1500 crowns per outfit slot (1 slot) just under $1200 for every slot

Ydrisselle

Charliff1966 wrote: »

Inoki wrote: »

Wayshuba wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

TL/DR : saying that the pricing is bad FOR YOU is fine. Your opinion, your criticism. Saying it's bad for ZOS isn't fine because you don't know that and neither do I. Is it that big of a deal anyway ?

I'd say recent actions by ZoS are proving otherwise. Two recent examples:

1.) Current mega-expensive house offering. For the first time, ZoS is running it for two weeks rather than four days. So they are reading these threads and considering some of the suggestions.

2.) The forthcoming Crown Crate motif. Considering the forums are a "minority" as you like to say, it is a big enough minority that it also influenced ZoS's decision to also put the pages as drops in fishing in Summerset.

In any MMO I have ever played, people like to dismiss valid complaints on forums because it is just a "minority" of players. But that has always proven to be untrue. What it represents is a "sampling" of the players - and an important one at that. They are the players willing to tell you what is wrong and give the company a chance to fix it, whereas a larger part of the base will just leave without saying a word and a company is left guessing why so many players are abandoning their game.

It is foolish to ignore customers. Take one case in point with SWTOR when they introduced the Galactic Command System. They were told it would absolutely destroy the game. They completely ignored the feedback, because that was a vocal minority, and put it in the game anyway. What happened? Exactly what they were warned about - a mass exodus of customers very quickly.

As to ZoS and the CS pricing, the outfit slots alone are not the problem, but I think they are what finally set people off that enough is enough. ZoS seems to lack a very basic understanding of what micro-transactions are. They are called "micro" to begin with, because it is supposed to be about selling volumes of low-cost items. Heck, the concept comes from "impulse" buy items stocked in the checkout lines in retail stores - a concept retail has long since perfected. The idea is that people, in general, will impulse buy items usually of $20 or less in value. Few will impulse buy $50 or $100 items.

This is why Fortnite does so well - nothing priced more than $20. Whereas ZoS just seems to keep escalating prices on digital items into the stratosphere until eventually customers just plain won't buy because there is no fair value to them - and I think ZoS is starting to see signs of this as evidenced by what I mentioned above.

I want ZoS to do well as we all win that way. But they just seem to keep shooting themselves in the foot with their pricing approach to the CS. $15 outfit slots, $50 motifs, $40 mounts, and $100+ houses. It is plain just stupid.

Well said.

I fail to understand how can anyone waste 50$ FOR A MOTIF or over 100$ for a digital house. What would you call that? Addiction? Insanity? Vanity?

This issue will persist for as long as even a minority will be willing to pay that amount for pixels. Only if people genuinely came to agree to stop supporting such practices may we witness their discharge.

For 100$ you can buy so much real life stuff, or if you want to spend on digital goods, why not buy more games?

Simply..... wow.

With our income €100 wil probably given to a waiter as a tip. ZOS should use different price-ranges for their shop so more people can buy stuff. For us €100 means nothing, for others its food for a week.

For me it would be for a month. Or more importantly it would be enough not to become homeless in a couple of weeks.

But everybody has different measures and interests.

Morgha_Kul

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Wayshuba wrote: »

As to ZoS and the CS pricing, the outfit slots alone are not the problem, but I think they are what finally set people off that enough is enough. ZoS seems to lack a very basic understanding of what micro-transactions are. They are called "micro" to begin with, because it is supposed to be about selling volumes of low-cost items. Heck, the concept comes from "impulse" buy items stocked in the checkout lines in retail stores - a concept retail has long since perfected. The idea is that people, in general, will impulse buy items usually of $20 or less in value. Few will impulse buy $50 or $100 items.

The issue isn't that ZOS does not understand micro-transactions, it is that they have decided not to use them.

Complaining that they lack an understanding of micro-transactions, when they aren't even attempting to do them, is like saying Ford lacks an understanding of what a car is because the Excursion is not a car.

For whatever reason, ZOS is not doing low cost volume items in their store. This is because they don't want to.

But they SHOULD want to. They're in business to make money (supposedly by making a good game people want to pay for), and having more customers at lower prices is going to make them more money overall. That's the point we keep making.

And that is EXACTLY the point I (and a few others) are disputing. YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT.
40*100$=4000$ is HIGHER a profit than 100*30$=3000$.
It all depends on the elasticity of the product depending on its price. It's different for every product/target segment and you can rest assured that ZOS did test that before deciding the prices.
For Talos' sake, STOP pretending you know better than ZOS !!!

