Big patches such as Imperial City are for free?

ElricFrancis · June 2015

BigM wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

If you have a subscription

But you lose access to it once you cancel sub. Then if you still want it but do not want to sub again, you will need to purchase it from crown store then it is yours for good!

why I won't ever sub. I'll buy it. Or not. Never sub however. I want wow to go console honestly.

Gidorick · June 2015

You SHOULD sub @ElricFrancis. Sometimes.

My plan:
1: Sub for 1 month when DLC is released
2: Play DLC for 1 month (likely finish DLC)
3: If I want that DLC for keeps, put 1500 Crowns toward purchase
4: Repeat whenever DLC is released.
5: Buy 5500 Crown packs for $40 otherwise
6: Profit

MornaBaine · June 2015

daemonios wrote: »

I loooove the smell of schadenfreude in the morning.

So, the same community who allegedly "begged" ZOS to make the game F2P (or B2P, if you care about the distinction) is now begging for free content. Priceless.

P.S. If it were up to me, the game would still be subscription only and all content would be free.

I don't think "the community" ever begged for this game to go either F2P or B2P. I strongly smell justification and hype. I, and many others, would still prefer it be subscription only with no cash shop. But that's not what happened so we play the hand we are dealt, at least until we decide the "house" has stacked the deck in its favor a few too many times. Imperial City and how they handle its release will, I suspect, be the deciding factor for a lot of folks.

MornaBaine · June 2015

Pallmor wrote: »

MornaBaine wrote: »

While I expect Imperial City and Orsinium/Wrothgar to be DLC for which they expect payment, if that is indeed going to be the case it leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth since these were promised additions LONG before the game went B2P.

They also promised that we would continue to have to pay $15/month to play the game back then too. You want them to keep that promise too?

So if you want the original terms, then just subscribe. You'll get all the DLC for free, as originally promised. And you'll also pay them your monthly sub, as originally promised.

I, in fact, have maintained my subscription all along and will do so for as long as I feel this game is worth playing. Doesn't change my opinion on what ZoS ought to ethically do.

Sallington · June 2015

daemonios wrote: »

I loooove the smell of schadenfreude in the morning.

So, the same community who allegedly "begged" ZOS to make the game F2P (or B2P, if you care about the distinction) is now begging for free content. Priceless.

P.S. If it were up to me, the game would still be subscription only and all content would be free.

I was definitely one of those who was militantly opposed to moving away from the subscription model, and thought anyone who assumed ESO would go B2P was crazy.

We should pay a $15/month sub, updates should be free, we pay for expansions, etc. Easy, non-controversial.

JamilaRaj · June 2015

It is controversial. Here is one contra-version: they not only could drop relatively more powerful or valuable rewards into DLC so that of two players the one farming in (paid) DLC would end up to be more powerful with same or less effort, effectively setting up P2W scheme, but unless they content-starve players before every DLC launch (relying on cash shop fluff & P2W elements in between to stay afloat) to the point they will buy pretty much anything for any price just because it is new, they will have to to coerce players into buying it. Alternatively, they could launch DLC and simultaneously nerf free/old zones to have the same effect.

NadiusMaximus · June 2015

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

Sallington · June 2015

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

This is how I feel as well. We basically paid $15 a month to fund the console launch and keep the servers on. That's it.

I won't even say we kept the servers functional (Cyrodil performance). We literally just kept them on.

Gidorick · June 2015

Sallington wrote: »

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

This is how I feel as well. We basically paid $15 a month to fund the console launch and keep the servers on. That's it.

I won't even say we kept the servers functional (Cyrodil performance). We literally just kept them on.

Which is one of the reasons I am no longer subbed.

I'll pay for content that they FINISH.

NadiusMaximus · June 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

This is how I feel as well. We basically paid $15 a month to fund the console launch and keep the servers on. That's it.

I won't even say we kept the servers functional (Cyrodil performance). We literally just kept them on.

Which is one of the reasons I am no longer subbed.

I'll pay for content that they FINISH.

Same here. I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't do the same. You don't even own the content if you get it under the new plan, you rent it.

Merlin13KAGL · June 2015

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

Absolutely. DLC should be free, paid in full (not rented or leased), for at least double the time we subbed for, because that's absolutely where the development $ came from.

They're not keeping the doors open by peddling wedding dresses and pony guars.

Sallington · June 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

NadiusMaximus wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Technically, we funded it long in advance.

Stuff that was said to be finished and would be released before B2p went live should be free to anyone that was paying the sub back then.

What the *** did we get for a years subscription? Craglorn? Beta console testing? Stuff is still broke, stuff is still bugged, still nothing new.

This is how I feel as well. We basically paid $15 a month to fund the console launch and keep the servers on. That's it.

I won't even say we kept the servers functional (Cyrodil performance). We literally just kept them on.

Which is one of the reasons I am no longer subbed.

I'll pay for content that they FINISH.

The lack of improvement in Cyrodil is one of the reasons I uninstalled. Then console launch and B2P just put me over the edge.

