ZOS: When does the 6 month subscription return?

darman77

Oh now... I will stop playing ESO if it goes F2P, too.. I hate F2P model.. it'll ruin this game.

DeLindsay

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodystab wrote: »

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/821/feature/9258/A-Look-Back-at-2014.html

We was part of this ZOS, dont let us down!

But we need official and real information couse as good as i remember: Rift , Age of Conan , TERA , Warhammer and Fallen Earth all removed their 6 month option shortly before going F2P. Trends speak for themselves.

People keep saying this but it isnt true. Warhammer removed the 6 month option right before they closed not before they went f2p. Rift was still selling the 6 month option in 2013. AOC still sells 6 month subs. Tera while it doesnt have a 6 month sub has a yearly sub option. Please check into this stuff before you parrot what other people say,

Rift also has a 1yr sub, both before and after it went F2P/P2P.

Sindala

As I said before, NO and I mean ZERO company would remove an option that gives them a large amount of capital to use and zero responsibility to pay it back if said user quits before the 6 months is up.

Something is going on behind the scenes and we all know what it is.
Release the console as a Sub game and some mite buy, release it as F2P and a substantial amount more would buy it.

It's all about box sales people, pure and simple.

Darlgon

Sindala wrote: »

As I said before, NO and I mean ZERO company would remove an option that gives them a large amount of capital to use and zero responsibility to pay it back if said user quits before the 6 months is up.

Something is going on behind the scenes and we all know what it is.
Release the console as a Sub game and some mite buy, release it as F2P and a substantial amount more would buy it.

It's all about box sales people, pure and simple.

Technically, the six month sub is the cheapest option, six months for $77.94, working out to $12.99 a month..cheaper than the 90 days at $13.99 a month and $14.99 for monthly. If it were me, I would cut out the cheapest also for people who are new subs.

lordrichter wrote: »

I got a response back from Customer Service to a direct inquiry:

Response By Email (Insaf) (01/02/2015 08:15 AM)
Greetings,

Thank you for contacting The Elder Scrolls Online Team. First, I would like to apologize for not having been able to reply to you earlier in order to assist you.

We found that our players strongly preferred the 30- and 90-day subscription options, so we have retired the 180-day one. We still offer the 30- and 90-day subscription options.

Wishing you a happy New Year!

Warm Regards,

Insaf.
The Elder Scrolls Online Team

I also replied letting them know that I hope that Zenimax reconsiders. I will write a /feedback sometime in the next couple of weeks, before my game time expires. I don't have to decide what to do for a while, but unless I win some raffle or someone gifts me with game time, I think I will hold out for at least a 180-day subscription before I do anything more permanent than the occasional game time.

Frankly, I have had too many CS people tell me something that got changed when a member of the CS management had it pointed out to them. I say, this @Zos_Insaf is dead wrong, and also not a member of staff, as I cannot pull his name up. I choose to believe the account page, with this screenie;



According to the Account page, I will be billed for SIX MONTHS again in May. Maybe not publicly, but @ZoS_GinaBruno or @ZoS_JessicaFolsom needs to take a look at what is going on inside CS.

Elsonso

Darlgon wrote: »

I say, this @Zos_Insaf is dead wrong, and also not a member of staff, as I cannot pull his name up. I choose to believe the account page, with this screenie;



According to the Account page, I will be billed for SIX MONTHS again in May. Maybe not publicly, but @ZoS_GinaBruno or @ZoS_JessicaFolsom needs to take a look at what is going on inside CS.

This is consistent with what Pierre said in French, so if it is not the real reason, at least they are reading from the same page. For all I know, they checked the forum to find out how to answer.

I am certain that the person who replied to me is not a ZOS employee. ZOS contracts out to RightNow (Oracle) for Level 1 customer support.

Mopar63

There is zero reason for the 6 month option to be removed due to popularity, any answer stating this is a pile of crap. If costs nothing for them to offer the six month option more does it create more work to have it. Even if only a few people use it, there is no reason not to offer it since there is no lose by it being there.

Removing an option means there is a financial reason for removing it, and popularity is NOT a financial reason.

