Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
How did WE fail as a SUB-Fee /MMO?
-
Varicite✭✭✭✭✭
✭We failed by not bailing like everybody else in the first 3 months and just waiting until it was free?
With all the changes made / being made, it's not like anything we've done in the past year will actually matter much in-game anyway.2 -
Lord_Kreegan✭✭✭✭✭
Is this a joke or what?Funkopotamus wrote: »<--SNIP-->
What I would like to know is exactly where we failed?
<--SNIP-->
My question is this.. How did we the fans fail?
<--SNIP-->
So I ask for your thought's .. Was it we the fans' fault for the game going BTP/P2W? Are we to blame because there are simply not enough of us?
Or are you a member of the ZOS marketing staff trying to redirect blame and sow confusion?
We the fans, consumers, players, and customers bought a PRODUCT that didn't meet the hype, didn't match the advertising, and -- quite frankly -- wasn't worth the price because the product was seriously flawed.
We the fans, consumers, players, and customers have no obligation to ZOS to accept a shoddy PRODUCT and have every right to expect a quality PRODUCT for our money. We have no obligation to spend hours writing bug reports in an effort to assist them to correct issues with the game that should never have been in released code. I haven't had a single day of playing the game since Beta when I haven't written a bug report...
The only way in which we failed was in trusting the developer of the product and not having enough sense to turn away from false advertising. We have been brainwashed over the years to accept shoddy products, so developers believe they can get away with it.
That's the long and short of it.
Fanbois and white knights and people from the marketing department posing as forumgoers all try to convince players that they should be loyal to the developer... why? How many times must we all get screwed before we begin to recognize that we're being screwed?
That's the reality; abuse my trust and I will no longer trust you. It's not hard to understand.3 -
miahq✭✭✭ESO has essentially taken the same path as SWTOR, with the added bonus that by getting rid of the p2p model they may do better on console sales. It just strikes me as an entirely financial decision.
ESO was announced for console from the get-go. The console market, like it or not, is a big and probably necessary source of profit for Bethesda and the Elder Scrolls franchise. Has been since Morrowind.
Do you really think it makes sense to charge console players a subscription fee? Do you really think that was ever planned?
Also, consider what happened to Playstation owners with Skyrim. They didn't get any of the bug fixes or DLC until long after those things were released on XBox, ostensibly because of technical difficulties with Sony's hardware/software. I suspect there will be similar inconsistencies between platforms with ESO.
This console release, and the B2P model that goes with it, isn't a failure at all. It's incredibly ambitious.
They originally planned to have the sub for the console actually, I mean if the release hadn't been pushed back they'd have released it only a few months after the PC version. It's hard to believe that they were planning on only having a sub for the first few months in that instance.
I'll agree that what they're trying to do is ambitious though, only in that they're essentially trying to completely remarket the game for console now, with the changes being made a big part of that pitch. But it does reflect a failure on their part-- a failure to really capture the audience they wanted, and a failure to sustain the model they'd originally planned.
If they themselves though didn't think the game had largely tanked though, they wouldn't be advertising it as essentially a brand new game-- advertising that's largely to build up hype and positive buzz for the console release. And frankly in retrospect, this change in direction was likely evident from the moment they cut their dev staff.
Frankly of the three big franchise MMOs I can think of (ES, SW, and FF), none of them performed like they expected and all three were sort of bombs at launch. The difference is that FF apologized, and told people that until they could fix the problems they'd suspend the sub. But, they still used a sub model, and have been relatively successful on console still. SWTOR likely drew a line and said, "sub numbers above this are going to be more profitable than a b2p model," and when they fell below that they changed models. ESO seems-- at the moment-- to be betting on console sales reviving the game and turning it around, that means dropping the sub to try and attract as many people as possible.
Even if those people don't play it, they don't care. They just want them to buy the game. After that they can likely easily support a smaller staff off of cash shop and plus sub income. But, you're hardly going to see any new content released as often as they originally said. And that new content is now obviously going to come at probably a decent cost.3 -
Vahrokh✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Funkopotamus wrote: »"EQ/AsheronsCalls player myself" Thing is I do not understand how a game that has the following like The Elder Scrolls fails and W0W is still rolling right along after all of these years.
