"IF" ESO goes F2P will you stay?

miahq

Without even getting into the trolls and spam, f2p is basically a scam, you end up paying far more money than you would with a sub, and cash shops are annoying... I mean it's basically like EVE, except at least eve wasn't shy about saying it's all about money. Hell, the entire point of that game seems to be a giant toilet where you can flush your money.

But, sub keeps the cash shop to a minimum, and helps keep the trolls and spammers out.

Sevric

Yes! Archeage, Guild Wars 2, etc are doing pretty well without a subscription fee. Even SWTOR did better after it went F2P. At the game's current development speed, I can't see $15 a month being fair. Yes, there is gonna be a big overhaul but the end game shouldn't have been dull and grindy in the first place.

Holycannoli

Not sure. I'm unsubbed and haven't even logged in since October. I'm only still able to post because I have time left on my 6 month sub.

I know I left Rift not long after it went F2P because I didn't like the sudden introduction of things like lock boxes and vanity items for cash, and I really enjoyed that game. Funny how I was happy to play when I had to pay and lost all desire to play when I didn't have to pay. Lock boxes and a focus on the cash shop bother me and I feel it takes a lot away from the game. It's even worse when you're constantly told about the latest cash shop money grabs. Cheapens the game.

Guess it depends on how they handle F2P. If it's al about lock boxes and desirable vanity items and mounts only obtainable with money then I won't bother with the game anymore, but if it's like Path Of Exile where it's simply pets or different looking armor I might not mind (I LOVE Path Of Exile's F2P model).

Like I said though I'm not sticking around anyway. This game hasn't delivered what I wanted it to and some of the decisions they've made in the past few months have chased me away, like forced scaling.

TaffyIX

Vis wrote: »

Lotro after f2p. End of argument.

^ This.

Vikestart

I'm not sure I'll stay if it goes Free-to-Play...

But Buy-to-Play isn't a problem. Then there's at least an initial payment wall, blocking off most of the bad community transformation.

I'd prefer it to stay Pay-to-Play though ofc.

animositysominab16_ESO

Definetley Buy-to-Play! Hope they keep it up.

Digiman

I doubt this is a change. They said numerous times they won't go F2P so I don't see why they would change it unless the population is huge problem and the reason why LFG tool isn't working as well which is very unlikely.

I think the change was placed there because of the console version of the subscription. It's possible they will bring back a 6 month subscription. Though not many people picking the option as a reason to remove it is the most stupidest one I have ever heard.

Seriously if that was the case they might as well remove all the options except for the most popular one and force everyone to pay through that.

Bloodystab

Digiman wrote: »

I doubt this is a change. They said numerous times they won't go F2P so I don't see why they would change it unless the population is huge problem and the reason why LFG tool isn't working as well which is very unlikely.

I think the change was placed there because of the console version of the subscription. It's possible they will bring back a 6 month subscription. Though not many people picking the option as a reason to remove it is the most stupidest one I have ever heard.

Seriously if that was the case they might as well remove all the options except for the most popular one and force everyone to pay through that.

Yeah, i have same feelings. It would make sense if its a "real item" like Prepaid card that require to be printed and cost more then 30 or 90 days version. But right now its just make none-sense as its a virtual.

DDuke

Maybe they just removed the 6-month subscription in order to shut down the game for a month or two (so people wouldn't be paying for nothing), while they install new servers to fix Cyrodiil.

Nikolas

If it goes F2P I'm out. If goes B2P I'm out. (Sorry guys no difference for me between the two)

Vikestart

Nikolas wrote: »

If it goes F2P I'm out. If goes B2P I'm out. (Sorry guys no difference for me between the two)

There's a huge difference.

With an initial paywall, one can't just start playing the game without being willing to pay something, which would stop the community for deteriorating. The Secret World is a Buy-to-Play MMO and has one of the finest communities I've experienced.

Buy-to-Play MMOs don't need a dramatic Item Store either if the developers can keep pushing out new content packs (that are paywalled) at a decent rate.

I think that's important. If ESO were to go Buy-to-Play, new content has to be paywalled.

martinhpb16_ESO

Lotro F2p was the gradual spread of evil from Mordor.

martinhpb16_ESO

Holycannoli wrote: »

Not sure. I'm unsubbed and haven't even logged in since October. I'm only still able to post because I have time left on my 6 month sub.

