The Elder Scrolls Online Will Have Subscription Fees

[kenu12345]

I think he is talking more about the fact that if he pays for a month then he feels he has to organize that month around that time limit for that game so that he can get the most out of it which can be down right hard sometimes

But if you break it down, a $15 a month fee is like $.50 a day, and if you purchased a month only to find yourself playing another game, then just unsub and don't pay for more game time until you get the itch to jump back in. If you are paying constantly for a game you aren't playing then you are doing it wrong.

You still paid 15 dollars for something you didnt use. If say it gave you a month worth of in game time then sure that would work

Honestly I love it subs switched over to allowing you to pay for in game time like you mentioned, that would be pretty awesome, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

My point is, if you get engrossed in another game, then just don't pay for your sub until you come back. If you keep getting pulled away from a sub based game right after you payed for a month of game time, then maybe MMOs aren't your thing and you should wait for ESVI (not meant to be insulting).

I know what you're saying man but truth is you never know when you will get engrossed with another game. For instance, my current skyrim playthrough has been halted cause I feel in love with saints row. Say if I payed the subsciption for this month then thats 15 bucks Im not getting for this month because I couldn't dedicate enough time to this particular month. One day I hope they actually switch to in game time even if its a bit more expensive. I think it would be more worth it

 

[Church185]

I know what you're saying man but truth is you never know when you will get engrossed with another game. For instance, my current skyrim playthrough has been halted cause I feel in love with saints row. Say if I payed the subsciption for this month then thats 15 bucks Im not getting for this month because I couldn't dedicate enough time to this particular month. One day I hope they actually switch to in game time even if its a bit more expensive. I think it would be more worth it

While that kind of sucks, to me it still comes down to $.50 a day and feeling like that amount of money really isn't that significant. Then again, people are in different financial situations and it may be a bigger deal to them.

 

[scw55]

This news has killed my interest in the MMO. However I will have to wait and see when it's actually shipped.

There is no logical reason to have a subscription-based Western RPG. The reason this is the case is because of World of Warcraft. That behemoth. The competing MMO would have to better than World of Warcraft to have a chance.

ESO will be wanting players. A lot of them will be veteran MMO players. Why should they pay an upfront fee and a subscription fee to leave their well-established characters?
The subscription fee will mean that the majority of the players going to play ESO will be TES fans who also want to play an MMO. I don't think that demographic is big enough.

It's actually funny if you think about it, how many sub-based MMOs have gone F2P. Even Rift who had a sub system and was surviving, decided to go F2P.

Yes, in DCUO I get annoyed by the spam to BUY X. And having a capped money cap, but it's fine. I play the game casually.

Having no sub-fee lets players enjoy the game at the pace they want to enjoy it. They aren't paranoid that they're wasting their sub-fee.

I think the sub-fee will stop a lot of people playing ESO initially. The game will have to be exceptional to justify the fee. Why play an MMO with a sub-fee when you can play one without?

 

[kortin]

It will fail.

It will be F2P within a year.

It's the TORtanic all over again.

I as much as I despise this game and the giant shit it is taking on the entire franchise, a part of is still giddy in anticipation for it.

The Transcription Error Scrollocaust will be a marvel to behold.

It takes place in 2E, whereas Morrowind and Oblivion take place in 3E and Skyrim takes place in 4E. As well as being developed by a studio that doesn't do the Elder Scrolls games, I think things, lorewise, will be just fine.

but yeah, a subscription is basically going to sink the ship that is TESO. Hell, during the beta test, I made sure to include (in the post test questionnaire) that I would not play the game if it has a sub. Haven't played during a test since. It was actually really fun, to be honest.

 

[Alorxico]

Are you up for a monthly fee, or will you be sticking to the Elder Scrolls offline?

I started playing Rift two months before it went Free-to-Play. Though the population was low, the other players were helpful and friendly, the PvP areas were well balanced and the competition friendly, and there were no gold-farmers spamming your inbox.

Then it went Free-to-Play.

Most of the players I now meet in-game are rude,; I have turned off most of the chat channels because most of the conversations there are racist, sexist, ignorant and always trying to start something; Most of the mail I get in my inbox is advertisements for Gold-farming; any time I hop into a Warfront (Rift's version of Battlefronts) I am constantly bombarded with messages telling me to quit the game because my gear, which I earned through hard work, is causing us to lose OR I am told to buy better gear from the Game Store with real money, like they did, if I want to win; players are now CAMPING respawn points in PvP areas, killing people as soon as they respawn so no one is able to play the game.

WoW had these problems when it was Pay-to-Play, I am under the impression WoW is the Mother of these problems, as did other MMOs I have played in the past, but I have noticed that if a game stays Pay-to-Play as more and more Free-to-Play games pop up, the trolls leave. You will never have a troll free game, but trolling becomes a rare occurrences rather than the normal gaming experience. This may not be true in all games that stay Pay-to-Play, but it appears to hold true in the games I have played.

