PCGamer comments on removal of 6-month subscriptions.

timidobserver · January 2015

Neizir wrote: »

If it really does come to the worst I'd rather ESO go B2P rather than F2P. I'd still prefer the sub model but GW2 and TSW have found success with the B2P model, selling useless cosmetics in their cash shops.

What ZOS could also introduce is a way to convert in-game currency or a special item for game time while still retaining a subscription. EVE does it, Wildstar does it and even WoW is thinking of doing it. It's a win-win situation. Everyone who wants to sub can stay subbed, while those who don't want to sub can collect these special items or trade their gold for gametime. Then everyone's happy.

I agree. I would stick around with B2P, but I am out of here if it goes full F2P.

Roechacca · January 2015

Everytime a game goes F2P , it's not long before I loose interest .

Wing · January 2015

why would Zos clarify this right now?

they just got a buttload of sites to advertise the game, I would laugh so hard if they remove the 6 month, everyone screams OMG F2P!!! then implement a year sub option. . .crickets.

danno8 · January 2015

Ourorboros wrote: »

All this speculation would go away if ZOS would just release a statement about why they removed the 6 month sub ( and not some lame excuse that it's not popular ). This issue has led to several forum threads with view counts among the highest ever, and has now spread to the internet gaming community. The official silence on this is making things worse. Why would they not make some statement if they have no F2P or B2P plans. I don't think this will go away soon unless ZOS makes a statement.

What can they say that will assuage peoples fears?

They could say something like " The 6 month option was the reason for over 50% of calls to our CS lines, as people usually wanted a refund after only 3 months.", then people will argue that means the game is dying.

They could say " 6 month was unpopular and only accounted for 1% of recurring subscriptions" and people will respond with how people don't play the game long before choosing to leave.

They could say " 6 month was popular, but we make more money in the long run with 1 month and 3 months, as they are more per month." and people will call them out as either being greedy or the game is dying because they need the money.

Who knows? Most mmos that go f2p still keep long subscriptions an option (LotRO and SWTOR still have 6 month options, LotRO still has 1 year option) so I find the "ESO going F2P because of the removal of 6 month option" argument to be suspect.

Wing · January 2015

danno816_ESO wrote: »

Who knows? Most mmos that go f2p still keep long subscriptions an option (LotRO and SWTOR still have 6 month options, LotRO still has 1 year option) so I find the "ESO going F2P because of the removal of 6 month option" argument to be suspect.

this, so much this.

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

I still think it has to do with who handles their accounts more than anything. I think that they get charged for having the 6 month option and if very few people use it they are being charged for nothing.

But Who knows.

driosketch · January 2015

The scariest thing in those articles are the comments of just how many people would get the game if it went F2P. They grumble because they want to play, but they want for free, never mind that F2P can cost on average more than a sub would. I still don't think ESO is going F2P anytime soon, but it's saddening how many gamers out there support that kind of system.

The OP article mentioned other games that went F2P canceled their 6 month sub option but didn't list any examples. I checked other games, SWTOR, DCUO, Rift, they all have the six month, and in some cases 1 year, sub available.

The only reason I can see ESO doing it is counterintuitive. They have subs set to automatically renew by default, which makes multiple month sub chunks redundant. They'll make more money having players auto renew the month to month sub, and worry less about declined or expired cards that could happen with a longer sub set on auto renew. Of course that would make sense only if they were confident in their sub numbers.

zaria · January 2015

Ourorboros wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

What I find amazing is all those sites that owe their existence to games go to such lengths to help spread unconfirmed rumors that hurt games.
Click bait. imo

Looked to me like all those articles are just doing their job. They reported our forum discussions, and, yes, in some cases did the same speculation we have been doing about the motive for losing the 6 month sub. All of this noise could be settled, if ZOS just responded. It's their silence, however, which is speaking volumes.

Yes, they reported the forum focus, the press lives of bad or sensational news so this is something they would like to publish as it generates clicks.

However switching to free to play before the console release does not make sense, Why would they not want all the console sales. They can go F2P later if they want to but this will be far later after most of the console subs has quit.

As for responding to this, well its holiday and after all the QQ after they posted the 30CP comment I would not say anything without running it trough multiple layers of review.

Gyudan · January 2015

My concern is that those rumors have spread far enough to damage the reputation of the game for potential new players. If you're looking to try a new sub-based MMO and there are rumors that it may go F2P soon, you'll probably wait and see for a while until the fog clears out.

Those sites, bad as they might be, are one way for potential new players to seek information about the game and all they see right now is not very attractive. $:\$

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

Gyudan wrote: »

My concern is that those rumors have spread far enough to damage the reputation of the game for potential new players. If you're looking to try a new sub-based MMO and there are rumors that it may go F2P soon, you'll probably wait and see for a while until the fog clears out.