Flynch

Mopar63 wrote: »

There is zero reason for the 6 month option to be removed due to popularity, any answer stating this is a pile of crap. If costs nothing for them to offer the six month option more does it create more work to have it. Even if only a few people use it, there is no reason not to offer it since there is no lose by it being there.

Removing an option means there is a financial reason for removing it, and popularity is NOT a financial reason.

So you know how much it costs to administer an account that is barely used on the whole - how much it costs in manpower to keep it updated or resolve issues, to have a system in place that waivers and supplies contingencies upon variable rates?

Awesome.

xtago

I was going to do a 6 month sub so I've been keeping a close eye on it.

At the start of Dec 2014 a 6 month sub was $72
By mid Dec it was changed to $78

Then end of Dec 2014 around the 20th they had removed it.

I assumed this was simply removed due to all the altered currency exchange rates around the world.

At $78 I'd be paying around $120 for 6 months so works sort of ok time wise but maybe this doesn't work out for zenimax, in some way.

As they'd be losing money via the Euro conversion rates, into USD and back.

Same deal with all the other money rates around the world.

Cody

If this game goes F2P im gone.

if it turns into a form of B2P, it better be a VERY good form, or I will be gone.

Nothing more needs to be said from me. Y'all likely know the reasons.

xtago

Flynch wrote: »

Mopar63 wrote: »

There is zero reason for the 6 month option to be removed due to popularity, any answer stating this is a pile of crap. If costs nothing for them to offer the six month option more does it create more work to have it. Even if only a few people use it, there is no reason not to offer it since there is no lose by it being there.

Removing an option means there is a financial reason for removing it, and popularity is NOT a financial reason.

So you know how much it costs to administer an account that is barely used on the whole - how much it costs in manpower to keep it updated or resolve issues, to have a system in place that waivers and supplies contingencies upon variable rates?

Awesome.

Currency rates aren't what they were about 4 months ago.

I expected the costs to go up which they have but I was wondering if they were going to keep them in place as I think the 6 month sub they were only getting $12 per month and it probably wasn't enough to keep it with the current currency value drops.

Wars in far away places don't always mean things are better at home.

Sunver

Well I have this idea: Maybe ZOS wants some hype. Suddenly most game-related magazines in Poland started to write about it(about possible switch to B2P or F2P). People will hear about it and get eager to play. Maybe ZOS has something big to be realesed in near future and needs this kind of attention. I really dont know but we see this kind of behaviour in politics - just in a different way(smaller scandals to cover bigger ones ). Have a nice day.

Mithe

I understand ZOS has plans they dont wish to release, but as the past year+ (pts included) has proven, you HAVE to be transparent, you cant remove something like the 6 month sub which will obviously create a lot of speculation of it going B2P or F2P and say nothing about it (in english).

You have community staff, managers and spokespeople for a reason. Their job is to communicate with the community and explain why decisions have been made.

You really need to speak to the community so you can see how we all feel about it and not leave us waiting for months to find out what is happening to the mmo we are spending our time on or whichever your decision, people will be upset; some more upset than others, and those may leave the game altogether.


Please do not fall down the same path of not speaking to and listening to your customers. (Although you have tried hard to fix that going forward from a couple months after launch) You have already proven what destruction it can cause to your game.

SirKeka

Skullemainia wrote: »

please don't make this game F2P, this game deserves better then that!!!!

I mean, B2P would be nice, it would make some of my friends start playing, but if it goes F2P.... I might cry.

Elsonso

xtago wrote: »

I was going to do a 6 month sub so I've been keeping a close eye on it.

At the start of Dec 2014 a 6 month sub was $72
By mid Dec it was changed to $78

Then end of Dec 2014 around the 20th they had removed it.

I assumed this was simply removed due to all the altered currency exchange rates around the world.

At $78 I'd be paying around $120 for 6 months so works sort of ok time wise but maybe this doesn't work out for zenimax, in some way.

As they'd be losing money via the Euro conversion rates, into USD and back.

Same deal with all the other money rates around the world.

I fear that what has happened to it is that not a lot of people were using it, a general referendum on the confidence that people place in the game, coupled with the changes in 2015 to the EU VAT that has caused them to run around and edit a gazillion Knowledge Base documents.

However, my thought is that if enough people wanted the option, and were willing to use it, it would return.

