I feel like there is too little for being a sub. I would like to see bigger boosts, and these ads... this is a topic for whole another disscusion.

There's people paying/playing since beta, give them new content, there's no need to wait for console release, the money is not everything, the game will get bad publicity from it's users then it's over. It's a fact that the players are not kept happy, even if they like the mechanics of the game. No dueling to kill the time...

Varicite wrote: »

It's time for subscribers like myself to quit thinking we are the major contributors to supporting the game still, because those days are numbered.

Wrong - you are part of a more reliable resource stream - making future investment decisions far easier for Zenimax.

In fact, you should be rewarded much more for providing such a valuable service to them...

Raash wrote: »

I think your polls are very strange.
What does lag has to do with feeling like a valued subscriber? It hits subbed and f2p´s alike.

Even though I think it may be an unrealistic item to hinge one's feeling of value as a subscriber upon, I imagine the OP is trying to point out that the performance issue in this game should be a top priority, not a console release. By placing focus on the console the message appears to be, "We had a run doing things our ways, but we didn't make the money we promised our investors. As a result, we are forced to issue a release on consoles to make up the dividends., and hold off on spending any further resources at this time. If that doesn't work, the game goes into maintenance mode similar to what happened in Vanguard SOH or Warhammer Online."

This is speculation on my part, but all signs point to an investor takeover when it comes to game direction and focus. I don't believe the devs are very happy with what they have to focus on now either, but their focus is certainly not on the original subscriber customers now. I think this all highlights why programs like Kickstarter are the way of the future for games.

Varicite wrote: »

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

It's time for subscribers like myself to quit thinking we are the major contributors to supporting the game still, because those days are numbered.

Wrong - you are part of a more reliable resource stream - making future investment decisions far easier for Zenimax.

In fact, you should be rewarded much more for providing such a valuable service to them...

Perhaps you may want to look at the income breakdown for pretty much all other successful B2P games and see just how little subs contribute to the overall picture.

You may think you are "more reliable", but that's like saying somebody pays me 5 bucks a week reliably, and that is somehow better than another person who gives me $300-500 every week or so.

Sure, the second guy isn't as "reliable" as the first, but he's most definitely contributing to future investments far more than five buck billy.

Except subscribers are paying $15 a month whereas other players are contributing little to nothing past the initial cost of the game, depending on how many micro-transactions are made.

You're using a very irrelevant and illogical example.
I would much rather have somebody give me $15 a month than $20-30 at their discretion. Not only is it more reliable it is more likely to be profitable in the long-run.

Nobody is spending $300-$500 on this game. At least I hope not.

I'm not a big fan of the advertising scrolling across my screen in three different languages.
But I'm not about to waste my energy raging against something so trivial though. Life is too short for that bs.
There are bugs, lag, etc.

However, with that said I see ZOS fixing things every week. I see them fairly active in the forums. I think they care about the game and are honestly trying to give us the best experience possible. I'm pretty sure they will eventually figure out the lag issue.

I think the subscription is a pretty good deal. And I know I'm having fun playing the game.

So does ZOS make me feel like a fairytale princess? No. But I don't feel clunked on either. I'd say they are doing about average.

No, I don't feel valued as a subscriber. Some of these issues are more about the past than now as I get 1500 crowns for my 15 bucks a month:

Most will only notice lag issues in major pvp battles, but considering in many cases it feels worse than it did months ago, not better - that's not a good sign. Many of our pvp groups end up quitting early because they can't do anything once the lag starts and it's just not fun.

The loyalty rewards have been a little insulting, especially how easy it is for players that were not subbed since beta to get them or the fact they just reskin them and sell them in the store anyway. I also don't think we were rewarded crown wise for past loyalty.

Get the damn ads off of my screen, subscriber or not. If you want to make players aware, you have it in the launcher already. You have it on the front page of crown store. Maybe just send a notification about it that pops up when you first log in and never again once you clear it.

The biggest issue though for me right now: content. We've had no new content since CoA in November and they are talking about none coming until well after console launch - that's... crazy and insulting. Rolling out a revamp of your game in the champion system was not 'content', nor was the justice system.

Varicite wrote: »

c.p.garrett1993_ESO wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

It's time for subscribers like myself to quit thinking we are the major contributors to supporting the game still, because those days are numbered.

Wrong - you are part of a more reliable resource stream - making future investment decisions far easier for Zenimax.

In fact, you should be rewarded much more for providing such a valuable service to them...