No, I DO know that. I work for a business with two stores. One does high end business, suits for $2000. Mine does volume business, suits for $200. My store outsells the other store significantly.

But, let's set that aside.

Consider:

Suppose I open a candy store. I sell a candy bar exactly like a Mars bar, but instead of pricing it at $1, as is the case in every other candy store, I sell my Mars bar for $15.

What will happen is this: One person might buy that candy bar for $15. All my other customers will look at my price and say, "why would I pay that much for a Mars bar? It's WAY overpriced," and NOT BUY IT.

Then, those unhappy people will go around telling their friends (who tell THEIR friends, and so on) about how ridiculous my prices are... and then THOSE people will NOT BUY from me. That's lost revenue. Sure, you made that $15 up front, but lost all the other potential customers that were there at the time, but also (and here's the critical part) ALL THE CUSTOMERS YOU MIGHT HAVE IN THE FUTURE.


The Microtransaction model is built around what they call "CHURN." That is, you're not interested in retaining customers, you're only interested in attracting the NEXT batch of customers. If you alienate your customers, you won't HAVE a next batch.

I said this before, but clearly need to again.

Sell 10 items at $15 each, and you have $150, and 10 happy customers
Sell 100 items at 1.50 each, and you have $150, and 100 happy customers.
The difference is that in the first case, you have 10 happy customers, and many UNHAPPY customers. Unhappy customers TALK about being unhappy, and your business declines as people hear about it. So, while the money is the same, or even if the money was BETTER in the first case, it wouldn't remain that way. Word of mouth is POWERFUL, especially in the information age, where opinions and reviews can be had in seconds.

They're on a dangerous path. I can't fathom why you are choosing not to see it.

Charliff1966

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Wayshuba wrote: »

As to ZoS and the CS pricing, the outfit slots alone are not the problem, but I think they are what finally set people off that enough is enough. ZoS seems to lack a very basic understanding of what micro-transactions are. They are called "micro" to begin with, because it is supposed to be about selling volumes of low-cost items. Heck, the concept comes from "impulse" buy items stocked in the checkout lines in retail stores - a concept retail has long since perfected. The idea is that people, in general, will impulse buy items usually of $20 or less in value. Few will impulse buy $50 or $100 items.

The issue isn't that ZOS does not understand micro-transactions, it is that they have decided not to use them.

Complaining that they lack an understanding of micro-transactions, when they aren't even attempting to do them, is like saying Ford lacks an understanding of what a car is because the Excursion is not a car.

For whatever reason, ZOS is not doing low cost volume items in their store. This is because they don't want to.

But they SHOULD want to. They're in business to make money (supposedly by making a good game people want to pay for), and having more customers at lower prices is going to make them more money overall. That's the point we keep making.

And that is EXACTLY the point I (and a few others) are disputing. YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT.
40*100$=4000$ is HIGHER a profit than 100*30$=3000$.
It all depends on the elasticity of the product depending on its price. It's different for every product/target segment and you can rest assured that ZOS did test that before deciding the prices.
For Talos' sake, STOP pretending you know better than ZOS !!!

No, I DO know that. I work for a business with two stores. One does high end business, suits for $2000. Mine does volume business, suits for $200. My store outsells the other store significantly.

But, let's set that aside.

Consider:

Suppose I open a candy store. I sell a candy bar exactly like a Mars bar, but instead of pricing it at $1, as is the case in every other candy store, I sell my Mars bar for $15.

What will happen is this: One person might buy that candy bar for $15. All my other customers will look at my price and say, "why would I pay that much for a Mars bar? It's WAY overpriced," and NOT BUY IT.

Then, those unhappy people will go around telling their friends (who tell THEIR friends, and so on) about how ridiculous my prices are... and then THOSE people will NOT BUY from me. That's lost revenue. Sure, you made that $15 up front, but lost all the other potential customers that were there at the time, but also (and here's the critical part) ALL THE CUSTOMERS YOU MIGHT HAVE IN THE FUTURE.


The Microtransaction model is built around what they call "CHURN." That is, you're not interested in retaining customers, you're only interested in attracting the NEXT batch of customers. If you alienate your customers, you won't HAVE a next batch.

I said this before, but clearly need to again.

