Bethesda Exec Defends Elder Scrolls Online's Subscription Model
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
With the much touted fight-for-the-throne PvP thing, I'm personally waiting for the first time the game informs everyone in giant raid text that Emperor Butts has taken command of the Empire. All hail Emperor Butts.Neverhoodian said:
With regards to the subscription model...eh. I'm going to re-state some of what I've said before. I don't think ZeniMax Online quite knows what they're doing here. About all I'm sure of is that it'll be a game. It might even be one whose collective fanbase will support an MMO despite it's flaws.
I don't think they're greedy though. Just blind and overconfident.
Absolutely fucking nothing. I don't play WoW either.Lightknight said:
Only difference is that WoW has actually managed to prove that to many people (again, not me) they are in fact worth the crazy ass amount of money they charge. TESO hasn't done that yet.
This game is a cynical cash grab. Take a middling mmo already in development, put elder scrolls on the box, implement every payment model possible, and then rake in the profit from all the rubes with more money than brains who care more about the trademark than the quality of the product.
The difference is that FFXIV is good.Czann said:
I played through several betas of ESO. It just...Doesn't interest me. The design is muddy (brown = real), the crafting is silly, the items all look the same, and the skill system - While interesting - doesn't feel like an elder scrolls game at all.
Also, the FOV for first person seems locked to some teeny tiny migraine inducing level. The third person camera is pretty yuckers, so you sort of have to make a choice.
To be fair though one of the biggest things about the Elder Scrolls series is that a lot of people roleplay their OC's with them. Along with having their own background story and what not. It's all really fun. Which is why you often have people vying for 6+ slots for their characters in MMOs.Karadalis said:
The issue isn't so much the subscription itself, but the heavily additional costs as well.Lightknight said:
Someone like me would not be willing or really able to throw in that kind of cash into an MMO that hasn't really proved itself.
It's not very bright to see that you pay $60.00 upfront for the actual game, with a $15.00 a month subscription charge a month, and on top of that they add in game transactions and block additional content like race behind a paywall.(according to previous users) No thank you. I'll just wait for Bethesda's next big hit (please be in Elsewyr)
After playing the beta extensively I actually agree with him.
BUT I also know a lot of people don't.
I know 5 people have played the beta at some point (Including me).
But out of those 5 people only I'm gonna stick around and pay a sub, with one person saying they may buy the game and occasionally buy time cards.
That's a 20 or sort of 40% retention rate in players approximately. That's not a good outlook.
BUT I also know a lot of people don't.
I know 5 people have played the beta at some point (Including me).
But out of those 5 people only I'm gonna stick around and pay a sub, with one person saying they may buy the game and occasionally buy time cards.
That's a 20 or sort of 40% retention rate in players approximately. That's not a good outlook.
You don't really need to pay that 15 dollars a month though. Buy the game at 60, play it the first month, then decide if you want to keep payin the sub fee since the first month is free.Dragonbums said:
Even if you only play it for an hour a day, thats still 28+ hours of game time out of a 60 dollar purchase. I've done that with a lot of MMO's over time and its never really been a huge hassle. Most of them I never stuck with past the first month either, but I got more than enough play time out of it to justify the 60 dollars up front.
Not for me. I can buy a regular non MMO $60.00 game and get weeks, months, and years out of it. There is no benefit to spend $60.00 on an MMO game with the hope that I may be invested in it for more than 3 days. That to me is complete bullshit and a complete waste of time on me who took the effort to go to GS and buy it, the retailers who have me the game after purchase, etc. etc. I'm not gonna waste my time and money for that.shintakie10 said:
So from what I've seen of ESO; I'm interested, mostly because of the PvP. Or I would be if it wasn't a full priced retail + subscription. Why would I pay that, when my two most played games of 2014 are Crusader Kings II and Bloodbowl (which I bought a year ago) and neither of them cost me more than £20? If it was free-to-play or at the least cheaper retail & cheaper subscription, then I would probably snap this up. But with the pricing model as it is? absolutely no way am I getting this, I can do my gaming and still enjoy it for far cheaper thank you very much.
Yeah... No.
As much as I like subscription based MMO's, the more stable game, reliable updates, bug fixes, content patches etc., are all really nice.
It's just that after playing the beta, I just don't see a game worth subscription. Sure I had fun playing it and if it was a one-time purchase with a cash shop for some cosmetic trinkets and small non-power effecting boosts then I'd be all for it, I'd buy it straight away and could see myself playing it for several months at least.
Justify it all you want by saying "We'll use the sub fee to release constant big updates!" the fact remains that I just don't think the gameplay is worth a sub fee, especially if it wants to compete with other sub based MMO's I'm currently playing (Like WoW, which while it will be incredibly stale for the next few months before WoD the gameplay and socializing I can do justifies the cost)
As much as I like subscription based MMO's, the more stable game, reliable updates, bug fixes, content patches etc., are all really nice.
