How do you feel about the B2P announcement

Inewbz

Like - all of the "likes" above

I voted 'like all' mainly because of what it appears it will be (yes i know, doesn't always turn out the way you expect, but that works both ways), but I'll be honest, I am scared that it may turn into a pay-to-win sort of thing at some point.

The idea of having 'some' (preferably most) of the game f2p (or b2p) is a good idea imo, having cosmetics that have no real benefit and just change the way you look is a nice way to make money without ruining anyone's achievements (i do agree, lore friendly outfits would be better than not but either way I'm fine with it), the xp/gold boost for being 'premium' is a nice way to say 'Thanks for supporting our game with money you can spare.' Which is a benefit for both parties, and as long as the crown shop stays cosmetic (with some DLC) there is no problem. Of course by some DLC I mean certain new areas, if all future expansions (not patches/improvements) become purchasable DLC then the only way this would be fine is if you can earn crowns in-game without being premium, and only EARN-ABLE not buy-able in-game (as it is said it will be) e.g. a 1% drop from any mob/monster near your level for 10-20 crowns.

Even if the game turns out to become pay to win though, ill probably still keep my subscription and play as I do but would completely understand people's anger towards Zenimax (or whoever would be to blame) for making ESO turn out that way. Anyway that's just my two cents.

EDIT: I also understand people's frustration about paying to beta-test a game and I pretty much agree that's what the game has been since release but I spent my 'hard earned money' on it as-well and I am happy with it because I knew this was an MMO, a pretty much guaranteed ever-changing game (especially for a new one)

Xsorus

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

What's funny for each 1 that left -> 10 new players will come to replace them..
Their revenue will increase at least 3-5x.

What's more funny you people still don't realize that nearly nothing will change for all of us with the subscription. It's gonna stay P2P for us. Everything FREE.

However B2P will be for everyone that won't bother to pay for a sub, they will have to pay for each single update. It's kinda a Trial behind a paygate.

Remember nothing is changing, ZOS is just implementing 2 models at the same time. You always wanted more options, so why cry now?

Instead of spending 20€ on each and every mount / pet / costum, we will gather enough crowns with our subscription anyway (it will cost way less). Crown Store is a Feature. You won't be doing anything else that you weren't up to this point, the only difference is that you will be way better rewarded for keeping a sub.
So far we were getting NOTHING, now we are gonna get Mounts / Pets and Costums along with our SUB.

Seriously how many brainless people on these forums. We will be waiting here for you to come back anyway.

You havent played many MMOs that are f2p or b2p have you?

Oh I've played plenty and ESO isn't close to f2p.

How many B2P MMOs do you know with a sub? Exactly.

The ONLY difference between f2p and b2p is the box purchase. They ALL end up pay to win. They cannot make money selling cosmetics and mounts. They HAVE to have stuff thats pay to win like xp boosts, special potions stuff like that. Next they will announce "loot boxes" that require a key from the store to open. Dont believe me look at LOTRO for an example. They promised the same nonsense about no advantage items.

Wrong. Look at GW2 -> They are not P2W, also they don't have a Sub either.
Rift is 100% F2P and is not P2W either.

ESO is switching to B2P + sub which is = P2P / B2P Hybrid. They are clearly aiming to overtake the West Market not just mess around with people.

Eventually everyone that is not subbed will be "forced" to do so.
Crown Store will keep operating, costums are gonna be nearly infinite.
DLCs are gonna be expensive and many.

Staying subscribed will only get you far more things than did in all these months since launch.

You people are crying because they are adding Cash Store. Us subscribers are not going to get limited to anything at all. Previously with our Sub we were getting nothing, now we will be getting crowns to spend for all the vanity crap. Updates will stay free for us.

LOL you obviously havent played GW2 or RIFT.

I've played both

I've also played LOTRO and TSW as well..

He's correct, you're incorrect.... move along

AlexDougherty

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

@AlexDougherty I've got to try that one day!

And just in case you - or anyone else for that matter - didn't know: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/General:Fishy_Stick

Ah, I didn't know about the connection, thanks.