Sell 10 items at $15 each, and you have $150, and 10 happy customers
Sell 100 items at 1.50 each, and you have $150, and 100 happy customers.
The difference is that in the first case, you have 10 happy customers, and many UNHAPPY customers. Unhappy customers TALK about being unhappy, and your business declines as people hear about it. So, while the money is the same, or even if the money was BETTER in the first case, it wouldn't remain that way. Word of mouth is POWERFUL, especially in the information age, where opinions and reviews can be had in seconds.

They're on a dangerous path. I can't fathom why you are choosing not to see it.

The other store ($2000) is still doing well and has a reason to sell expensive suits, right? Are you telling them they made the wrong decision with their pricing?
What if ZOS decided to sell expensive microtransactions for a reason? Maybe they dont look at the common rable and go for those with more money to spend. Yeah they may lose the common folk but they dont care because those folks arent their target audience.

Morgha_Kul

The other store survives, yes... but it could do better.

I have no problem with ZOS having SOME expensive items on the store (though defining "expensive" might be necessary), such as some of the more elaborate houses.

The problem arises when they price something at a price point that is grossly inconsistent with similar items in other games. They then get themselves into that candy store scenario I mentioned. Perhaps the solution might be to reduce the cost of the slots, but increase the cost of the tokens.

In any case, the point is to get the game into as healthy a position as possible. That means income, but it also means customer attitude.

Troneon

Why is there no way to buy slots with gold?

This is disgusting model.

Wayshuba

Charliff1966 wrote: »

The other store ($2000) is still doing well and has a reason to sell expensive suits, right? Are you telling them they made the wrong decision with their pricing?
What if ZOS decided to sell expensive microtransactions for a reason? Maybe they dont look at the common rable and go for those with more money to spend. Yeah they may lose the common folk but they dont care because those folks arent their target audience.

If that is the case, then their customer acquisition model needs to change since it is based around attracting the "common rable" as you refer to them. If they only wanted people with a lot of money to waste then they would price the base game at $300 to ensure that is the only customers they have, but they don't. They price it for mass market appeal.

So why would they price the game for mass market appeal and then set the CS up to only target 1%-3% of their customers? That makes absolutely no sense.

Furthermore, this is the video game market. There is no such thing as a luxury segment in video games. The idea behind micro-transactions is to get the mass market (minnows) to buy things here and there, yet offer enough items that those who spend more (whales) have enough to buy a lot of the items (thus why loot crates became so popular). Setting high prices to purposefully make it so a good portion of your customers don't buy makes no good business sense whatsoever.

MajesticHaruki

I am OK with them making a profit out of the outfit system but at this stage, they make non. I want to buy 2 slots on two of my characters. That's 6k crowns. Not going to spend so much for 4 outfits. 350 crowns would be enough for a slot on a character.

Inoki

Except these slots could be:

• purchasable and account, not character bound
• part of ESO Plus with all possible slots unlocked as part of membership

anitajoneb17_ESO

Troneon wrote: »

Why is there no way to buy slots with gold?

Because ZOS doesn't pay their employees and investors in ESO gold.

heaven13

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Troneon wrote: »

Why is there no way to buy slots with gold?

Because ZOS doesn't pay their employees and investors in ESO gold.

Let's not pretend that ZOS can't offer both.

• Mount training - gold and crowns
• Inventory upgrade - gold and crowns
• Outfit dyeing - gold and crowns
• Research scrolls - writ vouchers and crowns
• Potions/food - craftable and crowns
• Housing furniture - craftable and crowns
• Vampirism/Lycanthropy - free through questing/players and crowns

Multiple methods of acquisition would be preferable - time/currency sink in game, convenience purchase with real money. That goes for pretty much everything in this game: give me a reason to play content or, if I don't want to/don't have time, let me use crowns. Win/win. There will always be people spending crowns because they've got limited time but enough money to justify the convenience. And, in the end, the people who don't have the money to spend but like the game will likely play longer because they have goals to work towards, leading to a more populated game and people participating in more content. How many people are begging ZOS to put the dungeon styles (Kena, etc) in the actual dungeons because they want a reason to play them again? Instead, ZOS (as far as we know going off PTS) is just gonna stick that stuff in the crown store which reinforces the hypothesis that they are focused on short-term burst profit, rather than long-term steady customer base that will keep the game going.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

The other store survives, yes... but it could do better.

It does better in what ? Unit sale ? Cash sales ? Profit margin ?
Also, have you realized that, if the other store was doing the same as you it would actually *compete* with you and the two of you combined would achieve less than each of you on separate segments ?

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

Suppose I open a candy store. I sell a candy bar exactly like a Mars bar, but instead of pricing it at $1, as is the case in every other candy store, I sell my Mars bar for $15.

