xXSilverDragonXx wrote: »

Surveys are awesome. Don't want them, destroy them. My gods, some people will get pissy even when they give you nice stuff for virtually nothing.

Who said I didn't like them? I like what they give. I just find doing them in batches is much more efficient to do them in groups than one at a time.

I am an altoholic as well, so I will get them everyday (someplace) when doing daily writs on all 15 NA characters (for example) can take a lot of time. I have a similar number on both NA and EU on the PS4 and found I was skipping crafting days there, let alone survey writ gathering.

They have value for me, but not to do daily. Sorry if others disagree. You of course can get them as frequently as you want, but they do take up significant bank space.

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

That would be quite the opposite. This is a high-budget game. iirc, it was the most expensive game (at least one of the top two, to develop when it was released and nothing worth noting has been released since.

The added content is also much more expensive than added content in other games, especially top games like FF14 and WoW. Much of the expense comes from the voicing.

So yes, the expenses for the indie games are pocket change to what ESO costs. It is great we can play ESO for such a small cost.

Edit: I stand corrected https://mmos.com/editorials/most-expensive-mmorpgs-ever-developed

An indie is the most expensive MMORPG developed. Star Citizen has not been released, and many think it will never say daylight. However, it is not that it actually cost the money attributed to it, but that is that they have raised more than any other MMORPG has cost.

Apparently, NW comes in at second place but I find that difficult to believe as it is such a small game. Something is amiss within costing 200 mil to develop. This is not really an indie game, I know.

But NW, ESO, and SWTOR all seem to be tied for second and significantly higher than the most MMORPG that is most comparable to success and age which is FF14.

Star Citizen was a foolish effort. Of course it is costly. It had too much money and far too high ideals. Don't use that as a true standard.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

That would be quite the opposite. This is a high-budget game. iirc, it was the most expensive game (at least one of the top two, to develop when it was released and nothing worth noting has been released since.

The added content is also much more expensive than added content in other games, especially top games like FF14 and WoW. Much of the expense comes from the voicing.

So yes, the expenses for the indie games are pocket change to what ESO costs. It is great we can play ESO for such a small cost.

Edit: I stand corrected https://mmos.com/editorials/most-expensive-mmorpgs-ever-developed

An indie is the most expensive MMORPG developed. Star Citizen has not been released, and many think it will never say daylight. However, it is not that it actually cost the money attributed to it, but that is that they have raised more than any other MMORPG has cost.

Apparently, NW comes in at second place but I find that difficult to believe as it is such a small game. Something is amiss within costing 200 mil to develop. This is not really an indie game, I know.

But NW, ESO, and SWTOR all seem to be tied for second and significantly higher than the most MMORPG that is most comparable to success and age which is FF14.

Big studio games cost more but they also get way more players resulting in needing to monetize the game less than a lot of the indies that rely on giving the game out for free and then monetizing a lot of it.

A lot of SWTOR is also fully voiced and as far I have heard and can tell on Google is also less monetized than this game, with their sub unlocking dlc permanently even if you unsub.

In general a lot of the big studio games are less monetized from my experience than ESO, which more closely resembles a f2p indie game tbh, except it's not p2w. Seems about the only thing they don't do.

Bigger costs is bigger costs.

Also, SWTOR has crates and there are weapon and armor skins that sell for high dollars because they are rare drops from the crates. The only difference is players can directly sell what they buy from the cash shop or what drops from the crates.

So SWTOR is heavily monetized.

All we have to pay to play ESO is 15 USD/month and can get away with much less via DLCs. There is no need to pay more. Great bargain.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

That would be quite the opposite. This is a high-budget game. iirc, it was the most expensive game (at least one of the top two, to develop when it was released and nothing worth noting has been released since.

The added content is also much more expensive than added content in other games, especially top games like FF14 and WoW. Much of the expense comes from the voicing.

So yes, the expenses for the indie games are pocket change to what ESO costs. It is great we can play ESO for such a small cost.

