Why chapters are nails in the coffin of ESO

JKorr

Caligamy_ESO wrote: »

I'll just leave this here..

"When you're in an Elder Scrolls game, you're in a world. We don't want players to hit monetization fees when they're in the world. It's like, I go into a dungeon, if I don't have access to the dungeon it pops up a window: you don't have access to this, go buy 50 credits. We didn't want that experience. That's not an Elder Scrolls experience." - Matt Firor

Yeah. Too bad so many people didn't think they should actually pay for that experience.

The question about dlcs/access didn't come up until the game went buy to play. So for everyone who wouldn't accept a sub, guess what the OMG WHY IS THERE A SUB ALL THE STUFFS SHOULD BE FREE lead to. I might be in the minority, but I'd rather the game was still sub only, with extra for fun bling in the crown store if they still needed it.

Congrats for finding the quote from 8/13. But you missed a few lines.

ZeniMax Online's (or Bethesda's) decision to make The Elder Scrolls Online a subscription-based game certainly drew the ire of a few Elder Scrolls and MMO fans, but game director Matt Firor believes a sub-based payment model ensures the best possible experience for all players.

Speaking with Eurogamer, Firor walked through ZeniMax's reasoning in choosing subscriptions as TESO's primary method of generating revenue. He listed two primary motivators: one, to ensure monetization did not interfere with the traditional Elder Scrolls experience, and two, to keep money flowing for future content.

So, no subscription as sooo many people wanted, but there are now "paywalls" behind either eso plus, or buying crowns. Congratulations. Zenimax listened to the "I PLAY ON CONSOLE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ON TOP OF IT" people *and* the GUILD WARS IS BUY TO PLAY, WHY PAY A SUB FOR THIS people.

lagrue

JKorr wrote: »

Caligamy_ESO wrote: »

I'll just leave this here..

"When you're in an Elder Scrolls game, you're in a world. We don't want players to hit monetization fees when they're in the world. It's like, I go into a dungeon, if I don't have access to the dungeon it pops up a window: you don't have access to this, go buy 50 credits. We didn't want that experience. That's not an Elder Scrolls experience." - Matt Firor

Yeah. Too bad so many people didn't think they should actually pay for that experience.

The question about dlcs/access didn't come up until the game went buy to play. So for everyone who wouldn't accept a sub, guess what the OMG WHY IS THERE A SUB ALL THE STUFFS SHOULD BE FREE lead to. I might be in the minority, but I'd rather the game was still sub only, with extra for fun bling in the crown store if they still needed it.

Congrats for finding the quote from 8/13. But you missed a few lines.

ZeniMax Online's (or Bethesda's) decision to make The Elder Scrolls Online a subscription-based game certainly drew the ire of a few Elder Scrolls and MMO fans, but game director Matt Firor believes a sub-based payment model ensures the best possible experience for all players.

Speaking with Eurogamer, Firor walked through ZeniMax's reasoning in choosing subscriptions as TESO's primary method of generating revenue. He listed two primary motivators: one, to ensure monetization did not interfere with the traditional Elder Scrolls experience, and two, to keep money flowing for future content.

So, no subscription as sooo many people wanted, but there are now "paywalls" behind either eso plus, or buying crowns. Congratulations. Zenimax listened to the "I PLAY ON CONSOLE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ON TOP OF IT" people *and* the GUILD WARS IS BUY TO PLAY, WHY PAY A SUB FOR THIS people.

I couldn't agree more - sub-only is how this game should have stayed. But as long as it stays open, and sub is optional - people need to quit expecting everything to be lumped into the Sub - it's $15 dollars that's optional - it's not enough for them to support to game quality people expect forever.

By the way - don't blame console players - it was purely on PC players that subs got removed - come time of console release there wasn't even subs anymore because not enough people on PC were subbing - it wasn't working because PC Players made it not work -this was done purely by cheap*sses in the PC community and I resent console players being blamed. We gladly pay subs for other games on console... no idea where that misconstrued idea came from. (FF14 comes to mind, even though I don't play it).

