Are there better ways to get people to subscribe?

Megabear · May 2017

I personally am not in agreement with ZOS's approach in getting people to subscribe. I feel that they are intentionally starving us of inventory space to get us to subscribe. However I think this type of approach would work better where you offer products in addition to basic needs, rather than taking players' basic needs away, then turn around and market/sell these very needs right back to us.

I know most of you will not be happy about negative feedbacks on the very bloodline that supports the devs, but these are my opinions and I'd like to hear from you as well. Either you agree or disagree, if you can, please include alternative solutions/ideas that can better promote subscription.

*Edit: Just learned that inventory limitation was already in place before they got rid of the subscription model and I'd like to acknowledge that this does change my perspective toward the positive. However this does not necessarily mean that ZOS isn't exploiting inventory space limitation and would like to see an improvement to the subscription model in this regard.

Cpt_Teemo · May 2017

They're already adding extra bank space ontop of everything else in the update I think that's enough to intice people to sub

Sigtric · May 2017

Either both agree/disagree (parts) or have no opinion

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

Kyle1983b14_ESO wrote: »

They're already adding extra bank space ontop of everything else in the update I think that's enough to intice people to sub

That's exactly the negative reinforcement approach I was referring to, unless you mean that they are extra bank space to all players, not just subscribers.

Kodrac · May 2017

I disagree

They starved us, as you put it, for 3 years. This might be a valid argument if double bank space was an option from the beginning of B2P. But three years on it's definitely a perk.

Tholian1 · May 2017

I disagree

I like eso+ to offer useful perks. The additional bank space will add to its usefulness. If I just wanted cosmetics, then I could just buy some crowns without a sub.

If you want to hoard stuff, then you need to subscribe. I think that is fair.

Cpt_Teemo · May 2017

Megabear wrote: »

Kyle1983b14_ESO wrote: »

They're already adding extra bank space ontop of everything else in the update I think that's enough to intice people to sub

That's exactly the negative reinforcement approach I was referring to, unless you mean that they are extra bank space to all players, not just subscribers.

Negative reinforcement would mean they would start taking away from ESO sub perks not add to them btw.

starkerealm · May 2017

Okay... so, you've played games that use negative reinforcement to get you to subscribe? You know, like TOR that will permanently lock you out of receiving mission rewards if you're not paying? Or Champions Online, where non-subscribers are limited to horrifically gimped character classes. Or how about DCUO which limits the amount of cash your character can carry so low that for players running endgame group content, it is NOT possible to repair your gear at a vendor.

That's negative reinforcement. Here, you buy the game, you get access to all of the content from before the subscription was dropped.

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

Kyle1983b14_ESO wrote: »

Megabear wrote: »

Kyle1983b14_ESO wrote: »

They're already adding extra bank space ontop of everything else in the update I think that's enough to intice people to sub

That's exactly the negative reinforcement approach I was referring to, unless you mean that they are extra bank space to all players, not just subscribers.

Negative reinforcement would mean they would start taking away from ESO sub perks not add to them btw.

What I mean is that they would continue to starve us of inventory space and instead sell us these spaces through a subscription. They now want to expand on this strategy with added bank space, only if we subscribe.

Cpt_Teemo · May 2017

starkerealm wrote: »

Okay... so, you've played games that use negative reinforcement to get you to subscribe? You know, like TOR that will permanently lock you out of receiving mission rewards if you're not paying? Or Champions Online, where non-subscribers are limited to horrifically gimped character classes. Or how about DCUO which limits the amount of cash your character can carry so low that for players running endgame group content, it is NOT possible to repair your gear at a vendor.

That's negative reinforcement. Here, you buy the game, you get access to all of the content from before the subscription was dropped.

They also refunded all your previous months before the conversion in crowns which they didn't have to but they did and took the time to

Tandor · May 2017

I disagree

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

starkerealm wrote: »

Okay... so, you've played games that use negative reinforcement to get you to subscribe? You know, like TOR that will permanently lock you out of receiving mission rewards if you're not paying? Or Champions Online, where non-subscribers are limited to horrifically gimped character classes. Or how about DCUO which limits the amount of cash your character can carry so low that for players running endgame group content, it is NOT possible to repair your gear at a vendor.

