Paying a premium for this game.

Jollygoodusername

"The inventory system without that bag is an absolute pile of poo, even with maxed out bag/backpack."

Yes, I'll feel the pain in 10 days when my sub finally rests in peace. But that's the price we pay to win.

brimstone74

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

Just have to say, I have subbed since day one, early access PC/Na. ( march 2014).
Now, just to remind everyone, ESO went B2P BECAUSE of consoles, as Sony/Microsoft would not wave their Sub's and anyone on consoles would have to pay 2 sub fee's, so ESO dropped theirs. It had nothing to do with lack of players, game in trouble, etc.
Crown crates, Crown Store, etc are all repercussions of this and a direct result of people who ""Will Never Pay A Sub".
You have to support a game somehow, they have to get paid too, so I hope all of the "No sub" folks are buying lots of Crown Fluff and Crates!
Huzzah!!

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

Just have to say, I have subbed since day one, early access PC/Na. ( march 2014).
Now, just to remind everyone, ESO went B2P BECAUSE of consoles, as Sony/Microsoft would not wave their Sub's and anyone on consoles would have to pay 2 sub fee's, so ESO dropped theirs. It had nothing to do with lack of players, game in trouble, etc.
Crown crates, Crown Store, etc are all repercussions of this and a direct result of people who ""Will Never Pay A Sub".
You have to support a game somehow, they have to get paid too, so I hope all of the "No sub" folks are buying lots of Crown Fluff and Crates!
Huzzah!!

So the moral of the story is to avoid mmos that release on console...? They might save the game, but at what price?

Turelus

ESO had to go B2P to work on consoles, it would have been a huge flop if it had been sub only on console.

Console now brings in a lot if money for ZOS, so over all the game looks good financially.

Also I don't think if it made stacks more money it would be put into ZOS and more Dev staff, that's not how corporations think.

Mojmir

If you had to sub to play this game,things would be done quite differently, or it would end up like UO.

Nyladreas

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

DoShazarr wrote: »

scorpiodog wrote: »

A 100% subscription game is a large barrier to entry. Few people know if they want to pay $70 for a game plus $150 per year plus extras and expansions / chapters before they even try it out. That's like asking someone to go steady before you even go on the first date.

By going Buy to Play plus optional subscription, ESO gets in a steady crop of new players, casual players, or people just saying "heck why not?" If people like the game they either buy the DLCs or subscribe. If they get serious about the game beyond a certain degree, they subscribe.

If ESO relied 100% on a small group of dedicated MMO players for their revenue they'd be in big trouble. Game after game they demand special advantages and gratuitous favoritism that ultimately destroy a game.

Sooooo just make a 1-3 month free trial?

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

ZoS failed to deliver on numerous promises that came with the subscription. Content patches every three months? Took twice as long. Premium customer services? Ha! The value was no where near what was advertised or expected. That is why ESO lost the vast majority of their subscribers, and in order to keep the game going they'd have to go F2P.

Uhhhh the customer service is excellent idk what you're talking about. Unless you're being a *** in every ticket/post before you even get any kind of answer at all. I've always recieved quick help and always straight to the point.

BWAHAHAHAH!! HAHAHAH! Ah ha!!!!

Yeah well after that "insightful" reaction i'm not surprised ZOSCS doesn't handle your issues so well and so quick. *shrugs* to each their own.

Huyen

Wrekkedd wrote: »

Shad0wfire99 wrote: »

There is no chance that I'd ever buy a game, any game, and then pay for the right to play it.

The reason that you pay for an mmo after buying the game itself, is because it's not skyrim. They don't have 3 dlc packs or whatever, they have to pay people to constantly monitor the game, servers, etc...lmao

We have bought the DLC for Skyrim too, as well as TES:3 and TES:4. Dunno why this expansion is so shocking tho, as the DLC from previous games are called Expansions too. And why do you think Seasonpasses (aka ESO+) are so cheap compared to buying the actual DLC? Because this way they can make more money to sustain the updates.

Phinix1

scorpiodog wrote: »

A 100% subscription game is a large barrier to entry. Few people know if they want to pay $70 for a game plus $150 per year plus extras and expansions / chapters before they even try it out. That's like asking someone to go steady before you even go on the first date.

Since it is buy-to-play they have to spend the $70 for the game regardless of a mandatory sub. (More like $40 now, unless you mean Morrowind and the base game). Also I feel that one month of $15 sub is more than enough time to get a feel for whether it would be worth it to continue subbing. Plus you get to test all the DLC's that way without buying them.

