Monthly subscribers

Obscure

izenkim_ESO wrote: »

Obscure wrote: »

in 2015 have generated over $75 million dollars entirely from crowd funding with zero investors, I would have laughed directly into your face

Minor point, they received $75 million from investors. Crowd funding is not funding without investors, it simply opens up the investor pool for a lot more people.

There's a huge difference between an investor and a backer. Huge. I'll keep it short. An investment is an asset, or percentage of an asset, owned by the investor(s), entitling said investor to an equitable portion of that assets risk and revenue, granting a right to dictating business management relative to their stake on the asset.

Betahkiin

Gyudan wrote: »

I'm a monthly subscriber and I think the 10% bonus to everything should be removed.

I am a subscriber and I support that remove the beneficial to gain experience, for collecting gold and the 1500 crowns/month.

In return, I request access to all game content (including all that is offered in the store), all future content (DLC) and a stable service.

All I ask is what used to give a user with recurring subscription.

In models subscription, everyone pays the same and all have access to all content available without additional costs.

With the current model, to those who pay the subscription they take away the right of access to all content developed as part of it goes to the crown store. This will attempt to compensate with extra benefits which ultimately fail to compensate for the loss of access to the entire content developed.

With 1500 crowns monthly doubt you can access steadily everything offered in the store, so you're losing access to content developed.

Considering this, in the present model, subscribers are off a great benefit in exchange for a minor one.

Zhoyzu

i support a sub sub-forum

Thymos

The way I see it, the people playing free are there for me, even though I pay a sub. They are there filling my groups, and making it so I can tackle the group content.

Fox Hunter

Brilliant idea! I feel that with a proper forum, surrounded by pleasant and selected people, those whose souls exude aristocracy will feel more confortable and spend more time here than playing the game.

which may be the best for everyone.

minnisville

@Obscure,
I will still have to disagree...The sub thing they, SC, are doing, was well after the fact of the word of mouth by the people that bought/pledged for the game in kickstarter. And, as far as the marketing goes, it is way past doing just events. There is magazine after magazine doing "reports" on them too. So, that is advertising as well, without the mag. having to sub to do it. Now, I may agree that the sub's did help with that, and they do let the "pleb's" see whats going on too. But, This is all neither here nor there when it comes to ESO.

ESO doesn't need word of mouth from special vids, provided by sub's, of dev's talking about things to come. It doesnt need the subs money to do anything! BUT, IF you want to sub, then they will throw you a bone for doing it. And, it isn't a poor bone either. So, why do you need more and more for your apparent WANT to help them. It's like saying; "Hey ESO, I'll give you some cash to "help" out, but I WANT and WANT just for doing it." Not very friendly help, if you ask me. They don't "need" you that bad....

Ashigaru

Shadesofkin wrote: »

Ashigaru wrote: »

ya i was hoping they would keep the forums as before, if you wernt a paying sub then you couldnt post....

It'd make no sense to deny posting rights to the free players, but a private forum for Plus members would be nice.

The quality of posts have fallen off a cliff since the forums were opened up to everyone, now every 2 bit logger runs here to post there issues with the idea of how they think the game should be even though they dont even pay a sub. There have been more useless topics started since B2P came out then i think since the forums were put up.

The forums should be kept locked down to subscribers only.

Just curious how many are ACTUALLY subs that are for the open forums, i would guess the majority, like others said, let them have there junk section and have a locked section where they can read but not post.

twev

Gidorick wrote: »

Agreed. At the least a subscriber only forum section could be added.

Why?
Most of the interaction with site staff through timely announcements go through Twitter and Reddit.

A lot of us have been wondering why this forum is here, except through habit, as it's clearly not been used for the majority of breaking news or Q&A with the users.

wrlifeboil

Fox Hunter wrote: »

Brilliant idea! I feel that with a proper forum, surrounded by pleasant and selected people, those whose souls exude aristocracy will feel more confortable and spend more time here than playing the game.

which may be the best for everyone.

To op, if the 'exclusive' club of subscribers and the comments they provided to the devs had been enough to make TESO wildly successful in 2014, the game wouldn't have gone b2p.

The player base is now b2p. It makes sense that the forums should be open to all players of the game.

Besides, inbreeding usually doesn't turn out well.

winterscrolls229prerb18_ESO

Why? These forums seemed more of a mess before b2p than it is now.. The whining and entitlement of people who subscribed brought tears on so many occasions.

Subscribers bought login access, not a special snowflake pass.

Sinthrax

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Thymos

No matter what, everyone who plays has paid for the game at the very least, so ZOS is at least getting some contribution.

Aneima

Sinthrax wrote: »

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Yeah well it's some subs sad excuse to come up with a reason to keep the forums sub only that started this discussion not the other way around. Imagine the turn off of all the new players in the last 2 weeks if they had questions or whatever about the game to find out you can only access forums by paying a sub? If you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you. As for over priced dlc I haven't seen a single mmorpg cost more than 30-40 dollars for dlc and to be honest I really don't care what's cheaper or not if I want it i will buy it.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

wrlifeboil wrote: »

Fox Hunter wrote: »

Brilliant idea! I feel that with a proper forum, surrounded by pleasant and selected people, those whose souls exude aristocracy will feel more confortable and spend more time here than playing the game.

which may be the best for everyone.

