Would you still play if ESO went Monthly Subscription

WhyMustItBe

Yes

Linaleah wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

PizzaCat82 wrote: »

A large portion of people already pay for ESO plus. What makes you think they'd change that model when the crown store makes them so much?

Entire countries banning clown crates?

which doesn't do anything about direct purchases. crown crates are a fraction of what is sold on a cash shop. should they be banned, all the contents of crates will be sold directly. some - at much higher prices than you'd hope.

I disagree.

Firstly, that "crown crates are a fraction of what is sold on the cash shop." This is demonstrably not true. While it is true they do maintain a token list of basic outfits, mounts, and pets, along with account services like character re-customization on the direct purchase cash shop like other games, the VAST majority of cosmetics, houses, mounts, and other highly desired items are reserved for the crown store and have been for some time.

One saving grace of this has been the introduction of crown gems, which you can accumulate for getting duplicate items or exchanging (non-collectible) unwanted items from gamble boxes. You can then use this currency to directly purchase things you might want from the crown store rather than only being able to gamble for them. HOWEVER, the drop rates have been steadily nerfed on desired items, desired items have been increasingly moved to the 40 or 100 gem tier, and many new desired items like transmorphs or even certain pets have been shifted to limited time 100-400 crown gem prices which equates to well over $100 real US dollars to obtain.

So the idea that prices are only being held back by the gambling crates is again demonstrably false.

I also believe you are wrong about them making up the difference in lost revenue from gambling boxes simply by increasing flat rate prices. There is a specific vulnerable personality demographic that is susceptible to the gambling-based marketing tactics which statistically cannot be replace by the number that are susceptible to impulse buying overpriced items directly.

Studies have repeatedly shown that when you put the high price or odds of winning directly on the item, far less people are willing to purchase that item. The entire crown crate scheme is based on obfuscation of the actual price, thus making impulse or addiction-based gambling easier to rationalize in the mind of the vulnerable consumer. This is why these schemes work so well.

This is also why I feel it will take countries banning these predatory tactics before corporations will cease focusing on how to manipulate customers' weaknesses and addictions in order to satisfy their OWN addictions to radical windfall profits and greed beyond all precedent of what was previously ample to satisfy even the most voracious of material appetites, and back to a more realistic and sane distribution of wealth and investment in producing the best QUALITY product you can in order to EARN sales rather than "win" them through marketing and manipulation.

Dusk_Coven

No

ESO doesn't qualify for mandatory subscription if their customer service keeps talking nonsense to customers.

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/comments/hwduyh/eso_support_is_the_same_as_fallout76s_we_are/

SeaGtGruff

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

Once I would have said no, because in general I'm against the idea of buying a game and then having to pay a subscription on top of that to be able to play it. That's why I avoided ESO back when it was first released, and didn't buy it until after it became subscription-free.

But after playing the game for about two-and-a-half years, I was tired of spending most of my time juggling inventory between my alt mules, my bank account, and my eight storage chests. Plus, by then I was playing on PC EU as well as PC NA, and I had no immediate intentions of buying all of the DLCs again.

So I finally decided to subscribe to ESO+, and I plan to maintain my subscription as long as I'm playing the game as much as I have been. But I went with an annual subscription because it's cheaper that way. Hence my answer-- Yes, but annually rather than monthly.

However, as a general idea I don't think it's a good strategy to require a subscription to play, because I think players should be able to play the game they purchased without having to subscribe to it on top of that. It should be optional, not required.

SydneyGrey

Yes

I already pay for ESO +, so sure, why not.
But the popularity of the game exploded after they stopped the mandatory subscription model, so they'd be fools to go back to that.

DaveMoeDee

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

Thechuckage wrote: »

At the beginning when that was the only option, sure. Things worked back then, so it was worth it.

If sub only was going to fly, there would have to be severe improvements.

At this point they would be smart to launch ESO 2.0 before all the goodwill is gone.