I personally wish they had stuck with the sub and avoided all the snags of B2P economics as the balance of making valuable stuff to put in the Crown store (and crates) while simultaneously not making people paying a sub feel like they are missing out on everything cool for not spending MORE than a sub per month, is almost as difficult as balancing PVE and PVP separately...

Regardless I will continue paying a sub so long as I can afford to and still play.

Galwylin

What's the deal with acting like b2p is something other than a reworded f2p? Anyone who seriously plays a free to play game subscribes. We're still getting the same type of stuff a free to play game has. Not all but some. There doesn't seem to be any difference. The EverQuest games are free to play and if you subscribe you get the faster horse and such. There aren't parts of the game that are cut off from you as long as you have the latest expansion. Does that make it a buy to play? What a stupid made up phrase. Who came up with that one? To fully play any game, you buy something. They've just hoodwinked people into thinking they are getting something they aren't. Besides, we're seeing the same result either way. They're changing more for things. Things like the new DLC (its not an expansion, a look at any other games' expansion will show it solely lacking) now costing. All symptoms of being free to play. Not enough cash coming in since probably a sizable portion of players aren't paying anything. You know, because its free.

Belidos

The difference between buy to play and free to play is very simple, to play a B2P game you have to purchase the game in the first place, to play a F2P game you just download it and play it, there's no upfront cost associated with it, that's the only real solid difference.

AlienatedGoat

Galwylin wrote: »

What's the deal with acting like b2p is something other than a reworded f2p?

Because they're two very different animals. Free-to-play games almost exclusively rely on cash shop purchases to support the game. Buy-to-play games can also have cash shops, but the revenue is supplemental compared to the cashflow from game purchases and subscriptions. Free-to-play games have no barrier to entry, whereas buy-to-play games have some sort of monetary barrier to entry. The revenue systems are similar in some ways, but the nuances are clearly felt. Case in point, go play any free-to-play game, and I guarantee you'll find a toxic cesspool for a community. Having no barrier to entry invites every troll, griefer, kid and flamer in. By contrast, TESO has a very small barrier to entry (like 8-9 bucks for the base game on sale) and the community is much better for it.

Galwylin

I do play f2p games. I see no difference. And there's a current thread talking about how people act that I have never heard of being allowed in other games (pursuing after the group is over with harassment?). That isn't the first I've ever heard and in fact, this is the only game I've ever heard of that happening. And I heard of that happening twice before I read through that thread. I don't think you kept the trolls and kids and such out. Any way, this b2p game is acting a lot like a f2p game. Was that the big difference? You buy this one up front but its really f2p on the inside? I mean, come on. Crown Crates? Those are a b2p creation?

Rhoric

You still don't know what b2p and f2p are.

Fingolfinn01

Galwylin wrote: »

I do play f2p games. I see no difference. And there's a current thread talking about how people act that I have never heard of being allowed in other games (pursuing after the group is over with harassment?). That isn't the first I've ever heard and in fact, this is the only game I've ever heard of that happening. And I heard of that happening twice before I read through that thread. I don't think you kept the trolls and kids and such out. Any way, this b2p game is acting a lot like a f2p game. Was that the big difference? You buy this one up front but its really f2p on the inside? I mean, come on. Crown Crates? Those are a b2p creation?

I don't think you play the game.

Its usually very helpful to new and returning players

I suggest you return to your troll cave, you subtract from the genuine good will of the community.

Fhaerron

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

Just have to say, I have subbed since day one, early access PC/Na. ( march 2014).
Now, just to remind everyone, ESO went B2P BECAUSE of consoles, as Sony/Microsoft would not wave their Sub's and anyone on consoles would have to pay 2 sub fee's, so ESO dropped theirs. It had nothing to do with lack of players, game in trouble, etc.
Crown crates, Crown Store, etc are all repercussions of this and a direct result of people who ""Will Never Pay A Sub".
You have to support a game somehow, they have to get paid too, so I hope all of the "No sub" folks are buying lots of Crown Fluff and Crates!
Huzzah!!

If it went Buy to play because of consoles then why does Final Fantasy XIV requires a purchase and a subscription fee on both consoles and PC?

Also Xbox Live or PSN plus is not just for ESO, you need it regardless if you play ESO or not, all those games have something online now.
Destiny for example, without playstation plus you cannot play 90% of the game. And so pretty much all games have content locked behind PSN plus or Xbox Live. I'm pretty sure console folks play more then just ESO.

