SkyPigeon123
36525
1194
18
Mar 31, 2025 10:23 AM
SkyPigeon123
36525
1194
18
TheBlueMuppet
Having to pay an extra *road tax fee* for my very small electric car of $200. A number that my car is mechanically unable to ever actually meet. It's just a money grab, plain and simple.
TexMexHex
Stop talking in your fucking phone while driving
jridley
I have passed on so many nice apps because they're subscription. I have also paid $25 one time for an app instead of 99 cents a month.
OTOH, I use aCar - paid for the premium. Then they got bought by Fuelly, who started eroding the premium features. At this point they are in full money grab mode, the current version of aCar, THAT I PAID FOR PREMIUM, shows ads. I loaded a version from 2019 that works just fine and don't allow it to update.
ThisOldCPU
Tangentially related: Not being able to pass along your software when you die. I think it's fucked my kids can't just inherit my Steam and GOG libraries.
Note: I do download all the installers. The problem is they update them constantly.
ThatHurts
If the companies say we don't own the software, then piracy isn't stealing.
thedarkcanuck
When a streaming service has seasons 1, 2, 3, 5, and 8 of a TV show. You can find the other seasons on another streaming service, but that service is owned by the first streaming service. Oh and both of those are owned by Disney, which doesn't have that show.
m4uboy
old movies that are on the service but are rentals. why?
UglyDanTheUglyMan
The subscription or Software as a Service model allows the value and functionality of the software to be continuously improved for added value to the customers.
To me, it feels like many times it is negatively improved, eventually to the point that it has less than no value.
*cough* fuck the "Creative Cloud" *cough*
*cough* Adobe *cough*
*cough* fuck your AI bullshit *cough*
*cough* literally any company today *cough*
SavageDrums
But then how will they take all of your money and bleed you dry?
afambelafonte
Long ago your software came on a disk that you bought at the store. Your OS only occasionally needed an Internet connection. Now everything is always online so needs incessant security patches. If you never use it for work or input sensitive data into it (like it's say a video game) then it might be insecure but it's less important. Otherwise it needs to be patched all the time. The devs that are responsible for patching it tend to prefer to get paid regularly.
aoshistark
I don't think this is a boomer complaint. This is more a "common sense" complaint. Millennial here and I agree with this sentiment completely.
apolyton
This is the core tenet of late stage capitalism. AKA Technofeudalism. The switch from a producing economy to a rent-seeking economy. In the near future you will a have subscription to use your refrigator or toaster, hell maybe even your O2. Definitely not a boomer complaint.
Diaphoni
there are freakin baby cribs that require a subscription to use all the feature...
drateRAsuoY
I'm gonna be King of the pirates
Diaphoni
okay Luffy
F4ndango
This is a symptom of late stage capitalism. Society’s needs are so overfilled companies can’t make enough money selling you something only once. Microsoft Office is a great example. Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook were done like 15 years ago. They were complete. But M$ needs you to keep buying software and just new customers aren’t enough for them.
landofbob
As they support a party focused on privatizing everything. Hope you all enjoy paying a subscription for accurate weather information because guess what was defunded recently.
aoshistark
Good thing I have a VPN and several ways to hijack that stuff. Not stealing if I don't own it.
Badgerbadgerson3
Okay but that's not a boomer complaint, that should be common sense. A boomer complaint is something old and fucked up, like "Why do these damn tramsganders get to be visible for a whole day??! Back in mah time, they stayed quiet and died, as God intended!"
CallMeMcGyver
Yeah... that implies consumer rights "are so dumb and old fashioned"...Apparently objecting to exploitive rent-seeking business practices is out of touch?
FallingStar7669
Exactly. This is more of a millennial complaint; we grew up in a world where, if we bought a game, we owned it.
manyslayer
If buying is not ownership then piracy is not stealing.
ItsATrap
AI should be for dead robots trying to kill all humans, not a half-assed subscription service attempting to replace staff for stock growth benefits.
wazeewa
How is this a "boomer complaint"? I want to stop enshitification and part of that is this.
RaZorHamZteR
I am complaining about this and was born 7 years after the boomer era. Everyone should be complaining about this, from great great grandmas to toddlers.
VictusVonGuyver
Adding online connection DRM to very old games before you can play them. I.e.
