New dungeon pack not for sale, 'ESO+ only' for a limited time. (updated again 07/03)

Reginald_leBlem · January 10

Quethrosar wrote: »

subscribe or don't play, why should people get free playing when servers are involved?

The game is BUY TO PLAY you absolute turkey.

No one is playing for free. We all bought the game. People with ESO+ PAY MONTHLY for it.

People are complaining about not being able to B U Y the new dungeon DLC.

Exactly no one, not one single person, expects to play "for free"

fizzylu · January 10

LalMirchi wrote: »

Alaztor91 wrote: »

They already tried that in 2014(mandatory sub). The game almost died and only survived because of the Elder Scrolls IP, Console launch/Change to B2P model with optional sub in 2015 and later ''One Tamriel'' in 2016.

I'm not at all knowledgeable about the economics of online games but remember that times and circumstances are fluid and often in flux. What was relevant in 2014 may not be remotely relevant in 2024.

Actually, you're right! The game is probably even less likely of being able to sustain itself off of a mandatory sub than it was then. Almost everything locked behind an overpriced cash shop and gambling crates? Small updates? A lack of replayability for endgame content compared to other triple A MMOs with a mandatory sub? Terrible performance? A reputation for ignoring it's players? Hahahahaaaa, anyway.

Mesite · January 10

I don't have any plans to subscribe. I have enough to do in the content I already own.

I didn't start playing until they removed the mandatory subscription. I don't like giving my card details to websites.

SeaGtGruff · January 10

RomanRex wrote: »

virtus753 wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

Quackery wrote: »

It's just 10 dollars A MONTH, i.e. avoid drinking 2 beers and you'll be fine. You get an insane amount of value for that 10 dollars.

It's $15/month USD.

It varies depending on the term of your subscription.

“Pay more to save more.” 👍🏻

If you’re unsure you’ll still be playing the game in 3, 6, or 12 months, committing to ESO+ is a risky investment that could go to waste. When competitor games are released, ESO+ will feel more like a tether to a 10-year-old game than a benefit.

I resisted subscribing to ESO Plus for years, but once I decided that I was playing the game often enough to justify investing in a subscription, deciding between annual and monthly was a no-brainer for me. Yes, you pay more up front with an annual subscription, but it's a better deal than a monthly subscription. It's like choosing between a smaller package size and a larger package size when buying a food product in a grocery store-- the larger size is a better deal if it's something you're going to be eating regularly, but the smaller size is a smarter choice if it's just the right size for your needs and you'd end up throwing out most of the larger size due to not using it up before it expires.

meekmiko · January 10

I am flabbergasted by the people in this thread trying to downplay and defend this. It's actually appalling and making me seriously question still being here after nearly 9 years. (I have over 15 thousand hours on Steam alone and easily another thousand or two through opening the game itself without Steam. I have loved this game.)

I paid for ESO+ for many years until I ran into some financial hardship, and even then when I did have some money to spare I would pay for the sub on and off when I could. That is until the game's performance absolutely tanked for me that I stopped paying for ESO+ altogether.
And I'm glad that I had spent Crowns on a lot of the DLC otherwise I'd have absolutely NONE of it if I had depended solely on ESO+.

This, to me, honestly feels like the start of ZOS jumping on Ubisoft's "gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games" bandwagon.
And I get this is an MMO and is the epitome of it can be/will be taken offline forever whenever they feel like it and you'll lose everything you ever purchased, but this is wholly disheartening as we have always been able to buy a DLC day one and this feels like the beginning of something awful.

And this community constantly fighting with itself is absolutely depressing. Everyone needs to just back off each other. Stop discrediting people.
Some of us like all of the combat aspects dungeons/trials/arenas/pvp, some of us like to do the roleplaying/story stuff/housing, some of us like to do everything in-between, but we should ALL be respected AND respectful to one another.

There's so much venom and callousness flying between the community that I dunno if I can even deal with these forums much longer. You all need to take a step back and look at yourselves.

We are all two sides of the same coin and always will be. The sooner we realize that the better off we'll all be.

