So we buy game and pay sub AND IF WE WANT FUN ITEMS WE NEED PAY MORE!
i start get feel that they know ESO will fail and crap all money they can in few month.
Sub games should never ever have any cash shop.
Point me to one that doesn't.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
The big claim here is that people don't like F2P (or B2P) because of the cash shop and how they're nickeled and dimed to death. So why is it okay for a sub-game to have a cash shop again?
That might be some people's problem, but it isn't mine.
My problem with In game cash shops (as opposed to the out of game ones every single sub MMO and many single player franchise have) is not the shop per se since it can be ignored, it's the constant in game subtle and not so subtle marketing that I find intrusive and annoying... like all those broadcast message that so and so has unlocked such and such or the chest + key gambling crap that they all seem to have.
That's it for me...nothing else. I don't believe that F2P attracts more trolls or that P2P has a better community because people are more committed - I just don't want to be marketed at while playing the game. Outside the game with links off their website? I could give less of a shit what crap they're trying to sell me there. I never buy it.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I gather they are talking about in game services. Rift did this initially. IT wasn't a big deal really. Would I like paying a sub and seeing frilly shit i na cash shop? WEll, if I can get it in the game, probably not a big deal. If I can't get it except to buy....well, I'd not like that, but if the game is otherwise great, I'd live with it.
I'll draw the line at currency exchange. I won't touch that.
The problem here is we have a very rough translation of Matt's words to go on this "item shop" "fun items" thing, when they've said already (in plain English) that their game really doesn't fit micro transactions. People are freaking out over three words "Fun items" *services*. Which the later is to be expected as an additional fee, services always have been.
I don't really consider critical questioning freaking out. I linked two different articles (written within a short time of each other) where he discusses the revenue model. In one he fails completely to mention the cash shop. In the next he mentions it. I highlighted where he specifies the sub will cover the "basic game" and the cash shop will have fun stuff plus account services.
First, if someone is happy paying a lot more for a game that's fine. There is nothing wrong with that. However, this isn't in a vacuum. Firor is claiming that the sub fits the game style better providing a superior experience with high quality service. In the next interview he says something different, the sub will provide the base game and the cash shop will be filled with fun stuff. Every publisher says their cash shop is filled with fun stuff. If you ask Trion, ANet, EnMasse, Blizzard, SoE, Turbine, or any others, they will all tell you their cash shops are filled with fun stuff, yet for some reason those cash shops are unacceptable, yet this one is... wait for it... because it's got a sub.
The problem here is they're charging a minimum fee, misrepresenting why they're charging for it, and then charging extras. The big claim here is that people don't like F2P (or B2P) because of the cash shop and how they're nickeled and dimed to death. So why is it okay for a sub-game to have a cash shop again?
In sub games all that fun fluff is supposed to be earned through game play. In sub games why aren't account services part of my sub-service fee? Trion seemed to be able to manage that just fine.
Then entire point of paying an ongoing recurring fee is that you don't have to deal with micro-fees. So where is the justification for monthly subscription bills when they're setup the same as a F2P game only with a minimum fee. What exactly am I paying for? Server access? Other games don't require server access fees. I just don't see why these guys are getting a pass. Well I do, because just like "sandbox-style" "P2P" has become a hipster term and we seem to love those as gamers.
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Did I say Lineage 2? Maybe NC has added a CS to Lineage as well, but I can't read Korean and Chrome cant translate a bunch of Flash and images.
Whatever dude
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
Exactly. And no one seems to be asking the two most important questions of all:
1. What exactly other than name changes will they be selling?-- name changes is the only concrete example so far
2. Will the shop be accessible from inside the game or just off a website link? The former would be very objectionable to me too. The later, I could care less.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
Exactly. And no one seems to be asking the two most important questions of all:
1. What exactly other than name changes will they be selling?-- name changes is the only concrete example so far
2. Will the shop be accessible from inside the game or just off a website link? The former would be very objectionable to me too. The later, I could care less.