Doom (1993) on the Nintendo Switch has DRM that requires you connect online before you can even play it. There are more ported games that have done this despite 20+ years since the initial release.
It boggles my mind.
xXCarpeNoctumXx
It's a wonderful thing then that drm added can be just as easily removed later
VictusVonGuyver
Not always the case. Several publishers implemented DRM in their games, later trying to rerelease it only to discover they didn't have the original code nor access to the DRM anymore (because DRM company or programmers are long gone).
So a lot of companies have been caught releasing hacked copies of their own games. It's hilarious at times.
Example: https://www.techspot.com/news/100073-rockstar-sold-pirated-copies-games-steam-triggering-anti.html
samanthadlcruz
can't even read most news sites without a 'subscription'... fortunately ALL the right wing propoganda outlets are totally free...
stickywiggit
I want my buttons and knobs back
We have an atomic clock at work that stopped talking to the satellite and started randomly picking times. We had to put that clock for 24 hours in an east facing window to get it to set itself correctly. It'll probably lose signal again and we'll have to throw it away and buy a new one.
You know what's better and faster? A knob. That you turn till you get the correct time.
m4uboy
don't use your cellphone while driving! here's an enormous touchscreen for every driver controlled function
L0rdinquisit0r
We had to put that clock for 24 hours in an east facing window to get it to set itself correctly.
this is the start of a ritual and tech cults.
still not as weird as that server that required a human skull left on it to function however.
getadogupya
That seems like a gen x complaint, more than boomers.
OnlyByMoonlight
Correct. Boomers complain that they have to use software that doesn't come preloaded on their 15 year old pc in the first place.
Diaphoni
my dad..75 and trying to put android software on his Kindle Fire and then throwing it across the room when it won't install.
giganticroboticpenguin
They need you logged in online so they can process microtransactions to sell loot boxes. Anybody remember this?
jridley
They're working really hard at making operating systems a subscription.
qtRaven
Windows 11 will likely be the last Purchase version of Windows.
jridley
Windows 11 and their absolute insistence on logging in to a Microsoft account is what finally pushed me to Linux. I've been on Linux Mint for about 2 years and when I have to go back to Windows for something now it feels like I'm slumming.
qtRaven
I never switched to Windows 11. Once 10 gets discontinued I may switch to Linux or I may give up Steam.
jridley
I have a Windows machine that just runs some security software, and I also use it to DRM strip ebook purchases (software only works in Windows) and to run my ancient scanner. I only actually touch it maybe 5 minutes a week. I used the workaround to upgrade an old 4th gen machine to 11, just for security updates.
hatethisbit
Autodesk software subscriptions for our company of 8 people are a huge expense
xXCarpeNoctumXx
How about lifetime licenses for teamviewer, they revoked them right during the end of covid for my shop....20 licenses, replacing them with a subscription would have cost multiple coworkers gross pay for a year to replace
xXCarpeNoctumXx
*yearly
hatethisbit
Yeah that's pretty messed up
toolzgalore2
I am okay with a lifetime license, and also a one time purchase with a year or two of updates. But yes I absolutely hate that everything is a damn subscription now-a-days and I can't just use the version I bought forever.
On the flip side the ongoing costs of software development contrary to popular belief are not free so I can also understand the need for the subscription additionally nobody wanting to pay the full price the software would need to be in order to pay for dev time makes it suck
houghten
"stop ongoingally developing the software I already own" is included in my anti-subscription opinion at no extra cost
I want to buy a piece of software that works and then just use it forever without ever updating or patching it, which is why I still have Paint Shop Pro 7
Sechran
Whoo! Jasc forever!
aducksayswhat
The elephant in the room with this is windows, where people likely did buy it one way or another in the past, and there probably is an argument around 10 years to end of life being reasonable - but by cutting off people who are happily using it without an equivalent to jump to they are introducing a lot of risk, to those users and everyone else if they're made into zombies. (obligatory linux mention)
Shaodyn
If I buy a thing, I want the thing forever. I don't want it to paywall itself a year later and make me buy it again.
Heyitsdubblea
I like duplicacy's approach for individual licenses. $20 up front cost, $5 per year after. Not too expensive and leaves me more than happy supporting the devs.
toolzgalore2
Yes, exactly.