JWKe

Zo$ has been a BIG FAT money grab from the get go. They only wised up slightly at launch when no one were playing their game hence for a Triple A title to go f2p in less than a year is straight up EMBARRASSING. As of late of course they've gone back to their old ways.

According to Zo$ they call their xpacs/dlc "Chapters" because according to their article xpacs are oriented toward end game players whereas their "chapters" are for all players even those at level 1. Of course the idea that instantly comes to mind is "how does someone play an mmo consistently and still not be max lvl?" Lol wtf. Zo$ logic. Still can't forget that Christmas reindeer overpriced mount. That was Lol. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

It's good to see that almost i'd say 80% of my guilds be dead that makes it 4/5. Only guild I'm a part of that's up and running is a trade guild where folks hardly ever communicate other than for the daily pledges.

Kiwi

11000 crowns or 80 bucks
whats the difference

Absolut_Turkey

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

LadyLavina wrote: »

edit: deleted b/c i'd rather not touch this discussion

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

Royaji wrote: »

First of all, Morrowind will not be a paywall for new players since it comes with the base game. Next chapter will come in bundle with Morrowind + Base game. This is how expansions work in all other MMOs. So your paywall argument makes no sense.

About ESO+ loosing value though... They added double bank to ESO+ and Gina mentioned that they are looking into other options to add value to it. We are yet to see if those words are true but for now ESO+ is good value to me. I still have access to all other DLCs and will have access to new dungeons from Q3 and the other DLC in Q4.

If morrowind comes with the base game, I have the base game, why don't I have morrowind?
Because I bought earlier, how does that make sense?

This means new players will be getting the same play experience for less money. Punishing customers for loyalty isn't a good business model.

As ESO+ gives access to less and less of the overall game, will it remain good value?

Youre not a new player...Logic...............

I am therefore excluded from getting Morrowind with base game at a reduce price. Punished for loyalty, logic.

*facepalm*

Elsonso

JKorr wrote: »

Caligamy_ESO wrote: »

I'll just leave this here..

"When you're in an Elder Scrolls game, you're in a world. We don't want players to hit monetization fees when they're in the world. It's like, I go into a dungeon, if I don't have access to the dungeon it pops up a window: you don't have access to this, go buy 50 credits. We didn't want that experience. That's not an Elder Scrolls experience." - Matt Firor

Yeah. Too bad so many people didn't think they should actually pay for that experience.

The question about dlcs/access didn't come up until the game went buy to play. So for everyone who wouldn't accept a sub, guess what the OMG WHY IS THERE A SUB ALL THE STUFFS SHOULD BE FREE lead to. I might be in the minority, but I'd rather the game was still sub only, with extra for fun bling in the crown store if they still needed it.

Congrats for finding the quote from 8/13. But you missed a few lines.

ZeniMax Online's (or Bethesda's) decision to make The Elder Scrolls Online a subscription-based game certainly drew the ire of a few Elder Scrolls and MMO fans, but game director Matt Firor believes a sub-based payment model ensures the best possible experience for all players.

Speaking with Eurogamer, Firor walked through ZeniMax's reasoning in choosing subscriptions as TESO's primary method of generating revenue. He listed two primary motivators: one, to ensure monetization did not interfere with the traditional Elder Scrolls experience, and two, to keep money flowing for future content.

So, no subscription as sooo many people wanted, but there are now "paywalls" behind either eso plus, or buying crowns. Congratulations. Zenimax listened to the "I PLAY ON CONSOLE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ON TOP OF IT" people *and* the GUILD WARS IS BUY TO PLAY, WHY PAY A SUB FOR THIS people.

Clearly, our current Crown Store and Crown Store DLC situation means that we are not getting the best possible experience. I think that much is obvious. Accepting that change was probably a hard pill for Firor to swallow.

