Any opinion's on the purchasing model for TES:O?

[dante5186]

During PAX East 2013, while many skeptical fan's finally got to lay there hand's on the TES:O for the first time, very few asked the dev's what would be the current purchase model in mind for the company. When asked, one of the many dev's stated "We're most likely going to start out the game with monthly subscription's, and then after some time shift into free-to-play. We're still planning how to roll thing's out."

I personally prefer Buy-to-play, a similar model used in game's such as Guild War's 2. for me, it's less of a burden, and make's me more comfortable with the game, knowing I'm not expecting any more cash flowing out of my wallet, and knowing what I have to pay to play the game has already been paid.

The argument for me when it comes to free-to-play is that, eventually you're gonna be spending more than you're average $50-$70 for a game. and depending how they execute it, we're due to see ad's and many micro-transaction's for thing's of convenience.

With monthly subscriptions, You're constantly paying monthly, whether you play the game or not. What if around due time, a game you been anticipating releases? Such as... TES:VI for example? You're expecting on spending several hour's if not hundred's in a game. But at that given time, you'll be paying for another title which is currently idle in you'r, what I like to call "To play list"

I'm open to comment's and I'd like to hear you're opinions on the matter, as the purchasing model has not been confirmed yet, simply "rumored"
What would you prefer? and what are you're reasons? and what do you think of other possible model's?

[Taters]

Firstly, I think free-to-play, while initially appealing, is the worst choice of the three. Free-to-play might allow anyone who wants to to play the game, but using microtransactions for gear, or, worse, abilities and leveling, tends to make for a grossly unbalanced system where those with the most money have a leg up on everyone else.

Buy-to-play isn't bad; I played the original Guild Wars and really enjoyed it.

Subscriptions, to me, are the best way to go. Yes, in the long run they cost much more money than either of the other two options, but that extra money tends to go to things like more content, speedier bug fixes and better customer service. For example, I don't think World of Warcraft would be the behemoth it is without all the revenue of monthly fees.

Basically, IMO, you get what you pay for.

[AKB]

I would prefer all three. All models have their own advantages, so why not do them all? You can have it free for everyone, but you can pay for what you want. You can have a small subscription fee, that basically gives all the benefits of buying the game for those who are undecided if they'll be dedicate. And lastly have a lump sum payment that gives you life membership to the game's server. You get exactly what you're willing to pay for. This method attracts casuals and other MMO players while also giving normal ES players a chance to actually 'own' the game.

[Skrofler]

I really dislike FTP, but not because it's unfair or anything. After all, money spent equals time spent and what do I care if you bought that new suit for 30 dollars or 30 hours of grinding? As long as there are no exclusive items in shop it's perfectly fair.
No, I dislike FTP because it gives developers an incentive to make more cheesy items that lures money out of players' pockets instead of making game content that is actually fun. It also leads them to make content that can't be reached or completed without that special item or ability that, oh, just happened to be store exclusive.

BTP is a meaningless term because it doesn't generate nearly enough money to keep the game going, so it still needs either subs or cash shop to go around, and in fact it's just a way of getting people to pay up front for your FTP product. It's the worst of the three because everybody loses.

All the quality MMOs I've played, and all that I stayed in for long (EVE, WAR and WoW), were strictly by subscription and still are. These are easily the best MMOs I've had.
GW2, AoC, SWToR, Fallen Earth, Darkfall, (DDO), EQ2 and others came up seriously short for one reason or the other, although to be fair EQ2 might have lasted if I just wasn't bored with the EQ/WoW style game when I tried it. After all it was on subscription for a long time and it didn't lack content like so many of the others.

[Chaos the N'wah]

I've played games of all three and largely don't care, so long as it doesn't fall into the oft used term "pay to win" where games limit content or give exceedingly powerful boons that cannot be matched by those willing to put in the extra time, but not the scratch.

Having said that, I believe all MMOs should have some kind of cash shop; not only because it can add the extra revenue needed to fund server upkeep, but because having the game itself sell ingame currency reduces the likehood of large masses of "gold sellers" (particularly when it comes to spamming in Chat or via the mail system)

[Alarra]

I've not played an MMO before, but just from my experience as a gamer, buy-to-play is most appealing to me. I can easily see how free-to-play would be a bad idea, so I don't like that one. As far as a monthly subscription, I worry about what that would cost, and besides that, I tend to leave games alone for a while before going back to them, especially when life gets busy. (I haven't played Skyrim or Oblivion since March, and that was because of Spring Break.) The nice thing about buy-to-play would be that once I have it, I have it - no need to fear that my money's going to be going down the drain if I only get a chance to play two or three times a month.

