Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
Would you continue to play ESO if cash shop went away and game became monthly subscription?
-
Magenpie✭✭✭✭✭themaddaedra wrote: »UGotBenched91 wrote: »So, if ESO abandoned the cash shop and you had to pay $15 a month instead would you continue to play?
This is assuming that the cash shop exclusive items ( such as mounts, etc.) became available through in game tasks.
That train is long gone. The only thing that keeps me playing atm is the fact that i can obtain pretty much anything without spending real money, thanks to crown sellers.
What OP says would be great in an ideal game environment. But game is buggy, performance is utter sh!t and nobody with a clear mind would think that it will change significantly after this point. Making it impossible to willingly pay single penny for this game.
Am I right that it's tricky to find Crown Sellers in the EU? The whole thing is a bit of a mystery to me. They also seem to have a much more expensive Gold/Crown Exchange rate in the EU, which frustrates me if it's true.Edited by Magenpie on March 16, 2020 11:35AM0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Citation needed.Modern games are very expensive to make - it requires people who actually pay for it - with free loaders the industry could not exist.
Do you have access to ZOS' financial data? I don't. I have no idea if the game would sink with only sub revenue, or with fewer, less predatory clown store practies. The issue with the clown store isn't just whether it should or shouldn't exist, though I think that is a valid question. But it is also about whether a publisher's profit should have any connection with its costs. As it is right now, the industry is creating a model where they develop so-called content once, and sell many copies at zero marginal cost. Once the original investment is recouped, everything else is pure profit. And because there is clearly so much of it, publishers gouge themselves in blatantly cash-grabby practices, including loot crates, time-limited specials, price obfuscation through multiple-tiered currencies, solution selling, etc.
you forget opportunity costs - if a game costs a quarter billion to make that is 30 million dollars a year which you don't make, because you haven't invested it in something else with good profits. These are costs which are often forgotten.0 -
MagicPie✭✭✭I already pay a monthly fee so my answer is yes i would continue to pay for subscription.0 -
daemonios✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Citation needed.Modern games are very expensive to make - it requires people who actually pay for it - with free loaders the industry could not exist.
Do you have access to ZOS' financial data? I don't. I have no idea if the game would sink with only sub revenue, or with fewer, less predatory clown store practies. The issue with the clown store isn't just whether it should or shouldn't exist, though I think that is a valid question. But it is also about whether a publisher's profit should have any connection with its costs. As it is right now, the industry is creating a model where they develop so-called content once, and sell many copies at zero marginal cost. Once the original investment is recouped, everything else is pure profit. And because there is clearly so much of it, publishers gouge themselves in blatantly cash-grabby practices, including loot crates, time-limited specials, price obfuscation through multiple-tiered currencies, solution selling, etc.
you forget opportunity costs - if a game costs a quarter billion to make that is 30 million dollars a year which you don't make, because you haven't invested it in something else with good profits. These are costs which are often forgotten.
You still can't prove if and to what extent that applies to ZOS. You don't know their financials. I don't either, but the way publishers are flocking to these practices, I would be very surprised if they weren't generating copious amounts of profits. I don't want to support an industry that is rent-seeking rather than offering something at a fair value. That's why I prefer to pay a monthly sub. I can determine if it's a fair value for me. It's transparent. It's not predatory or manipulative. And as I said, once you decide to go for an in-game store, all practices are not created equal, and ZOS has some shady ones.Edited by daemonios on March 16, 2020 11:38AM2 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Citation needed.Modern games are very expensive to make - it requires people who actually pay for it - with free loaders the industry could not exist.
Do you have access to ZOS' financial data? I don't. I have no idea if the game would sink with only sub revenue, or with fewer, less predatory clown store practies. The issue with the clown store isn't just whether it should or shouldn't exist, though I think that is a valid question. But it is also about whether a publisher's profit should have any connection with its costs. As it is right now, the industry is creating a model where they develop so-called content once, and sell many copies at zero marginal cost. Once the original investment is recouped, everything else is pure profit. And because there is clearly so much of it, publishers gouge themselves in blatantly cash-grabby practices, including loot crates, time-limited specials, price obfuscation through multiple-tiered currencies, solution selling, etc.
you forget opportunity costs - if a game costs a quarter billion to make that is 30 million dollars a year which you don't make, because you haven't invested it in something else with good profits. These are costs which are often forgotten.