Those sites, bad as they might be, are one way for potential new players to seek information about the game and all they see right now is not very attractive. $:\$

Could be bad or could be good. They start releasing "OMG F2P!!" "Game Is Dead!!" People take notice because they want the game to go F2P and die so they can try it. They start watching and waiting. Looking at ESO closely. The ZOS releases console. Still waiting on F2P...Still watching. Then ZOS be all like nope we got 3 million registered accounts. (Accounts do not equal subs but it worked for FF14) Then people be like damn we should try that.

Or

Scenario #2

In 6 months I will miss you people.

Roechacca · January 2015

Allowing Bad Advertising is never a good idea for a already established name .

Rescorla_ESO · January 2015

As long as cash shop doesn't sell pay to win items that give you an advantage over players, why would anyone get upset if the game goes B2P or F2P?

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

As long as cash shop doesn't sell pay to win items that give you an advantage over players, why would anyone get upset if the game goes B2P or F2P?

Go look at their FB page. Those are the people you would now be playing with. Thats why.

Roechacca · January 2015

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

As long as cash shop doesn't sell pay to win items that give you an advantage over players, why would anyone get upset if the game goes B2P or F2P?

It never works out this way , F2P always charges for new content . Access to areas , leveling past a certain point ect . F2P is the biggest scam invented for replacing subscriptions . If you want the full game you end up paying more . Even if they claim that people who elect to subscribe get full access , the Gift shop model always ends up bringing in cash for items players can't earn in game . It's a farce , a ruse N much shenanigans ...

Lionxoft · January 2015

Video game media is the equivalent to TMZ clickbait. Just sayin'.

Alphashado · January 2015

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

As long as cash shop doesn't sell pay to win items that give you an advantage over players, why would anyone get upset if the game goes B2P or F2P?

F2P almost always means there will be pay to win items in the store. In addition to that, F2P also dramatically changes the dynamic of the player base.

B2P isn't terrible, but I would still rather not see it myself. After trying many many F2P and B2P games, I still prefer a subscription game where you don't have to pull out the credit card in order to get something someone else has. ESO has a small cash shop, but it's pretty harmless atm.

Gyudan · January 2015

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

As long as cash shop doesn't sell pay to win items that give you an advantage over players, why would anyone get upset if the game goes B2P or F2P?

All these reasons.

SIN-X · January 2015

I see a lot of interesting comments here...I will address a few
1. wow has been losing subs for years and its not f2p....Wow still has over4 mill subs and eso is closer to 250-500k. Don't compare the two.
2. Even if zos did respond about the 6 month sub would anyone believe them? Set aside the champ point retract and look at other instances such as the steam dog exclusive pet that was shortly thereafter available if you bought the nord plush and there are others as well but im not here to bash research yourself.
3. Zen is making a console game and weather you want to believe it or not your testing it while they finalize the financial agreements with xbox live and ps plus to remove the cost of subs for the players.
4. But zen said pc and console wont play together.. TRUE, however that's for the benefit of bringing in new players so they wont feel a huge disadvantage from pc players items and gold,But in the interest of selling more console games once purchased you can pay to transfer your account to console.
5. Fact is most ppl judge the eso success from the pre-order and initial launch sales. That was 8 months ago and they don't have nearly the original player base. Hide in your world or simply post for zen to release the sub numbers...GL
6. The fact is they are here for money not for the individual player and removing subs at console launch will give the a shot at another huge box sale and then moving to a cash store will for a short time bring in far more money than the current subs.

So now you know, play if you want or don't but stop expecting Zos to tell you the endgame plans

Kevinmon · January 2015

The article seems accurate to me

Alphashado · January 2015

SIN-X wrote: »

I see a lot of interesting comments here...I will address a few
1. wow has been losing subs for years and its not f2p....Wow still has over4 mill subs and eso is closer to 250-500k. Don't compare the two.
2. Even if zos did respond about the 6 month sub would anyone believe them? Set aside the champ point retract and look at other instances such as the steam dog exclusive pet that was shortly thereafter available if you bought the nord plush and there are others as well but im not here to bash research yourself.
3. Zen is making a console game and weather you want to believe it or not your testing it while they finalize the financial agreements with xbox live and ps plus to remove the cost of subs for the players.
4. But zen said pc and console wont play together.. TRUE, however that's for the benefit of bringing in new players so they wont feel a huge disadvantage from pc players items and gold,But in the interest of selling more console games once purchased you can pay to transfer your account to console.
5. Fact is most ppl judge the eso success from the pre-order and initial launch sales. That was 8 months ago and they don't have nearly the original player base. Hide in your world or simply post for zen to release the sub numbers...GL
6. The fact is they are here for money not for the individual player and removing subs at console launch will give the a shot at another huge box sale and then moving to a cash store will for a short time bring in far more money than the current subs.

So now you know my opinion, play if you want or don't but stop expecting Zos to tell you the endgame plans

They have actually. Countless times they have been asked if they intend to go F2P, and countless times they have said no. Obviously things change and developers are notorious for changing their tune. But for now we have rumors and fact. The fact is that zos has repeatedly said they have zero plans to go F2P.

