Why i suspect there has been so much silence

Dekkameron · January 2015

Blooming well hope it doesn't go F2P, every MMO i used to play that did that (STO, SWTOR and to a lesser extent LOTRO) i stopped playing.

Ourorboros · January 2015

LonePirate wrote: »

Did anyone else use the six month subscription plan twice? Surely I am not the only sucker, er, I mean loyal customer still playing this game.

I did it too. Still says 6-month renewal on my account. Guess time will tell if the option gets grandfathered in.

MrGhosty · January 2015

LonePirate wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

The optimist in me wants to hope that it is to take down the servers for a month or so, to install new ones in order to fix Cyrodiil.

Thanks for the funniest suggestion I've seen since the speculation started !

I agree, that is indeed funny. Cyrodiil and the players who spend the majority of their time there are the bast***, red-headed step-children of ESO who are relegated to sit at a different table than everyone else. The only difference is that in real life there would be food on that separate table whereas in ESO that table is ignored completely and never given anything to consume.

There is food there, but the lag makes it so the muffins rubberband around and everytime you try to capture a carrot in your mouth the table resets and it is back in the bowl.

spryler · January 2015

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

Well that's the crux. We don't think they've been honest, therefore we don't believe them. You think they are honest and therefore trust them. Even tho they've acted very questionable before.

But hey, that's your choice as it is ours. But neither of us can claim to know the ultimate truth and until time will have told, both of us have to read the signs - and probably keep interpreting them differently.

This is a perfect case for us to agree to disagree. Neither bashing nor defending will do any good. We prepare for the worst and you hope for the best and that should be it.

Agree 100%. I respect your decision not to trust them. My actual point was more directed toward the calls for them to re-answer this question.

They've answered it once, either you believe them or you don't.

If you ask again, you shouldn't take their silence as proof of anything.

DDuke · January 2015

There were plenty of people still using 6-month subscription.

Also, removing it does no good for ZOS financial wise.
Plenty of people subscribe for 6 months, but then 2-3 months in decide the game is not for them. These people cannot select the 6 months option anymore and instead opt for 3 months, which actually means less cash for ZOS since they wont be renewing.

This should be something blatantly obvious, but still seems to require me pointing it out to some people.

Dracane · January 2015

ZoS could at least say, that the F2P rumors are not true, like they did with the console version thing. This time, they say nothing and silence is agreeing. So it might very likely be true (hopefully not)

Elsonso · January 2015

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

Well that's the crux. We don't think they've been honest, therefore we don't believe them. You think they are honest and therefore trust them. Even tho they've acted very questionable before.

Oh please...

For the record, I do think they are being honest. Even if there is more than one reason, the one they gave is one of them. I have never caught them in an outright lie, so I have no reason to think they are lying or being deceptive.

I want them to reconsider the decision for the simple selfish reason that I want to use that subscription option instead of the 30 or 90 day variety.

I am very dedicated to this thought. I like the 180-day subscriptions! My feeling is that feedback, commentary in here, and even asking about it with CS, does not resonate with ZOS. They hear me, of that I am certain.

So, my next step is the survey they will send me when my subscription runs out. This will carry no more weight than my previous comments, but at least they will know that I am serious.

I might try subliminal messages, first. Who knows.

MrGhosty · January 2015

DDuke wrote: »

There were plenty of people still using 6-month subscription.

Also, removing it does no good for ZOS financial wise.
Plenty of people subscribe for 6 months, but then 2-3 months in decide the game is not for them. These people cannot select the 6 months option anymore and instead opt for 3 months, which actually means less cash for ZOS since they wont be renewing.

This should be something blatantly obvious, but still seems to require me pointing it out to some people.

If you're setup for auto renewal the option stays locked in, it's only gone if you stop your sub and come back. There could also be some legal stuff they don't want to deal with as part of the cause for the change. I don't know for sure, but I know SOE have changed a lot of their policies largely due to accounting and what they have to claim. It could well be that they just don't want to deal with that as an option anymore.

Additionally, the "reporting" by sites just further demonstrates how little we can actually consider most of these websites to be journalism. We were given an answer, whether or not that answer is enough for you is another case and honestly not their problem. I totally support the idea that ZOS needs to communicate with us more, but jumping to talk to us every time someone gets a wild hair is a bit ridiculous.

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Don't want to watch? Basically they removed it to come more in line with consoles who offers 1,3 and 12 month options so they removed it to be more in line with that.

Elsonso · January 2015

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Any chance of a written transcript being posted?

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

lordrichter wrote: »

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Any chance of a written transcript being posted?

I gave a TLDW. But probably not. Also using those words would get us banned lol.