You still can't prove if and to what extent that applies to ZOS. You don't know their financials. I don't either, but the way publishers are flocking to these practices, I would be very surprised if they weren't generating copious amounts of profits. I don't want to support an industry that is rent-seeking rather than offering something at a fair value. That's why I prefer to pay a monthly sub. I can determine if it's a fair value for me. It's transparent. It's not predatory or manipulative. And as I said, once you decide to go for an in-game store, all practices are not created equal, and ZOS has some shady ones.
Where is it not fair?- it is not as if it would be expensive to play ESO - not even subbed - and i get value for it.
Well, yes, I don't like those gambling crates - they are a rip off and target addicted people - i don't like that at all and avoid it.Edited by Lysette on March 16, 2020 11:43AM0 -
themaddaedra✭✭✭✭✭
✭themaddaedra wrote: »UGotBenched91 wrote: »So, if ESO abandoned the cash shop and you had to pay $15 a month instead would you continue to play?
This is assuming that the cash shop exclusive items ( such as mounts, etc.) became available through in game tasks.
That train is long gone. The only thing that keeps me playing atm is the fact that i can obtain pretty much anything without spending real money, thanks to crown sellers.
What OP says would be great in an ideal game environment. But game is buggy, performance is utter sh!t and nobody with a clear mind would think that it will change significantly after this point. Making it impossible to willingly pay single penny for this game.
Am I right that it's tricky to find Crown Sellers in the EU? The whole thing is a bit of a mystery to me. They also seem to have a much more expensive Gold/Crown Exchange rate in the EU, which frustrates me if it's true.
PC EU is way more expensive in crown/gold ratio yes. But finding sellers shouldn't be too much problem. There are servers dedicated for this. I myself prefer World Crown Exchange because sellers and buyers can decide their own prices and search accordingly. There are other servers but for example Tamriel Crown Exchange has fixed ratio which i don't like in the slightest.PC|EU0 -
Magenpie✭✭✭✭✭themaddaedra wrote: »themaddaedra wrote: »UGotBenched91 wrote: »So, if ESO abandoned the cash shop and you had to pay $15 a month instead would you continue to play?
This is assuming that the cash shop exclusive items ( such as mounts, etc.) became available through in game tasks.
That train is long gone. The only thing that keeps me playing atm is the fact that i can obtain pretty much anything without spending real money, thanks to crown sellers.
What OP says would be great in an ideal game environment. But game is buggy, performance is utter sh!t and nobody with a clear mind would think that it will change significantly after this point. Making it impossible to willingly pay single penny for this game.
Am I right that it's tricky to find Crown Sellers in the EU? The whole thing is a bit of a mystery to me. They also seem to have a much more expensive Gold/Crown Exchange rate in the EU, which frustrates me if it's true.
PC EU is way more expensive in crown/gold ratio yes. But finding sellers shouldn't be too much problem. There are servers dedicated for this. I myself prefer World Crown Exchange because sellers and buyers can decide their own prices and search accordingly. There are other servers but for example Tamriel Crown Exchange has fixed ratio which i don't like in the slightest.
I realise you probably won't agree with me, but if ZOS already sanctions this, I wish they'd just have a universal exchange system officially baked into the game. I feel very uncomfortable about needing to use a 3rd party site to do this. I know it's my choice etc, but I hope you understand what I mean.0 -
Malkiv✭✭✭✭✭I would stop playing if they removed the cash shop and went subscription only - but not for the reasons you may think.
I pay a subscription to ESO+ whether I'm playing it that month or not. I also enjoy getting some of the items from the Crown Store. A small group of people paying a subscription fee without any cash shop is not as lucrative as a larger group of people paying for cash shop items IN ADDITION TO people already paying a subscription fee. If the Crown Store were to go away, and the game shrank to only accommodating the subscription models, do you think there would be continued cosmetic developments to earn in-game as rewards or achievements? You're talking about drying up a massive pool of revenue, but expect everything to continue on as normal.Edited by Malkiv on March 16, 2020 11:55AMPC-NA | PvP (Gray Host & BGs) | PvE (vTrials & vDGs)0 -
RaddlemanNumber7✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭No, of course not. If that ever happened I expect I would be far too busy to play. I'm sure that watching the flying pigs and rainbow-propelled unicorns zip around the sky would be taking up all my time by then.
