For starters, anyone who took my "mansion" analogy seriously is a complete moron...
Secondly the $.50 argument IS 100% valid because if you cant afford that then you should EITHER:
A: Go play a currently F2P game ( because you dragging down everyone who is gladly paying for it by wanting it for free is just pissing off the people who think it IS worth the sub fee.)
B: Earn some more money and have a hobby you don't mind putting money towards so that it can constantly get better.
C: Realize that you cant afford this game whatever your financial restrictions, and hope that someone is cool enough to help you out. (friends, family, internet pals... it happens, but certainly NOT when you are being a dick and trashing the game out of spite.)
C: OR wait for the updates to roll in, and content to be expanded upon; then once the game meets your "My shit doesn't stink" levels of acceptance... purchase the game and sub with your money that is clearly better then mine.
In the traditional gaming world, there is no repeat customer, as in say... a grocery store. Therefore in MMO's where content is constantly created and expanded on they have to generate revenue to improve there product and keep their business running somehow.
Subscription based models have in the past proven to be the most stable to consistent updates for ALL players in the game, and one that isn't restricted to only those who paid for it in some form of micro transaction store.
Another reason people don't want F2P in ESO, because..... Guild wars 2 cash shop... that's why!
I can tell you that I for one don't want a huge chunk of development resources going to content/gear/costumes/skill lines and shit along those lines that will ONLY be accessible to players who pay for it in a shop if the game WAS F2P. That time should be spent on content seen and accessed by all players at some point in the game in my opinion.
I relate my ESO experience to another game I used to play a ton. Everquest 2 sucked balls until approximately 11 months in, after that I played it for 5 years. Sometimes its good to get your foot in the door and learn the class mechanics, then when everything gets expanded on you can be there at the top of the hill.
I am still playing ESO, this patch was a huge step forward, it did introduce a couple new bugs... but that's OK, shit happens. They are being hot-fixed, and plenty of new things are on the horizon. Hate all you want on the game and myself, but for those of us who are digging it, keep on keepin' on.
That is all.
Dude....people can afford 15$/month.
People just dont think ESO is WORTH 15$/month.
Get that through your head once and for all.
Subscription model has proven to be a scam and promise of wonders, and, only a fraction delivered, while not providing any better service than your standard F2P game.
And people ask legitimately: "WTF are we paying for" (WoW as biggest offender, how long has it gone without content in last couple of years AND when some chunk of content finally comes: BAM expansion, cash out another 60$). Not that other wannabe sub games do much better, and ESO falling in line with those failed wannabe sub games really quickly.
I know this is not the place to ask and totally off topic but I came across some user deleted like yesterday and was wondering was it someone I know and why they deleted their account because I saw quite a few threads with it and like I said it happened just yesterday. Seems to be someone who posted a lot. I of course want to know why they deleted it.They got into a fight or what...... the curious want to know me that is.
I really wish people would stop making these BS posts about ESO and how it should go F2P/ B2P.....
ITS OBVIOUS THAT THIS MEANS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN CHECKING IT OUT, stop trolling and just buy the game plus the .50$ a day it costs to play and STFU already.
So sick of this generation ( and I'm only 29) wanting everything for free, and when they get it they want all the access and rewards handed to them on a silver platter.
I'm sorry to post in this thread specifically because I don't feel like the OP hates the game, but for f**ks sake this has got to be the one millionth post about how people want to check out ESO but don't want to pay for it.
"Guess what, I want to live in your mansion and have someone wait on me all day and use the Aston Martin in the garage... Can I just try that out for a few months at one of your guys' house and then make my decision ... also is it cool if I sleep with your wife?"
Quote from article, "It is by definition, the personal, self-centered desire not to expend capital at all. Or to put a more modern take on it, rapid advances in technology have so lowered our perceptions of what things should cost, that ultimately many goods and services have become devalued far below what people are willing to pay for them.".
~
It doesn't really address one of the root causes....OK, so I only skimmed the article and mayu have missed it, but still.