---
TLDR: This sucks and the community as a whole needs to stop fighting with itself.

Rkindaleft · January 10

CoolBlast3 wrote: »

I don't really see the issue here. We all knew ZOS was going to hammer down monetization to make up for the lack of Chapter sales. If all they do is ESO+ then like...who cares?

Do people actually buy dungeons with crowns? That's such a waste of money honestly, they've never been worth the price.

I mean, yeah? Lots of people do. F2P players do, for example, by buying Crowns off someone else for in game gold. Whenever I've sold Crowns in the past I've sold tons of DLCs. Or just people who don't want to justify paying, in my case being in Australia on the PlayStation store right now, $189 AUD for a subscription of 12 months. Then there's people who buy DLCs with the Crowns they've gotten from their subscription anyways.

I was subbed all the way from like 2016 to Gold Road release where I finally decided to end my sub because I wasn't happy with the direction the game was taking, this kind of thing isn't pushing me to re-sub. It's just letting me know I can play something else when the DLC releases.

AzuraFan · January 10

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

Yes, you pay more up front with an annual subscription, but it's a better deal than a monthly subscription.

I'm on an annual too, and I'm happy my expiry date is in November. That'll give me plenty of time to see what seasons are like and how they're monetized, and if they manage to get "more difficult overland" in by then, what it looks like. I'll be in a good position to decide whether to renew.

If the overland change isn't done by November, I might switch to monthly until it's there because I'll cancel if they get it wrong, and I don't want months left on my sub. Anyway, as the year unfolds and we get a better idea of what exactly the changes are and the timing, I'll sub/unsub/go monthly accordingly.

demonology89 · January 10

I don't see how further dividing the playerbase is a win. I'm a bit shocked to see some people defending this.

Stephanie_ABT · January 11

I'm absolutely disappointed and disgusted with this move.

I have been playing ESO since launch day and always purchased my dlcs and bought crowns.Up to today I have all dlcs and every chapter that have been released so far.

I currently am sitting on thousands of crowns that I have been saving for new dlc.

In no way will I accept to be forced to pay for an ESO+ subscription. Already pay for other subscriptions as it is. Done fine all these years without ESO+ and periodically throughout the year I always purchase a ton of crowns and preorder the chapters and this system works for me.

This is a scummy move. Ill wait until any dlc do become on sale in the crown store.

What a shame as if there are others who feel like me more players might stop playing for a while which isn't good at all.

Changing how dlcs are released was one seriously bad move.

spartaxoxo · January 11

XSTRONG wrote: »

licenturion wrote: »

Just read the announcement on the official new page.

As mentioned above, if you wish to tackle these two new Alliance War-themed dungeons, you’ll need an active ESO Plus membership. The dungeon DLC will NOT be available for purchase for crowns at launch.

This is a bad move and sets a really bad precedent for the upcoming seasonal stuff.

I will wait until they are for sale at some point or wait until there is another trial week. Or just wait out a year of content and grab everything with one month of ESO+. No need for buying crowns either in sale because DLC was my main use for crowns. It will be a cheap year for a patient gamer.

I wonder also if this will affect matchmaking times for group finder now that a part of the community is excluded.

What do other think of this?

New content for paying players are a good thing in my opinion.

Buying to play is still paying. I don't understand where there's this disconnect about subscriptions and money. This is not a free to play game.

Desiato · January 11

I pay for subs and don't buy DLCs, but I can see why people who are invested in the B2P model would be annoyed by this, regardless of their reasons for choosing the B2P path.

spartaxoxo · January 11

demonology89 wrote: »

I don't see how further dividing the playerbase is a win. I'm a bit shocked to see some people defending this.

I am as well. I don't see how my sub values goes up for dungeon dlc by having to wait longer to find a group. I actually feel like I lost value as a subscriber. When I buy a video game, I prefer to be able to use it a timely manner.

Northwold · January 11

CalamityCat wrote: »

I was expecting a change to how we paid for stuff in ESO, but I guess we'll have to wait to see if Plus is going to be a real must have or as it is now, something that has pros but you can play without having it all the time.

