After reporting a full-year net loss of nearly $34 million, $22.8 million of which came from an impairment charge, Funcom CFO, Olav Sandnes, resigned his position. Funcom has stated that Age of Conan's performance has been affected by "shorter average subscription periods than anticipated". Their plan to rekindle the game's fire is to expand into new territories and revitalize AoC in its existing markets.
Source: GameIndustry.Biz [ more info ]

Again this is NO indication that Age of Conan is hitting the zapper.

Qualifying statement aside, it is estimated that active subscription numbers have dipped below 100 thousand and Funcom will be cutting the number of servers from 49 down to 18. [more info] Yeah, I know; it sounds bad (thus the comic). You know a company is potentially in trouble when I reuse a quote. Sorry about that! Truth is the whole thing extended from a sudden desire to say "Flymmerian".

Personal experience/opinion incoming...
As far as Age of Conan goes, I enjoyed the first 20 levels or so. Then it just started dragging on. Travel wasn't enjoyable (which is odd for me as I typically LOVE exploring every bit of a game). Then the quests seemed to lose their umph. There was nothing left, but graphics, to encourage me on. I ended up cancelling my account before my free time was done. I guess that's what they meant by "shorter average subscription periods than anticipated".

P.S.
FLYMMERIAN!

I played all the way into the 70's on that game and even was the head of a guild. I just could not take it any longer.

My comment when I quit was "I feel like you are punishing me for wanting to play this game"

I was a Necromancer. If you were in the game you might know how painful that was.

I picked up AoC on clearence at target for $10 and didn't make through the first month either. It's not a bad game but it's just not what I wanted. The graphics were ok but not really my thing and the combat was ok but it just didn't grab me.

I don't understand why game companies don't just start dropping the subscription price. I don't mean have it for free but drop AoC to $5 a month and I bet you'll have at least twice as many people playing it as they do currently. Hopefully with that increased player base they can sell an expansion and try to get the coffers full again. I don't know why $15 a month is the industry standard for EVERY game. Some games just aren't worth that monthly expense.

Heh Flymmerian, that is funny.

I am another of those "shorter than average" players. Picked up the game...made it into the 40s and quit.

One of the things that did bug me is that the world was too small. It felt like all 3 major regions around the main city were right next to one another--instead of the fact that you were crossing most of the damned world. That made part of the world seem very small.

I enjoyed that starter experience also, but after that it was just painful. So many bugs. Some of the graphics were cool, but everything looked kind of ugly too (especially the armor that seemed to be available for my casters, which all looked like a glorified burlap sack). My experience seems to mirror their overall numbers - I played for about a month, and then quit. And unlike some other games that I've quit and gone back to periodically (DAoC, CoH/CoV, HG:L), I've never felt any desire to play AoC again at all.

Gosh Woody I thought you had some inside scoop on AoC really getting zapped. So maybe it's not shutting down yet, but I wouldn't be very surprised if it did.

I agree, I played the first 20 levels and then cancelled my account.

There were a few points I did not like:
1. The Graphics were almost too "real"
2. The same starting story line for all players, I like the intro...once, playing through it a 2nd time was painful
3. The interface still seemed clunky and not player friendly.

I did like the PVP and instanced areas. The combat system was pretty fun as well.

I'm not sure what a normal subscription period is, I lasted the first 3 months from launch giving it go. But once everyone hit max level there was simply nothing to do but run around and look at the nice scenery. I may be better now, but 3 months in and the dungeons still were not finished, there was no gear to work for, and no reason to craft anything. Add in they still hadn't finished the pvp implementation and I simply gave up from boredom.

mitEj I definitely understand your pain. I was a Priest of Mitra myself, the "healer" class which consisted of throwing my two token heal over times and telling people to die slower.

I looked at it, tried it for a week, and feel it really doesn't hold a candle to WoW. My first MMO was WoW, so i guess I'm jaded about the ease and user friendliness that WoW is to newer players. While AoC's graphics are awesome, it's not really a fun game to me, and almost all of it stems from the user interface.

Originally Posted by Ivan_Only:

The interface still seemed clunky and not player friendly.

It's mind-boggling how not a single MMO that has come out since WoW has a decent UI. I guarantee WoW's UI is a main part of its mass-market appeal, and that's before mods. I was in the original WoW beta for 3 months before launch, the UI was more responsive than any MMO I've ever played, and there was already a thriving modding community. I was in the Warhammer beta a month before launch, the UI was slow and unresponsive, the lua API was completely undocumented and not even implemented until a few weeks before launch.

You can reroll a thousand times but there is always one constant: The interface. Why the hell do these companies not bother to make it DECENT?! There is no way in hell that a game will kill WoW if it doesn't have a stellar UI and mod support.

I have to agree that the interface in AoC was, and probably still is, in need of an overhaul. I was very excited about the game, but still couldn't make it through my full free month. Honestly I was hoping the 360 version would have come out soon after launch, as the game was MUCH more controller friendly then keyboard friendly in my opinion and not having to hook my PC to my big screen TV would have been a plus. The game was much better played on a larger screen.

Perhaps a lower monthly rate for the game, and getting the 360 version out could help? I for one would at least give it another month if it was finally on a console, or even play on the PC again if it wasn't another 15 bucks. Maybe even reinvent the mainstream MMO model a bit. Guild Wars is free to play, and did well enough for what 2 expansions now? What if AoC was free, or even 5 bucks a month, to play but certain areas with better loot or more expansive content had a higher per month fee, maxing out at 15 a month? Adding a 'free' option might get more people inclined to give the game a shot, even amid some bad press and a sagging playerbase.

And as for WoW, I think the already built in fan base for the Warcraft IP is what gave the game a HUGE leap into the MMO arena more then anything else, with the second reason being very low system specs to run the game in comparison to other MMO's or even standard PC games. I think if other widely popular MMO IP's (that Sony doesn't have it's dirty little hands on :P) had lower system specs I think a few of them might actually be a contender against WoW. I know plenty of people still playing WoW on a 4 or 5 year old PC and haven't looked at other games (and would like too) who simply can't afford a new PC or upgrades to then pay 50 bucks then 15 bucks a month on a game they might enjoy.