Mathius_Mordred

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

If they are true to their word then I see no problem, however if they start to gradually phase in P2W items in the store then it will be the long slow beginning of the end, I've seen it before and I don't want to see it here. Vanity, pets, housing etc, all great fun and if I could be absolutely sure that's all it would be then I would vote like.

Problem is money makes more noise then forumites and I don't trust businesses proclamations of goodwill, goodwill that could cost them short term profit.

Lorkhan

Like - all of the "likes" above

i feel like this

SantieClaws

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

At least LOTRO had a good four years before it went totally down the u bend. So sad to see this happen only one year into ESO. I assume it is tied to issues with the console release and payments there. It remains to be seen just how much of their soul they will be willing to sell in the store.

I'll be looking out for the very first signs of pay to win - any stat boost in the store, anything consumable store exclusive and any sort of lootbox or promise of random goodies.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

Wolfsspinne wrote: »

It's free and one can pay for whatever they want, how could that not be possitive?

Because the game will become worse as a whole.
Every single other game followed this pattern and ZOS are not the chosen ones.
ESO will become a bad game.

Darlantan wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

eisberg wrote: »

Kraven wrote: »

63%

“Our fans are our biggest inspiration, and we’ve listened to their feedback on the entertainment experience they want,” said Matt Firor

Yep, just blowing more smoke. No real honesty in it.

Apparently the fans who left the game, or the fans who never bought the game in the first place were some how louder than some forum poll.

The forum poll means nothing, there is no science behind it.

And this is the worst thing about all this, and the perpetual mistake of newly formed studios.

New players has no value if you can't manage player retention. And alienating your current playerbase is the worst way of getting new players.

The players that are the most important are the hardcore ones, the active guild leaders and content creators. They are those that sell your game for you, for free, and then provide the social hooks to keep players interested and engaged.

Darlantan wrote: »

To all the people that are leaving even before seeing are thing are turning out mean you never every cared for the game...

That also mean you are part of what make a game bad because you think a game can only be good if the developer listing to you or you little group and nobody else.

In a sense you are not a great loss.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out... and can i have your stuff?

Wrong.
It means those people already have lived through this kind of switch several times and know how it invariably ends.
There are NO succesful f2p games on the long term and they all become crippled by the sacrifices the model needs.

I think that quiting before seeing what you love become the shadow of itself is a way of keeping a good memory of a great game.

The lost of trust is also a factor. Would you stay with a spouse that lied and cheated on you?

I'm personaly staying to have at least a couple months of "see what you've missed, now it's gone" time with my buddies that were on the fence and might have came back after 1.6.
But I'm certainly going to advise them against investing any money in the game and won't be giving any more money past my 12 month sub mark.

Sorry, but for me it's nothing new. No MMO can stay the same forever or make any change with 100% approval. I have being playing game for too many year to past judgement with only this. The change could be great success. It could add new players. Not just some die hard and elitist who feel the game should only be for them. btw sorry but these are the people i hate the most in mmo because they make it very hard to just enjoy the game and play for fun.

A shadow of itself... Sorry but it's only a speculation. If these people did really like the game they would not stomp and cry a river even before the change is made. We do not even know how thing will turn out.

Comparing a cheating spouse to a company that have to make some change the current financial model of their game. WOW... If you fell like that no wonder you fell cheated. I hope that if you are with some one you do not put a $ on them...

Sure, a game can change and most change don't go fully approved.
Look, even good changes like the removal of forward camps had people whining about it.
But that's not the debate here. We're not talking about a change to the game but a change to the basic premise of the relationship between the players and the company.
It's not elitism or wanting the game to suit only our needs, it's about holding the company responsible for its pre-launch promises.

This is why I compared it to a romantic relationship because it was a good image. Of course it isn't at the same level of importance.
But this image enables to convey ideas quite simply in a way everyone can understand.
For instance: We were suposed to be in a long term relationship with zos, and now it says it wants to see other people. "But hey, if you pay a sub, we'll still hang out just like before" but the longer this lasts, the less it will care and the more it will ask of you to hang out.(cash shop)

And there is no speculation here.
No other games have managed to remain undamaged by a cash shop. None.
ESO will not be an exception.
We may not be able to predict how long it will take for the worst to happen, but we can say for sure that it will happen.