3. Will the existence of said shop help keep the Sub model in place, as well as planned content additions?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
Exactly. And no one seems to be asking the two most important questions of all:
1. What exactly other than name changes will they be selling?-- name changes is the only concrete example so far
2. Will the shop be accessible from inside the game or just off a website link? The former would be very objectionable to me too. The later, I could care less.
3. Will the existence of said shop help keep the Sub model in place, as well as planned content additions?
4. Is the cash shop robust enough to handle the eventual transition to a f2p/freemium model?
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
The question I have is:
How confident are the developers of this game if it's releasing with "Plan B" already in place?
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
The question I have is:
How confident are the developers of this game if it's releasing with "Plan B" already in place?
Well you see, there are questions and then there are "questions." The one you "ask" is really just an opinion using a question vehicle.
I mean, c'mon man, look at where we are. Your type of "question" is the oldest trick in the book for opinionated thread topics around here.
Some of us actually do have real questions we'd like to see answerd.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I am really disappointed with this news box + sub + cash shop :'(
Box + Sub (P2P) = Ok, IF, they actually use the subscription money to provide live support in game, and out of game with consistent content released...not only as boxed expansions. Hopefully one day professional GM/DMa to manage and create events on servers.
Box + Cash Shop (B2P) = This is ok, including charging for expansions. GW2 works out fine, but I think there is room for improvement.
Cash shop only (F2P) = Meh, not too big a fan of this one, I haven't personally played a really good F2P yet. Which makes sense since the company has to eat alot of risk.
Box + Sub + Cash shop (cash grab)= There is little justification for this combination anymore. Especially if they charge for paid services (Name, race, gender, server changes), and charge for expansions frequently.
Reallllllllly makes me think they are going to launch a decent game/average game and cash in as much as they can on the release hype, which is fine, but suggests to me they aren't overly confident in their own product in the market for them to do this.
I would gladly pay $40 a month for an MMO with AAA everything if the company had the integrity to use most of it back on the game itself, there is always room to improve and create content. unfortunately, most companies hit that tipping point in profit and use it on other projects which is smart for them, but as a customer I say, screw that!
Gonna put a pin in TESO for now until they make some changes by release, or I will wait well after launch to try it during trial periods...and if its the same business model the game better be phenomenal with amazing customer support.
Box + Sub + Cash shop (cash grab)= There is little justification for this combination anymore. Especially if they charge for paid services (Name, race, gender, server changes), and charge for expansions frequently.
If you didn't charge for that stuff, then you would have to have teams doing it constantly.
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
The question I have is:
How confident are the developers of this game if it's releasing with "Plan B" already in place?
Well you see, there are questions and then there are "questions." The one you "ask" is really just an opinion using a question vehicle.
I mean, c'mon man, look at where we are. Your type of "question" is the oldest trick in the book for opinionated thread topics around here.
Some of us actually do have real questions we'd like to see answerd.
ROFL, technically it is a real question because you can base it on past example of other games. It's not like the question is entirely unfounded. It's not like what is being asked, has not happened before.
We are not asking something that is uncommon.
On the contrary, it really does make a person wonder.
You can act like the game will not eventually go F2P, but what are you basing that assumption on, if not past games?
Are you basing it on, "This game is different?" If so, you are doing the same thing you are claiming others are doing.
Truth is, no one knows how this is going to turn out. We can only speculate. A question is a question and if it has any form of bases at all, it's a pretty decent question. Does't matter if you don't agree with it, or like it.
Honestly, in my opinion a subscription should mean that you have access to EVERYTHING in the game, including cosmetic items. I'm not a die-hard RPer, but even I want to make my character look interesting, or have a fun looking mount. The only services I'd agree with are server-related things such as world-transfers or name changes.
I can see how Blizzard would want to have a cash-shop in order to keep milking a dieing cow, but I don't see how any other MMOs could sustain that.
I had my doubts about ESO from the beginning, and this little piece of information just seems to add to the pile of concerns. Don't see how it can possibly be a smart move.
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
I think it's better to be proactive and push for answers so people don't have to jump to conclusions. You're just as guilty because you're concluding there isn't a problem until one makes itself known. I'm open to possibilities either way, but I'm generally unwilling to give any game dev the benefit of the doubt when it comes to marketing.
