Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Six-month sub option removed: What does it mean?

1235»

Comments

  • rodingorodingo Member RarePosts: 2,870

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • d_20d_20 Member RarePosts: 1,878

    This thread is GOLD.

     

    Savor it well.


  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,004
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by Octagon7711
    It shouldn't be to hard to put stuff up in a cash shop.  Treasure chests and keys, pets, XP pots, additional inventory space, treasure maps, clothing skins, a lot of fluff that's in game already can be put in a cash shop.  SWTOR put one together pretty quickly.

    It took EA c. 6 months to "convert" - and they hired some specific people with f2p experience. PotBS, AoC etc. about the same. some "months". Simply making stuff available in a cash shop is not enough; good f2p games - ones that make a profit and do so by being "fun" for people to play (there are bad f2p games as well of course) are designed differently. 

    Zenimax - according to what they have said - are not working on anything like this and they plan to launch on console when they have finished the current tranche of development (CS + Justice basically). Ergo they are not going f2p with the console launch. they will c

    Now never is a long time but the console launch is a "major event". And if you were going f2p + cash shop you would want to get your message out to lots and lots of people. Which is not as easy as you might think. 

    • Big IP
    • Sold 2.4M copies @ $60 + subscription required within 6 months
    • Announced 2M accounts 6 months after going f2p - some of whom will have been former subscribers.
    In case you have missed the point SWTOR sold more copies @ $60 + sub in the 6 months after launch than it signed up in the 6 months after going f2p.
     
    !

    Hmmm, OK.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed Member RarePosts: 7,400
    Originally posted by d_20

    This thread is GOLD.

     

    Savor it well.

    We'll maybe the B2P model will help in the long

    Philosophy of MMO Game Design

  • AnirethAnireth Member UncommonPosts: 940
    It should be possible to sue companies for intent to mislead when they do stuff like that. There is no way they hadn't already decided to go B2P when they removed the 180 day option. So at best, the claim that it was due to players preferring the shorter options was part of the reason, and certainly not the major deciding factor.

    I'll wait to the day's end when the moon is high
    And then I'll rise with the tide with a lust for life, I'll
    Amass an army, and we'll harness a horde
    And then we'll limp across the land until we stand at the shore

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by Anireth
    It should be possible to sue companies for intent to mislead when they do stuff like that. There is no way they hadn't already decided to go B2P when they removed the 180 day option. So at best, the claim that it was due to players preferring the shorter options was part of the reason, and certainly not the major deciding factor.

    In the US I am sure you could (I have lived there) but in fairness the decision probably wasn't taken at the time. On the cards - absolutely but probably not set in stone.  

    Allowing CS staff to spout drivel though - that was wrong. Internally they could have instructed them: options being considered, no decision yet, refer people to the sub plan page. Instead we got drivel - and today we learn there will be an be an optional 6 month sub plan. Amazing.

    Something has changed though. If they always intended to make an announcement in early January why cancel the 6 month plan in December. Doesn't make sense. Early March - sure. Which would be after 1.6. Now the developers backs will be up against a hard deadline. Which didn't go well for them last year. The December update as well - no mention of cosmetic stuff etc. Yeah.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,254
    Originally posted by bcbully

    ZOS_PierreL wrote: »

    "We have noticed that players prefered subscriptions of 30 and 90 days, the Elder Scrolls Online team therefore took the decision to delete the 180 days subscription.

    The 30 and 90 days subscription are still available."

     

    WoW will go b2p or f2p before ESO.

     Oh Bully...

  • nukeguynukeguy Member Posts: 9
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Tasslehoff35
    Originally posted by bcbully

    ZOS_PierreL wrote: »

    "We have noticed that players prefered subscriptions of 30 and 90 days, the Elder Scrolls Online team therefore took the decision to delete the 180 days subscription.

    The 30 and 90 days subscription are still available."

     

    WoW will go b2p or f2p before ESO.

     

    HAHA!!! I bet you wish you could go back and delete this comment!

    I stand by it.

     

    WoW has already made a move in that direction with an expanded cash shop and a $$ to gold conversion system. ESO's store has exactly 1 item, a horse that comes with the upgraded box that you can buy if you don't buy the upgraded box. No $$ to gold conversion system. 

    Umm do you still stand by this? 

Sign In or Register to comment.