Some are speculating that this means f2p or b2p is imminent.
What do you think it means?
Well it can also mean that if you remove the 6 month sub that you get your money fast if you only have 30 days and 90 days for with 6 month you have wait like 180 days until you get pay next time and if you have like 80 % of playerbase use 6 month options that mean basically that your financial hurt more for at the end of day you want to make money of your product.
Edit : On the official forums ( French ) a ZOS employee ( ZOS Tag on the name ) said they noticed that players preferred the 30 and 90 days sub models so they chose to remove the 6 month option.
Which brings up a question.. Isnt ESO doing well? Why would they go b2p / f2p if that is the case? Is it because they think console players will not like a monthly fee?
Most publishers come with BS reasons to justify a change like this. Why remove a 6-month sub option if not many people use it? It's not that it's taking extra power or costs (aside from the small discount, which is earned back by retention) to kepe it alive. I think something else is going on. And your 2nd reason might just be true. A lot of console players don't use subcriptions for games. See those few resent console MMOs we've had and are now F2P. Only Final Fantasy seems to do pretty well when it comes to subscription on consoles. Adding that Elder Scrolls is a pretty big IP and a console version is around the corner, it really wouldn't surprise me if they'd go B2P at the release of the console version of the game. And if that's really the case I might return to play. I thought ESO was nice, but not good enough to pay a monthly sub...
I've never heard of a company removing billing options prior to F2P either (as someone said above), so I don't know where that is coming from. I doubt subs would go away even if they went f2p, so it would make little sense to have to remove it now.
It would certainly have some type of premium with a f2p conversion, which 6 months subs would most likely transfer over to as well as 90 day.
It's like a bunch sharks circling the waters waiting for any hint of f2p to take a bite at. Carefully placing bait... fishing for reaction, or genuine talking point?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I feel like there probably just was literally almost 0 people getting 6 months, I feel like you either go in small (1 month) pr all in (12 months) I never have done anything in between really.
Some are speculating that this means f2p or b2p is imminent.
What do you think it means?
Wouldn't be too surprising if that was the case. Unfortunately it seems that not many MMO's can subsist on the subscription payment model anymore. Which is a shame, in my opinion at least, since that's the payment model that I prefer.
Many gamers prefer sub option - but - cash shops bring in additional profits even in subscription based games.
Still my guess is this
ESO will go F2P for console launch with cash shop in less than 6 months - there is no other reason why they would cancel the 6 month sub option.
Can't really blame any business for trying to maximize profits - that's what businesses do.
This is so laughable I have to honestly wonder if you even read what you type.
Why in God's name would any MMO with over a MILLION SUBS be going FTP? LOL
Heres a reality check for you. FF14 is on console, its not FTP and it never will with over 2 MILLION subs, and it just got even more going to console.
ESO is going the exact same way. This FTP pipe dream is just that. A pipe dream.
The claim that ESO has million+ subs is derived entirely from math done by fans assuming that the superdata did not included box sales as revenue with no justification for this assumption other than it was easier to do that math that way.
If the superdata did include box sales under revenue (which is quite possible since it is actually revenue) the number of subscribers turns out to be much much less than one million.
That said I do agree with you that f2p is pipe dream, mostly more because ZOS is certainly going to want to cash in on console box sales.
There has never been any reliable information put out there that there is anything close to 1 million subbed players in ESO, the question really was whether there was more than 500k or less, which given some of the issues and changes to how the campaigns work etc. would indicate that perhaps the numbers might be less than 500k. Superdata's data has only been speculative in nature, as Zenimax has not released any hard data, the only data they released was pre-launch based on numbers that signed up for the beta, not even active beta participants.
In a way it reminds me of what happened with SW;TOR, that they are about to switch to a Hybrid P2P/F2P model is definitely a possibility, which may well be timed to coincide with the launch of the game on Console.
"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."
THIS FOLKS ^
Why is this thread even went beyond this post is beyond reason.