Let them speak clearly about it. Firor has been unwilling to do that and has said two different things in two different articles. Did neither of the articles I linked cause you any concern or raise any questions?
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
Questioning may be good. Fine. But speculating should be acceptable, too. And it's fine if you want to be a cautionary voice; if you're saying, 'keep an open mind; don't be dogmatic in your opinions.' However, simply offering questions is hardly worthwhile when there is no response--or, at least, no timely response, until all is said and done.
To be fair, I'm sure that I'm not contradicting your intent, Distopia. I think that you are referring to the more precipitously passionate voices. But I thought some clarification was in order, nonetheless.
Box + Sub + Cash shop (cash grab)= There is little justification for this combination anymore. Especially if they charge for paid services (Name, race, gender, server changes), and charge for expansions frequently.
If you didn't charge for that stuff, then you would have to have teams doing it constantly.
Like most things all of the little things they charge us for under the guise of "work effort" can easily be automated. Its a BS barrier to wring money out of us...which is great business for them and smart on their behalf but I dislike being blatantly shook for money as a consumer.
I understand older games having to charge if they cant switch up some code or implement it since it will require processing and possibly manpower. Then again why would they when they can make money off it anyways, that is until one popular MMO comes along and sets the standard for free server transfers.
As for name changes, thinking about it, unless there is an account identifier these should be charged for to avoid people being D-bags and just changing out names.
Comments
Point me to one that doesn't.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Yes, because that model has destroyed WoW.
That might be some people's problem, but it isn't mine.
My problem with In game cash shops (as opposed to the out of game ones every single sub MMO and many single player franchise have) is not the shop per se since it can be ignored, it's the constant in game subtle and not so subtle marketing that I find intrusive and annoying... like all those broadcast message that so and so has unlocked such and such or the chest + key gambling crap that they all seem to have.
That's it for me...nothing else. I don't believe that F2P attracts more trolls or that P2P has a better community because people are more committed - I just don't want to be marketed at while playing the game. Outside the game with links off their website? I could give less of a shit what crap they're trying to sell me there. I never buy it.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Oh you mean this is not one? http://www.lineage2.com/en/marketplace/
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I gather they are talking about in game services. Rift did this initially. IT wasn't a big deal really. Would I like paying a sub and seeing frilly shit i na cash shop? WEll, if I can get it in the game, probably not a big deal. If I can't get it except to buy....well, I'd not like that, but if the game is otherwise great, I'd live with it.
I'll draw the line at currency exchange. I won't touch that.
I consider jumping to conclusions freaking out, as with all things I'll wait and see.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Whatever dude
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
No, 8 million people support Blizzard. No matter how crappy their games are, or how much money they ask of them.
Questions sure, I'm still unconvinced the game is even worth a sub, yet I'm not here saying it is or it isn't. Because I question it, I'm not seeing a whole bunch of questions being asked here though. I'm seeing a whole bunch of declarations.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Exactly. And no one seems to be asking the two most important questions of all:
1. What exactly other than name changes will they be selling?-- name changes is the only concrete example so far
2. Will the shop be accessible from inside the game or just off a website link? The former would be very objectionable to me too. The later, I could care less.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
3. Will the existence of said shop help keep the Sub model in place, as well as planned content additions?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
4. Is the cash shop robust enough to handle the eventual transition to a f2p/freemium model?
See we're just asking questions here, no declarations at all.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The question I have is:
How confident are the developers of this game if it's releasing with "Plan B" already in place?
Well you see, there are questions and then there are "questions." The one you "ask" is really just an opinion using a question vehicle.
I mean, c'mon man, look at where we are. Your type of "question" is the oldest trick in the book for opinionated thread topics around here.
Some of us actually do have real questions we'd like to see answerd.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I am really disappointed with this news box + sub + cash shop :'(
Box + Sub (P2P) = Ok, IF, they actually use the subscription money to provide live support in game, and out of game with consistent content released...not only as boxed expansions. Hopefully one day professional GM/DMa to manage and create events on servers.