And the sadest part in all of this is that ESO will not make more money.
There will be a short term cash influx, but on the medium to long term, it is impossible for a f2p title to get as much money as a subscription title.
It isn't a sustainable model.

Joejudas

Like - may draw in more population due to lack of monthly fees

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

Wolfsspinne wrote: »

It's free and one can pay for whatever they want, how could that not be possitive?

Because the game will become worse as a whole.
Every single other game followed this pattern and ZOS are not the chosen ones.
ESO will become a bad game.

Darlantan wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

eisberg wrote: »

Kraven wrote: »

63%

“Our fans are our biggest inspiration, and we’ve listened to their feedback on the entertainment experience they want,” said Matt Firor

Yep, just blowing more smoke. No real honesty in it.

Apparently the fans who left the game, or the fans who never bought the game in the first place were some how louder than some forum poll.

The forum poll means nothing, there is no science behind it.

And this is the worst thing about all this, and the perpetual mistake of newly formed studios.

New players has no value if you can't manage player retention. And alienating your current playerbase is the worst way of getting new players.

The players that are the most important are the hardcore ones, the active guild leaders and content creators. They are those that sell your game for you, for free, and then provide the social hooks to keep players interested and engaged.

Darlantan wrote: »

To all the people that are leaving even before seeing are thing are turning out mean you never every cared for the game...

That also mean you are part of what make a game bad because you think a game can only be good if the developer listing to you or you little group and nobody else.

In a sense you are not a great loss.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out... and can i have your stuff?

Wrong.
It means those people already have lived through this kind of switch several times and know how it invariably ends.
There are NO succesful f2p games on the long term and they all become crippled by the sacrifices the model needs.

I think that quiting before seeing what you love become the shadow of itself is a way of keeping a good memory of a great game.

The lost of trust is also a factor. Would you stay with a spouse that lied and cheated on you?

I'm personaly staying to have at least a couple months of "see what you've missed, now it's gone" time with my buddies that were on the fence and might have came back after 1.6.
But I'm certainly going to advise them against investing any money in the game and won't be giving any more money past my 12 month sub mark.

Sorry, but for me it's nothing new. No MMO can stay the same forever or make any change with 100% approval. I have being playing game for too many year to past judgement with only this. The change could be great success. It could add new players. Not just some die hard and elitist who feel the game should only be for them. btw sorry but these are the people i hate the most in mmo because they make it very hard to just enjoy the game and play for fun.

A shadow of itself... Sorry but it's only a speculation. If these people did really like the game they would not stomp and cry a river even before the change is made. We do not even know how thing will turn out.

Comparing a cheating spouse to a company that have to make some change the current financial model of their game. WOW... If you fell like that no wonder you fell cheated. I hope that if you are with some one you do not put a $ on them...

Sure, a game can change and most change don't go fully approved.
Look, even good changes like the removal of forward camps had people whining about it.
But that's not the debate here. We're not talking about a change to the game but a change to the basic premise of the relationship between the players and the company.
It's not elitism or wanting the game to suit only our needs, it's about holding the company responsible for its pre-launch promises.

This is why I compared it to a romantic relationship because it was a good image. Of course it isn't at the same level of importance.
But this image enables to convey ideas quite simply in a way everyone can understand.
For instance: We were suposed to be in a long term relationship with zos, and now it says it wants to see other people. "But hey, if you pay a sub, we'll still hang out just like before" but the longer this lasts, the less it will care and the more it will ask of you to hang out.(cash shop)

And there is no speculation here.
No other games have managed to remain undamaged by a cash shop. None.
ESO will not be an exception.
We may not be able to predict how long it will take for the worst to happen, but we can say for sure that it will happen.

