In the relatively few days since Zenimax announced that Elder Scrolls Online would be a subscription-based game, the talk around the 'Net has been rampant. In our latest ESO column, Garrett talks about why it's time to stop the discussion about the subscription fee and start talking about the game itself. Read on and then head to the comments!
Gameplay is king. If a game is very strong at its core and crosses new ground in the MMO space then people will play it. Whether it is for $15.00 a month or free, or even throwing over $200.00 a month to a cash shop they will still log in every night and do something in that world. It is not so much about price but more about fun. When a really good game comes out do you remember how much you paid for it? Do you think about how much every dollar you spent equates to your level advancement or skill tree? Probably not. That is where the idea of good solid gameplay comes in.
IMO 100% right, the only time i ever thought about how much i spent on a game is when it comes to P2W games like neverwinter. 15$ month could bring in a stronger player base, meaning they will stick around for the long run.
I somewhat feel this is totally the wrong way to look at it. Ya sure, as long as the game is good people are willing to pay. However, just how many are we actually talking about here?
Saying money isn't a concern if the game is good, is just simply not true at all. This is the same reason why people don't go out to the store buying the most expensive of what they are looking for. They usually try to get the cheapest or something in between if they are able to.
Of course where it stands, it all comes down to quality. However, there is a point where the difference in quality is so little, that the price doesn't seem worth it, unless you are an enthusiast. ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month.
Your statment is flawed, you leave out a ton of variables that you have to account for when talking about this. People are different in so many ways you cant say they go for the cheapest thing because then everything would be cheap for the most part. If someone can find a moderate level of value in something they will save up for it and buy it rather then settle for less, but with that said there are also a lot that will just buy the cheapest because that is their personality.
"ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month."
That is just your pinion, to me it shows that I might just buy a collectors pact that will be priced at around 200-300$ and I might even get 2 or three accounts total. Like I said everyone is different and something tells me about 90% of anyone that has played skyrim will buy the game.
While free to play games done right have proven to be able to release mini expansions and cosmetic changes on a regular basis (Guild Wars 2), they have fallen short in being able to fix actual bugs/glitches/exploits in the time that a larger populated subscription dev team can (Guild Wars 2's long list on lengthy fixes, some of which still aren't here a year after launch ((WvWvW orbs and dolyak escort rewards)).
Therefore, I'm glad that ESO is going to have a subscription model.
Haxus Council Member 21 year MMO veteran PvP Raid Leader Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
sorry if i sound like an ***hole, but we really need another column/new about how ESO , wildstar or FFXIV are pay to play? ,or how pay to play is coming , and f2p isnt the "thing" or w/e ?
I somewhat feel this is totally the wrong way to look at it. Ya sure, as long as the game is good people are willing to pay. However, just how many are we actually talking about here?
Saying money isn't a concern if the game is good, is just simply not true at all. This is the same reason why people don't go out to the store buying the most expensive of what they are looking for. They usually try to get the cheapest or something in between if they are able to.
Of course where it stands, it all comes down to quality. However, there is a point where the difference in quality is so little, that the price doesn't seem worth it, unless you are an enthusiast. ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month.
Your statment is flawed, you leave out a ton of variables that you have to account for when talking about this. People are different in so many ways you cant say they go for the cheapest thing because then everything would be cheap for the most part. If someone can find a moderate level of value in something they will save up for it and buy it rather then settle for less, but with that said there are also a lot that will just buy the cheapest because that is their personality.
"ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month."
That is just your pinion, to me it shows that I might just buy a collectors pact that will be priced at around 200-300$ and I might even get 2 or three accounts total. Like I said everyone is different and something tells me about 90% of anyone that has played skyrim will buy the game.
You do realize, if 90% of people who purchased skyrim, purchase ESO, it will have numbers above WoW. Skyrim sold roughly about 15 million copies.
I really think you are over estimating ESO by a lot. I also think you are overestimating how many people are interested in P2P.
Just to give you an idea of numbers, WoW has been dropping about 100,000 subs per month and they have said they may look into going F2P. I believe they are down below 8 million subs now or possibly lower.
Now keep in mind, which I am sure you already are aware, there has not been a single mmo to come out to reach even close to WoW numbers. Any P2P that has come out in the last 5 years only achieved around 2 - 3 million. Rift lasted 2 years before having to go F2P.
