Lord_Kreegan wrote: »

(1) How many zones are there?
(2) At any time of day, how many other players do you see in the zone?
(3) At any time of day, how many different people do you see in chat?

(4) How many concurrent phases of each zone are there?

Our approximate guesstimates just got doubled. Tripled. Decupled!

I didn't know decuple was a word, I had to use Google. At least I learned something today, so this post wasn't a total waste of time.

Xiana wrote: »

No way they had dropped P2P with one million subs ...

At the same time, it makes more sense as B2P fits far, far more in line with your standard console subscription.

my thoughts...

in 4 days they will have none.

instead premium members

Bloodfang wrote: »

Thanks @Brandalf for correcting me.

It makes even more sense now. Skyrim sold 60% of box copies on Xbox 360, that is a HUGE impact on their revenue. No wonder they were forced into a change.

Also I've been thinking, yes they owe us an apology and explanation about the change..But what if this is all true, and Microsoft forced it on them. They can't really go publicly flaming them. Not when there is so much money at stake.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels they owe us an explanation and an apology.

golfer.dub17_ESO wrote: »

There's no way there's a million subscribers when every zone I go to except Craglorn and Deshaan are completely dead.

You're not accounting for the other Megaserver. Or people that just flat out turn off zone chat.

IMO if they had those sort of numbers Zos wouldn't be trying to convince everyone it's a vastly improved game. Calling Tamriel Unlimited a re-launch is a bit rich. The game is still buggy as, Cyrodiil is a mess and the game is still laggy as all hell. There's been changes the most notable of which is the business model but that doesn't warrant calling it a re-launch.

Brandalf wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

When will you people get it.
ZOS didn't drop the Sub Fee because ESO was doing bad. The lowest ESO subs were at around 500k, for the past few months we were well above 1mil. (To put it in another perspective, WoW is dropping out of the 2mil subs in the West)

Now I can't say for sure why they dropped it.
The most logical explanation is because Microsoft refused to drop the PS Plus fee. Based on that it wouldn't make sense to keep Sub on XBOX and PC, while being B2P on PS4 lol.

So there you go. Either Microsoft forced this on them, or ZOS just wants more money from us. It doesn't matter really as I'm sure ESO will have quality updates and healthy playerbase for at least next 10 years.

You got some of that mixed up....Xbox is Microsoft and XBL, PS4 is Sony and PS+. Sony agreed to waive the PS+ fees for ESO subscribers, Microsoft never did. Personally I still believe that the console was originally delayed due to ZOS and Bethesda trying to come to an agreement with Microsoft; and that the second delay(the current one) was after talks feel through and ZOS and Bethesda made the decision to switch to the upcoming hybrid B2P model. This generation of consoles are so similar to PC in terms of architecture that there is no way it took them this much additional time to get the console version where they wanted it.

Everyone in my guild was pretty shocked when ZOS and Bethesda announced the conversion, at the time we were not considering the upcoming console release. I think the entire conversion was due to Microsoft's refusal to waive their XBL fees. ZOS and Bethesda aren't stupid, they know that their potential playerbase would be crippled on the Xbox platform if players were required to subscribe to both XBL and ESO. So here we are.

You got a link that backs up your comments? Cause I sure and hell never read anything like that before and it would be interesting to read your source or the link that contains this information. Or are you just speculating on what happened?

Hawk269 wrote: »

Brandalf wrote: »

Bloodfang wrote: »

When will you people get it.
ZOS didn't drop the Sub Fee because ESO was doing bad. The lowest ESO subs were at around 500k, for the past few months we were well above 1mil. (To put it in another perspective, WoW is dropping out of the 2mil subs in the West)

Now I can't say for sure why they dropped it.
The most logical explanation is because Microsoft refused to drop the PS Plus fee. Based on that it wouldn't make sense to keep Sub on XBOX and PC, while being B2P on PS4 lol.

So there you go. Either Microsoft forced this on them, or ZOS just wants more money from us. It doesn't matter really as I'm sure ESO will have quality updates and healthy playerbase for at least next 10 years.

You got some of that mixed up....Xbox is Microsoft and XBL, PS4 is Sony and PS+. Sony agreed to waive the PS+ fees for ESO subscribers, Microsoft never did. Personally I still believe that the console was originally delayed due to ZOS and Bethesda trying to come to an agreement with Microsoft; and that the second delay(the current one) was after talks feel through and ZOS and Bethesda made the decision to switch to the upcoming hybrid B2P model. This generation of consoles are so similar to PC in terms of architecture that there is no way it took them this much additional time to get the console version where they wanted it.

