TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
Shouldn't that be alarming enough though??
That a game's survival relies so heavily on something like a crafting bag, house/bank space and transmute storage instead of the game's quality and depth??
To me at least it raises the question whether ZOS should perhaps re-consider their business model to, I don't know - rely on how good the game is, instead of relying on what I mentioned above??
Necrotech_Master wrote: »TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
Shouldn't that be alarming enough though??
That a game's survival relies so heavily on something like a crafting bag, house/bank space and transmute storage instead of the game's quality and depth??
To me at least it raises the question whether ZOS should perhaps re-consider their business model to, I don't know - rely on how good the game is, instead of relying on what I mentioned above??
servers are a constant cost, i rather this not turn into a crown store only game supported entirely by a few whale players
TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
Shouldn't that be alarming enough though??
That a game's survival relies so heavily on something like a crafting bag, house/bank space and transmute storage instead of the game's quality and depth??
To me at least it raises the question whether ZOS should perhaps re-consider their business model to, I don't know - rely on how good the game is, instead of relying on what I mentioned above??
Necrotech_Master wrote: »TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
Shouldn't that be alarming enough though??
That a game's survival relies so heavily on something like a crafting bag, house/bank space and transmute storage instead of the game's quality and depth??
To me at least it raises the question whether ZOS should perhaps re-consider their business model to, I don't know - rely on how good the game is, instead of relying on what I mentioned above??
servers are a constant cost, i rather this not turn into a crown store only game supported entirely by a few whale players
TechMaybeHic wrote: »So you want to basically pay for just over a year subscription. They might offer than when they think they might shut the game down in a year an a half. If they plan to operate longer than that, it would be a bad business decision for them. It might be their biggest draw for subscription
Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »Craft bag imho is one of those things that in general (at least in larger picture) is actually more harmful than beneficial for the game. Think about it.
- Inventory management is fine if you are a new player. Once you reach the beginning of an end game you start to struggle with inventory management.
- In other words: Inventory management is designed around rental fee (sub = rental fee). What is worse, it is done in a "mobile game style" you don't struggle, until you invents a lot of time into the game.
- Once you pay just once for the ESO+, then your invetory management is kinda "held hostage" behind rental fee.
- Craft bag also arguably has a tradeing system breaking potential, as you can keep infinite amount of crafting materials. This means that just one account can buy off entire supply of crafting materials & dictate prices.
- The only non-rental inventory increase we ever had was either inventory pets (paid) or housing storage (which is not visible by crafting stations).
- With every new DLC / Chapter we get TONS of new crafting material types, while max bank space slots remain unchanged since 2014.
I think that what should be done is that Bank space should be increase as even counting only base game crafting items, the amount of types of those vastly increased while max bank space did not. So, increasing max bank space seems like a best way to solve the issue (assuming zos wants to solve it). Also it is a win-win since ESO+ users are getting double of that anyway.