I will wait to see what other information and material is released prior to launch before making my decision, but Bethesda announcing that the game is Pay-to-Play is not the deal breaker for me. I expected it. For the amount of content they are going to release at launch and are planning to release, they have to go Pay-to-Pay for at least the first year or so. And while I respect that some gamers will not play a game because there is a subscription fee, might I point out one thing (caution; comic features possibly offensive language):

http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20100628

If you go to an amusement park, you have to pay an entry fee. If you leave the park and return 5 days later you are expected to pay the entry fee again. Now, for some parks that business model does not work for them because they are small and don't have a lot of attractions; for them, making the park free with a request for donations is a better model. For some medium parks, a patron system is better, where paying a one time amount of money grants you special perks such as free food or drinks and being able to cut to the front of the line, to ensure that people keep coming back. And for some large parks, a combination of the three is best.

It is similarly true for MMOs; some are better made for Free-to-play, others are better for a Patron System and still others are better for Pay-to-Play. If the Elder Scrolls is going to be as expansive and involved as Bethesda promises, than a pay-to-play system would be needed to keep customer service and programmers focused on IT rather than their next title. After all, WoW went free-to-play and less than a year later announced that Project Titan was pushed back two years as they shifted all the talented programmers to something Diablo or Starcraft related. You get what you pay for.

But in the end, it is up to the gamer. It is the GAMER'S choice to patron a company or not. If you personally do not want to spend money on a subscription, that is fine. That is your choice. But if you want to, that is fine too. But always remember this; you get what you pay for, and if you don't you have a right to take your money elsewhere. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[ciasteczkowyp]

15 bucks is a very high subscription fee

 

[ClockworkUniverse]

That's all I needed. I'm out. I was maybe going to try it as a curiosity, but a sub fee? No thanks.

Good job Bethesda. You made and Elder Scrolls game I don't want. A heroic effort, and you should be commended.

It's worth remembering that Bethesda is not making TESO. ZeniMax Online Studios is making it.

At least they had the decency to call the new company something else, though. It annoys me when publishers do stuff like how TOR was made by a devteam called Bioware, but which was otherwise only related to the Bioware that makes all those other games in that EA owns both.

 

[WhitbyDragon]

It will fail.

*snip*.

When I'm his age, My Moustache is going pointy like this!!

On Topic: Damn, I was hoping for something epic and RPG like to get into but don't want to be tied to online :-(

I recently got Skyrim+addons for my lappy (used to play on X-box), I can't quite get back into it and a crossbow and building a house isn't quite doing it for me.

 

[Ickabod]

To me it's not so much the $15, it's that I have GW2 sitting on my computer collecting dust for free. Now if ESO wants my money it has to do something that really grabs my attention and deserves that $15/month, so far it looks like every other MMO out there.

Blizzard could justify that $15 back in the day for a couple of reasons:

1) It was the only model at the time.
2) They had content busting at the seems.
3) While not revolutionary, it pretty much did everything better than the other MMO's out there.
4) Your friends were already hooked, so you were hooked.

To me ESO looks like it pulling out the same MMO design model that WoW established years ago. When are developers going to finally understand that if I wanted to play WoW, I'd play WoW. Not their clone of it.

Had ESO looked liked it was going to try for the innovative path of Everquest Next, then maybe you can justify the monthly cost (that is if EQN delivers). But for the $15 I get some more quests a couple more areas, so what, the gameplay is the same gameplay that I have been playing for 10 years.

Maybe I'm missing something from the previews.

 

[KaZuYa]

F2P was the worse thing to happen to MMO's ever, It allowed developers and publishers to ship out shoddy games and focus more on what they could sell than actual content, and for all those people saying "hah good luck shelling out £120 a year for a game", do you know why the F2P market exploded? not because consumers wanted it, or even honest developers wanted it, it was because the truth is most people tend to spend more in a year on micro transactions than on a subscription. That is a fact ladies and gentlemen and that's why publishers drove the F2P market forward.

 

[Nalikill]

From what I've seen, they're saying the PREMIUM content is $14.99 a month. So that implies to me an F2P side of it will exist, along with the premium content. You COULD treat it like a lot of people treat WoW right now: subscribe for two or three months out of the year. Subscribe when a new patch drops or new content you want to play drops, and then unsubscribe when you get bored.

Subscribing to an MMO doesn't have to be a 'permanent or never' thing- you can and (should) be able to switch freely between the F2P and subscription side of things- and if I'm reading it right, they're taking that farther than ever before; freely switching between access and non-access to premium content, without having a character get 'locked' if you stop paying.

If they do it like THAT, then the sub fee won't be so bad- it'd be an easy way to nudge people into paying fees, and they'd get reliable bursts of income when new content drops.