If they had not changed from full subscription to B2P+optional subscription, I think we would still be paying extra for something like the Morrowind Chapter. Even with a full subscription, they would have done something like it to boost revenue.

STEVIL

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

m

lagrue wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

LorenzoSober wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

LukosCreyden wrote: »

Well, one way they will likely get around the chapter issue is by releasing "ESO: Murkmire" (for example) next year, which will include the base game and both chapters, probably for the same price that Morrowind is going for in the shops. Repeat so on and so forth each year for each chapter release.

So, best to opt out till they stop releasing them, as you'll get them way cheaper later. As others have said, they not required for advancement, so, why buy them now?

If you can wait that long, sure it is probably the cheapest way to upgrade the game. Like they did this for almost every MMO to date.

I was a subscriber, as this gave me access to the full game, as is the case for any good MMO. It no longer gives me full access, nor does the crownstore, nor do crowns.

So what you're upset you can't buy crowns and then go to the crown store and buy it? How would that be any different than just buying the expansion straight up...

I hear you on the subscriber bit - but really? You're upset it ain't in the crown store?

It's very different, if you're a subscriber, or have bought crown, Zos already has your money. In both cases, you're are prepaying, for future content you may want, from DLC to outfits.

Except now you can't, now you have to use a 3rd method to get full game access. Zos still have that subs/crowns money, but now they no longer give you the potential to access the whole game.

Is it therefore still wise to subscribe, or to pre-buy crowns?
Wouldn't it be better to buy as you need, instead of pre-buying?
Will MMO players increasingly realize this?
Will players choosing to not subscribe, or pre-buy crowns be to Zos's advantage?
As my OP clearly states, Zos have the right to do this, but is it right for them to do so?

RE the bold - this is incorrect.

A subscription does not guarantee you future anything. it never did. let that sub drop and its gone. All that money you ;aid to sub gets you benefits that are for now... not forever - with some partial exceptions. However, content is not one of those exceptions.

You sub pays for today... not all future.

if you dont believe me, drop it and see.

As for the future, the only thing you know for sure is that you agreed to let ZOS change the terms at anytime without your permission - if you are playing the game that is.

I am not questioning Zos's right to do this, but the wisdom of them doing it.

ESO+ when I paid my sub, full access. ESO+ now, while my current sub is still active, no full access. They have that right, but is it wise?

Without knowledge of their internal metrics on revenue, i have no, zip, nada, nil basis on which to draw a conclusion. But they did not violate any agreements they made with me and i am getting value for my dollar that I am ok with, so seems good on my end.

JKorr

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

m

lagrue wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

LorenzoSober wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

LukosCreyden wrote: »

Well, one way they will likely get around the chapter issue is by releasing "ESO: Murkmire" (for example) next year, which will include the base game and both chapters, probably for the same price that Morrowind is going for in the shops. Repeat so on and so forth each year for each chapter release.

So, best to opt out till they stop releasing them, as you'll get them way cheaper later. As others have said, they not required for advancement, so, why buy them now?

If you can wait that long, sure it is probably the cheapest way to upgrade the game. Like they did this for almost every MMO to date.

I was a subscriber, as this gave me access to the full game, as is the case for any good MMO. It no longer gives me full access, nor does the crownstore, nor do crowns.

So what you're upset you can't buy crowns and then go to the crown store and buy it? How would that be any different than just buying the expansion straight up...

I hear you on the subscriber bit - but really? You're upset it ain't in the crown store?

It's very different, if you're a subscriber, or have bought crown, Zos already has your money. In both cases, you're are prepaying, for future content you may want, from DLC to outfits.

Except now you can't, now you have to use a 3rd method to get full game access. Zos still have that subs/crowns money, but now they no longer give you the potential to access the whole game.

Is it therefore still wise to subscribe, or to pre-buy crowns?
Wouldn't it be better to buy as you need, instead of pre-buying?
Will MMO players increasingly realize this?
Will players choosing to not subscribe, or pre-buy crowns be to Zos's advantage?
As my OP clearly states, Zos have the right to do this, but is it right for them to do so?