And the sadest part in all of this is that ESO will not make more money.
There will be a short term cash influx, but on the medium to long term, it is impossible for a f2p title to get as much money as a subscription title.
It isn't a sustainable model.

Your telling me League of Legends doesn't make more than WOW. I don't agree

eariel

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

Apparently not.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/23/the-10-highest-grossing-online-pc-games-in-2014-hearthstone-dota-2-cant-compete-with-league-of-legends/

Joejudas

Like - may draw in more population due to lack of monthly fees

eariel wrote: »

Apparently not.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/23/the-10-highest-grossing-online-pc-games-in-2014-hearthstone-dota-2-cant-compete-with-league-of-legends/

This guy did the work for me. +1

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

Joejudas wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

Wolfsspinne wrote: »

It's free and one can pay for whatever they want, how could that not be possitive?

Because the game will become worse as a whole.
Every single other game followed this pattern and ZOS are not the chosen ones.
ESO will become a bad game.

Darlantan wrote: »

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »

eisberg wrote: »

Kraven wrote: »

63%

“Our fans are our biggest inspiration, and we’ve listened to their feedback on the entertainment experience they want,” said Matt Firor

Yep, just blowing more smoke. No real honesty in it.

Apparently the fans who left the game, or the fans who never bought the game in the first place were some how louder than some forum poll.

The forum poll means nothing, there is no science behind it.

And this is the worst thing about all this, and the perpetual mistake of newly formed studios.

New players has no value if you can't manage player retention. And alienating your current playerbase is the worst way of getting new players.

The players that are the most important are the hardcore ones, the active guild leaders and content creators. They are those that sell your game for you, for free, and then provide the social hooks to keep players interested and engaged.

Darlantan wrote: »

To all the people that are leaving even before seeing are thing are turning out mean you never every cared for the game...

That also mean you are part of what make a game bad because you think a game can only be good if the developer listing to you or you little group and nobody else.

In a sense you are not a great loss.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out... and can i have your stuff?

Wrong.
It means those people already have lived through this kind of switch several times and know how it invariably ends.
There are NO succesful f2p games on the long term and they all become crippled by the sacrifices the model needs.

I think that quiting before seeing what you love become the shadow of itself is a way of keeping a good memory of a great game.

The lost of trust is also a factor. Would you stay with a spouse that lied and cheated on you?

I'm personaly staying to have at least a couple months of "see what you've missed, now it's gone" time with my buddies that were on the fence and might have came back after 1.6.
But I'm certainly going to advise them against investing any money in the game and won't be giving any more money past my 12 month sub mark.

Sorry, but for me it's nothing new. No MMO can stay the same forever or make any change with 100% approval. I have being playing game for too many year to past judgement with only this. The change could be great success. It could add new players. Not just some die hard and elitist who feel the game should only be for them. btw sorry but these are the people i hate the most in mmo because they make it very hard to just enjoy the game and play for fun.

A shadow of itself... Sorry but it's only a speculation. If these people did really like the game they would not stomp and cry a river even before the change is made. We do not even know how thing will turn out.

Comparing a cheating spouse to a company that have to make some change the current financial model of their game. WOW... If you fell like that no wonder you fell cheated. I hope that if you are with some one you do not put a $ on them...

Sure, a game can change and most change don't go fully approved.
Look, even good changes like the removal of forward camps had people whining about it.
But that's not the debate here. We're not talking about a change to the game but a change to the basic premise of the relationship between the players and the company.
It's not elitism or wanting the game to suit only our needs, it's about holding the company responsible for its pre-launch promises.

This is why I compared it to a romantic relationship because it was a good image. Of course it isn't at the same level of importance.
But this image enables to convey ideas quite simply in a way everyone can understand.
For instance: We were suposed to be in a long term relationship with zos, and now it says it wants to see other people. "But hey, if you pay a sub, we'll still hang out just like before" but the longer this lasts, the less it will care and the more it will ask of you to hang out.(cash shop)

And there is no speculation here.
No other games have managed to remain undamaged by a cash shop. None.
ESO will not be an exception.
We may not be able to predict how long it will take for the worst to happen, but we can say for sure that it will happen.

