Originally posted by doodphaceYou are 100% wrong here. I even provided a link in my post (that you conveniently left out) proving that FFXIV not coming to xbox had absolutly nothing to do with fees, contradicting what you tried to pass off earlier....look, here it is again....The denial is reaching a fever pitch here..
Do you understand that I am not arguing nor talking about Final Fantasy XIV but Zenimax...?
FFXXIV and DUST were just given as an example that Microsoft policies are strict and negotiations can be difficult.
I am not wrong, you just can't read and make false conclusions.
And one more time:
Originally posted by GdemamiYou have absolutely no idea about technicalities that are being involved there, no insight into negotiations between Microsoft and Zenimax.
You are 100% wrong here. I even provided a link in my post (that you conveniently left out) proving that FFXIV not coming to xbox had absolutly nothing to do with fees, contradicting what you tried to pass off earlier....look, here it is again....
The denial is reaching a fever pitch here..
Do you understand that I am not arguing nor talking about Final Fantasy XIV but Zenimax...?
FFXXIV and DUST were just given as an example that Microsoft policies are strict and negotiations can be difficult.
I am not wrong, you just can't read and make false conclusions.
And one more time:
Originally posted by Gdemami
You have absolutely no idea about technicalities that are being involved there, no insight into negotiations between Microsoft and Zenimax.
Yes we get it what you are trying to say but you are still wrong. Read the damn link.
The argument being presented is that Microsoft is just impossible to negotiate with and that sub fee for ESO was completely out of question on XBOX one and yet Microsoft allowed the sub option for FFXI. Then the counter argument presented was that FFXIV is not on XBOX because Microsoft is well 'difficult' people which is again wrong and hence the link to prove it. If Zeni wanted they could have had gone the route of FFXI. maybe they themselves are not interested in it? to put entire blame on Microsoft is just another fantasy cooked up by fans in denial.
Why do you have this need to be always right even when obviously you are not?
Personally, I don't think the game failed as a Subscription game. I hear a lot of doom and gloom reports by professional victims, but there aren't any financial reports that support that idea.
Also, I don't understand how someone can simultaneously imply that F2P or B2P is the wave of the future and is better than Subscription, but then suggest how much ESO sucked so much that it couldn't maintain a Subscription model. There is so much backwards thinking in that line of reasoning... I don't even know where to begin. It's just... dumb. I'm sorry... but it's just hate-mongering. It's so full of contradictory principle, that it blows my mind to try and wrap my head around it.
How does a game suck so much that it fails into a better business model?
Someone... please... tell me you see how twisted and backwards logic that is.
subscription model for a theme park game is a fail these days ... WoW still has subscription model cause of the unique audience it has build around it. (dunno if i typed it correct..)
Originally posted by loulaki subscription model for a theme park game is a fail these days ... WoW still has subscription model cause of the unique audience it has build around it. (dunno if i typed it correct..)
I've been thinking the same thing since SWTOR went F2P. Content is just consumed too fast... there's no reason to retain the subscription. And that's the life blood of the developer. Without it... the game cannot support a staff. And a full staff couldn't even keep up with the content as it was. It's not likely a skeleton staff will.
MMO's need to be designed in such a way so that the content creates itself - similar to a sandbox I guess. I don't really have a proper term for what I am describing, but it would be something like a sandbox with a procedural content creator. That's the only thing that is going to survive in a subscription plan these days.
I dont often post here, cause this site is pure troll haven and mmorpg staff dont seem to care.
But as soon as you guys get off what ever broken chair your back sides are siting on to write garbage about other games you dont like, here's a notion, Dont play the games you dont like...
Or in all your cleverness and trollish bs forget the simple fact of life?
I do not believe they failed at maintaining the model, I believe this was a planned move from day one. The ease with which this transition is taking place for the dev team and the fact this game was targeting consoles points to this conclusion.
You have to understand the subscription model for consoles was never going to work. A B2P model works well for that group. So Zen was likely heading this way from the start and the timing of the change over, to hit just before the console versions hit bares this out.
With this conclusion we realize that this move is not an issue of a subscription model failing for ESO. In fact most ESO players I know played because the subscription model meant the dev had a steady cash flow and could turn out higher quality expansions. They had a solid player base and with the subscription model, more than enough for the income to sustain the game.
Instead the subscription model was a bait and switch, in my opinion, to get the PC gamers to pay for the development of the console game design. We have in essence been paying for a beta that was being tweaked and prepared for the main launch, Tamriel Unlimited. ESO was a project name at the end of the day, not the real game name.
This is the reason I left the game and the straw the broke the camels back for me with MMOs period. Zen lied to us from day one about their intent and pulled a bait and switch on the Elder Scroll faithful similiar to the one pulled on the MW faithful by MWO. This is a game that has years of play ahead of it tied to a company we already know will lie to us, how can we trust them to keep development of a good game?
As I stated in my blog post, in the end the issue we face as MMO players and specifically this case as ESO players, is that the game companies continue to all pull the same crap on the player base. Taking our money and then throwing away the promises and committments they made to move to an economic model that brings easy cash with no effort on their part. We keep getting crapped on and yet we keep coming back. Is it the games companies do not truly care or is it we as a community are to stupid to hold their feet to the fire and make them create great products? Sadly I feel it is the later.