Everyone in my guild was pretty shocked when ZOS and Bethesda announced the conversion, at the time we were not considering the upcoming console release. I think the entire conversion was due to Microsoft's refusal to waive their XBL fees. ZOS and Bethesda aren't stupid, they know that their potential playerbase would be crippled on the Xbox platform if players were required to subscribe to both XBL and ESO. So here we are.

You got a link that backs up your comments? Cause I sure and hell never read anything like that before and it would be interesting to read your source or the link that contains this information. Or are you just speculating on what happened?

A link to what information specifically? I can find articles on Sony stating that PS+ fees would be waives for ESO subscribers(Microsoft never made such an announcement). I can bring up official posts about the first delay for the console version and then the second delay, the rest is just my personal opinion on how it all went down.

When I look at pre-release interviews with the devs, see a healthy population in-game, see two seperate console launch delays(with the conversion announcement coming during the second delay), see Sony publicly announce they are waiving fees and Microsoft never making such an announcement, and finally look at Skyrim's console sales(about 86% of total sales, though Steam does not release sales numbers) compared to PC it all comes together to form a picture in my mind. That picture is that the conversion was a direct result of Microsoft and ZOS/Bethesda not coming to terms of some sort of deal.

I could be completely wrong, but IMO it's a pretty sound conclusion when looking at all of the above.

if this game had over 100k subs nov-dec i'd be surprised. Now that they've basically anounced no new content and that they're *** out the dev staff to make novelty mounts. their data must still include the torchbugs and deer.

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

jeevin wrote: »

IMO if they had those sort of numbers Zos wouldn't be trying to convince everyone it's a vastly improved game. Calling Tamriel Unlimited a re-launch is a bit rich. The game is still buggy as, Cyrodiil is a mess and the game is still laggy as all hell. There's been changes the most notable of which is the business model but that doesn't warrant calling it a re-launch.

1.6 was the relaunch. Tamriel Unlimited is a re-branding.

Did you read the article with the title "See what awaits when The Elder Scrolls Online relaunches as Tamriel Unlimited"? Re-launch this coming Tuesday. I stand by my comment earlier, to call this a re-launch is a bit rich. It's the same game with a new business model.

jeevin wrote: »

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

jeevin wrote: »

IMO if they had those sort of numbers Zos wouldn't be trying to convince everyone it's a vastly improved game. Calling Tamriel Unlimited a re-launch is a bit rich. The game is still buggy as, Cyrodiil is a mess and the game is still laggy as all hell. There's been changes the most notable of which is the business model but that doesn't warrant calling it a re-launch.

1.6 was the relaunch. Tamriel Unlimited is a re-branding.

Did you read the article with the title "See what awaits when The Elder Scrolls Online relaunches as Tamriel Unlimited"? Re-launch this coming Tuesday. I stand by my comment earlier, to call this a re-launch is a bit rich. It's the same game with a new business model.

I could care less what some individual at Yahoo decided to scribble. I call it like I see it. 1.6 was essentially a soft relaunch of the game. Tamriel Unlimited is just adding a cash-shop and removing the necessity of a subscription. That's it.

1.6 is the real 2.0. Now if the game were shut down and then reopened, I'd call that a relaunch. IE: Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn.

But since all the stats were redone, a metric ton of skills refurbished and tweaked, other skills flat-out removed and replaced, a new skill line added, 2 new systems implemented and the game polished even more, that's what is referred to as a "soft relaunch".

Roechacca wrote: »

AssaultLemming wrote: »

To put that in perspective...that mobile phone game that has been advertising recently with Kate Upton has 2 million people playing every day and generates a million dollars a day revenue with almost no overheads...and that's why they are moving to b2p and why eventually they will go f2p...

Did you just compare a phone app game to a mmo ?

That just happened.

Bouvin wrote: »

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

Check the article: https://games.yahoo.com/news/see-awaits-elder-scrolls-online-152430165.html

Yahoo! wrote:

The Elder Scrolls Online did not have a glorious first year; while the MMO counts around a million current subscribers, ......

Thoughts?

LOL.. Yahoo's info is about as solid as AOL's info that comes from "Shingy"

....