To op, if the 'exclusive' club of subscribers and the comments they provided to the devs had been enough to make TESO wildly successful in 2014, the game wouldn't have gone b2p.

The player base is now b2p. It makes sense that the forums should be open to all players of the game.

Besides, inbreeding usually doesn't turn out well.

Many who did provide comments to ZOS in the time you refer to would seriously argue ZOS DIDN'T listen, which is why the game tanked and had to resot to B23P to try to survive.

And yes, it clearly tanked, if it were a roaring success ZOS wouldn't have ditched the cash cow so quickly.

Genomic

Sinthrax wrote: »

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Next DLC likely in September at best. $15 * 7 = $105. If you think the DLC is going to cost $105 you're out of your mind. Likely $20-$30 (people won't pay more than this for 6 monthly DLCs, simple as that, maybe more for huge expansion packs, but then that's 2-3 years of subs worth, in which non subbers still win greatly), which means that non-subbers get the content at about 1/4 1/3 of the price that the suckers, er, I mean subbers pay.

Genomic

And in addition, non-subbers get to keep, rather than lease the DLC. Non-sub overlords FTW.

fluffycannibalb16_ESO

winterscrolls229prerb18_ESO wrote: »

Subscribers bought login access, not a special snowflake pass.

I want my Special Snowflake Pass and I want it now!

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

Genomic wrote: »

And in addition, non-subbers get to keep, rather than lease the DLC. Non-sub overlords FTW.

That's the great thing about B2P, you get to CHOOSE! Sadly some people can't handle 'choice'.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

Genomic wrote: »

Sinthrax wrote: »

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Next DLC likely in September at best. $15 * 7 = $105. If you think the DLC is going to cost $105 you're out of your mind. Likely $20-$30 (people won't pay more than this for 6 monthly DLCs, simple as that, maybe more for huge expansion packs, but then that's 2-3 years of subs worth, in which non subbers still win greatly), which means that non-subbers get the content at about 1/4 1/3 of the price that the suckers, er, I mean subbers pay.

Except that subs. will likely give you more than enough crowns to buy any DLC you want to keep should you decide to stop paying so your attempt at proving subscribers are 'mugs' (my word, your view) doesn't really work.

Genomic

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Genomic wrote: »

Sinthrax wrote: »

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Next DLC likely in September at best. $15 * 7 = $105. If you think the DLC is going to cost $105 you're out of your mind. Likely $20-$30 (people won't pay more than this for 6 monthly DLCs, simple as that, maybe more for huge expansion packs, but then that's 2-3 years of subs worth, in which non subbers still win greatly), which means that non-subbers get the content at about 1/4 1/3 of the price that the suckers, er, I mean subbers pay.

Except that subs. will likely give you more than enough crowns to buy any DLC you want to keep should you decide to stop paying so your attempt at proving subscribers are 'mugs' (my word, your view) doesn't really work.

I dunno, I get the feeling that ZOS is expecting subbers to spend their free crowns on cash shop items. Thus they are incentivised to remain subbed, as dropping the sub would mean losing the DLC. Why otherwise would they give you crowns? Certainly not to aid you in dropping your sub. Doesn't make any business sense.

And I was just being light hearted with my suckers comment. I should have added a smiley.

Aneima

.

YourNameHere

Betahkiin wrote: »

YourNameHere wrote: »

Betahkiin wrote: »

Slurg wrote: »

Betahkiin wrote: »

Slurg wrote: »

Wait what? That was kind of rambly but I think you're trying to say that ideas that come from someone brand new but subscribed to the game are somehow inherently better than ideas from someone with more experience with the game but who dropped their subscription (even if they spend more a month on the crown shop that the subscriber does).

That is wrong.

What they mean is that ideas or preferences of those who do not pay should not affect the general consensus of those who fund the game monthly and uninterruptedly.

Moreover it has no logic monthly spend more money in the store without being a subscriber because that way you must pay extra DLC.

If someone is going to spend in the store a monthly sum exceeding one month of play and will do so constant and uninterrupted, you should be a subscriber and buy extra crowns.

No one is going to tell me how and when to pay for what I want in the game. I see now this is yet another one of these "punish the non-subscribers because they are inferior" threads though and I don't believe in being petty like that so I will be taking my leave now.

You are wrong ...

If your ability to pay is to your advantage not guarantee a minimum income necessary because in your will you can decide not to pay for months.

If you do not pay monthly subscription, your ability to think and take weight on the most important changes would have to see reduced.

Politically it is something that companies try to avoid a matter of diplomacy (to please everyone) but the reality is undeniable.

Oh god he's putting his .... opinion over in this thread now after the original one he made was locked down.

Please do not comment on Betahkiin's posts. He made a similar topic here: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/160454/separation-instance-for-subscribers#latest and it got nasty, and had to be locked down.

There should be NO SEGREGATION from players. Everyone BOUGHT the game. The difference is those on ESOPlus(subs) get crowns, future DLC, and other things for free, while non subs have to pay with Crowns to buy future DLC.