Maybe because the opinion of 2 people isn't that important for others to stop any kind of discussion about ongoing changes.
The statement from the ACTUAL COMPANY is not the opinion of 2 people. That is called a "FACT"
The only fact is that the option to pay 6 months in advance has been removed.
Any statement beyond that is speculation.
Which was the point of the OP no, to speculate on what it "might" mean.
All in fun, and most likely it just wasn't an option often used.
I'm aware.
It was a nicer way to say that I feel that anyone who believes the reason given by Zenimax has to be somewhat naive.
The move gives Zenimax the OPTION of changing business models easily - presumably when the console version launches. The timing would be "about right". Doesn't mean they have decided to do so of course.
And forum moderators - don't decide company policy.
A possible change in business model is the likely reason.
As others have said we have no idea how many copies TESO has sold. And even if we knew the sales number - like those for FFXIV since it was first launched (pre-ARR) - sales do not equal subs. People leave and stop subscribing.
It all comes down to a revenue projection. A forecast as to whether they are better off selling:
"less" with a follow on sub.
"more" with B2P + DLC and / or cash shop
They went with 1. for TESO. Removing the 6 month option will make it easier for them to switch to option 2 - if they switch.
And 2 doesn't mean the game will have a cash shop - could have but might not. Skyrim was an option 2 for example. As are BF4 and Titanfall from EA; CoD and Destiny from Activision; GTA from Rockstar; Assassins Creed and Watch Dogs from UbiSoft; GW2 from NCSoft.
They still have people willing to pay a sub to test the game for them. Like I said in another thread ESo isnt good enough (still) to go free to play. They have to remain a sub and trick the guys who still think sub are superior and because they have a sub theyre playing a 'better' game. When in fact the opposite it true. Free to play games generally have to offer more to keep people playing or at least helping subsidize the game for the majoirty of free loaders.
Looks like the game is absolutely nothing like it was at release or soon will be. So the past 6 or 7 months of subs people have been paying have been going to testing the game and helping it morph into what it is right now.
I can say its a better deal than what trion gave people who bought into Archeage anyway. At least it looks like Bethesda is trying to fix the abortion this game was at launch. Not so with AA which continues ot be a cash grab of epic proportions. And while it technically released F2P it did cost a lot of people (myself included) between 50 and 150 bucks for a pre order package. which is probably what most ESO people will spend on ESO before it does in fact go free to play.
Rift , Age of Conan , TERA , Warhammer and Fallen Earth were some of the games that took down 6 month subscriptions prior to going f2p. There could be others.
I've always loved buying the longest sub I can. I always get my money back and then some when I do. I hope it does not got F2P, B2P isn't bad, but no F2P. I wouldn't be surprised if when console comes they will switch to B2P. If it goes to F2P, it'll join my list of games I loved and paid for faithfully that went F2P and I left within the first week of F2P. I can't stand the F2P community. You could charge me $50 for ESO and I would gladly pay it so I don't have to put up with the F2P community lol.
LOL the game will still have subs even if it did go F2P and my money says it won't. So to even make the statement they took it out because they are making it F2P is just stupid.
I want a 60 day sub I will go buy a game card. But then again why would I if for only 10 dollars more I can get a 90 day sub for $41.97. So to say they took the 60 day sub out is just BS. Like SWTOR they do not have a 60 day recurring sub it is only a one time payment which treats it like a game card.
I am almost sure it only states that there 6 months option was not used a lot by players for subs. I could be wrong on this but i don't see it a indication to anything for now.
edit : bcbully writes faster then me Ty for posting that link to confirm
Except why sit around and discuss something that costs them NOTHING to leave alone?I mean there is an entire game they could be thinking about ,but hey let's talk about something that is meaningless?It tells me they most certainloy have an agenda behind their reasoning,they are just not coming out with the truth because they expect nobody would buy anymore subs if they knew the truth.
