Please no more Pets in DLC


Well, this is good for Funcom to see. If they can target their efforts to what their customers actually want, they can certainly make more sales. I personally will buy all the DLCs, just because I want to build all the style bases, all over the map, but I have friends that also only want DLCs that have new decorative crafts.

Every other MMO and especially sandbox game I have played gets great fan feedback on every crafting update. People just love making stuff in games.


Btw better be both decorations and pets, and add support backwards. So aqualonian and khitan get animals and frontier and yamatai just decor


I love animals but most of them look good enough without such permanent decorations. I’d use such “skins” if I could change them freely for my existing pets.


I agree, we needs more placeable in the next DLCs


I assume the reason for this has not been mentioned in above replies

Please read the notice on
If you have any questions, suggestion or feedback for the wiki, please contribute or let us know. Anyone is able to contribute to the wiki - we also have a wiki channel on the fan-made discord and another discord, a Slack group, a Help wiki and other resources dedicated to contributing to the wiki. :smile:


Hmm. I get that it is more work for the artists for placeables, but this line confuses me a little: “Placeables take a lot more server/render memory than building pieces all things considered, and consoles were starting to creak under the pressure.”

If I place 100 Khitan rugs, does this put more pressure on the server than 50 Khitan and 50 Yamatai rugs?

I totally understand that less decorations will be placed if there are fewer choices and none of the choices match the architecture, but we are still going to decorate as best as we can with the few items provided.

Also, not making content that has more appeal to your paying customers, because it is too much work… why walk away from a deal that is easy to close?

I would gladly pay for a DLC that offered more placables to all of the current DLCs. Always happy to pay for the work. As they say on Reddit “take my money!”


I think pets are a good idea Like wouldn’t mind having some elephants as a pet and maybe a few spiders and snakes. But what would be something I feel like would bring the attention of a lot of players is making a DLC or Update that expands the world, like add in few new areas on the map. Now for DLC’s I feel like it would be good if you maybe added horses or some kind of mount you can ride like perhaps a Saber tooth like how they did in Far Cry: Primal. Another thing as its been mentioned by fans is more decorations. Like perhaps something like a glass ball that you can see and spy on other players on the map as if it was a CCTV camera. or a staff that summons the dead to fight alongside you. Another Idea would be to add in new creatures to fight maybe some things from Norths Gods or Egyptian. I also believe in adding in a few more gods for updates would be fun. Well these are just some Idea’s ive had and I’ll keep sending more.


Another Idea would be Pet armor to add in the game that would be awesome along side with riding mount and different saddles also allowing you to shoot your bow while on your mount would bring attention.


Confuses me too.

My point of interest is focused on placeables more than dressing pets and T3 building pieces. T3 structure materials take too long to gather and craft for my limited Solo playing time. I rarely use them. If there are no more decorations, then Conan: Exiles gets no more of my gaming budget.


On the server, no, probably not - or not noticeably so, in any case.

For your PC (or console), however strange it may sound, it could well be the case, though. The concept is generally known as “geometry instancing”, it’s variously also called “GPU instancing” or similar, and in a nutshell it allows the GPU (graphics card) to re-use calculations it already made for that object to render multiples much faster than it would’ve been otherwise able to.

Whether people use enough of the same placeable (not building pieces) for this to truly make a difference, I cannot say - only Funcom can answer that.

But consoles being what they are, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised to learn that they are (once again) the limiting factor, making the game worse than it otherwise could’ve been. For the record: I don’t dislike consoles (let alone the people who play on them!) by any means, but I am sometimes saddened by the effect they’ve had on the PC market.


Yeah, it is a shame. But the business reasons for supporting both is sound. You really have to throttle things back to make cross platform compatibility. I’d imagine the console players are often regretful that devs keep pushing so hard on console resources, to improve the game for PC players too.

When you think about it though, once you make a game for a certain generation console, your game is locked in to supporting that console forever. You can make CE2, 3 and 4 and require newer gen consoles, but the current release will always have to be throttled back to the levels that current consoles can handle.