And the sadest part in all of this is that ESO will not make more money.
There will be a short term cash influx, but on the medium to long term, it is impossible for a f2p title to get as much money as a subscription title.
It isn't a sustainable model.

Your telling me League of Legends doesn't make more than WOW. I don't agree

I usualy take care in my comments to specify that we're talking about MMOs, not just f2p in general. So to clarify: f2p MMORPGs are not viable.
f2p mobile games or arena based games can work out well but they still aren't doing as well than subscription based MMOs.

To answer to your comment in specific, Leage of legends is NOT an MMORPG, It's not even an MMO, it's a moba. There is no persistence, no massive interactions and no PvE content.
There is no actual game to break here and its scope is minimalistic at best.
In essence, being f2p doesn't hurt the game while it hurts true MMOs.

LOL is also as much of an outlier than WoW is. It got the very same perfect storm of luck to become a cultural phenomenom.
Everyone plays it so everyone plays it. Look at DOTA, the next in line, it barely makes $136M with 8M players.

LOL has over 67million users, and they make $946 million.
WoW has 7.5 million users and they make $727 million.
So barely 30% more revenue than WoW for 9 times more user.

In conclusion, while the f2p model can generate revenue for certain type of games, it puts constraints on game design in order to be sustainable. Simplistic games can get away with it, but anything trying to be even a bit complex will get iremediably damaged by the model.
Also, games that can get away with charging a sub have everything to gain by remaining a sub. As all games have a maximum amount of people interested in them, it is best to focus when possible on the most money per capita.

In average, only 2.2% of f2p players spend any money and not much. 46% of revenue come from 0.22% of the playerbase.
We do not know how many subscribers ESO has, but it would need at the very least 800k (wow/lol ratio) to 2.1M(f2p average stats) free players to replace 100k subscribers. And that's only in average. It could be more if DLCs don't come out fast enough.

For an estimation, the last numbers we've seen were 772k susbcribers in July, so it would be fair to assume that currently, there are at minimum 300k subscribers.
Do you really think that ESO can pull 2.4M or 6M players when swtor barely has 1.2M?
We may love ESO, but it doesn't have the pull Star Wars has on the f2p audience.

It clearly is more interesting to continue the susbcription model and make the game increase back to 800k subscribers, potentially more. This is something we know the game can achieve and it will bring in 144M yearly.
Yup that's right, more than DOTA 2 for 10 times less players.

However, investors just want a faster ROI and the console market is teasing them. They think that they can reach Skyrim's 11m sales and make out a good cash grab with DLC, but it won't happen.
Even if it did, it won't last and it certainly won't be sustainable for mroe than a year.

ahstin2001nub18_ESO

Dislike - other

tryia3b14a_ESO wrote: »

bellanca6561n wrote: »

B2P/F2P is the classic distinction without a difference.

Yet with no meaningful updates and bug fixes in six weeks for versions 3, 4, and 5 indicating no dedicated Live Team, I doubt they have to resources to support PC/Mac/PS4/XB1, cash shop stock, major new content releases and such without a major increase in revenue.

So we're stuck in some meaningful sense, either way.

It won't be the same. But was "the same" sustainable or even all that good?

I felt I was reaching the end before the announcement. Many people were. Many people have.

In so many ways an online game BEGINS development AFTER its release. This is why developers and publishers need to be very, very careful about what they promise before they release their game.

And this is the true failure here. The reality is hard to argue with. The real and implied promises and assorted communication failures are the heartbreakers here.

I couldn't agree with this more.

As someone who has worked in online games for many years, with what we call "ongoing support" or "ongoing content" I fully understand that a game is made and launched, and then the support of the game begins.

I work nights and I play around 1:30am PST or later and I have to say that I rarely see or hear any other players during my play time. I don't know what it's like during prime time, but during my play time, this game is empty. It's a vast, empty world that I play in by myself.

I'm all for them making the changes needed to bring in more players.

