This game has made 2 billion dollars!

XSTRONG

Buying one of those big houses in Crownstore costs more then buying the new expansions, the big crown crate pack is not far behind the price of the new expansions.

Makes you think where Zos is putting in most of its work on the game? I would guess whats brings in the most money over the year.

Tandor

XSTRONG wrote: »

Buying one of those big houses in Crownstore costs more then buying the new expansions, the big crown crate pack is not far behind the price of the new expansions.

Makes you think where Zos is putting in most of its work on the game? I would guess whats brings in the most money over the year.

I think they're adding as much adventuring content as any older-model subscription-only game would do, but when you have a cash shop as well as an optional subscription it gives you the additional opportunity to provide a lot more of the cosmetic content than you could ever do in a subscription-only game. So I think they're rightly investing revenue into both aspects of the game as in the modern gaming market pursuing only one or the other wouldn't really work.

Kite42

Pelanora wrote: »

Is that turnover or profit....I find it hard to believe this game makes a 200 mil profit per annum. Given its apparent difficulties buying the ict and staff it needs to deliver effectively to its customers.

Neither, it's revenue based on the heading of that huge graphic.

MaraxusTheOrc

The craft bag should never become free. I would bet anything it is the single biggest driver of ESO Plus subscribing.

LokiPagan

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

So just because someone pays for something in the past means it can't be improved upon? Legit question because you are entitled to having money where as some people don't have the luxury of investing tons of money into a game because they have to choose weather they want to pay a monthly sub or food for their kids. Or maybe they are disabled and are on a fixed budget idk my point is with the amount of money they make off crown sales and houses and loot boxes ECT they could easily give craft bag away.

If you have to choose between a measly $15 sub and FEEDING YOUR KIDS, you shouldn't have kids. Something went very wrong in that person's life.

Though, I get what you're saying about the disability and fixed budget, but there are a million different games out there and ESO IS a business, they need to make money to stay open, otherwise nobody gets to play. If they made craftbag free for everyone, they would lose 90% of their subscribers, full stop.

Crown crates and crown prices are pretty exploitative, though. No way I'm paying $100+ for a house.

TaSheen

LokiPagan wrote: »

If you have to choose between a measly $15 sub and FEEDING YOUR KIDS, you shouldn't have kids. Something went very wrong in that person's life.

Uh. No. If someone is choosing to sub instead of feeding his/her kids, the state should be taking the kids away and that mom or dad should be in real trouble.

wolfie1.0.

I have seen reports that eso has between 15 to 20 million players, at 2 billion over 10 years...

Well if we assume 20 million (for easy math) that comes out to $100 per player over 10 years.

If we go down to 15 million that's 133 per player over 10 years.

That's about 13.3 dollars per year. Which really isn't all that much. Assuming that my math is right and the player base estimate is right.

wolfie1.0.

Zama666 wrote: »

I hope ESO does better! Been playing for 9 years now. Where is Skyrim 6?

Trust me you don't want them rushing TES 6.

Not unless you want a game that is lacking in quality like starfield.

wolfie1.0.

Pelanora wrote: »

Is that turnover or profit....I find it hard to believe this game makes a 200 mil profit per annum. Given its apparent difficulties buying the ict and staff it needs to deliver effectively to its customers.

This information has actually been collaborated by leaked court documents in the FTC court filings. That Microsoft themselves leaked due a mistake.

TaSheen

I believe that "15 to 20 million" is accounts created since inception. That includes people like me, with three accounts both PC megaservers.

Self-aggrandizement is a hallmark of game publishers.

Dagoth_Rac

Revenue <> profit. And I am guessing an MMO is one of the most expensive types of games for operating costs. Especially one with a very high frequency update rate like ESO.

Also, things like crown crates seasons and new houses are probably hard to predict which will be popular and sell like crazy, and which will get a lukewarm reception and disappointing sales. Whereas ESO+ is likely a very steady, predictable revenue stream, which businesses love. It gives them a good feel for the revenue floor and evens out what could be wild swings in earnings. Mass cancelation of ESO+ would not just be any loss, but a loss of the kind of consistent income that is key to a consistently updated product.

ESO certainly seems successful. But not so successful that they can essentially turn it from a business into a charity.

And the fact that the subscription price (in USD) has not changed in 10 years is telling. They must be very scared of cancelations and maintaining ESO+ subscriber numbers must be very important to ZOS.

wolfie1.0.