A third method?

Pray tell, what magical means did you use to buy the original "full" game? Did you wish for it and it just appeared? Or did you :gasp: use a third method like paying for it on Zos's store, Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy, whatever your favorite purchase method?

Don't know about you, but I bought my copy off Zos's store. Bought Morrowind that way too. So I guess I used the same first method or something? I'm kind of confused. Short of stealing the game or getting it as a gift, it had to be purchased from somewhere.

And no, I'm NOT "pre-paying for content". I'm paying a sub for content I currently have access to. My support of their game/world/work is what my sub is paying for. ZOS gives me crowns for my sub/their assured income so I can buy fun stuff like pets, costumes, and mounts. They don't really have to do that. And I can buy extra crowns on top of what they give me if I want more fun stuff, but that is an intentional exchange by me of money for crowns for stuff I want.

I've used the crowns they gave me to buy the dlc outright. If I ever have to stop my sub for some reason, I'll still have access to "the full game". I view buying the chapter/expansion Morrowind the same way. If I want it, I have to pay for it. I'm okay with that. The content is, to me, very much worth it, and I'm not talking about the Warden class.

Rosveen

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

Also, I'd only buy crowns now, if I was spending them all right away, so no pre-buying crowns. This means Zos get that money later than they otherwise would.

But you pay more that way. The cheapest route is buying crowns only during sales - not only do you pay less, but you're also careful with impulse purchases because your crown stash needs to last at least until the next sale.

IcyDeadPeople

This ESO coffin has so many nails at this point, I mean since the game first launched in 2014 a new final nail keeps getting hammered in there each week.

Bouldercleave

Kiwi wrote: »

11000 crowns or 80 bucks
whats the difference

Perception.

kunquatb16_ESO

Rosveen wrote: »

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

Also, I'd only buy crowns now, if I was spending them all right away, so no pre-buying crowns. This means Zos get that money later than they otherwise would.

But you pay more that way. The cheapest route is buying crowns only during sales - not only do you pay less, but you're also careful with impulse purchases because your crown stash needs to last at least until the next sale.

Yes, but I'd only do that to buy already existent content. So would both buy crowns, and that content later.

Rosveen

Bouldercleave wrote: »

Kiwi wrote: »

11000 crowns or 80 bucks
whats the difference

Perception.

Crowns are also non-refundable and cannot be bought in the exact amount you need for the item you want.

Jamascus

kunquatb16_ESO wrote: »

I'd like to start with the acknowledgement that Zos has the right to use whatever business model it chooses. This however, does not make whatever business model they choose the right one.

The effect the chapters will have going forwards, will be to build up an increasing pay wall to new players. Player base growth is vital to the long term viability of any MMO.
Currently, this paywall is not too onerous for most, being base + chapter + subscription (or crowns) for the full game.
Next year, for new players, it will be base game + 2 chapters + subscription. Year on year, this situation will get worse. Fewer player will be able to afford the whole game, and so fewer will join. This reduces player base grown sharply. As the cost of the full game will become prohibitive for all but the wealthy, and soon after, people leaving will outpace those joining.

There is also an issue with the way they introduced chapters as an idea. The announcement that it would not be included in ESO+, or be available on the crown store was not made until after I paid my last subscription. I know that I am only one of a few for whom this is the case, that is no defence of it. Even if I do subscribe, which is in the balance right now, I will not do so before offsetting the cost of Morrowind.

Chapters are DLCs in all but name, and given the way in which it's been foisted upon players seems craven, mealy mouthed and dishonest. I'd like to reiterate, that Zos has the right to do this, but that this does not make right for them to do so.

If people don't speak out against this, what is to stop them from swapping out another DLC for a “optional content pack” go “it's not a DLC” and not make it available on the crownstore either next year? And then another the year after that?

