Why I think DLC's will get less "P2W" over time.

MrDerrikk

I'v been thinking about it, and a lot of people on these forums (myself included) have seen how ZOS have been hiding a lot of very good gear/mats etc behind DLC's (everything in Orsinium BoP, IC being the only place to get VR16 enchantments), and have longed for the days when this game had a mandatory subscription. Granted, this turned me off for a good long while as I have always hated the subscription model and I left just after Beta, but after seeing the alternative presented it seems much better.

What I see could happen though is that as ZOS is bringing out a new DLC every three months, the people who are not ESO+ subscribers are going to be paying through the nose just to keep up with all the new content, or be forced to sub. New players coming into the game will certainly be forced to sub, or be paying hundreds of dollars what with the prices of the content. Therefore more and more of the remaining playerbase will be subscribing to the game, where eventually the percentage of those not will be low enough that ZOS can safely assume that everyone will be able to already access the content through sub and focus on quality to keep us here instead of forcing us to buy the next DLC.

TLDR; At the rate ZOS is adding DLC's most people will eventually be subscribing for them so they can focus on good content instead of a P2W-esque walling away of gear/mats in them to force purchases.


Anyway, what do you peeps think?

Itoq

By the time this would happen there would be twelve players left total. All of the other players will have left due to the lack of 'good content.' How those remaining twelve players will be paying will not matter.

MrDerrikk

Itoq wrote: »

By the time this would happen there would be twelve players left total. All of the other players will have left due to the lack of 'good content.' How those remaining twelve players will be paying will not matter.

Maybe original players, but newer players lured in by the frequent expansions will enjoy it. I'll probably still be there as I'm on ESO+ and don't have to worry about being forced into the DLC too much.

Genomic

MrDerrikk wrote: »

Itoq wrote: »

By the time this would happen there would be twelve players left total. All of the other players will have left due to the lack of 'good content.' How those remaining twelve players will be paying will not matter.

Maybe original players, but newer players lured in by the frequent expansions will enjoy it. I'll probably still be there as I'm on ESO+ and don't have to worry about being forced into the DLC too much.

If they either have to pay for 12 DLCs or sub, there won't be any new players. ESO went B2P for a reason.

No, each DLC will become free (i.e. included in the box price for new players) after a year or so, just as every other MMO does, and for good reasons.

I'm not sure why anyone in their right mind would think the only choices being "paying through the nose just to keep up with all the new content, or be forced to sub" is a viable business model.

MrDerrikk

Genomic wrote: »

MrDerrikk wrote: »

Itoq wrote: »

By the time this would happen there would be twelve players left total. All of the other players will have left due to the lack of 'good content.' How those remaining twelve players will be paying will not matter.

Maybe original players, but newer players lured in by the frequent expansions will enjoy it. I'll probably still be there as I'm on ESO+ and don't have to worry about being forced into the DLC too much.

If they either have to pay for 12 DLCs or sub, there won't be any new players. ESO went B2P for a reason.

No, each DLC will become free (i.e. included in the box price for new players) after a year or so, just as every other MMO does, and for good reasons.

I'm not sure why anyone in their right mind would think the only choices being "paying through the nose just to keep up with all the new content, or be forced to sub" is a viable business model.

Good point, I guess I didn't think hard enough...

I guess I'm just grasping at the hope that eventually most people will be subbing so ZOS can make better content and not seem like it's trying to make as much of a cash grab as possible, as they wouldn't be with the majority subbing.

iamnotweakrwb17_ESO

When the peny drops that character appearance changes / additions is the biggest money maker for Zenimax, they'll stop hiding gear behind paywalls.

MrDerrikk

iamnotweakrwb17_ESO wrote: »

When the peny drops that character appearance changes / additions is the biggest money maker for Zenimax, they'll stop hiding gear behind paywalls.

And player housing + accessories for this...my goodness that'll be a money sink.

Volkodav

Itoq wrote: »

By the time this would happen there would be twelve players left total. All of the other players will have left due to the lack of 'good content.' How those remaining twelve players will be paying will not matter.

Umm,..there are actually way more than 12 subbers,and more will come.Not ALL will be freebie players.And I think most will stick for a long while.Except for those who want more more,and more,gear,XP,CHPs,etc.Those who actually like all that goes with TES games will be playing for a long time.And there are a whole lot of us. :}

Hatoreehanzo

I don't think it's setup as P2W at all currently. Charging for an expansion or ESO+ provides more resources for them as a company, development, R&D, etc. As with almost every other game out, they usually charge for expansions... Limiting yourself by not buying it is not a cruel P2W scheme made by them. It's a way to sustain their company and offer new/better content.

