Reason for going B2P?

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

BigM · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

Paid 14 bucks for that horse

BigM · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

BigM wrote: »

No one is saying anything about M$ being evil or a hero. Also why does it matter how old it is, in fact it is right at time it was all going on. FF has been around for years. So again confused by you're post?

Oh well I tried but seems you guys want to just say M$ wouldn't allow them when in fact they did allow it!

Noone ever said MS wouldnt allow a subscription only based game. They said they would not allow ZOS the option of bypassing xbox live gold. So players would have to pay for both. ZOS didnt think players would pay for both. So they dropped the sub and created the whole TU b2p thing. If you still dont get it then you are simply dense.

And what I am saying that was all PR, so maybe you are right and they decided to go B2P from the start. But that also means they did a deliberate two face to us PC/MAC players! I really do not want to believe that because that would be a very good reason never to pay another nickel to them.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

BigM wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

BigM wrote: »

No one is saying anything about M$ being evil or a hero. Also why does it matter how old it is, in fact it is right at time it was all going on. FF has been around for years. So again confused by you're post?

Oh well I tried but seems you guys want to just say M$ wouldn't allow them when in fact they did allow it!

Noone ever said MS wouldnt allow a subscription only based game. They said they would not allow ZOS the option of bypassing xbox live gold. So players would have to pay for both. ZOS didnt think players would pay for both. So they dropped the sub and created the whole TU b2p thing. If you still dont get it then you are simply dense.

And what I am saying that was all PR, so maybe you are right and they decided to go B2P from the start. But that also means they did a deliberate two face to us PC/MAC players! I really do not want to believe that because that would be a very good reason never to pay another nickel to them.

I never said they planned on going b2p from the start. I think the whole year long delay was they first had to convert the PC to the b2p model. Then finish the console game AND add the cash shop etc. The only choices were risk the game tanking because consoles refused to buy the game, pay the xbox live membership, pay the monthly fee AND buy new DLC as it comes out. Right or wrong they decided the risk wasnt worth it and did the whole b2p thing.

Honestly it seems to have worked out well at least on the console. They sold upwards of 3 million copies had 800K people in queue etc. As far as a deliberate about face thats exactly what they did to pc people. I didnt like it either and I havent paid em a dime since march.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

BigM · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

BigM wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

BigM wrote: »

No one is saying anything about M$ being evil or a hero. Also why does it matter how old it is, in fact it is right at time it was all going on. FF has been around for years. So again confused by you're post?

Oh well I tried but seems you guys want to just say M$ wouldn't allow them when in fact they did allow it!

Noone ever said MS wouldnt allow a subscription only based game. They said they would not allow ZOS the option of bypassing xbox live gold. So players would have to pay for both. ZOS didnt think players would pay for both. So they dropped the sub and created the whole TU b2p thing. If you still dont get it then you are simply dense.

And what I am saying that was all PR, so maybe you are right and they decided to go B2P from the start. But that also means they did a deliberate two face to us PC/MAC players! I really do not want to believe that because that would be a very good reason never to pay another nickel to them.

I never said they planned on going b2p from the start. I think the whole year long delay was they first had to convert the PC to the b2p model. Then finish the console game AND add the cash shop etc. The only choices were risk the game tanking because consoles refused to buy the game, pay the xbox live membership, pay the monthly fee AND buy new DLC as it comes out. Right or wrong they decided the risk wasnt worth it and did the whole b2p thing.

Honestly it seems to have worked out well at least on the console. They sold upwards of 3 million copies had 800K people in queue etc. As far as a deliberate about face thats exactly what they did to pc people. I didnt like it either and I havent paid em a dime since march.

Sorry man thought you were the one that said it, I apologize sir.

Well personally I think it was a bad decision and also think they have a game here once they fix all the bugs and chat on consoles that will make WoW look like GW2.

Alp2760 · June 2015

What annoys me about things like the op is the ignorance of their statements.

'One last question to the console players you do realize you will need to pay for all content to the crown store if you want to play it right?'