PC EU0 -
Nerouyn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It's not even possible.
They sold the same as buy to play.
Legally they couldn't now make a subscription necessary to play.2 -
Magenpie✭✭✭✭✭It's not even possible.
They sold the same as buy to play.
Legally they couldn't now make a subscription necessary to play.
I was wondering about that too. Terms of service and already selling DLC content to F2P players. Tricky I think, but what do I know?Edited by Magenpie on March 16, 2020 12:02PM0 -
Nerouyn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I was wondering about that too. Terms of service and already selling DLC content to F2P players. Tricky I think.
Buy to play as a model definitely has much broader appeal.
A lot of players will have bought the game and possibly also spent money in the cash shop only because it didn't require a subscription to play.
ZO would all kinds of BLEEPed if they tried to reinstate the mandatory subscription.3 -
Magenpie✭✭✭✭✭.
There are no free to play players in ESO it is at least buy to play.
Yes sorry mis-spoke. My bad. I mean the people who now play unsubbed, but who have unlocked DLC content through buying from the store.0 -
Danikat✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭If I remember correctly there's something in the terms of service about ZOS having the right to change the payment model at any time, and also that even when you buy the game or DLC you're technically only renting access to a service and it can be withdrawn at any time. I don't know if that would stand up in court, but presumably someone at ZOS thinks it's got a shot or they wouldn't bother putting it in there.
The bigger problem would be the PR side of things. Even if they can legally do it that doesn't mean players would be happy with the change or would keep playing afterwards. They caused enough of a mess when they switched the game from pay-to-play to buy-to-play back in 2015 and I'm prettt sure they've got a lot more players now, including some at least who got it specifically because the subscription was optional.
I know it disappointed or angered some people who prefer the idea of a pay-to-play game I think moving to an optional subscription is an easier sell - you're giving your customers they choice of when and how they give you money. I don't know of a single game which has switched to a mandatory sub after being buy-to-play or free-to-play and I can't imagine the decision would be well recieved.PC EU player | She/her/hers | PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
"Remember in this game we call life that no one said it's fair"1 -
StoneSoul ShrivenEverything on the Crown store is collector's edition stuff, take my money please. I mean if you buy a statue for your home. Who you gonna show? Cor-rect. Every payment model is so people get rewarded for their work, you aren't forced to buy these things. I know the crown store is some thing that allows you to keep costumizing your style, and with out this powerful asset, i can't find any way to keep making new versions of my char. Outfits, mounts, set bonuses. I wouldn't play if i couldn't have so many options.0
-
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Everything on the Crown store is collector's edition stuff, take my money please. I mean if you buy a statue for your home. Who you gonna show? Cor-rect. Every payment model is so people get rewarded for their work, you aren't forced to buy these things. I know the crown store is some thing that allows you to keep costumizing your style, and with out this powerful asset, i can't find any way to keep making new versions of my char. Outfits, mounts, set bonuses. I wouldn't play if i couldn't have so many options.
in a single player game people want as well mannequins to display their stuff in their homes - and no one else will see it. it is not a matter of showing off, they do it for their own pleasure and feeling good about themselves.3 -
Nerouyn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭If I remember correctly there's something in the terms of service about ZOS having the right to change the payment model at any time.
Terms of Service aren't binding. Courts toss them out all the time. And they would in this case.
ZO would be super BLEEPed.
I understand that business is bad right now. I can see all the signs. But this is not a viable solution.
Making the game better is the solution.
If ESO were multi-player Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim, they'd be rolling around in great big Blizzard size piles of money.0 -
LedJack✭✭✭Not only would I quit, I'd probably lodge a consumer complaint to get my money back...