What will happen is this: One person might buy that candy bar for $15. All my other customers will look at my price and say, "why would I pay that much for a Mars bar? It's WAY overpriced," and NOT BUY IT.

First, and as I already said, we're not talking about the same Mars bar here, truly identical. We're talking about outfit slots in one game vs. outfit slots in another game.

Even then... you know there's far more attached to a product than the product itself. There's a lot of image, too, and the price is part of that image. An Apple phone does little to nothing more than any much cheaper Android phone. A Dior perfume is chemically speaking no different from a generic Walmart perfume (assuming Walmart does its own perfume brand, which I don't know, since I don't live in the US). Yet people buy LOTS of Apple phones and Dior perfumes.

I believe part of ZOS' strategy in keeping the prices high is to avoid the very bad image of microtransactions and the very bad image of microtransaction-driven games. They also want to capitalize on their image of a game with fantastic graphics (which is true). In a game with fantastic graphics, outfit slots are expensive. (All last paragraph is plain - although rational - assumptions from my side as to why ZOS chooses the high-end positioning for crown store products).

anitajoneb17_ESO

heaven13 wrote: »

• Mount training - gold and crowns
• Inventory upgrade - gold and crowns
• Outfit dyeing - gold and crowns
• Research scrolls - writ vouchers and crowns
• Potions/food - craftable and crowns
• Housing furniture - craftable and crowns
• Vampirism/Lycanthropy - free through questing/players and crowns

- Mount training :

"Crown only" would mean "P2W". Also, the daily riding lesson (gold version) is meant to keep us logging in daily. Which benefits ZOS too money wise (investors watch daily logins very closely).

- Inventory upgrade :

"Crown only" would mean P2W. Inventory upgrades are a normal part of leveling a character.

- Outfit dyeing :

Is part of ESO+ incentive (for costumes) .

- Scrolls/Pots/Werewolf/Vampire/etc : available ingame as normal procedure, for crowns as a convenience, but ingame stuff is better than crown stuff, to avoid P2W. No big real money to be made here. Also, WW & vampire for crowns only would mean P2W.

- Housing and furniture : some are available for gold, some for crowns, most of them are not the same, people who want to have them all need to spend crowns. This is more a crown business than a gold business.

Outfit slots are purely cosmetics. Any offer of them for gold would lead to a straight cut in their cash income, without any benefit (daily login, ESO+ incentive, etc. ). They have no reason to do that.

heaven13

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

• Mount training - gold and crowns
• Inventory upgrade - gold and crowns
• Outfit dyeing - gold and crowns
• Research scrolls - writ vouchers and crowns
• Potions/food - craftable and crowns
• Housing furniture - craftable and crowns
• Vampirism/Lycanthropy - free through questing/players and crowns

- Mount training :

"Crown only" would mean "P2W". Also, the daily riding lesson (gold version) is meant to keep us logging in daily. Which benefits ZOS too money wise (investors watch daily logins very closely).

- Inventory upgrade :

"Crown only" would mean P2W. Inventory upgrades are a normal part of leveling a character.

- Outfit dyeing :

Is part of ESO+ incentive (for costumes) .

- Scrolls/Pots/Werewolf/Vampire/etc : available ingame as normal procedure, for crowns as a convenience, but ingame stuff is better than crown stuff, to avoid P2W. No big real money to be made here. Also, WW & vampire for crowns only would mean P2W.

- Housing and furniture : some are available for gold, some for crowns, most of them are not the same, people who want to have them all need to spend crowns. This is more a crown business than a gold business.

Outfit slots are purely cosmetics. Any offer of them for gold would lead to a straight cut in their cash income, without any benefit (daily login, ESO+ incentive, etc. ). They have no reason to do that.

heaven13 wrote: »

And, in the end, the people who don't have the money to spend but like the game will likely play longer because they have goals to work towards, leading to a more populated game and people participating in more content.

I specifically stated EXACTLY why they would have a reason to do that - keep players playing the game which is a necessity if you want a game to last. Without players, you don't have consumers. Without consumers, you have no profit.

BTW, before you jump to that conclusion, I'm not saying that the game will die if they don't offer slots for gold (I doubt the game is so close to death that this will be the tipping point but I very much am of the opinion that the continuing trend of macrotranscations and exorbitant crown/crown crate exclusives is not healthy for longevity and I will not be surprised to see the purchase model shift focus AGAIN). I'm just responding to the fallacy that they need to offer slots for crowns only because without them they cannot pay their employees.

anitajoneb17_ESO

heaven13 wrote: »

I specifically stated EXACTLY why they would have a reason to do that - keep players playing the game which is a necessity if you want a game to last. Without players, you don't have consumers. Without consumers, you have no profit.