Dagoth_Rac · June 2015

MornaBaine wrote: »

While I expect Imperial City and Orsinium/Wrothgar to be DLC for which they expect payment, if that is indeed going to be the case it leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth since these were promised additions LONG before the game went B2P. They should be free updates based on that alone. Otherwise, my suspicion is going to be that ZoS deliberately held them back as long as they did just so they could make us pay extra for them. And that stinks. I'd LIKE to think the company is better than that.

They never said Imperial City or Wrothgar would come before March 2015. We got new dungeons, new zones, new Trials, new game systems, etc., roughly every 6 weeks. The final update took longer, but it was something of a double update, with both Champion System and first part of Justice System. I know some people don't consider Champion System or Justice System new content, but they likely took just as much if not more development time and coding than "real" content like Imperial City or Wrothgar. The patch notes for Champion System/Justice System were how long? Like 70 pages? Real people had to spend a lot of real time getting that accomplished. It was "real" content.

The real drought in updates will be post B2P through Imperial City. They did drop the sub, so we have saved $15/month since the B2P launch. That will be about $90 in savings by time Imperial City releases. More than enough to buy it. If you kept sub and moved to ESO+, you will have gotten about 9000 crowns from sub. Again, should be more than enough to pay for Imperial City if you ever drop sub. The delays in getting new content out are annoying, for sure, but we will likely save money or break even in the long run. This is really an, "I want new stuff to play or I may get bored and leave issue," not really a money issue.

If ZOS really wanted a cash grab, they would have made the potions and food in cash shop better than in-game. They would have made the new XP Boosters cash shop only. They would have made it where you could not have a mount or pet except via the cash shop, or cash shop mounts would have better stats. They have done a nice job of trying to not turn the game into the typical cash grab where the game is nearly unplayable if you don't pony up for a subscription or cash shop items. You could have dropped sub in March and spent 0 crowns since then and noticed no difference in gameplay compared to someone who has stayed subbed and spent tens of thousands of crowns in cash shop. That is about as far from a cash grab game as you can get. I wish people would appreciate that.

Xendyn · June 2015

daemonios wrote: »

I loooove the smell of schadenfreude in the morning.

So, the same community who allegedly "begged" ZOS to make the game F2P (or B2P, if you care about the distinction) is now begging for free content. Priceless.

P.S. If it were up to me, the game would still be subscription only and all content would be free.

Yeh we never could figure out exactly who that "community" was. Sure wasn't us here.

Gidorick wrote: »

You SHOULD sub @ElricFrancis. Sometimes.

My plan:
1: Sub for 1 month when DLC is released
2: Play DLC for 1 month (likely finish DLC)
3: If I want that DLC for keeps, put 1500 Crowns toward purchase
4: Repeat whenever DLC is released.
5: Buy 5500 Crown packs for $40 otherwise
6: Profit

This. Since you're just renting with a sub anyway, I'll play it for a month and see if it is actually Worth buying.
Which for me, won't be unless there is actually some necessary or interesting replayability factor involved.

markt84 · June 2015

I'll pay the sub for the Bears, once I get my bear, I'll stop. I really don't want to miss out on that bear.

Oh yeah and they should charge for dlc. Not sure why anything expects/thinks they shouldn't

markt84 · June 2015

markt84 wrote: »

I'll pay the sub for the Bears, once I get my bear, I'll stop. I really don't want to miss out on that bear.

Oh yeah and they should charge for dlc. Not sure why anything expects/thinks they shouldn't

Anyone

Zhoyzu · June 2015

any project started during payed beta test should be free. Its not like they used that money for anything else.

markt84 · June 2015

Zhoyzu wrote: »

any project started during payed beta test should be free. Its not like they used that money for anything else.

Just don't buy it, problem solved

Rosveen · June 2015

Zhoyzu wrote: »

any project started during payed beta test should be free. Its not like they used that money for anything else.

They used it for console development.

JamilaRaj · June 2015

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

If ZOS really wanted a cash grab, they would have made the potions and food in cash shop better than in-game. They would have made the new XP Boosters cash shop only. They would have made it where you could not have a mount or pet except via the cash shop, or cash shop mounts would have better stats. They have done a nice job of trying to not turn the game into the typical cash grab where the game is nearly unplayable if you don't pony up for a subscription or cash shop items

Crown store XP boosters are clearly cash grab aimed at massive initial playerbase of console version before it declines to, say, more long-term levels. These players want to level up as fast as possible and there is no way they could be saturated with in-game XP boosters. To them these are de facto unavailable and will turn to cash shop.
Also note this is something of extra money to ZOS, nice bonus they can get with little effort, but bulk of their revenue is very likely coming from regular box sales. A few months down the line, as these will dwindle and population of potential cash-shoppers as well, they will take the gloves off and start milking players in earnest.

Attorneyatlawl · June 2015

jcodbf2b14_ESO wrote: »

I am going to say that the Imperial City will be free. I think this because it is such a big thing for PvP and it needs to be for everyone.

Everything after will be paid DLC.

This. It's a huge mechanical addition and many of us paid $250-300 into ESO before the buy to play conversion, having been told the Imperial City would be released last year, several months before that even happened. It would be fair for them to provide this DLC complimentary for anyone subscribed for three months or more total before the buy to play conversion, and charge anyone else, honestly.