TaSheen wrote: »

I believe that "15 to 20 million" is accounts created since inception. That includes people like me, with three accounts both PC megaservers.

Self-aggrandizement is a hallmark of game publishers.

Your not wrong, I have 50 accounts. But honestly players with more than one account are outliers, just like people that drop 5000 usd every crown sale.

But for the 10 years and 2 billion dollars to hit absurd per player numbers you would have to drop the player count pretty low to get a 10 year per player amount that's really high.

Pelanora

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

Pelanora wrote: »

Is that turnover or profit....I find it hard to believe this game makes a 200 mil profit per annum. Given its apparent difficulties buying the ict and staff it needs to deliver effectively to its customers.

This information has actually been collaborated by leaked court documents in the FTC court filings. That Microsoft themselves leaked due a mistake.

Interesting.




Yes forecast revenue, c 200 mil. Not profit though.

Sluggy

Pelanora wrote: »

FluffyBird wrote: »

Is it a lot? I mean, by itself it is, but compared to other games how much is 2 billion dollars over 10 years?

The fifa soccer game makes ea games 1 billion per annum. https://www.goal.com/en-au/news/how-much-money-does-ea-sports-make-from-fifa--ultimate-team/r1tbutqcbjhx19gkz54rtrp68

Hogwarts Legacy, 2023’s best-selling video game, has sold 24 million copies, generating well over $1 billion in sales, and Elden Ring sold about 20 million copies as well.

So it's taken ESO ten years to make the kind of money that the big games make in a year.

Those are all also outliers and huge commercial successes. Most games don't come anywhere near those numbers. Not even today. This still puts ESO as the top earner of all time for Zenimax.

PapaTankers

All this money and zenimax still doesn't have the resources to fix "in combat" bug. LOL

silky_soft

PapaTankers wrote: »

All this money and zenimax still doesn't have the resources to fix "in combat" bug. LOL

All the dev time go thrown at starfield and it's contentless planets.

PapaTankers

MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »

The craft bag should never become free. I would bet anything it is the single biggest driver of ESO Plus subscribing.

I also disagree that craft bag should be free.

Actually, let me rephrase that.

I would much rather game actually becomes manadatory sub and pushes all the clown store items as gameplay rewards.

Right now the game is monetized with a box price, optional sub, which you pay just so you wouldnt have to spend 50% of your playtime managing inventory.

The game is a buy to play game which is monetized as a free to play game.

barney2525

all in small bills

agelonestar

Revenue of around $200 million per annum is, by any standards, amazing performance for a video game. Very few games get anywhere near those numbers.

TBH we should be glad that ESO is recognised as a financial success. That's what will drive its continuation, ongoing investment in infrastructure and game content, and cement its future.

I know it's been ten years, but I'm not ready to move on yet!

FluffyBird

agelonestar wrote: »

TBH we should be glad that ESO is recognised as a financial success. That's what will drive its continuation, ongoing investment in infrastructure and game content, and cement its future.

I'm going to disagree on that part. Putting matters of personal preferences aside (like story, or class tweaks, or gameplay freshness): I went on a prolonged break because I felt that game lacks in polish, quality control and communication. And, most importantly for this thread, I really, really really dislike ESO's monetization and how events get more and more grindy. Again, all personal opinion, of course.
So, to be completely honest, I'm not glad about this financial success and current direction is not a future I'd personally want to cement.

(I also have doubts about "investments" but that discussion would need some proof and I have none)

Blood_again

h9dlb wrote: »

What does the game need support for? They've made 2 Billion dollars. That's just like poor people who donate to billionaire presedential candidates!

"Guys, you've been working hard for many years and got a lot of money. I counted, that's a huge sum... so from now you will work for free.
Also don't forget the QoL update this month."

SydneyGrey

Glad they're doing well. It ensures the game will last a good many years more.

Maybe some day they'll let us have a few more character slots. *Hopes*

Varana

PapaTankers wrote: »

I would much rather game actually becomes manadatory sub and pushes all the clown store items as gameplay rewards.

Right now the game is monetized with a box price, optional sub, which you pay just so you wouldnt have to spend 50% of your playtime managing inventory.

