ZOS? Do you not Undersand?

Gandrhulf_Harbard · June 2015

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Unlike P2P games, B2P and F2P games can afford to lose players at higher numbers as long as they can maintain sales through their MicroTransaction Store.

No, they can't.

Bean-counters who are only concerned about the next quarter's bottom-line think they can; but they really, really, really, can't.

Every lost player is a player that is not only not spending money now, but one who will not spend money in the future.

Going to use a simplified example here.

Let's say the bean-counters want $250 profit for the next quarter, from a player base of 500 players.

That's $0.50 profit/player.

But because of lack of content they lose 10% of the playerbase.

That Profit/Player value is now shifted to $0.55/player.

So prices in the Crown Store have to go up, or more revenue streams added to the Store to try and incentivise players to spend.

Maybe a deliberately engineered grind is added to create a market for a Store Item - much like the change to Stable Riding Skills and the addition of Riding Skill packages in the Store.

Higher prices see players LESS likely to spend money.
And Development money spent on the Store is money NOT spent on Real Content.

Higher prices, more grind AND a lack of new content is a Game Killer.

So more players drift away, and each player is spending less (in relation to the profit/player projection) than they should be.

So prices get hiked, or yet more revenue streams are added to the Store further depleting investment in Real Content.

And the circle repeats, and repeats, and repeats.

Less investment in Real Content = Less Players.

Western Markets are simply not going to accept the interminable grind, only relieved by Micro-Transactions that are ubiquitous in Asian MMO markets.

And $25 for a horse and a further $100+ for a properly buffed horse ISN'T really Micro-Transactions.

Jack Cohen, the founder of Tesco, understood the way to get people to part with money: "stack them high, sell them low" - lots of choice, and competitive prices.

The current store model is naff-all choice, and prices at least twice what they should be.

If the game is to be able to survive as a financially viable product it needs two things to change, ASAP, more content and more value-for-money in its pricing structure.

As things stand I don't see the game being here in two year's time; because it simply doesn't offer value for money to its customer base.

When I can buy an entire game for $25 what makes anyone think I will part with $25 for a Horse?
If the Horse were really good in terms of looks I may spend $5 on it.
If it came with +25 starting value (not max) to all three Skills I may even be prepared to spend $10 on it.
But $25?
Never in a million years.

All The Best

Gandrhulf_Harbard · June 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

They understand. They have also addressed it a couple of times on ESO live.

They realise we are in need of new content. They have also stated that they have been concentrating on the console version because it is not a simple console port. Lots of it has been rebuilt from the ground up. That takes time and effort and man hours.

All well and good.

But still no reason, or excuse, for all but abandoning PC.

If, for example, one of your children is struggling with exams and needs a lot more support from you than normal do you suddenly totally stop caring for your other children?

All The Best

Xandryah · June 2015

Imo Elder Scrolls Online has a pleasant way to communicate with players > ESO Live > also the site is easy to navigate > they explain a lot of things very detailed...

In swtor you don't have this...i have another feeling about those guys at bioware/Ea games... at times i had the feeling those are a bunch of greedy cheaters , especially with those packs and the Cartel Market conditions and all and also the time you need to invest to get some things... (some things are the same here though > champion system) and also levelling a few months ago.. and veteran levelling (is still to hard)

many things have improved though in swtor ... and pvp will be cheaper too... in the meantime you "wasted" time to put it negatively

but, to get back to the topic....

swtor never released information about future content... very , very, very little only and just every 6 months or so

compare with this game too > The Division (by Ubisoft) > they dont' communicate nothing at all ! they game should have been release this year (say autumn) but the official website sucks 200%.... the game may be release in 2016 (spring) i heard....but communication is 200% bad...

from this point of view... ESO is much, much , much communicative and "honest" with the players...content-wise

they probably will inform people more after console release....which is absorbing quite a lot of time

well, that's my weekly 2 cent to he community, thank you for reading , sorry for mistakes and brainstorming-kind-of-writing...

Take care^^

Xandryah

Korah_Eaglecry · June 2015

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Unlike P2P games, B2P and F2P games can afford to lose players at higher numbers as long as they can maintain sales through their MicroTransaction Store.