WoW is an ancient, good game.
ESO is a new, lackluster game.
That's it.
Come on, how can you deliver a game with perma-blocking, flawed basic mechanics so people "light attack weaves", completely "rubber" controls: when I play something else for 2-3 days and get back to ESO I have to slow down because of how unresponsive the controls are.Vaerah, Dark Elf Magicka Sorceress
Trials addict, soloer extraordinaire!
Here are my Elder Scrolls Online videos
Here is the Sorcerer Helper addon I have updated to work on current ESO1 -
Spiritreaver_ESO✭✭✭ESO has essentially taken the same path as SWTOR, with the added bonus that by getting rid of the p2p model they may do better on console sales. It just strikes me as an entirely financial decision.
1)ESO was announced for console from the get-go. The console market, like it or not, is a big and probably necessary source of profit for Bethesda and the Elder Scrolls franchise. Has been since Morrowind.
Do you really think it makes sense to charge console players a subscription fee? Do you really think that was ever planned?
2)Also, consider what happened to Playstation owners with Skyrim. They didn't get any of the bug fixes or DLC until long after those things were released on XBox, ostensibly because of technical difficulties with Sony's hardware/software. I suspect there will be similar inconsistencies between platforms with ESO.
This console release, and the B2P model that goes with it, isn't a failure at all. It's incredibly ambitious.
@ 1- This is a very good point and goes a long way to explaining to me why Tweet Hines(will explain in a bit) showed up in that ESO Live vid i just saw where all this hullabaloo was trotted out to the public.
@ 2- Your use of the word 'ostensibly'shows you are a class person. I will just flat call Bethesda out as lying through that whole fiasco. The only technical difficulties they had were not having the decency to start the PS3 ports (or PC for that matter)until they had the Microsoft console versions in some semblance of working order. Then instead of actually disseminating info about what was going on, Mr. Hines would release some snide comment on Twitter and call it a day....
I more than suspect the poor PS4 crowd is in for some rough times when things go wonky on their version. The Sony platform(PS3 in the past, now PS4) has long been an afterthought to Bethesda and with that crew seeming to be running point over ZoS atm, i can hazard a guess that mindset will be ongoing with TESO as well.
0 -
Hawk269✭✭✭I played a bit of the Beta and have played since the official launch of the game and one of the issues like the first response was that it did launch with a lot of technical issues, both performance and bugs etc. I think they made massive improvements from Beta to launch, but still it was pretty rough.
I had several IRL friends that quit that game after the 30day free month and few 2 months later because of the issues and how long it took to fix those issues. That is what I believe is the primary reason that they had to make this change.
I don't for second believe it was anything on the users/community that we didn't do to prevent this. The community, especially those that I have had the pleasure to play with have been fantastic. I play other MMO's and prefer ESO due to the community, so it was nothing to do with US.
It is something that they felt they had to do to be more successful. There is a great deal of people that love this game and these changes have been hard, but at the end of the day gaming is a business and they need to find ways to be financially successful and it sounds like a B2P model is what will make it more profitable.
If it works, in the end the players will benefit since it will generate more positive buzz about the game and it will encourage more people to buy the game because of the positive buzz about it. With the game coming to PS4/Xbox One, those units have huge install base, so the potential of them selling a lot of copies is very possible.
But the caveat here is that if the console versions launch and they are also plagued with issues like the PC launch then it could kill the game that most of us enjoy. They will now have the PC, Mac, PS4 & Xbox One to test and support, that is a big undertaking for them and they need to launch on Console with a rock solid port of the game. Frame rate issues, screen tearing or other tech issues will kill the game on console and word will spread that it was a bad port. They are counting on that money to continue to develop new content and improving our game.
If they do the console version well, they could have a major hit on their hands and this will only be good for all of us. Let's just hope that with the delays that the console version is rock solid.
0 -
leonaSoul ShrivenIt's not even just the lackluster endgame- a ton of people never got to it to decide it was lackluster because the VR grind was so bad they dropped the game in the first couple ranks.4 -
jeevin✭✭✭✭✭It's not even just the lackluster endgame- a ton of people never got to it to decide it was lackluster because the VR grind was so bad they dropped the game in the first couple ranks.