Or this isn't true at all.
There are only three F2P games I enjoy, Trove, Marvel Heroes and PoE. Trove and PoE have fair cash shops, but Marvel Heroes borders on insane price wise. I prefer a subscription system as well. If ESO goes free to play or buy to play, I'm probably gone as well and it sucks because I just came back and I really enjoy it. I'd give the shop a chance and see if it is fair.
Subscription games biggest weakness is and always has been, there is only room for so many of them. You don't want to pay subscriptions for 2 - 4 games. Sometimes even more, and then you feel like you have to play them all to get your money's worth. Not enough time, so you stick with your comfort MMOs, and that is usually established ones for years. Meaning the death of the new games or a change in payment model.
Whereas free to play and buy to play you can sit back relax and no there is no rush to play anything, and you don't feel obligated to log in. But the thing is sometimes you can spend more money, than on a subscription game for a year, and still not feel obligated to log in. Scary indeed.
I completely understand why people would leave ESO if they dropped the subscription. I remember when Old Republic went the F2P, I left that as well. The game was better for it, without a doubt. Population wise. But the community was worse for it, and the business model was horrible. Suddenly, a game you had access to almost everything, suddenly has pay walls and gambling walls up. So I understand the leaving aspect. Wildstar failing to go free to play yet surprises me. Especially if ESO goes the route first.
My money is on this meaning nothing though. I tried to pay the six-month option and it did not go through as soon as it was offered. I asked at launch if there would ever be a lifetime subscription option or a year option, and they said no.
So it's clear the were never going to offer that aspect anyway, even during launch. So I am going to guess bumping the payment model, is technical. Nobody says they can't put it back.
Originally posted by Gravarg I've always loved buying the longest sub I can. I always get my money back and then some when I do. I hope it does not got F2P, B2P isn't bad, but no F2P. I wouldn't be surprised if when console comes they will switch to B2P. If it goes to F2P, it'll join my list of games I loved and paid for faithfully that went F2P and I left within the first week of F2P. I can't stand the F2P community. You could charge me $50 for ESO and I would gladly pay it so I don't have to put up with the F2P community lol.
Most free to play communities are bad indeed. The minute you launch or make a game free to play. The worst of the worst trolls come out in droves. Soon there are characters like mydichurts, cu nthearu and obamavota. But also keep in mind it also depends on the genre of the MMO too, or any free to play genre like MOBAs.
The more competitive the MMO, the worse the community. Usually. There are plenty of trolls in subscription games. Hello, EVE and WoW. But the lowest of the low, are in free to play in my experience.
I agree with you. Hell I'd pay 100 dollars a month subscription if it meant getting rid of a toxic community.
If I was a shrewd businessman calling the shots at Zenimax in order to ensure a smooth, profitable console launch coinciding with a business model transition (while also trying to minimize disruptions to consumer confidence), here's how I'd do it:
End of March: 3-month subscription option quietly removed from website.
Console launch: 5/5/2015 (preceded by a weekend "beta", of course)
Late May: gather console player retention rate data in order to determine best course of action.
Early June: annoucement (if warranted) of F2P/B2P option, effectice July 1st.
ZoS was having a lot of problems with billing. Lot of people couldn't get their cc/debt cards to work so had to go over to paypal which made a lot of people upset. I look at it they fixed the issue but for some reason it just won't take the six month so they pulled it. I was one at start that had to move to paypal to get it to go through. It is fixed now so I moved to what I originally wanted to have it set at.
I don't believe this has anything to do with F2P.
Pritty much this ...
But then people went tin foil hat way and discussion was born.
With many crying over ESO going F2P with no evidence nor reason for this to happend.
If I was a shrewd businessman calling the shots at Zenimax in order to ensure a smooth, profitable console launch coinciding with a business model transition (while also trying to minimize disruptions to consumer confidence), here's how I'd do it:
End of March: 3-month subscription option quietly removed from website.