Which means that the entry barrier is considerably lower than with a mandatory sub.
The forum population and more addicted invested players will most probably have ESO+. But there are many, many players who don't. And they contribute to the game's continued existence and survival - by buying stuff in the clown store, but also just by playing. MMOs need numbers.
If you had a monthly subscription (like ESO did in the beginning, and it didn't work), the entry barrier would be much higher. Players are more likely to try out a game for (almost) free - the base game is basically peanuts these days - and then move to a subscription once they decide that they like it enough to justify the cost, than commit to a substantial regular cost right away.
I agree that the clown store monetisation can be really stupid at times. Although to be fair, it's basically just cosmetics with a few time savers, very far from what the more predatory monetisation plans in other games can look like. If you come from mobile and East Asian games, ESO's monetisation is mild and noobish. If you come from traditional single player games, it's overly aggressive.
But a mandatory sub will most likely kill the game by drastically reducing the player base.

FluffyBird wrote: »

I'm going to disagree on that part. Putting matters of personal preferences aside (like story, or class tweaks, or gameplay freshness): I went on a prolonged break because I felt that game lacks in polish, quality control and communication. And, most importantly for this thread, I really, really really dislike ESO's monetization and how events get more and more grindy. Again, all personal opinion, of course.
So, to be completely honest, I'm not glad about this financial success and current direction is not a future I'd personally want to cement.

That assumes that you would like the alternative. I doubt that. Not liking the direction and stopping to play is one thing. Wanting to take away something that others still enjoy, is ... petty, to stay nice. And ESO going under or getting into financial difficulties would very likely not mean that ZOS would change course into a direction you like. What usually happens, is that monetisation gets continuously more evil until the thing closes down.

FluffyBird

Varana wrote: »

FluffyBird wrote: »

I'm going to disagree on that part. Putting matters of personal preferences aside (like story, or class tweaks, or gameplay freshness): I went on a prolonged break because I felt that game lacks in polish, quality control and communication. And, most importantly for this thread, I really, really really dislike ESO's monetization and how events get more and more grindy. Again, all personal opinion, of course.
So, to be completely honest, I'm not glad about this financial success and current direction is not a future I'd personally want to cement.

That assumes that you would like the alternative. I doubt that. Not liking the direction and stopping to play is one thing. Wanting to take away something that others still enjoy, is ... petty, to stay nice. And ESO going under or getting into financial difficulties would very likely not mean that ZOS would change course into a direction you like. What usually happens, is that monetisation gets continuously more evil until the thing closes down.

No, no, of course I don't WANT the game to die, exactly because many people still enjoy it. It's more of a concern about encouraging business practices I disagree with. More of "I wish what they did resulted in a financial results which would not kill the game, but make ZOS change their QA and monetization approach".
But hey, that did not happen which means those many people like what they have and ZOS doing things right as a business. Great for them.

agelonestar

FluffyBird wrote: »

agelonestar wrote: »

TBH we should be glad that ESO is recognised as a financial success. That's what will drive its continuation, ongoing investment in infrastructure and game content, and cement its future.

I'm going to disagree on that part. Putting matters of personal preferences aside (like story, or class tweaks, or gameplay freshness): I went on a prolonged break because I felt that game lacks in polish, quality control and communication. And, most importantly for this thread, I really, really really dislike ESO's monetization and how events get more and more grindy. Again, all personal opinion, of course.
So, to be completely honest, I'm not glad about this financial success and current direction is not a future I'd personally want to cement.

(I also have doubts about "investments" but that discussion would need some proof and I have none)

I'm no a fan of grindy mechanics either, but in honesty the game has ALWAYS been grindy (arguable it's a genre thing?) I'd also say that monetisation in this game is unusually well balanced - there's almost always a way to get what you want without paying and the paid elements are pitched at a reasonable level.

Ultimately, the game has to make money if we want it to carry on.

Point taken though. I guess nothing's perfect!

PapaTankers

Varana wrote: »

PapaTankers wrote: »

I would much rather game actually becomes manadatory sub and pushes all the clown store items as gameplay rewards.

Right now the game is monetized with a box price, optional sub, which you pay just so you wouldnt have to spend 50% of your playtime managing inventory.