Ok so basically what they said is that ZOS probably did it to bring it in line with console Subs. I know PSN is not required I'm just going to use it a reference.

So 1 month ESO $15 and 1 month PSN $10=25
3 months= ESO $42 and PSN $18= $60
Both of which are manageable but you get 2 6 month ESO subs eventually you are going to pay that plus PSN

ESO 6 $78 month and PSN 1 month $10 =$88
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 3 month $18 =$96
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 1 year $50 =$128

So basically offering the 1 and 3 makes it less daunting towards console players.

WebBull · January 2015

Sadly the game is going F2P Q2-Q3 of this year. Holiday season or not, ZOS would have dispelled the rumor by now if it wasn't true. You are just fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

Elsonso · January 2015

WebBull wrote: »

Sadly the game is going F2P Q2-Q3 of this year. Holiday season or not, ZOS would have dispelled the rumor by now if it wasn't true. You are just fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

Uh. No. It is so unlikely that ESO is going to do anything F2P/B2P in 2015.

Elsonso · January 2015

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Any chance of a written transcript being posted?

I gave a TLDW. But probably not. Also using those words would get us banned lol.

Ok so basically what they said is that ZOS probably did it to bring it in line with console Subs. I know PSN is not required I'm just going to use it a reference.

So 1 month ESO $15 and 1 month PSN $10=25
3 months= ESO $42 and PSN $18= $60
Both of which are manageable but you get 2 6 month ESO subs eventually you are going to pay that plus PSN

ESO 6 $78 month and PSN 1 month $10 =$88
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 3 month $18 =$96
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 1 year $50 =$128

So basically offering the 1 and 3 makes it less daunting towards console players.

Thanks for posting that summary.

It is an interesting theory, but I largely disagree. There maybe something console related to all of this, but offering only 1 and 3 months subscriptions just because of Mircosoft and Sony does not make sense to me. I am more inclined to believe that it is some bean-counter accounting thing than it is something to do with the console.

I would be more likely to believe that they were planning on lowering the subscription cost, which would make the 180-day subscriptions too much of a discount.

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

lordrichter wrote: »

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Any chance of a written transcript being posted?

I gave a TLDW. But probably not. Also using those words would get us banned lol.

Ok so basically what they said is that ZOS probably did it to bring it in line with console Subs. I know PSN is not required I'm just going to use it a reference.

So 1 month ESO $15 and 1 month PSN $10=25
3 months= ESO $42 and PSN $18= $60
Both of which are manageable but you get 2 6 month ESO subs eventually you are going to pay that plus PSN

ESO 6 $78 month and PSN 1 month $10 =$88
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 3 month $18 =$96
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 1 year $50 =$128

So basically offering the 1 and 3 makes it less daunting towards console players.

Thanks for posting that summary.

It is an interesting theory, but I largely disagree. There maybe something console related to all of this, but offering only 1 and 3 months subscriptions just because of Mircosoft and Sony does not make sense to me. I am more inclined to believe that it is some bean-counter accounting thing than it is something to do with the console.

I would be more likely to believe that they were planning on lowering the subscription cost, which would make the 180-day subscriptions too much of a discount.

Very well might be. They also bring up the point that out of all the games that went F2P the only one that actually did remove the 6 month sub was SWTOR. Who had to pay for licensing and lets face it is ran by EA so..... yeah.

Warhammer didn't actually go F2P it shut down because they lost the license to develop for it and had to shut down.

Age of Conan still has 6 month sub as well as Rift.

Thats just some of the other points they bring up.

Lynnessa · January 2015

Dracane wrote: »

ZoS could at least say, that the F2P rumors are not true, like they did with the console version thing. This time, they say nothing and silence is agreeing. So it might very likely be true (hopefully not)

So a while back, someone noticed subscription options changed... and then someone imagined a correlation between the change in subscription options and f2p.

There is no evidence to suggest such a correlation. None. ZOS saying nothing does not indicate agreement. It does not indicate anything.

I can't believe so many people have allowed themselves to be influenced by this sensationalist nonsense called "news".

Dracane · January 2015

Lynnessa wrote: »

Dracane wrote: »

ZoS could at least say, that the F2P rumors are not true, like they did with the console version thing. This time, they say nothing and silence is agreeing. So it might very likely be true (hopefully not)

So a while back, someone noticed subscription options changed... and then someone imagined a correlation between the change in subscription options and f2p.

There is no evidence to suggest such a correlation. None. ZOS saying nothing does not indicate agreement. It does not indicate anything.

I can't believe so many people have allowed themselves to be influenced by this sensationalist nonsense called "news".

I did say, it might be possible. I think it can be an answer.
And where did I mention the subscription thing ? I didn't, so keep your pseudo-intelligent speech for yourself, please.