That's negative reinforcement. Here, you buy the game, you get access to all of the content from before the subscription was dropped.

You're simply comparing ESO to worst examples.

Acrolas · May 2017

1 month of ESO+ = $14.99
1 pre-ordered reserved seat movie ticket on opening night to a movie that Instagram already spoiled for me = $16.21

Don't always agree with the development directions. But as far as value? Yep. I'm good.

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

Cpt_Teemo · May 2017

Acrolas wrote: »

1 month of ESO+ = $14.99
1 pre-ordered reserved seat movie ticket on opening night to a movie that Instagram already spoiled for me = $16.21

Don't always agree with the development directions. But as far as value? Yep. I'm good.

Yeah 1 month compared to 2 hours i'd take the month tbh. Also they even give your 15$ back just with the 1500 crowns they give you everything else is extra.

Elsonso · May 2017

It might be "starving" if the inventory space had not been touched since launch. This is not the case.

They doubled the size of resource stacks from 100 to 200. They changed how stacking works so that more items in inventory stack. They moved some items out of inventory and into collections.

It is more appropriate to say that base inventory space considerations are lagging behind introduction of new items. I mean, who would not believe that something ZOS does is lagging?

(yeah, cheap shot)

starkerealm · May 2017

Kyle1983b14_ESO wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Okay... so, you've played games that use negative reinforcement to get you to subscribe? You know, like TOR that will permanently lock you out of receiving mission rewards if you're not paying? Or Champions Online, where non-subscribers are limited to horrifically gimped character classes. Or how about DCUO which limits the amount of cash your character can carry so low that for players running endgame group content, it is NOT possible to repair your gear at a vendor.

That's negative reinforcement. Here, you buy the game, you get access to all of the content from before the subscription was dropped.

They also refunded all your previous months before the conversion in crowns which they didn't have to but they did and took the time to

They also reimburse your subscription cost in Crowns, more or less. I can't think of another MMO that does that. Usually it's you get $5 or $10 bucks worth of store currency to play with, not something close to the full sub fee.

Megabear wrote: »

You're simply comparing ESO to worst examples.

No, I'm comparing it to actual examples. In a negative reinforcement situation, you would actually take away content from players who refused to subscribe. That would mean things like putting a hard cap on stored gold, or removing the ability to upgrade the bank, inventory, and horses with gold (instead of having to cough up cash for them through the shop), removing the ability to pick the locks on chests unless you used special keys sold in the store. Those would all be negative reinforcement situations. The closest ESO gets to that is the Thieves Caches, which subscribers can, fairly reliably tell you, are next to worthless.

starkerealm · May 2017

lordrichter wrote: »

I mean, who would not believe that something ZOS does is lagging? (yeah, cheap shot)

*rimshot*

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

I would definitely consider selling more inventory space through a subscription wall, a negative reinforcement. It may not look so bad compared to worst/actual examples, but still a bad way to get people to pay.

Danksta · May 2017

"- Issue special currency that gives access to exclusive cosmetics to subscribers, on top of current subscription bonuses. This is just an example, but in my opinion playing on people's greed and/or need to achieve better fashion, rather than making people play the "inventory" game or pay up, is a better approach."

This is an awesome idea, they could call them crowns!

Tandor · May 2017

I disagree

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

Really? So you're being herded into buying crown crates, for example? I don't think so, they're entirely optional.

Every decision I've taken about e.g. subscriptions (held on one account, not on the other account), DLCs (some bought, some not), crown crates (spent a few sub crowns on a couple of crates when they launched to see what the fuss was about, not touched them since), crown store purchases (hardly any), Morrowind (pre-ordered on one account, will wait and see on the other account), housing (totally free choice as to whether to buy any and if so which, and whether to pay in gold or crowns)... All these decisions I made on the basis of free choice, I wasn't herded into any of them.

ParaNostram · May 2017

Either both agree/disagree (parts) or have no opinion

They aren't taking anything away from unsubscribed players, they're literally just offering perks to those who subscribe. Negative reinforcement would be to take away a feature from those who are not subscribed like if they announced that upgrading mounts was going to be only for subscribers.

What they're doing is positive reinforcement by definition.

Honestly I'd be subscribed without the in game perks, the continual access to DLC is what sold it for me and what keeps me subscribed. I think the perks go too far, even.