I encourage other ESO+ members to offset the cost of the Morrowind DLC (calling it what it is) from their subscriptions. In the hopes Zos realize that depreciating rather than appreciating the ESO+ membership will only do their profitability harm. ESO+ Members are the steady stream lifeblood of ESO, and should be treated as such.

Additionally, not making chapters available on the crownstore seems directly target against those that have already bought crowns, with the understanding that all future DLC will be purchasable there. Morrowind is a DLC in all but name, and therefore should be available on the crownstore.

They added double bank space to ESO+, I think that will offset any subs lost because they changed their business model again. It will be disheartening when they do as you say with future content though, but I whole heartedly expect them to do as you say.

SteveCampsOut

lagrue wrote: »

By the way - don't blame console players - it was purely on PC players that subs got removed - come time of console release there wasn't even subs anymore because not enough people on PC were subbing - it wasn't working because PC Players made it not work -this was done purely by cheap*sses in the PC community and I resent console players being blamed. We gladly pay subs for other games on console... no idea where that misconstrued idea came from. (FF14 comes to mind, even though I don't play it).

It's a Historical FACT that subs were removed because Console players whined about having to pay Game subs on top of Console Subs. We were there! The subs were removed before console purely in preparation for the console release. Those of us who were there know the facts and you sir obviously were not there.

Elsonso

SteveCampsOut wrote: »

lagrue wrote: »

By the way - don't blame console players - it was purely on PC players that subs got removed - come time of console release there wasn't even subs anymore because not enough people on PC were subbing - it wasn't working because PC Players made it not work -this was done purely by cheap*sses in the PC community and I resent console players being blamed. We gladly pay subs for other games on console... no idea where that misconstrued idea came from. (FF14 comes to mind, even though I don't play it).

It's a Historical FACT that subs were removed because Console players whined about having to pay Game subs on top of Console Subs. We were there! The subs were removed before console purely in preparation for the console release. Those of us who were there know the facts and you sir obviously were not there.

By there, I assume you mean in the ZOS offices?

SirDopey

I thought much the same at first but after getting through Morrowind I'm happy to change my stance. I got a new class and almost 30 hours of /played out of morrowind, and that's without stepping into HoF yet.

For that, I'm happy to pay the $40.00.

For me, what really needs to be discussed is the line to be drawn in the sand over what is a DLC and what's an expansion and the minimum requirements the community expects in order to fork out extra cash.

SirDopey

As for the success / popularity of it, you only have to venture into VVardenfall to discover the success. There's masses of people everywhere. Sure, not everyone is a Warden but they're still in there.

idk

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

The game engine for ESO needs upgraded and soon or technology will pass them by. That's the only thing I could see keeping ESO from lasting as long as it should. WOW was in an era where Microsoft had no reason to upgrade DirectX 11 and was sitting on stagnation for years until AMD forced their hand with Mantle...ESO doesn't have that luxury sadly and they need to start working towards implementing these technologies as a continuing path towards constantly improving their game and performance.

The engine does not need upgrading. There is absolutely no reason to change the engine. There is reason to update the graphics since the older version of DirectX is not longer being supported by the game. That does not require upda

JKorr wrote: »

Caligamy_ESO wrote: »

I'll just leave this here..

"When you're in an Elder Scrolls game, you're in a world. We don't want players to hit monetization fees when they're in the world. It's like, I go into a dungeon, if I don't have access to the dungeon it pops up a window: you don't have access to this, go buy 50 credits. We didn't want that experience. That's not an Elder Scrolls experience." - Matt Firor

Yeah. Too bad so many people didn't think they should actually pay for that experience.

The question about dlcs/access didn't come up until the game went buy to play. So for everyone who wouldn't accept a sub, guess what the OMG WHY IS THERE A SUB ALL THE STUFFS SHOULD BE FREE lead to. I might be in the minority, but I'd rather the game was still sub only, with extra for fun bling in the crown store if they still needed it.

Congrats for finding the quote from 8/13. But you missed a few lines.