Originally posted by kitarad How does FFXIV ARR manage to get console players on playstation to pay a subscription and ESO cannot .
Fair question.
We know that SE have c. 1M subscribers across FFXI, FFXIV ARR and DQ. So FFXIV has 500k say - could be more, could be less.
I think we can be pretty certain that Zenimax could launch on consoles and get some people to buy the game and subscribe. Maybe 500k. (No one knows of course).
As others above have said Zenimax have updated whatever financial model they have and decided that they will make more money with a Box Price + cash shop + optional sub approach.
An updated model because they were going to launch on console with box price + sub. Circumstances could / will have changed but we can speculate that revenue came in at the low end or below the range the model projected.
SE will have a financial model as well of course. With different factors. Maybe they are planning to launch FFXV as B2P + paid DLC and feel that if they remove FFXIV's sub fewer people will buy FFXV. Just speculation btw - just pointing out that whilst all companies have the same goal (profit) what drives one company may not drive another.
Originally posted by mrneurosisIf Zeni wanted they could have had gone the route of FFXI
If that was true, Square Enix could have done the same with FFXIV but apprarently they could not.
In the article, it is explicitely stated:
"The policy has not changed on Microsoft's side," he revealed. "The main reason from our side is that I don't want the community to be divided; to be split into two or more."
It is Microsoft being "difficult" that did not allow the level of integration Square Enix wanted and as pointed out same happened to CCP and very likely Zenimax too. You are mistaking cause for consequence.
So even this part of your post is false:
Originally posted by mrneurosisThen the counter argument presented was that FFXIV is not on XBOX because Microsoft is well 'difficult' people which is again wrong and hence the link to prove it
I am not wrong, you are just making some very, very bad conlusions.
I was pretty adamant about how bad the game was in the later stages of beta and early release and said it then this game would not be a big hit. I ended up being right but I think all along they had envisioned going F2P at some point which is the norm for subscription games. Savvy business sense but it sucks for fans.
With that being said I am glad it is going F2P as the game is a lot better now after much work to squash bugs, still not a fan of the slower paced combat (for an action MMO) but I honestly believe if the game released today it still wouldn't be worth a subscription. It is a dying business model and honestly do not see the appeal when time after time proves F2P makes more money and is better for retention and bringing in new players. Subscriptions only appeal to the hardcore MMO gamer who don't know nothing else. Even though I've been playing MMO's since 1999, I have evolved with the times and now only play F2P or B2P because it offers me the best bang for my buck and allows me to monetize content and game play instead of being forced to pay a subscription where 99% of the money it brings in goes toward game styles I dislike greatly. Plus F2P allows me to skip or speedup the boring early stages of an MMO where you're forced to wear rags, walk at a snails pace, and have the carrying capacity of a anorexic field mouse. Inventory space, XP potions, and Mounts are a huge boon to skip or trivialize the most boring part of any new game.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by loulaki subscription model for a theme park game is a fail these days ... WoW still has subscription model cause of the unique audience it has build around it. (dunno if i typed it correct..)
I've been thinking the same thing since SWTOR went F2P. Content is just consumed too fast... there's no reason to retain the subscription. And that's the life blood of the developer. Without it... the game cannot support a staff. And a full staff couldn't even keep up with the content as it was. It's not likely a skeleton staff will.
MMO's need to be designed in such a way so that the content creates itself - similar to a sandbox I guess. I don't really have a proper term for what I am describing, but it would be something like a sandbox with a procedural content creator. That's the only thing that is going to survive in a subscription plan these days.
While I agree with you on the content issue, sandboxes don't have much of an appeal for Average Joe. I even saw someone posting that The Repopulation was crap because it didn't have much 'content'.... another one talking about 'endgame' issues...
BTW The Rep has the system you are describing, you get emails with 'jobs' that are generated depending on your skills and interests
I dont often post here, cause this site is pure troll haven and mmorpg staff dont seem to care.
But as soon as you guys get off what ever broken chair your back sides are siting on to write garbage about other games you dont like, here's a notion, Dont play the games you dont like...
Or in all your cleverness and trollish bs forget the simple fact of life?
Vote with your creditcards, not with forum posts.
Igits!
Very well said. Every new game that comes out gains a bunch of haters that spend ALL their time writing (often ignorant) rubbish about a game they don't like NOR play
there is basically ONE reason this game could not live up to it's hype, and quite frankly, that's the ignorance of it's users/players.
the main point i saw was "uuuuh this ain't elder scrolls. this is an mmo and no ES!"
yea because you can NOT do a 1:1 skyrim port for mmos kids. you wanted it, we got it, but that will NOT happen, because - let's face it - everyone would have just whiped out riverwood, and not a single npc would have survived that.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Originally posted by filmoret They were planning to do this since the beginning. It maximized their profits. Who in their right mind thinks that you can charge a sub for a console game? You think a console gamer is going to pay a sub for ESO as well as the sub they gotta pay Sony?
They been doing it for FFXI for 12 Years and for FFXIV for 4 years. Not sure in which world you live but here in reality console gamers do pay a sub for GOOD games.
You are 100% wrong here. I even provided a link in my post (that you conveniently left out) proving that FFXIV not coming to xbox had absolutly nothing to do with fees, contradicting what you tried to pass off earlier....look, here it is again....