KuriyamaSoManyNumbers
Those are new editions that people should have a right to choose to update to or not. If I'm happy with my current version of Word and it gets what I need done I don't need to keep rebuking it every month forever, I just want the version I have that I bought up front.
porphyre1e00
A "lifetime license" is still not owning it.
toolzgalore2
Not sure how you define lifetime but the software I have purchased with lifetime licenses they haven't asked for a penny more and I am still able to either use the version I bought or the latest version if I choose
porphyre1e00
If Amazon goes offline, you can't watch your purchased movies.
Modern game systems don't even accept physical media. If you actually read the EULA (there's that word again, license) on 99% of digital download products, you're not buying a game or a movie, you're buying a license to play/watch a game or a movie. It's non-transferable. You can't will your Steam library to your descendants.
toolzgalore2
I didn't say *all* lifetime licenses, because companies are sleazy and use lifetime incorrectly. There are softwares that I have purchased with a lifetime license and there has been no additional money changing hands. Hell I even donated to a piece of free software and when they upgraded their pricing model, they gave me a license key because I donated so long ago
therealikstemtegen
A lifetime license is for THAT product. This is a new, almost the same, product with an advanced in the name. You have the normal. The normal is not supported anymore but you may use it the rest of your life as long as you keep running Windows 3.11.
hufflesnuff
I don't want any ongoing development. I want a tested, quality-controlled, working piece of software "out of the box." I want it do do what it claims to do, no more, no less, with the lowest failure rate possible. That's all.
I don't want "over the air" updates. I don't want half-baked "new features" from a half-baked initial release that needs them. I will pay more up front to just get to own one piece of working software I do not have to update of mess with for its entire life every time.
trasneoir
A native app that works "out of the box" can get broken by OS updates pretty quickly these days, especially on mobile. If an app is to stay useable long-term, there needs to be at least a skeleton staff.
If an app is popular one viable alternative is to open-source it, so the community can patch it as needed after it's abandoned.
InTheBeginningWasTheNerd
This is why I like the JetBrains model - any time you pay for at least a year, you get a lifelong licence to whichever version was the latest at the time. So, if you're okay with using an older version, you can just pay once and use it for the rest of your life (effectively buying that version), or pay yearly to get the latest version and support the continuing development of their tools.
ScientificPanda
Just putting this out there but ( in the case of AAA games) there might be a few hundred play testers( quick Google says 100-200) but, upon a successful launch you can have hundreds of thousands of people doing different things in the game. So while it might seem buggy to consumers, there are just so many more brains trying different actions in comparison to the amount of play testers.
I'm not trying to make excuses for when a fresh game doesn't work, just offering a different viewpoint.
ScientificPanda
2/2
That being said, I would very much prefer a game to be delayed a few months and have no need for a day one patch, then downloading a game and then immediately needing to update it before I even pressed start.
FredGarvinMaleProstitute
"ongoing costs of software development" is a funny way to say "fixing the thousands of bugs in the beta version that we were selling as a final package"
aducksayswhat
I think that needs to be balanced against not buying something that's buggy, and being able to check that status before buying
ropetopus
Ongoing costs are real, yes, but used to be factored into the purchase price. Subscriptions are occasionally a sensible way to price software (when it’s a service, for example), but mostly it’s just rent-seeking to make up for bad design / business decisions (or just greed)
toolzgalore2
Yeah, agreed but the consumers have dictated that they don't want to pay for the full license they want it to be cheaper so now we have subscriptions so it appears cheaper but isn't and because consumers KEEP SUPPORTING this model, it proliferates.
ropetopus
The subscription model wasn’t consumer driven though. It’s not cheaper, many people don’t like it. It was driven by providers—it’s rent-seeking.
toolzgalore2
But the consumers continued to purchase the product instead of finding an alternative I understand that people don't like it, but voting with one's wallet is very much the way to stop this behavior IMO
MightyIink
I like how companies tell you it's cheap and easy when all these subscriptions are adding up over $100/month now... and you don't own anything, it's gone when it's gone, you paid for nothing in the end.
piratejimthedagger
Like private renting.
ourari
Also, you don't know if it's been or will be edited in some way, like Simpsons episodes. It's already possible to custom-edit content with AI on a user-by-user basis. Not saying that is happening, just saying it's already possible.
