anything like that. Actually, the lawsuits can potentially be much worse depending. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

That is getting more in line to the point, yes! :smile:

Reckless… possible. It is fairly standard but also at the same time Funcom was also at deaths door when Conan Exiles was being made. If this game did not sell well, Funcom would not exist. That is simple a matter of fact. They were I.I this close to shutting their doors and Conan Exiles was their last ditch effort to keep themselves alive as a company so they took the “best” offer they could get (presumably). Was it a good offer? NO! But when you are desperate you sometimes take what you have to. Sadly we are the ones that are suffering for it, but at least we still HAVE Conan Exiles.


For your first pharagraph -
I can’t speak from business-side, but I can speak from law/contract-side:
If they made a contract that states the server is capable of handling it’s full capacity (40), but they are not capable of that, the contract could end.
I work a lot of contracts daily and they all have in common: the participants grant they do everything stated above in the contract, because if they can’t, the other can initiate to end the contract immediately. If not, lawsuit, but if it (the incapability of handling the servers) can be proven, the contract ends, and the faulty half has to pay for the costs.

Of course in game industry it can be different, and we did not see the contract (it is possible that they did not even declare what happens if they don’t do what they stated - that is a big suck by the way, always secure yourself!), so it might be not true what I wrote, but if G-portal can’t handle even half full servers, not Funcom is the one who is in a bad position. They just only have to prove which can be the most difficult part of the story. But as I see from your feedbacks it clearly CAN NOT handle more than a dozen people properly, it wouldn’t be that hard. I think.


So much of what you mention was not present in test. Yes mods were tested BUT no one had the 3.0 devkit yet so of course they had major issues. I personally built a pillar base and the rock didnt disappear but it did once 3.0 went live for some people. You know people complain about test, but the thing is, if the bug doesnt exist on the test server, its kinda hard to foresee it.

As to the rushed bit, business has deadlines. Anyone who works for a living knows what that’s like.

IF That is what the contract stipples then yes, they could. Considering they have failed to do so at this point in time I doubt that it does. However, as pointed out, none of us are privy to the details of said contract and thus we do not know what exactly it says.

1 Like

I haven’t checked since I left, let me look. OK, my old server, 1876 was “merged into.” It used to be in a cluster of four that shared the same IP address. Two were culled, two still exist.

However, when I go down the list of servers with the most players right now, the top-ranking Official shares its IP with two other servers. Both of those servers show static 0/0 players for the last 48 hours.

Farther down the active server list, it looks like there’s a 1-server per IP here, two there and at the most three. But you don’t see four anymore. This warms the cockles of my heart. Thanks for asking, I needed to know this. <3

1 Like

I’ve put in a few thousand hours. My eyes are plenty open thanks. I’m sure there are bugs, and as I understand most of those live on the console, so thats why I don’t experience them.

I also understand a lot of people experience bugs when they use mods, which I also don’t use.

1 Like