Did ZOS officially state WHY they decided to go B2P?

fromtesonlineb16_ESO · January 2015

RSram wrote: »

If this was already posted, I apologize, so just post a link. I couldn't find any information on this with the search engine.

You won't get such a statement, at least not this year, in all previous examples of MMOs ditching the subscription model (LOTRO, Rift, SW:TOR, etc.) there was no attempt by any of the publishers to explain it .. given they all in their turn, as did Matt with ZOS, had gone to great lengths to justify the sub-based-model they launched with, they couldn't turn round and admit they were wrong without a massive loss of face, or potentially massive loss of shareholder confidence.

Thus they all spun it out in "rainbows and flowers" language about how it's Good News (as ZOS put into the game launcher's popup annoyance) that this change is happening.

Personally I'm waiting to seem, LOTRO bombed once Turbine sold out, Rift OTOH is still pretty much what it was and Trion's integrity is still pretty high IMO .. whether ZOS have such integrity or will take ESO down the depths Turbine dragged LOTRO only time will tell.

One thing, I'm not expecting any honesty from ZOS in the highly unlikely event they do try to explain this; history shows corporate honesty is a very scarce commodity.

SantieClaws · January 2015

I did almost choke when Matt said this was what the community wanted. I also think I thought or said a few rather rude words. This is what he was told to say though and Matt and Paul did look considerably uncomfotable throughout that twitch stream.

I strongly suspect Molag Bal has got himself a seat round the boardroom table at ZOS.

I think what probably swung it was the console release and the compatability of the payment model with console systems.

Whoever made this decision won't be reading the forums. They will be looking at sales figures on an excel spreadsheet over a glass of expensive brandy.

Rosveen · January 2015

wenxue2222b16_ESO wrote: »

I did almost choke when Matt said this was what the community wanted. I also think I thought or said a few rather rude words. This is what he was told to say though and Matt and Paul did look considerably uncomfotable throughout that twitch stream.

I strongly suspect Molag Bal has got himself a seat round the boardroom table at ZOS.

I think what probably swung it was the console release and the compatability of the payment model with console systems.

Whoever made this decision won't be reading the forums. They will be looking at sales figures on an excel spreadsheet over a glass of expensive brandy.

I've been thinking about it and you know, this community didn't want it, but there's a thread on Bethesda forum full of people celebrating the change and saying they're going to try ESO now. So there is a community they listened to... it just wasn't us.

It's obvious console release factored into this situation, so I really hope ESO does well on consoles, otherwise it'll feel like such a waste of efforts.

SantieClaws · January 2015

I wonder just how many of those people who were not willing to stump up for a sub will actually stick around and be good, productive members of the community (the community that actually pays for and plays the game)? Time will tell on this one ...

Elloa · January 2015

RSram wrote: »

I'd been reading all the discussions on the B2P change, and maybe a missed a post on this, but did ZOS officially state why they decided to go B2P?

If this was already posted, I apologize, so just post a link. I couldn't find any information on this with the search engine.

Officially in the ESO live Tamriel Unlimited, matt Firor explains that it was the right moment to do it, that with the Update6, they had a solid game to propose for players with tons of content to play, and that it was the community feedback, player wanted a more flexible system to pay the game "Play what you want, how you want"

That's the official version.

What I personaly believe (as I explains in my ESOLive summary video) is that Zenimax had to do the buisness change due to the Console release. I think Microsoft disagreed with the subscription of the Elder scrolls that their customers would have had to pay in addition of the "internet" monthly fee.
So, Zenimax had been forced to change their model. It's also probably the reasons why the console release has been pushed back so long: a B2P conversion is not improvised in few weeks.

Lord_Draevan · January 2015

I'm sure it was done for console players. If it were still sub required, they'd need to pay 15$ a month on top of whatever it costs for PS Plus or Xbox Live, which would suck for them.
As least it's not a free download, i.e Free-To-Play, and since it's going on console there's no way it ever will be. I can't see Microsoft or Sony giving it away for free :disagree:

Bc1151 · January 2015

First thing that comes up on google for the term "B2P" : http://massively.joystiq.com/2015/01/22/the-think-tank-analyzing-elder-scrolls-onlines-b2p-model/

Just thought it was worth reading.