Console launch: 5/5/2015 (preceded by a weekend "beta", of course)
Late May: gather console player retention rate data in order to determine best course of action.
Early June: annoucement (if warranted) of F2P/B2P option, effectice July 1st.
Not quite imo.
Removing the 6 month option - doubt remains; removing the 3 month option - they may as well say that subs are being abandoned.
The actual launch date? At this point in time I would expect them to be flexible and QA to hold the high ground. They fixed a date for the PC launch months and months before - and the result was subpar/poor/bad/horrendous; any word but good! They need a good launch.
And if they are going to change business model then I would expect them to combine the announcement (of switching to a no sub model) with the date of the console launch - 3 or so months out. They will want to generate as much hype as possible to sell as many copies as possible. And a combined announcement will get more coverage.
Originally posted by Yamota It means that those of us who said the game will go F2P within a year after release, were right.
Yeah you guys keep moving the goal post just like every doom and gloomer for every Mmo...most the haters were saying within 3 months...now it's a year? After a year will you change your tune again to what two years?
Check my history if you like. I always said within a year. It is Elder Scrolls after all.
Apparently the six month billing is still working if you had it set up before they removed the option, as i got the mail notifying me i am 66 euro lighter as of today
Your subscription payment for The Elder Scrolls Online has been successfully processed. You may cancel your subscription or revoke authorization at any time by logging into your Modify Subscription page in your Elder Scrolls Online account or by contacting customer support at help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/home. We hope you'll enjoy your continued adventures in Tamriel!
Below are the details of your transaction.Order #: 73KYLEFA5C***** 180 Day Recurring Subscription
Welcome back to Tamriel! You've purchased 180 days of game time. When this game time runs out, you will be automatically billed €65.94EUR + applicable taxes for another 180 days of game time on your payment method (PayPal: ).
This confirms that you authorize us to initiate recurring payment transactions for your subscription using the payment information listed above. €65.94E
Quoting what the company rep says doesn't really back you up to say that's why they would not be going FTP. If it is 6mo away they definitely won't come out and say they are going FTP now.
It also does not make sense to take the option away once it is already set up just because most people don't use that option. If 10% used the 6 month option then that is still revenue they have locked up for 6 months that they can count on in the books. If anything they should want to keep that to forecast long term subscription numbers.
I'm fairly certain the sites used to pay for subscription are not outsourced but if they were it would also cost them extra to have the changes done rather than leave them there which again do not harm them at all.
I of course can be missing some blatantly obvious reason other than "most people use 15 days and 90 days" which is a silly reason.
Comments
Well it can also mean that if you remove the 6 month sub that you get your money fast if you only have 30 days and 90 days for with 6 month you have wait like 180 days until you get pay next time and if you have like 80 % of playerbase use 6 month options that mean basically that your financial hurt more for at the end of day you want to make money of your product.
Most publishers come with BS reasons to justify a change like this. Why remove a 6-month sub option if not many people use it? It's not that it's taking extra power or costs (aside from the small discount, which is earned back by retention) to kepe it alive. I think something else is going on. And your 2nd reason might just be true. A lot of console players don't use subcriptions for games. See those few resent console MMOs we've had and are now F2P. Only Final Fantasy seems to do pretty well when it comes to subscription on consoles. Adding that Elder Scrolls is a pretty big IP and a console version is around the corner, it really wouldn't surprise me if they'd go B2P at the release of the console version of the game. And if that's really the case I might return to play. I thought ESO was nice, but not good enough to pay a monthly sub...
I've never heard of a company removing billing options prior to F2P either (as someone said above), so I don't know where that is coming from. I doubt subs would go away even if they went f2p, so it would make little sense to have to remove it now.
It would certainly have some type of premium with a f2p conversion, which 6 months subs would most likely transfer over to as well as 90 day.