ZeniMax Online's (or Bethesda's) decision to make The Elder Scrolls Online a subscription-based game certainly drew the ire of a few Elder Scrolls and MMO fans, but game director Matt Firor believes a sub-based payment model ensures the best possible experience for all players.

Speaking with Eurogamer, Firor walked through ZeniMax's reasoning in choosing subscriptions as TESO's primary method of generating revenue. He listed two primary motivators: one, to ensure monetization did not interfere with the traditional Elder Scrolls experience, and two, to keep money flowing for future content.

So, no subscription as sooo many people wanted, but there are now "paywalls" behind either eso plus, or buying crowns. Congratulations. Zenimax listened to the "I PLAY ON CONSOLE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ON TOP OF IT" people *and* the GUILD WARS IS BUY TO PLAY, WHY PAY A SUB FOR THIS people.

True, but the unfortunate reality is Zos has lacked a real vision for the game and adequate planning.

Looking back at the comment that subs was desired for to keep money flowing for future content. Yes less than a year into the game the well dried up and Zos had stopped developing content early after launch because they had no planned appropriately to prepare the ports to console.

Those of us who started ESO before early release probably recall Zos explaining the lack of a UI customary in MMORPG games like ESO. Their comment was it had always been their vision that we get our information from the environment rather than from the UI. I think Sage said that, maybe Firor. Regardless, they would not have spent the time and money on developing the full UI that was present in earlier Beta if that was the case. Just an example of the lack of vision and planning.

Personally, think 2 things changed since Firor made the comments you posted.
1. Business side realized cash shops are great revenue which is why so many MMOs include them.
2. Since the went to Sub/B2P hybrid model with a cash shop the Business side realized that many save a great deal of $$$ merely buying DLCs, especially so when they bought their crowns on sale. With that they increased ESO+ incentives and decided that taking a DLC and adding more to it like BGs and Warden they could require anyone who wants to play it buy it with real money.

Personally, I do not object to the changes, however, I would prefer it, for the longer term benefit of the game, that Zos begin to think things through better. I question the how well they plan out these new ideas and certainly question they actually have a vision for the game.

donpaulieone

I wonder if this debate will continue on until next year's "chapter." A few thoughts/truisms I've come to realize:

1) ZOS making it a non-DLC purchase was a low blow. No questions there. So much for them $23.99/5500 crowns pack I bought on sale in December. People have a right to be pissed.
2) ESO+ - totally optional. I sub when I play regularly. I'm a loot *** and the craft bag comes in handy. And it's 50cents a day. My daily coffee addiction costs 10x that! Use your banked crowns, buy "Guilds and Glory," and unsubscribe to voice your protests. ZOS will find someone to fill your place
3) ZOS really doesn't give two *** about us. We play the game because we enjoy it. And they laugh all the way to the bank.
4) early adopters in MMOs usually end up paying more when it comes to content
5) Millenials complain a lot

SydneyGrey

Since pretty much every other MMO charges for extra content, I doubt charging for Morrowind is going to make the company go into free-fall.

CaptainBeerDude

jircris11 wrote: »

So all in all, ZoS is not being nearly as greedy as people think, a lot of time,money and effort went in to the expansion and it shows. Sure they have bugs still, and i DO disagree with some of their mount prices in the crown store. But all in all its a solid buy if you are looking for entertainment. I mean 30 bucks is enough to go see 2 movies and get a large popcorn and drink here in California. OOOOR i could buy morrowind where thus far i have gotten over 20 hours of quests and enjoyment.

I went to the movies on the weekend. 2 adult tickets, 1 medium caramel popcorn, 1 jumbo soft drink and 1 jumbo frozen Coke and 2 ice creams was about $85.

Edit:
I'm jelly of your movie pricings.