Which means that the entry barrier is considerably lower than with a mandatory sub.
The forum population and more addicted invested players will most probably have ESO+. But there are many, many players who don't. And they contribute to the game's continued existence and survival - by buying stuff in the clown store, but also just by playing. MMOs need numbers.
If you had a monthly subscription (like ESO did in the beginning, and it didn't work), the entry barrier would be much higher. Players are more likely to try out a game for (almost) free - the base game is basically peanuts these days - and then move to a subscription once they decide that they like it enough to justify the cost, than commit to a substantial regular cost right away.
I agree that the clown store monetisation can be really stupid at times. Although to be fair, it's basically just cosmetics with a few time savers, very far from what the more predatory monetisation plans in other games can look like. If you come from mobile and East Asian games, ESO's monetisation is mild and noobish. If you come from traditional single player games, it's overly aggressive.
But a mandatory sub will most likely kill the game by drastically reducing the player base.

I don't agree with that.
Yes, while barrier of entry would be higher, it doesn't mean that it would have a negative effect on playerbase.
This has been proven by other giants in mmorpg landscape. Namely FFXIV and WOW. Former actually keeps growing each year. I find that not asking for a mandatory sub just means that you are not confident in your product.

Which brings me to my other point. WOW and FFXIV subs rely on pushing out quality content so people would stay subbed.
ESO sub (even tho optional) focuses on removing inconveniences that they artificially created. (I believe most people sub either for craftbag or extra furnishing slots).

Base game itself might only cost peanuts, but you get exactly what you pay for. Peanuts.
Most of the game is locked behind paid expansions. Paid dungeon dlcs. And your rewards for ingame activities are also peanuts.

While it is true that most of clown store is just cosmetics, I would argue that this is one of the biggest aspects that keeps players engaged with mmos in the first place.
At its current form, I would honestly recommend eso for only people that are interested in lore.

My favourite game (Sea of thieves) only required box price. Never have I had to pay for any updates, which they a lot of. Never paid a sub. And while it's true that they also have a cash shop and optional battle pass for 10 bucks, it is way less agressive monetization. I will happily buy from their cash shop from respect for the studio and continued development of the game.

I feel like most of the 2billion zenimax generates goes towards lining the pockets of executives instead of being invested back into the game. The lack of quality control is astonishing.

Elsonso

FluffyBird wrote: »

agelonestar wrote: »

TBH we should be glad that ESO is recognised as a financial success. That's what will drive its continuation, ongoing investment in infrastructure and game content, and cement its future.

I'm going to disagree on that part. Putting matters of personal preferences aside (like story, or class tweaks, or gameplay freshness): I went on a prolonged break because I felt that game lacks in polish, quality control and communication. And, most importantly for this thread, I really, really really dislike ESO's monetization and how events get more and more grindy. Again, all personal opinion, of course.

Quality control has been a problem for this game for a long time. I know they have a dedicated QA team, but something is clearly not dialed in and finely tuned, given the number of bugs that I see on new content. Some of these bugs take a very long time to fix, too. It would not surprise me if some of them take more than 10 years to fix.

As for "polish", there are a ton of broken things in this game. There is the whole tutorial mess, which feels like a puzzle piece that almost fits, but is actually from a different puzzle. There is also the rewards, which are a mishmash of random low value, high engagement, things that are somewhat inconsistent in how they are rewarded.

Some days, it just feels like this ship is steering itself, but it seems to be making money at it. That is not bad, I guess.

Kidgangster101

LokiPagan wrote: »

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

So just because someone pays for something in the past means it can't be improved upon? Legit question because you are entitled to having money where as some people don't have the luxury of investing tons of money into a game because they have to choose weather they want to pay a monthly sub or food for their kids. Or maybe they are disabled and are on a fixed budget idk my point is with the amount of money they make off crown sales and houses and loot boxes ECT they could easily give craft bag away.

If you have to choose between a measly $15 sub and FEEDING YOUR KIDS, you shouldn't have kids. Something went very wrong in that person's life.

Though, I get what you're saying about the disability and fixed budget, but there are a million different games out there and ESO IS a business, they need to make money to stay open, otherwise nobody gets to play. If they made craftbag free for everyone, they would lose 90% of their subscribers, full stop.

Crown crates and crown prices are pretty exploitative, though. No way I'm paying $100+ for a house.

I was using the kids example as an example to prove things happen and hardships happen. To some people 15 is nothing to others it isn't is all I'm trying to say.

I guarantee you they don't make a huge % of their money from subs. They make most of their money from microtransactions. So I actually don't think they get hurt that much. Guess what happens when you aren't subbed? You now need more microtransactions for all the dlc packs. So just saying they can truly get you many different ways.