'Sony being good' yeah their track record is stellar.
The list of 'good' companies associated with great MMOs is short and sweet. I wouldnt put Sony on it. I guess because they have money is the reasoing.
But back to this game and the way they have decided to roll it out. I suspect that the semantics of who owns what and who is in charge is done for a reason. I am sure theyre keeping the Bethesda name as far away from this as possible in case it is a failure. That keeps the Bethesda name clear for the future console and stand alone products it will be releasing in the future. While the forum trolls and anyone who is willing to do a Google search knows theyre intricately linked and basically the same entity, the people who just go by name recognition alone will differentiate between them. This isnt like Runewaker and Sony teaming up to put out Dragon's Prophets. Where Runewaker is the developer and Sony is the publisher. Those two entities are completely separate. For all intents and purposes Zenimax and Bethesda are the same company separated only by the legal hyperbole companies like to use to avoid whatever theyre trying to avoid.
I will more than likely buy a copy, I will play my 30 days free. If they add the dozen or so things they need to add between now and release I might sub. But buying and owning a copy I suspect I will also get some free 'welcome back' time in there somewhere as well. If it stays pay to play long enough that is.
I know the guys who always clamor for subs always feel special and usually 'elitist' like since they pay a sub it is THEIR game. Not really. Your a consumer and the more your rapid feelings go the more they know they can squeeze out of you. The major issue is no company can produce content fast enough to keep up with the player base, but to actually produce and release content you need money. Something Subs USED to provide, at least more regularly than cash shop type games. But not anymore. Another irony about free to play or buy to play games is this, and one the fanboys dont comprehend. The fly by night non fan types will flock to it, and they will spend, and they will spend a lot and generally up front, they will rush to whatever end they think they need, and most will eventually leave. So you basically put up with the fre to play 'crowd' for a short time and then theyre gone. They spent a lot of money they did what they wanted, they then bash the game on their way out. Another predictable cycle.
Look at the free to play and buy to play games out there. How many, after the initial release or change over are still saturated with these 'lower level' players? The kind people think 'ruin' a game? How about zero. Most games go right back to the levels they were at BEFORE they made the switch the big difference is they got a lot of quick cash and are able to do something with it. If they so choose. GW2 gets updated more than any game out there, its buy to play and it isnt over flowing with players of any type.
ESO is going both ways. Theyre going to milk subs for as long as they can, then theyll expand the store and go but to play or free to play. I suspect theyll require to buy a box and then you can play unlimited.
Either way these next few betas will really tell the tale, they better start putting them out there more frequently because even in retail land and if you go to the extreme the end of the second quarter is still sometime in June, so 7 months away. I am sure there will be a one month to six week 'open beta' (free preview) of the game. Or maybe not considering how good or bad it is. So there isnt a lot of time left. If they do betas like they have been that means at best there will be two more, which means the second of those will more than likely be the finished product and that beta will be to tweek numbers, make sure there are no obvious bugs, and correct spelling mistakes or dialogue issues, and it also means this past one is a product of 75-85% 'completion'.
I will say this, they better shorten their beta time tables, because they need 5 or 6 more betas IMO to get the issues I saw ironed out. That is just for the people who actually got IN the game, that isnt counting the log in issues where people couldnt even make accounts or download the client.
Its at 7.95 on the hype meter, I think i t topped out at 8.25 maybe 8.3 will be interesting to see where it goes from here as we move forward.
Its at 7.95 on the hype meter, I think i t topped out at 8.25 maybe 8.3 will be interesting to see where it goes from here as we move forward.
Not sure why you even care. There is a ZERO % correlation with the success of a game and it's hype meter on this site, especially with the amount of non-typical jaded SWG/Darkfall folks that litter this site...or folks that support only one game that isn't necessarily much different and then go on to other forums putting a 1 in the Hype Meter for any game that isn't their favorite..not to mention the folks with multiple accounts via multiple IP addresses. Just a lot of immaturity here. If anything the fact that the Hype Meter seems reasonable for this game is a good sign.