Do you honestly think ESO is going to all of a sudden just come out of no where and change things? Not even swtor was even able to come close, and that is star wars. They have a huge follower base in comparison to TES.
Now, I know what you will say. The game wasn't good enough. However, it didn't even get enough initial purchases. Why? Because people didn't want to pay monthly.
Again, I ask, what makes you think this is going to be any different with all odds stacked against it? Proof is in past numbers. If you think this will all of a sudden change, you are dreaming.
Now i will admit, I good game could change this. However, it will likely have to be something ground breaking, and I don't see how anyone could think ESO is ground breaking when it clearly isn't.
It looks like a fun game and is a game I would most certainly enjoy. However, I will wait for it to change to B2P or F2P. I am not going to waste money on a game that is likely to change its models. You can take the risk if you want, I will not. I seen it to many times to be fooled.
I mean seriously?...people are bickering over $15.00 a month??!!...you all realise that on a 31 day month that's only 48c per day?...heck I can rent a couple of videos and it would cost me more. Do the math people, it probably cost you more to live each day than it does to pay for a game that you'll spend at LEAST 1-2 hours a day on if not more.
Technically speaking if you take your data package to your ISP into account, it probably cost you more than 48c to post on this forum.
I somewhat feel this is totally the wrong way to look at it. Ya sure, as long as the game is good people are willing to pay. However, just how many are we actually talking about here?
Saying money isn't a concern if the game is good, is just simply not true at all. This is the same reason why people don't go out to the store buying the most expensive of what they are looking for. They usually try to get the cheapest or something in between if they are able to.
Of course where it stands, it all comes down to quality. However, there is a point where the difference in quality is so little, that the price doesn't seem worth it, unless you are an enthusiast. ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month.
Your statment is flawed, you leave out a ton of variables that you have to account for when talking about this. People are different in so many ways you cant say they go for the cheapest thing because then everything would be cheap for the most part. If someone can find a moderate level of value in something they will save up for it and buy it rather then settle for less, but with that said there are also a lot that will just buy the cheapest because that is their personality.
"ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month."
That is just your pinion, to me it shows that I might just buy a collectors pact that will be priced at around 200-300$ and I might even get 2 or three accounts total. Like I said everyone is different and something tells me about 90% of anyone that has played skyrim will buy the game.
You do realize, if 90% of people who purchased skyrim, purchase ESO, it will have numbers above WoW. Skyrim sold roughly about 15 million copies.
I really think you are over estimating ESO by a lot. I also think you are overestimating how many people are interested in P2P.
Just to give you an idea of numbers, WoW has been dropping about 100,000 subs per month and they have said they may look into going F2P. I believe they are down below 8 million subs now or possibly lower.
Now keep in mind, which I am sure you already are aware, there has not been a single mmo to come out to reach even close to WoW numbers. Any P2P that has come out in the last 5 years only achieved around 2 - 3 million. Rift lasted 2 years before having to go F2P.
Do you honestly think ESO is going to all of a sudden just come out of no where and change things? Not even swtor was even able to come close, and that is star wars. They have a huge follower base in comparison to TES.
Now, I know what you will say. The game wasn't good enough. However, it didn't even get enough initial purchases. Why? Because people didn't want to pay monthly.
Again, I ask, what makes you think this is going to be any different with all odds stacked against it? Proof is in past numbers. If you think this will all of a sudden change, you are dreaming.
Now i will admit, I good game could change this. However, it will likely have to be something ground breaking, and I don't see how anyone could think ESO is ground breaking when it clearly isn't.
It looks like a fun game and is a game I would most certainly enjoy. However, I will wait for it to change to B2P or F2P. I am not going to waste money on a game that is likely to change its models. You can take the risk if you want, I will not. I seen it to many times to be fooled.
I hate to argue definitions and wording but success is determine by what you believe is successful, with that said if they meet their target audience which could be a mature group with money to spend and no time to spare. I would like to say you would have to be right about the numbers if I was a guessing man, they will more then likely never reach those numbers of WoW.