There's also the general lack of polish. Someone posted earlier rubber controls and I agree, the input is still floaty and somewhat unresponsive. There are so many aspects to the game that feel unfinished. So yeah, I would say the devs and publishers failed the game completely.1 -
rawne1980b16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭I play other MMO's and prefer ESO due to the community, so it was nothing to do with US.
Pretty much what he said at the end.
Me and my wife both quit because it was in terrible shape in May of last year.
Nightblade passives not working properly, quests still bugged we'd been reporting through beta, vampires, bots and others I can't remember because it was nearly a year ago and i'm old with a bad memory.
On top of those issues some of us were annoyed with the lack of Dark Brotherhood and Thieves Guild .... but we were told they would be coming .... i'm guessing that's been canned now.
Some of us were also miffed about the lack of housing. It's getting popular in MMO's and it's been in Elder Scrolls games but we just got told "maybe after one or two anniversaries" but I think that's been canned too.
Cyrodiil 90 day campaigns *insert "aint nobody got time for dat" song here*.
Loot nerfs in PvE, Cyrodiil XP nerf and loot reward nerf and the nerf of the repeatable "20 kill" quest because of whining (although I heard it's back now).
ZOS taking on the bots started to feel like it was punishing us. The bots found ways to carry on and we were left with nerfs on everything they were exploiting.
VR ranks being grindy, incredibly boring and having to go through zones I detest (there is a reason I didn't choose to play AD ... I hate their zones and didn't want to do them).
All that led to me quitting after 2 months.
The community had no part in it. Quite the opposite, I had some great laughs on the forums and ton of fun with folk in game. It started going downhill after the first month when people I was having giggles with started leaving.
1 -
skillastat✭✭✭✭LonePirate wrote: »The PC players never failed ZOS. Rather, ZOS failed us.
I totally agree, my friend.
(PC NA)
-Saulo Stamina Sorcerer
-skillastat Stamina Nightblade
-a blade spirit Stamina Templar
-Ultima Online I Magicka Dragonknight
-'Solo DC* Stamina Sorcerer
-'Ultima Online Stamina Dragonknight
-Nerd Dk Tank Dragonknight
-Solochi Magicka Sorcerer
-Solo Lucci Magicka Nightblade
-Sølomon Magicka Warden
*All characters are EP, except for one DC.
French Canadian!1 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭The community didn't fail.
ZoS was damned if they did and damned if they didn't.
On one hand free to play titles drew a ton of folks from the game once ZoS started requiring a subscription.
On the other hand folks left the game for a variety of reasons.
1. bugs
2. because there were balance issues. The game truly favors a class and certain build types and play styles n that order. ZoS has been too slow in bringing relative balance to Cyrodiil.
3. because ZoS was trying to fix balance issues. (you think impulse groups are bad now, you should have seen it early on.) Whole guilds left because ZoS wasn't catering to the Impulse Zerg loving instant gratification, you OWE me, crowd. I think they all went to Archage that seems to have that style combat system. ZoS is actually trying to do something a little different.
4. Night Blades- Many wanted to play a classic Rogue. ZoS really never offered that. The Stealth/Cloak/Stamina issues chased off a significant portion of the player base dedicated to a certain style of play. Things are better then they were but lets face it, you had to be a very long suffering and patient player to put up with it to this point. Even now Cloak is still a wonky and marginally reliable skill.Edited by Vizier on January 27, 2015 10:01AM0 -
Digiman✭✭✭✭✭Funkopotamus wrote: »Honestly I am reading post after post on these forums as well as other forums everything from hate to love over the upcoming BTP/P2W system.
What I would like to know is exactly where we failed?
I understand as a SubFee MMO that there needs to be a steady number of subscribers for the game to stay alive. "EQ/AsheronsCalls player myself" Thing is I do not understand how a game that has the following like The Elder Scrolls fails and W0W is still rolling right along after all of these years.
