Ya, if they wanted my business they would've had to convince me to pay. I've paid for stuff in Secret World after all. Going subscription means they'll never see my business.
The Elder Scrolls Online Will Have Subscription Fees
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well I've have lost all interest. Call me when it goes free to play a year after its original release date.
By implying that a significant number of people who are below the middle class would have been playing it had it been F2P, as though people below the middle class can afford new computers and broadband Internet but can't do a subscription fee.Reeve said:
I realize it is a price barrier for many, but if you think people below the middle class on average can afford those things in the first place then I don't think you understand what the lower class is.
No. I was thinking about kids playing on consoles. Not the PC. In Britain, where I am, working class families will probably get a PS4 - if they get anything. And since they'd have to be paying for both the Internet (twice!) I don't think they'll be able to get TES: Online.Lilani said:
You couldn't of missed the point any further if you had turned around and fired in the opposite direction. If you can't read what was said without spouting so much drivel really don't bother. I'm talking about the modern Freemium MMO market where there are literally hundreds of F2P MMO's which range from bloody awful to above average but all of them are souped up versions of Farmville, I'm sure if you played Farmville and never spend a single cent they wouldn't care less if you walked away, F2P is designed to entrap people into spending money and people do. So either you're someone who doesn't understand the business model or you can't afford a sub and will defend F2P with a fever.cursedseishi said:Pleaaaaaaaaaase...KaZuYa said:
F2P existed long before publishers ever "forced" it down our throats buddy. F2P is predominant because a MAJORITY of the F2P titles are imported from regions where its more successful. Its horribly naive of you then, to try and play it off as if some Western mobile developer started it. Because it wasn't.
Online MUDS existed in the 1980s, while the earliest any major title went F2P was 2007 (Lord of the Rings). And yes, those text-based online games were TOOOOTALLY soulcrushing in their cash shops.
And, as an informative aside, the majority within F2P games either outright do not pay, or pay very little, towards a F2P game. Most of the money, depending on the game, comes from a small subset of the playerbase willing to pay a large chunk of cash. Of course, this mostly happens in titles wherein competition is likely. And before you go spouting off "F2P!!!!", EvE Online is a strong player in all this as well. A P2P game with a side of Cash-to-Currency conversion, leads some players to putting hundreds of bucks in monthly licenses, so they can sell them and obtain better ships/supplies.
Cash shops are only as horrible as the developers running them make it. Allods Online is a great example of that horrific amount of hyperbole you're using, for instance. Their cash shop is abusive, ugly, and works solely against players. Cryptic has similar issues with their games as well, though it appears at least Neverwinter is the least horrible shop they have (not much of a compliment for that game though). Or Star Wars, for locking even simple GUI options behind a cash shop paywall.
Then there are games that aren't. TERA being one of them, due to the simple fact that they don't limit you at all. Rift does a decent enough job of it as well, and while I'm by no means a fan of it, the purely PvE-based design of DDO keeps the item store in that game relegated to content packs, with other things being unlockable as you play the game. Again, I'm no fan of it, but they do at least give you the ability to gain currency (Turbine Points) simply by playing the game, instead of the market-abusive transfer style driven in Cryptic games or Guild Wars 2.
Pay-to-Play titles do not solve anything, however. Most every game is now double-dipping with a Cash Shop + Subscription model (which throws out your inane argument), and all it really does is lock players into something. A player who pays $60 for 6 months, and only plays for one, isn't saving a dime. A player who only spends $15 a month and only plays for that month, however, doesn't lose anything.
It's also painfully ironic that you use the "investment" argument against F2P games, because P2P works exactly the same way. It relies on forcing the player to play, because you've already invested upwards of $100+ a year even if you only played for a month out of it, and you don't want to "unsub" because you've invested time in the game.
Oh, and about that "A" point of yours? If you aren't happy with the game, and you aren't spending money on it, what's your point? The player simply walks away. Because it's completely exploitative of the publishers to make a game that you don't enjoy playing and haven't paid any money to, is that about it?
TLR? Learn to actually research and look into what you're talking about, please. It saves everyone some time when they don't have to facepalm over every logical and factual fallacy in your post.
Small price to pay, and here in New Zealand our dollar is only worth .78 USD at the moment.. so it's even more for us every month ($20 approx).Yuuki said:
Whole lot of whining about subscription costs and pining for GW2 B2P pricing models in this thread.
1) Harden up, It's not some flowery mess of lore like GW2 (which I enjoyed, but it's forgettable), it's BLOODY ELDER SCROLLS.
2) How about waiting for the game to actually be out of Beta with release details set before guessing "It's not worth a measly $14.99 a month". Y'all some broke ass busters if that is breaking your bank, playing MMOs costs money, this isn't Skyrim, that is why it is going to cost you more than Skyrim.