The denial is reaching a fever pitch here..
Do you understand that I am not arguing nor talking about Final Fantasy XIV but Zenimax...?
FFXXIV and DUST were just given as an example that Microsoft policies are strict and negotiations can be difficult.
I am not wrong, you just can't read and make false conclusions.
And one more time:
Originally posted by Gdemami
You have absolutely no idea about technicalities that are being involved there, no insight into negotiations between Microsoft and Zenimax.
You used FFXIV as "proof" that xbox live is what prevented ESO from keeping its sub...
Your exact words (that you, again, conviently stopped quoting as soon as i provided you that link) were:
"I can imagine it was a choice between release on XBox and PS under B2P model or keep subscription but release on PS only."
The only thing that kept FFXIV off of xbox was Microsoft not wanting cross platform play, NOT Xbox Live+subscription fees...Dust not coming to xbox was also for the exact same reason, nothing to do with fees. Cross platform play was never affecting ESO, so bringing up FFXIV or Dust 514 as examples of why ESO ditched its subscription, is lieing to yoursefl, plain and simple...
BTW, your little "you have absolutly no idea about the technicalities and negotiations" is right...I don't...and neither do you.....I, on the other hand, have real word examples of Microsoft waiving the live fee for a sub MMO (FFXI), and fees having nothing to do with why FFXIV or Dust are not on xbox...
Keep diggng for excuses though, I am sure you will find something to stick that can't be blamed on the game itself...
Its simple really. Skyrim was what everyone including myself thought of and wished for in a online sense. They knew the great expectations that awaited them outside of Skyrim. They fell way short on more than internet connections, the in ability to make classes not dependent on weapons with skills that are not based entirely on weapons equipped. Not only that there is no depth people to the class leveling, its either Weapons = Stamina or Magic = Mana you ran out of one or the other and could not keep fighting consistently. That my opinion and it glaring to me.
Originally posted by loulaki subscription model for a theme park game is a fail these days ... WoW still has subscription model cause of the unique audience it has build around it. (dunno if i typed it correct..)
I've been thinking the same thing since SWTOR went F2P. Content is just consumed too fast... there's no reason to retain the subscription. And that's the life blood of the developer. Without it... the game cannot support a staff. And a full staff couldn't even keep up with the content as it was. It's not likely a skeleton staff will.
MMO's need to be designed in such a way so that the content creates itself - similar to a sandbox I guess. I don't really have a proper term for what I am describing, but it would be something like a sandbox with a procedural content creator. That's the only thing that is going to survive in a subscription plan these days.
While I agree with you on the content issue, sandboxes don't have much of an appeal for Average Joe. I even saw someone posting that The Repopulation was crap because it didn't have much 'content'.... another one talking about 'endgame' issues...
BTW The Rep has the system you are describing, you get emails with 'jobs' that are generated depending on your skills and interests
Well, like I said. Sandbox isn't technically the term I want to go with, because what we've experienced in the past with them isn't good enough, and it isn't really what I mean. Frankly, the term "sandbox" back in the day was a term used to describe the idea that YOU the player create your own stories and actually Role-Play with other people in an otherwise, largely lifeless and uneventful world. But these days, the term has sort of lost its relevance for that application and as a result, lost its meaning - it doesn't have a definitive representation of what exactly it is supposed to be.
At any rate, I use that term, but... I don't really know what to call what I am talking about.
The procedurally generated content is the way to go - and maybe that isn't the word I'm looking for either. Having a text box appear that explains some thing that is hardly relevant to anything isn't particularly interesting. A problem or a thing that needs doing shouldn't have to be told to you as a player. It should just be a relevant avenue that you decide needs to be accomplished.
A good example from the old days, SWG didn't have much in the way of AI behaviors for mobs, but it sort of had a similar situation with how each planet would be linked to have certain resources on it. And the frequency and quality of resources in any particular area would change all the time. One week, you might find a spot with some metal or whatever that had a 90% density and a perfect quality. The next.... it wouldn't be there. And in game play terms, this required the player to constantly move around their harvesters. This is kind of what I am talking about, though it's not exactly a modern representation of what would be minimally acceptable. The illustrated point here is that the world itself was actually doing stuff that wasn't dependent upon a hard coded script that could be seen as a pattern.
I don't know much about the game, and I'm not saying it's going to be overall awesome, but the way the Storybricks system is purported to work in EQN sounds like a pretty good start. At least... if I am understanding it correctly. We'll see how it turns out and how well SOE puts it to use, but I would say, again in theory, that's sort of what I mean when I talk about this sandbox/procedurally generated thing.
Basically, you need a game world that actually does stuff even if the player isn't in the game. It has to have behavior to change and... like... live. MMO's rely way too heavily on scripted events and AI's, when they should be utilizing something more along the lines of how in The Sims.... the Sims themselves will totally go on autopilot and live their lives. And they will react to any situation based on their needs and/or wants. It can get pretty crazy, but that's because the game expects the player to micromanage them a little. But as you're playing your Sim - the rest of the neighborhood is off doing its own thing. And it only alters from that path when it is reacting to what you, the player, are doing.