Perhaps they could make more money doing it. But right now they said they want no part of it and the majority of the ESO player base agrees with them. A few people would stick around if they switched, but a huge amount of people would drop ESO like a rotten bag of potatoes if it switched to F2P. Including myself.

It isn't like it was a few years ago when F2P games were all the rage because people were tired of paying subs. There is a GIGANTIC amount of people that have "been there and done that" and want no part of a F2P game.

Nybling · January 2015

Gyudan wrote: »

It's not just PCgamer.

http://www.loadthegame.com/2014/12/31/elder-scrolls-online-removed-six-month-subs/

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/25868/article/the-elder-scrolls-online-removes-six-month-subcriptions/

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/12/new-sign-that-elder-scrolls-online-might-go-free-to-play/

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/elder-scrolls-online-free-play-release-rumors-fly-after-bethesda-drops-six-month-404000

Maybe @ZOS_GinaBruno should take a look before it gets out of hand.

Looks like a lot of clickbait, lol. No wonder there is a major pushback against gaming sites going on for the last few months.

Bloodystab · January 2015

I hope its just a PR tactics, make veryone feels like its going F2P and tell on next ESO Live its not true and we love Your community so we can't do this too them.

But i know how real world works...

, if this really happend there is no safe MMO and i think never will be for me.

Darlgon · January 2015

Interesting FACT. I signed up for six-month sub renewing back in May.. And it renewed on November 7, 2014 until May 7, 2015. Also my account info still says today, "YOU HAVE SELECTED THE 180-DAY SUBSCRIPTION".

Looks to me like the six month subs are still in effect. Maybe someone oopsed on the store for new purchasers and it will be fixed after the holidays.

Geez.. imagine how red-faced those so-called reporters will be when it reappears. Rumor-mongers.

Bloodystab · January 2015

@Darlgon‌

There was official info on French forum section that was removed - only hope is someone hacked Staff account and talk crap

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · January 2015

You could also look at this as alot of free press for ESO. The old saying goes "No press is bad press if its free.".

eserras7b16_ESO · January 2015

Hope it does not go F2P!

JKorr · January 2015

Ourorboros wrote: »

All this speculation would go away if ZOS would just release a statement about why they removed the 6 month sub ( and not some lame excuse that it's not popular ). This issue has led to several forum threads with view counts among the highest ever, and has now spread to the internet gaming community. The official silence on this is making things worse. Why would they not make some statement if they have no F2P or B2P plans. I don't think this will go away soon unless ZOS makes a statement.

And if they make a statement there will be an immediate flood of "THEY ARE LYING AGAIN!!!" no matter what the content of their announcement is.

Ourorboros · January 2015

JKorr wrote: »

Ourorboros wrote: »

All this speculation would go away if ZOS would just release a statement about why they removed the 6 month sub ( and not some lame excuse that it's not popular ). This issue has led to several forum threads with view counts among the highest ever, and has now spread to the internet gaming community. The official silence on this is making things worse. Why would they not make some statement if they have no F2P or B2P plans. I don't think this will go away soon unless ZOS makes a statement.

And if they make a statement there will be an immediate flood of "THEY ARE LYING AGAIN!!!" no matter what the content of their announcement is.

So I've been told already. By this logic, it's better to have rampant rumor mongering than to be forthcoming with players and address their concerns. Aside from nut jobs, I think the reaction is likely to be based on what kind of response is given. The one response from ZOS so far (it's not a popular option) has taken a lot of flack because it is flimsy, and there is precedence for this action being followed by going F2P. Since this topic is generating massive attention, it's hard to imagine ZOS is not aware of it at highest levels. And, yes, any response is likely to be greeted with skepticism, but continuing to remain mute is not helping. Honestly, they've put themselves in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

DeLindsay · January 2015

GL hoping that anyone @ZoS will actually respond to this. ZoS is the most opaque/beige gaming company I've ever seen. I don't know how a company can think it's ok to NOT be transparent with it's game. Transparency is always a good thing, but all this never answering players or giving them official statistics on how game mechanics work, or even giving them a proper way to test it is absurd.

Elsonso · January 2015

Bloodystab wrote: »

There was official info on French forum section that was removed - only hope is someone hacked Staff account and talk crap

It has not been removed.

Bonjour à tous,

Nous avons constaté que les joueurs préféraient les abonnements de 30 et 90 jours, l'équipe The Elder Scrolls Online a donc pris la décision de supprimer l'abonnement de 180 jours.
Les abonnements de 30 et 90 jours sont toujours disponibles.

danno816_ESO wrote: »

What can they say that will assuage peoples fears?

They could say: "We have restored the option to select 6-month subscriptions."

This would shut down this source of speculation pretty quickly. I am sure, however, that a few people would disbelieve that the 180-subscription was actually returned and assume it is nothing but a PR ploy.