Do you think dlc content is new to console players? If anything, they are more used to paying for this sort of thing. They don't have the luxury of free community add ons like pc. Basically anything, however big or small added to console games is paid content. Of course they realise, don't be so patronising.

The way you sum up console players like they have never played anything on a pc is a joke as well. You do realise that a lot of gamers will go between both? I and many others have played both pc and console games, don't act like you are special or have some inside knowledge that others don't.

The arrogance of some (not all) pc players is and has for some time been laughable. If anything, it is the pc community that is expectant and self entitled - that doesn't just go for this game, I find that pc gamers are generally more negative and seem to think they are the 'higher beings' of anything gaming.

Again, NOT aimed at all, but I doubt you would find half as many comments from Console players, looking down on pc as the other way around.

If you have issues, just raise them, don't drag in and ignorantly raise an entire player Base as an excuse for your whining.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

PC people are negative because we were made to spend money to play this game. We tested everything. Then we were shuffled to the side and almost 9 months later still no content for us because they were too busy making the console game. Then we still have to wait because we are told console players do not like day one DLC. So the animosity isnt personal its just we've been delegated to second class while console is given all of the attention.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

hm, maybe wow can do this, because they have already their fanbase, but i am sure zos never want subs and dlc money together. its not economic reality in todays world of mmos

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

hm, maybe wow can do this, because they have already their fanbase, but i am sure zos never want subs and dlc money together. its not economic reality in todays world of mmos

It was the plan from day one. The sub would cover access to the game and they would sell expansions. If not for the console release it would have remained this way.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

hm, maybe wow can do this, because they have already their fanbase, but i am sure zos never want subs and dlc money together. its not economic reality in todays world of mmos

It was the plan from day one. The sub would cover access to the game and they would sell expansions. If not for the console release it would have remained this way.

hell no. they always plan for console and they know they cant manage console subs and dlc paying too

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

I just want to be sure everyone is on the same page here. There seems to be some confusion on a second piece.

There are two ways to experience new content.

1. Subscribe - If you are a subscriber you have access (while subscribed) to all new DLC content. Period. If your subscription expires you loose access to anything beyond the base game.

2. Purchase DLC - If you are not subscribing and want access to new content as released, you can pay for the DLC and will forever have access to the content. You own it, and can continue to access it without any additional fees.

You will never have to subscribe and purchase DLC.

BigM · June 2015

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

hm, maybe wow can do this, because they have already their fanbase, but i am sure zos never want subs and dlc money together. its not economic reality in todays world of mmos

It was the plan from day one. The sub would cover access to the game and they would sell expansions. If not for the console release it would have remained this way.

hell no. they always plan for console and they know they cant manage console subs and dlc paying too

Yet they thought it was a great idea to have them buy DLC and crown store items not discounting the box cost? Well we will see how much these DLC's will be and how the console players take it, will be interesting I will say that much!

@Elijah_Crow you actually think a lot of these console players know this by reading what was on the box. Lot of posts from them seem not to back that up but I hope you are right and they know.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I believe they planned all along on selling DLC via a shop either in game or like the palomino horse. I dont believe they planned from day one to go b2p.

so you think they plan manage subs and extra money for dlc? cant be serious)))

Why not? One of the most popular games in history and by far the most populated MMO in existance today does exactly this. You pay a sub fee and you also pay for expansions. Not just that they also have a cash shop. The game started off with a horse you could buy for cash only. They did plan on expanding that shop to include a lot of DLC which would cost outside of the subscription. Its how elder scrolls games work.

hm, maybe wow can do this, because they have already their fanbase, but i am sure zos never want subs and dlc money together. its not economic reality in todays world of mmos

It was the plan from day one. The sub would cover access to the game and they would sell expansions. If not for the console release it would have remained this way.

hell no. they always plan for console and they know they cant manage console subs and dlc paying too

Again this is not true. They worked hard trying to get MS to not charge the xbox live gold to their customers. They planned on charging a sub across all platforms.