Attorneyatlawl · June 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Carde wrote: »

When Firor compares what Elder Scrolls will offer its premium players to free offerings, he brings up issues that F2P titles once had in abundance, yet are not as prevelant now. "Elder Scrolls is about being in a giant world, where you’re exploring, and you go to a dungeon, and you don’t get a paygate in front of you saying you don’t have this dungeon," Firor says. "Which means, to us, you need to monetise it outside of the game." While paygates are increasingly less common, some barriers still persist. Certainly, the penny-pinching tactics found in The Old Republic are not desirable.

And there's something to be said about not being confronted with extra costs while in the game itself. "You go outside the game, you pay your month, you go in the game, and when you’re in the game, you’re in the game," Firor clarifies. "There’s no real world stuff reaching in to grab you." Few things break immersion quicker than a game telling you that you can spend cash to unlock chests or get special gear.

Source?

Google.com. I don't have the link handy, but it is a genuine quote.

kevlarto_ESO · June 2015

Pallmor wrote: »

If you're a subscriber, then yes. If not, then no.

This^^^ Zenimax is a for profit company, why would anyone think they are going to pay to have content created and then give it away to everyone? As a subscriber you get this included as part of your ESO+, all others pay.

Carde · June 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Carde wrote: »

When Firor compares what Elder Scrolls will offer its premium players to free offerings, he brings up issues that F2P titles once had in abundance, yet are not as prevelant now. "Elder Scrolls is about being in a giant world, where you’re exploring, and you go to a dungeon, and you don’t get a paygate in front of you saying you don’t have this dungeon," Firor says. "Which means, to us, you need to monetise it outside of the game." While paygates are increasingly less common, some barriers still persist. Certainly, the penny-pinching tactics found in The Old Republic are not desirable.

And there's something to be said about not being confronted with extra costs while in the game itself. "You go outside the game, you pay your month, you go in the game, and when you’re in the game, you’re in the game," Firor clarifies. "There’s no real world stuff reaching in to grab you." Few things break immersion quicker than a game telling you that you can spend cash to unlock chests or get special gear.

Source?

http://www.pcgamesn.com/elderscrolls/matt-firor-justifies-elder-scrolls-subscriptions-we-re-not-worried-about-getting-people-door

Carde · June 2015

Yeah, having to pay for it would sure show all of those subscription fee sympathizers what for.

NadiusMaximus · June 2015

Why did any of us buy the game when it came out. Why did any of us pre-order?
We love the game.
We paid top dollar for it day one, or before. We then paid a sub for an entire year.
So, for $270.00 we recieved the free pets for being subbed at that time.
Everything else in the game so far can now be bought for $19.99.
We each could have saved $250.00 and recieve the exact same content as anyone that buys it now.

Old player already invested 270.00, was promised content the entire time, ie soon™, only new thing was Craglorn.
New player $19.99 buys game with Craglorn already part of it.

What were we paying for? ( The game was actually P2w back then, Pay To Wait)
I've gotten over it, yet still feel a tad burned by the way new players are like " oh, they never said that stuff would be released last year... You don't get it for free... Blah blah"..
Watch last year's event, E3 or quake, they said released last fall, then was pushed back till after console.
Well, now it's going to be this fall again, so a full year and a half after they said it was about finished it's still being said to be released soon™

Wana bet it gets pushed untill early 2016.
Meh, rant over. Game uninstall in six months if nothing new happens.

AngryNord · June 2015

Xendyn wrote: »

daemonios wrote: »

I loooove the smell of schadenfreude in the morning.

So, the same community who allegedly "begged" ZOS to make the game F2P (or B2P, if you care about the distinction) is now begging for free content. Priceless.

P.S. If it were up to me, the game would still be subscription only and all content would be free.

Yeh we never could figure out exactly who that "community" was. Sure wasn't us here.

Elder Scrolls Online's FB page. Ever since launch, pretty much every official post there had multiple comments about "Free to play, please!" "You MUST make this Free NOW!" etc etc etc

Moonshadow66 · June 2015

MornaBaine wrote: »

While I expect Imperial City and Orsinium/Wrothgar to be DLC for which they expect payment, if that is indeed going to be the case it leaves a pretty bad taste in my mouth since these were promised additions LONG before the game went B2P. They should be free updates based on that alone. Otherwise, my suspicion is going to be that ZoS deliberately held them back as long as they did just so they could make us pay extra for them. And that stinks. I'd LIKE to think the company is better than that.

I just wanted to say it.
I remember I.C. should have been out by end of last year, this was before the game went B2P. I really don't see why I should pay AGAIN for something that should have been implemented already at a time where I was still subbed.

AngryNord · June 2015

Sharakor wrote: »

I hope ZOS charges for Imperial City as a DLC just to *** off all of the whiners and moaners on forums.

I hope they make IC free just to *** off fanboys like you

Lava_Croft · June 2015

The biggest 'screw you' that ZOS could give the PvP community is by making the Imperial City a paid DLC.