Subscription overhaul?


#21

The point is the game is in maintenance mode and most people don’t want to spend a normal sub.price for a game thats in that mode. Its just wasting money to most people. And before you spit out to keep the servers on this doesn’t matter to most people. They don’t want to pay the normal sub.fee for a game in maintenance mode. Thats all they see.


#22

I personally contacted Funcom with an e-mail hoping they would ride the nostalgia wave that’s making games like Pantheon, Shroud of the Avatar, and Camelot Unchained popular, and make the game plus expansions free to play while enhancing the subscription to provide players with bonus XP/SK, a 20% XP gain in research separate from XP contribution (as in free XP), and 500 funcom points a month. Combine that with the loyalty program and a minor investment by Funcom in creating new social items to sell be they clothes, armors, mounts, etc., and you’ve got a strong business model. There’s even room to argue for a subscriber only account wide bank to transfer nodrops. I have a sub account and a froob account, and it’s honestly hard to play on the froob account. It was originally just for mules and item transfers, but I’ve been having to play it since my subscription ran out. By giving players access to arguably the best content in the game you’re more likely to hook them. And I checked the market to see GRACE reaching 600 sales this month. Now imagine you can buy GRACE without a subscription, and that market gets bigger because new players want to get a head start on credits.

I even encouraged Funcom to bring back open world player cities and start a big rush event using a Steam front page update to generate new players and bring back previous players. By using this community event to pull in new players you’ve got them hooked even harder through socializing. This game has a great community still who go out of their way to help others, and that’s another point for AO.

In this time where we see more and more people flocking to the “old school” MMOs as they search for games that have challenges and active communities rather than spamming a dungeon finder all day, Anarchy Online is a beautiful diamond in the rough. It wouldn’t take much to draw in a crowd these days, and I know it’s hard to believe, but people are more likely to spend money on something they enjoy rather than something that constantly tells them to. So why not let new players in on the REAL fun Anarchy Online can be and entice them to bolster that fun with a subscription?

Regardless of whether or not Funcom decides to take action to resurrect this gem of a game, I will still enjoy it and continue to subscribe whenever I can afford to do so, but I’d love it a lot more with a larger community. And I’d love to believe that if something like what I’ve described works we might see Funcom return to active development on AO with new content, bug fixes, and maybe even an HD rework to bring the game into the DX11 high poly world of today.


#23

i really believe the player count would skyrocket if the monthly sub was 5 eu. and they would end up making more money cuz more people would mb etc.


#24

No, games that have continuing development are crazy cheap entertainment. Games that are in maintenance mode being kept alive solely as a tax write off while most of the money goes to their other game are not crazy cheap. Sorry to be blunt, but you’re an idiot if you pay AAA prices monthly for a stagnant game.


#25

I know around 20 people that would come back if the sub.was 5 bucks.


#26

I would be back in an instant if the sub was more reasonable.
And i know plenty others that would. We miss this game. :confused:


#27

The sub was $5, noone came. That’s why they removed the $5 sub option.


#28

That was SL only subscription, iirc. I guess most people realized it’s not worth the money since it couldn’t get you nowhere near the full-paid players in terms of power and it didn’t allow you to enter areas where most of the endgame content happened at the time (and still does), except for Pande and DB.


#29

All they have to do is make a steeper discount for a year sub. I loathe f2p / p2w models. Most games I have played what ‘went free’ went to $h17.

7.99 / month is a fair price for an 18ish year old mmo. I will call bs on those ‘I’ll play if it was cheaper’ ppl. I’ve had several friends that would say things like that. There is always something that keeps them from subbing, they choose a reason instead of it being the reason. At least what I’ve dealt with. Maybe you guys have a different take and all.


#30

If they drop the price to 5 euro per month, i’ll sub up 8 accounts, and keep them running all year long, even if I’ll be playing other games and wont use them for longer periods of time. Currently have not been paying for allmost 2 years, for no accounts. Do the math FC.


#31

I would cancel my WoW account and come back to AO if the sub would be like 10-12 euros.


#32

It’s €109,71 per year (including VAT), so €9,14 per month. Welcome back? :smiley:


#33

I believe its even cheaper if you pay in usd


#34

Yep, always been a point of contention-- If it’s $96 in US it should be the same in euros. (I’m in the U.S.)

AAA console & PC games are up to $59 and more .


#35

I haven’t played in about a year and I dont see myself returning anytime soon.
The reason? Well, i have multiple bills to pay every month, I dont play enough to justify a pricing of 17 EUR a month, if i paid 17 EUR a month I would feel forced to play just to get a bang for my buck.

Just go F2P already and focus more on the itemshop with reasonable items such as cosmetics and QoL items, but not with crazy prices like you currently have.

the old itemshop was a lot better than the newer one, at least there, you could choose what you wanted to buy.