dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
33459
share rss forum feed


shinjuru
Premium,Mod
join:2000-10-29
West Coast
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet

Elder Scrolls Online Doomed?

Well, according to Forbes it is! It's a pretty good read about the subscription based MMO model.

said by Forbes :

Though the Elder Scrolls is certainly a beloved series, and we all have our own fond memories of Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind and so on, it’s certainly no Star Wars, and an MMO version of the game isn’t something that deserves anywhere remotely near a $200M budget.

There are some who are saying that by being cross-platform, an MMO that functions on PC, PS4 and Xbox One, that the game will have an expanded reach that SWTOR, and most other MMOs, don’t.

Yes, that’s true, in theory. I certainly would give TESO a shot on my One or PS4, even though I’m not normally a big PC MMO guy. But then I, and all other console players like me, will slam into the iron gate that’s the game’s $15 monthly subscription fee.

No thanks.

Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no patience for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model. It’s something almost never seen across console titles especially, and while TESO might have put up Skyrim-ish sales numbers with fee-less release, that $15 charge is going to severely limit their cross-platform audience to only the series’ most devoted fans.

I’m not sure if it’s arrogance, the idea that people love the Elder Scrolls so much they’ll pay $60 for a box copy and $180 a year to play TESO, but it’s bad business sense at the very least. It’s not only subscription fees that are becoming out of fashion, but the very concept of huge budget, AAA MMOs in general. I thought SWTOR was the final object lesson any other studio would need to scale back whatever future plans they had for their own expensive MMO attempts, but it appears that lesson didn’t sink in for TESO, and they may end up paying the price for it.

Know Your Audience

This goes back to a fundamental question that I asked when The Elder Scrolls Online was first announced. Who ever even asked for an Elder Scrolls MMO? While there were plenty of people clamoring for a better version of Star Wars Galaxies, or even a few wondering what a multiplayer version of KOTOR would look like before The Old Republic came out, I can’t say the same is true for The Elder Scrolls. The series has first and foremost always been the quintessential single player game. You, the hero, explore a vast countryside, taking on quests and saving the day. I don’t think many players ever stopped and thought “This would be so much better with 50 other versions of me running around with names above their heads.”

In short, Bethesda and Zenimax spend an ungodly amount of money developing a game for an audience that may not even exist.

Read he rest of this story over at »www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/···-online/
--
Data - Game-Tech - Nor*Cal


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
I've enjoyed my short time in the couple Betas I've been in with this game for the most part. But...it'll take nothing short of a miracle for me to actually pay a subscription fee to play this game. Unless something drastically changes on the next Beta and convinces me otherwise.

I already pretty much stopped playing GW2, which is a great game, and completely subscription free. The damn non stop grinding got old years ago for me though. First with WoW, next with SWTOR, and then with GW2.

I just think a vast majority of people out there don't give a flying fuck about MMOs anymore.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
I agree. Looks like a fantastic game, but the subscription model is likely to put a dent in the potential number of players.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON
Reviews:
·MTS
reply to shinjuru
My 2 cents...

It's a game set in the world of Elder scrolls, but it's not an Elder Scroll game. It misses the freedom that came with the single players games.

As such, it looks very much like a Wow theme park, with attendant limitations and grinds.

I'll pass and wait for a true sequel.


MacBridger
Late to the party
Premium
join:2001-01-11
Morgantown, WV
That's my biggest disappointment, it's a WoW clone.


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5

2 recommendations

said by MacBridger:

That's my biggest disappointment, it's a WoW clone.

It's not a WoW clone. I played WoW for years. ESO looks and plays nothing like it in the slightest.


banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
Premium
join:2001-08-18
Frisco, TX
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to shinjuru
I've played all the Elder Scrolls games since Daggerfall, but I do not do MMOs, I do not pay subscription fees and I absolutely will not be buying this.
--
"The counsel of fools is all the more dangerous the more of them there are." -?lafr H?skuldsson


TigerLord
UEE Citizen
Premium,Mod
join:2002-06-09
Canada
kudos:8

1 recommendation

reply to shinjuru
Most of us said they were insane to go with a subscription based model when the original announcement was made, so BBR predicted this way before Forbes

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
reply to shinjuru
Yeah, of course its doomed. It has a monthly fee, on top of a base price of $60 you have to pay just to get the game on to your pc/console, and I've heard it has an in game cash shop(but I cannot confirm myself since I've not played). So yeah were it base price + ingame cash shop fine, or even monthly fee + ingame cash shop thats okay too, but base price and a monthly fee, and maybe a cash shop, = hell no for me.

Not to mention the fact that it doesn't even look as good as skyrim, we may all know why and be okay with that but console players most likely do not and will not be okay with it. They are caught up in the "next gen" BS and will probably whine endlessly about how its not as good graphics as last gen. Plus they've never had a monthly fee for just one game before so that could be hard for anyone who pays $60 for a game already to wrap their head around.