Paywalls? BOP gear? You mean to tell me they want you to buy the content to be able to use it?! Oh no!

I'm confused how people get up in arms over this. If you consider $30 paying through the nose, you might want to reevaluate your financial responsibilities. If they're releasing content every quarter that's $10 a month, roughly $0.32 a day... I spend more on drinks in a night that end up in the head an hour later.

stewart.leslie76b16_ESO

This is what I think, I have no/little evidence to back me up. Do not take my word as gospel. I think i read somewhere that ZOS were doing a cycle on their DLCs, Craglorn (not a DLC as such, but not part of the original game) was group, IC was PvP, and Orc land solo able PvE, so depending on what the focus of the next DLC will give us players and idea what to expect in the short to medium future.

I'm hoping that the next DLC is a free one, I don't think that doing 4 DLCs a year through the crown store is a good idea. When new players arrive, opening the crown store and seeing a massive list of DLCs is going to be off putting. I'm hoping that the Next DLC is not a group one like Craglorn because that would indicate they are following a cycle. I'm hoping that the next is a small but free one, a kind of carrot on the stick to show non-subscribers and those which have not brought the DLCs an idea in what they are missing. I'm in 2 minds that Dark Brotherhood and Thieves guild should be free or crown. I think the guilds and skill lines should be free, but the story/quests telling why they are now entering the fray should be a payable DLC zone. Although with the justice system in play as it is, there is reason to make the thieves guild and their story free.

JD2013

I don't think P2W means what you think it means.

You're not going to get DLC for free. New gear always ends up in guild traders.

phairdon

stewart.leslie76b16_ESO wrote: »

This is what I think, I have no/little evidence to back me up. Do not take my word as gospel. I think i read somewhere that ZOS were doing a cycle on their DLCs, Craglorn (not a DLC as such, but not part of the original game) was group, IC was PvP, and Orc land solo able PvE, so depending on what the focus of the next DLC will give us players and idea what to expect in the short to medium future.

I'm hoping that the next DLC is a free one, I don't think that doing 4 DLCs a year through the crown store is a good idea. When new players arrive, opening the crown store and seeing a massive list of DLCs is going to be off putting. I'm hoping that the Next DLC is not a group one like Craglorn because that would indicate they are following a cycle. I'm hoping that the next is a small but free one, a kind of carrot on the stick to show non-subscribers and those which have not brought the DLCs an idea in what they are missing. I'm in 2 minds that Dark Brotherhood and Thieves guild should be free or crown. I think the guilds and skill lines should be free, but the story/quests telling why they are now entering the fray should be a payable DLC zone. Although with the justice system in play as it is, there is reason to make the thieves guild and their story free.

Just the way things are in this day & age, whether MMO or single player games. Look at all the games with season passes now, leading to a common complaint about lack of content in original releases. GW2 recently had their first expansion, it was not free & that game is over 3 years old with a cash shop.
Subbing to this game is probably the wisest option, because of currency conversion, meaning the dlc is going to cost some players way more than $30 through the crown store, depending on where they live in the world (subbing on a monthly basis is cheaper than purchasing the dlc through the store).

Hatoreehanzo

If you get ESO+ then you get all DLCs. What's the issue?

MrDerrikk

@Hatoreehanzo

I'm actually a subber myself, but I'm making this post because of the things i mentioned; the fact that the only way to collect VR16 mats yourself is through DLC's and that more and more gear is BoP, where even IC had some sets that people new to the game or just not interested could have access to.

As an example, I bought the Ultimate edition of Dragon Age Origins, and each expansion in that has at least 1-2 legendary class items that are very easy to get in the questline and leave you thinking it's a cash grab scheme to almost force you to buy the DLC for the item.
I'm not saying ESO is that bad, but there are a lot of design choices made with these recent expansions that almost force players who would normally have not much to zero interest in the DLC (solo PvE players and IC, pure PvP players and Orsinium) buy it anyway (or sub) because of how much they would be left behind with it.

Therefore it's not strictly P2W, but as many other posters have mentioned it's skirting the border, so it can afford to be less P2W.

LadyNalcarya

P2W?... Lol, you guys just havent seen P2W games.
Any F2P Korean mmo is much more P2W than ESO.
P.S. And btw, if ESO still was P2P you would still need to pay for subscription. This is not very different from buying dlc every now and then.

MrDerrikk

Hatoreehanzo wrote: »

If you get ESO+ then you get all DLCs. What's the issue?