I don't think it was worth it back then. They weren't producing new content at a fast enough rate. Craglorn and nothing else. That is why I finished the main game, did some Craglorn when it dropped, and left game until Tamriel Unlimited. My initial sub was the 1 month included in game purchase + a 3 month sub.

If they went back to a sub model, I would only play when they dropped new content.

Mortiis13

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

If crownstore disappear and all mounts/cosmetics/houses etc would be obtainable via archivements or so + stable performance.
Yes
Other then that no.

I only sub when all my chars are full with craftmaterials to get free space or I get it gifted.

Girl_Number8

No

No I wouldn’t in the least. I have had multiple accounts with eso+ for years supporting the game. What changed is, I have found the countless promises made for better performance in PvP never came.

Instead PvP has been gutted of any skilled play and the performance was better long ago.

Gythral

Yes

but with a near total reversal of expenditure prorities (probably)

Eifleber

¿You mean a fee on top of ESO+ so effectively $30 a month?

TwinLamps

Yes

Yes, but not on multiple accounts

redgreensunset

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

Generally I dislike games where you have to play for playtime after having bought the game because it feels like you're "forced" to play that, and only that unless you have a lot of free time, while the subscription run. With that said I'm leaning towards a firm 'maybe', it would depend on price, what exactly is included in the subscription and whether or not performance is improved and the content is a bit less... thin with new expansions. If subscription meant that they used that steady income to improve the game/game performance and maybe were a little less pushy with new content each year but took the time to make something with depths I wouldn't mind it so much.
Like I just played through most of the Greymoor main story (got hard stopped in the last quests because of a game breaking bug that's been there since early pts testing and still haven't been fixed) and I kinda liked it, it had a lot of potential (bugs aside) but it feels like it doesn't have the depths required because it is too short and too rushed. This had the potential to be a really great story, instead it just feels a little... nondescript and meaningless. If a subscription would mean that they took the time to give the story the depths and time they need, okay then I could deal with that.

Ryath_Waylander

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

I'm not sure what that would equate to in our currency. I already pay for crummy performance with ESO+. If the fee was in addition to ESO+, the game would become unaffordable and I would have to quit it. I do however agree that everything should be earnable ingame, with the option to purchase for crowns for those that wish to. Even if the item costs 50 million gold, it would, theoretically be earnable and thus, available to all.

UGotBenched91

Yes

Thanks for the input on this thread all! With all due respect , as any hypothetical post like this should, this question is just for fun. Some of you are nitpicking it and creating unnecessary details and arguments about games using cash shops. Lighten up my friends it’s just a casual post.

Nairinhe

Yes

If all those shinies become available in-game, I'd first happily run to ZOS HQ waving my money and then equally happily run back to farm those shinies

Edit to add: it's not that I object to crown store purchases, but game seriously lacking in farmable cosmetics department

vestahls

No

Man, I can barely be persuaded to play it for free. Besides, I see nothing wrong with the crown store. If people have too much money laying around, I won't judge how they spend it.

But this game is getting further and further away from what TES games were about, and the lore and the original tabletop RP philosophy is why I like these games at all. It's turning fast into a story not worth listening to.

When it comes to judging it as an MMO, it compares too badly with others in terms of the experience, lag, QoL, even graphics. There's other MMOs that are so vapid, but they look so much better, or the quest order is more consistent, or they're way more consumer friendly, it's a real shame. This game, I have to close everything else running to let the CPU focus on ESO, then deal with the inevitable crash I get one or two hours into it, plus the stuttering inbetween. And I don't believe all the money in the world could fix it, I think it's a problem in the foundations of the game, that everything else is built on top of.

Sarannah

No

I was playing ESO when it was a monthly sub game still. The reason I left is because I felt cheated by how they went buy-to-play(still do). It was only years later that I came back, because I really like the game itself. There would also be no reason to remove the crown store if the game went monthly sub again.

ESO will never be montly sub again, they tried it and it failed.

My preference for MMO's is actually sub based, this weeds out many of the evil-do'ers.

PS: I am subbed still, but wouldn't want ESO to be monthly sub again.