I would like to say that p2p is a real safe way of doing things and prevents temptations beyond having to work for it through time. For the consumer it depends on whom you are, if you fall into that group of people willing to spend 200$ on a game without thinking about it ( me) but have not much time to play and am not willing to feel like i am nickel and dimming my self to death or those that have a ton of time and can just get everything they want with effort rather then buying it. I understand F2P but as we all know if a corporation is involved they 'er soul purpose is to make as much money for as long as they can, that brings in all kind of room for ethical issue with pricing IMO and most of the public agrees from what I read.
From just my point of talking I would be happy with a pop of EVE in this game and something tells me that the producers and share holders and executives agree but I could be wrong.
I buy 'games', not 'membership to access'. (done with that scam)
and I'll gladly pay a box price for a game. I don't expect anything to be free in life. I don't expect companies to entertain me for free. I will gladly pay for a product I want. But you don't own a game if it has a sub. you 'rent it'.
the real question is (for me).
Why 15$? they don't need that much to maintain servers and staff. it's not like the idea of 'free server' games is outlandish. it is actually MORE common to find a game with a free server than one you pay to access monthly. This scam only exists within MMO's. and it is not very justified when most of the sharded pieces of broken up game world's in MMO's are no more advanced than the maps in rts games, or games of other genres.
15$ might not be much money at all, but it is a waste if you aren't playing. it is tedious and tiresome (and maybe impossible) to try and 'estimate' how long you are going to have fun playing a game. I have wasted too much money in the past on games with subs, because 'fun' is not a predetermined matter and I might lose my spark at the end of the month after I have already been billed, just to cancel it and then get the spark again out of nowhere, and have to decide if it is worth turning it back on or not. I got to the point, where I just don't.
I don't want that to EVER be a part of my gaming experience again.
I mean seriously?...people are bickering over $15.00 a month??!!...you all realise that on a 31 day month that's only 48c per day?...heck I can rent a couple of videos and it would cost me more. Do the math people, it probably cost you more to live each day than it does to pay for a game that you'll spend at LEAST 1-2 hours a day on if not more.
Technically speaking if you take your data package to your ISP into account, it probably cost you more than 48c to post on this forum.
This takes into the account that you only want to play that game when you are subscribed. It also takes for granted that you may have multiple family members. It also ignores the $60 up front cost, and the cash shop. It also assumes you will be playing or wanting to play that often.
I could pay $60 for a game like Skyrim, play it for quite a few hours, let other family members play it, get quite a bit out of it in several months.
Or I could buy ESO, lets say I have 3 family members that want to play it and we enjoy it for only 3 months (since that is likely how much content it will have). That's $90 per person, $270 all together. I could do a heck of a lot more with that money, say buy 4.5 Skyrim type games, or enjoy another hobby. Now imagine if you wanted to play several MMO's or other games in that same time period.
Whenever people argue the cost for entertainment, they fail to take into account all of the things included and tend to sight things like going out to movies as an example of typical expense. What you should do is keep in mind there are more cost effective ways aside from 'going out' to entertain a family. Youtube is free, Hulu is free, many games are now free or much cheaper. Hell the videos that you talk about renting, you could sign up to Netflix for 34 months on that. There are many different competing ways to entertain a person or family, MMO's do not live in a vacuum. Its less about it being unaffordable its more about it being out of line with the cost of similar goods.
I hate to argue definitions and wording but success is determine by what you believe is successful, with that said if they meet their target audience which could be a mature group with money to spend and no time to spare. I would like to say you would have to be right about the numbers if I was a guessing man, they will more then likely never reach those numbers of WoW.
I would like to say that p2p is a real safe way of doing things and prevents temptations beyond having to work for it through time. For the consumer it depends on whom you are, if you fall into that group of people willing to spend 200$ on a game without thinking about it ( me) but have not much time to play and am not willing to feel like i am nickel and dimming my self to death or those that have a ton of time and can just get everything they want with effort rather then buying it. I understand F2P but as we all know if a corporation is involved they 'er soul purpose is to make as much money for as long as they can, that brings in all kind of room for ethical issue with pricing IMO and most of the public agrees from what I read.
From just my point of talking I would be happy with a pop of EVE in this game and something tells me that the producers and share holders and executives agree but I could be wrong.
Well to me success would simply be breaking even and making more then they could make simply using a B2P model. Believe it or not, that is extremely hard to do in this day and age. Did you know if they only get 3 million subs, and those 3 million subs stay subscribed for an entire year, they might surpass the potential B2P sales. That is a pretty lofty goal though.