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

I just want to be sure everyone is on the same page here. There seems to be some confusion on a second piece.

There are two ways to experience new content.

1. Subscribe - If you are a subscriber you have access (while subscribed) to all new DLC content. Period. If your subscription expires you loose access to anything beyond the base game.

2. Purchase DLC - If you are not subscribing and want access to new content as released, you can pay for the DLC and will forever have access to the content. You own it, and can continue to access it without any additional fees.

You will never have to subscribe and purchase DLC.

I'm optimistic as console players are already used to buying the game and accessing future content by buying it in chunks of DLC. Personally I like an ever evolving subscriber game so here we have the best of both worlds for them an us. ZOS makes a ton of money and keeps pushing out content. It's the dream.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

THERE IS NO CHARGING A SUB AND EXTRA FOR DLC. It's one or the other for access to new content and they leave it up to you to pick how you want to pay.

Help me out here guys.. am I not being clear?

So, what do you get as an ESO Plus member? Let’s go over the benefits:

An allotment of crowns to spend in the new in-game Crown Store based on your membership period (more below)
Access to all of ESO’s downloadable content (or DLC) game packs for the duration of your membership
A 10% bonus to XP and gold gain, crafting research, and inspiration

If you have no ESO Plus, you just pay for each DLC.

BigM · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

THERE IS NO CHARGING A SUB AND EXTRA FOR DLC. It's one or the other for access to new content and they leave it up to you to pick how you want to pay.

Help me out here guys.. am I not being clear?

Yeah and when they decide to stop paying sub lose access, yeah no one will get mad. YOU read same forums I do?

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

THERE IS NO CHARGING A SUB AND EXTRA FOR DLC. It's one or the other for access to new content and they leave it up to you to pick how you want to pay.

Help me out here guys.. am I not being clear?

tell it to jamesharv

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

Then don't sub for $15 a month. Save your money and buy each DLC outright. You will probably spend less and you will never loose access.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

The plan BEFORE b2p was to charge a monthly fee AND to charge for DLC. This only changed when they switched to b2p in March 2015. Almost a YEAR after release. The ONLY DLC we got was craglorn and by then the b2p switch was already being done in the background unknown to us other than rumors that turned out to be true.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

THERE IS NO CHARGING A SUB AND EXTRA FOR DLC. It's one or the other for access to new content and they leave it up to you to pick how you want to pay.

Help me out here guys.. am I not being clear?

So, what do you get as an ESO Plus member? Let’s go over the benefits:

An allotment of crowns to spend in the new in-game Crown Store based on your membership period (more below)
Access to all of ESO’s downloadable content (or DLC) game packs for the duration of your membership
A 10% bonus to XP and gold gain, crafting research, and inspiration

If you have no ESO Plus, you just pay for each DLC.

Your problem is you arent reading the whole thread. We know how is NOW. I am talking about the ORIGINAL plan back when they released the PC version and DELAYED the console version shortly there after. Your confusion lies in you arent paying attention to the conversation.

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

The plan BEFORE b2p was to charge a monthly fee AND to charge for DLC. This only changed when they switched to b2p in March 2015. Almost a YEAR after release. The ONLY DLC we got was craglorn and by then the b2p switch was already being done in the background unknown to us other than rumors that turned out to be true.

Your statement is a bit misleading. Before B2P, there was no "DLC". There were just standard updates like all subscriptions games have. Craglorn wasn't "DLC" it was an addition to the subscription game..a new area added.

There was never a plan to charge anything above a subscription, until the payment model changed. At that time it changed so that if you wanted to own the game and buy each piece of content and never pay a subscription you could. OR you can continue to play the old way where you subscribe monthly and you always have the full game which will continue to grow.

BigM · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

The plan BEFORE b2p was to charge a monthly fee AND to charge for DLC. This only changed when they switched to b2p in March 2015. Almost a YEAR after release. The ONLY DLC we got was craglorn and by then the b2p switch was already being done in the background unknown to us other than rumors that turned out to be true.