Hard copies or verifiable files (like with torrents) are more trustworthy than anything in the cloud.
ropetopus
And heaven forbid you’re a hobbyist user who only needs something occasionally. I used to use Lightroom by buying upgrades whenever my current version stopped working on the current OS (every 4-ish years). But I can’t do that anymore and I don’t use it enough to justify a subscription.
CeruleanK
"It's only this much per month!" "Okay I only need it for a month. Can I pay for one month?" "Nooooo."
Hrafna55
And they are using your data to train LLMs at the same time.
Tengenstein
Hope the like the word Fuck
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
"But we keep releasing bugfixes and updates! That costs money!" Then how about you deliver a finished product without major bugs or glaring security holes? If I find out after the purchase that the product I bought is broken, you better believe I expect it to be fixed for free.
BryanTenn
We all want M.O.R.E.: The ability to Modify, Own, Repair, Erase. Forcing everything to use an internet connection is a choice. You buy a new Bosch dishwasher and you can't just turn on Rinse unless you use the Pay Subscription App. It's INSANE, and very much anti-consumer. Now for stuff that needs to use the internet, use basic secure code verses copy pasting "maybe" code and fixing crap as it happens.
ropetopus
Bug fixes and the like used to be — and should be — included in the purchase price. I shouldn’t have to pay extra for you to warrant your product. Feature enhancements, sure; but then give me a choice to subscribe and get them immediately or not and have to buy a future bigger release. Like… this was a solved problem already.
TheWombatStrikesAgain
Releasing bugfixes and updates for your current product is part of the advertisement for your brand, and by extension for all software you're gonna try to sell in the future.
Marsupialmessiah
A security hole wouldnt be an issue if youndid nit need to contact abserver in the first place, now would it? Damn "A" game companies.
tekcor
Large studios with multiple products can still make the one-and-done model work. The trouble is you don’t make a dime until you release, so you find a publisher to loan you the money for development, and gets all your money until paid back. You only profit after they do. And there’s no guarantee you will. Small developers cannot make this model work, because it takes too much time to build a portfolio large enough to always have a new feature release to make money from.
Medellei
No Man's Sky is a perfect example of how this shit should be done. Awful fucking launch where the game got trashed. Constant free updates with no subscription that fixed the launch complaints and expanded the game dramatically. 8 years later they're still rolling major new updates more often than ever before. Haven't had to pay a cent more than when I bought it in 2016.
CYB3R57R1K3
At 48M in profits, as long as people keep buying No Man's Sky, they will keep updating. Unfortunately, not every publisher is like this. But at just shy of a decade and a new game in the works, they are probably going to sunset it in a year or so.
innagaddavidababy
You wouldn’t be interested in paying what it would cost to make that software. You would buy a cheaper, earlier released product for less. The market has spoken clearly on this.
ropetopus
Yes, yes I would. And do, when companies offer the option. Subscriptions are pushed because it’s better for the company bottom line, not out of massive consumer demand.
innagaddavidababy
I don’t think so. Do you have an opinion on how much it costs and how much longer it takes to produce a price of software with, say, 50% fewer bugs?
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
That's nonsense. I remember Photoshop 1.0 and other software that was released before widespread internet access. Back then there was no easy way to update software. It was released as-is and it was reasonably stable. Business customers paid around 800 - 900 bucks, students had access to a cheaper version, home users robbed naval vessels at sea, Adobe turned a decent profit, and you had ca. 2 years before you needed to buy a newer version.
Taokan22
Right? No one made you go to market with a broken, incomplete product. Well, no one not already on your board of directors.
kyro
Software as a Service (SaaS) exists for two reasons:
- The consumer is less aware of the cost when their subscription price is the only thing shown to them
- People frequently forget they're subscribed and will pay for it far past their use of it
Any reason given to you otherwise is propaganda.
Boyachi
Yes but: if the Saas is entirely hosted online to deal with your [business’s] web traffic then they provide the hardware, is upkeep, and connectivity, as well as the brunt of the security.
Web security is an utter blackhole of a deep dive. It is easier to keep current with thermodynamics than web security.