I did vote no just because I don't feel like they've added anything new to this game in an entire year of subscription fees and box sales, and I worry that the money brought in from the cash shop will just return to developing more cash shop stuff.

I hope that I will be surprised and it will be a good thing because like the poster I quoted said, this game was already a sinking ship.

i am one of the insomnia crowds, and my experiences in all my MMOs, is that late night gaming is always lesser on off hours. in modern times (post-2004-2006) i have found that regardless to the pay model, that its still quite a chirp fest at night, starting around 10 PM PST/1 AM EST going until about 6 am PST/9am EST. personally i like it, but since antisocial insomniacs aren't the norm i feel my opinion is not quite worthy of acknowledgment. the only major impact will be seen during and around peak hours.

BBSooner

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

From another thread, but:

I'll probably sub. As disappointed as I am with the model change I still greatly enjoy the game and what they have provided thus far. Whatever the reason for the change may be, I've had fun and admire the coders. I just wish it didn't now come with the negativity that cash shops equate to/bring over time.

tryia3b14a_ESO

Dislike - fears of new content slowing down

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

i am one of the insomnia crowds, and my experiences in all my MMOs, is that late night gaming is always lesser on off hours. in modern times (post-2004-2006) i have found that regardless to the pay model, that its still quite a chirp fest at night, starting around 10 PM PST/1 AM EST going until about 6 am PST/9am EST. personally i like it, but since antisocial insomniacs aren't the norm i feel my opinion is not quite worthy of acknowledgment. the only major impact will be seen during and around peak hours.

This game is way more empty than other games though.

I could understand if it was like "oh well, you're on the dead server", but there is only one server, and it is dead at night.

Recently, I have also played The Secret World, and World of Warcraft during my play times and I've had no trouble in those games finding other players at night to group up with and do group content.

I'm just hoping that bringing in a bunch of new players will also bring in a few of us night-time players.

ahstin2001nub18_ESO

Dislike - other

tryia3b14a_ESO wrote: »

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

i am one of the insomnia crowds, and my experiences in all my MMOs, is that late night gaming is always lesser on off hours. in modern times (post-2004-2006) i have found that regardless to the pay model, that its still quite a chirp fest at night, starting around 10 PM PST/1 AM EST going until about 6 am PST/9am EST. personally i like it, but since antisocial insomniacs aren't the norm i feel my opinion is not quite worthy of acknowledgment. the only major impact will be seen during and around peak hours.

This game is way more empty than other games though.

I could understand if it was like "oh well, you're on the dead server", but there is only one server, and it is dead at night.

Recently, I have also played The Secret World, and World of Warcraft during my play times and I've had no trouble in those games finding other players at night to group up with and do group content.

I'm just hoping that bringing in a bunch of new players will also bring in a few of us night-time players.

<note> im not saying your wrong or im right, as perspective/perception does come into play here, but keep in mind WoW (sub game) only has horde and alliance separation (not sure if that has changed), and different end game content (raids). LoTRO (f2p) had quest grinding for levels (though i preferred leveling in skirmishes and instances) and stereotypical gear grinds for end-game. ESO has 3 faction dividers, and, in my raiding opinion, a less attractive end game. so between level 1 to VR-14, and three faction splits, along with multiple ways to get to end game (quest or grinding), combined with questing walls based on progress, it may not have a huge dramatic change. i do know that i have always used late night for "me" time specifically because the numbers were consistently and substantially lower on off-times. that's what makes me skeptical it would have much effect on the later hours.

i should say that this is based on the NA servers, so EU may be vastly different- i don't know.

martinhpb16_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

I'm genuinely worried.

I really like this game since my last MMO, LOTRO, deteriorated beyond all recognition once the cash shop came in.

It destroyed that game for so many people and Turbine ended up losing loads of staff.

ESO really seemed like a quality effort.

We will see new money orientated management come in, the creative guys will get the chop and its all downhill from there.

I really hope I'm wrong but experience tells me different.

NeHoMaR

Like - other

I just got the game, and the ONLY reason was the B2P model. I avoid subscriptions games, because I am casual player type.

