Maintenance for the week of February 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Unrealistic to stop increasing monetization
-
teiselaise✭✭✭I won't spend crazy amounts of money, only if there's something I really really like, wich there has not been yet, and if that item appears, it will be cheap since we get the 3 crates every season and the most expensive things are at 400 gems atm I already got 100 from free crates, if that thing turns up next season it will be sorta expensive, I won't chase any radiants tho.
With that said, can you guys please stop trying to expell people from the community because of their financial situation? This community has turned into the most immature hateful community I've ever seen. Because you are unable to earn the same amount of money as someone else, you can't just reject him, it's absurd. I am 100% against crown crates don't take this as me defending them, but damn, some of you guys are worse than zos.Argonian masterrace2 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ChaosWotan wrote: »@Wreuntzylla
The point is that new hardware the next five years, decades and centuries will prb make it possible to create a gaming experience which is better than a LSD trip, created by artists that are just as good as Rembrandt and Picasso, with a storyline written by some of the best authors in the future
And it will be "Call of Duty: whatever #861251931231" and "FIFA #148264126414".
Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
rustic_potato✭✭✭✭✭There is nothing wrong with having 99% of cool items unavailable to those who cannot cough up the money to pay for such stuff. That is how the world works. If I have money that I can throw around and get stuff that would benefit me why wouldn't I do it? I'm not going to worry about every person out in the world who cannot afford what I can.
As for the in game harassing for having crown crate stuff, that is the most hilarious stuff I have read on this forums for a while. People should just grow a thick skin and ask these idiots to ***k off.I play how I want to.3 -
Billy2112✭✭✭Go play Archeage or many of the "mobile" and Asian mmos. Talks about paying to win. This game does not sell anything in the crown store that gives an edge in combat to the player if he or she decides to purchase it. I understand you might be jelly the man with more crowns got the flashy horse but this game is far from allowing cash to determine play level. Most high quality MMOS will sell the expansions and have a sub service that benefits those that subscribe. This is good business and allows them to develop content not ways to mess with the economy or constantly changing the meta to sell more cash shops items which is the rat race people choose to be stuck in in many of the "other" mmos.
Just because content is completed in a day by people who lookup how to grind and get to the end the fastest way possible does not mean the content is irrelevant nor doe sit mean others want to rush tot he end to whine they are bored and then complain on the forums as if it is the devs problem now.0 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Go play Archeage or many of the "mobile" and Asian mmos. Talks about paying to win. This game does not sell anything in the crown store that gives an edge in combat to the player if he or she decides to purchase it. I understand you might be jelly the man with more crowns got the flashy horse but this game is far from allowing cash to determine play level. Most high quality MMOS will sell the expansions and have a sub service that benefits those that subscribe. This is good business and allows them to develop content not ways to mess with the economy or constantly changing the meta to sell more cash shops items which is the rat race people choose to be stuck in in many of the "other" mmos.
Just because content is completed in a day by people who lookup how to grind and get to the end the fastest way possible does not mean the content is irrelevant nor doe sit mean others want to rush tot he end to whine they are bored and then complain on the forums as if it is the devs problem now.
We always called them (2nd paragraph) "content locusts".
The only thing I can think of that might remotely be considered "P2W" would be the horse upgrades. I suppose those might matter in PvP. Aside from that...shinies.
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake0 -
Azurya✭✭✭✭✭
✭ChaosWotan wrote: »Even if gambling in computer games is banned, it is very likely that games in the (near) future will be so advanced and amazing that game companies can sell exclusive memberships to owners of Platinum, Centurion, Palladium or Chairman credit cards. Not only selling items for $10 000, like we now see in Star Citizen, but also having a relatively large group of rich people buying these products, including gated communities, security packages, whole maps and dungeons. Average gamers are too atomized and passive to unite against this development. Consequently, it's most likely a waste of time and energy to protest against it. Ordinary players just have to accept this new reality (in the near future).
as I already mentioned somewhere else in the forums, you don´t need the crap from the cs to get along in the game!