I admit I was a console hold out until 13 days ago when I broke down and bought the PC version. I have a friend that works at GS and he told me ESO console release had been rolled back AGAIN till sometime NEXT YEAR. He told me they had just gotten an update about it and it was on the wall right there in front of me on the shelf release date 1/1/16 so I said hell with it and finally bought the PC version for $70.00 now 10 days after that..... this announcement comes along and I feel like I was robbed lol.
I was one of the people that WANTED the game to stay sub fee based even on the XBONE.
My question is this.. How did we the fans fail? Did the people holding the purse strings come to this decision because of the number of sub's are to low? Or was this the plan all along? To just get the game running and make the fans pay for a prolonged beta test and then drop everything to open a cash shop?
I just do not understand how a game with the reputation that TES has can not stay afloat when a game like W0W can stay Sub Fee based. ESO is going to have one competitor on the console _Neverwinter_ is being released before ESO so I wonder if that pushed them into rushing this out the door?
At the end of the day ZOS has to make money we all know that, but it just makes me sad to think there are not enough fans out there to keep this game SUB FEE based. Everyone knows what is going to happen when that Cash Shop door opens. There is no going back! You can say what you want about "It will only be cosmetics" but the fact is NO IT WILL NOT only be cosmetic. If there are exp bonus given to Premium players then there will be EXP potions in the cash shop. That will basically be advertisement for going premium.
So I ask for your thought's .. Was it we the fans fault for the game going BTP/P2W? Are we to blame because there are simply not enough of us. Was this the plan from the start and the fans paid for a beta test? I wanted ESO to be the game that stayed SUBFEE based and survive on the console.. Hell I played EQ Online Adventures on my PS2 for like 9 years lol. MMO'S can survive on the console.
Why it failed why WoW still exists? WoW is failing buddy, the subs it had is dwindling as people are getting tired of paying $15 on top expansions to the point that they are considering going F2P.
Secondly ESO was not developed by Bethsada the company to brought this game to its legendary height but by ZoS.
Thirdly and I can't stress this enough, they are going B2P to change their competition. Right now it was them and WoW. Now its just a new avenue to attract new customers. WoW had the clout and its systems to connect players together to raiding and such. ESO was a damn failure from launch, with its mass bugs and broken quests on top of VR system that burnt players out.
They have been busy redoing everything on top of adding new content and customers just don't see the point in keeping subscribed to play a game, especially when they have burned through the content which they would have given the time remaining. With lower population, the harder it is to find players to group with especially with a broken LFG tool. Less players mean empty game and empty economy which means more less players which means ZoS will go bankrupt just catering to you.
They are out of job catering to you wanting to keep paying for $15 dollars that won't feed their families.
Lastly and I can't stress this enough, EXP BOOSTS ARE NOT P2W! Nor have they said they plan to have a cash shop let you buy legendary gear, EXP boosts aren't a gateway to P2W. Right now I have haven't played an MMO who has P2W cash shops when they have EXP boosts. No one wants to play P2W games, the only people who do are people with money to burn and company that doesn't care about its reputation.
Sick of this P2W nonsense because of EXP boosts. They said most of it will have convienence items. From what I gather that's to make grinding soul gems and leveling more tolerable for subscribers to the game.
0 -
LordTareq✭✭✭✭✭LonePirate wrote: »The sub model was never a failure for this game. Rumored current subscriber numbers are more than enough to sustain this game.
However, the allure of selling an estimated 2-4 million copies of the game for the consoles within a month or two of release was simply too much to pass up. If a business has a solid chance to make (conservatively) $150M or more almost instantly, then giving up the revenue stream of $15/month subs from around half a million players is a solid financial decision. Not only that but cash shops are cash cows, especially when game companies can trade quality and content for pricy, easy to create trinkets.
The PC players never failed ZOS. Rather, ZOS failed us.
So true.
0 -
wiz12268b14_ESO wrote: »So while I said they were continuing the trend of releasing a bad game and charging too much for it, they also might be setting a trend in that theyre actually going to try and improve the game they released. Alshough to be fair FFXIV started it but they were forced to. ESO was bad but it wasnt nearly as bad at that game at release.
Here's an interesting point.
FFXIV is now reaching around 1M subscribers by having access only to ps3 and ps4 console wise.
There are no competitiors for ESO on xbox one, and if FF proves anything is that games that improve increase their subscription numbers.