I think players are overreacting to this, like if the game is going to full F2P, full of "disgusting people", but not, is B2P, you must pay to play, that's a considerable filter.

Khami

NeHoMaR wrote: »

I just got the game, and the ONLY reason was the B2P model. I avoid subscriptions games, because I am casual player type.

I think players are overreacting to this, like if the game is going to full F2P, full of "disgusting people", but not, is B2P, you must pay to play, that's a considerable filter.

Not when the game is cheap to get and you can get it for $25 at Amazon.

Once ZoS realizes people won't pay $60 to d/l, it will go completely free or greatly less than people are paying now.

Even Wildstar has dropped the price of their game to $39.99

Languish4567

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

So I've been considering the P2W aspect and come to this conclusion. If I and another player of similar skill and level, spend 30 days playing the same content, I as a subscriber will have 10% more gold and 10% more CP as such, I am more likely to be able to afford say a nirnhoned weapon or other piece of better set gear given my 10% more gold, that added to the fact that I have earned 10% more CP, or exp depending on our levels, leads me to believe that head to head against someone, with similar skill, who didn't buy the subscription I would have at least a minimal advantage if not a significant advantage over a player that is even a little less skilled than me. On the other hand I would be more competitive against a non paying player with a little more skill than me. Therefore the benefits of paying are not just more convenient, but will actually give an advantage to those who pay, how is that not P2W. I mean two players at the same skill level one not subing and one who is, the paying player will have at minimum a 10% advantage if not more given the gold, and that's not even getting into the inspiration bonuses that mean I will have to spend less time crafting and more time gaining exp or CP, then add on that I can buy filled soul gems with my crowns and don't have to worry about having to try and fill them. I mean I may be wrong, but it does seem as if this change will give paying players at minimum some advantage if not a significant advantage once you add all of the convenience up.

Morshire

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

NeHoMaR wrote: »

I just got the game, and the ONLY reason was the B2P model. I avoid subscriptions games, because I am casual player type.

I think players are overreacting to this, like if the game is going to full F2P, full of "disgusting people", but not, is B2P, you must pay to play, that's a considerable filter.

Well welcome to the game. As you can see, we may not "hate" you per say, the change that made this game appealing to you has "gotten under" some people skin. Nothing personal. The verbiage may be shocking at first. Know it is the crying screams of those that feel like they have lost a loved one. I hope you enjoy the game and stick around for a long time to come.

prototypefb

Like - all of the "likes" above

looking forward to the new system, looks good enough, potentially will add million new players+ console peeps

Morshire

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

Khami wrote: »

NeHoMaR wrote: »

I just got the game, and the ONLY reason was the B2P model. I avoid subscriptions games, because I am casual player type.

I think players are overreacting to this, like if the game is going to full F2P, full of "disgusting people", but not, is B2P, you must pay to play, that's a considerable filter.

Not when the game is cheap to get and you can get it for $25 at Amazon.

Once ZoS realizes people won't pay $60 to d/l, it will go completely free or greatly less than people are paying now.

Even Wildstar has dropped the price of their game to $39.99

Wait, I am totally confused. I got the game, for PC, for a friend of mine in like Oct/Nov and only paid $29.99 for Imperial Edition. Where the heck are we getting $60? Maybe for the console then? Cause if we are discussing PC and the price drop, I paid $80 for the Imperial Edition and it is way down now. Sorry, I think I must be missing something.

wenchmore420b14_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

SteveCampsOut wrote: »

burningcrow wrote: »

This pole shows all those people on the forums burning others for their concerns about these changes are the minority. The majority is concerned with this change and we are justified in asking our questions.

You really must be new to the interwebz! Forum polls show nothing more than a vocal minority at best! Those who are happy with the changes aren't going to stop playing and come to the forums if they're not already in the habit of doing so. Just the disgruntled rush here to complain and vote. I personally just have a forum addicted personality or I wouldn't be here. I'm actually playing the game happily on my main monitor right now.