I'd hope there would be a way for players to buy the DLC for crowns as well as the subscription, given that both do cost money. It's possibly an attempt to get people subscribing and experiencing the craft bag and other perks, to get sub numbers up. Then we'll possibly get the chance to buy the DLC outright later. Wait and see I guess.

I'd rather try a new dungeon via Plus before I buy it anyway. There are some DLC dungeons I'm glad to lose when my Plus runs out

Honestly, I was concerned about a season pass being needed ON TOP OF ESO plus so I'm actually rather surprised.

If things are switching to ESO plus for everything new (and that's a big if), well, at current prices that looks cheaper than buying things with crowns, albeit that for continuing play over long periods it may work out more expensive. As for players paying with crowns they didn't pay for, well, from a business perspective I'm not sure to what extent it's reasonable to expect ZOS to take such players into account when financing the development of wholly new content.

SeaGtGruff · January 11

I don't know that anyone is "defending" this. As far as anything I have said about it, it was basically to point out that this might simply be a sort of "test the waters" experiment rather than the beginning of a trend.

And if the playerbase doesn't respond well to it, then surely ZOS will take note of their reactions.

So another key aspect of my own responses to recent news and developments has been "Let's not all freak out about this until we see whether there's actually something to freak out about." A lot of people seem too quick to assume worst-case scenarios and then react accordingly, which doesn't help the situation.

Personally-- and I've said this a number of times in these forums over the years, so I apologize for repeating myself yet again-- I always purchase every DLC upon release, even though I'm actively subscribed to ESO Plus. Not only that, but I prepurchase everything if that option is available, and buy the collector's edition which includes any additional items such as non-combat pets, mounts, experience scrolls, etc. So I'm definitely interested in seeing how this is going to work as far as being able to actually "buy" the DLC versus just "renting" it via ESO Plus, because I prefer to "buy" rather than "rent."

TaSheen · January 11

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

I don't know that anyone is "defending" this. As far as anything I have said about it, it was basically to point out that this might simply be a sort of "test the waters" experiment rather than the beginning of a trend.

And if the playerbase doesn't respond well to it, then surely ZOS will take note of their reactions.

So another key aspect of my own responses to recent news and developments has been "Let's not all freak out about this until we see whether there's actually something to freak out about." A lot of people seem too quick to assume worst-case scenarios and then react accordingly, which doesn't help the situation.

Some of us have been around QUITE long enough to freak out immediately. I actually am beginning to see the end of my ESO days. In general, ZOS doesn't "back off" something that's not actually viable....

licenturion · January 11

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

So another key aspect of my own responses to recent news and developments has been "Let's not all freak out about this until we see whether there's actually something to freak out about." A lot of people seem too quick to assume worst-case scenarios and then react accordingly, which doesn't help the situation.

People have good reason too. I watched the live stream reveal and they didn’t mention it. They just posted it in a blog post afterwards. And they put some words in capitals, so they knew this wasn’t going to be a popular decision.

But the most important thing that people can do is not to let FOMO overtake them and don’t buy if you don’t support this practice. If this test hasn’t the intended results, they won’t repeat is. I am glad my thread got so much traction. Hopefully ZOS_Kevin reports his findings to the team on their next internal meeting. There is also a big thread of unhappy customers on Reddit as well.

wolfie1.0. · January 11

I have mixed feelings regarding this honestly.

First, having Dungeon DLCs and other content DLCs being available on day one for ESO+ members is nothing new. its always been that way. Even when chapters were introduced, that didn't change, when chapters became DLCs they were available.

Second, Dungeon DLC's are 1500 crowns in the crown store. if you buy just enough crowns to get the dlc, it is the exact same price as a 1 month sub of ESO Plus. Given a choice between Eso plus and a monetary crown purchase it has been more economical to buy the subscription, as ESO+ will give you 1600 crowns which is enough to purchase the DLC and then have it forever. Plus the added benefits of ESO Plus, and you can hold the crowns for when the dlc hits the store. However, this changes that model.