Your statement is a bit misleading. Before B2P, there was no "DLC". There were just standard updates like all subscriptions games have. Craglorn wasn't "DLC" it was an addition to the subscription game..a new area added.

There was never a plan to charge anything above a subscription, until the payment model changed. At that time it changed so that if you wanted to own the game and buy each piece of content and never pay a subscription you could. OR you can continue to play the old way where you subscribe monthly and you always have the full game which will continue to grow.

Sorry I missed that part and been here from beta, weird how people remember things different isn't it?

Elijah_Crow · June 2015

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

VincentBlanquin wrote: »

charging a sub? maybe. Charging a sub and extra for dlc from the same player ? no

THERE IS NO CHARGING A SUB AND EXTRA FOR DLC. It's one or the other for access to new content and they leave it up to you to pick how you want to pay.

Help me out here guys.. am I not being clear?

So, what do you get as an ESO Plus member? Let’s go over the benefits:

An allotment of crowns to spend in the new in-game Crown Store based on your membership period (more below)
Access to all of ESO’s downloadable content (or DLC) game packs for the duration of your membership
A 10% bonus to XP and gold gain, crafting research, and inspiration

If you have no ESO Plus, you just pay for each DLC.

Your problem is you arent reading the whole thread. We know how is NOW. I am talking about the ORIGINAL plan back when they released the PC version and DELAYED the console version shortly there after. Your confusion lies in you arent paying attention to the conversation.

Last time. I don't know where you are getting your info, but it's just plain wrong.

In the beginning, this was a subscription game. Period. If you wanted to play, you paid $15 a month and you would always have access to the full game including anything that was added in the future.

((The only exception to this would be some massive new continent, system adding, huge expansion like WoW sees once every several years))

There was no "DLC" nor was there ever any intent to charge subscribers for any additional content which was developed.

For me as a subscriber, this hasn't changed. I pay monthly, i have access to all and will continue to.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

Elijah_Crow wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

The plan BEFORE b2p was to charge a monthly fee AND to charge for DLC. This only changed when they switched to b2p in March 2015. Almost a YEAR after release. The ONLY DLC we got was craglorn and by then the b2p switch was already being done in the background unknown to us other than rumors that turned out to be true.

Your statement is a bit misleading. Before B2P, there was no "DLC". There were just standard updates like all subscriptions games have. Craglorn wasn't "DLC" it was an addition to the subscription game..a new area added.

There was never a plan to charge anything above a subscription, until the payment model changed. At that time it changed so that if you wanted to own the game and buy each piece of content and never pay a subscription you could. OR you can continue to play the old way where you subscribe monthly and you always have the full game which will continue to grow.

Dude Ive been here since day one. I know exactly what they had planned. Its not like they hid it. The game was going to cost so much per month and the expansions (which is what PC people call DLC) would cost extra. Craglorn was only free because by then the b2p switch was already decided behind the scenes. They couldnt very well charge people for it then a few months later give the entire game away for $60 with no sub required.

BigM · June 2015

First I ever heard about a DLC not costing us money is when they went B2P and brought up the sub. Before that I was always under the assumption we would have to pay for it, other than Imperial City which was already promised to us. Maybe that is where you are getting confused.

VincentBlanquin · June 2015

i simply think that zenimax marketers know market and its progress. they know that pay methods are moving more and more from mandatory subs to variable paying for specific things (cash shop). and they know they creating elder scrolls game, famous single player series game, where players only buy game and dlc but not pay monthly. they know this all for "years" so there was always plan for tamriel unlimited version. dont foolish yourself ...

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · June 2015

This article from 2012 before the game even came out claims one of the downfalls of the game is having to pay for a sub AND pay for expansions. Thats how they planned it. The problem is that kind of model simply doesnt fly these days. This article had some good points and came out almost 2 years before ESO went live on PC.

http://www.shadowlocked.com/201205082608/features/8-reasons-why-the-elder-scrolls-online-has-had-its-time.html