Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

bareheiny wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

If I buy a lawn chair, is home depot going to give me another one, and a table? No. They wont. More money for more work, period.

Yeah, but if you find that the chair starts to crack upon use you'd be taking it back for a replacement / refund.

You sure as *** wouldn't be buying more of the same chairs hoping that home depot would take that money and address the cracking issue.

And odds are pretty good that you wouldn't be forking out more money for a table of the same "quality".


Or maybe you would actually throw more money at them....because that seems to be what your advocating with your sub up or shut up attitude.

A chair or any material possesion will age and become damaged, so your euphomism is poor.

Allow me to try again. If I pay someone to paint the door on my truck, will he paint the hood and tail gate for free? Negative.

I was expanding on your euphemism, and there was an underlying assumption that the chair began cracking a short period after purchase.

No, you wouldn't expect them to pain the rest of your truck...but you'd expect a quality job (depending on the amount you paid for). Would you seriously pay for the job, then pay extra for touch-ups to address a poor quality paint job?

Or maybe he'll get a sledgehammer and put a dent in that door because he's having a bad day.

Riko_Futatabi wrote: »

Or maybe he'll get a sledgehammer and put a dent in that door because he's having a bad day.

Note to self - forumites do not understand the proper use of a euphomism.

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Mighty_oakk wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

bareheiny wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

If I buy a lawn chair, is home depot going to give me another one, and a table? No. They wont. More money for more work, period.

Yeah, but if you find that the chair starts to crack upon use you'd be taking it back for a replacement / refund.

You sure as *** wouldn't be buying more of the same chairs hoping that home depot would take that money and address the cracking issue.

And odds are pretty good that you wouldn't be forking out more money for a table of the same "quality".


Or maybe you would actually throw more money at them....because that seems to be what your advocating with your sub up or shut up attitude.

A chair or any material possesion will age and become damaged, so your euphomism is poor.

Allow me to try again. If I pay someone to paint the door on my truck, will he paint the hood and tail gate for free? Negative.

No but if he paints the door and you realise its cheap paint wouldn't you want it fixed? But he just ignores your concerns. So you pay him more money and maybe he will fix it or maybe he will put it in his pocket?

Again, poor euphomism. Nothing about EsO is cheap.
Mistakes within reason are a part of life. Refer to my statement concerning millions of eyes versus 20.

Actually alot of things about eso are cheap compared to games from proper studios. I guess it's just perspective. But just keep giving a b2p game your money with your fingers crossed.

Xiana wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

ZoS did not have millions of people testing eso, so please don't say it's outrageous that millions found bugs that 20 or 30 people could not.

ZoS released the game with a beta forum full of bug reports. Believe me, I've been there.

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Second, you're right. You payed 60 for the game. The game being the work that was put into it.
If I buy a lawn chair, is home depot going to give me another one, and a table? No. They wont. More money for more work, period.

Sure you'll generously give the home depot more money to fix your new lawn chair if it's faulty,

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Third, if it actually does cost them 40,000 to patch the game, and no one is subbing.. expect about 15 patches. Ever.

Last time I checked ZoS Media was a profit-orientated corporation but not welfare. If they can't pay the patches they did something wrong, not the cutomer.

They wont sink more money into a project than they've made, no one would. There it is, backwards thinking.

Mighty_oakk wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Mighty_oakk wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

bareheiny wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

If I buy a lawn chair, is home depot going to give me another one, and a table? No. They wont. More money for more work, period.

Yeah, but if you find that the chair starts to crack upon use you'd be taking it back for a replacement / refund.

You sure as *** wouldn't be buying more of the same chairs hoping that home depot would take that money and address the cracking issue.

And odds are pretty good that you wouldn't be forking out more money for a table of the same "quality".


Or maybe you would actually throw more money at them....because that seems to be what your advocating with your sub up or shut up attitude.

A chair or any material possesion will age and become damaged, so your euphomism is poor.

Allow me to try again. If I pay someone to paint the door on my truck, will he paint the hood and tail gate for free? Negative.

No but if he paints the door and you realise its cheap paint wouldn't you want it fixed? But he just ignores your concerns. So you pay him more money and maybe he will fix it or maybe he will put it in his pocket?

Again, poor euphomism. Nothing about EsO is cheap.
Mistakes within reason are a part of life. Refer to my statement concerning millions of eyes versus 20.

Actually alot of things about eso are cheap compared to games from proper studios. I guess it's just perspective. But just keep giving a b2p game your money with your fingers crossed.

For my own sake, could you possibly provide sources? Or examples?

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Xiana wrote: »

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

ZoS did not have millions of people testing eso, so please don't say it's outrageous that millions found bugs that 20 or 30 people could not.

ZoS released the game with a beta forum full of bug reports. Believe me, I've been there.

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Second, you're right. You payed 60 for the game. The game being the work that was put into it.
If I buy a lawn chair, is home depot going to give me another one, and a table? No. They wont. More money for more work, period.

Sure you'll generously give the home depot more money to fix your new lawn chair if it's faulty,

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

Third, if it actually does cost them 40,000 to patch the game, and no one is subbing.. expect about 15 patches. Ever.