You are absolutely right! I rarely was on here except to check on up-dates and such. But the notice msg as I logged in drove me here like so many others. This is worth stop playing for and voice our disappointment and concern.

Bouvin

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

I guess the whole "we listened to our players when making this decision" line isn't panning out very well here.

More like, we caved to Microsoft and the almighty dollar.

AlexDelta

Dislike - other

I've said before that I feel ripped off, but seriously I am going to give it a chance. Would be nice though, if they gave us old subscribers a little more than just a couple of crowns. Maybe a couple of months of free ESO Plus or something. Even if it is just for us to find out that this B2P system is not as bad as we think.

togmb16_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

So, 47% disliked the change for all the stated dislike reasons and 15% for special reasons. That makes 69% who dislike the change, right? Can we assume the majority of voters disliked the change now?

edit: Oops, forgot 7% of disliking for other reasons. Fixed now.

Any comments on that from ZOS would be nice at this points.

Or don't all the dislikers not matter, because the new huge incoming crowd is the only one that matters now!?

I'm out for good but a lot of the others, who will stay, would possibly like some kind of statement I assume.

eisberg

Like - may draw in more population due to lack of monthly fees

Forum polls are really meaningless, there is nothing scientific about them to be considered as accurate information. The best forums can do is make developers aware of issues for them to look into, but that doesn't mean it would sway any decision. Sure 69% of the people who clicked on that poll dislike, but for all we know 90% of the people who bought this game like this change.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

What's funny for each 1 that left -> 10 new players will come to replace them..
Their revenue will increase at least 3-5x.

What's more funny you people still don't realize that nearly nothing will change for all of us with the subscription. It's gonna stay P2P for us. Everything FREE.

However B2P will be for everyone that won't bother to pay for a sub, they will have to pay for each single update. It's kinda a Trial behind a paygate.

Remember nothing is changing, ZOS is just implementing 2 models at the same time. You always wanted more options, so why cry now?

Instead of spending 20€ on each and every mount / pet / costum, we will gather enough crowns with our subscription anyway (it will cost way less). Crown Store is a Feature. You won't be doing anything else that you weren't up to this point, the only difference is that you will be way better rewarded for keeping a sub.
So far we were getting NOTHING, now we are gonna get Mounts / Pets and Costums along with our SUB.

Seriously how many brainless people on these forums. We will be waiting here for you to come back anyway.

You havent played many MMOs that are f2p or b2p have you?

Oh I've played plenty and ESO isn't close to f2p.

How many B2P MMOs do you know with a sub? Exactly.

The ONLY difference between f2p and b2p is the box purchase. They ALL end up pay to win. They cannot make money selling cosmetics and mounts. They HAVE to have stuff thats pay to win like xp boosts, special potions stuff like that. Next they will announce "loot boxes" that require a key from the store to open. Dont believe me look at LOTRO for an example. They promised the same nonsense about no advantage items.

Wrong. Look at GW2 -> They are not P2W, also they don't have a Sub either.
Rift is 100% F2P and is not P2W either.

ESO is switching to B2P + sub which is = P2P / B2P Hybrid. They are clearly aiming to overtake the West Market not just mess around with people.

Eventually everyone that is not subbed will be "forced" to do so.
Crown Store will keep operating, costums are gonna be nearly infinite.
DLCs are gonna be expensive and many.

Staying subscribed will only get you far more things than did in all these months since launch.

You people are crying because they are adding Cash Store. Us subscribers are not going to get limited to anything at all. Previously with our Sub we were getting nothing, now we will be getting crowns to spend for all the vanity crap. Updates will stay free for us.

LOL you obviously havent played GW2 or RIFT.

I've played both

I've also played LOTRO and TSW as well..

He's correct, you're incorrect.... move along

LOTRO is 100% pay to win I know because Ive played it since the first closed betas. I dont know anything about TSW but others in this thread have said it is also pay to win.

Karnus

Iago

Dislike - all of the "dislikes" above

In the end it doesn't really matter how any of us feel about the change in Payment model.

They're going to do whatever they want to do Player opinion be damned.