It is just cosmetics sold there, nothing needed to play toplvl like I do
IT IS JUST COSMETICS
so don´t come whining , YOU don´t need it to be a good player!0 -
Carbonised✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.1 -
Zordrage✭✭✭✭✭ChaosWotan wrote: »Even if gambling in computer games is banned, it is very likely that games in the (near) future will be so advanced and amazing that game companies can sell exclusive memberships to owners of Platinum, Centurion, Palladium or Chairman credit cards. Not only selling items for $10 000, like we now see in Star Citizen, but also having a relatively large group of rich people buying these products, including gated communities, security packages, whole maps and dungeons. Average gamers are too atomized and passive to unite against this development. Consequently, it's most likely a waste of time and energy to protest against it. Ordinary players just have to accept this new reality (in the near future).
We cant Unite ? look at EA and battlefront 2....
the Box shop and progression system the players forced the Devs hands to outright remove the Box system from the game and change the progression and even reduce the Grind time by 60% lol
all because the players got fed up by EAs *** and said no.....
if they would have not made these changes the would have fallen off ALLOT of money from the players for not buying the game...0 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.Edited by DieAlteHexe on December 11, 2017 9:35AM
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake0 -
Zordrage✭✭✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
both Eso and GW2 sofar is doing a realy good job with a F2P system that does not punish you to oblivion or forces you to buy something....
Except the Inventory management without Eso+ ....... omg pls end my torture..... cant pay monthly for the next 2 month so pls kill me...
Life without the reagent bag and double bank space is like hell....Edited by Zordrage on December 11, 2017 9:41AM1 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
both Eso and GW2 sofar is doing a realy good job with a F2P system that does not punish you to oblivion or forces you to buy something....
Except the Inventory management without Eso+ ....... omg pls end my torture..... cant pay monthly for the next 2 month so pls kill me...
Gawd, you have my sympathies. That was a brilliant addition and has saved me a ton of angst.
I'm not sure, though, that's a P2W issue. More a "Pay To Be Stupidly Organised"...
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake0 -
ChaosWotan✭✭✭✭✭@Zordrage
EA got into trouble because gambling was connected to skill-based p2w. Prb all gamers are against that. But there are not enough rpg-gamers to build a strong enough united front against rpg-based p2w, because the great majority of gamers view rpg-based p2w as only "cosmetics", since they are not that into rpg, despite ESO being a mmorpg. Therefore it's unrealistic to stop this kind of monetization.
Personally I'm finished with this debate, as explained in my thread "Fixes that will make gambling clearly ethical":
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/384482/fixes-that-will-make-gambling-clearly-ethical/p1
0 -
Zordrage✭✭✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
both Eso and GW2 sofar is doing a realy good job with a F2P system that does not punish you to oblivion or forces you to buy something....
Except the Inventory management without Eso+ ....... omg pls end my torture..... cant pay monthly for the next 2 month so pls kill me...
Gawd, you have my sympathies. That was a brilliant addition and has saved me a ton of angst.
I'm not sure, though, that's a P2W issue. More a "Pay To Be Stupidly Organised"...
"Pay to not pull out all your hair by the end of the month"0 -
zaria✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Game would be unplayable for me without ESO+, think the inventory mini game was part of the reason I stopped playing.DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
both Eso and GW2 sofar is doing a realy good job with a F2P system that does not punish you to oblivion or forces you to buy something....
Except the Inventory management without Eso+ ....... omg pls end my torture..... cant pay monthly for the next 2 month so pls kill me...
Life without the reagent bag and double bank space is like hell....
Back then I also did not have the gold to upgrade character and bank space fully either.
Grinding just make you go in circles.
Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.1 -
Carbonised✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Edited by Carbonised on December 11, 2017 11:11AM2 -
Jade1986✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭rustic_potato wrote: »There is nothing wrong with having 99% of cool items unavailable to those who cannot cough up the money to pay for such stuff. That is how the world works. If I have money that I can throw around and get stuff that would benefit me why wouldn't I do it? I'm not going to worry about every person out in the world who cannot afford what I can.