Last time I checked ZoS Media was a profit-orientated corporation but not welfare. If they can't pay the patches they did something wrong, not the cutomer.

They wont sink more money into a project than they've made, no one would. There it is, backwards thinking.

You really don't know, how these things work, do you? Just go ahead and throw your money at them. You They deserve it.

You know, if ESO was subscription only I'd probably subscribe.

If ESO was subscription optional AND didn't require PS +....I'd probably subscribe.

But at the moment, I'm not inclined to pay for PS + AND ESO Plus.


Added to that, there's not that much benefit in subscribing. I subbed with DCUO for around 3 years...but there were incentives, and a reasonable amount of DLC related content.

ESO is too young for that just yet....and odds are pretty good that purchasing the DLC will still be more cost effective for me.

Gidorick wrote: »

I was perfectly happy with the subscription model. ZOS didn't think that was the way to go... so they changed the model. If ESO was still sub I would be paying my $15 a month to pay for the FUTURE development of ESO. Since ZOS changed the pay model I will pay for content AFTER they finish it.

I didn't decide to change the model. ZOS did. I'm just being following their lead.

I don't blame them for changing it, it scared away a lot of people. As far as DLC, yes. I completely agree with you.

bareheiny wrote: »

You know, if ESO was subscription only I'd probably subscribe.

If ESO was subscription optional AND didn't require PS +....I'd probably subscribe.

But at the moment, I'm not inclined to pay for PS + AND ESO Plus.


Added to that, there's not that much benefit in subscribing. I subbed with DCUO for around 3 years...but there were incentives, and a reasonable amount of DLC related content.

ESO is too young for that just yet....and odds are pretty good that purchasing the DLC will still be more cost effective for me.

That's an understandable way to look at it. I'm mainly targeting the players that refuse to put a dime into it, but rant and complain constantly about how that want everything fixed NOW. It's just unrealistic.

I like the game in its totality

Auction house is terrible / bugs are here ( same for any MMO )

Meh

Tommy_valkyria wrote: »

The reason they went B2P was because of the fan base they scared away with the subscription model. They didn't have to due to lack of sales, etc.

So, you're saying the game was thriving under the subscription model, and they didn't need to make changes? That wasn't my understanding, but I certainly could be misinformed.

And aren't these same people who were "scared away" by the subscription model, the same people you're now asking to voluntarily subscribe?

Gidorick wrote: »

I was perfectly happy with the subscription model. ZOS didn't think that was the way to go... so they changed the model. If ESO was still sub I would be paying my $15 a month to pay for the FUTURE development of ESO. Since ZOS changed the pay model I will pay for content AFTER they finish it.

I didn't decide to change the model. ZOS did. I'm just being following their lead.

For those still here from get-go, that's the gist of it^. ZOS decided this non-sub program. ZOS made the sub benefits passable. ZOS decides exactly what to sell us and how to sell it to us, we as customers decide if it's worthy or not. Same as any other business.

Under B2P I would think the customer has more power to steer development too. We can all rant and rave on here about what we like/want/hate...but as different types of content comes and players pick and choose, ZOS will have the numbers as to what actually sells.

And as far as development...plz! Am the only person that heard that guy on ESO Live say he is working on content two years down the road that he can't talk about? Sounds like they have plenty of "content" to sell us to earn for future development. All they have to do is make sure it's worth the buy to the masses.

Tessie wrote: »

Psychobunni wrote: »

...but as different types of content comes and players pick and choose, ZOS will have the numbers as to what actually sells...

And because they control the content they're releasing, the numbers will show that 14 different types of cat mounts are what actually sells. Even if that isn't what the community wants to be buying.

I strongly believe in supporting the games I play. I am an ESO+ member, I have bought crowns, I own multiple accounts, etc. But just because I'm willing to buy something, doesn't mean that it was what I'd prefer to have bought. I would have preferred content over mounts. I would have preferred content over costumes. I would have preferred PvE content over PvP content (personal preference, and I have no problem with PvP players getting content). But we can only buy what they make available to us.

While I agree you can only buy what is made available, I'd argue that by buying content / items that you don't really want, but are buying because it's there, you're sending ZOS the message that they are providing what you want.

Ideally we shouldn't buy things we don't like....if the items don't sell, eventually ZOS should get the message and identify something people want.

bareheiny wrote: »

Ideally we shouldn't buy things we don't like....if the items don't sell, eventually ZOS should get the message and identify something people want.

Which sort of brings this thread full circle. The OP's suggestion is that the developers can't produce what we want without money, so subscribe, then optimistically we'll get the stuff we want. But the things they've been producing aren't what we want. So if they get paid for them, they'll think they're giving us what we want. And then produce more of it.

The developers have had an overwhelming job this last year. The conversion from a subscription model to B2P, the launch of two next gen console versions, creation of crown store revenue producing items, bug fixes, IC, and working on the next PvE xpac. Now with most of that list behind us, hopefully we'll be able to see what type of content they're willing to provide us based upon what they think we want.

For me, I want repeatable PvE content.