Keep in mind, the potential B2P sales is an estimate based on Skyrim sales which as I said before sold about 15 million copies. The estimate I am going by is 10 million. If ESO was B2P, I assume that majority of those who liked Skyrim would probably purchase it or at least 2/3 of them.
In the end, you could very well be right. Zenimax may not care if they can make more money another way, however, your forgetting that their plan will only work if people stay. I am sure most companies think the same way you are thinking when they go P2P. Funny thing is, it never really seems to work well.
I couldn't be happier. Already thousands of undesirable players have been weeded out.
Now we hope for a quality MMO, and the rest is history.
I really don't see why people use this argument. It makes no sense at all. From a scientific standpoint, based on numbers, chance and probability. You are not jsut weeding out undesirable players. You are weeding out players of all types. Undesirable players would probably only be a very small percentage of the players.
I really don't know what people are thinking when they think trolls, jerks, and undesirable people don't spend money XD. There really is no bases to claim that on.
Yes there will be less people, so you will have a smaller amount of these undesirable people, but you will also have a smaller amount of players in general.
Hope for a quality MMO? The rest is history? Ya you know ... cause history has not already shown us what happens time and time and time again. Yet we still believe and hope for different results each and every time.
I would use the saying "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.", however I already know the actual definition of insanity is nothing of the sorts. Which is to bad, cause I liked that saying. X3
I'm really getting tired of this false idea that "if a game is good people will pay outlandish prices for it no matter what".
None of the games that went sub-free are bad, including TOR. They just couldn't justify a monthly rental bill from their customers. For me no game is worth renting for $200 a year. It doesn't matter how deep it is compared to the rest of the herd.
...
It's not about being better or deep. It's about how much is a game worth. I can see paying a box fee. I can see supporting development with extra money through a cash shop and/or DLC content packs. I can't see renting my games and only being able to play them if I keep paying more. To me that is the true definition of nickle and diming a customer.
Good luck with your ESO rental version. I'll be watching to see if the p2p crowd will really put their money and "commitment" where their rhetoric lies.
I'm going to have to agree.
I'm done with the whole Box Price + $15/mo + Expansion + Optional Cash Shops (like Blizzard selling mounts and pets for WoW. Even if it is optional, and just vanity stuff, it's double dipping, and it's bullshit).
TOR, GW2, TSW, Terra, Aion, AoW, AoC, DDO, LotRO, Rift. I don't think that anyone could seriously argue that those games are "bad". Perhaps they are not for you, that's fine. But those are all quality games that are at the very least decent, if not better.
I don't think I was going to give this game a try at launch anyways but I'm also not a fan of the subs anymore. If it's a sub game, they should give you the game for free then since you need to sub. A sub isn't bad if you play all the time, but if you are like me and play for a couple months, then have to put it down for awhile due to personal reasons and work, you end up paying for something that you are not playing.
I agree about the fun factor but let's look at this objectively. Zenimax Online is making this game not Bethesda and this is their first game. From what I've seen it doesn't look nearly as good as Skyrim and plays like other MMO's not an Elder Scrolls game. The game may be good but what I've seen is not going to get me playing at launch. Seems like just more of the same MMO mechanics and I won't pay a sub for that anymore. I had a sub on at least 1 game from 1999 - 2011, since then only subed a month here or a month there on any game because none are worth it (SWTOR I'm talking about you). I hope I'm wrong about this but having seen my friend play in beta I'm just not impressed at all (I signed up also and haven't gotten an invite). I think ES fans will be disappointed and MMO fans will say this is just the same old MMO we have already played.
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Firstly, I love the ES games & they are great single player games that excel at making you an important hero in their stories. This is kind of fundamental to the series & so in an MMO space They are really going to struggle to get away from single player heavy themepark model where players veraciously consume content.
So on pricing model if they want monthly subs they are really going to have to work hard patching in fresh content constantly (beyond / in addition to paid expansion content btw)to provide adequate value for the majority of players to keep subbing.
This is a demanding pace & something no MMO including WoW has accomplished to date & I highly doubt TESO will achieve it.