Third, This completely removes the option of gifting DLC's to friends on launch that don't have Plus. This is annoying as it requires them to have Plus and WE CAN"T GIFT PLUS to other players accounts. My suspicions are that they are doing this again to combat gifting abuses and cut down on tickets requesting gifting access.

Fourth, the trend of early access to content is honestly a horrible one and this is essentially what this is, and this trend needs to stop, its not early access its delayed access.

Next, this screams of ZOS testing the monetary boundaries of what the community will tolerate when it comes to things like this. Of the DLCs, Dungeon DLCs are (IMO) the least popular of the DLCs. It seems they want to test the waters with this.

Lastly, ZOS's coin counters know what they are doing with this. Month per month its cheaper to pay for an annual sub than it is for a 6 month, 3 month, or monthly sub. Subs are also what are called "Sticky" products, as in once people pay for one month they are more likely to pay for 2 or more vs a 1 time purchase, so they earn more money over time.

doesurmindglow · January 11

And yet, we have people on the forums arguing that "we can't know" if subs are down.

In a literal sense, sure, but like: we know.

Lyraen_Skyforge · January 11

TaSheen wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

I don't know that anyone is "defending" this. As far as anything I have said about it, it was basically to point out that this might simply be a sort of "test the waters" experiment rather than the beginning of a trend.

And if the playerbase doesn't respond well to it, then surely ZOS will take note of their reactions.

So another key aspect of my own responses to recent news and developments has been "Let's not all freak out about this until we see whether there's actually something to freak out about." A lot of people seem too quick to assume worst-case scenarios and then react accordingly, which doesn't help the situation.

Some of us have been around QUITE long enough to freak out immediately. I actually am beginning to see the end of my ESO days. In general, ZOS doesn't "back off" something that's not actually viable....

I’ve stepped away from the game after the last update and don’t see U45 offering enough to bring me back.

The shift in their business model seems focused on attracting new players while neglecting long-time players and ongoing issues. It feels like an effort to prioritize revenue over meaningful improvements, which is disappointing for those who’ve supported the game for years.

sarahthes · January 11

doesurmindglow wrote: »

And yet, we have people on the forums arguing that "we can't know" if subs are down.

In a literal sense, sure, but like: we know.

I mean, it follows logically: if population is down, subs are also down.

LatentBuzzard · January 11

Northwold wrote: »

Honestly, I was concerned about a season pass being needed ON TOP OF ESO plus so I'm actually rather surprised.

That will be coming in the April announcement. Simply giving you the new content via ESO+ as is, is not going to make up for the lost revenue from no longer selling a yearly chapter. There's no way that the price of ESO+ doesn't get increased and/or a new ESO+ tier gets introduced and/or new reoccuring season / battle passes get introduced as ZOS is not going to leave money on the table.

Caligamy_ESO · January 11

Seems very reminiscent of the time when Chapters were introduced in the first place.

richo262 · January 11

It is disappointing if these dungeons are ESO+ only.

I'll care less if this content goes on sale in the crown store after 3 months and in that 3 months ZOS does not put any ESO+ walled content as exclusive events, with tickets being afforded to ESO+ subs only.

I'll accept that with the Chapters gone they may need to seek to adjust revenue streams elsewhere, or improve the value of ESO+ to entice fence sitters, so long as they don't outright screw over non-subs, that's fine by me. Essentially ESO+ gets a bit of a priority, and non subs are only hindered by time and dont miss out on even tickets or collectibles. If non-subs get hit with 'FOMO' in events, then its just an unethical tactic by ZOS.

Greystag · January 11

It's insane to me that ZOS is literally removing options from their customers and people are out here defending it as if it's a good thing. The "it doesn't affect me directly so I'm okay with it" mentality strikes again.

It's spitting on long-term players who have invested time and money on buying DLC. If we wish to access future DLC, we'll need a sub from now on, so what was the point of buying older DLC?