We the community did not fail, the game itself didn't fail. It genuinely improved.
Only the executives at ZOS failed to understand what potential they had at their disposal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_cow
That's what they failed to see in order to sell a few more copies of the game.2 -
BlueIllyrian✭✭✭rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »
You won't. He likes the sound of his voice and uses facts collected by the famous pull-it-out-of-your-hindquarters method.
Remember, ESO will pwn the market, pwn when those console hordes flock to the banner!
Blizzard is already green with envy.1 -
BlueIllyrian wrote: »rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »
You won't. He likes the sound of his voice and uses facts collected by the famous pull-it-out-of-your-hindquarters method.
Remember, ESO will pwn the market, pwn when those console hordes flock to the banner!
Blizzard is already green with envy.
Actually, the article is quite easy to find if you google a bit, but the above poster is reading a bit too much into it.
What blizzard said is that they weren't against the idea of going f2p.
It doesn't mean the will do it though. They have a very succesful product with stable subscription revenue, consumers ready to pay for things two times in a row by buying expansions and a cosmetic cash shop selling sparkle ponies and lvl 90 characters. it would be stupid of them to switch.
Blizzard themselves said at one point that WoW will never grow again.
Yet, they may be proven wrong with their latest expansion. The simple idea of the game returning to its roots and focus around its core audience again made their subscription numbers go up again.
We actually witnessed the same thing in ESO. The hype of 1.6 got the steam stats active players to more than double. It was the first improvement in months.
ESO will pown the console market though, at least on xbox, as it has virtually no competition on it. Anyone that wants an MMO on their xbox will have to play ESO. Which makes this b2p move more than shortsighted.
Make a good game, don't screw it up and actually improve it, and people will pay subs.0 -
BlueIllyrian✭✭✭frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »BlueIllyrian wrote: »rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »
You won't. He likes the sound of his voice and uses facts collected by the famous pull-it-out-of-your-hindquarters method.
Remember, ESO will pwn the market, pwn when those console hordes flock to the banner!
Blizzard is already green with envy.
Actually, the article is quite easy to find if you google a bit, but the above poster is reading a bit too much into it.
What blizzard said is that they weren't against the idea of going f2p.
It doesn't mean the will do it though. They have a very succesful product with stable subscription revenue, consumers ready to pay for things two times in a row by buying expansions and a cosmetic cash shop selling sparkle ponies and lvl 90 characters. it would be stupid of them to switch.
Blizzard themselves said at one point that WoW will never grow again.
Yet, they may be proven wrong with their latest expansion. The simple idea of the game returning to its roots and focus around its core audience again made their subscription numbers go up again.
We actually witnessed the same thing in ESO. The hype of 1.6 got the steam stats active players to more than double. It was the first improvement in months.
ESO will pown the console market though, at least on xbox, as it has virtually no competition on it. Anyone that wants an MMO on their xbox will have to play ESO. Which makes this b2p move more than shortsighted.
Make a good game, don't screw it up and actually improve it, and people will pay subs.
WoW stated for years they are not discounting anything and WoW F2P rumour is at least as old as their first expansion.0 -
Kraven✭✭✭✭✭daneyulebub17_ESO wrote: »We didn't fail.
ZOS failed us.ZOS lacked the patience it requires to make money as a sub game. Had they stayed the course, they would have picked up subscribers over time and kept their loyal base.
They just didn't want to wait that long. Sad because they could have been another WoW (well maybe not that big, but a solid decades-long MMO).
This. The customers didn't fail. By all accounts they had over 700k subscribers. IF they only had 500k that is still $90m a year. Rather than keep 500k happy they've decided to make a grab for more. B2P will earn them some nice numbers from box sales for 2015. However without subscriptions they're fighting a losing battle.
I know subscription is still an option. However, it's not a realistic option. Your subscription buys you rental of DLC and a few crowns every month, Oh and an xp/gold boost, that is a big whoop. Every single person is better off buying the crowns they want when they want them and buying the DLC outright when it comes out. Making subscription pointless and useless, many will realize that eventually.