I pre ordered the Physical Imperial Edition and also been a sub/player since early access but I actually quit the day they removed the subscription fee. (I'm just 'semi' back now to try out the expansion as ZoS was nice to give me beta access to it).

I quit RIFT the day they removed the sub and changed to F2P. I quit GW2 soon too.

The games I've been playing loyally are WoW & Final Fantasy XIV and both of these require a sub. There's just something about non sub games that puts me off, maybe it's just the community of those games.




Edit: Fixed a typo.

Jitterbug

DoShazarr wrote: »

Uhhhh the customer service is excellent idk what you're talking about. Unless you're being a *** in every ticket/post before you even get any kind of answer at all. I've always recieved quick help and always straight to the point.

Unless you're being sarcastic I'm just gonna go ahead and call bullsnip on that

Bryong9ub17_ESO

Going b2p is the best thing this game has done... if this game still had a monthly sub this game would almost be dead and empty. The entire population would probably drop by at least half. I know I wouldn't be in it.

Elvenpath

Bryong9ub17_ESO wrote: »

Going b2p is the best thing this game has done... if this game still had a monthly sub this game would almost be dead and empty. The entire population would probably drop by at least half. I know I wouldn't be in it.

Nope. It wont be dead. I can login freely now, but i'm subbing still.

Carbonised

scorpiodog wrote: »

A 100% subscription game is a large barrier to entry. Few people know if they want to pay $70 for a game plus $150 per year plus extras and expansions / chapters before they even try it out. That's like asking someone to go steady before you even go on the first date.

By going Buy to Play plus optional subscription, ESO gets in a steady crop of new players, casual players, or people just saying "heck why not?" If people like the game they either buy the DLCs or subscribe. If they get serious about the game beyond a certain degree, they subscribe.

If ESO relied 100% on a small group of dedicated MMO players for their revenue they'd be in big trouble. Game after game they demand special advantages and gratuitous favoritism that ultimately destroy a game.

Couldn't disagree more with this.

Once again a case of console peasants ruining it for everyone else i.e. the dedicated PC gamer people.
PC people were happy with a subscription based game that didn't try and coerce you out of every nickle and dime you own, but because of Sony and consoles, we just couldn't have that, no.

In comes the transition from B2P to a B2P/F2P hybrid, which isn't the best of both worlds, but instead the worst. Not only do we have to pay for the base game, we also have to pay for subscription (try playing the game without crafting bag, I dare you), for expansions (sorry, "chapters"), and pay overprice for every reskinned fart of a mount that we take interest in. They're milking us with both hands - via both the B2P sub model and the F2P microtransactions.

What do we end up with? A casino store that tries to nickle and dime you as much as possible, where everything remotely interesting will be put up for sale, and usually not for a transparent transaction, but instead falsely hyped up with the usual "limited edition, 5 days only, shop now!" signs all over them, to make the product seem exclusive and limited, a well known ploy of the advertisement known as the scarcity fallacy. Or packed away in gambling crates loathed by most of the community as another cheap trick to maximize profits and obfuscate the transaction process and the factual price you pay for this hot air.

If ESO relied on a smaller group of dedicated MMO/RPG players, maybe we would have the premium RPG game that we deserve, and that we have paid for. Catering to the casual player and the almighty dollar is what has ruined the game and given us this cash shop that mostly resembles something out of Candy Crush, as well as the increasing casualization and homogenization of game mechanics that plagues anyone who considers themselves even remotely an RPG player.

Addendum - AKA tl;dr: Catering to the masses will always, always result in the lowest common denominator. ESO is no exception.

Kay1

I stopped at F2P.


Are you guys high?

playsforfun

sadly I've just unsubbed and I've been a sub since release, I'm just not happy with the direction the game and just lack of communication in general and the constant band aid fixes every 6 months.

andreasv

Fhaerron wrote: »

...
The games I've been playing loyally are WoW & Final Fantasy XIV and both of these require a sub. There's just something about non sub games that puts me off, maybe it's just the community of those games.


Edit: Fixed a typo.

I play the latter regularly and am more than happy to pay for it. It's a different experience to log into a game and instead of seeing the newest fluff and gamble crates you get a link to how to play the game and available quests near you. I didn't even know that FF XIV had optional items to purchase until a few months ago.