I bought the game and some DLC under a buy-to-play model only to have me locked out of the product I bought? Sure felicia...3 -
Scion_of_Yggdrasil✭✭✭✭✭I voted yes but it would depend... better stability and support, and get rid of all gouging tactics, starting with crown crates. Gacha/loot crate bs needs to leave the gaming world, asap.1
-
RDMyers65b14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Nothing has changed... I still sub. I was playing during the mandatory sub and haven't stopped.0 -
ZOS_VolpeadminGreetings,
After removing a handful of baiting comments, we must remind everyone that all should be kept civil, constructive, and within the guidelines of the rules that we have in place. If there may be any questions in regards to the rules, please feel free to take a few moments to review them here.
Thank you for your understanding,
Edited by ZOS_Volpe on March 16, 2020 4:35PMThe Elder Scrolls Online: Tamriel Unlimited - ZeniMax Online Studios
Forum Rules | Code of Conduct | Terms of Service | Home Page | Help Site0 -
TheShadowScout✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
That's how I started ESO, and I have no issues going back to it either.UGotBenched91 wrote: »Would you continue to play ESO if cash shop went away and game became monthly subscription?
...
Not that its likely to happen, they DID try that model, and CHOOSE to change it to the current setup.
2 -
x48rph✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes, but only cause I already own it and only if they stop selling the expansions and include them. Games like FFXIV, which I like don't get me wrong, really , really make me mad because you have to buy the game and then on top of it you have to pay to play it. It should be one or the other. Either buy to play or pay to play , not buy and then pay more to play and anytime you don't have cash handy for the sub, your locked out of the game you bought.0 -
santhoranb16_ESO✭✭✭They old system will never be brought back as it is a financial downside to every company (the wall to get someone over to start investing $15 before play).
Still for players the system has only benefits IF done correctly. Its just a matter that the world isnt in fair for consumer friendly models as they gain less revenue out. Whales are a big factor, they add up so much potential that no other system will overcome that.
Remember: A consumer friendly system has their attention on only gameplay, stability and long term activity. A sales system...well on cash - shop items, how to get most out of that from a broad as possible playerbase (still its very low part from players that invest seriously in a cash shop, but these DO make it out).
Example: Want a radient apex mount? Pay high amount to do so. In a sub-only, that would be reward of a trial achievement for example. Or the end of a chapter zone Quest. Or as a reward for loyality sub. Or for PvP campaing end reward. Thousand possibilities what could be added on multiple ends.0 -
karekiz✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭No, because that would be the company telling me:
Hey! You know all those DLC's you spent money on, because of the systems we had? JK LUL. Thx 4 cash!
At that point I would just go to another gameEdited by karekiz on March 16, 2020 5:08PM2 -
MEBengalsFan2001✭✭✭✭✭That is how I wish it had stayed the whole time. IMO microtransactions may have made sense for ZOS, but the game is worse for it today.
Disclaimer: my sub is currently cancelled as I wait and see where we go with the performance improvement. Playing on PC-EU, I couldn't justify keeping my sub with the sub-par performance and all the downtime.
Even games that are sub only to play, they still have a marketplace to buy styles, etc...
I don't think the crown store is going any wheres or the crates for that matter.
This is one of the better MMOs I have played and over the last few years playing I have put less money into this game with membership and buying the chapters than I have put into other MMO games and as I play ESO more I get more enjoyment from my money.
0 -
JKorr✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭No. The game failed as a pay-to-play game, which is why it went buy-to-play in the first place. We certainly wouldn't get yearly expansions if it were to change back (not that it can).
I don't recall hearing much about "failing" as much as many of the console players pitching absolute fits over having to pay a sub and pay for Microsoft Gold/PSN platinum/whatever the heck the console online charges were called. Before the consoles got involved there didn't seem to be a huge outcry over a sub. [No one wanted to acknowledge that to play *any* game online they would have had to pay the microsoft gold/psnwhatsis fee; it was a total abhorrent abomination that it was ONLY ESO that would involve the fee. Even though that wasn't the case.] Sony even sort of attempted to exempt ESO from the psn requirement, only that died when Microsoft wouldn't budge on charging the microsoft gold fee.]0