 

[Zagzag]

Adding a couple of quests does not equate to adding a lot of content. They are small bite-sized updates with the occasional large one that could be completed within two hours at most.

Also, "doing well" depends entirely on the person. Does it have a lot of people who bought the game? Yes. However, how many routinely play the actual game? I know I go on at most once every two months, most of my friends even longer between log ins and my guild of 200 is the same as me.

Well, the guild I run are still around, so they must be doing something right. The updates aren't exactly that massive or that impressive, but I find that they're just large enough to give you time to earn all the achievements from the latest patch before the next one hits, which is what a lot of people are going to want to do, especially as they usually remove the previous patch's content for good with new patches.

 

[Chizzicle]

I'm not all too happy with this, but assuming we get at least the standard 1 month subscription when buying the game, I will get it just to try it.

Considering that when Skyrim came out, my play time after the first week was about 100 hours and had reached 200 hours after a month, if this is anywhere near as good or interesting (which I kinda doubt but we'll see), and I can stay interested long enough to play it as much as I did Skyrim, 200 hours should be easily enough to experience most of what the game has to offer and make a decision whether or not to keep playing. If on the other hand it does not keep me interested enough to test it thoroughly, that most likely means it won't be worth paying anything more.

 

[Sight Unseen]

You do realize you will also be paying that initial 60 on top of the subscription cost right

Do you have a source for this? As far as I know this has never been confirmed anywhere. Maybe it's just a free download once they receive your subscription payment. Until I see a confirmed source for this I'm going to be skeptical of that.

Not sure if this is considered a good source but I did a quick search and got this http://www.walmart.com/ip/20895851?wmlspartner=wlpa&adid=22222222227015557193&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=18156486550&wl4=&wl5=pla&wl6=40018939270&veh=sem

Thanks for that link. I wouldn't consider that a hard source for a few reasons:

a) it could all be placeholder information
b) Walmart is not really the best source for accurate gaming information
c) it could come bundled with a few months of pre-paid subscription


But I'll definitely keep that in mind, and it would suck to have to pay $60 and then $15 a month for the game, but I'll have to wait and see what the game is like before I judge anything.

 

[Whytewulf]

I prefer a subscription model. There is very little Free in F2P, GW2 might be an exception. I have no problem paying for something that offers a continuing evolving game play. These companies have to make money also. In addition, you can always start sub and go f2p, but you can't go the other way.

 

[PatrickXD]

Does Guild Wars 2 not exist, or something? There's a third option here, guys, and it has led to one of the fastest selling MMO's of all time - if not the most.
I was looking forward to the announcement that TES:O would require a one off payment, and include aesthetic microtransactions. Now I'm just going to ignore the title, because one game is not worth £120/year.

 

[Sight Unseen]

Does Guild Wars 2 not exist, or something? There's a third option here, guys, and it has led to one of the fastest selling MMO's of all time - if not the most.
I was looking forward to the announcement that TES:O would require a one off payment, and include aesthetic microtransactions. Now I'm just going to ignore the title, because one game is not worth £120/year.

Fast initial sales but precipitous drop off after 2 weeks is not an ideal sales model for an MMO that should be designed to keep gamers playing for a long time. It means that they get a large initial recovery of their investment but then nothing to sustain them to develop the game further.

I'm not at all an expert on GW2, but several people here have been posting about the glaring drawbacks of their model ( no apparent long-term growth of the game, temporary updates, expensive microtransactions, player population drops, etc) If a company wants to maintain and nurture a player base for an MMO they need the financial assets to be adding compelling and substantial content and show long term growth of the game to encourage their fanbase to keep playing, and a buy once and be set forever model doesn't work that well when you have to also consider server maintenance and upkeep and longterm growth of the game.

 

[Grabehn]

And now, although sadly, I'm out. Don't have time to make the price be worth it, although I like the idea. Games with fees generally have a all around better community than those without them. I do expect them to come up with the "we're going f2p" a while after release.

 

[darron13]

Well I can no longer afford this game, disappointing.

 

[Jenny Jones]

On the one hand paying consistently for a game after you bought it isn't exactly something I would enjoy. However if they are true to their promise of monthly content updates and those are significant updates then we might see it work. I have played free to play MMOs and the content updates are usually new power creep items when sales of the last one have dwindled. Story wise content might come every 6-12 months, everything you can unlock is ONCE PER CHARACTER which is fine if you only have 1 but rapidly goes up for trying new stuff with new characters.

All in all if you pay a sub and get everything for free, never have to pay for new items, new content and they're removing the incentive to create ultra powerful items to sell more and actually balance a game then I'd be all for it. The proof will be be in the pudding though. If the content updates are monthly, good and engaging enough that it tells a story and gives you plenty to do for even 2-3 weeks then subbing is great. If it's updates for the sake of updates and making it looks good then it will fail.

Just try to keep in mind that for the price of 3 games you're getting a game that is fun, interactive and evolving for a full year.