That, at least to me, is what a Sandbox in an MMO SHOULD be. A game world that could theoretically just go on autopilot, but is able to respond and react to things you do, and in turn, requires you to respond and adjust to it. Thus, perpetuating a cycle of content that never ends. Which.... to me... is especially congruent with a Subscription model. The only thing the devs might have to do is fix faulty AI, or adjust some sliders or whatever that keeps certain things from doing something incredibly crazy. The bulk of their time could be spent on developing new ways for the AI to behave. And that portion of EQN is really what interests me about it.... at least... they are explaining it that way. We'll just have to wait and see how it actually turns out. I don't know much about the rest of the game... because largely, on the topic of business model, it doesn't really matter.
People get wrapped up in how an MMO needs Raids and PvP. And they think maybe a new take on the combat system is going to change the game. And... I can understand the appeal to that. For years I was the same way. But... I mean like with anything that you observe closely... you start to get a better understanding of it. And the thing that MMO's are really missing is that idea that the game is actually responding to your input, instead of you going through the ride. And this is where I say its a Sandbox - because it's the only word I know to call it. Maybe a new word needs to be created, or maybe there is one and I don't know of it. But what I do know, is that the Themepark for the moment has run its course, and it isn't going to work with a Subscription like it used to. And... they're just not interesting to play anymore - not to me. A Themepark has one movement, and it constantly loops that same movement over and over and over. And it never changes, no matter how much they write into the script. The pattern will always be seen.
The trick is not to remove the pattern, but to make the loop itself the only pattern visible. In other words, the only pattern you should see is that the game constantly requires your input if you want it to change.
2. Low level questing was a pain if you teamed weeding out many of that type of player. High level teaming required teaming and lots of people who like teaming left the game already due to badly designed questing.
3. Forced solo content. Solo content is awesome but in a MMO you need the option to play it with friends. In the case of my wife (and others like her) being handy caped, its required.
4. To many of the dungeons were copy and paste
5. Veteran Grind, there are so many ways to make this fun but they messed it up
6. Forced questing, Pure PvPer would love to play this game and level in PvP but that was removed and you are forced to PvE to compete in PvP. Not good (Would have already bought the game but for this move)
7. Straying to far from DAoC model that made it magic. Like Caps on AoE, this forces players to play large group zerg armies only. Over small groups with good leadership being able to take out large armies. Some of the best moments in DAoC was doing just that.
ZOS said a long time ago they would go with a sub model at first and then drop it after the game settled in a lot more. This comes to me as no surprise. Even if you didn't know that, it also comes to no surprise that console gamers have always been used to buy once and play as long as you want. This move makes sense and has peaked the interest of a lot of my console only friends.
I won't say that the game "failed" to be a successful Subscription game, as I happen to think it was a move made to transition better to the Consoles. However, I will express what personally disappointed me about the game.
1. It didn't feel like Elder Scrolls.
Now, what I am talking about here specifically has more to do with how questing worked. Basically... when I buy an Elder Scrolls game, I have one major thing on my mind: I can go just about anywhere and find something to do and explore. Everything is going to be a mystery, kind of. In ESO... the thing that really detracted from this was with how quests were dealt.
Now, I'm not talking about the quest markers. Even Oblivion had quest markers... so did Skyrim. Those weren't a big deal to me. No, what bothered me was something a little more vague. I'll explain:
You know how in Skyrim, you would get some random quest that told you to go out to some damn remote place out in the middle of nowhere on the other side of the map? That! That's what ESO didn't have. Instead of picking up a quest in Glenumbra that required me to make a trek out to Skyrim, and along the way fall into any number of other adventures that would send me off to other far reaching areas, thereby getting lost in the whole process... it simply just asked me to go down the road a ways and do this thing.
THIS is the biggest fault I had with the game, and frankly, is the biggest oversight in the whole thing. It was such a hugely missed opportunity that simply made no sense to me from a brand name perspective. It could have actually broken the Themepark mold by doing this, but instead of that... they just made it a cleverly disguised quest hub Themepark. I know there would have been a Mob Level issue, but... I've written articles in the past how to easily alleviate that. The short answer is... sometimes in games (especially in an Elder Scrolls game) you have to learn what you should and should not mess with in order to survive.
2. There were no consequences.
This has to do with the Justice system, that.... I'm still not even sure has been implemented. Basically... half the fun of an Edler Scrolls game was in fighting the temptation to do something you weren't supposed to do (if you were good) or not getting caught doing something you weren't supposed to be doing.
Sneaking into a castle and relieving the nobility of their sacred relics was a big deal in all the ES games.... largely because you didn't even need a quest to do it. You could just make it your own objective. Or... how about this perspective. Sneaking into a ruin and relieving a Storm Lord of his Lich Staff ran off the same justice system? They attacked you... because to THEM (the evil guys) you were breaking a law. Now THAT is Elder Scrolls.
I know, again, that is a rather hefty thing to program. But... I mean... that's kind of important if you're going to put an ES name on your game. There wasn't even a hint of this, and I doubt even if the Justice system they put in eventually will even mimic this.
3. The economy.
I don't understand how it works. It felt like a convoluted mess to me. I was all for not relying on Auction Houses... but... I didn't particularly enjoy not did I understand how just selling your crafted items to other players required you to be in a guild that participated heavily in PvP. That just doesn't make sense to me.