Tan9oSuccka · May 2017

They "encourage" people to sub with extra benefits.

I don't see anything negative for the average non sub. Inventory management will be somewhat of a struggle for you. You have to be selective on what you save.

I gladly pay for the craft bag. Where else can I store 17K Alkahest? Never know when I'll need it!

NewBlacksmurf · May 2017

Either both agree/disagree (parts) or have no opinion

First of all....there shouldn't be any subscription at all after the Morrowind announcement.
Second, all prior dlc should act like Morrowind if purchased previously and new purchases should allow crowns to some other voucher.

Basically any subscription model needs to go away.

Now in terms of crowns or cosmetic and consumables, I believe these should also move to a Morrowind type of purchase with one difference. The future dlc should include these things in tiers and allow separate purchases in smaller bundles or individual purchases via real money

Crowns should be converted to a non-refundable voucher
Those eso plus benefits should be base game items accessible via some type of ingame progression and not via real money

Queo · May 2017

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

WTF are you smoking?!!?

Either you buy the game or you don't. Either you pay a sub fee, or you don't. This is not even a "gray" area issue. There is no puppet master herding people one way or the other when it comes to this game. If there is then its not the game that does but weak minded people who demand such treatment.

wolfdoggie_ESO · May 2017

I disagree

Shoulda picked 3rd one buy can't change it.

100% of everyone should have a crafting bag right off the bat. Free crafting bag can be limited while allowing the purchase of upgrade to the crafting bag size.

Add more bank expansions for gold and/or crowns.

Many people prefer buying permanent things as we don't play 24/7. That's why we buy the DLC outright instead of subscribing. Allow more of that. If you force ESO plus onto people to allow the game to be enjoyed, which it barely is with such minimal space then it makes buying the DLC kinda pointless. Also stop with the ESO plus only costume dye thing, it makes the game dull when everyone's using the same color costumes. It hurts both subs and nonsubs by making the game less attractive/unique visually.

ThePaleItalian · May 2017

Should have never left sub only model..

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

Tandor wrote: »

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

Really? So you're being herded into buying crown crates, for example? I don't think so, they're entirely optional.

Every decision I've taken about e.g. subscriptions (held on one account, not on the other account), DLCs (some bought, some not), crown crates (spent a few sub crowns on a couple of crates when they launched to see what the fuss was about, not touched them since), crown store purchases (hardly any), Morrowind (pre-ordered on one account, will wait and see on the other account), housing (totally free choice as to whether to buy any and if so which, and whether to pay in gold or crowns)... All these decisions I made on the basis of free choice, I wasn't herded into any of them.

I think you're straying a bit there buddy.

Megabear · May 2017

I agree

Queo wrote: »

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

WTF are you smoking?!!?

Either you buy the game or you don't. Either you pay a sub fee, or you don't. This is not even a "gray" area issue. There is no puppet master herding people one way or the other when it comes to this game. If there is then its not the game that does but weak minded people who demand such treatment.

The good stuff

Tandor · May 2017

I disagree

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

Megabear wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

There are way too many people moaning on this forum about things that are entirely down to free choice.

In my opinion It's a gray area. ZOS wants to give us an illusion of choice, in the background they are herding us along.

Really? So you're being herded into buying crown crates, for example? I don't think so, they're entirely optional.

Every decision I've taken about e.g. subscriptions (held on one account, not on the other account), DLCs (some bought, some not), crown crates (spent a few sub crowns on a couple of crates when they launched to see what the fuss was about, not touched them since), crown store purchases (hardly any), Morrowind (pre-ordered on one account, will wait and see on the other account), housing (totally free choice as to whether to buy any and if so which, and whether to pay in gold or crowns)... All these decisions I made on the basis of free choice, I wasn't herded into any of them.

I think you're straying a bit there buddy.

In what way? I was responding to the comment quoted, with points relating to the issue of choice over subscribing - my response included reference to subscriptions and the things that come with them - DLCs, crowns to purchase housing crates, crown store items etc. It seems pretty on-topic to me.

CountEdmondDantes · May 2017

I disagree

The fact that you want bag space so bad that you posted this thread is proof to me that their subscription model is working.

The Elder Scrolls Online

Are there better ways to get people to subscribe?

Are there better ways to get people to subscribe? 25 votes