If they want my sub they are going to have to earn it & not be greedy & put innapropriate items in their cash shop. Neither of which seem likely to happen in the current fetid stench of a stagnant MMO industry.
The only problem with their pay model announcement is that it's way too early.
A lot of people seem to forget that the core of this game, the feature that drives it is the 3-sided Alliance war in Cyrodiil. In other words this is a PVP game at heart. That's their end game. It's the one feature that will determine customer retention after the first 30 days.
But the focus of beta to this point and their PR has been all about PVE. We know next to nothing about the PVP in Cyrodiil other than the zone is BIG and that there are keeps and other structures to fight over. From that info we have to do our very own "pre-reveal EQN" thing and guess, project and assume.
For me and many others (some who don't even realize it yet) that's where the ESO value is...and we don't have enough information yet to make an intelligent assessment of its worth.
If the PVP in Cyrodiil is anything like the original model being copied here, "vanilla" DAoC, it'll be worth subbing just for that. If it isn't and the game has to rely on the PVE content and the perpetual PVE issue of content consumption and new content release schedule, then it will be just another PVE themepark with the usual number of casual tourist log-ins for the first month and drastic drop after that.
This game will live or die based on the Cyrodiil "end game." If it's good, that will be worth every penny of a sub. If it isn't, ESO will be just the latest themepark curiosity...until the next one comes along.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I’m not sure what the disparage is with buying a game at release. When I am looking at a game to play I’m looking into it because it interests me. It doesn’t matter what others do, F2P, P2P, if the features, gameplay, crafting and lore are up to snuff then I’m not waiting, I’m buying it to play at it’s release. I’ve personally played several F2P and P2P games. Some P2P games have gone to F2P models due to low turn out or high competition or a combination of these. I do not much like cash for gear or content personally.
I also do not like games (SWG) Where PVP etc. can get you gear as good or better than crafting. It completely makes crafting skills useless for the most part. F2P games tend to allow people to buy what they want instead of playing the game. I played Everquest for so long because it was hard. Because it took alot to get something good. Not just a $10 spot. Potions should be crafted, Ammunition...crafted, Clothes and building materials...crafted. Meaning someone had to collect resources/train skills and craft items. Without that action, the items do not exist.
ESO was all about gathering, foraging and killing for resources. Then, equipment had to be located or bought to make the items. No exception. No Universal Bazaar or quick buy system. People need to hawk their wares in the towns just like it should be. No convenient buying service or traveling service. You gotta blow time to travel and go to where things are sold or collect it yourself.
Another issue that needs to be addressed, gold pharming. In F2P games does anyone get tired of that? The adverts that begin to pop up days into launch? It happens in P2P as well but man it’s annoying.
First PC Game: Pool of Radiance July 10th, 1990. First MMO: Everquest April 23, 1999
Free 2 play games are free2play becouse nobody would pay to play them. It's that simple. Why isn't WoW and EVE going free2play? Becouse people are willing to pay for them. Becouse they are that good, fun, addictive, immersive, deep, long-lasting, well designed. Why did SWtOR, Tera, Aoc, TSW went free2play? Becouse they were crap, shallow, boring, broken, incomplete, failed piece of *****. There are no quality products availble for free, there never were and there never will be.
Yes, you can make MMO buy 2 play, sure, but it is basicly the same as launching with box price + subscription and than going free2play after 6 months - you just loose money that you would make from those 5 months. It won't keep people playing your game, it won't make your game better in any way.
If I am enjoying the game I have no problem paying a subscription fee which I have done for years. I don't decide to play or not to play a game based on whether it is free to play or subscription fee based.
I am pretty sure most MMORPG players will pay a subscription fee if they like the game.
Some people even say (I may agree with this) that subsciption fee helps to make a higher quality game, because the company can then focus on developing better game mechanics and content instead of trying to find ways to milk the players thru cash shops.
so, you played the game?? i thought it wasnt out for at least 8 more months? if you are judging a game still in alpha, then you are crazy...every report along the way have gotten better and better each time they have tested the game, by they i mean the game press that do reviews on these games. if this game is anywhere near as good as Skyrim, i will be more than happy to pay a sub fee vs a F2P, micro transactions, P2W model game..it will be cheaper in the long run
Comments
IMO 100% right, the only time i ever thought about how much i spent on a game is when it comes to P2W games like neverwinter. 15$ month could bring in a stronger player base, meaning they will stick around for the long run.