-------------
That's basically it. Those were my major gripes about this game. Essentially, I actually enjoyed almost everything else about it. But... with an ES game, I expect certain things. I don't need a fully fledged representation - but some semblance of an idea has to exist. Number one especially... there's no excuse. Number 2, I could have waited until they had it right. Number 3... should have been taken back to the drawing board.
Originally posted by doodphace The only thing that kept FFXIV off of xbox was Microsoft not wanting cross platform play, NOT Xbox Live+subscription fees...Dust not coming to xbox was also for the exact same reason, nothing to do with fees. Cross platform play was never affecting ESO, so bringing up FFXIV or Dust 514 as examples of why ESO ditched its subscription, is lieing to yoursefl, plain and simple...
...you are mistaking cause for consequence.
Cause: Microsoft does not allow or only very limited, access to their XBox Live network.
Consequence: No cross platform gameplay for FFXIV and Dust, and very likely it also affects payment processing and billing - all micro-transactions, subscription and account information would need to be kept separate and exclusively on XBox Live network.
All in all, there is way more behind Microsoft limitations. Things are not as simple as you think they are.
The only thing that kept FFXIV off of xbox was Microsoft not wanting cross platform play, NOT Xbox Live+subscription fees...Dust not coming to xbox was also for the exact same reason, nothing to do with fees. Cross platform play was never affecting ESO, so bringing up FFXIV or Dust 514 as examples of why ESO ditched its subscription, is lieing to yoursefl, plain and simple...
...you are mistaking cause for consequence.
Cause: Microsoft does not allow or only very limited, access to their XBox Live network.
Consequence: No cross platform gameplay for FFXIV and Dust, and very likely it also affects payment processing and billing - all micro-transactions, subscription and account information would need to be kept separate and exclusively on XBox Live network.
All in all, there is way more behind Microsoft limitations. Things are not as simple as you think they are.
Neither of us know for sure what their ultimate situation was with MS in the end, but what both of us DO know, is that MS has in the past waived live sub fees for subscription based MMOs, and cross platform play (the only hurdle for all other console MMOs that are exclusive to PS/PC) was never a factor for ESO...There has been no indication that fees had anything to do with FFXIV or Dust, all announcements actually state the opposite, so your "and very likely affects transactions/fees" is purely large speculation on your part at best, and plain wishfull thinking at worst. With those facts in place, I am sure you can appriciate the humor is seeing someone imply that xbox live subscription fees were a major reason, let alone even a factor, in ESO abandoning its subscription model.
there is basically ONE reason this game could not live up to it's hype, and quite frankly, that's the ignorance of it's users/players.
the main point i saw was "uuuuh this ain't elder scrolls. this is an mmo and no ES!"
yea because you can NOT do a 1:1 skyrim port for mmos kids. you wanted it, we got it, but that will NOT happen, because - let's face it - everyone would have just whiped out riverwood, and not a single npc would have survived that.
That's actually not 100 percent true which makes me think that you don't have much experience with older mmo's.
There is nothing special about the open world Elder Scrolls game play that can't be tweaked here or there for an mmo.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
Do you understand that I am not arguing nor talking about Final Fantasy XIV but Zenimax...?
FFXXIV and DUST were just given as an example that Microsoft policies are strict and negotiations can be difficult.
I am not wrong, you just can't read and make false conclusions.
And one more time:
Yes we get it what you are trying to say but you are still wrong. Read the damn link.
The argument being presented is that Microsoft is just impossible to negotiate with and that sub fee for ESO was completely out of question on XBOX one and yet Microsoft allowed the sub option for FFXI. Then the counter argument presented was that FFXIV is not on XBOX because Microsoft is well 'difficult' people which is again wrong and hence the link to prove it. If Zeni wanted they could have had gone the route of FFXI. maybe they themselves are not interested in it? to put entire blame on Microsoft is just another fantasy cooked up by fans in denial.
Why do you have this need to be always right even when obviously you are not?
Personally, I don't think the game failed as a Subscription game. I hear a lot of doom and gloom reports by professional victims, but there aren't any financial reports that support that idea.
Also, I don't understand how someone can simultaneously imply that F2P or B2P is the wave of the future and is better than Subscription, but then suggest how much ESO sucked so much that it couldn't maintain a Subscription model. There is so much backwards thinking in that line of reasoning... I don't even know where to begin. It's just... dumb. I'm sorry... but it's just hate-mongering. It's so full of contradictory principle, that it blows my mind to try and wrap my head around it.
How does a game suck so much that it fails into a better business model?
Someone... please... tell me you see how twisted and backwards logic that is.
I've been thinking the same thing since SWTOR went F2P. Content is just consumed too fast... there's no reason to retain the subscription. And that's the life blood of the developer. Without it... the game cannot support a staff. And a full staff couldn't even keep up with the content as it was. It's not likely a skeleton staff will.
MMO's need to be designed in such a way so that the content creates itself - similar to a sandbox I guess. I don't really have a proper term for what I am describing, but it would be something like a sandbox with a procedural content creator. That's the only thing that is going to survive in a subscription plan these days.
I dont often post here, cause this site is pure troll haven and mmorpg staff dont seem to care.
But as soon as you guys get off what ever broken chair your back sides are siting on to write garbage about other games you dont like, here's a notion, Dont play the games you dont like...
Or in all your cleverness and trollish bs forget the simple fact of life?