It's just that after playing the beta, I just don't see a game worth subscription. Sure I had fun playing it and if it was a one-time purchase with a cash shop for some cosmetic trinkets and small non-power effecting boosts then I'd be all for it, I'd buy it straight away and could see myself playing it for several months at least.
Justify it all you want by saying "We'll use the sub fee to release constant big updates!" the fact remains that I just don't think the gameplay is worth a sub fee, especially if it wants to compete with other sub based MMO's I'm currently playing (Like WoW, which while it will be incredibly stale for the next few months before WoD the gameplay and socializing I can do justifies the cost)
I'll repeat what I said. Even if they know that they'll have to go free to play, they still stand to get more money at launch if they start with this subscription base.VaporWare said:
First few months, lots of subscriptions. Once they taper off they switch to free to play just like everyone else. They could get lucky and be the next WoW with sustainable subscriptions. I will say that I do prefer their universe to WoW's.
You just buy the game at $60 assuming the reception is good (don't buy early in that case) and then play it for a month. If the game hasn't earned your business then no additional cost would be incured since the first month is free.Dragonbums said:
Then how would it be any different from a game you purchased that you got tired of? If you really like it then you continue paying for it and are no worse off.
There are precious few games that I've played more than a month. Several of those few games have been elder scrolls games.
This is hogwash. Sure, you can "defend" the subscription fee, but why do you need to? Its been evident that the 15$ a month fee is to fund further development, EQ did it, WoW did it, every MMO thats even been released had this model at one time or another. Sure there are a few that come out F2P instantly, or B2P, but they fund themselves via sales of the product and the in-game store stuff.
Here's whats wrong with ESO:
60$ for the Box, or more of you get the Imperial Edition. Includes a free month.
15$ per month to continue playing after the first month, usually you have to register a payment method initially anyway and then opt out of actually paying further, otherwise they usually automatically bill you even if you stopped after that month.
In-game store. No, this is a bad idea. For one its not necessary, you cannot offer convinience, like leveling faster when you already pay a monthly sub to begin with. You also cannot sell luxury stuff like store-exclusive vanity clothing when by default everything IS paid for by the subscription unless said subscription automatically includes points or whatever you can spend in the store on top, see LOTRO for an example.
Pre-order bonus. This is dumb. First why would the option to play any race in any faction be a pre-order incentive if the whole point was that the races dont get along and therefore fight? Either dont have it or make it standard by default. Further Imperials being exclusive to the Imperial Edition..this is dumb again because this could actually be a simply pre-order bonus rather than being tied to the deluxe version.
And the biggest failure, your lore. Dominion makes somewhat sense. You can even argue the Covenant to a degree. Ebonheart does not make sense in any way. Nords HATE Dunmer, the only reason they ever worked together, which by the way was just a CEASE FIRE, was because of the akaviri invading. They would not work together, likewise the Dunmer have repeatedly waged war against the Argonians AND have enslaved a sizeable part of their population, they would under no circumstances work together.
It would be much easier if factions were instead split into 5. Altmer+Bosmer, Argonians+Khajit, Nords+Imperials, Redguard+Bretons and Dunmer+Orsimer. Or change the setup to Covenant being Nord, Redguard and Breton. Dominion being Altmer, Khajit and Argonians and Ebonheart being Dunmer, Orsimer and Bosmer. At least these races would have incentives and reasons to work together happily against the others, the only reason your factions are setup the way they are is because you were too lazy to actually stick to the lore and went with "their lands have to touch". Further Tamriel is tiny, if you want to make ALL of Tamriel playable, make each zone as big as a singleplayer experience, if you can play Skyrim for 80 Hours, then i should be able to spend 80 hours having fun in Skyrim in TESO. You can expand the game and its zones after you release the game, LOTRO being the example there, Rohan wasnt in from the start, neither was Moria, or Lothlorien or Mirkwood, these were added later on, with increased levelcaps and new content, you can equally limit the initial areas to ONE zone, such as High Rock or Hammerfell, Skyrim or Morrowind and Summerset or Valenwood depending on faction, then add the rest of the zones later, full of new content to keep players playing.
As it stands, this game is already a trainwreck and it hasnt even left the station yet. And if you think your IP is going to save you, Star Wars was a bigger IP, it didnt save SWTOR either.
Here's whats wrong with ESO:
60$ for the Box, or more of you get the Imperial Edition. Includes a free month.
15$ per month to continue playing after the first month, usually you have to register a payment method initially anyway and then opt out of actually paying further, otherwise they usually automatically bill you even if you stopped after that month.
