What about Mortal?

Thread starter #1

Valhalo

Trial Member
The state of Mortal Online is bad, truly. Logging in to the game towns are barren, markets are empty, the record low Steam Chart numbers which people like to dismiss as inaccurate seem to correlate with a deserted game. The passion for the game has burned out, development news and game updates have become infrequent, no updates on 'Mortal Online 2' whether or not you consider it to be a pipe dream it's starting to seem that it would have been better for them never to have mentioned it.

A new player island isn't going to rescue the game, it's time to free Mortal. Henrik said it himself:
we are not relying on MOs current income
Simply take the risk and scrap the subscription model. Best case scenario word will spread between old players who will return to the game, which paired with an update and steam re-release could result in an at least somewhat decent player base which can then be capitalised upon through other means. When I for one consider downloading a new game, I check the steam charts and upon seeing that a game has a low player base I will avoid it, this loss of players is a downward spiral that can only be escaped through a drastic change.

No reduced prices, no bullshit just make the change. You'll most likely make more from character slot sales alone and if not, oh well, you said yourself you don't require the money so if your that bent on getting a little extra cash on the side, it might be time to consider selling some feet pics.
 

Lacdanon

Senior Member
I agree, though I fear it will be too late.

Players creating loads of accounts because of no cap would be an issue I could see coming up.
 

Marcus Aurelius

Silver Supporter
Is that out of context? He said that development of MO2 and the team was already covered. If MO goes totally free, can it sustain itself? Will it expand between now and MO2? This just seems like it'll increased the population of a stale game. Game will still be stale...
 
Thread starter #4

Valhalo

Trial Member
Is that out of context? He said that development of MO2 and the team was already covered. If MO goes totally free, can it sustain itself? Will it expand between now and MO2? This just seems like it'll increased the population of a stale game. Game will still be stale...
If MO2 is coming at all, it isn't coming any time soon, which is pretty clear by the rate at which SV is working/giving updates. The small amount of subscriptions would not be pulling a whole lot of money, face it, MO is not sustaining itself as it is now, people continue leaving because it's so empty and the playerbase will continue to dwindle until it reaches zero. Going totally f2p and continuing to sell character slots/rerolls and potentially creating a cash shop is the only option.
 
I havet been really hooked on a game for years.

I put my hope in MO2.
 
You quoted Henrik... oh nevermind I can't be bothered with another one of these threads demanding free content for the sake of it.

The game is stale. Making it free and accessible still makes it a stale game. Making it free won't fix that. I'm out.

Edit: You "rated" disagree? So you think the game isn't stale then? Go on open the flood gates and make the game totally free. Shroud of the Avatar did that with their terrible game. Removed the price tag and made the ENTIRE GAME free. Guess what? It's still on the decline. Even it's cash shop full of 'cosmetics' hasn't helped. It's still a terrible managed game and making it free didn't fix it.
one of the main reasons the game is stale is because of the low population. Sure the tc endgame is unbalanced and stuff like mounteds, pets and guards too but this could be overlooked if there was constant pvp to be had.

is shroud of avatar even a sandbox? you cant compare it with MO where the population has a huge impact in the quality of your gaming experience
 
I have to point out that Shroud of the Avatar was garbage straight out of the gate. They introed pay to win right up front. Other than skills you could start the game with a freaking castle if you just donate enough real money, all with no real PvP.

Everyone expected the next great sandbox, and everyone expected UO2, but what we got was soulless pay to win trash.

That was the last time I ever pre ordered or pre supported a game. If ole Lord Brit will screw you over you really can’t trust anything anymore.
 

Marcus Aurelius

Silver Supporter
one of the main reasons the game is stale is because of the low population. Sure the tc endgame is unbalanced and stuff like mounteds, pets and guards too but this could be overlooked if there was constant pvp to be had.
Like you said, population won't fix it all. You've still got no new mechanics, no PVE, no 'townlife', no lore, no new continents, no sailing/boating and a terrible TC system.

People screamed for extra skill points so they could make particular skills such as riding a secondary. They did that and it STILL didn't bring people back.

So how will making it free and sacrificing guarunteed income fix this. The game's core is rotten, not it's entry point. When the game was "free" on Steam was when we saw the worst of the PVP imbalances with new players being wiped out before they could even orientate themselves and become familiar with actually playing the game. That did more hurt than good.

is shroud of avatar even a sandbox? you cant compare it with MO where the population has a huge impact in the quality of your gaming experience
Yes it is and yes you can. It's specifically tagged on steam as Sandbox, Openworld and featuring (poor) MMO capability. It's social aspecs are one of its selling points allowing players to have their own towns and cities and having 3 different multiplayer options that you can select between at launch to change the game.

So yes you can compare. And going free never fixed it. If people can compare ESO, a game that revolves arouding leveling up your own personal linear storyline in the company of players without open world PVP and full loot, the same as World of Warcraft, then they can compare this, that's entirely fair. Even UO going free to play hasn't helped the numbers. The very game the developers of THIS have stated many times was a key influence.

I have to point out that Shroud of the Avatar was garbage straight out of the gate. They introed pay to win right up front. Other than skills you could start the game with a freaking castle if you just donate enough real money, all with no real PvP.
But the castles are cosmetic? You don't "need" a house. Player towns are cosmetic. The "point of the game is the story" not playing "medieval sims". You can still socialise for "free". All the same rubbish we've heard before being spouted here. That's the essence of these "cash shops" which end up costing MORE than a subscription. I can't fathom why people prefer to pay more than a subscription.

Everyone expected the next great sandbox, and everyone expected UO2, but what we got was soulless pay to win trash.
Exactly my point. Everything on the store was supposed to be "cosmetic" and not important. And slowly the pay to win rubbish crept in when they became desperate for money and realised there were always those whales willing to splurge it. Every cash shop has some sort of real currency to in-game currency conversion. They ALL have it for this reason. It always creeps in.

Even when it was totally free it still didn't entice players.

That was the last time I ever pre ordered or pre supported a game. If ole Lord Brit will screw you over you really can’t trust anything anymore.
Roger that. I backed it and absolutely regret it. The final straw was making the game free and completely negating any reason for backers to have paid for it in the first place. A $60 USD game suddenly goes free for all. What a fucking insult.


Anyway, I'm done fucking arguing. It's the same bullshit arguments we had before it went free on Steam and that changed nothing either. All it did was imbalance the population, pissed off vets and pushed away new players. At this game's peak we didn't need free access and new player experiences or centralised starting points. The vocal minority got what they wanted and it changed nothing. All it did was increase the population for PKs to slaughter and created the impression that free players can't compete, which they can't, and the game was bombarde with negative reviews claiming the game is pay-to-win. Hopefully the new player island alleviates this but all I see it doing is creating a pocket of civilization because people will want the rest of the game free too. New island will have players, Myrland will still be empty.

Add a cash shop and all the sub tokens you want, without an in-game economy and actual subbed players selling them for real money (which is pay to win by the way), there won't be any sub tokens for people to buy with their in-game money. It doesn't fix the problem.

Edit: By the way Valhalo, what changed your mind?

Mortal should have never went f2p.
 
Last edited:
Top