Your statment is flawed, you leave out a ton of variables that you have to account for when talking about this. People are different in so many ways you cant say they go for the cheapest thing because then everything would be cheap for the most part. If someone can find a moderate level of value in something they will save up for it and buy it rather then settle for less, but with that said there are also a lot that will just buy the cheapest because that is their personality.
"ESO from what I have seen doesn't show nearly enough for it to really justify it to cost $60 +$15/month."
That is just your pinion, to me it shows that I might just buy a collectors pact that will be priced at around 200-300$ and I might even get 2 or three accounts total. Like I said everyone is different and something tells me about 90% of anyone that has played skyrim will buy the game.
While free to play games done right have proven to be able to release mini expansions and cosmetic changes on a regular basis (Guild Wars 2), they have fallen short in being able to fix actual bugs/glitches/exploits in the time that a larger populated subscription dev team can (Guild Wars 2's long list on lengthy fixes, some of which still aren't here a year after launch ((WvWvW orbs and dolyak escort rewards)).
Therefore, I'm glad that ESO is going to have a subscription model.
21 year MMO veteran
PvP Raid Leader
Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
You do realize, if 90% of people who purchased skyrim, purchase ESO, it will have numbers above WoW. Skyrim sold roughly about 15 million copies.
I really think you are over estimating ESO by a lot. I also think you are overestimating how many people are interested in P2P.
Just to give you an idea of numbers, WoW has been dropping about 100,000 subs per month and they have said they may look into going F2P. I believe they are down below 8 million subs now or possibly lower.
Now keep in mind, which I am sure you already are aware, there has not been a single mmo to come out to reach even close to WoW numbers. Any P2P that has come out in the last 5 years only achieved around 2 - 3 million. Rift lasted 2 years before having to go F2P.
Do you honestly think ESO is going to all of a sudden just come out of no where and change things? Not even swtor was even able to come close, and that is star wars. They have a huge follower base in comparison to TES.
Now, I know what you will say. The game wasn't good enough. However, it didn't even get enough initial purchases. Why? Because people didn't want to pay monthly.
Again, I ask, what makes you think this is going to be any different with all odds stacked against it? Proof is in past numbers. If you think this will all of a sudden change, you are dreaming.
Now i will admit, I good game could change this. However, it will likely have to be something ground breaking, and I don't see how anyone could think ESO is ground breaking when it clearly isn't.
It looks like a fun game and is a game I would most certainly enjoy. However, I will wait for it to change to B2P or F2P. I am not going to waste money on a game that is likely to change its models. You can take the risk if you want, I will not. I seen it to many times to be fooled.
Well it could be worse...you could be playing it on console.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/27/elder-scrolls-onlines-xbox-live-gold-requirement-being-fought
This could end up being very interesting.
I mean seriously?...people are bickering over $15.00 a month??!!...you all realise that on a 31 day month that's only 48c per day?...heck I can rent a couple of videos and it would cost me more. Do the math people, it probably cost you more to live each day than it does to pay for a game that you'll spend at LEAST 1-2 hours a day on if not more.
Technically speaking if you take your data package to your ISP into account, it probably cost you more than 48c to post on this forum.
I hate to argue definitions and wording but success is determine by what you believe is successful, with that said if they meet their target audience which could be a mature group with money to spend and no time to spare. I would like to say you would have to be right about the numbers if I was a guessing man, they will more then likely never reach those numbers of WoW.
I would like to say that p2p is a real safe way of doing things and prevents temptations beyond having to work for it through time. For the consumer it depends on whom you are, if you fall into that group of people willing to spend 200$ on a game without thinking about it ( me) but have not much time to play and am not willing to feel like i am nickel and dimming my self to death or those that have a ton of time and can just get everything they want with effort rather then buying it. I understand F2P but as we all know if a corporation is involved they 'er soul purpose is to make as much money for as long as they can, that brings in all kind of room for ethical issue with pricing IMO and most of the public agrees from what I read.
From just my point of talking I would be happy with a pop of EVE in this game and something tells me that the producers and share holders and executives agree but I could be wrong.