No, they can't.

Bean-counters who are only concerned about the next quarter's bottom-line think they can; but they really, really, really, can't.

Every lost player is a player that is not only not spending money now, but one who will not spend money in the future.

Going to use a simplified example here.

Let's say the bean-counters want $250 profit for the next quarter, from a player base of 500 players.

That's $0.50 profit/player.

But because of lack of content they lose 10% of the playerbase.

That Profit/Player value is now shifted to $0.55/player.

So prices in the Crown Store have to go up, or more revenue streams added to the Store to try and incentivise players to spend.

Maybe a deliberately engineered grind is added to create a market for a Store Item - much like the change to Stable Riding Skills and the addition of Riding Skill packages in the Store.

Higher prices see players LESS likely to spend money.
And Development money spent on the Store is money NOT spent on Real Content.

Higher prices, more grind AND a lack of new content is a Game Killer.

So more players drift away, and each player is spending less (in relation to the profit/player projection) than they should be.

So prices get hiked, or yet more revenue streams are added to the Store further depleting investment in Real Content.

And the circle repeats, and repeats, and repeats.

Less investment in Real Content = Less Players.

Western Markets are simply not going to accept the interminable grind, only relieved by Micro-Transactions that are ubiquitous in Asian MMO markets.

And $25 for a horse and a further $100+ for a properly buffed horse ISN'T really Micro-Transactions.

Jack Cohen, the founder of Tesco, understood the way to get people to part with money: "stack them high, sell them low" - lots of choice, and competitive prices.

The current store model is naff-all choice, and prices at least twice what they should be.

If the game is to be able to survive as a financially viable product it needs two things to change, ASAP, more content and more value-for-money in its pricing structure.

As things stand I don't see the game being here in two year's time; because it simply doesn't offer value for money to its customer base.

When I can buy an entire game for $25 what makes anyone think I will part with $25 for a Horse?
If the Horse were really good in terms of looks I may spend $5 on it.
If it came with +25 starting value (not max) to all three Skills I may even be prepared to spend $10 on it.
But $25?
Never in a million years.

All The Best

Your example and opinion fails to take into consideration Whales (which are the core of any F2P/B2P marketing demographic).

Whales can sustain games better then the guy thats randomly spending money here and there or barely at all. Whales will spend at times hundreds and even thousands of dollars a year on a game. Especially if theres a gambling mechanic built into the game.

If youre assuming that everyone is sharing the expected quarterly earnings evenly like a Sub Model game then you dont understand how F2P and B2P games work and why they are successful.

The current Store is lacking, but this is a short term issue that will become a non-issue the more they add to it. And the more they add consumables to the store. The easier it is to move in the direction of a profit.

You also make the misinformed judgement that because YOU wont pay for certain things at a certain price that that must mean theyll fail to make a profit. Never even once considering that youre not the target audience for the item. Not everything on the store is going to appeal to you. Not everything put into the store is marketed specifically for you and your demographic. Ever heard the saying 'Different strokes for different folks'? That applies in business. By offering differing services and items on their store they reach a wider audience and boost their potential for a larger profit.

Doing simple math and forgetting all of the different variables was your mistake.

Rune_Relic · June 2015

Ah but you're missing the point.
Its not subscription based any more.
Its buy to play "existing content"......and cash shop.

There is no requirement for them to provide any new content in any time frame any more

Subscription charges are a rock chained around your neck where commitments are concerned.
Dump subscription...and the "obligations" and "requirements" that come with it are gone.
Enjoy the wait

..it will be done.....SOOOOOOOOOOON!

Gandrhulf_Harbard · June 2015

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Your example and opinion fails to take into consideration Whales (which are the core of any F2P/B2P marketing demographic).

Whales are more likely to jump ship to the "next big thing" though, they have the money to spend on whatever takes their fancy, and what often takes their fancy is "buying advantage" in the "next big thing" so they can be "top of the pile" for a few weeks.

Relying on Whales is less sustainable than relying on steady, low-value, high volume income.

And just to pint out my post has 2 Likes, your's has none.

I'm guessing that means my post is more resonant with more players than is yours.

ESO should, if they are good at business, be taking note of that.