AFrostWolf · January 2015

Valencer wrote: »

On the other hand, it's pretty unlikely that people will buy the game any time from now until the actual release of the "Tamriel Unlimited", so I think they shot themselves in the foot a little bit.

Many people have been buying the Cd keys for the Standard edition for $10 on G2A and other cd key sites. The cost has now hiked up to $30 and rising as those extra keys are being bought up and sold out. The B2P announcement sparked a lot of interest in the game from players who never wanted to pay a sub and are waiting to join soon.

Sindala · January 2015

Well on the ESO live they did, they gave some bull**** about 'the playerbase' wanting it when in reality the only ones asking for it were console players...and they weren't even players yet.

Reality the only ones who made this decision were the Suits wanting their cash back. Originally $300 million was used to 'create' ESO now wether they went over that figure we will never know, but they sure as hell wouldn't have come in under. lol
Obviously the fact the game bombed hard after the initial launch means they were not getting their investment back quick enough so they went to plan B.

F2P.

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P within 6 months with a fully functional cash shop.
2 years max and this will be one of those "oh you play THAT game do you.....poor fool" games that everyone knows are still around but its just embarrassing to admit playing......like Hello Kitty online

I hope they are enjoying their new Subscription figures now since about half the playerbase have unsubbed and quit and prob another quarter have unsubbed waiting for F2P in 2 months. Do your figures look good now Zenimax, you know now that you listened to the players?? my arse.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO · January 2015

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

SFBryan18 · January 2015

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Sindala · January 2015

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

SFBryan18 · January 2015

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

daemonios · January 2015

stefan.gustavsonb16_ESO wrote: »

There are very few players still in the game, and subscription numbers are most likely dropping rapidly. They desperately need to attract more people, and that can be seen as a form of indirect community feedback, because the community that used to be in the game sent feedback by leaving in droves.

I think you're right. I imagine many people dropped their subs after the first 30 days in view of all the bugged quests that wouldn't let players progress in the story. Then again in July when ZOS made Cyrodiil unplayable for nearly a month with one of their updates. And ever since then we've seen those forbidden "I quit" posts in the forums due to a number of bugs, performance issues, lack of balancing, lack of content or other reasons.

The truth is, I think ZOS brought this on themselves by rushing the game and new content without bothering to fix serious issues in the existing content. There may not have been a choice at this time, but if they'd done their homework in time, I think they could have kept the subscription model.

I've kept playing (and paying) because I still have fun with the game. But this move was a **** move IMHO, and it doesn't reinforce my trust in ZOS to get their act together. Unless they sell a whole lot of mounts, they're gonna be strapped for cash again soon, and I'm sure they're going to start filling up the cash store with more than "vanity and convenience" items, all while having devs work more and more in the store and less and less in fixing the game.

For me, microtransaction systems are inherently dishonest. They're designed to keep the cash coming in regardless of costs. They're artificial and monopolistic marketplaces by design. I'll keep playing as long as I can mostly ignore the cash store. The minute I feel I'm being forced to use it, I'll go.

burningcrow · January 2015

I bet the big reason is not striking a deal with XBox and PS4 over the subscription plan. So there is no way console players are going to pay their internet subscription plans on top of an ESO plan. I bet that is the main reason.

Dagoth_Rac · January 2015

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

I don't know. The $60 initial game price + $15 mandatory subscription fee did not keep the bots away last spring. So I am not sure how big an impediment that is.

Nonetheless, I am cautiously optimistic about bots and gold sellers. It was not like the bots and gold sellers slowly but surely went down in population as interest in the game waned. The bots were a plague and then one day - poof! - they disappeared. ZOS figured out something. Either the character deletion limits or some behind-the-scenes bot-identifying code added to the game engine.

Of course, the game population will skyrocket once it is B2P. It may not be a population of players that most of us current subscribers like, but there will be a lot more people playing. That may entice the bots and gold farmers to put more work into getting around ZOS' restrictions.

technohic · January 2015

Syntse wrote: »

Valencer wrote: »

In ESO Live, Matt said they wanted to change their revenue model because of community feedback.