Why does "no sub" mean that there has to be a cash shop?
Skyrim doesn't have a sub nor did it have a cash shop. But, but .... Skyrim wasn't an mmo ..... So what? Skyrim was a) very successful and b) had significant new content added that lots of people paid for. And we have already been told that TESO has a solo "be a hero" core.
The on-line part of the equation doesn't need lots of money. What needs the money is content.
I would rather ESO have a higher box price and no sub.
I would rather ESO have no sub and sell 10M copies than have a sub and sell 2.4M.
I would rather ESO charge for new content rather than have a sub.
I would rather ESO release a chunk of a Skyrim xpac say every 6 weeks and charge $20 or $25 or whatever.
I would rather ESO sell 5M of each xpacs rather than have under 1M subs.
Content is not free. It is very easy to see subscribers as freeloaders. The ones that flit between games pay hardly anything - a month's sub once or twice a year. Many of those who stay whine. Whine about the lack of new content. Whine about the lack of people to group with. Whine about the shape of a helm. Whine because they believe that as subscribers their every whim should be catered for.
And publishers cannot do it. Content is not free.
GW showed that the on-line part of an mmo doesn't cost "a lot" of money. WoW showed the key is to sell lots and lots. Many, many games have launched recently with a sub and failed. And if an IP like Star Wars can only sell 2 to 3 million why should TESO be any different?
Games like Battlefield, FIFA and others have shown that you can have a no-sub, no "cash shop" on-line games. Premium subscriptions and stuff to buy for sure but bigger stuff rather than micro-transaction stuff. And for sure Matt Frior says he doesn't want people to turn up at a point and not be able to contine because someone hasn't bought x, y or z but does that mean TESO is never going to have an expansion? Never? I can't see that. Which destroys the argument.
Paid for expansions simply means there are not enough subs to pay for the content. So why bother going the sub route at all.
So no I don't want a sub. Paid for content yes but that doesn't mean "cash shop" style micro-transaction stuff. Proper content that you pay for. Which those gadfly freeloading subscribers have to pay for as well.
Its at 7.95 on the hype meter, I think i t topped out at 8.25 maybe 8.3 will be interesting to see where it goes from here as we move forward.
Not sure why you even care. There is a ZERO % correlation with the success of a game and it's hype meter on this site, especially with the amount of non-typical jaded SWG/Darkfall folks that litter this site...or folks that support only one game that isn't necessarily much different and then go on to other forums putting a 1 in the Hype Meter for any game that isn't their favorite..not to mention the folks with multiple accounts via multiple IP addresses. Just a lot of immaturity here. If anything the fact that the Hype Meter seems reasonable for this game is a good sign.
yes the number is meaningless on its own but by comparison it can be a factor. If a game gets a 9 in the hype sight unseen that is obviously meaningless. But after a couple tests or developer videos or announcements it drops to a 7 that does mean something, maybe not much but something, then after a few people play it the usual leaks come out and the word of mouth is horrid and it drops to a 6 then that is really really telling, especially when you have a few people trying to claim the majority are making the typical 'sky is falling' posts about a game.
Originally posted by ElRenmazuo Because not only will it be an insult to the series and make it seem cheap if it was either f2p or b2p with cash shop, it would personally kill the kind of immersion I get from playing an elder scrolls title. Just imagine logging in and the first thing that pops up is a window saying deals of the day lol. Or zoning to a new area only to be stopped and reminded I need to buy this area to go on further. Or seeing people with hair styles that werent available in character creation. I think even the console fans would have been like WTF is this.
I am really interested in knowing which game you possibly played where you need to buy access to regions. Or even a game which forcefully pops up a window telling the deals of the day as soon as you login. You actually sound like you have never played a F2P MMO.
Subscription does not mean no cash shop, people should realize this by now. All they have done is made you waste $15 a month to get what you can get for free elsewhere and make you spend $15 to try the game again after you take a break.