Wifeaggro13 · January 2015

Joejudas wrote: »

I honestly think that the gaming sites might be on to something with the F2P thing and it caught ZOS off guard. The silence has been them trying to figure out the damage control on that F2P being leaked early. I cant think of any other reason they wont just answer our questions.

Didnt they answer already. The game wont go F2P it will go freemium if anything. But i love conspiracy. Anyhow anyone who was here at launch would know a few months after. they hired Sleepy Giant, a development firm that helps companies put together post launch Features notoriously associated with cash shop games. Like the TOR cartel market and a Stripped down F2P version of the game that restricts all content.

We will hvae our sub . but it does not bode well for post content even tor's last expansion was laughable

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/08/sleepy-giant-suffers-layoffs-as-it-ends-work-on-disney-infinity-elder-scrolls-online-and-more/

According to Sleepy Giant, the layoffs are a result of ending projects. “Some of our projects like Disney Infinity, Elder’s Scrolls Online, and Robot’s Orcs Must Die 3 are coming to an end with regards to the technology side and as such we have let some people go that were on those teams two weeks ago, which was roughly 18 folks, but we are still employing a good healthy company of around 50 people,” Sleepy Giant told GamesBeat.

Sleepy Giant was hired before launch and was not because of F2P or B2P or anything else.

The_Great_Maldini · January 2015

LonePirate wrote: »

Did anyone else use the six month subscription plan twice? Surely I am not the only sucker, er, I mean loyal customer still playing this game.

I have been charged for the six month sub twice, so there are at least two suckers around...suckers for a good bagrain!

/rimshot

Elsonso · January 2015

The_Great_Maldini wrote: »

LonePirate wrote: »

Did anyone else use the six month subscription plan twice? Surely I am not the only sucker, er, I mean loyal customer still playing this game.

I have been charged for the six month sub twice, so there are at least two suckers around...suckers for a good bagrain!

/rimshot

Sure, brag about it. Make me sad.

Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO · January 2015

DDuke wrote: »

There were plenty of people still using 6-month subscription.

o really ? I didn't know that ZoS gave you the metrics on subscription types you must be one special cookie !

DDuke wrote: »

Also, removing it does no good for ZOS financial wise.

people have explained multiple times how this effects overall profit, your not getting it

DDuke wrote: »

Plenty of people subscribe for 6 months, but then 2-3 months in decide the game is not for them. These people cannot select the 6 months option anymore and instead opt for 3 months, which actually means less cash for ZOS since they wont be renewing.

ever think that maybe more people who sub for the 6 month option have been playing the entire 6 months thus lowering ZoS overall profit ?

DDuke wrote: »

This should be something blatantly obvious, but still seems to require me pointing it out to some people.

And the point that ZOS gave us an answer already doesn't seem to be getting through to you either, like it or not that is the reason they gave. As far as "reputable" gaming websites reporting these RUMORS it goes to show you how hungry they are for views, doom and gloom will always bring in lots of attention while the same can not be said for positive news. Just take a look at how television news networks run their programs. Day in and day out they try their hardest to frighten people into watching.

bosmern_ESO · January 2015

If they do it right (And everything is speculation right now, hopefully its not going f2p) Free to play won't be all to bad.

If ESO were to go F2P I'd still like there to be a subscription people can pay, and the people that are subbed will get a bunch of bonuses and perks over F2P. Things like PTS, Early access to new content, exclusive disguises, special AvA siege and other things in pvp, etc.

phairdon · January 2015

lordrichter wrote: »

Joejudas wrote: »

I honestly think that the gaming sites might be on to something with the F2P thing and it caught ZOS off guard. The silence has been them trying to figure out the damage control on that F2P being leaked early. I cant think of any other reason they wont just answer our questions.

1. Holidays. Most of the decision makers have been otherwise distracted.
2. ZOS seems to have no interest in responding to rumors. I can see their point in that once they start they will be constantly having to respond to whatever crazy idea catches the imagination of the forums. This does tend to allow imaginations to run wild.
3. If something does come up that needs clarification, the best bet to see something posted is a normal business week from Monday PM (Eastern Time Zone) through Friday. Demanding that they respond from late Friday through noon the following Monday is pointless.

The last official statement they made on this subject was that they were committed to the subscription model. I do not expect any statement from them on this subject unless that changes. You are free to speculate that no news is bad news, but in this case, it is any news will be bad news.

Despair9 wrote: »

The last time they said patch notes were at 48 pages and counting.

61 pages and 22,000 words as of this morning.

The other MMO I play has a ton of rumor & speculation (for different reasons) about why the dev's do not respond to topic's, wants & needs of the vocal players. Nothing changes .