It's also nice that every player basically gets the same gaming experience. There's no "This subscription feature should be made available to every player" argument.

M0bi

I agree that that was the very first mistake that ZoS made. Making the game NoN-sub and B2P. Ruined the community whole-sale. Now we have weebs complaining on the forums all the time.

strikeback1247

They dropped the sub, so instead they let the gamblers keep the game alive through crown crates. Smart move ZoS :^)

theher0not

Synfaer wrote: »

brimstone74 wrote: »

Gorthax wrote: »

SteveCampsOut wrote: »

Fingolfinn01 wrote: »

AoDD33pfri3d wrote: »

Fingolfinn01 wrote: »

my mistake, I should of said when they removed the subscription from this game it was a mistake.

Wait they are removing eso +

Mandatory sub, not a good day for me on the forums.

However they are improving eso+ so in a way they are removing eso+ and replacing it with eso++

How do you figure they're improving ESO+ when they're locking Morrowind beind a paywall?

did you buy any of the other dlc? Those were a paywall too apparently. Or did you buy the gold edition? Or did you use monthly crowns from a sub to buy the dlc, which was a paywall as well.....

I really hate when people say paywall when they come out with content as if the developers owe it to you to let you play what they created. It is a new story arc "chapter"/expansion. You have every right to pay/dont pay for it. You dont want too, then you dont get to play it.

P.S.

Dont read that in a angry/snarky tone as I am actually not trying to be offensive or rude. Just pointing that little tidbit out

Have a great day.

Oh one more thing, damn mcdonalds putting that double cheese burger behind a paywall >_>

Um no....

You get all the other DLC's with a sub. You never have to buy them. For Subs...MW is behind a paywall. The poster you quoted is using the term correctly as the payment model changed for subs with Morrowind, which they coyly title a Chapter, not a DLC, not an Expansion, a Chapter...

...it's a DLC....

So, umm can you please post the generically acceptable definition of DLC and the definition of an Expansion so I can compare them? Also the definition of a Chapter while your digging through the dictionary, wikipedia or thesaurus etc.

There is no real difference between morrowind and any other DLC other than the name. The only reason they don't call morrowind a DLC is because they promised that all DLC would be free for subs and thet want to make subs buy it too.

WhitePawPrints

lordrichter wrote: »

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

ZoS failed to deliver on numerous promises that came with the subscription. Content patches every three months? Took twice as long. Premium customer services? Ha! The value was no where near what was advertised or expected. That is why ESO lost the vast majority of their subscribers, and in order to keep the game going they'd have to go F2P.

The updates in 2014 came out every 6 weeks, just as they said.

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

DoShazarr wrote: »

Uhhhh the customer service is excellent idk what you're talking about. Unless you're being a *** in every ticket/post before you even get any kind of answer at all. I've always recieved quick help and always straight to the point.

BWAHAHAHAH!! HAHAHAH! Ah ha!!!!

I am never a *** in my tickets. They are always handled quickly, and usually in my favor.

I don't know if you're trolling me or just stupid. CONTENT updates were advertised to be released every three months; with Dark Brotherhood and/or Thieves Guild to be released within six months to a year . Craglorn was released SIX months after launch.

DoShazarr wrote: »

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

DoShazarr wrote: »

scorpiodog wrote: »

A 100% subscription game is a large barrier to entry. Few people know if they want to pay $70 for a game plus $150 per year plus extras and expansions / chapters before they even try it out. That's like asking someone to go steady before you even go on the first date.

By going Buy to Play plus optional subscription, ESO gets in a steady crop of new players, casual players, or people just saying "heck why not?" If people like the game they either buy the DLCs or subscribe. If they get serious about the game beyond a certain degree, they subscribe.

If ESO relied 100% on a small group of dedicated MMO players for their revenue they'd be in big trouble. Game after game they demand special advantages and gratuitous favoritism that ultimately destroy a game.

Sooooo just make a 1-3 month free trial?

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

ZoS failed to deliver on numerous promises that came with the subscription. Content patches every three months? Took twice as long. Premium customer services? Ha! The value was no where near what was advertised or expected. That is why ESO lost the vast majority of their subscribers, and in order to keep the game going they'd have to go F2P.

Uhhhh the customer service is excellent idk what you're talking about. Unless you're being a *** in every ticket/post before you even get any kind of answer at all. I've always recieved quick help and always straight to the point.

BWAHAHAHAH!! HAHAHAH! Ah ha!!!!