Hey everyone, stop acting like you're entitled to F2P Elder Scrolls MMOs because you were the ****in Dragonborn.
TESO is not only an TES game, it's also a MMORPG, they cost money to play right - at least you wont have to buy bank slots, quick slot bars and character slots since it's a subscription based MMO, Guild Wars 2 DID cost money if you actually wanted to y'know, have a decent amount of characters, bank slots and inventory. B2P is not the Messiah, F2P is not Mother Theresa, get it through your heads - MMORPGs will cost you to play, they are an ongoing cost no matter what payment scheme it is, unless you are a freeloader who doesn't want to access the full package in MMOs 'on principle'.
Oh, you say you can buy 3 full games with the cost of the subscription?
Cry me a river, if you put any real effort in your will get 30 games of content out of TESO within a year, man up people: Tamriel is in strife, this isn't the time for pansy footing around.
Oh, and long live the Queen... or however long you can afford the meagre subscription cost.
/High Elven Rant.
I will bet my left Kidney that Bank slots will not be a microtransaction.CriticKitten said:
Full Box Price + Subscription does not equate to Buy to Play + Heavy Cash Shop (you comparing TESO and Guild Wars 2).
$230 is childs play, if you can't afford the cake, stay out of the MMO Bakery son.
If the game is as good as we're hoping, it's worth it.
Three words though: Post Leveling Content. They're the lifeblood of MMO's, and we ALL love those sweet juicy bits that require us to come back every single day for the best stuff in the game.
*want*
Three words though: Post Leveling Content. They're the lifeblood of MMO's, and we ALL love those sweet juicy bits that require us to come back every single day for the best stuff in the game.
*want*
We've truly been spoiled when we're willing to look on in apathy as people buy their way through the game rather than just shill out a measly £9. A cinema ticket costs me £7 for two hours of amusement - this however is granting me access for a whole month for a mere £2 more. Whilst you can say that GW2 was "fun items and cosmetics only" you also tend to say that "you can buy those gems with ingame cash!" completely forgetting that the gems are being purchased from other players, meaning that someone can buy their way through all in game cash barriers. Want that cool new gun? Buy some gems, sell the gems, buy the gun.
I'd rather just hop into the in game world and not see anyone buying their way in front of me. That would make me much happier truth be told. If they just want to sell some ingame fireworks and crap, good for them.
If I were to give criticism though, I'd say that they should aim for what Runescape had going. Whether you liked RS or not most would generally have to accept its model was brilliant - it gave a good amount of content for free and if you liked that content you could get your mits on the full world. It netted plenty of subscribers and allowed people to see if they liked the pie before they invested in the pie. If they were to do this then I couldn't fathom a complaint. Alternatively, lowering the subscription cost by a few pounds or dollars would also go a very long way. Such a steep sub price for such a new MMO is not a wise choice.
I'd rather just hop into the in game world and not see anyone buying their way in front of me. That would make me much happier truth be told. If they just want to sell some ingame fireworks and crap, good for them.
If I were to give criticism though, I'd say that they should aim for what Runescape had going. Whether you liked RS or not most would generally have to accept its model was brilliant - it gave a good amount of content for free and if you liked that content you could get your mits on the full world. It netted plenty of subscribers and allowed people to see if they liked the pie before they invested in the pie. If they were to do this then I couldn't fathom a complaint. Alternatively, lowering the subscription cost by a few pounds or dollars would also go a very long way. Such a steep sub price for such a new MMO is not a wise choice.
Good.
Now I don't have to play this amazing game with people that lack the motivation to play the game properly.
Now I don't have to play this amazing game with people that lack the motivation to play the game properly.
Technically it's the same price, not more (unless you're comparing it to a few months ago when the NZD was stronger). It's like saying a tonne of feathers weighs more than a tonne of bricks.LongMuckDong said:
Personally I don't really care about a subscription fee since $15 a month isn't that much. That being said, I'm not actually that interested in TES:O (and this is coming from a big Elder Scrolls fan). I may try it out later since I've always wanted to see Valenwood and Elsweyr though.
You took the quote out of context. The quote is from Jeremy Gaffney about WildStar (as I mentioned RIGHT NEXT TO THE ORIGINAL QUOTE).prpshrt said:
I don't know about ESO, but barely anyone has played WS Closed Beta (it's currently not even active, and the few who played it are under NDA). He's not talking about scamming people from their money, either. Lets say that ESO achieves their closed world that feels complete without micro transactions. Even if they do that perfectly, if they don't make it fun then the whole thing is a waste, I agree. Gaffney has been using this as a pillar for his own game WS; any time a system is completed, if people decide it's kinda lame they remake it until it isn't.