It's like a bunch sharks circling the waters waiting for any hint of f2p to take a bite at. Carefully placing bait... fishing for reaction, or genuine talking point?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
There has never been any reliable information put out there that there is anything close to 1 million subbed players in ESO, the question really was whether there was more than 500k or less, which given some of the issues and changes to how the campaigns work etc. would indicate that perhaps the numbers might be less than 500k. Superdata's data has only been speculative in nature, as Zenimax has not released any hard data, the only data they released was pre-launch based on numbers that signed up for the beta, not even active beta participants.
In a way it reminds me of what happened with SW;TOR, that they are about to switch to a Hybrid P2P/F2P model is definitely a possibility, which may well be timed to coincide with the launch of the game on Console.
I'm aware.
It was a nicer way to say that I feel that anyone who believes the reason given by Zenimax has to be somewhat naive.
The move gives Zenimax the OPTION of changing business models easily - presumably when the console version launches. The timing would be "about right". Doesn't mean they have decided to do so of course.
And forum moderators - don't decide company policy.
A possible change in business model is the likely reason.
As others have said we have no idea how many copies TESO has sold. And even if we knew the sales number - like those for FFXIV since it was first launched (pre-ARR) - sales do not equal subs. People leave and stop subscribing.
It all comes down to a revenue projection. A forecast as to whether they are better off selling:
They still have people willing to pay a sub to test the game for them. Like I said in another thread ESo isnt good enough (still) to go free to play. They have to remain a sub and trick the guys who still think sub are superior and because they have a sub theyre playing a 'better' game. When in fact the opposite it true. Free to play games generally have to offer more to keep people playing or at least helping subsidize the game for the majoirty of free loaders.
Looks like the game is absolutely nothing like it was at release or soon will be. So the past 6 or 7 months of subs people have been paying have been going to testing the game and helping it morph into what it is right now.
I can say its a better deal than what trion gave people who bought into Archeage anyway. At least it looks like Bethesda is trying to fix the abortion this game was at launch. Not so with AA which continues ot be a cash grab of epic proportions. And while it technically released F2P it did cost a lot of people (myself included) between 50 and 150 bucks for a pre order package. which is probably what most ESO people will spend on ESO before it does in fact go free to play.
Rift , Age of Conan , TERA , Warhammer and Fallen Earth were some of the games that took down 6 month subscriptions prior to going f2p. There could be others.
Did ESO get more votes than the game you are playing?
So much Alice in Wonderland logic going on.
LOL the game will still have subs even if it did go F2P and my money says it won't. So to even make the statement they took it out because they are making it F2P is just stupid.
I want a 60 day sub I will go buy a game card. But then again why would I if for only 10 dollars more I can get a 90 day sub for $41.97. So to say they took the 60 day sub out is just BS. Like SWTOR they do not have a 60 day recurring sub it is only a one time payment which treats it like a game card.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
Or this isn't true at all.
There are only three F2P games I enjoy, Trove, Marvel Heroes and PoE. Trove and PoE have fair cash shops, but Marvel Heroes borders on insane price wise. I prefer a subscription system as well. If ESO goes free to play or buy to play, I'm probably gone as well and it sucks because I just came back and I really enjoy it. I'd give the shop a chance and see if it is fair.
Subscription games biggest weakness is and always has been, there is only room for so many of them. You don't want to pay subscriptions for 2 - 4 games. Sometimes even more, and then you feel like you have to play them all to get your money's worth. Not enough time, so you stick with your comfort MMOs, and that is usually established ones for years. Meaning the death of the new games or a change in payment model.
Whereas free to play and buy to play you can sit back relax and no there is no rush to play anything, and you don't feel obligated to log in. But the thing is sometimes you can spend more money, than on a subscription game for a year, and still not feel obligated to log in. Scary indeed.