All The Best

stewhead2ub17_ESO · June 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

sadownik wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You're being incredibly short sighted. Hard and fast dates and info are nearly impossible to keep in the mmo industry. Deadlines come and go. Info tends to change due to often times unforseeable circumstances. Imagine how upset you would be if you were given a date for something and then that date had to be pushed back. As for the player numbers, those haven't been published. It is your own speculation and/or what your limited sphere of observation that enables you to draw the conclusion ESO is losing players. I would submit they are gaining new players at a near equal pace as those that leave. My advice, enjoy what's on your plate in front of you. Keep an eye on the future. If it isn't to your liking go scope out something else for awhile. Enjoy!

You are incredibly naive or should take off pink glasses.

I don't believe I'm naive and I don't know what the "pink glasses" refers to. But I do know that I'm enjoying ESO (and other games as well) and I'm not distressed or feeling moved to complain/whine on the various forums.

FYI:

rose-coloured glasses
(British & Australian) also rose-colored glasses/rose-coloured spectacles (American & Australian/British)
if someone thinks about or looks at something with rose-coloured glasses, they think it is more pleasant than it really is She's nostalgic for a past that she sees through rose-colored glasses.

Aha "rose colored glasses" I understand. I thought the poster was comparing me to Sir Elton!!

kenpachi480 · June 2015

I am with OP on this one,. not spending cash nor time into ESO till I get some new content,.

been supporter for hole year, was eager to play since first day announcement,. played 2000 hours

been in epic pvp battles, did some epic soloing, did some epic group content, and got bored,.

only thing I miss are some friends, but since they dont make the effort either to stay in touch, i dont feel all that bad about it,.

so yeah new content please,. i gladly give another 2000 hours,. but has to stay fun for that to happen

Forestd16b14_ESO · June 2015

The game is only a year old. You honestly WoW, Runescape, and all those other games had flawless starts? No. Just cause the game is on a bumpy road now doesn't mean we'll never get off it. So either shut up and enjoy the ride now or just leave and miss out on the future of possabilities ESO has for it. Cause if I recall the last Elder Scrolls game to feature all 9 provinces was The Elder Scrolls: Chapter 1 The Arena back in 1994. Cause I don't know about you but I can imagine alot of adventures all over Tamerial plus we still have 11 other Daedric princes to worry about..... well 10 cause Azura isn't all that bad well 9 cause Sanguin isn't that bad either just a super frat boy who always get you and the gang arrested.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

no, we are not at wow release times anymore and zenimax has already made many mistakes. maybe they should hire some folks who really play the game to help him

AH93 · June 2015

Heh, new content appears in the crown store for us all

Heromofo · June 2015

AH93 wrote: »

Heh, new content appears in the crown store for us all

They are supposedly moving the devs off after console launch over to their new project.
It does look good though but it seems we will have to wait another year for content until the new project is finished.

All i was able to dig up was this one picture:

wraith808 · June 2015

FrostixX wrote: »

Can they at least INFORM US about that content ? JUST INFORMING US WON'T KILL THEM

They did before. And then priorities change. And the players aren't amenable to that, and continue to hold that over their heads.

sadownik · June 2015

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

The game is only a year old. You honestly WoW, Runescape, and all those other games had flawless starts? No. Just cause the game is on a bumpy road now doesn't mean we'll never get off it. So either shut up and enjoy the ride now or just leave and miss out on the future of possabilities ESO has for it. Cause if I recall the last Elder Scrolls game to feature all 9 provinces was The Elder Scrolls: Chapter 1 The Arena back in 1994. Cause I don't know about you but I can imagine alot of adventures all over Tamerial plus we still have 11 other Daedric princes to worry about..... well 10 cause Azura isn't all that bad well 9 cause Sanguin isn't that bad either just a super frat boy who always get you and the gang arrested.

"Its a beginning problems", "every game has bugs at launch", "Its only 1 year give it a time". A lie repeated 100 times not always becomes a truth.

ChuckDanson · June 2015

When their beloved console launch tanks compared to what they are expecting, they will realize how big of a mistake it was to screw over the loyal pc subs.

bedlom · June 2015

They did say a long time ago not to expect any new content until consoles are sorted.