Box + Cash Shop (B2P) = This is ok, including charging for expansions. GW2 works out fine, but I think there is room for improvement.
Cash shop only (F2P) = Meh, not too big a fan of this one, I haven't personally played a really good F2P yet. Which makes sense since the company has to eat alot of risk.
Box + Sub + Cash shop (cash grab)= There is little justification for this combination anymore. Especially if they charge for paid services (Name, race, gender, server changes), and charge for expansions frequently.
Reallllllllly makes me think they are going to launch a decent game/average game and cash in as much as they can on the release hype, which is fine, but suggests to me they aren't overly confident in their own product in the market for them to do this.
I would gladly pay $40 a month for an MMO with AAA everything if the company had the integrity to use most of it back on the game itself, there is always room to improve and create content. unfortunately, most companies hit that tipping point in profit and use it on other projects which is smart for them, but as a customer I say, screw that!
Gonna put a pin in TESO for now until they make some changes by release, or I will wait well after launch to try it during trial periods...and if its the same business model the game better be phenomenal with amazing customer support.
If you didn't charge for that stuff, then you would have to have teams doing it constantly.
ROFL, technically it is a real question because you can base it on past example of other games. It's not like the question is entirely unfounded. It's not like what is being asked, has not happened before.
We are not asking something that is uncommon.
On the contrary, it really does make a person wonder.
You can act like the game will not eventually go F2P, but what are you basing that assumption on, if not past games?
Are you basing it on, "This game is different?" If so, you are doing the same thing you are claiming others are doing.
Truth is, no one knows how this is going to turn out. We can only speculate. A question is a question and if it has any form of bases at all, it's a pretty decent question. Does't matter if you don't agree with it, or like it.
Honestly, in my opinion a subscription should mean that you have access to EVERYTHING in the game, including cosmetic items. I'm not a die-hard RPer, but even I want to make my character look interesting, or have a fun looking mount. The only services I'd agree with are server-related things such as world-transfers or name changes.
I can see how Blizzard would want to have a cash-shop in order to keep milking a dieing cow, but I don't see how any other MMOs could sustain that.
I had my doubts about ESO from the beginning, and this little piece of information just seems to add to the pile of concerns. Don't see how it can possibly be a smart move.
yeah its false paying a sub and for cosmetics you have to pay AGAIN, just your comment was providing a false attitude ...
You know from the very first day they announced the game, up until now revealing the subscription model.
It has been nothing but double twisted words.
First it was going to be "like wow" then it was going to be "something else".
The same attitude is reflected in their last reveal about the pricing structure.
Anyone is free to do whatever they want, me I'm just not going to waste my money on the game.
Questioning may be good. Fine. But speculating should be acceptable, too. And it's fine if you want to be a cautionary voice; if you're saying, 'keep an open mind; don't be dogmatic in your opinions.' However, simply offering questions is hardly worthwhile when there is no response--or, at least, no timely response, until all is said and done.
To be fair, I'm sure that I'm not contradicting your intent, Distopia. I think that you are referring to the more precipitously passionate voices. But I thought some clarification was in order, nonetheless.
Like most things all of the little things they charge us for under the guise of "work effort" can easily be automated. Its a BS barrier to wring money out of us...which is great business for them and smart on their behalf but I dislike being blatantly shook for money as a consumer.
I understand older games having to charge if they cant switch up some code or implement it since it will require processing and possibly manpower. Then again why would they when they can make money off it anyways, that is until one popular MMO comes along and sets the standard for free server transfers.
As for name changes, thinking about it, unless there is an account identifier these should be charged for to avoid people being D-bags and just changing out names.
A company spending millions on a MMO, wants to get their money back plus more?
The shock! The horror! ...LOL
Welcome to the real world kiddies, this is what companies do. They did not make this game for you, out of the goodness of their hearts.
You do NOT have any rights or privileges in this game. They do not owe you a darn thing, so they can make the game how they want too.
Buy it or dont, that is the only choice you have.