I know I left Rift not long after it went F2P because I didn't like the sudden introduction of things like lock boxes and vanity items for cash, and I really enjoyed that game.

Ewww lockboxes in Lotro were so evil. Find a locked box, buy a key from he store with real cash, unlock it and get something really crap.

Brunlea

F2P can be good if they offer a good subscription system to keep people paying per month and don't sell items that give you a benefit in PvP.

If it turns into a Perfect Worlds F2P model then it's all over, man the lifeboats!

AngryNord

I'd probably keep playing, but not as regularly

NukaCola

I would come back and play sometimes. Right now the game has too little content and does not justify its monthly sub fee.

Elloa

I hate F2P model. It's always disastrous. It bring the wrong community. Bring players that are not dedicated to the game, that ruin the atmosphere, spam the chat (Hello gold farmer and bots), that generaly become vulgar, immature, trolly and unfriendly.

I've seen Tera Online community evolution, SWTOR awfull model, ArcheAge model...where you can basically do nothing if you have not a subscription.

The only games where I find the F2P model to have worked is The Secret World, as the whole game is free, but all new content (not fixes and improvement) is package that you can buy.

As reminder, GW2 is not a F2P model, its B2P. I hope that ESO will never ever be F2P. A B2P version could work if well done. But I really prefer the subscription model.


If ESO become F2P, I'll stay to see how the community evolve, but if I'm getting disturbed by trolls, unfriendly players and morons, I'll probably stop to care about the game.

Sinbaar

I will be out too if it becomes f2p. I am very happy with the current mode. if i wanted a f2p game - then i would play one of the hundreds out there...

i really hope that it is just a rumor and they'll stick with the abo...

alainjbrennanb16_ESO

This happened with swtor, as soon as it did the game went down hill by the idiots who ruin the game, i gave it a few weeks but left, i will not go through that again if eso foes f2p or b2p i will leave the game straight away

Vikestart

Elloa wrote: »

The only games where I find the F2P model to have worked is The Secret World, as the whole game is free, but all new content (not fixes and improvement) is package that you can buy.

It's not free. It's Buy-to-Play just like GW2. But unlike GW2 where new content is free, new content in TSW comes in DLC packs labelled "Issues" and cost about $10 each.

I think that's a business model that works great. You pay for new content, so the dev team can't just slack off and have people pay monthly subscriptions for nothing, they'll have to bring the content to you to make money.

Of course, I still prefer Pay-to-Play as produces a more reliable income and content release schedule, as well as not having to deal with Item Store challenges at all.

Elloa

Vikestart wrote: »

Elloa wrote: »

The only games where I find the F2P model to have worked is The Secret World, as the whole game is free, but all new content (not fixes and improvement) is package that you can buy.

It's not free. It's Buy-to-Play just like GW2. But unlike GW2 where new content is free, new content in TSW comes in DLC packs labelled "Issues" and cost about $10 each.

I think that's a business model that works great. You pay for new content, so the dev team can't just slack off and have people pay monthly subscriptions for nothing, they'll have to bring the content to you to make money.

Of course, I still prefer Pay-to-Play as produces a more reliable income and content release schedule, as well as not having to deal with Item Store challenges at all.

ooh okay. Well this prove my point even more in that case. F2P is crap. B2P
can be good if well done.
I still hope they will not change it though!

knightblaster

miahq wrote: »

Without even getting into the trolls and spam, f2p is basically a scam, you end up paying far more money than you would with a sub, and cash shops are annoying... I mean it's basically like EVE, except at least eve wasn't shy about saying it's all about money. Hell, the entire point of that game seems to be a giant toilet where you can flush your money.

But, sub keeps the cash shop to a minimum, and helps keep the trolls and spammers out.

EVE isn't F2P. It requires a sub to play. Players can purchase game time from CCP and resell it to other players for in-game currency, but that isn't F2P. There is a small item shop that sells vanity items for cash, but in EVE, which doesn't have any avatar interaction to speak of, this is all meaningless stuff.

B2P, like GW2, can also be problematic. in GW2, they sell boosters and inventory space and cosmetic looks and so on in the cash shop, as well as allowing players to basically buy in-game currency by means of a currency exchange (you buy gems from Arena.net and you exchange them for in-game gold), which can make it P2W in terms of gearing. The only thing that saves this from going completely off the rails in GW2 is that top gear (or practically top gear) isn't that hard to get anyway, and all PvP gear is evened out. But this creates other problems regarding the sense of progression for players, which is lacking compared to conventional MMORPGs of that (this) type.