BTW, before you jump to that conclusion, I'm not saying that the game will die if they don't offer slots for gold (I doubt the game is so close to death that this will be the tipping point but I very much am of the opinion that the continuing trend of macrotranscations and exorbitant crown/crown crate exclusives is not healthy for longevity and I will not be surprised to see the purchase model shift focus AGAIN). I'm just responding to the fallacy that they need to offer slots for crowns only because without them they cannot pay their employees.

Don't you think there are enough goals to pursue ingame as it is ? Honestly ? Are players overall bored ? Do we need more ?
Even when they put things ingame we accuse them of "forcing us to grind"... Just because we're never happy...

Sure, technically they could have put slots available for both crowns and gold. But they haven't. Probably because, all criteria combined, they've considered that the best outcome for them in terms of profit (which is, ultimately, and legitimately, what matters to them) was to put them for crowns only. And believe me, I too thought firmly they'd be available for gold ! And I was quite disappointed to see it wasn't the case.

Bottom line is, in this entire thread and not only this post, that I trust ZOS for making the right decisions for the game - or for themselves, which I believe to be a valid goal when it comes to something as trivial as a videogame. While you - and many other participants in this thread - do not trust them to do the right thing - especially if that "thing" doesn't cater to your particular desires as a player.

I think that sums it up pretty well.

heaven13

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

I specifically stated EXACTLY why they would have a reason to do that - keep players playing the game which is a necessity if you want a game to last. Without players, you don't have consumers. Without consumers, you have no profit.

BTW, before you jump to that conclusion, I'm not saying that the game will die if they don't offer slots for gold (I doubt the game is so close to death that this will be the tipping point but I very much am of the opinion that the continuing trend of macrotranscations and exorbitant crown/crown crate exclusives is not healthy for longevity and I will not be surprised to see the purchase model shift focus AGAIN). I'm just responding to the fallacy that they need to offer slots for crowns only because without them they cannot pay their employees.

Don't you think there aren't enough goals to pursue ingame as it is ? Honestly ? Are players overall bored ? Do we need more ?
Even when they put things ingame we accuse them of "forcing us to grind"... Just because we're never happy...

Sure, technically they could have put slots available for both crowns and gold. But they haven't. Probably because, all criteria combined, they've considered that the best outcome for them in terms of profit (which is, ultimately, and legitimately, what matters to them) was to put them for crowns only. And believe me, I too thought firmly they'd be available for gold ! And I was quite disappointed to see it wasn't.

Bottom line is, in this entire thread and not only this post, that I trust ZOS for making the right decisions for the game - or for themselves, which I believe to be a valid goal when it comes to something as trivial as a videogame. While you - and many other participants in this thread - do not trust them to do the right thing - especially if that "thing" doesn't cater to your particular desires as a player.

I think that sums it up pretty well.

I'd prefer you didn't make assumptions about me, or use your superiority ("I trust the developers and you're selfish because you just want them to cater to you") as some kind of /end argument.

If you look at my comment history, you will see that I do commend ZOS for certain decisions - most recently, bringing back the Friday the 13th content (even though those items were not at all anything I desired) and making the items from dwarven crates purchasable for gems, even though I dislike the practice of crown crates. Also, changing their stance on the Pyandonean motif (though this "caters" to my "desires" as I am both a crafter and a fisher).

Unfortunately, companies do make mistakes. Being the developer of the game does not make them infallible. Voicing my opinions does not make me selfish, concerned only with trying to get ZOS to cater to MY desires. It's about disagreeing with the priority of short-term profit over longevity and player loyalty.

I want this game to succeed. I want it to be consumer-friendly, rather than alienating a large portion of their player-base that isn't able to afford/justify the expense of some of the insanely priced digital cosmetics. The continuing trend of pushing the prices up and up and up while offering less to be acquired through gameplay is neither consumer-friendly or player-friendly. The outfit slot prices are one facet of that as a whole.

anitajoneb17_ESO

heaven13 wrote: »

I'd prefer you didn't make assumptions about me, or use your superiority ("I trust the developers and you're selfish because you just want them to cater to you") as some kind of /end argument.

