Subscription confirmed

  • 62 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Subjugation (4718 posts) -

The age of the subscription MMO is over. I guess they didn't get the memo.

#52 Posted by Irvandus (2826 posts) -

@subjugation: Bethesda was too busy fighting off press sneak fucks to mention it.

#53 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11477 posts) -

So... Free to Play in 6-12 months?

#54 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

I'll likely try both Wildstar and Elder Scrolls Online. Though I don't expect either to grab me. My guess, Everquest Next is the real deal in terms of rekindling my fascination with MMOs. Its Minecraft levels of interactivity is nothing short of mind blowing.

So it'll be the included *free* 30 days and one 60 day gametime card at most for me.

#55 Posted by TooWalrus (13137 posts) -

@lord_xp said:

Its official, you have to pay a monthly fee to play this game

http://kotaku.com/youll-pay-a-monthly-fee-to-play-the-elder-scrolls-onli-1176508405

There is the article explaining this.

I for one will not be playing this game anymore which is pretty damn upsetting since I was excited to play.

I probably wouldn't play it regardless but personally I prefer a monthly subscription over a web of micro-transactions.

Me too, though I might give it a try if some of my MMO-loving friends get into it (they're playing TERA now and it's driving me crazy). Also, it was built as a WoW-type game, and it'd probably be wise to structure the price as such. Isn't the Old Republic's post-launch "free to play" structure kind of a disaster?

#56 Posted by Lyisa (328 posts) -

It feels shitty that people who aren't inclined to play mmos anyway demand f2p. I'd rather these games fail than for them to turn to a model that isn't fun to deal and takes away enjoyment of the game.

At least if more of these failed it'd give more pause on releasing one.

#57 Edited by OurSin_360 (834 posts) -

@vermisean said:

@leftie68: Agreed. It's bizarre to me how much backlash a subscription model gets these days. I have always preferred it over f2p. I will definitely be subscribing to this one (And FFXIV).

I think it's just the difference between your typical MMO players, and people (like me) who are just eldor scrolls fans. I've never payed a monthly fee and never will to play one game. Either go F2P or charge full retail, i'm not paying 15 a month for a game that'll probably be dead within 2 years. It's what turned me off from MMO's in the first place

#58 Posted by TheHBK (5463 posts) -

I wouldn't have a problem with it if they didn't make you pay $60 bucks for the game first. When you think about it, that is a pretty stupid business model that works for a select few. Just imagine if all the subscription based stuff we use required paying for the software first. Pay 50 bucks for netflix on top of the $8 a month. Or that you have to pay for itunes before you can buy music. either you are making a service from this game or a game.

Now I will say they probably have no choice and want to grab as much of those game sales and subscription fees. They also were planning to launch the game this way, of course they were, pretty much every MMO that started development 5 years ago was. It might have been too late to start making the changes needed to make it free to play along with getting it ready to launch. So when it launches, they can get as much sub money from it then switch it to free to play. Star Wars the Old Republic has to be the biggest example. Such a huge IP, and it couldn't last a year. This will be about 6 months tops before we can all play it for free. I just want to explore, alone or with a couple friends.

#59 Posted by MikkaQ (10268 posts) -

I think in this day and age if you're charging a sub for your MMO, I see no reason why the base game shouldn't be free. The amount of money you're giving them as a regular sub would make a boxed retail price pretty much negligible in comparison and by giving a couple week trial for free, it's much easier to make an upsale to a sub if there's no cost to get the actual game.

#60 Posted by Vermisean (154 posts) -

@oursin_360: I can see that being the case for sure, now that I think about it.

And for sure, if it is dead in two years, then it could be considered wasted money.

I suppose it's just the changing MMO space.

#61 Edited by Franstone (1092 posts) -

Figured they might have a monthly subscription fee even though most people see that as a death sentence these days.
I was hoping they were going to use a lower pricing model rather than charging the "industry standard" for pay per month MMOs.
Considering it's going to launch on PC and both next gen consoles (sorry WiiU) which already have a fee, I hoped they would break that $15 mold.
They could have charged $5-$10 and still been insanely profitable, I was personally hoping for $7.50 per month.

While on another site I was thinking about how much they could make with this model if people actually bought into it and stayed as paying members...
Correct me if I made a mistake (I can do that) but this is how I broke it down.

Skyrim Sales (according to this page in 2012 http://www.statisticbrain.com/skyrim-the-elder-scrolls-v-statistics/)
Cost to make Skyrim = 82 Million
First Week Sales = 7 Million Units

Estimate half as many units sold of Elder Scrolls Online (Only the first week remind you) = 3.5 Million Units
3.5m x $60(per unit) = $210,000,000
$15 a month x 3,500,000(players) = $52,000,000 (per month)
1 year servicing 3.5 million players = $572,000,000 (First month of service free)
First full year sales w/ subs combined = 782,000,000
Additional years = $624,000,000 (per year)

This is all assuming they will sell millions more than these first week numbers, as well as maintain at least that player count.

I mean I'm all for the developer (I've worked for one and have friends that do) but this reeks of publisher, hahah.
Are you sure the poor bastards will be able to get by making content with 3 quarters of a billion dollars the first year and a measly 624 million each additional year?
; )

I wanted to play ESO but it doesn't look like I will be utill I get my career back on track.
Or until it goes F2P....
Whichever comes first.

Off to play some Skyrim!

#62 Posted by pweidman (2298 posts) -

They're charging for the game and monthly fees? Hilarious. Who's gonna pay all that? Seriously who?

Maybe they don't wanna overstress their servers at launch. :D

I could see a little fun in there with co-op ES but the game looks about the same as 2 yr. old Skyrim. Silly Bethesda, lol.

#63 Edited by Whitestripes09 (399 posts) -

I have no idea why they would think about having a subscription model. B2P is more easy on people and the way Guild Wars 2 handles it is perfectly sound. Then with rumors of people who have played the beta are saying that the game isn't even that great I just don't understand how they could mess it up. It should not be that hard to nail an elder scrolls mmo and be succesful. Guess I'm just going to have to wait for the next single player game and hope that it has some sort of co op feature.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.