The Elder Scrolls Online Review - Levels 1-20

[Lykosia_v1legacy]

We need more good sandbox MMORPGs.

"sandbox mmos" don't get good numbers on account of the fact most people get actually get bored and lose motivation when left largely to their own devices.

even the grand doyen of the genre EVE, often spoke of in hushed tones as if it was some gaming nirvana, only has about about 500k of a playerbase....if that now...

Aion, Runescape, SWTOR, STO, Lineage I & II and ofc WoW all roflstomping over those numbers even on a purely regional basis and those are just the ones you might have heard of (cause its a whole other world over where they write in pictures)...

for most people following a path is simply more compelling than wandering around a field.

sandbox MMORPGs are there, its not like good ones haven't been made , but the truth is they're not in a very healthy state at all compared with their "theme park" neighbours...and at the end of the day...dem bills, oy...

But what's the difference between EVE and WoW at the moment? EVE Online is constantly getting more players when WoW is losing them. And which one is older game? EVE. Granted, EVE is nowhere near the numbers of WoW or some other theme park MMOs, but you don't need to be if you're smart and don't expect to "kill WoW." It's much easier to get bored in a themepark MMO, because the pretty much only "endgame" you've is raids, dungeons and Pvp. When in EVE or in other sandbox MMOs the players have much more freedom to do what they want with just trading, crafting, mining, wars etc. And it's all player driven.

Btw, RuneScape is a sandbox MMO though more limited than EVE.

What I like about ESO is that it at least encourages exploration.

 

[Deadcyde]

Paying full price for the game then have a subscription ontop of that is why I will not touch it. So you pay full price to rent the game for 30 days? No thank you. Then have to pay rent every month to continue? Even worse.

If it was pay full price and you can continue playing it until they shut the servers off never to be turned back on again I would be OK with that. If the game was free to download but required a subscription then that would be OK as well. If it was buy the game and be able to play forever then a cash shop to buy things with real money is acceptable, but if there is a subscription then I cannot accept a cash shop. The subscription pays for the servers and for development of new content. Making players pay for new content they pay for in the subscription should not be acceptable by players.

TesO will not be getting my money because of the blatant money grab of buy the game at full price, subscription, and a cash shop.

You must be new to MMOs.

Thing is the whole 'F2P' model is fairly, well, NEW.

It's not a 'money grab'.

That would be the yearly Cod/Madden games, or most of the mobile F2P market.

You know what they say about assumptions? Also yours is incorrect.

[Note: I generally had to pay a deposit on an apartment then monthly rent... so I don't think that is an apt comparison]

Less of a money grab than a lot of those 'F2P' games, many of which can be considered Pay2Win. Doesn't ESO just offer a horse? And there is no in-game ads telling you to go buy something, you have to manually go to their website. WoW (considered the most successful MMO of all time) also has a sub fee and sells mounts and pets.

Having to pay for a game and then a subscription was standard practice around 2009ish and back. I think the purpose of having an upfront price is to initially offset the development costs, which can be significant. And I thought that ESO is

Having a subscription fee gives the devs incentive to make a quality product. May F2P games have to balance between addicting and frustrating to convince players to pay for some type of bonus. You can find information about what these developers call 'whales'(same term used by casinos for suckers) by looking at various talks and workshops at last month's Game Dev Conference. Another thing to note is that companies are hiring people who specialize in 'consumer psychology'. The DSM-V has even added game addiction to a list of possible disorders for future study.

It's gotten to the point that the EU is determine whether or not to add restrictions on companies for using the 'free to play' terminology.

Not saying that all F2Ps are bad, they do still need to make a profit after all. A game like Path of Exile is the perfect example of what I would consider an effective cash shop model. Something like SWTOR switched to an awful model. They severely limited the end-game content, prevented access to your bank for storage, and blocked non-subscribers from using certain items. Not sure if these have been addressed yet, but this was a critical success that lost all credibility by switching to a 'free' model.

I think the main point here is that I would rather companies not attempt to manipulate me into having what is basically an addiction

But, who knows, maybe if ESO becomes F2P it will be done in a consumer friendly way.

I agree with you, and I have never understood people's fear of subscriptions. That's how MMOs started, that's what makes them different. It may not be for everyone, but I think it's still a good option. And your big AAA titles will start that way, EQ, WIldstar, WOW, etc. And yes it is a way for them to make more money maybe, well I guess that's silly for a company to want to make money.

well for starters, you get your deposit back with housing and secondly, are you getting your monies worth? Are the constantly updating the game as you pay them? Do you get guarantees of quality and features? (like a tenants agreement if you want to continue the analogy) What is in place if you are unsatisfied?

Games you buy have this. Subscription games do not.