Software companies have been exploiting, abusing, monetizing and generally, over promising and under delivering for years. Consumers are tired of it.
Have you ever actually read one of their ELUAs? They are convoluted and intentionally complex, but the gist of them is to basically tell the consumer, they have purchased access to something they don't own, The publisher still retains rights over the purchase. In other words, you spend money but have no rights.
Indeed, I too get fed up with those who think their life is going to be handed free to them, and these boards have more than their fare share of such people. Is it a gamer mentality? I think not, just those who think they deserve to be educated, given a job and have their entertainment for free. They treat life as if it were a F2P game where they put as little back in as possible.
To the last poster, there is nothing unusual about ELUA's, they are designed to fit the product. They are complex because online games and their relationship with players are complex.
If you buy a book do you own the words? No. This should help you understand the first concept, buying something does not imply complete ownership.
Effectively we are renting a P2P MMO, MMO's by their nature are nebulous products. If you rent a car and it turns out to be the wrong car you could expect money back. But if you rent something you end up not liking it would you expect you money back? Do you think you should be able to return a game to a store because you did not like it?
Companies have 'rights' too, and one of the things they need protection from is people who want everything for free. It is a two way street, not just a your way street.
People were expecting Skyrim online, not Rift: Tamriel Edition.
Actually nobody asked for Skyrim MMO. Skyrim MMO would be pretty damn boring since there would be nothing after 70 hours apart from messing with mods and running around.
People were asking Bethesda to add a coop feature to Skyrim itself, play with a friend. Nobody asked for ESO.
Privately owned doesn't mean what people think it means. If by private you mean that there's a board of directors who control shares of the company though privately traded stock but aren't listed as a publicly traded company, that still requires capital investment, then sure zenimax is a "privately owned company".
However, people keep using that to say that they aren't required to repay development costs, and are able to just pull 200+ million out of a personal bank account to make a niche game that doesn't meet expectations to such an extent that they need to delay the console release of that game. Or that the board of directors is happy to make a game that doesn't appeal the majority of the fans of the single player series who they hoped it would appeal to, or even MMO gamers for that matter.
Both EA and zenimax media have a board of directors that have financial goals that their respective studios are obligated to meet.
The only difference between the two companies is that EA sells its stock publicly and zenimax sells its stock privately. Just because its privately traded doesn't mean that the stock doesn't suffer from poor performance, or that the stock holders will cut some slack.
Who do you think is going to be more forgiving? Some dude that buys a few thousand worth of EA stock, or the limited number of guys who invested millions each into zenimax stock?
Zenimax does indeed have quarterly investor calls, it's all done privately though.
This is key right here. Rather people realize it or not, Zenimax indeed has people who are financially invested into the company and would most likely want a return in their investment. If it means changing the sub model and their market research shows it will draw more money by doing so, well then guess what is going to happen...
So again, what can ZOS do to prevent this? Some will say just stay the course as the way things are now. If they don't change their sub model is it because of arrogance or do the devs know something about the MMO market that the rest of us players don't?
They're dedicated to the sub model, but it would be foolish to think they don't have a minimum number of subs that they require to either keep the game running or from converting to a different monetization method.
That minimum sub number will also have a timeframe attached to it that they would expect to achieve that number of subs within that amount of time.
The game cost to much to make, and zenimax is very large company (they put in the second highest bid, something like 26 million, to acquire THQ the other day. On top of buying out id software and all of its IP's). They aren't doing anything based on feeling or principles, they do things based in revenue and operating costs.
Firor doesn't get the final say on how the game is monetized, and just because he says the game won't go free to play it really means nothing. He's not in charge, the guys who sit on the board at zenimax media are the ones who call the shot, it's their money and stock at stake, not Firors. In fact, I bet you the first change that gets made, prior to the game going buy/ free to play, will be Firor and Sage exiting ESO; spun as a mutual decision because god forbid anyone in their position ever admit they were fired.