Vote with your creditcards, not with forum posts.
Igits!
I do not believe they failed at maintaining the model, I believe this was a planned move from day one. The ease with which this transition is taking place for the dev team and the fact this game was targeting consoles points to this conclusion.
You have to understand the subscription model for consoles was never going to work. A B2P model works well for that group. So Zen was likely heading this way from the start and the timing of the change over, to hit just before the console versions hit bares this out.
With this conclusion we realize that this move is not an issue of a subscription model failing for ESO. In fact most ESO players I know played because the subscription model meant the dev had a steady cash flow and could turn out higher quality expansions. They had a solid player base and with the subscription model, more than enough for the income to sustain the game.
Instead the subscription model was a bait and switch, in my opinion, to get the PC gamers to pay for the development of the console game design. We have in essence been paying for a beta that was being tweaked and prepared for the main launch, Tamriel Unlimited. ESO was a project name at the end of the day, not the real game name.
This is the reason I left the game and the straw the broke the camels back for me with MMOs period. Zen lied to us from day one about their intent and pulled a bait and switch on the Elder Scroll faithful similiar to the one pulled on the MW faithful by MWO. This is a game that has years of play ahead of it tied to a company we already know will lie to us, how can we trust them to keep development of a good game?
As I stated in my blog post, in the end the issue we face as MMO players and specifically this case as ESO players, is that the game companies continue to all pull the same crap on the player base. Taking our money and then throwing away the promises and committments they made to move to an economic model that brings easy cash with no effort on their part. We keep getting crapped on and yet we keep coming back. Is it the games companies do not truly care or is it we as a community are to stupid to hold their feet to the fire and make them create great products? Sadly I feel it is the later.
=============================
I have a soap box and I am not afraid to use it.
Fair question.
We know that SE have c. 1M subscribers across FFXI, FFXIV ARR and DQ. So FFXIV has 500k say - could be more, could be less.
I think we can be pretty certain that Zenimax could launch on consoles and get some people to buy the game and subscribe. Maybe 500k. (No one knows of course).
As others above have said Zenimax have updated whatever financial model they have and decided that they will make more money with a Box Price + cash shop + optional sub approach.
An updated model because they were going to launch on console with box price + sub. Circumstances could / will have changed but we can speculate that revenue came in at the low end or below the range the model projected.
SE will have a financial model as well of course. With different factors. Maybe they are planning to launch FFXV as B2P + paid DLC and feel that if they remove FFXIV's sub fewer people will buy FFXV. Just speculation btw - just pointing out that whilst all companies have the same goal (profit) what drives one company may not drive another.
If that was true, Square Enix could have done the same with FFXIV but apprarently they could not.
In the article, it is explicitely stated:
"The policy has not changed on Microsoft's side," he revealed. "The main reason from our side is that I don't want the community to be divided; to be split into two or more."
It is Microsoft being "difficult" that did not allow the level of integration Square Enix wanted and as pointed out same happened to CCP and very likely Zenimax too. You are mistaking cause for consequence.
So even this part of your post is false:
I am not wrong, you are just making some very, very bad conlusions.
I was pretty adamant about how bad the game was in the later stages of beta and early release and said it then this game would not be a big hit. I ended up being right but I think all along they had envisioned going F2P at some point which is the norm for subscription games. Savvy business sense but it sucks for fans.
With that being said I am glad it is going F2P as the game is a lot better now after much work to squash bugs, still not a fan of the slower paced combat (for an action MMO) but I honestly believe if the game released today it still wouldn't be worth a subscription. It is a dying business model and honestly do not see the appeal when time after time proves F2P makes more money and is better for retention and bringing in new players. Subscriptions only appeal to the hardcore MMO gamer who don't know nothing else. Even though I've been playing MMO's since 1999, I have evolved with the times and now only play F2P or B2P because it offers me the best bang for my buck and allows me to monetize content and game play instead of being forced to pay a subscription where 99% of the money it brings in goes toward game styles I dislike greatly. Plus F2P allows me to skip or speedup the boring early stages of an MMO where you're forced to wear rags, walk at a snails pace, and have the carrying capacity of a anorexic field mouse. Inventory space, XP potions, and Mounts are a huge boon to skip or trivialize the most boring part of any new game.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
While I agree with you on the content issue, sandboxes don't have much of an appeal for Average Joe. I even saw someone posting that The Repopulation was crap because it didn't have much 'content'.... another one talking about 'endgame' issues...
BTW The Rep has the system you are describing, you get emails with 'jobs' that are generated depending on your skills and interests
Very well said. Every new game that comes out gains a bunch of haters that spend ALL their time writing (often ignorant) rubbish about a game they don't like NOR play
Really...
there is basically ONE reason this game could not live up to it's hype, and quite frankly, that's the ignorance of it's users/players.
the main point i saw was "uuuuh this ain't elder scrolls. this is an mmo and no ES!"
yea because you can NOT do a 1:1 skyrim port for mmos kids. you wanted it, we got it, but that will NOT happen, because - let's face it - everyone would have just whiped out riverwood, and not a single npc would have survived that.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
They been doing it for FFXI for 12 Years and for FFXIV for 4 years. Not sure in which world you live but here in reality console gamers do pay a sub for GOOD games.