Subscription means a cash shop is not necessary. Some MMOs add them on out of pure greed (or perhaps because subs are somehow not covering the expenses), but that is a more recent thing that came about only since people started embracing the idea of paying extra money for items in a game you're already paying to play. I don't agree with it, either, but hey.. if people weren't so eager to buy the stuff, they probably wouldn't bother selling it.
At the very least, a sub-based MMO adding a cash shop can at least limit it to truly cosmetic, non-game affecting things and can avoid the draw of adding things are ever more compulsory. Unlike a F2P MMO, their ability to stay in business doesn't depend on people spending as much in the cash shop as they can, as often as they can. They have a sub fee as their primary revenue source, and, so, can be more selective in what they sell.
Your second statement is flawed because you can't get the same experience elsewhere. Each MMO is its own experience, in its own world, its own setting, its own story, classes, races, etc. There's similarities in that they're all MMOs, but in many cases that's where it ends. Hey... Cola is Cola. Yet there are myriad different brands, and people still choose one brand as a favorite over all others. Why do you think that is? Because despite being similar, they're not the same. Same concept here.
You're not going to find an Elder Scrolls MMO, or anything like it, anywhere else, free or otherwise. Unless you can point me to one? Zenimax may have a copyright case on their hands if there is one.
Yes, a subscription-based MMO makes its money on the concept of providing a wide-open game where progress is made and the entire game is experienced through playing the game (rather than spending money), and making it enjoyable enough for people to want to stick around and continue playing month after month. There's no need to think about nickel and diming, or impulse spending more money in a cash shop or not. Everything is obtained by playing the game.
How much or how little money someone has outside the game means nothing inside the game because everyone has the same requirements to get what they want. Whether something is "just vanity" or not isn't an issue because it's obtained in-game, by playing. Whether a means of travel is faster than another isn't such an issue because everyone can obtain it in the same way, by playing. Whether a piece of gear makes a character more powerful isn't an issue because everyone can obtain it in the same way, by completing the same content. P2P MMOs are built around this crazy concept of actually playing your way through the content, not buying your way through it.
Ultimately, it's just like any other subscription service people will happily pay for and never think twice about it, so long as it's worth it to them. And no matter how much you play, you will never spend more than $15 a month (or whatever the sub fee is for a given game), except for the occasional expansion.
Further, the idea that it seems "offensive" to you that you'd have to pay $15, or any amount, to engage in activity produced by another entity (be it a company or anyone else) isn't a strike against them for charging it. The concept of products and services being offered in exchange for money isn't some strange, alien concept. Subscriptions for a service are not some strange alien concept. They're quite standard and quite normal.
So, that final remark of yours about "making you pay $15 to try the game again" is both disingenuous and indicative of an entitled, "I shouldn't have to pay for something I want" mentality. But hey, you're not alone. There's a lot of people floating around these days who've been misled into believing they're entitled to have anything they want for free, simply because they want it.
Couldn't be said any better!
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
Originally posted by ElRenmazuo Because not only will it be an insult to the series and make it seem cheap if it was either f2p or b2p with cash shop, it would personally kill the kind of immersion I get from playing an elder scrolls title. Just imagine logging in and the first thing that pops up is a window saying deals of the day lol. Or zoning to a new area only to be stopped and reminded I need to buy this area to go on further. Or seeing people with hair styles that werent available in character creation. I think even the console fans would have been like WTF is this.
I am really interested in knowing which game you possibly played where you need to buy access to regions. Or even a game which forcefully pops up a window telling the deals of the day as soon as you login. You actually sound like you have never played a F2P MMO.
Doesn't LOTRO lock F2P players out of regions?
yes but turbine is dumb. They sold lifetime subs at the inception of the game. Then when they went F2P they scrambled to try and find a way to appease the lifers. They went over board and gave too much. since I would guess half the existing playerbase is still that group of people who bought lifetime accounts and are thus getting paid by Turbine to simply own the game at this point Turbine is hurting for money. Looking at how the product has free fallen since release proves that out. This last expansion was a joke.