Still this is why I hate the OneDrive and ICloud reminders: So I filled up 5 GBs; I have at least half a TB of physical storage so let me use it!
Kamchatkah
It's a tough one. I work in mobile software development and the number of edge cases for ways users interact with something, the ever increasing number of devices/operating system versions, and the always-evolving security threats mean it's very difficult to fully future-proof software. You can test in every way you thought possible, release, and then a month later find that one bug that only occurs for people named Steve who pressed a button 3 times while standing on one leg during a full moon.
awkungen42
Yes and no. You'll always encounter day 1 bugs you couldn't have possibly fixed and optimization issues because Billy is running the 69420 XX Dog Shit video card. But past that there is negligent behavior and patterns(looking at you Bethesda and almost every other studio AAA studio out there) that are entirely the company's fault. Optimization is hard, but it does need to be a priority before you ship out your game.
ishouldprobablybeplayingpokemonATM
I dunno, my Nintendo 64 has never had any security issues. The problem is the insistence in making things that don’t have to be connected connect
2graves
It did have an optional hardware update
ishouldprobablybeplayingpokemonATM
And that hardware update never led to a breach in my banking security
Kamchatkah
This, combined with battling competitors who are prepared to add new features which can decrease your revenue and ability to keep paying employees, means feature releases and bug fixes are unfortunately a necessity. I'm in no way defending the predatory subscription models but maintaining software so that it's usable for a user and feasible from a business perspective does take money.
SlightlyRelatedToThePost
Now, while I don't exactly consider Paradox Interactive to be the gold standard for such things, their business model is a lot less egregious than many I've seen. No subscription service or always-online model, but they release a couple of DLC each year over the course of the life of the game. Each DLC release comes with a free patch with a few new features, but you have to pay for the DLC to unlock everything. For those paying once and that's it, you get constant bug fixes for a while.
Drenathar
The simple fix is to go back to how most things used to be. Pay for a certain major version of the software, get patches and bug fixes included for the support lifetime of the version. Pay again if you want to upgrade to the next version. Easy peasy.
seehemewe
Then it’s user’s responsibility if they upgrade, right?
Buy once, pay once.
If I need an upgrade, I pay for the upgrade at a lower cost than the original price, as the bug fixes should be less man hours than the original software.
Frederf
I'm finding bugs in software that any 11 year old spots in the first 10 minutes. They simply aren't finishing software before release.
dieselfury
Web and mobile architecture make me miss Winform apps. You could go a year between release, less moving pieces.
GOAE
Microsoft gets a lot of shit for all their bug riddled software like Windows and Visual Studio. But Windows Forms is actually one of the best bits of software Microsoft has ever made in my opinion. It's very straight forward and easy way to make a powerful user interface, and I have never encountered a window UI library as trivial to use. I've tried over a dozen cross platform window UI libraries over the years, and they all were much more annoying and convoluted to use.
dieselfury
Yeah, XAML and UWP..... pass. Fortunately, Blazor slaps IMO. A little bootstrap and you can prototype an app in no time
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
I understand that it's difficult to predict every possible user behavior, but security is an easy one for a majority of apps: Simply don't add any online functionality. It's ridiculous that you can't use, say, Photoshop anymore without an internet connection. Nevermind that you have to agree to let Adobe steal your work for AI training purposes (read: in order to sell your employer or customers a replacement for you). While you're paying a subscription fee for a software you've already purchased
RickTheMarshallSelke
Software costs money to maintain. Developers have to eat. That's how it works. AI is a seperate problem. As far as security goes, as time goes on, people will continue to find exploitable code. You can never make something completely exploit/fool proof.
kazaamjt
Ah but that online is there to make sure you have paid your subscription. A subscription they tell you is to keep receiving updates. Security updates you need because it's online. And around we go feeding greedy investors. Use Open Source!
Kamchatkah
100%, I fully believe that if it's not required for common functionality then it should be opt-in. However for security, you've also got to consider things like malware which got onto your computer/device from another source (e.g. opening an email link). These kinds of threats sometimes demand patches to ensure your software doesn't get affected or make things worse. Thankfully a lot of software offers these patches free.
ThatHurts
This has always been the case. For 50 years software was sold as a unit to companies and individuals and a subscription based model to fix problems with software were only required if you had a need to extend the life of software past the intended timeframe.