[dante5186]

As I come to imagine, B2P would be more appealing for console players, or fans of the Elder Scrolls series in general, that have not come to try any sort of MMO.

I myself have played a handful of MMO's but I've never considered investing hour's in an MMO seriously. I tend to login more from here to there. That's why I prefer B2P.

I never thought about it until now, but I feel Mr. Roboto is on to something... What if it had all models?
All F2P, B2P, and Monthly subscriptions in a single packaged game for the consumers preference?
Of course, while it's far fetched, it seems possible, and a great idea if executed correctly.
F2P players would have to be restricted, but in a way that leaves the game balanced. Remember how the Devs stated they would allow "New Game+" and "New Game++"? So once you've finished with one character, you can start again in a different faction? Only thing I have in mind now, is only allowing one play through for the F2P players, and some alternate restrictions. Maybe limiting the game by giving limited access to several dozen maps and capping level ups until Lvl 20? Adding several packages of content (such as access to high leveled maps) and to further unlock the game, piece by piece through micro-transactions?

Example -
Purchase the Colovian Highlands areas with level 18+ mobs for $5
Purchase LVL 50+ Level cap increase $5
Purchase an additional faction character slot $15 (In this case maybe my F2P character which means I'm restricted to a single play through, with NO new game+, is in the Aldmeri Dominion. Buying this gives me acces to make another character in Ebonheart Pact or Daggerfall Covenant.)

The B2P method would be equal to that of the F2P when purchasing all of the packages of content, giving you access to everything in the core game. But expansions (DLC such as Wrath of the Lich King, and Mist's of Pandaria when referring to expansions for WoW) would have to be purchased separately and then Players who are subscribed, get all of the content, including expansions as part of they're subscription?

It'd be a dream if it worked like that, it definitely attract a wide range of players from both hardcore MMO's and casual Rpg's. But it's hard to say at the present time.

I'd think some cool expansions would be to different realms of oblivion ( Something like Shivering Isles) since most of the continents in the Elder Scrolls lore that aren't Tamriel are barely habitable for man.

[TheOogyBoogyMan]

I've never stuck to any of the good MMO's, because of their monthly payment plans. The idea that I would constantly spend money every month for an indefinite time for just one game seemed absurd. That being said, I would totally pay monthly for ES:O. I love The Elder Scrolls and that payment option seems to be the method that would provide me with the best game possible. The last thing I need is another glitchy mess that the developers can't be bothered to fix due to a lack of funds.

It will be interesting to see if other console players such as myself remain so dedicated to the brand in this endeavor.

[iamlegend]

what I personally would like to see, is definitely not F2P, I hate that, but I would like P2P, but since I'm not really familiar with a lot of P2P MMO's,
can you play like 5 months, so pay like 5 times a certain monthly price, and then stop for 3 months so you don't pay those 3 months, are you at the same level and things like that when you start to play again? shortly, do you keep your progress?
Or do you have to pay constantly, even if you don't play?

[Avron the S'wit]

I personally find B2P much more appealing, and subscriptions are great, but they're not for everyone. I think having to financially contribute to the game in some way, shape, or form does help promote a user base who at least cares a little about the gameplay, which I think makes a difference in MMOs.

There's always the possibility for in-game markets or special weapons or extras for paid users, which is appealing, but can get a little unfair. I played a MUD that was free to play, but they offered lessons (as that was how you learned special skills without leveling up, and you had a limited number per level otherwise), items, properties, etc. to those who contributed cash. It's fun...for the paying users. They're the ones who really ended up accelerating way beyond the level of anyone who was F2P, which made a lot of uneven playing field among the user base. The system works if it also helps promote keeping everyone on a realistic scale; making it amazing for the payers but reaching a point where it becomes tough for the free players only causes agony, in my experience.

[iamlegend]

Well, first I thought too that B2P was best, but I'm not really very familiar with MMO's, like said (I played 2 of them, were F2P).
After reading this topic through, Lots of people say that P2P is better so that the game continues to release good updates and such things..
B2P or P2P for me...
F2P is unfair

[Kinzer]

I'd like either B2P or P2P. That way everything is available to every player and there doesn't have to be a grind in order to entice players to buy things. So I guess if I had to choose I'd say P2P, as long as the price is reasonable.