Tammany

Yes

SydneyGrey wrote: »

I already pay for ESO +, so sure, why not.
But the popularity of the game exploded after they stopped the mandatory subscription model, so they'd be fools to go back to that.

And now we have nodes half empty half looted.
Was fun to play during summerset event to dig rune stone for 1x Ta rune because some non ESO plus dude does not bother gathering all items.

Tandor

Yes

I've subscribed since launch, with a second account also on subscription since early 2015. I've no plans not to subscribe, the game runs just fine for me and the content is constantly improving. The Crown Store is largely irrelevant to me.

Danikat

No

Mandatory subscription just doesn't work for me. My time is too unpredictable, so I can easily end up paying for time I never use. No it's not a lot per month but I'd rather not knowingly waste any money. At least if I buy something from the crown store and then don't get around to using it for a while I don't have to pay extra for it.

I didn't buy this game until they announced they were dropping the mandatory subscription and if they brought it back I'd stop playing.

scorpius2k1

Yes

redspecter23 wrote: »

I like the crown store for certain things. I'd hate to see it go away completely even if some items are a complete scam/ripoff. It doesn't make the entire store a waste. What would I have to do to earn things in game that are in the store right now? That would be a huge deciding factor for many people and it's not really mentioned here at all.

Why would a monthly sub remove the crown store? I think it would actually just become a secondary source of income for the company instead of being as it is now, the primary source. A long-term positive side-effect I also feel a sub would help more things being earnable in game.

I would GLADLY pay a required sub. Just make the game free to play up to level 50, and sub required to play that toon from there. It you think about it, many already do pay a monthly sub with ESO+ it's just that word "optional" vs "required" that is the issue...but how optional is it really unless you want to deal with all the non-eso+ game handicaps.

Since ESO started out with a sub, and failed initially I think the company is scared to do it again but surely they realize this isn't 2014 and ESO has come a long way and has a large player base since. I personally feel like the pros of a required sub far outweigh the cons when you think about how it would effect how much the game currently relies on microtransactions as a top priority. It would surely let the focus be on other areas of the game that have been suffering for ages now.

Just my two cents.

.

Kadoin

No

Why would I pay for a game monthly with:

• Crap performance
• Unfun endless grind mechanics
• Unfun dungeon mechanics that makes the game a complete DPS race
• Ultra-high grind walls like for housing or gear
• Too much shifting balance resulting in an unbalanced POS at the end of the day, that is apparently remedied by nerfing things that don't need to be nerfed, and buffing all the wrong things
• Dev team that seems to be completely out of touch with reality, themselves, and the players

I can pay a little in a terrible Korean F2P and dominate my enemies instead while patting myself on the back and pretending I don't P2W and at least get more out of it.

RefLiberty

Yes

Iluvrien wrote: »

Yes, obviously.

I pre-ordered the game when in was P2P only. That is the game I wanted then.

I wasn’t happy about B2P or any of the Crown based shenanigans. I’m still not.

I’d go back to P2P tomorrow if I could.

This.

I'm paying ESO+ anyway soo...
But yeah, I would like to see more stuff obtainable through game play and less with credit card, even if that means obligatory subscription.

And btw, people who spend money in Store or on a Gem Crates are not having issues paying the sub and 99% are on ESO+ anyway.

ArchangelIsraphel

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

Although I do pay for a monthly subscription, I prefer to be able to have access to my game without the sub if I choose to go play something else for a while and temporarily cancel my sub. I mean, I'd sub to ESO because it is that good....but I'd prefer it to NOT be mandatory to access my stuff.

MythicEmperor

No

ESO started off with a mandatory subscription model. They aren’t going to change it back, nor should they. Although I often use ESO+, I don’t want to constantly pay 15 a month just to play the game again. There are months where I have little time, and in those cases it’s nice to unsub from ESO+ and still be able to do a few things in-game.

Kiralyn2000

No

Tammany wrote: »

SydneyGrey wrote: »

I already pay for ESO +, so sure, why not.
But the popularity of the game exploded after they stopped the mandatory subscription model, so they'd be fools to go back to that.