VincentBlanquin

game is now ESOQ - elder scrolls online questing

they prefer develop dozens of quests every 3months as ultimate priority, including for some new grind a got to go. everything else is just optional. its obvious if you rethink some of their statements from the past like "we observe players come and leave (depends on when new dlc will go live)". heavily feed on original TES games nostalgia and fact that no new single player TES is announced

jircris11

CaptainBeerDude wrote: »

jircris11 wrote: »

So all in all, ZoS is not being nearly as greedy as people think, a lot of time,money and effort went in to the expansion and it shows. Sure they have bugs still, and i DO disagree with some of their mount prices in the crown store. But all in all its a solid buy if you are looking for entertainment. I mean 30 bucks is enough to go see 2 movies and get a large popcorn and drink here in California. OOOOR i could buy morrowind where thus far i have gotten over 20 hours of quests and enjoyment.

I went to the movies on the weekend. 2 adult tickets, 1 medium caramel popcorn, 1 jumbo soft drink and 1 jumbo frozen Coke and 2 ice creams was about $85.

Edit:
I'm jelly of your movie pricings.

Ouch. But to be fair it was just butter popcorn. Not the delicouseness you had lol.

altemriel

Malic wrote: »

These doom and gloom threads are hysterical.

What game are you all playing? I logged in last night, there were long queues for everything and the hubs were full of players.

What coffin exactly? I think ZOS are scumbags for the bait and switch on subscribers, that argument has been talked to death and its certainly perfectly consistent with how they run their game but, coffin? Death?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSqqIOf3pgk

this !!


nope, no coffin here

kunquatb16_ESO

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

The game engine for ESO needs upgraded and soon or technology will pass them by. That's the only thing I could see keeping ESO from lasting as long as it should. WOW was in an era where Microsoft had no reason to upgrade DirectX 11 and was sitting on stagnation for years until AMD forced their hand with Mantle...ESO doesn't have that luxury sadly and they need to start working towards implementing these technologies as a continuing path towards constantly improving their game and performance.

The engine does not need upgrading. There is absolutely no reason to change the engine. There is reason to update the graphics since the older version of DirectX is not longer being supported by the game. That does not require upda

JKorr wrote: »

Caligamy_ESO wrote: »

I'll just leave this here..

"When you're in an Elder Scrolls game, you're in a world. We don't want players to hit monetization fees when they're in the world. It's like, I go into a dungeon, if I don't have access to the dungeon it pops up a window: you don't have access to this, go buy 50 credits. We didn't want that experience. That's not an Elder Scrolls experience." - Matt Firor

Yeah. Too bad so many people didn't think they should actually pay for that experience.

The question about dlcs/access didn't come up until the game went buy to play. So for everyone who wouldn't accept a sub, guess what the OMG WHY IS THERE A SUB ALL THE STUFFS SHOULD BE FREE lead to. I might be in the minority, but I'd rather the game was still sub only, with extra for fun bling in the crown store if they still needed it.

Congrats for finding the quote from 8/13. But you missed a few lines.

ZeniMax Online's (or Bethesda's) decision to make The Elder Scrolls Online a subscription-based game certainly drew the ire of a few Elder Scrolls and MMO fans, but game director Matt Firor believes a sub-based payment model ensures the best possible experience for all players.

Speaking with Eurogamer, Firor walked through ZeniMax's reasoning in choosing subscriptions as TESO's primary method of generating revenue. He listed two primary motivators: one, to ensure monetization did not interfere with the traditional Elder Scrolls experience, and two, to keep money flowing for future content.

So, no subscription as sooo many people wanted, but there are now "paywalls" behind either eso plus, or buying crowns. Congratulations. Zenimax listened to the "I PLAY ON CONSOLE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ON TOP OF IT" people *and* the GUILD WARS IS BUY TO PLAY, WHY PAY A SUB FOR THIS people.

True, but the unfortunate reality is Zos has lacked a real vision for the game and adequate planning.

Looking back at the comment that subs was desired for to keep money flowing for future content. Yes less than a year into the game the well dried up and Zos had stopped developing content early after launch because they had no planned appropriately to prepare the ports to console.