I apologize if it came across that way. I was merely referring to the personal bias that affect all of us when assessing a situation. Not a personal criticism.

heaven13 wrote: »

Unfortunately, companies do make mistakes.

Yes they do, but, due to data available to them and the collective nature of corporate decisions they're far less likely to do mistakes than biased individuals like you and me who have no data, a different purpose/goal and also a different point of view.

heaven13 wrote: »

I want this game to succeed.

Hasn't it already succeeded ? It's been over 4 years, and it's thriving (at least with players, we don't know about profits). WoW exception apart, not many MMOs are still listed among the best and healthiest available after 4 years of existence. Yet there is ESO.
That's the main FACT for which I trust ZOS to make the right decisions - because they've lead ESO to where it is now and you cannot possibly say it's a bad place.

Morgha_Kul

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

The other store survives, yes... but it could do better.

It does better in what ? Unit sale ? Cash sales ? Profit margin ?
Also, have you realized that, if the other store was doing the same as you it would actually *compete* with you and the two of you combined would achieve less than each of you on separate segments ?

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

Suppose I open a candy store. I sell a candy bar exactly like a Mars bar, but instead of pricing it at $1, as is the case in every other candy store, I sell my Mars bar for $15.

What will happen is this: One person might buy that candy bar for $15. All my other customers will look at my price and say, "why would I pay that much for a Mars bar? It's WAY overpriced," and NOT BUY IT.

First, and as I already said, we're not talking about the same Mars bar here, truly identical. We're talking about outfit slots in one game vs. outfit slots in another game.

Even then... you know there's far more attached to a product than the product itself. There's a lot of image, too, and the price is part of that image. An Apple phone does little to nothing more than any much cheaper Android phone. A Dior perfume is chemically speaking no different from a generic Walmart perfume (assuming Walmart does its own perfume brand, which I don't know, since I don't live in the US). Yet people buy LOTS of Apple phones and Dior perfumes.

I believe part of ZOS' strategy in keeping the prices high is to avoid the very bad image of microtransactions and the very bad image of microtransaction-driven games. They also want to capitalize on their image of a game with fantastic graphics (which is true). In a game with fantastic graphics, outfit slots are expensive. (All last paragraph is plain - although rational - assumptions from my side as to why ZOS chooses the high-end positioning for crown store products).

My store does better in all areas; unit sales, profit margin and overall sales. The other store sells well enough to stay open, but likely wouldn't if not for MY store's income.

A Mars bar is a Mars bar. You're deliberately avoiding the point. An outfit slot is an outfit slot. There are some minor differences, but they're very minor... except the price.

You're quite right, there IS an issue of image here... and ZOS is severely tarnishing theirs. You're suggesting they're pricing things really high in order to make it appear to be a luxury product? To sacrifice their business to create an illusion of superiority? THAT'S THE PROBLEM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

As has been pointed out many times now, microtransactions are about the impulse purchase, about the "minnows." Others have described this better than I would here, so I'll leave it at that.

Frankly, if you really think this way, you're deluding yourself. However, I no longer care if YOU are deluded, so long as ZOS does not remain so.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

My store does better in all areas; unit sales, profit margin and overall sales. The other store sells well enough to stay open, but likely wouldn't if not for MY store's income.

You didn't answer the point : if the other store was doing the same as you, would you both combined reach a better result as currently ? Or would the competition between you two end up in a lesser combined result ?

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

A Mars bar is a Mars bar. You're deliberately avoiding the point. An outfit slot is an outfit slot. There are some minor differences, but they're very minor... except the price.

An opinion is an opinion, a fact is a fact.
The fact is, you CANNOT buy an outfit slot for ESO in any other game. Outfit slots for other games are for other games. An outfit slot for ESO is an outfit slot for ESO and only purchasable from ZOS. That's fact. Nothing to compare with the same Mars bar you can find in any shop around the globe.

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

Frankly, if you really think this way, you're deluding yourself. However, I no longer care if YOU are deluded, so long as ZOS does not remain so.

So you still believe you know better. Fine. Can't change that. Doesn't matter, since the decisions are (luckily) in ZOS' hands, and not yours. Oh, the frustration is yours too.

Morgha_Kul

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

My store does better in all areas; unit sales, profit margin and overall sales. The other store sells well enough to stay open, but likely wouldn't if not for MY store's income.

You didn't answer the point : if the other store was doing the same as you, would you both combined reach a better result as currently ? Or would the competition between you two end up in a lesser combined result ?