As for the in game harassing for having crown crate stuff, that is the most hilarious stuff I have read on this forums for a while. People should just grow a thick skin and ask these idiots to ***k off.
Its fine having the items avaialable for a price, but hiding them behind rng is just scummy.Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Someone gets it! According to the people that think RNG crates have to be in the game to have the company profit, the world of gaming must have imploded before this scumminess was introduced.1 -
ChaosWotan✭✭✭✭✭@Carbonised
It matters little that one has (more or less) good reason to think that one has the better arguments in a debate if not enough people are willing to support and act on these arguments. In this thread we are, in one way, discussing "gaming politics". Bismarck said that "politics is the art of the possible". All idealists, gamers or not, should really meditate on that sentence.
If you don't like the new developments in ESO, cut your losses and find another mmo. Many have already done this.0 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Frankly, so long as it doesn't go truly P2W, I'm fine with it. I want the company to keep going and this "transaction" thing (for better or worse) is the way most have gone. I'm happy to "carry" those who do not want to indulge.
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake0 -
SisterGoat✭✭✭✭✭I was curious what this expensive Star Citizen thing was, and it was for crowd funding. That's not too unusual to have massively expensive reward tiers to fund development, but it is unusual to sell something that expensive in an already fully developed product. There is a line between reasonable and outrageous, and the OP is alluding to things way beyond outrageous.Jumps-In-Water - Magicka Templar
Dar'akar - Stamina Nightblade
Jumps-In-Lava - Magicka Dragon Knight
PC/NA2 -
Jade1986✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Frankly, so long as it doesn't go truly P2W, I'm fine with it. I want the company to keep going and this "transaction" thing (for better or worse) is the way most have gone. I'm happy to "carry" those who do not want to indulge.
Just because a bunch of people do something questionable, does not make it ok, and that should never be the measure of something being ok. The game would still make money if all the scam crate items were available, albeit a higher, for a set price. One should strive to be a wolf, not sheep, and the way you said, is them being the sheep.0 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Frankly, so long as it doesn't go truly P2W, I'm fine with it. I want the company to keep going and this "transaction" thing (for better or worse) is the way most have gone. I'm happy to "carry" those who do not want to indulge.
Just because a bunch of people do something questionable, does not make it ok, and that should never be the measure of something being ok. The game would still make money if all the scam crate items were available, albeit a higher, for a set price. One should strive to be a wolf, not sheep, and the way you said, is them being the sheep.
*shrug*
I don't care either way but if you think that pricing things higher will be met with approbation, you've another think coming.
It is what it is and given the direction the industry has chosen to go and failing the outrage driven attempts to counter it, it's (ESO) not a horrible model. In fact, I rather like it.
YMMV
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake1 -
Jade1986✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Frankly, so long as it doesn't go truly P2W, I'm fine with it. I want the company to keep going and this "transaction" thing (for better or worse) is the way most have gone. I'm happy to "carry" those who do not want to indulge.
Just because a bunch of people do something questionable, does not make it ok, and that should never be the measure of something being ok. The game would still make money if all the scam crate items were available, albeit a higher, for a set price. One should strive to be a wolf, not sheep, and the way you said, is them being the sheep.
*shrug*
I don't care either way but if you think that pricing things higher will be met with approbation, you've another think coming.
It is what it is and given the direction the industry has chosen to go and failing the outrage driven attempts to counter it, it's (ESO) not a horrible model. In fact, I rather like it.
YMMV
And thats your opinion. But do not be surprised if the quality and quantity of content you get for ESO + drops dramatically in the future because of this approach they have taken.1 -
DieAlteHexe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Frankly, so long as it doesn't go truly P2W, I'm fine with it. I want the company to keep going and this "transaction" thing (for better or worse) is the way most have gone. I'm happy to "carry" those who do not want to indulge.