Edit: I stand corrected https://mmos.com/editorials/most-expensive-mmorpgs-ever-developed

An indie is the most expensive MMORPG developed. Star Citizen has not been released, and many think it will never say daylight. However, it is not that it actually cost the money attributed to it, but that is that they have raised more than any other MMORPG has cost.

Apparently, NW comes in at second place but I find that difficult to believe as it is such a small game. Something is amiss within costing 200 mil to develop. This is not really an indie game, I know.

But NW, ESO, and SWTOR all seem to be tied for second and significantly higher than the most MMORPG that is most comparable to success and age which is FF14.

Big studio games cost more but they also get way more players resulting in needing to monetize the game less than a lot of the indies that rely on giving the game out for free and then monetizing a lot of it.

A lot of SWTOR is also fully voiced and as far I have heard and can tell on Google is also less monetized than this game, with their sub unlocking dlc permanently even if you unsub.

In general a lot of the big studio games are less monetized from my experience than ESO, which more closely resembles a f2p indie game tbh, except it's not p2w. Seems about the only thing they don't do.

Bigger costs is bigger costs.

Also, SWTOR has crates and there are weapon and armor skins that sell for high dollars because they are rare drops from the crates. The only difference is players can directly sell what they buy from the cash shop or what drops from the crates.

So SWTOR is heavily monetized.

All we have to pay to play ESO is 15 USD/month and can get away with much less via DLCs. There is no need to pay more. Great bargain.

No. It's not as simple as bigger costs is bigger costs.

Both the amount of your costs and your revenue determine your profits. If you have a ton of players then even if your costs are higher you could still end up with much bigger profit margins because the income coming in greatly exceeds the income coming out.

This is why indie free to play games are generally more heavily monetized than big studio games, regardless of higher initial costs. This is why so many end up p2w. They have to monetize a lot more things despite being lower cost because they also have lower revenue and thinner profit margins.

Looking at the sub and ignoring the crates/store, the SWTOR old republic sub is 15 bucks a month. And you only need to pay 5 dollars once to unlock all the dlc permanently as a preferred member.

So that would make them less monetized than eso because the actual gameplay packs are less monetized even though the cosmetics appear to be more monetized. It also seems that you can't max level your character without having made a purchase once, but it's only 5 bucks once which is less than the cost of a chapter.

Any business has the right to choose what they want. It is their business, their risk.

Each person who has an interest in a product or service, as is the case with ESO, makes their own choice if they are willing to pay the cost. This is where everyone's opinion on the costs, or business model matters.

A successful business does not charge more than what the market will bear and Zenimax seems to have made a wise choice with what they charge. They seem to be very successful and most of us are here because we are willing to pay the cost to play the game. That is the reality, and only facts that matter, to this discussion.

DarkWombat wrote: »

I have 1,500 plus hours into this game. I also sometimes play World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2 and Lord of the Rings Online.

I have a couple friends and also my son who dabble with ESO from time to time and we all agree the whole payment model just rubs us the wrong way. I try to tell myself if I pay a monthly subscription like WoW I get all the content minus any expansions but something about ESO still rubs me the wrong way.

• I don't like all these mounts and cool items behind loot boxes.
• I don't like artificial "LIMITED TIME" pop ups when I log in to create fear of missing out.
• I don't like buying an expansion like the Skyrim one, and only getting to play half of the story and find out there is another half that is not included in the expansion.
• I don't like it how expansions and their land masses and content have gotten smaller and smaller and the content seems to be getting worse not better.
• I don't like it how damage done is based on total mana or stamina, a system so bad that no MMO in history has used it before and the only one who uses it is the one universe that actually had the most hybrids in its single player games, so this system actually hurts that!
• I don't like it that you can't purchase a craft bag, and it stirs resentment every-time I play. Something like a crafting bag should not be the number one reason to get a subscription and designing this as a negative to get you to subscribe feels bad.

Whats funny is I actually like the combat, I like the graphics and UI with addons. I love the music and love being in Tamriel.
Its just when I log in, I get mad. I have to physically try to play the game and not think about it.

How do I get past this or is there even a way?

Somehow when I see these very eloquent posts I think, as per the TOS we as paying customers do not have any say on how the development directions go so whatever happens is mosdef not in our hands, --- as a "dear customer!