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

A Mars bar is a Mars bar. You're deliberately avoiding the point. An outfit slot is an outfit slot. There are some minor differences, but they're very minor... except the price.

An opinion is an opinion, a fact is a fact.
The fact is, you CANNOT buy an outfit slot for ESO in any other game. Outfit slots for other games are for other games. An outfit slot for ESO is an outfit slot for ESO and only purchasable from ZOS. That's fact. Nothing to compare with the same Mars bar you can find in any shop around the globe.

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

Frankly, if you really think this way, you're deluding yourself. However, I no longer care if YOU are deluded, so long as ZOS does not remain so.

So you still believe you know better. Fine. Can't change that. Doesn't matter, since the decisions are (luckily) in ZOS' hands, and not yours. Oh, the frustration is yours too.

It is not I that missed the point. The point is the other store does not do as well because it is more expensive there. It's not a matter of competition.

You're making a spurious argument. I can't buy ESO outfit slots anywhere but in ESO, but neither can I buy TOR outfit slots anywhere but in TOR. The POINT is that outfit slots exist in many other games, and are functionally similar to those in ESO... and cost far less in those other games. That's the problem. My Mars bar would be functionally similar to other Mars bars, even if somewhat different, and would only be found at MY candy store, but if I charged $15 for it, it would not sell, because other SIMILAR candy bars in other stores are priced far cheaper. It's not that they would get MY candy bar elsewhere (just as I can't get an ESO outfit slot elsewhere), it's that they're comparing MY product to similar ones, and not seeing anything worth the exorbitant price.

But, we've been over this several times now. I think the point is made, and quite clear. If you're not seeing it, it's because you choose not to.

DaveMoeDee

Morgha_Kul wrote: »

The other store survives, yes... but it could do better.

I have no problem with ZOS having SOME expensive items on the store (though defining "expensive" might be necessary), such as some of the more elaborate houses.

The problem arises when they price something at a price point that is grossly inconsistent with similar items in other games. They then get themselves into that candy store scenario I mentioned. Perhaps the solution might be to reduce the cost of the slots, but increase the cost of the tokens.

In any case, the point is to get the game into as healthy a position as possible. That means income, but it also means customer attitude.

The other store has a niche that doesn't put them in direct competition with the low end store. I don't know if that applies here, but I just wanted to point that out. Successful business often turn to crap because they lose focus, spreading from their niche to other, highly competitive markets that hurt their margins as they try to build their presence.

I do think the issue you raise about the cost of cosmetics here compared to other games in interesting. Personally, I have no idea what other games charge, but I assume that, unlike me, most players willing to spend on cosmetics have played other MMOs and have an idea what typical prices are.

Anthony_Arndt

DaveMoeDee wrote: »

...I do think the issue you raise about the cost of cosmetics here compared to other games in interesting. Personally, I have no idea what other games charge, but I assume that, unlike me, most players willing to spend on cosmetics have played other MMOs and have an idea what typical prices are.

EA's flagship MMO SWTOR has a nearly identical outfit system to ESO (but with a far inferior dye system).

Most outfits in SWTOR cost 400-1400 CCs (about $3.20-11.20) (plus another 30-600 CCs/ $0.24 - $4.80 if you want to unlock it account-wide). The most expensive outfit that I have ever seen SWTOR sell directly is the original Revan's and that, at it's most expensive price ever, was something like 2800 cartel credits (CCs) (about $22.40 if you bought the CCs).

Unlike ESO, you never have to buy anything with CCs except the unlocks to make something account-wide. The majority of things I have bought in SWTOR I have used in-game credits and bought from the AH. I also used in-game credits to buy the vast majority of my outfit slots. I have 4-8 per character, on every character, on every server in SWTOR. I have something in the neighborhood of 50 characters. I think I bought three account-wide outfit slots: one account-wide unlock off the AH, and the other two using CCs in the store. The other 1-4 have all been with in-game credits.

EA charges 300 CC (about $2.40) per account-wide outfit slot unlock. And in EA's games, an account-wide unlock is actually account-wide, every server in both the NA and EU. In ESO you have to buy everything twice since "account-wide" unlocks are only good on the server you are currently logged into. So if you play both servers like I do, you double all crown store prices before committing to buying.

At the time SWTOR was released in 2011, outfit systems, particularly outfit tabs like LOTRO's and SWTOR's were considered by many MMORPG players to be baseline functionality. To me, charging $15 for an outfit slot unlock with no way of unlocking it game is far worse than charging $15 per 10-slot bag and vault unlock with no other way of unlocking it.