BOTH support the game and ZoS.

As I see you like to lie and defame others:

A - My comments on this issue began before the other thread was closed.

B - The other issue was closed by verbal abuse of others when commenting, not the topic of the item in question or by providing different views (you can see the explanation of employee ZOS).

C - Encourage others to ignore a particular user and defame goes against the code of conduct.

Greetings!

I do not want this thread to go the way of the other you created. And please, don't be innocent as you were also acting rude to those who did not see your side of things.

And no where did I encourage anyone to ignore you. Just not to comment, as such things led to a flamewar/rude posts before. If a person ignores you (i.e. going to your profile and pressing the Ignore button - which I will be doing-. I am not holding or moving their hand) that is their choice.

So having you call me a liar and a defamer w/o any proof, is the pot calling the kettle black in this situation.

But I will leave you to your point of view. Just am looking for a nice forum to come too, not a person pushing their views so hard they begin to personally attack others because of their view and start taking over other's threads

Gidorick

Genomic wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Genomic wrote: »

Sinthrax wrote: »

Aneima wrote: »

People and their sense of entitlement. What crowns and perks aren't enough? Maybe some of you would like them to rub vasaline on your hiney and tell you it's special and different from everyone else's?

I can promise you that ESO will make more money in the end from selling crown store items than it does from monthly subs.

I see it the other way. The ones with no sub feel entitled to the same game as subs. Are subs special? I don't know ask ZoS..they are already giving them a bonus. I think that is special treatment. And in the end once the overpriced DLC comes out and everyone finds out it will be cheaper to have a sub...well, then you might change your mind.

Next DLC likely in September at best. $15 * 7 = $105. If you think the DLC is going to cost $105 you're out of your mind. Likely $20-$30 (people won't pay more than this for 6 monthly DLCs, simple as that, maybe more for huge expansion packs, but then that's 2-3 years of subs worth, in which non subbers still win greatly), which means that non-subbers get the content at about 1/4 1/3 of the price that the suckers, er, I mean subbers pay.

Except that subs. will likely give you more than enough crowns to buy any DLC you want to keep should you decide to stop paying so your attempt at proving subscribers are 'mugs' (my word, your view) doesn't really work.

I dunno, I get the feeling that ZOS is expecting subbers to spend their free crowns on cash shop items. Thus they are incentivised to remain subbed, as dropping the sub would mean losing the DLC. Why otherwise would they give you crowns? Certainly not to aid you in dropping your sub. Doesn't make any business sense.

And I was just being light hearted with my suckers comment. I should have added a smiley.

It's funny... the lack of compelling Crown Store items coupled with the lack of subscriber benefits is dissuading me from subscribing. I got like 4700 Crowns at the start... I've spent like 1100. So I have 3600 Crowns and don't want anything else from the Crown Store so I certainly don't want more crowns every month ad nauseam.

Ysne58

Having to pay twice for the same content if I want it on both EU and NA is probably the last straw for. I am leaning towards not resubbing come May at this point. That is beyond greed on the part of ZOS

Elsonso

Ysne58 wrote: »

Having to pay twice for the same content if I want it on both EU and NA is probably the last straw for. I am leaning towards not resubbing come May at this point. That is beyond greed on the part of ZOS

The logic here escapes me.

You dislike that your store purchases do not span servers, but the one purchase that does span servers is the ESO Plus membership. Since you want your purchases to span both servers, obviously, you would drop the one thing that does.

I get that you want your house cat, panther, and guar to be on both servers. I am just not getting how dropping your ESO Plus membership benefits you in this case.

wrlifeboil

Requiring a monthly sub to play a DLC just doesn't make sense from a console point of view. I doubt that the pricing will be different for consoles and PCs.

The DLC model is buy it once and own it or more specifically, own the right to play it forever. That model for PC mmos already exists in GW2.

Can't imagine ZOS would try to muck it up the pricing. Keep it simple and charge $19.99, $29.99, or $39.99 for DLCs depending on the amount of new content and forget about the Rube Goldberg pricing schemes.

Soloeus

Maybe they should have a limited number of posts a month, say 3 thread starts and 3 replies to posts. After that, you have to pay $.79 per post.

Audigy

If you are in a Beta or Alpha, then you are often the only person who is allowed to give feedback. Having only sub members contribute would serve the same purpose, to avoid spam, but I must admit that I don't like it that much.

You don't need to necessarily play a game to give feedback or idea´s. I did support HOTS long before I got into the Alpha, yet several of my topics were later considered and are now in game (not only due my feedback, but someone has to start the threads right?).

I would base giving feedback probably more on a post count.

Let someone with a few hundred posts open threads there, while everyone can post into the threads after maybe 10 or 20 posts in other sections.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

First they came for the non-subscriber, and I wasn't a non-subscriber so I said nothing...



All The Best

Aeladiir

Danikat wrote: »

It's also kind of insulting to ZOS to suggest that they're incapable of judging for themselves what is and is not a good idea for the game they created and need those suggestions filtered via a paywall first.

Well they're not. Money is their judge.