I am not sure how they would know whether people wanted to use it. I am curious for myself, so that is why I created a *poll* that will at least give an indication about what some people think on the subject.

Demands and petitions are not helpful, but I would certainly like them to reconsider sooner rather than later, since I fall into the boat of someone planning to subscribe using the 180-day subscription here in January, only to be denied just a few days before the end of the year.

If I had known in advance, I would have subscribed earlier to get in before they closed it down. They seem to grandfather the people who have it already.

Digiman

xtago wrote: »

I was going to do a 6 month sub so I've been keeping a close eye on it.

At the start of Dec 2014 a 6 month sub was $72
By mid Dec it was changed to $78

Then end of Dec 2014 around the 20th they had removed it.

I assumed this was simply removed due to all the altered currency exchange rates around the world.

At $78 I'd be paying around $120 for 6 months so works sort of ok time wise but maybe this doesn't work out for zenimax, in some way.

As they'd be losing money via the Euro conversion rates, into USD and back.

Same deal with all the other money rates around the world.

If that is true that is shady and greedy at best for nickel and dimes because none of the other MMO's that offer 6 month subscriptions removed their options.

As I have stated what ticks me off is the lack of communication ZoS gave, no emails informing users of the removal or announcements on their page. I had to find out from third part news sites.

It infuriates me with the lack of respect and courtesy they gave to their customers when implementing that stealth change.

Elsonso

Digiman wrote: »

xtago wrote: »

I was going to do a 6 month sub so I've been keeping a close eye on it.

At the start of Dec 2014 a 6 month sub was $72
By mid Dec it was changed to $78

Then end of Dec 2014 around the 20th they had removed it.

I assumed this was simply removed due to all the altered currency exchange rates around the world.

At $78 I'd be paying around $120 for 6 months so works sort of ok time wise but maybe this doesn't work out for zenimax, in some way.

As they'd be losing money via the Euro conversion rates, into USD and back.

Same deal with all the other money rates around the world.

If that is true that is shady and greedy at best for nickel and dimes because none of the other MMO's that offer 6 month subscriptions removed their options.

As I have stated what ticks me off is the lack of communication ZoS gave, no emails informing users of the removal or announcements on their page. I had to find out from third part news sites.

It infuriates me with the lack of respect and courtesy they gave to their customers when implementing that stealth change.

This is not a game play issue. It is not something to do with the design or implementation of the game. It is not a feature or capability of the game itself.

That makes me wonder if the issue is not that Zenimax is not telling us, but that Bethesda is the one making this decision and they are the ones that need to be talking to us.

SteveCampsOut

malthol wrote: »

I hope this change isn't permanent or to be forced on us. My account still shows I'm on a 6-month plan. Personally, I'd rather be able to pay for a year at a time.

If you have to change your credit card information when the card expires you will loose the option as I did.

grimsfield

Oolou wrote: »

I wrote to ask why the change and received this reply:

“We found that our players strongly preferred the 30- and 90-day subscription options, so we have retired the 180-day one. We still offer the 30- and 90-day subscription options”



Thank You

"The Elder Scrolls Online"


So ... when I replied, also stating that if they had added an annual sub option, I would use it, I asked that my discontent with the change would be added to any feedback being collected, if any was being collected. I'll probably be sending some IG feedback (using the /feedback in the IG chat) too.

I'd suggest those who are unhappy with the change also make their feelings known through the /feedback route. It may not make a difference, but at least we will have tried.

This sounds like a lie to me.

Elsonso

grimsfield wrote: »

Oolou wrote: »

I wrote to ask why the change and received this reply:

“We found that our players strongly preferred the 30- and 90-day subscription options, so we have retired the 180-day one. We still offer the 30- and 90-day subscription options”



Thank You

"The Elder Scrolls Online"


So ... when I replied, also stating that if they had added an annual sub option, I would use it, I asked that my discontent with the change would be added to any feedback being collected, if any was being collected. I'll probably be sending some IG feedback (using the /feedback in the IG chat) too.

I'd suggest those who are unhappy with the change also make their feelings known through the /feedback route. It may not make a difference, but at least we will have tried.

This sounds like a lie to me.

I am sure that @OOlou is telling the truth.