Velaethia

Inoki wrote: »

Except these slots could be:

• purchasable and account, not character bound
• part of ESO Plus with all possible slots unlocked as part of membership

All of them being unlocked with ESO+ is extremely unlikely. But a single bonus one you have access too exclusively with ESO+ would be nice. (On each of your characters)

Inoki

Velaethia wrote: »

Inoki wrote: »

Except these slots could be:

• purchasable and account, not character bound
• part of ESO Plus with all possible slots unlocked as part of membership

All of them being unlocked with ESO+ is extremely unlikely. But a single bonus one you have access too exclusively with ESO+ would be nice. (On each of your characters)

why not? 1 slot we already have and it's too few, at least 2 or 3 more would be more than fine.

Let's not keep everything behind a pay wall shall we?

Velaethia

Inoki wrote: »

Velaethia wrote: »

Inoki wrote: »

Except these slots could be:

• purchasable and account, not character bound
• part of ESO Plus with all possible slots unlocked as part of membership

All of them being unlocked with ESO+ is extremely unlikely. But a single bonus one you have access too exclusively with ESO+ would be nice. (On each of your characters)

why not? 1 slot we already have and it's too few, at least 2 or 3 more would be more than fine.

Let's not keep everything behind a pay wall shall we?

It'd be cool. But I'm just saying what is, or isn't realistic. An additional one per character on the account with ESO+ is the most realistic option. But with how they've been so far with outfit slots I don't see it happening. They're making actions which have a negative impact on customer loyalty so I can't imagine them doing this as it'd have a positive impact on customer loyalty.

Morgul667

At the end of the day, there is a thing called common sense.

1500 crowns for a character outfit slot is overpriced big time.

Then : building hype on something then making it out of reach, for most people, is a very good way to get people angry.

You want something fancy for the 0.1% whales that dont care on price at all (do they actually exist ?), make those outfit specials for higher price (shiny ? sparkling ? special visual effect ? whatever but not game breaking).

For the rest of people, make it affordable. 1500 crowns account wide or smaller prices per character.

Donari

Still far too pricey (for me) but there is a brief sale on the slots.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/413054/redoran-motif-outfit-change-slot-sale-in-the-crown-store-all-platforms-may-17-to-may-21#latest

anitajoneb17_ESO

Donari wrote: »

Still far too pricey (for me) but there is a brief sale on the slots.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/413054/redoran-motif-outfit-change-slot-sale-in-the-crown-store-all-platforms-may-17-to-may-21#latest

^^THIS^^

This quote comes from this other thread :

VaranisArano wrote: »

This sale is why Outfit Slots were 1500 crowns to begin with, so that they get sales from everyone who wants it right away and will pay top $$$ for it, then they can have a sale and 750 crowns for an outfit slot for a single character looks almost reasonable.

Nice marketing, ZOS, but I'm still not buying them. If they were account-wide, that'd be a different story.

That's another aspect of "high pricing" that I did not tackle earlier but nonetheless very true : pricing high allows companies to make still very high prices look low when on sales.

Velaethia

750 per character per slot. $7.50. Is still way to expensive. The most I'd ever concede with is 500 and even that's stupid high.

Velaethia

Wow... just wow.... I accidently hit cancel instead of post and not even a "are you sure you want to delete your post" and my long as response disappears forever. Such a good, well made forum....

Anyways I'm not going to rewrite everything because that's insane. Incredibly irritated right now.

The point I made was that all of this was ZoS plan to begin with. They always intended to do this. To make profits initially off of fools and whales. Then provide a sale so masses amount of people who wouldn't have bought it before now do even though its still considerably over priced. Then I predict they're going to extend the sale and eventually make it permanent. That way they save face. They don't have to apologise for over pricing it, or refund anyone who bought them before the sale. They regain some customer loyalty because people are appreciative of this. Customers consider this price good in comparison to what it was and thus are more willing to buy an over-priced product because it's permanently half off from what it was. For them it's a win/win/win for long and short term profit. It conserves customer loyalty, produces a large amount of burst profit, while also ensuing long term profit as well. It's incredibly clever but it's also a bit predatory and messed up morally.

Morgha_Kul

Velaethia wrote: »

750 per character per slot. $7.50. Is still way to expensive. The most I'd ever concede with is 500 and even that's stupid high.

I'm half expecting the bait and switch. They ask us for 1500 crowns because it makes 750 or even 500 seem reasonable by comparison.