Initial cash grab might look good on the books this year, but as the years roll by that will be less and less. This game had the potential to be so great, I'm going to miss it.V14 - IMPERIAL NIGHTBLADE - DPS/TANK
V13 - BRETON SORCERER - HEALS/DPS
V2 - REDGUARD DRAGONKNIGHT - MELEE DPS
V1 - BRETON TEMPLAR - TANK/DPS
to be continued... Nevermind, no longer "to be continued"3 -
rawne1980b16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »ESO will pown the console market though, at least on xbox, as it has virtually no competition on it. Anyone that wants an MMO on their xbox will have to play ESO. Which makes this b2p move more than shortsighted.
Make a good game, don't screw it up and actually improve it, and people will pay subs.
As a few of us have said, console users already pay a subscription for Xbox Live and Playstation Plus.
A hell of a lot of people that would play this game would not pay two subscriptions.
0 -
McDoogs✭✭✭✭Consumers can't fail a product. If you believe otherwise you don't understand the economic model.2
-
xtago✭✭I don't think the plan was to ever go buy 2 play.
I'd say it was a large amount of people emailing the parent company to force a change, seeing as the changes didn't seem to happen till November.
If you look on facebook you'll see a lot of messages from people saying their emails and messages have worked and forcing the parent company to get rid of the sub.
A game going free 2 play doesn't always mean more money, in fact it can kill a game much faster. just look are warhammer online, it only went free 2 play because guilds demanded the game go free 2 play to bring in more players, it didn't work though.
1 thing though I don't understand why everyone is so desperate for a console release from the very start, MMO's don't last on consoles for long you can't even download the DC Universe on the PS.
And the other MMO type games on PS have been shut down a while ago.
I don't think ESO on a console will last all that long maybe a year, year and half at most while the PC plugs along having to carry the console stuff with it, then ZOS ending up having to drop the console servers.
Right now though to me the B2P model just seems to be a trail of the game and once some DLC is released you'll see a sudden drop in pop unless they can keep people on a sub.
EVE online has always kept it sub, you can use in game cred to buy plex to pay for the month but it's like 20 million plex each month. and they convert ingame money to plex cards so you can send it to other players.
I think ZOS has stuffed up going to B2P but from what I could tell from matts body language is he wasn't happy to say ESO has gone to B2P model anyway, so I'd say it was a forced change.
The PC game sold around 2 million pre sales but pre sales don't mean much really.
I don't really know where the dropping of PSN+ and Xbox Gold came from but I know MS would never drop that and PSN+ isn't required to play online anyway, it only hands out free games each month for the sub1 -
eisberg✭✭✭LonePirate wrote: »The sub model was never a failure for this game. Rumored current subscriber numbers are more than enough to sustain this game.
However, the allure of selling an estimated 2-4 million copies of the game for the consoles within a month or two of release was simply too much to pass up. If a business has a solid chance to make (conservatively) $150M or more almost instantly, then giving up the revenue stream of $15/month subs from around half a million players is a solid financial decision. Not only that but cash shops are cash cows, especially when game companies can trade quality and content for pricy, easy to create trinkets.
The PC players never failed ZOS. Rather, ZOS failed us.
So true.
If that Rumor was true that there was enough subscribers to sustain this game, doesn't mean Zenimax Media/ZOS didn't see the subscriber numbers continuing to fall and most likely falling at a fast rate. Perhaps they predicted there would be enough subscribers to simply keep the game running and only having a skeleton crew fix bugs, but no new content.
Something has to be more than profitable, they have to justify the rate of return on the investment made. Firefly was a profitable TV series, yet it was still canceled, the rate of return vs invesment made were not justified, they knew they could put that same investment somewhere else and make a higher rate of return.
0 -
Dave2836✭✭✭rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »
WoW in the publisher's eyes is a phenominal success. It continues to be as longas the player base doesn't demand too much of the developers. Case in point, gold farming and botting remain prevelant today and the push to eliminate it has taken an alternate path to "how can we make $$ off it?". When they were on their secret police mission and noticed their sub numbers dropping they realized something about its community and the monstrosity it has become.
If i was the original game designer, I would have considered that in of itself a failure. Through the collective will of its community, WoW has evolved into an unnofficial pay to win game.