I understand your frustration. With what amounts to predatory monetization and a genuine disregard for the interests and needs of the player base, I found it difficult to continue paying for ESO+. I do log in...time to time...but after a few minutes in game, I log out again.

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

That would be quite the opposite. This is a high-budget game. iirc, it was the most expensive game (at least one of the top two, to develop when it was released and nothing worth noting has been released since.

The added content is also much more expensive than added content in other games, especially top games like FF14 and WoW. Much of the expense comes from the voicing.

So yes, the expenses for the indie games are pocket change to what ESO costs. It is great we can play ESO for such a small cost.

Edit: I stand corrected https://mmos.com/editorials/most-expensive-mmorpgs-ever-developed

An indie is the most expensive MMORPG developed. Star Citizen has not been released, and many think it will never say daylight. However, it is not that it actually cost the money attributed to it, but that is that they have raised more than any other MMORPG has cost.

Apparently, NW comes in at second place but I find that difficult to believe as it is such a small game. Something is amiss within costing 200 mil to develop. This is not really an indie game, I know.

But NW, ESO, and SWTOR all seem to be tied for second and significantly higher than the most MMORPG that is most comparable to success and age which is FF14.

Big studio games cost more but they also get way more players resulting in needing to monetize the game less than a lot of the indies that rely on giving the game out for free and then monetizing a lot of it.

A lot of SWTOR is also fully voiced and as far I have heard and can tell on Google is also less monetized than this game, with their sub unlocking dlc permanently even if you unsub.

In general a lot of the big studio games are less monetized from my experience than ESO, which more closely resembles a f2p indie game tbh, except it's not p2w. Seems about the only thing they don't do.

Bigger costs is bigger costs.

Also, SWTOR has crates and there are weapon and armor skins that sell for high dollars because they are rare drops from the crates. The only difference is players can directly sell what they buy from the cash shop or what drops from the crates.

So SWTOR is heavily monetized.

All we have to pay to play ESO is 15 USD/month and can get away with much less via DLCs. There is no need to pay more. Great bargain.

No. It's not as simple as bigger costs is bigger costs.

Both the amount of your costs and your revenue determine your profits. If you have a ton of players then even if your costs are higher you could still end up with much bigger profit margins because the income coming in greatly exceeds the income coming out.

This is why indie free to play games are generally more heavily monetized than big studio games, regardless of higher initial costs. This is why so many end up p2w. They have to monetize a lot more things despite being lower cost because they also have lower revenue and thinner profit margins.

Looking at the sub and ignoring the crates/store, the SWTOR old republic sub is 15 bucks a month. And you only need to pay 5 dollars once to unlock all the dlc permanently as a preferred member.

So that would make them less monetized than eso because the actual gameplay packs are less monetized even though the cosmetics appear to be more monetized. It also seems that you can't max level your character without having made a purchase once, but it's only 5 bucks once which is less than the cost of a chapter.

Any business has the right to choose what they want. It is their business, their risk.

Every customer has a right to call out predatory business decisions. Every customer has a right to leave negative feedback about those business decisions. Ask the people of Belgium if they thought that ESO had a right, regardless if they sold well, to sell loot crates.

This idea that only thing that determines if a customer base is getting gouged is the business is wildly anti-consumer. And thankfully not reflective of the real world, where companies sometimes change strategies based on feedback because customer opinion does actually matter. And where if there is enough bad PR for the business they will make changes.

Speaking of which how are you liking your seals of Endeavor? You get something you enjoy out that? We wouldn't have them if customers expressing displeasure at company policies hadn't put the fear of legislation into Microsoft, resulting in them self-regulating and changing them to something far less predatory. Odds disclosure? Ways to get crate items in-games? Those are things that came from players of video games across the industry complaining about loot boxes. And now companies are much less predatory about them than they used to be at the beginning. They sold well the entire time.

But if you don't like that happened you're free to never use them. Since apparently ZOS should never have faced pressure to change how the system works since it sold well. Lol

Amottica wrote: »

A successful business does not charge more than what the market will bear and Zenimax seems to have made a wise choice with what they charge. They seem to be very successful and most of us are here because we are willing to pay the cost to play the game. That is the reality, and only facts that matter, to this discussion.