I have no reason to not believe that the 180-day subscription was the least used of the three. I see no reason for them to lie about it. If there was something that they didn't want to tell us, they would simply ignore the query or deflect it. They would not need to concoct a lie.

I have had my own separate conversation with Zenimax on the subject and they pretty much told me the same thing back at the beginning of the month.

I think I am on record now as wanting the 180-day subscription back. I would evangelize this more, but my time runs out soon. If I take a lesser subscription or use a time card when my time runs out, it sends a mixed message.

I do encourage others to comment, answer the *poll*, and send /feedback, as deemed appropriate. The general lack of support in the forum does tend to lend credence to their assertion that people were not using it.

mamericus

Gyudan wrote: »

@bellanca6561n: on the french forum, one of the players was arguing that he'll now have to pay an extra 1€ every month (+7% increase) for his sub.

I just read this and it occurred to me (and I apologise preemptively for reopening an old wound by the way; I just now stumbled upon this thread), maybe we're onto something here. Perhaps all this decision was about was in fact, money. Maybe ZoS's sales/subscription projections are indeed gloomy at best (though not enough to make a move to f2p) and they decided to come up with ways of making more money.

Last piece of info I could find online on estimated ESO subscriptions was something in the hundreds of thousands (citation needed), but say it was around 100,000. And say, just indulge me here for a moment, that 10% of those subscribers decided to go for the 180 day (6 month) subscription model. That would be 10,000 players who now have to pay an extra Euro per month to play, which translates into €10,000 more for ZoS every month, just by removing that option. This could also very easily justify why they have decided to stay relatively quiet about it, as no company wants to be seen as "greedy", much less by their established customer base, and it's a way of increasing revenue without outright coming out and saying "we're going to charge you more now".

On another note, however, if I were correct in this assumption and this is the price it takes for this game (which I enjoy immensely) to continue to improve and grow, I will gladly pay it. I'm currently paying month-to-month anyway, so no qualms here.

So sorry. I was wrong. All the doomsayers were right. ESO is now F2P. Was fun while it lasted. GG everyone.

criscal

Here for all people that handed out the tin-foil hats generously.
pcgamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-drops-subscription/
Just felt like rubbing it in.

I_killed_Vivec

Don't worry, the 180 membership is coming back!!

Wait. What? When it's F2P?

grimsfield

grimsfield wrote: »

Oolou wrote: »

I wrote to ask why the change and received this reply:

“We found that our players strongly preferred the 30- and 90-day subscription options, so we have retired the 180-day one. We still offer the 30- and 90-day subscription options”



Thank You

"The Elder Scrolls Online"


So ... when I replied, also stating that if they had added an annual sub option, I would use it, I asked that my discontent with the change would be added to any feedback being collected, if any was being collected. I'll probably be sending some IG feedback (using the /feedback in the IG chat) too.

I'd suggest those who are unhappy with the change also make their feelings known through the /feedback route. It may not make a difference, but at least we will have tried.

This sounds like a lie to me.

Good job lying to the community ZOS. *Pat on back*.

Lestierse

ZOS_PierreL wrote: »

"Bonjour à tous,

Nous avons constaté que les joueurs préféraient les abonnements de 30 et 90 jours, l'équipe The Elder Scrolls Online a donc pris la décision de supprimer l'abonnement de 180 jours.
Les abonnements de 30 et 90 jours sont toujours disponibles."

Translation:


"We have noticed that players prefered subscriptions of 30 and 90 days, the Elder Scrolls Online team therefore took the decision to delete the 180 days subscription.
The 30 and 90 days subscription are still available."

mmmmmkay if u say so.

Oolou

grimsfield wrote: »

Oolou wrote: »

I wrote to ask why the change and received this reply:

“We found that our players strongly preferred the 30- and 90-day subscription options, so we have retired the 180-day one. We still offer the 30- and 90-day subscription options”



Thank You

"The Elder Scrolls Online"


So ... when I replied, also stating that if they had added an annual sub option, I would use it, I asked that my discontent with the change would be added to any feedback being collected, if any was being collected. I'll probably be sending some IG feedback (using the /feedback in the IG chat) too.

I'd suggest those who are unhappy with the change also make their feelings known through the /feedback route. It may not make a difference, but at least we will have tried.

This sounds like a lie to me.

And you turned out to be correct! So disappointed ...