I really wish people like you would stop saying things like this.
As for the 50 cents a day bull crap. Sorry, your right .. it is 50 cents a day. A DAY ... everyday. As long as a person wants to play the game they have to pay 50 cents. Of course it sounds cheap when you put it that way. You know .. if I play a few years it's ONLY $600+ for 1 game.
I hate when people try and make something sound cheap by doing that.
But what you aren't taking into account is that these games cost more money to not only develop but also run and continue development.
Players want to pay their single player game prices (those who pay for their games) for games that are designed to be more than 60 hour affairs.
As far as your ".50 PER DAY!" comment, that could be applied to a lot of things. For instance "coffee". Bean water. People spend about 1.70 to 2.00 per day on coffee. You never hear wingeing (winging?) about that from people. They just pick up their coffee and go on their merry way.
Where game companies might deserve some ire is that they got complacent and didn't update their games enough, didn't include enough events and in the process people would be subscribing only to say "where is my money going".
Game companies need to always make sure that there is a good perception of value for their product in order to ask for any money and insure they actually get it. Whether it's p2p, b2p or f2p.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I really wish people like you would stop saying things like this.
As for the 50 cents a day bull crap. Sorry, your right .. it is 50 cents a day. A DAY ... everyday. As long as a person wants to play the game they have to pay 50 cents. Of course it sounds cheap when you put it that way. You know .. if I play a few years it's ONLY $600+ for 1 game.
I hate when people try and make something sound cheap by doing that.
But what you aren't taking into account is that these games cost more money to not only develop but also run and continue development.
Players want to pay their single player game prices (those who pay for their games) for games that are designed to be more than 60 hour affairs.
As far as your ".50 PER DAY!" comment, that could be applied to a lot of things. For instance "coffee". Bean water. People spend about 1.70 to 2.00 per day on coffee. You never hear wingeing (winging?) about that from people. They just pick up their coffee and go on their merry way.
Where game companies might deserve some ire is that they got complacent and didn't update their games enough, didn't include enough events and in the process people would be subscribing only to say "where is my money going".
Game companies need to always make sure that there is a good perception of value for their product in order to ask for any money and insure they actually get it. Whether it's p2p, b2p or f2p.
You missed the point. I have already said I have no issues with P2P games. I would gladly pay a monthly fee, if I feel the game is worth it. The issue here is many people keep using "It's only 50 cents a day" argument as if that changes anything.
As for MMOs costing more than single player games, that is a given. However, you greatly reduce the amount of players and box sales by making the MMO P2P. It's actually a bad business model when you are talking about converting a single player IP over to a MMO.
Because if ESO was B2P, they could have catered toward the Elder Scrolls fans and we all know how many there are. Just take a look at Skyrim box sales. If they even sold half as many, they would still likely surpass what they could make from a P2P model.
They should have taken full advantage of the popularity of the IP, but by making it P2P ... it greatly reduces the amount of people who are willing to try it because elder scrolls fans are used to single player games, and thus used to a one time fee payment model.
With that said, even reducing the price to $5 a month would have helped greatly in that area.
Edit: The point I am trying to make is, I doubt they would have had any issue at all with making the game B2P, and in fact I think it would have done vastly better.
I really wish people would stop making these BS posts about ESO and how it should go F2P/ B2P.....
ITS OBVIOUS THAT THIS MEANS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN CHECKING IT OUT, stop trolling and just buy the game plus the .50$ a day it costs to play and STFU already.
So sick of this generation ( and I'm only 29) wanting everything for free, and when they get it they want all the access and rewards handed to them on a silver platter.
I'm sorry to post in this thread specifically because I don't feel like the OP hates the game, but for f**ks sake this has got to be the one millionth post about how people want to check out ESO but don't want to pay for it.
"Guess what, I want to live in your mansion and have someone wait on me all day and use the Aston Martin in the garage... Can I just try that out for a few months at one of your guys' house and then make my decision ... also is it cool if I sleep with your wife?"