You can't lead a discussion on seeming and end it by saying this is reality and factual.

If you take an hour or two to really delve into the history of ESO, you'll see that they are increasing in "subscribers" (anyone that buys the game) and active players (in a ratio worse than other MMOs because so many people are buying the game again for multiple accounts), but that is simply due to existing and marketing that existence--mainly the Elder Scrolls IP. There is no drove of players moving into ESO because of the way it is reshaping the MMO genre. They had a chance with curated drops, but when you factor in the horizontal progression, the isolated RNG incidents we get in other MMOs kind of meets the same time commitment for what you want here. There no success to be gleaned beyond a figure no different than adjusting for inflation.

They couldn't shake the popularity of New World, Lost Ark, or FF14's next expansion and still haven't recovered from that loss of players. Given a disappointing new chapter preview and 860 votes currently showing 54% disliking it, 25% mixed, and only 20% onboard with what they've seen, ESO's business model has influenced how the game is being received. By putting so much stock in the things the OP is exactly frustrated with, the game lives and dies from those willing to partake in it and those activities only exist from this business model they're chosen. Whether or not you see predatory practices or prolonged gameplay design, others are taking indeterminate breaks from being bombarded with the same sentiments we've gotten for the last 2 years: "the only way to look cool is to pay" and the same grinds for the same activities just with a new skin.

Amottica wrote: »

and @Kiralyn2000 you are correct SWTOR. The additional unlocks many have to be purchased just to do simple things like hiding your helmet and they have crates as we have in ESO. If you are not subbed you cannot do raids at all and are limited to a small number of boss drops from their equivalent of dungeons Not sure how that can be considered a better business model than we have here. Full cash shop and extremely limited options if you are not a subscriber.

Well, the rest of the game must still be enjoyable and varied because it currently has a better ratio of subscribers-to-active players than ESO. But that could just be recent from the expansion. But even without that, the two MMOs hold relatively the same engagement percentage. Though I think SWTOR is struggling more because Disney is kind of tarnishing the Star Wars IP. Time will tell.

There’s a saying “you need to spend money to earn more money.” This one even recalls a NPC from Solstheim quipping a similar line

This one just hasn’t seen much investment in recent years, even only from the quality of story writing and creativity, quests, in-game PVE experiences and so on. Communication has improved a tad, and we have really engaged mods with cheery and positive responses but still not what can be considered passing a pub test (ie regularity, transparency and accountability).

Kwoung wrote: »

I feel like monetization in ESO is directly connected to their customer retention model, which is near non-existent. Yes, yes, many folks play ESO long term, I do not deny that, but that is because they like the game and choose to do so, not because ZOS is actively encouraging it. ESO basically works around a constant influx of new players coming in, leveling up to some point, using the crown store along the way so their toon doesn't look like complete garbage, then leaving.

As a GM of a rather large guild (and in numerous others), I see this constantly, the turnover in this game is incredible. I am not talking about folks leaving the guild either, I mean the folks that join, play for some months and are then offline forever.

So basically, ZOS needs to monetize pretty much everything, in order to milk what they can from the average player in the short time they will be here. Personally I prefer the FFXIV model, where most things are earnable in game, and the cash shop has little extras. That model is geared more towards long term player retention, as players stick around to earn things, are proud to show off what they earned, etc...

Every MMORPG survives due to a constant influx of new players even with long-term players that stick around for years.

It is the addition of new content that is a major factor in any game's survival. That is a big reason why ESO and F14 do well.

EdmondDontes wrote: »

Simple. Don't sub or spend any money with ZOS until performance improves. It's the only solution for dealing with situations like this really.

Exactly. I essentially said our voices are loud when we choose to pay to play a game, or not.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Stx wrote: »

Excellent post, and yes it is really hard for me to accept that on top of paying a monthly sub, I have to shell out more cash for any mounts / costumes I want. The monthly amount of crowns they give you with eso plus isn't nearly enough to cover what you might want from the store.