But therein lies the rub, and the crux of the arguments here. A MAJOR IP DOES NOT insure success. If the company cant deliver a product that is any good then the game wont be played by anyone, free or not. I would dare say Lord of the Rings is a bigger IP than The Elder Scrolls is. I would also say that just because Bethesda has, in the past delivered great games doesnt mean this will be one of the either. Turbine has Asherons Call, one of the longest lasting (and still subscription based) MMOs around. But expectations in that game are what they are, just like expectations of a game released in 2013 are going t be MUCH greater than a game released in 1999.
So it isnt just a developer or an IP or any singular entity they share. it is a sum of ALL the parts.
Should ESO be sub based? Not from what I have seen of it. COULD it be? Sure, IF it delivered upon expectations, which we know that no came will for most people, but ANY game that wants to be subbed based these days has to deliver enough of the expectaions to enough people to make money.
I dont think it should be free to lay either. Its too big an IP and they obviously spent too much money to do that.
So Buy to play is the obvious. Its what they have always done. So 60 bux or whatever gets you access tot he game and the world. If they add content they can charge for it, or not, depending. But anything that is free for owning the game can be accessed for buying the game. If there are DLC packages that you pay for so be it. Worked for every other game they had, not sure why it cant work for this one.
But I have been constant on this they will eventually go to free access at some point. My guess within a year. Be it full on free to play or simply buy to pay. You dont put a store in a sub based game and not have that plan in mind. That is there to milk the REAL fans and 'suckers' charge them 60 bucks for the game, charge them 15 bux a month then charge them 50 cents here a dollar there for cosmetic mounts and armor.
Either way we will see a year from now how it goes. I suspect if it isnt already free access it will have announced it will be.
A lot of people are glad about that. The question is: are enough people going to sub up month 2? If not, then F2P in 6 months. Is this game going to be able to hold onto enough subs considering that it isn't planning any raids and is mostly focused around GW2 style WvW PvP with 4 man dungeons at endgame?
I can't wait to see what happens with this one. To me though, it doesn't look like it's planning to offer enough for long term subscribers. But then there could be some unannounced stuff that no one knows about.
Why subscription from wow became traditional as something long some kind of life never ending and out money with which supports the game developers can create new content on and on.
To be honest I'm starving for a long term game with good lore and great in all aspects of game.
and also with a frequent update new world to explore Especialy considering HOW amazing was Morrowind Ive spent so much time in that game if Elder scroll online will be so catch ass Morrowind Zenimax you can have my soul
Comments
Glad you like it
Here's to hoping most morons wont play because of this
Not sure if you completely understood the meaning of that comment.
I like the subscription model. The game on the other hand is a whole different story.
'Sony being good' yeah their track record is stellar.
The list of 'good' companies associated with great MMOs is short and sweet. I wouldnt put Sony on it. I guess because they have money is the reasoing.
But back to this game and the way they have decided to roll it out. I suspect that the semantics of who owns what and who is in charge is done for a reason. I am sure theyre keeping the Bethesda name as far away from this as possible in case it is a failure. That keeps the Bethesda name clear for the future console and stand alone products it will be releasing in the future. While the forum trolls and anyone who is willing to do a Google search knows theyre intricately linked and basically the same entity, the people who just go by name recognition alone will differentiate between them. This isnt like Runewaker and Sony teaming up to put out Dragon's Prophets. Where Runewaker is the developer and Sony is the publisher. Those two entities are completely separate. For all intents and purposes Zenimax and Bethesda are the same company separated only by the legal hyperbole companies like to use to avoid whatever theyre trying to avoid.
I will more than likely buy a copy, I will play my 30 days free. If they add the dozen or so things they need to add between now and release I might sub. But buying and owning a copy I suspect I will also get some free 'welcome back' time in there somewhere as well. If it stays pay to play long enough that is.
