Age of Conan pricing confirmed

By Oli Welsh Published 1 May, 2008

Also: shocking install size revealed.

Funcom has laid out the full subscription pricing structure for its imminent fantasy MMO, Age of Conan.

In the UK the game will cost GBP 8.99 per month to play, the same as most competitors - except hold on, that doesn't include VAT. In fact, an Age of Conan subscription will set you back GBP 10.34 a month.

It comes in a little cheaper if you commit to three months or six - GBP 28.95 and GBP 53.06 respectively, including tax.

The situation is reflected in Europe, where thanks to the strong Euro, the game is really quite expensive to play. A EUR 12.99 monthly base rate becomes EUR 14.94 with tax. The three and six month subs cost EUR 41.37 and EUR 75.83.

Americans get off lightest: they pay USD 14.99 for one month, USD 41.97 for three, and USD 77.94 for six.

Alternatively, you can buy 60-day timecards from shops. These have a recommended retail price of 29.99, in both US dollars and euros.

The cost of playing Age of Conan is not just monetary, however. We've just received our beta copy of the game - open beta starts today - and can confirm that the install comes in at a whopping 32GB.

Best start clearing hard drive space and updating your graphics card drivers now. This one's a monster.

Age of Conan launches on 20th May - 23rd May in Europe - which is excitingly soon. Check out the gamepage for words and media, and look for more from Eurogamer MMO as launch approaches.

Picture of Oli.

About Oli Welsh

Oli is Eurogamer's acting deputy editor and reviews editor and likes to take things one word at a time. He is among the best dressed people in South London.

Read more articles from Oli by visiting the Oli Welsh archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (37) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • mazerius1st #1 4 years ago

    £8.99 per month is not so bad but, hopefully there will be an option for a lifetime subscription. As for the open beta it starts today at 3:00 GMT so I hope to see all of you inside ;). The installation although it says in the box the it needs 30Gb it is no so terrible for a game with such a big world and with such high resolution textures. Really why you needed 32Gb? My beta client fully patched at the moment is 26Gb.

  • MaxiSleep #2 4 years ago

    32 GB!

    Lagtastic slowness on the way I suspect

  • Maximilian #3 4 years ago

    32GB? Is that a record I wonder.

  • Katsumoto #4 4 years ago

    Why would the install size affect lag? Am I being a thicky?

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #5 4 years ago

    ahh the install size. :) wondered how long til that get released.. with it being in beta so long am amazed it wasnt already reported on

    Install size shouldnt cause lag, the beta used 2GB files, whereas the release version changes this to 1GB files, should mean less fragmentation etc.
    Edited by jaywalker3010 at 01/05/08 @ 09:50

  • Drone #6 4 years ago

    My beta install directory is now sitting at 46.6gig. Its been growing ever since i got into the beta last November

  • anomagnus #7 4 years ago

    @drone

    how good is it, honestly?

    thinking of getting it

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #8 4 years ago

    Drone -

    When did you last delete the backuprdb folder? ;) I always wonder what that folder is for except for keeping a record of every time you've patched (its not like it can roll back to it)

  • systems #9 4 years ago

    @mazerius1st - £8.99 is bad - it's not including VAT so it's really £10.34 per month as stated in the article.

  • Ashy #10 4 years ago

    And once again those of us in the UK get ripped off.
    Thanks Funcom.

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #11 4 years ago

    The currency exchange rate is really volatile right now.

  • Drone #12 4 years ago

    I haven't ever deleted anything. Im actually curious how big i can get it! Probably should of reinstalled by now.

    @ anomagnus - It would be unfair for me to comment on how good the game is because the fact is i dont really know. Ive played multiple lowish lvl characters on the beta but never high lvl so it would be unfair for me to make a judgement on the game based on my experiences so far. I have enjoyed it though.

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #13 4 years ago

    Drone -

    hehe its probably mostly that folder then which is benign to the game :)
    Edited by jaywalker3010 at 01/05/08 @ 10:29

  • anomagnus #14 4 years ago

    @drone

    cool, thanks for the honesty man

    i'll give it a shake anyway:)

  • Eraysor #15 4 years ago

    That's a pretty incredible size. Also nobody will pay it over WoW if they have to pay more.

  • Gurrah #16 4 years ago

    32Gb is just outrageous - my Steam folder has the same size, but there's about 15 games in there...

  • Petrarch #17 4 years ago

    32GB is huge - that's more than my program files and Windows folder combined...

  • FooAtari #18 4 years ago

    32Gb is pretty insane. As I only use my Windows box for games, I only have a 160Gb drive it, currently has about 50Gb (so thats about 100Gb used by both windows and around 15 games) free or there about, looks like I would need to upgrade before thinking about installing this.

    Quite steep monthly sub as well. Is there gonna be a demo?

  • f00b_inc #19 4 years ago

    Big install, expensive subscription :o

    I'm interested in it - although I'm not in Uni anymore and don't think I can really spend that much time on these games anymore. I'd know everyone says 'play an hour or two a night' but realistically I'd probably get addicted and start forgetting what my girlfriend looks like (right now when I look at her all I can see is an Eastern European)
    Edited by f00b_inc at 01/05/08 @ 12:16

  • Amblin #20 4 years ago

    32GB? WTF are you on? it is 26.4GB on my HD for the fileplanet OB client. The download was 12.6GB. Unless your telling us we have 6GB of d/ls to add!!!!

    As for the sub, it is right, as we have to pay tax if the game/company is based in the US?

    By using the 8.99 base they are trying to pshycologically con us into believing it is a good deal. The accountants/marketing obvisouly worked for DFS prior to funcom lol.




    Any chance of a job, so we can get some decent, accurate reporting? =/

    P.S any chance of reporting as to whether we dear uk gamers are still gonna be shafted on pre-order bonuses if we pre-ordered the CE edition?