It's sad coming from a game like wow, where 99% of the cosmetics and mounts are obtainable in game. ESO it seems like 99% of cosmetics are on the cash shop. At least mounts and costumes and the coolest weapon skins.

Considering games were charging 15 USD a month a decade ago and subscribing it still 15 USD a month it makes sense developers have to find some means to handle the very real increased costs of operating this type of business.

Inflation in the real world cannot be ignored and we know a lot of players would balk at paying 30USD since many forgoe paying a subscription and choose the much lower cost of buying the DLCs.

This isn't some indie game. It could absolutely afford to ease up on it's monetization

That would be quite the opposite. This is a high-budget game. iirc, it was the most expensive game (at least one of the top two, to develop when it was released and nothing worth noting has been released since.

The added content is also much more expensive than added content in other games, especially top games like FF14 and WoW. Much of the expense comes from the voicing.

So yes, the expenses for the indie games are pocket change to what ESO costs. It is great we can play ESO for such a small cost.

Edit: I stand corrected https://mmos.com/editorials/most-expensive-mmorpgs-ever-developed

An indie is the most expensive MMORPG developed. Star Citizen has not been released, and many think it will never say daylight. However, it is not that it actually cost the money attributed to it, but that is that they have raised more than any other MMORPG has cost.

Apparently, NW comes in at second place but I find that difficult to believe as it is such a small game. Something is amiss within costing 200 mil to develop. This is not really an indie game, I know.

But NW, ESO, and SWTOR all seem to be tied for second and significantly higher than the most MMORPG that is most comparable to success and age which is FF14.

Big studio games cost more but they also get way more players resulting in needing to monetize the game less than a lot of the indies that rely on giving the game out for free and then monetizing a lot of it.

A lot of SWTOR is also fully voiced and as far I have heard and can tell on Google is also less monetized than this game, with their sub unlocking dlc permanently even if you unsub.

In general a lot of the big studio games are less monetized from my experience than ESO, which more closely resembles a f2p indie game tbh, except it's not p2w. Seems about the only thing they don't do.

As someone who is subbed to both SWTOR and ESO. ESO's sub has more value, ESO has more content in less time and puts out more content yearly. SWTOR drips content. I've seen them do updates where the only thing added is an operations boss. Needing a group of 8 or 16 to beat it and it's instanced. Whoopie.

Yes, the getting DLC for $15 shows how little BW/EA values their work being it's not even worth the $15 pre month half the time, especially when they were doing the chapters.

Longest I've ever been gone from ESO in the almost 8 years it's been live is about 18 to 20 months. SWTOR almost five years because of their crappy pay model.

SWTOR literally decreased XP gained for non-subbers even if you are preferred status. Gate how much money you can have. Gate hiding helm, unable to match dyes on your armor. Can't have a mount until level 20. No augments to gear. Need more? SWTOR literally forces you to sub to their game if you want to actually play it and get full enjoyment out of it.

You can only do so much PvP and Operations per week or get an unlock for it. ESO's crown store is mostly fluff. SW:TOR's Cartel Market are things a player must buy if they want to to stuff like ranked PvP or raids.

SilverBride wrote: »

DarkWombat wrote: »

I don't like it that you can't purchase a craft bag, and it stirs resentment every-time I play. Something like a crafting bag should not be the number one reason to get a subscription and designing this as a negative to get you to subscribe feels bad.

But as nice as this bag is, it's not the only reason to subscribe. Double bank storage, double bag space and double housing furniture slots, plus free access to all DLCs and free crowns are also very nice perks.

Agree, buying all of the DLC outright would be horrendously expensive too. ESO Plus gives you access to the entire game. And you get an allowance of crowns every month, I hate lootboxes but I always invest my crowns I get via ESO plus on boxes. I'll never directly buy them, but if they're free I'll take it. Eventually I'll have saved up enough of the currency to get something neat. I already got a fancy mount through it without spending any money outside of the ESO Plus subscription.

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

I have been disappointed that ESO didn't gain much from the Warcraft exodus.

That should really concern management at ZOS.

The bald one directed the flood to ffxiv, may have had a legitimate influence