[Chaos the N'wah]

what I personally would like to see, is definitely not F2P, I hate that, but I would like P2P, but since I'm not really familiar with a lot of P2P MMO's,
can you play like 5 months, so pay like 5 times a certain monthly price, and then stop for 3 months so you don't pay those 3 months, are you at the same level and things like that when you start to play again? shortly, do you keep your progress?
Or do you have to pay constantly, even if you don't play?

In most subscription based MMOs you have the option to buy game cards en lieu of a payment plan (6 - 12 month increments), for the most part they play as if you were playing a normal plan and don't limit your character, staying the same as you had last played.

So yes you normally keep your progress (I can't think of a game that resets characters outside of cases where an account hasn't been accessed within years and GMs will store your characters' data and delete the immediate access to save on space in order to either downsize servers, shutdown said servers, or repeated instances of violations without response from the original email or via support)

For both Subs and their game cards, when you buy the hours the clock starts ticking and doesn't track hours played

Personally I always opted for the Sub, since quite a few MMOs give discounts for longer sub-times (Average game card or 6 month sub is around $15, but I've had subs as low as $9.50 on an 18 month sub plan which saved around $100 if I had continued to buy game cards within that time span)

[Octagonapus97]

I'd be perfectly fine with P2P in the form of game cards á là Xbox LIVE.

[Enodoc]

I'd be perfectly fine with P2P in the form of game cards á là Xbox LIVE.

Same here. If we can buy chunks of time (say cards for 3 or 6 months at a time) rather than having to pay something every month, and if that also results in a discount, say $10 for 3 months at once instead of $5 per month (<- is that a sensible suggestion, or are these values too low? ) then that would be OK with me too.

[iamlegend]

I'd be perfectly fine with P2P in the form of game cards á là Xbox LIVE.

Same here. If we can buy chunks of time (say cards for 3 or 6 months at a time) rather than having to pay something every month, and if that also results in a discount, say $10 for 3 months at once instead of $5 per month (<- is that a sensible suggestion, or are these values too low? ) then that would be OK with me too.

I think that 5/month is a little too low, since the few P2P games I know are at least 7/month

[Yaije]

1. server access
2. expansions
3. game shop
4. re-customization
5. server transfers
6. The Box (a.k.a. the game)

I don't like paying real world money for more than 3 of the above. Game shop excluded from that count, of course. Aside from WoW I haven't played any game that does require payment for the above list in it's entirety and I don't plan to unless it's a game that manages to add more content in each of it's updates beyond class balance changes and a few multiplayer only areas (yes I'm aware of the second M in MMO... I like the first one to go with it though).

I'm unconvinced that a sub fee is what makes a good game, and tend to ignore a game if I have to spend more than $90 (or it's equivalent) on any given year.

Spoiler:

WoW....price tag on everything almost. Even stuff you get for free in Runescape.

b2p, is starting to look pretty good for some games. Add in a cash shop and then it's all a matter of how the game handles it's in game economy and loot distribution in relation to it.

edit: Don't forget there's the method similar to Swtor where is essentially f2p with a store and members get currency added to spend in it. Only reason it doesn't appeal to me in ToR is that if you don't pay for some things it feels really limited....

Spoiler:

couldn't make up a new character to look like another toon I created when subbed and some races were locked out.... like mirilian and twilek smugglers

[LtAscott]

B2P is awesome but then it ends up like skyrim, that only really pays for all the work that happened pre-release, if you want them to take the game seriously and continue working on it diligently, u need the subscription fee model, every game that has been f2p with an item shop or whatever has been horrid. It is a total crap chute because they need the money from the item shops or whatever to keep the game going. The thing with subscription based games: higher ups (corporate guys) stay off the developers backs and just let them do their thing, the only thing they have to worry about is keeping the game fresh for people to continue playing; expansions, additional content, etc. Subscription is the best way to go to ensure the best and most balanced game possible. Besides, if you think about it its really not that much money, for the price of going and seeing a movie (without snacks) you get a months worth of entertainment. Fair trade for me, besides bethesda/zenimax deserve to be a bigger company, they have an excellent staff and make great games. Hopefully they dont go the way of blizzard tho, diablo 3 was the worst piece of [&@%!] i have ever played, HORRIBLE game ugh. When a company is making good games that have a long life (im still playing oblivion/morrowind overhaul/fo3/skyrim to this day) they deserve to be successful, as soon as they make a garbage game that sucks, wait to buy the next one.