And this is my point. Hopefully when most people are subbing to get the expansions, ZOS can stop putting so much emphasis on putting things only in the DLC instead of rolling it out to the rest of the game that the game can be more complete and content-based instead of "buy the next DLC to have access to VR18 loot".

(Of course, it'll be "700CP" loot then).

stewart.leslie76b16_ESO

phairdon wrote: »

stewart.leslie76b16_ESO wrote: »

This is what I think, I have no/little evidence to back me up. Do not take my word as gospel. I think i read somewhere that ZOS were doing a cycle on their DLCs, Craglorn (not a DLC as such, but not part of the original game) was group, IC was PvP, and Orc land solo able PvE, so depending on what the focus of the next DLC will give us players and idea what to expect in the short to medium future.

I'm hoping that the next DLC is a free one, I don't think that doing 4 DLCs a year through the crown store is a good idea. When new players arrive, opening the crown store and seeing a massive list of DLCs is going to be off putting. I'm hoping that the Next DLC is not a group one like Craglorn because that would indicate they are following a cycle. I'm hoping that the next is a small but free one, a kind of carrot on the stick to show non-subscribers and those which have not brought the DLCs an idea in what they are missing. I'm in 2 minds that Dark Brotherhood and Thieves guild should be free or crown. I think the guilds and skill lines should be free, but the story/quests telling why they are now entering the fray should be a payable DLC zone. Although with the justice system in play as it is, there is reason to make the thieves guild and their story free.

Just the way things are in this day & age, whether MMO or single player games. Look at all the games with season passes now, leading to a common complaint about lack of content in original releases. GW2 recently had their first expansion, it was not free & that game is over 3 years old with a cash shop.
Subbing to this game is probably the wisest option, because of currency conversion, meaning the dlc is going to cost some players way more than $30 through the crown store, depending on where they live in the world (subbing on a monthly basis is cheaper than purchasing the dlc through the store).

Expansions are different to DLCs, when this game drops an expansion it is going to be big. However, GW2 did something very interesting by making the original content F2P on release of the expansion. It will be interesting to see what happens next for them.

And I won't sub, subbing means having to keep up with payments or lose access to areas. I don't know what is worse, losing access to you character (as what would happen on the traditional subscription model), or having access to your character but with very little to do with it.

Hatoreehanzo

MrDerrikk wrote: »

@Hatoreehanzo

I'm actually a subber myself, but I'm making this post because of the things i mentioned; the fact that the only way to collect VR16 mats yourself is through DLC's and that more and more gear is BoP, where even IC had some sets that people new to the game or just not interested could have access to.

As an example, I bought the Ultimate edition of Dragon Age Origins, and each expansion in that has at least 1-2 legendary class items that are very easy to get in the questline and leave you thinking it's a cash grab scheme to almost force you to buy the DLC for the item.
I'm not saying ESO is that bad, but there are a lot of design choices made with these recent expansions that almost force players who would normally have not much to zero interest in the DLC (solo PvE players and IC, pure PvP players and Orsinium) buy it anyway (or sub) because of how much they would be left behind with it.

Therefore it's not strictly P2W, but as many other posters have mentioned it's skirting the border, so it can afford to be less P2W.

It's BOP because that content is from the expansion. If you don't have the expansion, you can't get it. If otherwise, what would the reason for buying the expansion be when you can lurk Traders for gear? At least people without the DLC still have access to the mats (of course at a gouged rate), but at least it's there. I don't see how ZOS is limping players by having a prerequisite expansion, it's more like the player is limping themselves. It isn't P2W in any way shape or form. It's pay for the new content they're providing you. They're contributing new content, you're contributing money to fund it. If anything it's P2PNS, or Pay To Play New ***. If they're not interested in the new content, what are you paying to win at? PVP where it's battle leveled? New dungeons that they don't have access to? They have to pay people to come up with the content right? I wonder how that happens?

MrDerrikk

Hatoreehanzo wrote: »

It's BOP because that content is from the expansion. If you don't have the expansion, you can't get it. If otherwise, what would the reason for buying the expansion be when you can lurk Traders for gear? At least people without the DLC still have access to the mats (of course at a gouged rate), but at least it's there. I don't see how ZOS is limping players by having a prerequisite expansion, it's more like the player is limping themselves. It isn't P2W in any way shape or form. It's pay for the new content they're providing you. They're contributing new content, you're contributing money to fund it. If anything it's P2PNS, or Pay To Play New ***. If they're not interested in the new content, what are you paying to win at? PVP where it's battle leveled? New dungeons that they don't have access to? They have to pay people to come up with the content right? I wonder how that happens?