And this is total BS, they seem to misuse the 'community feedback' a lot to justify their actions. It's like they try to say we(community) asked for it what ever they did that time based on "community feedback" and also try to say "we listen".

Any poll on this forum that touches b2p or f2p will tell that majority of community did not want this model.

I'm sure it is surprising to poll people who are subscribing to the game and find that they are ok with subscribing to the game.

Iago · January 2015

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

they couldn't turn round and admit they were wrong without a massive loss of face, or potentially massive loss of shareholder confidence.

If I were shareholders I would be worried anyway, if the company lies to the people who buy their product just imagine the lies they tell shareholders to keep their money invested in the company.

Sindala · January 2015

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

The same places you could but it last time about 1 month after launch, you think it's gonna keep a $60 price tag just cos it's now F2P?? The game is nearly a year old, plus Bots and gold farmer normally don't use their own CC to buy stuff

firstdecan · January 2015

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

That's about how much a stolen credit card number goes for (exact number will vary depending on your news source).

starkerealm · January 2015

aesircorpb16_ESO wrote: »

yanchen wrote: »

2. ESO will release on PS4 and Xbox. Console players won't wanna pay subscription fee for ESO, because they already have to pay something like PS Plus (Play station network server for gaming.) every month. (Truth)

I was thinking about that too but the playstation and xbox network subscription havent been unexpectedly introduced this year and caught them by suprise. They must have known about that issue ever since launch, which makes me wonder if the change of buisness model was planned ever since release and the subscription model on pc just a temporary solution until console launch.
If ESO goes b2p because of dropping subs what would have been the plan on pc if the subs are fine and we would have, lets say, well over a millionen active subscripters? Subscription model on PC and B2P model on consoles?

I´d really love to hear a statement on that. The "we listen to the community" argument is bull****. Nobody ever wanted a f2p or similar model.

I remember articles kicking around back in October talking about how they were trying to get the PS+ and XBL subs waved. So, it wasn't an unknown issue, though it might actually be part of why the console release kept getting pushed back.

Bethesda was able to push Microsoft around back with the Oblivion DLC releases (as I remember, Shivering Isles actually exceeded Microsoft's DLC size limits.) So, they must have thought they could pull it again. But, in the end it looks like that didn't work out, this time.

SFBryan18 · January 2015

firstdecan wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

That's about how much a stolen credit card number goes for (exact number will vary depending on your news source).

It's still a pay wall keeping out all the potential bots that don't have access to stolen credit cards. I'm sure the potential is very high.

Sindala · January 2015

SFBryan18 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

That's about how much a stolen credit card number goes for (exact number will vary depending on your news source).

It's still a pay wall keeping out all the potential bots that don't have access to stolen credit cards. I'm sure the potential is very high.

It all depends really on wether they see ESO as a worthwhile venture, if the "masses" of F2P players don't show up and it's not worth gold farming then No they wont come. If however there is RL cash to be made then kid yourself now, they will be here in vast numbers.

Iago · January 2015

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Sindala wrote: »

Yes you heard me I said F2P as this B2P crap wont hide the fact this game is F2P

I agree there is no real difference, those using B2P are desperately trying to deluded them selves this isn't a switch to F2P .. paying a one-off price for the game and expacs (like LOTRO and SW:TOR do it) changes nothing in terms of the effects on the game off allowing people to play for 'free' after buying it.

Except when the gold farming bots are reported and banned, they'll need to buy a whole new license to play again. That's a pretty big difference.

Ohh...so they will have to spend $5 to make $500. I'm sure they're worried....

Where can you buy ESO for $5?

That's about how much a stolen credit card number goes for (exact number will vary depending on your news source).

It's still a pay wall keeping out all the potential bots that don't have access to stolen credit cards. I'm sure the potential is very high.

It all depends really on wether they see ESO as a worthwhile venture, if the "masses" of F2P players don't show up and it's not worth gold farming then No they wont come. If however there is RL cash to be made then kid yourself now, they will be here in vast numbers.