Yeah well after that "insightful" reaction i'm not surprised ZOSCS doesn't handle your issues so well and so quick. *shrugs* to each their own.

To enlighten you both, when I was pleasant in my limited tickets, I got no response or a copy and paste response (and this was before automated emails were created). The only time I had someone take a look at an issue was when I had to get a little assertive. I haven't submitted a ticket in years (actually submitted one about a year ago, very detailed and quoted their ToS multiple times, and never received a response at all), but when their was a subscription requirement, the customer service was downright insulting and would not pass as basic customer service, let alone the premium customer service that was promised with the subscription.

Nyladreas

Entitled people just don't realize that by quitting their subs they're not fixing anything. But rather causing more damage and possibly getting people fired.

Everyone's a great businessman when they're not the one in charge.

QuebraRegra

Graydon wrote: »

$15 a month and worth every penny. ESO subscription is great entertainment value.

I pay it, but it could be a BETTER value... This is obvious even to ZOS as they are adding bankspace to ESO++

Id like to see a free crate throw in , etc. I'd also like to see loyalty bonuses (ie. 6 month sub awarding unique dye unlocks, etc.).

WhitePawPrints

Carbonised wrote: »

scorpiodog wrote: »

A 100% subscription game is a large barrier to entry. Few people know if they want to pay $70 for a game plus $150 per year plus extras and expansions / chapters before they even try it out. That's like asking someone to go steady before you even go on the first date.

By going Buy to Play plus optional subscription, ESO gets in a steady crop of new players, casual players, or people just saying "heck why not?" If people like the game they either buy the DLCs or subscribe. If they get serious about the game beyond a certain degree, they subscribe.

If ESO relied 100% on a small group of dedicated MMO players for their revenue they'd be in big trouble. Game after game they demand special advantages and gratuitous favoritism that ultimately destroy a game.

Couldn't disagree more with this.

Once again a case of console peasants ruining it for everyone else i.e. the dedicated PC gamer people.
PC people were happy with a subscription based game that didn't try and coerce you out of every nickle and dime you own, but because of Sony and consoles, we just couldn't have that, no.

In comes the transition from B2P to a B2P/F2P hybrid, which isn't the best of both worlds, but instead the worst. Not only do we have to pay for the base game, we also have to pay for subscription (try playing the game without crafting bag, I dare you), for expansions (sorry, "chapters"), and pay overprice for every reskinned fart of a mount that we take interest in. They're milking us with both hands - via both the B2P sub model and the F2P microtransactions.

What do we end up with? A casino store that tries to nickle and dime you as much as possible, where everything remotely interesting will be put up for sale, and usually not for a transparent transaction, but instead falsely hyped up with the usual "limited edition, 5 days only, shop now!" signs all over them, to make the product seem exclusive and limited, a well known ploy of the advertisement known as the scarcity fallacy. Or packed away in gambling crates loathed by most of the community as another cheap trick to maximize profits and obfuscate the transaction process and the factual price you pay for this hot air.

If ESO relied on a smaller group of dedicated MMO/RPG players, maybe we would have the premium RPG game that we deserve, and that we have paid for. Catering to the casual player and the almighty dollar is what has ruined the game and given us this cash shop that mostly resembles something out of Candy Crush, as well as the increasing casualization and homogenization of game mechanics that plagues anyone who considers themselves even remotely an RPG player.

Addendum - AKA tl;dr: Catering to the masses will always, always result in the lowest common denominator. ESO is no exception.

So... you're saying that when creating a product, the goal is to target the smallest audience?

WhitePawPrints

DoShazarr wrote: »

Entitled people just don't realize that by quitting their subs they're not fixing anything. But rather causing more damage and possibly getting people fired.

People choosing where they spend their money is... entitlement? What are you smoking?

I don't care if people lose their jobs, if they provide a service that I am not satisfied with then I will no longer pay for that service.

Nyladreas

WhitePawPrints wrote: »

DoShazarr wrote: »

Entitled people just don't realize that by quitting their subs they're not fixing anything. But rather causing more damage and possibly getting people fired.

People choosing where they spend their money is... entitlement? What are you smoking?

I don't care if people lose their jobs, if they provide a service that I am not satisfied with then I will no longer pay for that service.

People shut their subs and ask for better service at the same time, that's my problem. Just quit if you don't like it but don't *** about it like a 16 year old that got the wrong phone for Christmas.