Some gear, such as the Molag Kena monster set (I'm not suggesting it should not be BoP) are only accessible via DLC, and are a staple of almost all DPS builds nowadays. At the same time, Skoria has been nerfed multiple times over and left the only other monster set that is interesting being Nerien'eth, which is only useful in certian situations because of the delay. The new IC dungeon sets are very useful for most builds and are amoung the limited amount of VR16 sets attainable, and in Orsinium is the only way to farm VR16 mats without TV stones (yet again in a DLC).

Because they are only really updating sets + content through DLC's, the only way to have a reasonably powerful end-game char is to a). buy the DLC, b). subscribe, or c). pay millions for the necessary mats to craft some VR16 gear from the limited amount of crafted gear sets available.

Hatoreehanzo

MrDerrikk wrote: »

Hatoreehanzo wrote: »

It's BOP because that content is from the expansion. If you don't have the expansion, you can't get it. If otherwise, what would the reason for buying the expansion be when you can lurk Traders for gear? At least people without the DLC still have access to the mats (of course at a gouged rate), but at least it's there. I don't see how ZOS is limping players by having a prerequisite expansion, it's more like the player is limping themselves. It isn't P2W in any way shape or form. It's pay for the new content they're providing you. They're contributing new content, you're contributing money to fund it. If anything it's P2PNS, or Pay To Play New ***. If they're not interested in the new content, what are you paying to win at? PVP where it's battle leveled? New dungeons that they don't have access to? They have to pay people to come up with the content right? I wonder how that happens?

Some gear, such as the Molag Kena monster set (I'm not suggesting it should not be BoP) are only accessible via DLC, and are a staple of almost all DPS builds nowadays. At the same time, Skoria has been nerfed multiple times over and left the only other monster set that is interesting being Nerien'eth, which is only useful in certian situations because of the delay. The new IC dungeon sets are very useful for most builds and are amoung the limited amount of VR16 sets attainable, and in Orsinium is the only way to farm VR16 mats without TV stones (yet again in a DLC).

Because they are only really updating sets + content through DLC's, the only way to have a reasonably powerful end-game char is to a). buy the DLC, b). subscribe, or c). pay millions for the necessary mats to craft some VR16 gear from the limited amount of crafted gear sets available.

I still don't see the issue. They're releasing new content (gear), that you want, without paying for the access to it. How is that unreasonable that you're required to not only get the DLC, but put in the work to get it yourself.

The drop rate chances are a whole different issue that I'd most likely agree upon, but this P2W rant I cannot.

MrDerrikk

Hatoreehanzo wrote: »

I still don't see the issue. They're releasing new content (gear), that you want, without paying for the access to it. How is that unreasonable that you're required to not only get the DLC, but put in the work to get it yourself.

The drop rate chances are a whole different issue that I'd most likely agree upon, but this P2W rant I cannot.

It's completely fair that if you want new gear etc from a DLC then you should have to buy it and work toward earning it. What isn't fair is making it so if you don't have that gear then you are gimped stat-wise because you no longer have access to the beat. The DLC should not be something that you are forced to buy to stay competitive, but something you want to buy for the content.

Anyway, this is actually getting away from the original point of my post, which was that this should hopefully be fixed when much more people are subbing out of the majority.

Hatoreehanzo

Better yet. Simple solution for BOP.

Switch them to BOE, but only trade-able to those who have the pertaining DLC to the item. That way you don't end up with multiple set items to deconstruct and the drop rate doesn't seem so intimidating when it's accessible in the Traders.

Again, it isn't unreasonable for them to want you to purchase or sub to access the DLC. Here's a simple analogy. Imagine this same business platform on other games, like Battlefield. They release a map pack/gear expansion. Only those that buy it, can play in the area and use the gear. Is that play to win? No, it's pay to play the content.

Toc de Malsvi

Its no different than Halo, call of duty and other games' map packs that are released quarterly. Players who want to play the game will continue to pay, players who don't or are on the fringe of their budget will either continue and delay buying the DLC or will quit.

Hatoreehanzo

Toc de Malsvi wrote: »

Its no different than Halo, call of duty and other games' map packs that are released quarterly. Players who want to play the game will continue to pay, players who don't or are on the fringe of their budget will either continue and delay buying the DLC or will quit.

^ This man gets it.

P2W would be selling Monster Helms, Gold Keys, and Master Weapons in the Crown Store.

Only things in there now are mostly visuals - with the exception of XP Scrolls, Mara Rings, and Mount Upgrades which doesn't really affect anything substantial.

BabeestorGor

If by the time I reach veteran levels theres a decent amount of dlc content I'll subscribe.
Atm theres no real reason for me to subscribe.