Grunim · January 2015

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Don't want to watch? Basically they removed it to come more in line with consoles who offers 1,3 and 12 month options so they removed it to be more in line with that.

Interesting, I didn't have the chance to watch this podcast. So are they suggesting that ZOS may introduce a 12 month option to replace the 6 month option? I'm currently on the 6 month plan, but I wouldn't mind any option that saves me money.

ers101284b14_ESO · January 2015

Grunim wrote: »

ers101284b14_ESO wrote: »

http://questgamingnetwork.com/category/podcasts/esotr-podcasts/

These guys had a good theory. 48 minutes in it starts.

Don't want to watch? Basically they removed it to come more in line with consoles who offers 1,3 and 12 month options so they removed it to be more in line with that.

Interesting, I didn't have the chance to watch this podcast. So are they suggesting that ZOS may introduce a 12 month option to replace the 6 month option? I'm currently on the 6 month plan, but I wouldn't mind any option that saves me money.

No more that the 3 option makes more sense since it is cheaper. If you look at my next post after that I point out the prices. I will edit this one with that information in a minute. Basically it lets console players not pay a whole crap ton at once and makes it more manageable.They don't get into super detail they kind of explain it. I crunched the numbers myself. using PSN as an example. So it makes it less paid out at once while still gaining them more money in the long run.

Edit: Numbers I crunched

So 1 month ESO $15 and 1 month PSN $10=25
3 months= ESO $42 and PSN $18= $60
Both of which are manageable but you get 2 6 month ESO subs eventually you are going to pay that plus PSN

ESO 6 $78 month and PSN 1 month $10 =$88
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 3 month $18 =$96
ESO 6 month $78 and PSN 1 year $50 =$128

So basically offering the 1 and 3 makes it less daunting towards console players.

AlayneStone · January 2015

People have been claiming its gonna go F2P since the start, getting a bit silly.

DDuke · January 2015

Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

There were plenty of people still using 6-month subscription.

o really ? I didn't know that ZoS gave you the metrics on subscription types you must be one special cookie !

No, but I happen to know a lot of people who subscribed for 6 months

Also, the fact that other MMOs have 6 month subscriptions should make it pretty clear that it is still quite a popular choice.

But of course ESO subscribers are special snowflakes who would never use that option...

Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

Also, removing it does no good for ZOS financial wise.

people have explained multiple times how this effects overall profit, your not getting it

And I have explained why these people are wrong

You don't have to be financial genius to understand it.

Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

Plenty of people subscribe for 6 months, but then 2-3 months in decide the game is not for them. These people cannot select the 6 months option anymore and instead opt for 3 months, which actually means less cash for ZOS since they wont be renewing.

ever think that maybe more people who sub for the 6 month option have been playing the entire 6 months thus lowering ZoS overall profit ?

Interesting. Let's take a look at the numbers (using euros, sorry):

Every 6-month subscriber that quits after 3 months essentially pays 36 euros extra. Every 6-month subscriber that quits after one month pays 55 euros extra.

By purchasing 6-month subscription, you save:

2 euros/month compared to 1-month subscription (a total of 12 euros)
1 euro/month when comparing to 3-month subscription (a total of 6 euros).

With this, we can come up with the conclusion that you'd need an average of one in ten to quit early for 6 month subscriptions to be profitable.

How realistic is it, that 10% of 6-month subscribers end up quitting early? I'd say it's not only realistic, but probable that this number is even higher (especially counting the launch day subscribers).

Cervanteseric85ub17_ESO wrote: »

DDuke wrote: »

This should be something blatantly obvious, but still seems to require me pointing it out to some people.

And the point that ZOS gave us an answer already doesn't seem to be getting through to you either, like it or not that is the reason they gave. As far as "reputable" gaming websites reporting these RUMORS it goes to show you how hungry they are for views, doom and gloom will always bring in lots of attention while the same can not be said for positive news. Just take a look at how television news networks run their programs. Day in and day out they try their hardest to frighten people into watching.

It is not an honest answer (nor was it officially announced), anyone with half a brain cell can tell that.

Making strawmen out of news outlets isn't really plausible either. ZOS created this mess by not being honest, and it is their job to calm people down (which they aren't doing currently).

No company would remove an option from the subscribers, an option that brings them money.
There's something else cooking up, and I for one demand honesty & transparency before giving any more money to this company.

Gidorick · January 2015

LonePirate wrote: »

Did anyone else use the six month subscription plan twice? Surely I am not the only sucker, er, I mean loyal customer still playing this game.

And I'll pay it again, if they offer it... er... and make some improvements. lol

Vikestart · January 2015

They could be avoiding the topic because anything they say can be twisted around and used in an argument to point at the exact opposite. They have to be careful here. That's possibly all it means...