PCs on the other hand… You make a game that supports PC. Well heck, there really is no generation or model, just a general “PC”. System requirements can continue to increase as the game evolves and it still satisfies it’s original support of “PC”.

I wonder, is there any equivalent on console, to the different graphics settings for PC? Ultra, high, low end mode? Could Funcom make more placables and then offer console users lower settings to make it playable?


I find it sad as well.

We use PlayStation for gaming as well. I like playing console games but never realized how limited they are. For future reference, I will pay more attention to PC games that attempt to cross platforms. When I play on PC, I want the full power of the PC.


I personally notice very little change in performance on my laptop, when I switch from low to ultra settings. I found this very curious at first, but now it makes a lot more sense. CE can never be optimized for PC and never be optimized for console. Both platforms have to make sacrifices for the other.

It is like cars in RL. I’m tall and I can tell that the seats were designed for someone shorter than me. My wife is short and she can tell that they were designed for someone taller. I guess there are times where being average is optimal?


I personally would like more decorations and for pets I would like scorpions and also new creatures to fight if new creatures can’t be brought into the world for some reason then bring them in with the purges if it’s creature purges not npc purges


They already told about how and why mounts are technically not possible, but lets force this upon them.
On the other hand, the reason they stated was the map. It would have to be redone completely.
I for myself would love a redone map which is larger. A LOT larger. (A lot starting at +200%.)
… So if the map would be asked for and then a mount dlc suggested (though that was originally planned for the game itself, not as some additional DLC), then I think it would be fine.

True. I still hope for a god to be about sorcery.

Mh… I think I once heard something about objects and how they are “cut” making a difference. Also lightning pressures machines a lot too. (Basically there is a difference between just textures and a bookcase with lots of books inside, being 3d, not just a texture.)
I dont know if the first part is true, but I am certain that the lightning one is correct. Please correct me if I am wrong.
However, weather inflicts A LOT more pressure on my machine than anything else. (Oh and please spare me the 3000 foundations thing. Thats just stupid landclaimspam… :confused:)
My machine starts crying whenever it’s raining.


i think you can ride all of that animals, but cus console peasnts cant run that /5 year old hw/ so we dont have it

pls rideble bear


building pieces are the easiest to do DLC for. Just re-skins and colors of existing objects.

Animals may be slightly harder, but they are still mainly reskins, with a head piece and simple mesh design armor.

The hardest is Armor and weapons, which have unique meshes and all kinds of other code. A majority of players will use those, in my opinion, so any extra code needed to add them is warranted.

Decotaive items are very unique, unless you/we just want different “colors” of the meshed items we already have. Thus, they take more data to add to game. Having some with every DLC should be plausible though.


Not sure about this. I have worn the same armor since I started the game last year. The only change to my weapon was to phase out the star metal one as I haven’t seen a star metal node since…I can’t remember when I last saw one.

I use the T1 sandstone and the “T2” insulated wooden pieces to build. I rarely use the T3 pieces. Sadly that is all that is being made for DLCs. I did not purchase the last two DLCs because they did not contain placeables or T1/T2 structure pieces.

I decorate and redecorate routinely. So, for me, the decorations and placeables are used most often. They may be more technical to make, but as I play, they are worth the effort and the cost of purchasing DLC that contains a significant amount of palceables.


But the majority do use T3 and the like, as well as multiple sets of armors. I was only talking about the ease, or lack there of to add certain objects to games. Not trying to poo-poo people who don’t use any of them. Not every discussion is out there to attack SP and RP players, and trying to leave them out. Some threads are just informative and discussions on overall general data, and thus will try to make an understanding of logic behind Funcom decisions.


Someone mentioned the unique meshes used to make something, have you ever jumped on top of a wheel of pain? If they made meshes like that (real basic cylinder on cylinder design) the place a texture on it that changes the look it should not be to taxing . i.e. several diffrent looking statues of same height with diffrent textures on them. Or the rugs with diffrent colors. The shape is the same the texture is different.