Quote from article, "It is by definition, the personal, self-centered desire not to expend capital at all. Or to put a more modern take on it, rapid advances in technology have so lowered our perceptions of what things should cost, that ultimately many goods and services have become devalued far below what people are willing to pay for them.".
~
It doesn't really address one of the root causes....OK, so I only skimmed the article and mayu have missed it, but still.
Software companies have been exploiting, abusing, monetizing and generally, over promising and under delivering for years. Consumers are tired of it.
Have you ever actually read one of their ELUAs? They are convoluted and intentionally complex, but the gist of them is to basically tell the consumer, they have purchased access to something they don't own, The publisher still retains rights over the purchase. In other words, you spend money but have no rights.
Indeed, I too get fed up with those who think their life is going to be handed free to them, and these boards have more than their fare share of such people. Is it a gamer mentality? I think not, just those who think they deserve to be educated, given a job and have their entertainment for free. They treat life as if it were a F2P game where they put as little back in as possible.
To the last poster, there is nothing unusual about ELUA's, they are designed to fit the product. They are complex because online games and their relationship with players are complex.
If you buy a book do you own the words? No. This should help you understand the first concept, buying something does not imply complete ownership.
Effectively we are renting a P2P MMO, MMO's by their nature are nebulous products. If you rent a car and it turns out to be the wrong car you could expect money back. But if you rent something you end up not liking it would you expect you money back? Do you think you should be able to return a game to a store because you did not like it?
Companies have 'rights' too, and one of the things they need protection from is people who want everything for free. It is a two way street, not just a your way street.
Not the same. There is a difference in retaining rights over intellectual property vs. putting limits on me as to how I may and may not use my purchase on my equipment.
Originally posted by Crusades I can tell you how it will be received in the console market, poorly. Sub games outside of FFARR do not work on consoles. Buy to play does, console players pay a sub fee for online play already and expect to be able to play all of their games online for that fee. Why does FFARR work? FF has deeper roots on ps consoles and it is crossplatform.
Got next week's lottery numbers too? lol.
When I said i had "time", i meant virtual time, i got no RL "time" for you.
I really wish people would stop making these BS posts about ESO and how it should go F2P/ B2P.....
ITS OBVIOUS THAT THIS MEANS YOU ARE INTERESTED IN CHECKING IT OUT, stop trolling and just buy the game plus the .50$ a day it costs to play and STFU already.
So sick of this generation ( and I'm only 29) wanting everything for free, and when they get it they want all the access and rewards handed to them on a silver platter.
I'm sorry to post in this thread specifically because I don't feel like the OP hates the game, but for f**ks sake this has got to be the one millionth post about how people want to check out ESO but don't want to pay for it.
"Guess what, I want to live in your mansion and have someone wait on me all day and use the Aston Martin in the garage... Can I just try that out for a few months at one of your guys' house and then make my decision ... also is it cool if I sleep with your wife?"
$.50 a day people ...
FIFTY CENTS!!!!!!
AGREE! ! People sometimes just want to find out something to write.
Comments
Dude....people can afford 15$/month.
People just dont think ESO is WORTH 15$/month.
Get that through your head once and for all.
Subscription model has proven to be a scam and promise of wonders, and, only a fraction delivered, while not providing any better service than your standard F2P game.
And people ask legitimately: "WTF are we paying for" (WoW as biggest offender, how long has it gone without content in last couple of years AND when some chunk of content finally comes: BAM expansion, cash out another 60$). Not that other wannabe sub games do much better, and ESO falling in line with those failed wannabe sub games really quickly.
Indeed, I too get fed up with those who think their life is going to be handed free to them, and these boards have more than their fare share of such people. Is it a gamer mentality? I think not, just those who think they deserve to be educated, given a job and have their entertainment for free. They treat life as if it were a F2P game where they put as little back in as possible.