I completely understand why people would leave ESO if they dropped the subscription. I remember when Old Republic went the F2P, I left that as well. The game was better for it, without a doubt. Population wise. But the community was worse for it, and the business model was horrible. Suddenly, a game you had access to almost everything, suddenly has pay walls and gambling walls up. So I understand the leaving aspect. Wildstar failing to go free to play yet surprises me. Especially if ESO goes the route first.
My money is on this meaning nothing though. I tried to pay the six-month option and it did not go through as soon as it was offered. I asked at launch if there would ever be a lifetime subscription option or a year option, and they said no.
So it's clear the were never going to offer that aspect anyway, even during launch. So I am going to guess bumping the payment model, is technical. Nobody says they can't put it back.
Most free to play communities are bad indeed. The minute you launch or make a game free to play. The worst of the worst trolls come out in droves. Soon there are characters like mydichurts, cu nthearu and obamavota. But also keep in mind it also depends on the genre of the MMO too, or any free to play genre like MOBAs.
The more competitive the MMO, the worse the community. Usually. There are plenty of trolls in subscription games. Hello, EVE and WoW. But the lowest of the low, are in free to play in my experience.
I agree with you. Hell I'd pay 100 dollars a month subscription if it meant getting rid of a toxic community.
I will try never to sub. to a game again its bullshit!
elders scroll6 rumer to launch march 2016.
I bought dreanor and you have to sub. but its not worth while for me I play 2 hours then I am bored.
why do you buy a game and have to pay to play it just to get rid of idiots in the game just ignore them.
dark souls games have no sub. and I saw very view a-holes playing the game.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
If I was a shrewd businessman calling the shots at Zenimax in order to ensure a smooth, profitable console launch coinciding with a business model transition (while also trying to minimize disruptions to consumer confidence), here's how I'd do it:
Pritty much this ...
But then people went tin foil hat way and discussion was born.
With many crying over ESO going F2P with no evidence nor reason for this to happend.
Not quite imo.
Removing the 6 month option - doubt remains; removing the 3 month option - they may as well say that subs are being abandoned.
The actual launch date? At this point in time I would expect them to be flexible and QA to hold the high ground. They fixed a date for the PC launch months and months before - and the result was subpar/poor/bad/horrendous; any word but good! They need a good launch.
And if they are going to change business model then I would expect them to combine the announcement (of switching to a no sub model) with the date of the console launch - 3 or so months out. They will want to generate as much hype as possible to sell as many copies as possible. And a combined announcement will get more coverage.
Check my history if you like. I always said within a year. It is Elder Scrolls after all.
My gaming blog
Apparently the six month billing is still working if you had it set up before they removed the option, as i got the mail notifying me i am 66 euro lighter as of today
Your subscription payment for The Elder Scrolls Online has been successfully processed. You may cancel your subscription or revoke authorization at any time by logging into your Modify Subscription page in your Elder Scrolls Online account or by contacting customer support at help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/home. We hope you'll enjoy your continued adventures in Tamriel!
Below are the details of your transaction.Order #: 73KYLEFA5C*****
180 Day Recurring Subscription
Welcome back to Tamriel! You've purchased 180 days of game time. When this game time runs out, you will be automatically billed €65.94EUR + applicable taxes for another 180 days of game time on your payment method (PayPal: ).
This confirms that you authorize us to initiate recurring payment transactions for your subscription using the payment information listed above. €65.94E
Go figure...
Quoting what the company rep says doesn't really back you up to say that's why they would not be going FTP. If it is 6mo away they definitely won't come out and say they are going FTP now.
It also does not make sense to take the option away once it is already set up just because most people don't use that option. If 10% used the 6 month option then that is still revenue they have locked up for 6 months that they can count on in the books. If anything they should want to keep that to forecast long term subscription numbers.
I'm fairly certain the sites used to pay for subscription are not outsourced but if they were it would also cost them extra to have the changes done rather than leave them there which again do not harm them at all.
I of course can be missing some blatantly obvious reason other than "most people use 15 days and 90 days" which is a silly reason.