In general, this type of game design works better for very casual players, because they tend not to spend much, just log in for a bit, have a bit of fun, and log off. They don't care much about progression, and won't buy their way there either. Good deal for them. For people who are into competitive gaming, which includes a lot of MMO players (social games are inherently competitive for many), it's a big money sink in order to stay competitive, because for most of these sorts of players any potential upgrade becomes mandatory in order to maintain competitiveness. This is how F2P's make money -- it's the smaller number of very competitive gamers who feel compelled to keep up, and pay to do so, because it isn't fun for them to play unless they are in the top pack.

skillastat

up

Mettaricana

i loved tera online but when it went free all upgrade materials became cash shop mounts became all cash shop and in a couple months so many players quit they had to merge all the pve servers into 1 server like 5 servers combined into 1 i left the game after everything became a pay wall i'm not paying a f2p ever again unless its only cash options are cosmetic and no pay to win anything gacha etc BS

seancaputo_ESO

I would leave like I left, LOTRO -- and I have lifetime membership, Secret World, Star Wars and Rift..... F2P is complete Vegas B.S -- you need to pay to get your stuff, because they changed the loot tables... and the quality of the game and players go down with the ship.....

Moonshadow66

DDuke wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

Brandalf wrote: »

Inklings wrote: »

doesn't mater, already unsubed.

Can I have your stuff?

Not sure, but I think, you can't even write in the forum, if you have unsubed. So maybe he/she is lying.

As long as you have an active account/you have time left, you can post here. When you cancel your account and your account is no longer active, then you can't post anymore.

Wrong.

I was still able to post one month after my subscription ran out last October, not only with this account, but also with my beta account (which had never even been subscribed)

No. Whether it worked that way for you or not, it is supposed to be active account only to post. On the knowledge base:

I don't have an active subscription, can I still read the forums?
Updated 06/14/2014 06:23 AM Published 06/13/2014 05:12 PM

The official forums for The Elder Scrolls Online are visible to anyone who visits them, but only players with active game accounts may post to the forums. Once players activate a account with a subscription, they will receive an invitation code welcoming them to the forums!

Can anyone post in the forums?
Updated 09/15/2014 05:15 AM Published 04/04/2014 08:08 PM
Only players with active game accounts have permission to post in the forums. While the forums are publicly visible for anyone to read, players will need to have an active game account in order to have an active forum account.

How do I access the forums?
Updated 04/13/2014 04:06 AM Published 04/02/2014 05:21 PM

The official forums for The Elder Scrolls Online can be accessed at http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com. The forums are visible to anyone who visits them, but only players with active game accounts may post to the forums.

If a player has purchased the game and has an active subscription, but does not yet have access to the forums, they should contact Customer Support.

I'm sure that's how it's supposed to work, but I bet there's plenty of unsubscribed people still commenting here on forums.

Either they're manually suspending the posting rights (and forgot to suspend mine when I went on a break), or there's some bug in their system :P

I know someone who signed up during beta but coudn't actually participate due to his rather older computer which cannot quite handle the game. He also was never subscribed after launch, but he still can post here on the forums.
So yeah, it does work, I think it's a bug.

Mopar63

Being F2P or not F2P is not really an issue. What is an issue is the Devs have stated NUMEROUS times they would NOT take the game to F2P. If they do so they will have lied to us, that is a big deal to me.

Many of us stay with this game because it is NOT F2P, gladly paying for a game we love. A move to F2P is a slap in the face off all of us that have been here since day one.

Bouvin

DDuke wrote: »

No, and I will boycott every single game Zenimax Media Inc. publishes in the future if this happens (including Elder Scrolls 6 & Fallout 4). Same with B2P.

ZOS doesn't make those games. That's actually Bethesda.

DDuke

Bouvin wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

No, and I will boycott every single game Zenimax Media Inc. publishes in the future if this happens (including Elder Scrolls 6 & Fallout 4). Same with B2P.

ZOS doesn't make those games. That's actually Bethesda.

and Bethesda is a subsidiary of Zenimax Media Inc.

Zenimax Online Studios is another subsidiary of Zenimax Media Inc.

Aeratus

To me, there's nothing inherently wrong with F2P. I'm fine with it if it is implemented well.