I know the guys who always clamor for subs always feel special and usually 'elitist' like since they pay a sub it is THEIR game. Not really. Your a consumer and the more your rapid feelings go the more they know they can squeeze out of you. The major issue is no company can produce content fast enough to keep up with the player base, but to actually produce and release content you need money. Something Subs USED to provide, at least more regularly than cash shop type games. But not anymore. Another irony about free to play or buy to play games is this, and one the fanboys dont comprehend. The fly by night non fan types will flock to it, and they will spend, and they will spend a lot and generally up front, they will rush to whatever end they think they need, and most will eventually leave. So you basically put up with the fre to play 'crowd' for a short time and then theyre gone. They spent a lot of money they did what they wanted, they then bash the game on their way out. Another predictable cycle.
Look at the free to play and buy to play games out there. How many, after the initial release or change over are still saturated with these 'lower level' players? The kind people think 'ruin' a game? How about zero. Most games go right back to the levels they were at BEFORE they made the switch the big difference is they got a lot of quick cash and are able to do something with it. If they so choose. GW2 gets updated more than any game out there, its buy to play and it isnt over flowing with players of any type.
ESO is going both ways. Theyre going to milk subs for as long as they can, then theyll expand the store and go but to play or free to play. I suspect theyll require to buy a box and then you can play unlimited.
Either way these next few betas will really tell the tale, they better start putting them out there more frequently because even in retail land and if you go to the extreme the end of the second quarter is still sometime in June, so 7 months away. I am sure there will be a one month to six week 'open beta' (free preview) of the game. Or maybe not considering how good or bad it is. So there isnt a lot of time left. If they do betas like they have been that means at best there will be two more, which means the second of those will more than likely be the finished product and that beta will be to tweek numbers, make sure there are no obvious bugs, and correct spelling mistakes or dialogue issues, and it also means this past one is a product of 75-85% 'completion'.
I will say this, they better shorten their beta time tables, because they need 5 or 6 more betas IMO to get the issues I saw ironed out. That is just for the people who actually got IN the game, that isnt counting the log in issues where people couldnt even make accounts or download the client.
Its at 7.95 on the hype meter, I think i t topped out at 8.25 maybe 8.3 will be interesting to see where it goes from here as we move forward.
Not sure why you even care. There is a ZERO % correlation with the success of a game and it's hype meter on this site, especially with the amount of non-typical jaded SWG/Darkfall folks that litter this site...or folks that support only one game that isn't necessarily much different and then go on to other forums putting a 1 in the Hype Meter for any game that isn't their favorite..not to mention the folks with multiple accounts via multiple IP addresses. Just a lot of immaturity here. If anything the fact that the Hype Meter seems reasonable for this game is a good sign.
There Is Always Hope!
Why does "no sub" mean that there has to be a cash shop?
Skyrim doesn't have a sub nor did it have a cash shop. But, but .... Skyrim wasn't an mmo ..... So what? Skyrim was a) very successful and b) had significant new content added that lots of people paid for. And we have already been told that TESO has a solo "be a hero" core.
The on-line part of the equation doesn't need lots of money. What needs the money is content.
I would rather ESO have a higher box price and no sub.
I would rather ESO have no sub and sell 10M copies than have a sub and sell 2.4M.
I would rather ESO charge for new content rather than have a sub.
I would rather ESO release a chunk of a Skyrim xpac say every 6 weeks and charge $20 or $25 or whatever.
I would rather ESO sell 5M of each xpacs rather than have under 1M subs.
Content is not free. It is very easy to see subscribers as freeloaders. The ones that flit between games pay hardly anything - a month's sub once or twice a year. Many of those who stay whine. Whine about the lack of new content. Whine about the lack of people to group with. Whine about the shape of a helm. Whine because they believe that as subscribers their every whim should be catered for.
And publishers cannot do it. Content is not free.
GW showed that the on-line part of an mmo doesn't cost "a lot" of money. WoW showed the key is to sell lots and lots. Many, many games have launched recently with a sub and failed. And if an IP like Star Wars can only sell 2 to 3 million why should TESO be any different?