And now we have nodes half empty half looted.
Was fun to play during summerset event to dig rune stone for 1x Ta rune because some non ESO plus dude does not bother gathering all items.

Required sub wouldn't fix that. WoW had people moaning about half-looted nodes & chests, even back when I was playing it years & years ago. It's a jerk thing.

(unless you mean "with craft bag they'd loot everything!". Which might be true for nodes, but wouldn't matter for chests/etc)

coletas

No

in current state i wouldnt play it even they pay me 300

richo262

No

I don't think it would be possible to revert at this stage.

Players that don't sub but buy DLC's instead would get shafted and they'd need to be refunded.

Malthorne

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

I would prefer to pay a mandatory sub, but the game just isn’t good enough to be sustainable with that business model.

karekiz

DoNt WoRrY gUyS a MoNtHlY sUb WiLl sUrElY fIx CyRoDiIl LaG

Linaleah

Other (no reason for this but it seems to upset people not to include other because....reasons) :)

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

Linaleah wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

PizzaCat82 wrote: »

A large portion of people already pay for ESO plus. What makes you think they'd change that model when the crown store makes them so much?

Entire countries banning clown crates?

which doesn't do anything about direct purchases. crown crates are a fraction of what is sold on a cash shop. should they be banned, all the contents of crates will be sold directly. some - at much higher prices than you'd hope.

I disagree.

Firstly, that "crown crates are a fraction of what is sold on the cash shop." This is demonstrably not true. While it is true they do maintain a token list of basic outfits, mounts, and pets, along with account services like character re-customization on the direct purchase cash shop like other games, the VAST majority of cosmetics, houses, mounts, and other highly desired items are reserved for the crown store and have been for some time.

One saving grace of this has been the introduction of crown gems, which you can accumulate for getting duplicate items or exchanging (non-collectible) unwanted items from gamble boxes. You can then use this currency to directly purchase things you might want from the crown store rather than only being able to gamble for them. HOWEVER, the drop rates have been steadily nerfed on desired items, desired items have been increasingly moved to the 40 or 100 gem tier, and many new desired items like transmorphs or even certain pets have been shifted to limited time 100-400 crown gem prices which equates to well over $100 real US dollars to obtain.

So the idea that prices are only being held back by the gambling crates is again demonstrably false.

I also believe you are wrong about them making up the difference in lost revenue from gambling boxes simply by increasing flat rate prices. There is a specific vulnerable personality demographic that is susceptible to the gambling-based marketing tactics which statistically cannot be replace by the number that are susceptible to impulse buying overpriced items directly.

Studies have repeatedly shown that when you put the high price or odds of winning directly on the item, far less people are willing to purchase that item. The entire crown crate scheme is based on obfuscation of the actual price, thus making impulse or addiction-based gambling easier to rationalize in the mind of the vulnerable consumer. This is why these schemes work so well.

This is also why I feel it will take countries banning these predatory tactics before corporations will cease focusing on how to manipulate customers' weaknesses and addictions in order to satisfy their OWN addictions to radical windfall profits and greed beyond all precedent of what was previously ample to satisfy even the most voracious of material appetites, and back to a more realistic and sane distribution of wealth and investment in producing the best QUALITY product you can in order to EARN sales rather than "win" them through marketing and manipulation.

quantitatively - crown crates take up a small portion of the store. as i have said. removing crown crates does NOT remove the rest of the store. it doesn't remove vast VAST collection of crown only decorations (forgot about those, did you), mounts, pets, outfits, houses, etc.

as for prices? I'm making my estimation on a basis of how much they are charging for some of the special rare items that come to crown store. 4-6k for mounts, 4-6k for a motif book, 5k for a single statue etc etc.

and while crown crates rely on appeal to gambling luck, its not the only way to hit vulnerable people. i present to you - limited time items! FOMO is a heck of a motivator. why do you think its something that they keep doing, month after month after month. its even a part of crown crate selling strategy.

but.. to bring it back to my original point. removing crates will NOT diminish crown store. it certainly will not eliminate it.