In-game store. No, this is a bad idea. For one its not necessary, you cannot offer convinience, like leveling faster when you already pay a monthly sub to begin with. You also cannot sell luxury stuff like store-exclusive vanity clothing when by default everything IS paid for by the subscription unless said subscription automatically includes points or whatever you can spend in the store on top, see LOTRO for an example.
Pre-order bonus. This is dumb. First why would the option to play any race in any faction be a pre-order incentive if the whole point was that the races dont get along and therefore fight? Either dont have it or make it standard by default. Further Imperials being exclusive to the Imperial Edition..this is dumb again because this could actually be a simply pre-order bonus rather than being tied to the deluxe version.
And the biggest failure, your lore. Dominion makes somewhat sense. You can even argue the Covenant to a degree. Ebonheart does not make sense in any way. Nords HATE Dunmer, the only reason they ever worked together, which by the way was just a CEASE FIRE, was because of the akaviri invading. They would not work together, likewise the Dunmer have repeatedly waged war against the Argonians AND have enslaved a sizeable part of their population, they would under no circumstances work together.
It would be much easier if factions were instead split into 5. Altmer+Bosmer, Argonians+Khajit, Nords+Imperials, Redguard+Bretons and Dunmer+Orsimer. Or change the setup to Covenant being Nord, Redguard and Breton. Dominion being Altmer, Khajit and Argonians and Ebonheart being Dunmer, Orsimer and Bosmer. At least these races would have incentives and reasons to work together happily against the others, the only reason your factions are setup the way they are is because you were too lazy to actually stick to the lore and went with "their lands have to touch". Further Tamriel is tiny, if you want to make ALL of Tamriel playable, make each zone as big as a singleplayer experience, if you can play Skyrim for 80 Hours, then i should be able to spend 80 hours having fun in Skyrim in TESO. You can expand the game and its zones after you release the game, LOTRO being the example there, Rohan wasnt in from the start, neither was Moria, or Lothlorien or Mirkwood, these were added later on, with increased levelcaps and new content, you can equally limit the initial areas to ONE zone, such as High Rock or Hammerfell, Skyrim or Morrowind and Summerset or Valenwood depending on faction, then add the rest of the zones later, full of new content to keep players playing.
As it stands, this game is already a trainwreck and it hasnt even left the station yet. And if you think your IP is going to save you, Star Wars was a bigger IP, it didnt save SWTOR either.
While the subscription is too high and I don't agree with cash shops the sub model is the only way forward in games like these, I don't understand while people moan, you actually have something you can hurt them with if they don't fix/make content. The F2P model is killing gaming it focuses everything on what they can sell you and the fact is the F2P model is actually more profitable for them.
Years ago we happy playing games like Everquest, World of Warcraft and Dark Ages of Camelot for example paying a subscription fee but I feel people have been breastfed this entitlement to free games and access, if you don't want to pay don't pay.
The F2P model is also a total con if you really like a game you want to experience it all which means you have to pay and people normally end up paying a lot more than $14.99 a month to do so if they admit or not. People can shout from their ivory towers about never spending a cent on a F2P and well done you didn't fall into the exploitative trap that F2P is but people do, a lot more people who ever admit to it and that's why it's a multi billion dollar industry on mobile platforms and I don't want it's cancer near mainstream gaming.
Years ago we happy playing games like Everquest, World of Warcraft and Dark Ages of Camelot for example paying a subscription fee but I feel people have been breastfed this entitlement to free games and access, if you don't want to pay don't pay.
The F2P model is also a total con if you really like a game you want to experience it all which means you have to pay and people normally end up paying a lot more than $14.99 a month to do so if they admit or not. People can shout from their ivory towers about never spending a cent on a F2P and well done you didn't fall into the exploitative trap that F2P is but people do, a lot more people who ever admit to it and that's why it's a multi billion dollar industry on mobile platforms and I don't want it's cancer near mainstream gaming.
Yup this right here is the reason why I am boycotting it as well. Truly cynical triple dipping.Hawkeye21 said:
This is a price gouging cash grab if ever there was one, and I will not be a part of perpetuating that, so I vote with my wallet.
Now if the game ONLY had a sub fee attached, no cash shop, no buying the box, just download, pay a sub fee and play, I might have considered it, assuming the game was any good. I'd rather pay sub fee than microtransactions. But this "all the monetization models all at once" approach just no, never going to happen.
The problem I have with subscription based MMOs is everything in them is designed to take an excessive amount of time to accomplish (with WoW's do-this-every-day-for-a-month dailies leading the charge).
Since my friends aren't interested I think I'll be sitting this one out.
Since my friends aren't interested I think I'll be sitting this one out.
I think that goes with pretty much all MMO models. Heck F2P with cash shop are often the worst offender here, as they often make the game grindier so you have to buy boosts just to get it back to regular MMO grind curve.Phourc said:
I guess the pay-once model are the only ones that aren't incentivized to do this, and then only if they don't have a cash shop.