And somehow I suspect the bot hammer will be severely nerfed by this change giving the bots free roam of Console and PC servers

Wolfsspinne · January 2015

RSram wrote: »

did ZOS officially state why they decided to go B2P?

Why should they?
I mean it's not like we are their business partners, we are just their customers.

You as a customer should only consider whether or not you want to pay for the service as it is offered.
I can't tell why ZOS made that decision but if nobody would pay for a b2p/f2p/freemium game they sure wouldn't have...

Khivas_Carrick · January 2015

We who are on these forums are not a majority of the gaming community let alone the portion of the gaming community that played ESO. Facebook all wanted people to go B2P, other places on the massive internet probably wanted this, I know for damn sure many console players wanted this too, and you guys have stated, Playstation was willing to be play nice but Micro[snip] wasn't, thus to actually spare and be nice to an entire demographic, ZoS went B2P, which btw technically isn't a lie on their original wording, stating they'd never go F2P, which technically they didn't.

Now I'm not overly praising these guys because hot damn that was done sneaky stuff right there, but I know where to place the blame for any ill intentions, and that's too Microsoft for being *** in the gaming world once again. Either way, while this is a *** move, it's not nearly as bad as everyone is making it out to be. We'll be fine guys, things will work out, trust me.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

HeroOfNone · January 2015

No one here outside of ZOS has the information on why the B2P model was chosen. They may have done it due to community feedback, god only knows how many folks come into stream asking "is this F2P yet?!" And how many critics cried out against the subscription model. In my own belief however they did this due to console release. Lets run a senario:

Negotiations broke down with Microsoft, who I've never known to give an online game a pass through from its gold subscription model between January 1st and January 19th. Sony probably wouldn't let the game go through their networks either without getting some type of kickback, knowing that Microsoft was getting their money as well. So what can ZOS do if that did happen?

- Charge their 15 on top of the console subscriptions and not be able to pay for the megaserver? thus draining development dollars?
- Give it away free to console gamers but not PC gamers?
- Cancel the console release?
- Cancel one of the console releases and risk burning a bridge with a major distributor?
- Delay the console release another year? which they may have already did...
- Setup a Buy to Play model so they can still release the game and get some subscription revenue with those willing to pay it for the DLC to fund development?
- Setup a Free to Play model where everyone gets the game, pissing off those that buy it, and setting up micro transactions to keep the game afloat to make revenue?

Think about the alternative if they DID get Xbox-1 and PS4 to agree to forgo the subscription model, do you think this would still happen? Wouldn't they release it ASAP and get as much money in the guaranteed subscriptions?

Now about WHY they did the announcement now.If this decision was made any time in the month of January, or that's when the deadline was set on the agreement, what would you tell the PC gamers?

- We have a release date on the consoles and we're going Buy to Play.
- We have a release date on the consoles but no news on the subscription model. (we'll tell you later why its buy to play)
- We have a release date on consoles and it will be subscription based (oh wait we lied)

This seems the most likely senarios to me. Again this is all my opinion, but seems more likely than ZOS being run by a bond like villian that is making a doomsday weapon inside of a MMO fueled by money and tears.

SantieClaws · January 2015

See the thing is buying game time is a little different than buying a biscuit or a pizza. You invest your time and your hopes into a game in a way that you don't with an instantly consumable product. You build up characters and you plan where you will take them. You follow the game news and wait for updates. You look forward to future content they promise, to taking your characters on a new journey to a new place.

When after nearly a year they then turn and around and blow a raspberry in your face your first thought is that they have been leading you on a merry dance of some sort.

That isn't a good feeling.

LtCrunch · January 2015

Blame Microsoft is me and my guild's official stance.

BBSooner · January 2015

Joejudas wrote: »

I keep hearing PS waived the fee for PS Plus and Microsoft didn't and that's part of the reason. Pure speculation though

Iirc, this is the official explanation Yoshida (Director of FF XIV) gave for why Xbox won't be receiving FF XIV. I would safely apply that reasoning to ESO.