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
The subscription used to be for customer support, back when customer support staffed with actual human employees from a first world country who natively spoke your language and earned a living wage was still a thing. Nowadays it's for fixing bugs that should have been caught before release and for "feature updates" you never asked for (but are forced to install b/c the real reason for the update is improved datamining).
2graves
Thank Salesforce
Humputse
I get that there are unpredictable problems that will occur in the software. But also, when a development-related problem in a car is spotted, they recall the vehicles and change the parts for free.
CYB3R57R1K3
I understand the sentiment but It's life or death with cars most software isn't life or death.
PirateRubberDuck
Can't we just have those consumer rights without the requirement of high risk?
tekcor
And cars cost a LOT more money. You’re paying for those recalls in the sticker price. They know, statistically speaking, how many recalls per model they need to deal with, and build that into the price. Some models will have fewer, some will have more, but across their whole product line, it’ll wash out.
ropetopus
Yes, and this is a much better model than subscribing to my car would be.
tekcor
I’m not suggesting you subscribe to a car, though that’s an option too. It’s called a lease.
bladderinfection
Single player games that require an online presence.
zimirken
No man's sky gets a pass though, and maybe elite dangerous.
giganticroboticpenguin
NMS didn't need it for 5 years. Only if you wanted coop, and visit other players bases. They added the latter as an achievement to get people to accept it.
Sticklebrickk
"Just sell me a finished game!" "Updates, bro!" "JUST FINISH A GAME AND SELL IT WHY IS THAT SO HARD!" "Micro-transactions!"
giganticroboticpenguin
Fucking Rockstar. GTA V and RDR 2. After an update RDR 2 wouldn't launch. Eventually found that they had updated location services but hadn't updated docs for RDR 2. Found the new data in GTA V docs. Fuck you Rockstar.
MorrowDisca
Add to that: Amazing single player gaming experiences going multiplayer to chase Twitch content. Looking at you PZ and Subnautica!
iLoveItWhenMyFingersSmellLikePussy
I liked the single player but still connect with other players in death stranding. Just the amount of interaction I enjoy lol
ILDL
Good ol' poopisoft. Got AC Odyssey because of a deep sale, (or as I like to call it Ass Odyssey) and immediately remembered why I don't buy ubisoft games outside of super deep sales. You'd think its a free to play multiplayer game.
JustHereForTheMemes0321
Thissss
captainsweatypants
AllTheGoodOnesWereGone
And an anti-cheat rootkit /spyware.
FelonyRaptor
Yeah that's pretty much why I don't play anything anymore. Fuck useless accounts.
CaptCrobar
This
ropetopus
I *kind of* understand for free-to-play (but I still don’t like it and think it should die in a fire), but it’s absolutely unforgivable in a game I bought outright.
CyberHexx
Fucking Assassins creed.
thedarkcanuck
I don't want a ubisoft account just to play AC
BloodyDisappointment
You dont need one if you play console.
2graves
I've never made one too okay Valhalla a, Odyssey, and older. I did have to turn off the Internet on my Xbox though
xXCarpeNoctumXx
Then wait for the "Yar Har" edition to release
SolidAqua
My friend ask, what?
AThreeFootTallChocolateMooseWithFudgeEyes
piracy
BloodyDisappointment
Pretty sure Shadows has Denuvo, which is notoriously hard to crack. Only one scene does it, Empress, and they are a right wing idiot.
Though I have been seeing in increase in Denuvo games having it stripped, and repacked by FitGirl or Dodi or others as"denuvo-less". So it is possible.
McFrazzlestache
I remember my first time this happened. Conan for PC. The first one. I was so stoked to play anything as fucking CONAN, my favorite fantasy char on film and literature. Nah. Have to sign up for this thing, sign that thing, set up a profile, first month is free, yada yada. Deleted it. Never looked back. Physical disc is collecting dust in a shed as a reminder of how far we have fallen. Was it a good game?
2graves
That's... An online game LMAO
Z0op
Ofcourse not, that very thing you just mentioned makes it a suckass game, regardless how the test is.