Those of us who started ESO before early release probably recall Zos explaining the lack of a UI customary in MMORPG games like ESO. Their comment was it had always been their vision that we get our information from the environment rather than from the UI. I think Sage said that, maybe Firor. Regardless, they would not have spent the time and money on developing the full UI that was present in earlier Beta if that was the case. Just an example of the lack of vision and planning.

Personally, think 2 things changed since Firor made the comments you posted.
1. Business side realized cash shops are great revenue which is why so many MMOs include them.
2. Since the went to Sub/B2P hybrid model with a cash shop the Business side realized that many save a great deal of $$$ merely buying DLCs, especially so when they bought their crowns on sale. With that they increased ESO+ incentives and decided that taking a DLC and adding more to it like BGs and Warden they could require anyone who wants to play it buy it with real money.

Personally, I do not object to the changes, however, I would prefer it, for the longer term benefit of the game, that Zos begin to think things through better. I question the how well they plan out these new ideas and certainly question they actually have a vision for the game.

Honestly think this post deserves it's own thread, it does all come back to vision and planning

Elsonso

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Personally, think 2 things changed since Firor made the comments you posted.
1. Business side realized cash shops are great revenue which is why so many MMOs include them.
2. Since the went to Sub/B2P hybrid model with a cash shop the Business side realized that many save a great deal of $$$ merely buying DLCs, especially so when they bought their crowns on sale. With that they increased ESO+ incentives and decided that taking a DLC and adding more to it like BGs and Warden they could require anyone who wants to play it buy it with real money.

Honestly, I think that #2 is more that the business side decided that they did not want to give us big base game features for free. It has nothing to do with DLC or ESO Plus. I think Chapters are about recovering the expense to develop new systems.

drakhan2002_ESO

The OP misses the mark somewhat; yes the Chapters will always cost real money or crowns, but as we've seen in other MMOs, the price of those Chapters/expansions usually go down in price or are bundled into the main game as part of base game.

I think that yes, future players will need to buy all the content (why shouldn't they?)...but it will likely be less expensive than today.

kunquatb16_ESO

drakhan2002_ESO wrote: »

The OP misses the mark somewhat; yes the Chapters will always cost real money or crowns, but as we've seen in other MMOs, the price of those Chapters/expansions usually go down in price or are bundled into the main game as part of base game.

I think that yes, future players will need to buy all the content (why shouldn't they?)...but it will likely be less expensive than today.

It is true, but part of my point is the effect such sudden changes have on people. My response won't be abnormal, somewhat confirmed in the rest of the thread.

Zos need to decide 1 way to get full access, price it, stick with it. All the other ways can still be used. Devalueing ESO+ by changing that it give full access, will make less subscribe, and of those that do, an increasing number will do so less often.
After all, if they just change ESO+ without good reason, who's to say they won't "un-include" DLCs in future?

I think it's an overall losing strategy, even if it does lead to short term gain.

lagrue

SteveCampsOut wrote: »

lagrue wrote: »

By the way - don't blame console players - it was purely on PC players that subs got removed - come time of console release there wasn't even subs anymore because not enough people on PC were subbing - it wasn't working because PC Players made it not work -this was done purely by cheap*sses in the PC community and I resent console players being blamed. We gladly pay subs for other games on console... no idea where that misconstrued idea came from. (FF14 comes to mind, even though I don't play it).

It's a Historical FACT that subs were removed because Console players whined about having to pay Game subs on top of Console Subs. We were there! The subs were removed before console purely in preparation for the console release. Those of us who were there know the facts and you sir obviously were not there.

How and where did we whine about it? Because last time I checked you can't even access the forums without first owning the game and setting up and account. Was ZOS reading the commnt section of Kotaku articles? I'd just really like to know where this info comes from. When I read up on the issue - it seems clear the sub model was failing on PC already, and they didn't have high hopes it would be any better on console.