Just because a bunch of people do something questionable, does not make it ok, and that should never be the measure of something being ok. The game would still make money if all the scam crate items were available, albeit a higher, for a set price. One should strive to be a wolf, not sheep, and the way you said, is them being the sheep.
*shrug*
I don't care either way but if you think that pricing things higher will be met with approbation, you've another think coming.
It is what it is and given the direction the industry has chosen to go and failing the outrage driven attempts to counter it, it's (ESO) not a horrible model. In fact, I rather like it.
YMMV
And thats your opinion. But do not be surprised if the quality and quantity of content you get for ESO + drops dramatically in the future because of this approach they have taken.
Again... *shrug*.
If that happens, I move on as should anyone for whom the game, for whatever reason, no longer appeals.
We'll see, won't we.
Dirty, filthy casual aka Nancy, the Wallet Warrior Carebear Potato Whale Snowflake2 -
ChaosWotan✭✭✭✭✭@Jade1986
Did you mean wolf or shepherd dog? Wolfs are the bad guys. However, as a SF soldier wrote recently: it's better to be a porcupine than a shepherd dog. Because the latter image is kind of elitist, creating a division between "you" and "them". In any case, an online game need none of that imagery, because it's just a game.
@SisterGoat
In the OP I was talking about both the near and distant future. As games develop and become like high-tech art, on the same level as Rembrandt, the rich will pay. $10,000 is not much when you have 100 million dollars or more.
However, it's also likely that new developments will make it much easier to create indie games in the future, so let's hope an indie company creates a vet mmorpg, by vets and for vets, with less emphasis on having the latest in graphics and more focus on excellent storylines and gameplay, including maps with very high replay value. Skilled rpg vets can then play that, while those who can afford it indulge in games that have the most amazing aesthetics.
Edited by ChaosWotan on December 11, 2017 1:23PM0 -
SisterGoat✭✭✭✭✭ChaosWotan wrote: »@Jade1986
Did you mean wolf or shepherd dog? Wolfs are the bad guys. However, as a SF soldier wrote recently: it's better to be a porcupine than a shepherd dog. Because the latter image is kind of elitist, creating a division between "you" and "them". In any case, an online game need none of that imagery, because it's just a game.
@SisterGoat
In the OP I was talking about both the near and distant future. As games develop and become like high-tech art, on the same level as Rembrandt, the rich will pay. $10,000 is not much when you have 100 million dollars or more.
However, it's also likely that new developments will make it much easier to create indie games in the future, so let's hope an indie company creates a vet mmorpg, by vets and for vets, with less emphasis on having the latest in graphics and more focus on excellent storylines and gameplay, including maps with very high replay value. Skilled rpg vets can then play that, while those who can afford it indulge in games that have the most amazing aesthetics.
How many people who have hundreds of millions of dollars are going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on one game? Not many, I assure you. Movie and sports stars have that kind of money, but not the time to spend on video games.Jumps-In-Water - Magicka Templar
Dar'akar - Stamina Nightblade
Jumps-In-Lava - Magicka Dragon Knight
PC/NA0 -
ChaosWotan✭✭✭✭✭@SisterGoat
You are wrong Partly because VR and neuro-VR (in the future) are new formats where artists can still be truly creative, in the sense of being revolutionary and having shock value. When more artists start to realise that, it will become mainstream among our best artists. And, as we know, the wealthy love art. 0 -
Carbonised✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »DieAlteHexe wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »It is not unrealistic to stop increasing predatory monetization. If anything, the recent EA fiasko has proven that.
Due to Star Wars Battlefront 2 lootboxes and pay to win, EA stock is currently plummeting into the abyss, and Sales of Star Wars Battlefront 2 are pitifully small.
If enough people make enough noise about these issues, companies are forced to retract their exploitative schemes. Simple as that.
And replace that income...with what? That's what I wonder about. Given the moving away from flat paid subs to sort of F2P, they will want to have income enough to make a profit after having kept a game up to date.