[Yaije]

I'd think profit earned at any point in the development cycle is profit, rather than splitting it up into where the profit goes. The only way box sales wouldn't be paying for new development is if no new boxes were getting sold. Also, much like Skyirm you wouldn't be getting major updates for free (no modding community will likely be supported like in Skyrim)

I also suggest you go out and look at some F2P games if you haven't found a decent one yet, there are some that handle the same issues you'd see in a full on P2P game. Granted most of those decent f2p games are completely focused in one thing. Like Dust514 or League of Legends (no cost to sign up, no cost to play, optional cash shop that might get you to buy something that doesn't really impact your gameplay directly that would eventually be obtainable normally through in game actions).

The Subscription fees actually wind up going to customer service more than towards new content anyways.

[Skrofler]

I also suggest you go out and look at some F2P games if you haven't found a decent one yet, there are some that handle the same issues you'd see in a full on P2P game. Granted most of those decent f2p games are completely focused in one thing. Like Dust514 or League of Legends

That's exactly the issue. Dust514 and LoL aren't comparable to big MMORPGs at all when it comes to development cost and scale.

The Subscription fees actually wind up going to customer service more than towards new content anyways.

That sounds like a popular myth but of course good customer is a must too. Content updates, bug fixes and customer service are what signifies a solid P2P MMO.

[Yaije]

That's exactly the issue. Dust514 and LoL aren't comparable to big MMORPGs at all when it comes to development cost and scale.

Maybe the initial development cost, but the post release is what I'm doubtful of. I'm more thinking of what all happens after launch, Dust in particular is interesting because it's the guys from eve, making a new MMO and shoving it into eve while not really changing Eve all that much. It's now 10 days old (post release) and I think it's worth taking note of to see where it winds up.

The Subscription fees actually wind up going to customer service more than towards new content anyways.

That sounds like a popular myth but of course good customer is a must too. good Content updates, bug fixes and customer service are what signifies a solid P2P MMO.

gotta clarify that update bit somehow. Going a few months and getting nothing new beyond the buff/nerf cycle isn't exactly appealing.

[Mr.Argonian]

With the recent announcement of Rift going F2P, it seems WoW stands alone as the only subscription fee MMORPG on the market at this time. If ES:O goes a subscription fee as I fell it most likely will, I fear it will become another SWOTOR, with a lack of subscribers after a few months. Subscription fees just don't seem to work anymore, with the exception of WoW, with their already established fan base. But even WoW has lost subscribers and it looks like subscription fees are a thing of the past.

[dzio]

I really think they should go with B2P. They could get away with P2P, I think, because they also have an established fan base - all of us, fans of single-player TES games. With the huge success of Skyrim I don't think they'd lack subscribers. But on the other hand single-players are a somewhat different breed and many TES fans are perfectly happy to sink hundreds of hours into their games, but not necessarily over a short period of time, playing for hours every day or almost every day. They should notice that a large group of their most devoted fans are not hardcore gamers.

For me a monthly subsription would be one reason never to try ES:O. I'm 30. I have a job, I have my studies, I have a life. I'm not going to pay a (probably rather high) monthly fee and then not have time to touch the game for the next week, or two, or three. But if I can buy it and play whenever I can find the time - count me in.

[Taters]

I really, really don't like the idea of b2p with a cash shop. I've played some games like that and you always have a handful of people who buy everything and are OP without even trying, while most of the rest scramble around getting whatever loot drops normally and not doing nearly as well. Heck, look at Diablo 3's real money auction house. It was unbalanced from the start, and Blizzard is(from what I've read) planning to get rid of it.

[dzio]

But they say they're going to set up RP-focused servers for ES:O and you'll be able to choose if you want to play with powergamers or casuals, or roleplayers, or whatever. I don't know, my entire MMORPG experience is about 10 hours of WoW, so I don't know jack s**t, but it looks to me that if they implement B2P right, we could pay once and then have as much fun as we want, while the people you're decribing will be paying for our customer service two servers away. The point is, if it's B2P they need to figure out a way to separate the RP crowd and the "my daddy's credit card is bigger than your daddy's credit card" crowd. If they manage to do that, we'll have a blast and they can have their d**k measuring contest in another room.