    Edited by Amblin at 01/05/08 @ 12:23

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #21 4 years ago

    Fooatari -

    Open Beta is the demo as such.

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #22 4 years ago

    Amblin -

    26GB is about right for starting install. Remember theres always padding in the requirements for future updates/Swap file etc etc

  • bushwod #23 4 years ago

    how are they going to fit that on a 360

  • dreamkin #24 4 years ago

    @Beta Players: Defragment your directory with the launch utility. It should decrease the size of the directory and actually make the game run a bit faster.

    @Others:
    Normally it would be a violation of NDA but I can say that the launch delay was a really good idea. Currently the game is really playable and there really isn't much lag in combat. How good is it? It's good. But you have to be open minded for something different. Combat is a lot more complicated. It really matters where you are getting hit and how you will defend and how you will hit the mob or the other player.

    In short, this is the most interesting MMO to be released post WoW.

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #25 4 years ago

    bushwod -

    Putting the discs into a blender til they are mush then pouring thru the open drive? as a guess :)

  • MaxiSleep #26 4 years ago

    "Why would the install size affect lag? Am I being a thicky?"

    With that texture size then zone swaps (or whatever they do) will be yucky. I would guess you will need 8gigs of ram (i.e. 64 bit windows xp/64) to be silky smooth and you will still get judder as you move around the map. This sort of size strikes me as either being wonderfully diverse or horribly unoptimised

    If diverse then they will have to cache a huge amount, If unoptimized then vanguard has a sequel

    We shall see.

  • Benno #27 4 years ago

    "That's a pretty incredible size. Also nobody will pay it over WoW if they have to pay more."

    People who play WoW know more than anyone that £9 a month is insane value for the time you can spend playing that game. I really couldn't care less if it was £9 or £10 a month, as long as the game is decent.

  • HMAN #28 4 years ago

    @MaxiSleep

    Funny you should say that. According to a friend who is on the beta, the game is know as "Age of Vanguard" on the beta forums :D

  • penhalion #29 4 years ago

    /Grabs wallet .....rummage....rummage......american holiday coins......cents.....two found....Aha!

    32gb for an instally is stupid end of story. It will take hours to install the game and woe betide anyone who has to re-install! I've been racking my programmer noggin and I can't see a single reason for this size of install. Not a one. Even streaming the world into the game you'd end up with a continent on disk (I mean a litteral africa sized continent here!). It would take physical weeks or even months to cross it.

    Edit: Clearly some of you already have downloaded this. What's the install time like etc. etc?

    Are EG sure they haven't misread or mis-interpretted the press release? Are they using procedurally generated data to expand to 32gb after a 3 gig install (seems more realistic).

    EG should seriously get to the bottom of what is contained in this 32gb of data. Oh and I should add that I'm no way instally that much data onto my drive for a game!
    Edited by penhalion at 01/05/08 @ 16:21

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #30 4 years ago

    As i said before release is only 26GB. Installation from the 2 DVD9's takes about 45 mins including the uncompressing.

    The size of these textures are HUGE, think about it a BluRay disc is 25GB single layer, and PS3 has `filled` that already.. So whats the difference.

    HD prices are so cheap now so thats no longer a valid argument.

  • paul_haine #31 4 years ago

    1.21 jigawatts!

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #32 4 years ago

    paul_haine -

    Hehe.. and some said 640k would be all we ever need ;)

  • penhalion #33 4 years ago

    @jaywalker3010

    Some have pointed out in other threads that this constant need to upgrade your PC to play these games is killing the PC market. I no longer accept arguments like

    1. Just upgrade component X it's cheap enough.
    2. You're too cheap to upgrade component X, your loss.

    Upgrading a HD consists of taking a PC apart, backing up existing contents and then re-instally to the new drive or hoping their is a spare drive connector and your power supply can handle the extra drain.

    I fully understand why the majority of PC owners simply go without the game in question rather than go through this hastle. This is why the console market is now the leading market for games. The 360 and PS3 are powerful PCs in their own right. New games prove that it takes years to get the most out of them so constant upgrading isn't necessary. I see no reason why PC games companies are not leveraging existing PC technology in the same way. Becoming more efficient and advanced in their coding and algorithms rather than simply yelling more power and then targetting the latest Geforce ?800 card that no-one in their right mind has actually purchased.

    Sorry for the rant but, I guess I'm totally fed up of this whole "Just upgrade" nonsense.

  • FooAtari #34 4 years ago

    I see no reason why PC games companies are not leveraging existing PC technology in the same way

    Good point that. I often wonder how hard graphics are really pushed compared to a console in its lifetime. I do think developers take the easy way out and rely on new hardware rather than really pushing cards to their limits.

  • mkreku #35 4 years ago

    I remember a time when I used to be impressed with what developers were able to squeeze out of the existing hardware. I owned a Commodore 64 and when you saw Turrican 2 or Katakis the first time.. it was mind-blowing! Same happened when I played the God of War games on my Playstation 2 a couple of years back. Never in my life had I thought they'd be able to squeeze that much out of that ageing machine!

    But when was the last time you felt the same way about a PC game? I know Crysis looked pretty good, but it's a system hog of intergalactic dimensions. Had they managed to deliver something like that but with sane hardware needs, it would have been impressive. Now it was more annoying than impressive as most everyone had to turn down a lot of features to get it running smooth.

  • jaywalker3010 Verified Mastering Manager, Square Enix #36 4 years ago

    penhalion -

    I do agree that specs of games are increasing, but if we didnt push technology we'd be criticised for not doing so. Conan is NOT a low end game thats for sure, but its always been high end.

  • Bleh #37 4 years ago

    And once again we European get's ****** against our fellow US players.
    Seems to be the new trend :(.