You used FFXIV as "proof" that xbox live is what prevented ESO from keeping its sub...
Your exact words (that you, again, conviently stopped quoting as soon as i provided you that link) were:
"I can imagine it was a choice between release on XBox and PS under B2P model or keep subscription but release on PS only."
The only thing that kept FFXIV off of xbox was Microsoft not wanting cross platform play, NOT Xbox Live+subscription fees...Dust not coming to xbox was also for the exact same reason, nothing to do with fees. Cross platform play was never affecting ESO, so bringing up FFXIV or Dust 514 as examples of why ESO ditched its subscription, is lieing to yoursefl, plain and simple...
BTW, your little "you have absolutly no idea about the technicalities and negotiations" is right...I don't...and neither do you.....I, on the other hand, have real word examples of Microsoft waiving the live fee for a sub MMO (FFXI), and fees having nothing to do with why FFXIV or Dust are not on xbox...
Keep diggng for excuses though, I am sure you will find something to stick that can't be blamed on the game itself...
Its simple really. Skyrim was what everyone including myself thought of and wished for in a online sense. They knew the great expectations that awaited them outside of Skyrim. They fell way short on more than internet connections, the in ability to make classes not dependent on weapons with skills that are not based entirely on weapons equipped. Not only that there is no depth people to the class leveling, its either Weapons = Stamina or Magic = Mana you ran out of one or the other and could not keep fighting consistently. That my opinion and it glaring to me.
Well, like I said. Sandbox isn't technically the term I want to go with, because what we've experienced in the past with them isn't good enough, and it isn't really what I mean. Frankly, the term "sandbox" back in the day was a term used to describe the idea that YOU the player create your own stories and actually Role-Play with other people in an otherwise, largely lifeless and uneventful world. But these days, the term has sort of lost its relevance for that application and as a result, lost its meaning - it doesn't have a definitive representation of what exactly it is supposed to be.
At any rate, I use that term, but... I don't really know what to call what I am talking about.
The procedurally generated content is the way to go - and maybe that isn't the word I'm looking for either. Having a text box appear that explains some thing that is hardly relevant to anything isn't particularly interesting. A problem or a thing that needs doing shouldn't have to be told to you as a player. It should just be a relevant avenue that you decide needs to be accomplished.
A good example from the old days, SWG didn't have much in the way of AI behaviors for mobs, but it sort of had a similar situation with how each planet would be linked to have certain resources on it. And the frequency and quality of resources in any particular area would change all the time. One week, you might find a spot with some metal or whatever that had a 90% density and a perfect quality. The next.... it wouldn't be there. And in game play terms, this required the player to constantly move around their harvesters. This is kind of what I am talking about, though it's not exactly a modern representation of what would be minimally acceptable. The illustrated point here is that the world itself was actually doing stuff that wasn't dependent upon a hard coded script that could be seen as a pattern.
I don't know much about the game, and I'm not saying it's going to be overall awesome, but the way the Storybricks system is purported to work in EQN sounds like a pretty good start. At least... if I am understanding it correctly. We'll see how it turns out and how well SOE puts it to use, but I would say, again in theory, that's sort of what I mean when I talk about this sandbox/procedurally generated thing.
Basically, you need a game world that actually does stuff even if the player isn't in the game. It has to have behavior to change and... like... live. MMO's rely way too heavily on scripted events and AI's, when they should be utilizing something more along the lines of how in The Sims.... the Sims themselves will totally go on autopilot and live their lives. And they will react to any situation based on their needs and/or wants. It can get pretty crazy, but that's because the game expects the player to micromanage them a little. But as you're playing your Sim - the rest of the neighborhood is off doing its own thing. And it only alters from that path when it is reacting to what you, the player, are doing.
That, at least to me, is what a Sandbox in an MMO SHOULD be. A game world that could theoretically just go on autopilot, but is able to respond and react to things you do, and in turn, requires you to respond and adjust to it. Thus, perpetuating a cycle of content that never ends. Which.... to me... is especially congruent with a Subscription model. The only thing the devs might have to do is fix faulty AI, or adjust some sliders or whatever that keeps certain things from doing something incredibly crazy. The bulk of their time could be spent on developing new ways for the AI to behave. And that portion of EQN is really what interests me about it.... at least... they are explaining it that way. We'll just have to wait and see how it actually turns out. I don't know much about the rest of the game... because largely, on the topic of business model, it doesn't really matter.
People get wrapped up in how an MMO needs Raids and PvP. And they think maybe a new take on the combat system is going to change the game. And... I can understand the appeal to that. For years I was the same way. But... I mean like with anything that you observe closely... you start to get a better understanding of it. And the thing that MMO's are really missing is that idea that the game is actually responding to your input, instead of you going through the ride. And this is where I say its a Sandbox - because it's the only word I know to call it. Maybe a new word needs to be created, or maybe there is one and I don't know of it. But what I do know, is that the Themepark for the moment has run its course, and it isn't going to work with a Subscription like it used to. And... they're just not interesting to play anymore - not to me. A Themepark has one movement, and it constantly loops that same movement over and over and over. And it never changes, no matter how much they write into the script. The pattern will always be seen.
The trick is not to remove the pattern, but to make the loop itself the only pattern visible. In other words, the only pattern you should see is that the game constantly requires your input if you want it to change.