Out of those I've encountered, I think ESO does a pretty good job on how they do this. It can be ignored. Those who want to indulge, can and those who don't, aren't really punished for it (aside from, possibly, the horse stats bits).
As for "addiction", that's a rough road but I wonder at the percentage and whether it's something that should be considered in this whole situation.
And replace it with how these companies used to make money before this whole charade: by selling products with decent prices and stop insisting on bleeding their customers dry with the "games as service" scheme. You know, like CD Project Red has done since forever. Like Bethesda has done up and until the paid mods and Creation Club fiasco. Like Sony's president said in a recent interview, that they would focus on making great single player game, and not pursue the "games as service" scheme.
Why do people defend these multibillion dollar international companies like they were on the brink of bankruptcy? Have you any idea how much money triple A gaming companies rake in these days?
And for MMOs, by providing virtual goods with transparent and fair pricing. Like the ESO crown store used to be, before overpriced limited time mounts, before houses so expensive that they put the micro in microtransactions to shame, before con crates that introduced forced gambling to those who wanted some specific content of the crates, before extremely limited and astronomical expensive mounts from con crates that couldn't be bought with gems, and before introducing more and more pay-to-progress into the crown store and con crates (motifs, trait research, mount upgrades, 150 % exp scrolls etc), by forcing you to sub ESO plus if you are more than a casual player to the game (since item variety has exploded and makes it impossible to play regularly without the expanded inventory, bank and craft bag).
All of this happened in ESO within the last one and a half year. Go back 2 years, and the Crown Store is basically a fair and transparent transaction, selling you costumes, mounts and pets for fair prices and without too many con schemes.
The slippery slope argument has never been more correct than here, each con crate season introduces more scamming and manipulation, each crown store season pushes the limit as to how low ZOS will go to rake in money. Only a fool would think they are going to stop now.
The only thing that will make this stop, is a huge slap over their greedy fingers, and customers, media and politicians saying "enough is enough", just like what happened with EA.
Yup and the howling that ensued with having to pay pretty much "full price" (or half-price if lucky) for the expansions drove a lot of folk off as well.
Lol, I even forgot about the scummy "let's charge full game price for a glorified DLC" - thanks for reminding me!
Just goes to show that ZOS is using as many cheap and dirty tactics to shovel in the allmighty dollar that I even can't recall every one of them when making a post.
0 -
SisterGoat✭✭✭✭✭From all these posts you are making, it seems you are obsessed with not being able to obtain everything ZOS puts out because you aren't as rich as other players. First you shun the Crown Crates for RNG, which is fine. But then you try to make a blacklist of richer players to punish them for buying lots of Crown Crates, to deter them buying more. Now you try to blow things out of proportion that ZOS will go down the road of ultimate greed and will release items worth thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars in the future, all out of some desperate attempt to enrage and rally people to fight the big bad evil Zenimax, because you can't have the best of the best. You are also delusional that game companies will only cater to the most wealthiest of gamers in the future. And if there ARE games out there that are extremely expensive, who cares? Why must you have EVERYTHING?Jumps-In-Water - Magicka Templar
Dar'akar - Stamina Nightblade
Jumps-In-Lava - Magicka Dragon Knight
PC/NA3 -
ChaosWotan✭✭✭✭✭@SisterGoat
Ad hominem arguments don't cut it. And you obviously haven't read what I have written the last days. As already mentioned in an earlier post in this thread today, please read:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/384482/fixes-that-will-make-gambling-clearly-ethical/p1
The wealthy, including my own family, have always sponsored artists. In one way, I welcome the development described in the OP. So please don't assume too much about people you don't know, when participating in online discussion forums.
If you want "exaggerations" check what Ray Kurzweil and Elon Musk have said about gaming and the future of computer progress.
And to everyone else: please don't revive this thread anymore. I'm busy with Nier Automata and other rpg games, while having ESO on ice until next summer, so prefer not to spend more time on a debate that is basically closed, as far as I'm concerned. Just go and have fun, with or without radiant mounts
0
This discussion has been closed.