Northwold · January 11

Greystag wrote: »

It's insane to me that ZOS is literally removing options from their customers and people are out here defending it as if it's a good thing. The "it doesn't affect me directly so I'm okay with it" mentality strikes again.

It's spitting on long-term players who have invested time and money on buying DLC. If we wish to access future DLC, we'll need a sub from now on, so what was the point of buying older DLC?

To buy the older DLC. I'm sorry but, as with many posts in this thread, your logic escapes me. Pricing models change, games evolve. We may like it, we may not, but appeals to past purchases as arguments against changes to future content that has not been released yet simply don't make sense.

If people don't like this, if people don't want to pay this way for coming content, then they don't have to. But it doesn't affect what is already there and what has already been paid for as things stand.

Ishtarknows · January 11

Thinking about this I can't help but be reminded about the new way zos sold the Seabloom Villa house. It wasn't available for crowns (read: bought with ESO+ crowns or gifted for gold) but a purely cash only sale. It was "only" £4 or thereabouts and so many people bought it because of the price point.

I wonder if this might be the way DLC purchase might go?

Elsonso · January 11

Greystag wrote: »

It's insane to me that ZOS is literally removing options from their customers and people are out here defending it as if it's a good thing. The "it doesn't affect me directly so I'm okay with it" mentality strikes again.

It's spitting on long-term players who have invested time and money on buying DLC. If we wish to access future DLC, we'll need a sub from now on, so what was the point of buying older DLC?

What I see is a change in monetization strategy.

When we get into "Seasons", and how that is monetized, I expect that things will be much more evident. My expectation is that "Seasons" will replace purchasing DLC in the Crown Store.

licenturion · January 11

Northwold wrote: »

Greystag wrote: »

It's insane to me that ZOS is literally removing options from their customers and people are out here defending it as if it's a good thing. The "it doesn't affect me directly so I'm okay with it" mentality strikes again.

It's spitting on long-term players who have invested time and money on buying DLC. If we wish to access future DLC, we'll need a sub from now on, so what was the point of buying older DLC?

To buy the older DLC. I'm sorry but, as with many posts in this thread, your logic escapes me. Pricing models change, games evolve. We may like it, we may not, but appeals to past purchases as arguments against changes to future content that has not been released yet simply don't make sense.

If people don't like this, if people don't want to pay this way for coming content, then they don't have to. But it doesn't affect what is already there and what has already been paid for as things stand.

You don't change your business model on the fly like this after 10 years when people have invested in the game by buying DLC. Nor do you devaluate in game currency people already saved or bought suddenly without announcing those major changes well in advance so people can prepare for those changes.

Games changed business models in the past like Overwatch and like Destiny recently did when they stopped doing chapters. But they announced changes well beforehand. Heck even Overwatch put number 2 in their title to switch business models.

ESO just dropped this casually in a sentence at the end of a blog post and didn't even mention this huge change during the stream. If they will do this the same way in April, chances are they will turn off a lot people. Destiny 2 is at an all time low player count in the lifetime of the game since they switched from chapters to seasonal content.

The least ZOS could have done was appending a few words: ' The dungeon DLC will NOT be available for purchase for crowns at launch but will be available separately as DLC purchase on XX/XX/XX' . Not hard and good transparent communication.

WhiteCoatSyndrome · January 11

TaSheen wrote: »

Some of us have been around QUITE long enough to freak out immediately. I actually am beginning to see the end of my ESO days. In general, ZOS doesn't "back off" something that's not actually viable....

This. We’ve been trained to expect this sort of thing for the last ten years; ZOS is actually quite consistent in that regard.

AngryPenguin · January 11

LalMirchi wrote: »

My take on this is that I think the game should be entirely subscriber based. An active paying subscription required to even login.

The free aspect IMHO does not bring in any realistic revenue and while that might boost & boast player numbers the free players do not bring any money to the table.

This would only work if ZOS brought back their 2020 content release schedule AND fixed performance/lag issues AND returned Cyrodiil to it's former glory.

Anything less and a subscription to play could not be justified.