Here is my thoughts...
1. Really bad launch
2. Low level questing was a pain if you teamed weeding out many of that type of player. High level teaming required teaming and lots of people who like teaming left the game already due to badly designed questing.
3. Forced solo content. Solo content is awesome but in a MMO you need the option to play it with friends. In the case of my wife (and others like her) being handy caped, its required.
4. To many of the dungeons were copy and paste
5. Veteran Grind, there are so many ways to make this fun but they messed it up
6. Forced questing, Pure PvPer would love to play this game and level in PvP but that was removed and you are forced to PvE to compete in PvP. Not good (Would have already bought the game but for this move)
7. Straying to far from DAoC model that made it magic. Like Caps on AoE, this forces players to play large group zerg armies only. Over small groups with good leadership being able to take out large armies. Some of the best moments in DAoC was doing just that.
I won't say that the game "failed" to be a successful Subscription game, as I happen to think it was a move made to transition better to the Consoles. However, I will express what personally disappointed me about the game.
1. It didn't feel like Elder Scrolls.
Now, what I am talking about here specifically has more to do with how questing worked. Basically... when I buy an Elder Scrolls game, I have one major thing on my mind: I can go just about anywhere and find something to do and explore. Everything is going to be a mystery, kind of. In ESO... the thing that really detracted from this was with how quests were dealt.
Now, I'm not talking about the quest markers. Even Oblivion had quest markers... so did Skyrim. Those weren't a big deal to me. No, what bothered me was something a little more vague. I'll explain:
You know how in Skyrim, you would get some random quest that told you to go out to some damn remote place out in the middle of nowhere on the other side of the map? That! That's what ESO didn't have. Instead of picking up a quest in Glenumbra that required me to make a trek out to Skyrim, and along the way fall into any number of other adventures that would send me off to other far reaching areas, thereby getting lost in the whole process... it simply just asked me to go down the road a ways and do this thing.
THIS is the biggest fault I had with the game, and frankly, is the biggest oversight in the whole thing. It was such a hugely missed opportunity that simply made no sense to me from a brand name perspective. It could have actually broken the Themepark mold by doing this, but instead of that... they just made it a cleverly disguised quest hub Themepark. I know there would have been a Mob Level issue, but... I've written articles in the past how to easily alleviate that. The short answer is... sometimes in games (especially in an Elder Scrolls game) you have to learn what you should and should not mess with in order to survive.
2. There were no consequences.
This has to do with the Justice system, that.... I'm still not even sure has been implemented. Basically... half the fun of an Edler Scrolls game was in fighting the temptation to do something you weren't supposed to do (if you were good) or not getting caught doing something you weren't supposed to be doing.
Sneaking into a castle and relieving the nobility of their sacred relics was a big deal in all the ES games.... largely because you didn't even need a quest to do it. You could just make it your own objective. Or... how about this perspective. Sneaking into a ruin and relieving a Storm Lord of his Lich Staff ran off the same justice system? They attacked you... because to THEM (the evil guys) you were breaking a law. Now THAT is Elder Scrolls.
I know, again, that is a rather hefty thing to program. But... I mean... that's kind of important if you're going to put an ES name on your game. There wasn't even a hint of this, and I doubt even if the Justice system they put in eventually will even mimic this.
3. The economy.
I don't understand how it works. It felt like a convoluted mess to me. I was all for not relying on Auction Houses... but... I didn't particularly enjoy not did I understand how just selling your crafted items to other players required you to be in a guild that participated heavily in PvP. That just doesn't make sense to me.
-------------
That's basically it. Those were my major gripes about this game. Essentially, I actually enjoyed almost everything else about it. But... with an ES game, I expect certain things. I don't need a fully fledged representation - but some semblance of an idea has to exist. Number one especially... there's no excuse. Number 2, I could have waited until they had it right. Number 3... should have been taken back to the drawing board.
...you are mistaking cause for consequence.
Cause:
Microsoft does not allow or only very limited, access to their XBox Live network.
Consequence:
No cross platform gameplay for FFXIV and Dust, and very likely it also affects payment processing and billing - all micro-transactions, subscription and account information would need to be kept separate and exclusively on XBox Live network.
All in all, there is way more behind Microsoft limitations. Things are not as simple as you think they are.
This could end up being very interesting.
Neither of us know for sure what their ultimate situation was with MS in the end, but what both of us DO know, is that MS has in the past waived live sub fees for subscription based MMOs, and cross platform play (the only hurdle for all other console MMOs that are exclusive to PS/PC) was never a factor for ESO...There has been no indication that fees had anything to do with FFXIV or Dust, all announcements actually state the opposite, so your "and very likely affects transactions/fees" is purely large speculation on your part at best, and plain wishfull thinking at worst. With those facts in place, I am sure you can appriciate the humor is seeing someone imply that xbox live subscription fees were a major reason, let alone even a factor, in ESO abandoning its subscription model.
That's actually not 100 percent true which makes me think that you don't have much experience with older mmo's.
There is nothing special about the open world Elder Scrolls game play that can't be tweaked here or there for an mmo.
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
Yes, it is a speculation, I never implied otherwise but it is far from large, it is well reasoned.
However, your claims are based on denial of any reason whatsoever...but do not let reason stand in way of your agenda.