To the last poster, there is nothing unusual about ELUA's, they are designed to fit the product. They are complex because online games and their relationship with players are complex.
If you buy a book do you own the words? No. This should help you understand the first concept, buying something does not imply complete ownership.
Effectively we are renting a P2P MMO, MMO's by their nature are nebulous products. If you rent a car and it turns out to be the wrong car you could expect money back. But if you rent something you end up not liking it would you expect you money back? Do you think you should be able to return a game to a store because you did not like it?
Companies have 'rights' too, and one of the things they need protection from is people who want everything for free. It is a two way street, not just a your way street.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Actually nobody asked for Skyrim MMO. Skyrim MMO would be pretty damn boring since there would be nothing after 70 hours apart from messing with mods and running around.
People were asking Bethesda to add a coop feature to Skyrim itself, play with a friend. Nobody asked for ESO.
They're dedicated to the sub model, but it would be foolish to think they don't have a minimum number of subs that they require to either keep the game running or from converting to a different monetization method.
That minimum sub number will also have a timeframe attached to it that they would expect to achieve that number of subs within that amount of time.
The game cost to much to make, and zenimax is very large company (they put in the second highest bid, something like 26 million, to acquire THQ the other day. On top of buying out id software and all of its IP's). They aren't doing anything based on feeling or principles, they do things based in revenue and operating costs.
Firor doesn't get the final say on how the game is monetized, and just because he says the game won't go free to play it really means nothing. He's not in charge, the guys who sit on the board at zenimax media are the ones who call the shot, it's their money and stock at stake, not Firors. In fact, I bet you the first change that gets made, prior to the game going buy/ free to play, will be Firor and Sage exiting ESO; spun as a mutual decision because god forbid anyone in their position ever admit they were fired.
But what you aren't taking into account is that these games cost more money to not only develop but also run and continue development.
Players want to pay their single player game prices (those who pay for their games) for games that are designed to be more than 60 hour affairs.
As far as your ".50 PER DAY!" comment, that could be applied to a lot of things. For instance "coffee". Bean water. People spend about 1.70 to 2.00 per day on coffee. You never hear wingeing (winging?) about that from people. They just pick up their coffee and go on their merry way.
Where game companies might deserve some ire is that they got complacent and didn't update their games enough, didn't include enough events and in the process people would be subscribing only to say "where is my money going".
Game companies need to always make sure that there is a good perception of value for their product in order to ask for any money and insure they actually get it. Whether it's p2p, b2p or f2p.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You missed the point. I have already said I have no issues with P2P games. I would gladly pay a monthly fee, if I feel the game is worth it. The issue here is many people keep using "It's only 50 cents a day" argument as if that changes anything.
As for MMOs costing more than single player games, that is a given. However, you greatly reduce the amount of players and box sales by making the MMO P2P. It's actually a bad business model when you are talking about converting a single player IP over to a MMO.
Because if ESO was B2P, they could have catered toward the Elder Scrolls fans and we all know how many there are. Just take a look at Skyrim box sales. If they even sold half as many, they would still likely surpass what they could make from a P2P model.
They should have taken full advantage of the popularity of the IP, but by making it P2P ... it greatly reduces the amount of people who are willing to try it because elder scrolls fans are used to single player games, and thus used to a one time fee payment model.
With that said, even reducing the price to $5 a month would have helped greatly in that area.
Edit: The point I am trying to make is, I doubt they would have had any issue at all with making the game B2P, and in fact I think it would have done vastly better.
In the world of gaming, cost of game discussions are (in my mind) pointless.
People do not play a game they are not interested in because its $2 a month less than the one they are interested in.
we are not talking about speed boats here. We are talking about the cost of lunch
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Not the same. There is a difference in retaining rights over intellectual property vs. putting limits on me as to how I may and may not use my purchase on my equipment.
Got next week's lottery numbers too? lol.
When I said i had "time", i meant virtual time, i got no RL "time" for you.
AGREE! ! People sometimes just want to find out something to write.