Games like Battlefield, FIFA and others have shown that you can have a no-sub, no "cash shop" on-line games. Premium subscriptions and stuff to buy for sure but bigger stuff rather than micro-transaction stuff. And for sure Matt Frior says he doesn't want people to turn up at a point and not be able to contine because someone hasn't bought x, y or z but does that mean TESO is never going to have an expansion? Never? I can't see that. Which destroys the argument.
Paid for expansions simply means there are not enough subs to pay for the content. So why bother going the sub route at all.
So no I don't want a sub. Paid for content yes but that doesn't mean "cash shop" style micro-transaction stuff. Proper content that you pay for. Which those gadfly freeloading subscribers have to pay for as well.
yes the number is meaningless on its own but by comparison it can be a factor. If a game gets a 9 in the hype sight unseen that is obviously meaningless. But after a couple tests or developer videos or announcements it drops to a 7 that does mean something, maybe not much but something, then after a few people play it the usual leaks come out and the word of mouth is horrid and it drops to a 6 then that is really really telling, especially when you have a few people trying to claim the majority are making the typical 'sky is falling' posts about a game.
I'm glad every game I play and love most have all sub model (or mixed in worst case scenario).
So WoW, FF XIV, and maybe Eve online then? Or stuff from the 1990s.
Doesn't LOTRO lock F2P players out of regions?
Couldn't be said any better!
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
yes but turbine is dumb. They sold lifetime subs at the inception of the game. Then when they went F2P they scrambled to try and find a way to appease the lifers. They went over board and gave too much. since I would guess half the existing playerbase is still that group of people who bought lifetime accounts and are thus getting paid by Turbine to simply own the game at this point Turbine is hurting for money. Looking at how the product has free fallen since release proves that out. This last expansion was a joke.
But therein lies the rub, and the crux of the arguments here. A MAJOR IP DOES NOT insure success. If the company cant deliver a product that is any good then the game wont be played by anyone, free or not. I would dare say Lord of the Rings is a bigger IP than The Elder Scrolls is. I would also say that just because Bethesda has, in the past delivered great games doesnt mean this will be one of the either. Turbine has Asherons Call, one of the longest lasting (and still subscription based) MMOs around. But expectations in that game are what they are, just like expectations of a game released in 2013 are going t be MUCH greater than a game released in 1999.
So it isnt just a developer or an IP or any singular entity they share. it is a sum of ALL the parts.
Should ESO be sub based? Not from what I have seen of it. COULD it be? Sure, IF it delivered upon expectations, which we know that no came will for most people, but ANY game that wants to be subbed based these days has to deliver enough of the expectaions to enough people to make money.
I dont think it should be free to lay either. Its too big an IP and they obviously spent too much money to do that.
So Buy to play is the obvious. Its what they have always done. So 60 bux or whatever gets you access tot he game and the world. If they add content they can charge for it, or not, depending. But anything that is free for owning the game can be accessed for buying the game. If there are DLC packages that you pay for so be it. Worked for every other game they had, not sure why it cant work for this one.
But I have been constant on this they will eventually go to free access at some point. My guess within a year. Be it full on free to play or simply buy to pay. You dont put a store in a sub based game and not have that plan in mind. That is there to milk the REAL fans and 'suckers' charge them 60 bucks for the game, charge them 15 bux a month then charge them 50 cents here a dollar there for cosmetic mounts and armor.
Either way we will see a year from now how it goes. I suspect if it isnt already free access it will have announced it will be.
Why subscription from wow became traditional as something long some kind of life never ending and out money with which supports the game developers can create new content on and on.
To be honest I'm starving for a long term game with good lore and great in all aspects of game.
and also with a frequent update new world to explore Especialy considering HOW amazing was Morrowind Ive spent so much time in that game if Elder scroll online will be so catch ass Morrowind Zenimax you can have my soul