Online profiles or micro transactions, get a skip from me. I dont care if mtx is only for cosmetics, or you dont need if you play enough. Fuck that noise, either put it in the game or dont, dont put it behind a paywall, or just fuck off. Hundreds of other games to play, i aint missing out
Tahroo
Age of Conan was not a good game. Only the first act was really polished and then everything went to non-voiced and large empty fields of bland textures. It held on to a moderately sustainable subscription of roleplayers because it had nudity and a nice harem style tavern in the second act. It is now a F2P mmorpg rebranded to Age of Conan Unchained in 2013 (to reset their review scores).
djevelen
Good game? No, that i can agree with you on, but i had a good deal of fun with it, back when it was still in a subscription model, myself and like... 4-6 guild mates defended our castle during a castle siege from another guild of like... 40 for a solid 90 minutes.
thedudeman519
Age of Conan?
smokinghashalg
It's still going strong last i saw. Never played it but it holds up with the classics from what I've heard.
Malak224
The first WoW-killer.
Anaphriel
The first in a long, long line unfortunately.
Malak224
I was there Gandalf.
tantallous
Every game tried to take on wow. The problem most of them ran into was that they couldn't compete in terms of content because wow had time to get expansions and qol that a new release just wasn't able to equalize.
McFrazzlestache
Yes.
aducksayswhat
The MMO? I'm looking at the old box covers and I'm pretty sure there's a big box calling out the internet requirement
McFrazzlestache
Mmo's weren't the most prevalent style of gaming back then, so assumptions were made when I saw Conan and said take my money. I'm fully to blame, I'm just reminiscing when this phenomenon happened to me.
JoschiGray
Sorry but, that a MMORPG or massively *multiplayer online* role playing game requires you to have an account and be online is not that surprising. That's the polar opposite of an single player game.
McFrazzlestache
Yes. I'm aware. I didn't know it was that until I brought it home, and now everyone is screeching at me because I mentioned I didn't like a game because I brought home an MMO and didn't realize it. Also, this was back when you had to physically buy games for the most part to play them, so, take that as you will. Honest mistake that was entirely my fault. Still hate that we have to have an online presence to play any game at all now.
jfrhvkm26r
Sounds like you are talking about Age of Conan? That was an MMORPG, they are usually subscription-based.
Sensiblyinteresting
If true sounds like they didn't understand what an MMOrpg was when they bought it
jfrhvkm26r
It's possible they are referring to Conan (2004) but I'd be surprised to find out that one had all that rigamarole attached. I played Conan (2007) and it didn't have any.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_based_on_Conan_the_Barbarian
IlluminaBlade
I don't wanna play the "you should have read the box" card buuuuuut.
McFrazzlestache
Mmorpg wasn't a prevalent style of gaming when it came out, iirc. Also, I saw Conan and said take my money. Every box has been read thoroughly since, mmw. Now I won't even buy a game unless it's at least a $20, 2 year old, GOTY all DLC 90% off Steam sale.
BloodyDisappointment
MMOs have been the second biggest genre of games, next to shooters, since gaming became big in the 90s.
McFrazzlestache
In 2008, an estimated 186.8 million people were involved in Pay To Play PC gaming, while 1.03 billion engaged in Games As A Service PC gaming. So no, it wasn't as prevalent as you think. Regardless, this was about always having to be online to play anything anymore, to which I replied an anecdote. Geez Louise.
Badprenup
MMOs were the BIGGEST thing in gaming when Age of Conan came out. What are you talking about?
McFrazzlestache
Were they? I count about 5 or 6 mmo games out at that time. Hardly near the claim you made. Does it even matter? The comment was about having an online presence to play these games at all, even single player. I reminisced about the time I found that out in a very rude way by buying a game that required that. What the fuck is everyone getting so bent out of shape for? I never claimed it wasn't entirely my fault I didn't read the box. My god, man.
MrE158
Conan is from 2008; WoW and EQ2 were 2004, Matrix Online and Guild Wars 2005, LotR Online 2007, Warhammer AoR 2008. It was kinda peak MMO.
McFrazzlestache
You named 6 games out of the 6000 that were out. Why are you making this an argument? I was just reminiscing when gaming used to good amd how it was easy to mistake a good concept for a bad game. This shit ain't it, and never was. I will go on record and say there isn't a single good mmorpg game. Ever.