ESO is not WoW. I hope it will never become like WoW.0 -
Vahrokh✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Funkopotamus wrote: »The community had no part in it. Quite the opposite, I had some great laughs on the forums and ton of fun with folk in game. It started going downhill after the first month when people I was having giggles with started leaving.
Totally true. I unsubbed and decided to uninstall... so much for the closed beta, de luxe edition and stuff. But some of my guildies are so cool (expecially the lads
) that I resubbed only for them.
Basically I am playing thanks to the fun we have on TeamSpeak during trials, not to ESO.Vaerah, Dark Elf Magicka Sorceress
Trials addict, soloer extraordinaire!
Here are my Elder Scrolls Online videos
Here is the Sorcerer Helper addon I have updated to work on current ESO0 -
Kilandros✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Funkopotamus wrote: »The community had no part in it. Quite the opposite, I had some great laughs on the forums and ton of fun with folk in game. It started going downhill after the first month when people I was having giggles with started leaving.
Totally true. I unsubbed and decided to uninstall... so much for the closed beta, de luxe edition and stuff. But some of my guildies are so cool (expecially the lads ) that I resubbed only for them.
Basically I am playing thanks to the fun we have on TeamSpeak during trials, not to ESO.
In MMOs you come for the game, stay for the people.
Unfortunately, going B2P will just create an influx of more insufferable and unpleasant people.Invictus
Kilandros - Dragonknight / Grand Overlord
Deimos - Templar / Grand Warlord
Sias - Sorcerer / PrefectZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Short answer is DKs likely won't be seeing a ton of changes before we go live; this class is still quite powerful (as it should be being a tank), even after some of the adjustments we've made to other classes and abilities.
DK IS NOT JUST A TANK CLASS. #PLAYTHEWAYYOUWANT1 -
rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »frosth.darkomenb16_ESO wrote: »ESO will pown the console market though, at least on xbox, as it has virtually no competition on it. Anyone that wants an MMO on their xbox will have to play ESO. Which makes this b2p move more than shortsighted.
Make a good game, don't screw it up and actually improve it, and people will pay subs.
As a few of us have said, console users already pay a subscription for Xbox Live and Playstation Plus.
A hell of a lot of people that would play this game would not pay two subscriptions.
And as a few others have retorted, anyone that would be interested in an MMO is already a multiplayer kind of gamer. The vast majority already have a susbcription to play COD or whatever with their friends.
Playing ESO would only make it even more worth the money.
So no, that's not two subscriptions to play ESO. Unless you consider you're paying three susbcriptions now?
After all, to play ESO we need an internet subscription and electricity.
2 -
UthSoul ShrivenHonestly I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one who reads forum articles all the time while being humored by all of the people that complain. It's usually the people that aren't very good at the game. If people want a kids game with kid friendly 'systems' then a pro game like ESO will definitely weed out all the bad apples of the game.1 -
Dave2836✭✭✭Funkopotamus wrote: »The community had no part in it. Quite the opposite, I had some great laughs on the forums and ton of fun with folk in game. It started going downhill after the first month when people I was having giggles with started leaving.
Totally true. I unsubbed and decided to uninstall... so much for the closed beta, de luxe edition and stuff. But some of my guildies are so cool (expecially the lads ) that I resubbed only for them.
Basically I am playing thanks to the fun we have on TeamSpeak during trials, not to ESO.
In MMOs you come for the game, stay for the people.
Unfortunately, going B2P will just create an influx of more insufferable and unpleasant people.
The community takes its direction with the precedents available. If the existing community consists of liars, cheaters, and jerks, thats the type of people who will congregate here. Its the responsibility of the collective community to reinforce acceptable behaviour while interacting.
A single person is smart, people are wild, panicky, fearful. To paraphrase Agent K. Don't underestimate mob mentality, rather understand it and use it. Thats what alphas do.
If we want to perpetuate toxicity, then I'm ok with that too, but don't be hypocritical about it when the community changes in a direction our words have been preaching about. ZOS is not here to police us, their priority is to maintain the solvency of the game. The community regulates themselves through example. I hope determination, discipline, and self control are the examples we can set forth for ourselves.
0