Perhaps you may want to look at the income breakdown for pretty much all other successful B2P games and see just how little subs contribute to the overall picture.

You may think you are "more reliable", but that's like saying somebody pays me 5 bucks a week reliably, and that is somehow better than another person who gives me $300-500 every week or so.

Sure, the second guy isn't as "reliable" as the first, but he's most definitely contributing to future investments far more than five buck billy.

Except subscribers are paying $15 a month whereas other players are contributing little to nothing past the initial cost of the game, depending on how many micro-transactions are made.

You're using a very irrelevant and illogical example.
I would much rather have somebody give me $15 a month than $20-30 at their discretion. Not only is it more reliable it is more likely to be profitable in the long-run.

Nobody is spending $300-$500 on this game. At least I hope not.

The example isn't relevant NOW, while there is no real content on the Crown Store. My post that the person I'm replying to quoted makes it very clear that right now, subs are king.

However, as soon as DLCs and actually desirable stuff starts making it onto the Crown Store, that will no longer be the case.

When that happens, the example WILL be accurate, as that is exactly what has happened in every successful B2P game. That is the model ESO is following.

Your 15 bucks a month will be nothing compared to what others are paying and you will no longer NEED to be valued as anything more than somebody who buys 1500 crowns a month.

Which will be nothing compared to thousands of people buying DLC or "convenience" items to get a leg up on the competition. Heck, as soon as XP potions hit the Crown Store, your sub will be a complete joke when compared to what others are spending.

Enjoy your time in the sun for now, because those days are numbered. History repeats itself.

DLC is included with the subscriptions.
This essentially only leaves pets, cosmetics, and convenience items.
While a fair few may be inclined to make these purchases they will be in small amounts at a time and likely infrequently.
In the event these purchases are larger than expected, subscription costs for a year ($180) is still a substantial amount of money and it's multiplied by the number of subscribers. I find it unlikely the total amount spent in crowns will outweigh the subscription costs. Even if it does the subscriptions will draw in a significant amount of money that they would not be eager to lose.

I'm certainly not saying you are wrong. I'm simply hoping they have the decency to be loyal to their fans, if they are than those high-selling items that boost experience and give unequal advantages will never exist.

Even those who have subscriptions will very likely purchase the DLCs in the Crown Store, as you do not actually own the DLC otherwise. You WILL get to try them out before you buy them, though, and that is very nice.

You pay for 1500 crowns a month as a subscriber, and get a few perks. Access to DLC areas, 10% xp / inspiration / gold boost.

You may find it unlikely, but that is how the model works. That is what ZOS fully expects, because that is how it has always been for successful B2P games.

Why do you think ZOS introduced a cash shop in the first place? To try to make money from subscribers, which clearly did not work in the first year of the game's life?

People don't buy just pets. They'll buy XP and gold boosters, they'll buy repair kits, they'll buy things that give them some sort of advantage in game. Those things will likely be the fuel for ESO in the future. That is the intent.

Your sub is just a "thanks, here's a few bonuses for pledging to buy at least 1500 crowns from us each month". A stack of potions is 4 bucks. You can only buy Crowns in certain amounts. The LOWEST amount you can buy crowns in is 750 for 8 bucks.

That will buy you 1 stack of potions. XP potions will be at least the same cost as these potions, if not more. If a player buys just 2 stacks (no clue how many xp pots will come in a stack, or if they will stack, pure speculation here) of potions in an entire month, they have paid just as much as you have as a subscriber.

If they buy just 1 more stack, they have contributed MORE than you as a subscriber. Individually, a player may not buy 3 stacks of pots in a month, but MANY MANY MORE people will buy these potions than those who actually subscribe, or at least that is ZOS' aim. That is how the model works.

This amounts to way more than subscribers will be contributing, or at least that is how it is in the other noteworthy B2P games. And as I already said, history repeats itself.

The "unlikely" thing is that it WON'T work as I described.

I really enjoy the game but I voted no because lack of content it just seems to me and I do not know why but between the poor ly done content updates, the horrible eso live streams(really need people with a personality to run those) and the format for the live stream is just wrong in many ways.

The company just seems they are clueless in how to run an MMo and I feel the perks i could care less about give us more content but yet we suffer so they can work on the console release.

Jaxsun wrote: »

That's why I cancelled my sub....

Ditto. I've been waiting to see how their B2P scheme would pan out. I've seen enough.

I felt more valued before 1.6... We are currently in the longest drought of ESO content and still have a month or two before anything new comes. It honestly amazes me that the Imperial City is STILL not out.