I buy 'games', not 'membership to access'. (done with that scam)
and I'll gladly pay a box price for a game. I don't expect anything to be free in life. I don't expect companies to entertain me for free. I will gladly pay for a product I want. But you don't own a game if it has a sub. you 'rent it'.
the real question is (for me).
Why 15$? they don't need that much to maintain servers and staff. it's not like the idea of 'free server' games is outlandish. it is actually MORE common to find a game with a free server than one you pay to access monthly. This scam only exists within MMO's. and it is not very justified when most of the sharded pieces of broken up game world's in MMO's are no more advanced than the maps in rts games, or games of other genres.
15$ might not be much money at all, but it is a waste if you aren't playing. it is tedious and tiresome (and maybe impossible) to try and 'estimate' how long you are going to have fun playing a game. I have wasted too much money in the past on games with subs, because 'fun' is not a predetermined matter and I might lose my spark at the end of the month after I have already been billed, just to cancel it and then get the spark again out of nowhere, and have to decide if it is worth turning it back on or not. I got to the point, where I just don't.
I don't want that to EVER be a part of my gaming experience again.
This takes into the account that you only want to play that game when you are subscribed. It also takes for granted that you may have multiple family members. It also ignores the $60 up front cost, and the cash shop. It also assumes you will be playing or wanting to play that often.
I could pay $60 for a game like Skyrim, play it for quite a few hours, let other family members play it, get quite a bit out of it in several months.
Or I could buy ESO, lets say I have 3 family members that want to play it and we enjoy it for only 3 months (since that is likely how much content it will have). That's $90 per person, $270 all together. I could do a heck of a lot more with that money, say buy 4.5 Skyrim type games, or enjoy another hobby. Now imagine if you wanted to play several MMO's or other games in that same time period.
Whenever people argue the cost for entertainment, they fail to take into account all of the things included and tend to sight things like going out to movies as an example of typical expense. What you should do is keep in mind there are more cost effective ways aside from 'going out' to entertain a family. Youtube is free, Hulu is free, many games are now free or much cheaper. Hell the videos that you talk about renting, you could sign up to Netflix for 34 months on that. There are many different competing ways to entertain a person or family, MMO's do not live in a vacuum. Its less about it being unaffordable its more about it being out of line with the cost of similar goods.
I couldn't be happier. Already thousands of undesirable players have been weeded out.
Now we hope for a quality MMO, and the rest is history.
Well to me success would simply be breaking even and making more then they could make simply using a B2P model. Believe it or not, that is extremely hard to do in this day and age. Did you know if they only get 3 million subs, and those 3 million subs stay subscribed for an entire year, they might surpass the potential B2P sales. That is a pretty lofty goal though.
Keep in mind, the potential B2P sales is an estimate based on Skyrim sales which as I said before sold about 15 million copies. The estimate I am going by is 10 million. If ESO was B2P, I assume that majority of those who liked Skyrim would probably purchase it or at least 2/3 of them.
In the end, you could very well be right. Zenimax may not care if they can make more money another way, however, your forgetting that their plan will only work if people stay. I am sure most companies think the same way you are thinking when they go P2P. Funny thing is, it never really seems to work well.
I really don't see why people use this argument. It makes no sense at all. From a scientific standpoint, based on numbers, chance and probability. You are not jsut weeding out undesirable players. You are weeding out players of all types. Undesirable players would probably only be a very small percentage of the players.
I really don't know what people are thinking when they think trolls, jerks, and undesirable people don't spend money XD. There really is no bases to claim that on.
Yes there will be less people, so you will have a smaller amount of these undesirable people, but you will also have a smaller amount of players in general.
Hope for a quality MMO? The rest is history? Ya you know ... cause history has not already shown us what happens time and time and time again. Yet we still believe and hope for different results each and every time.
I would use the saying "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.", however I already know the actual definition of insanity is nothing of the sorts. Which is to bad, cause I liked that saying. X3
I'm going to have to agree.
I'm done with the whole Box Price + $15/mo + Expansion + Optional Cash Shops (like Blizzard selling mounts and pets for WoW. Even if it is optional, and just vanity stuff, it's double dipping, and it's bullshit).
TOR, GW2, TSW, Terra, Aion, AoW, AoC, DDO, LotRO, Rift. I don't think that anyone could seriously argue that those games are "bad". Perhaps they are not for you, that's fine. But those are all quality games that are at the very least decent, if not better.
Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor.
Thomas Jefferson
So on pricing model if they want monthly subs they are really going to have to work hard patching in fresh content constantly (beyond / in addition to paid expansion content btw)to provide adequate value for the majority of players to keep subbing.
This is a demanding pace & something no MMO including WoW has accomplished to date & I highly doubt TESO will achieve it.
If they want my sub they are going to have to earn it & not be greedy & put innapropriate items in their cash shop. Neither of which seem likely to happen in the current fetid stench of a stagnant MMO industry.
The only problem with their pay model announcement is that it's way too early.
A lot of people seem to forget that the core of this game, the feature that drives it is the 3-sided Alliance war in Cyrodiil. In other words this is a PVP game at heart. That's their end game. It's the one feature that will determine customer retention after the first 30 days.
But the focus of beta to this point and their PR has been all about PVE. We know next to nothing about the PVP in Cyrodiil other than the zone is BIG and that there are keeps and other structures to fight over. From that info we have to do our very own "pre-reveal EQN" thing and guess, project and assume.
For me and many others (some who don't even realize it yet) that's where the ESO value is...and we don't have enough information yet to make an intelligent assessment of its worth.
If the PVP in Cyrodiil is anything like the original model being copied here, "vanilla" DAoC, it'll be worth subbing just for that. If it isn't and the game has to rely on the PVE content and the perpetual PVE issue of content consumption and new content release schedule, then it will be just another PVE themepark with the usual number of casual tourist log-ins for the first month and drastic drop after that.
This game will live or die based on the Cyrodiil "end game." If it's good, that will be worth every penny of a sub. If it isn't, ESO will be just the latest themepark curiosity...until the next one comes along.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I’m not sure what the disparage is with buying a game at release. When I am looking at a game to play I’m looking into it because it interests me. It doesn’t matter what others do, F2P, P2P, if the features, gameplay, crafting and lore are up to snuff then I’m not waiting, I’m buying it to play at it’s release. I’ve personally played several F2P and P2P games. Some P2P games have gone to F2P models due to low turn out or high competition or a combination of these. I do not much like cash for gear or content personally.
I also do not like games (SWG) Where PVP etc. can get you gear as good or better than crafting. It completely makes crafting skills useless for the most part. F2P games tend to allow people to buy what they want instead of playing the game. I played Everquest for so long because it was hard. Because it took alot to get something good. Not just a $10 spot. Potions should be crafted, Ammunition...crafted, Clothes and building materials...crafted. Meaning someone had to collect resources/train skills and craft items. Without that action, the items do not exist.
ESO was all about gathering, foraging and killing for resources. Then, equipment had to be located or bought to make the items. No exception. No Universal Bazaar or quick buy system. People need to hawk their wares in the towns just like it should be. No convenient buying service or traveling service. You gotta blow time to travel and go to where things are sold or collect it yourself.
Another issue that needs to be addressed, gold pharming. In F2P games does anyone get tired of that? The adverts that begin to pop up days into launch? It happens in P2P as well but man it’s annoying.First PC Game: Pool of Radiance July 10th, 1990. First MMO: Everquest April 23, 1999
Free 2 play games are free2play becouse nobody would pay to play them. It's that simple. Why isn't WoW and EVE going free2play? Becouse people are willing to pay for them. Becouse they are that good, fun, addictive, immersive, deep, long-lasting, well designed. Why did SWtOR, Tera, Aoc, TSW went free2play? Becouse they were crap, shallow, boring, broken, incomplete, failed piece of *****. There are no quality products availble for free, there never were and there never will be.
Yes, you can make MMO buy 2 play, sure, but it is basicly the same as launching with box price + subscription and than going free2play after 6 months - you just loose money that you would make from those 5 months. It won't keep people playing your game, it won't make your game better in any way.
If I am enjoying the game I have no problem paying a subscription fee which I have done for years. I don't decide to play or not to play a game based on whether it is free to play or subscription fee based.
I am pretty sure most MMORPG players will pay a subscription fee if they like the game.
Some people even say (I may agree with this) that subsciption fee helps to make a higher quality game, because the company can then focus on developing better game mechanics and content instead of trying to find ways to milk the players thru cash shops.