All in all it just looks very bad for them, add on the fact that there are no mods and I cannot see it doing well.


Ghastlyone
Premium
join:2009-01-07
Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
said by me1212:

Not to mention the fact that it doesn't even look as good as skyrim

It looks better than Vanilla Skyrim by miles. Not as good as a fully modded Skyrim, but really, you can't compare the two.

said by me1212:

we may all know why and be okay with that but console players most likely do not and will not be okay with it. They are caught up in the "next gen" BS and will probably whine endlessly about how its not as good graphics as last gen.

TESO looks better than pretty much anything last generation consoles had to offer. It really does have nice graphics. I don't see any consoles players complaining about the graphics when this releases.

said by me1212:

Plus they've never had a monthly fee for just one game before so that could be hard for anyone who pays $60 for a game already to wrap their head around.

This one is going to be interesting. Part of me wants to think it won't go over well. The other part of me believes that it won't be an issue because console players are okay with forking over annual subscription fees year after year for their "free games" and online play, and enjoy paying full price for most their games anyways.

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
Must have been some graphical upgrades, I've not seen any screen shots since the beta started.

They may be okay with it when it get them "free" games but 3 times that(psn+ is $5 iirc) a month for just one game and no free stuff. eehh I dont see it going well.


mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON
Reviews:
·MTS
reply to me1212
said by me1212:

Plus they've never had a monthly fee for just one game before so that could be hard for anyone who pays $60 for a game already to wrap their head around.

Actually, not quite right. FFXI has that honour.


me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
Oh yeah, I forget that came out...


Savious
Premium
join:2012-03-05
Belgrade, MT
kudos:4
reply to shinjuru
If this game is as addictive and expansive as classic WoW, I'd pay $30 a month.

The feeling of a whole new world, smooth game play, endless possibilities and polished end game are tantalizing.
--
Gaming with me is better than sex.

dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
reply to shinjuru
Since people were attempting to mod multiplayer into oblivion and skyrim, people wanted a 'Elder scrolls multiplayer', not a MMO where you are limited to playing solely online.


cat666

join:2013-04-26
reply to shinjuru
I've said it before and I'll no doubt say it again but subscription based MMO's cannot work in this current climate.

1. It puts casual gamers right off.
2. It puts WoW devotees off of trying it.
3. The game is left being played by mostly hardcore MMO gamers who proceed to bitch and whine about it being a WoW clone before leaving it for the next "big" MMO.

The result, as RIFT and SWTOR found out, is you have an near empty MMO, almost devoid of life, which has been labelled a failure by the media as it hasn't reached the impossible task of getting more subs than WoW, which puts yet more people off.

GW2 has the right idea. One price then pay to speed the end game up. Console players are happy with this setup, casual gamers are happy, and even WoW devotees will try it as there is no subscription. More players = better press = more players.

Chuck_IV

join:2003-11-18
Connecticut
said by cat666:

GW2 has the right idea. One price then pay to speed the end game up. Console players are happy with this setup, casual gamers are happy, and even WoW devotees will try it as there is no subscription. More players = better press = more players.

That's the way LOTRO went and when they did, they initially tripled their income. I dunno where LOTRO is today in terms of profitability, but it's still gotta be good considering they just released another expansion. I have several friends who are playing it now with me. They started because it was F2P but have since spent money on points because they saw the advantages of it and one even decided to really jump in and buy the 4-Pak expansion pak for $20 and get a bunch of included points along with VIP status. If LOTRO was still a sub based game, none of them would have even bothered.

In this day and age, I think when you give people the OPTION to pay, they will, when the right time(s) come(s). Forcing them to maintain a sub to play is just not going to work well anymore.


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to shinjuru
Any MMO past WoW is totally screwed. WoW perfected it. It is now done.

HOWEVER... ESO could be amazing if it did the following;

Look and play like skyrim, fully modded graphics. Tank, healer, dps (range, magic, melee). No classes, just specializations. Play like skyrim without a pause button. minimal UI. That would PRINT money like the treasury.

Why is DayZ going insane right now? Non-traditional open world mmo.
--
"If something about the human body disgusts you, complain to the manufacturer" - Lenny Bruce
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
reply to me1212
said by MacBridger:

That's my biggest disappointment, it's a WoW clone.

said by me1212:

I've heard it has an in game cash shop(but I cannot confirm myself since I've not played).

Let me first say that there are many people who haven't played the betas and know nothing about the game making predictions. I think that everyone should at least play the game first before assuming they know what the game plays like. The Microtransactions are much like WoW has now. Only cosmetic changes. Lots of rumors and haters are trying to link it as a play to win which is not the case, at least so far.

Now, as for this game being doomed, I really don't know what is going to happen. After playing the betas, I can say that I will sub to this game and buy it in the short term. Will I play it long term? I have no idea. I think the game has promise, but I don't know if it will have lasting appeal or not. I will be taking a chance on this game for sure though.

I believe that gamers will pay for a quality product with lots of content updates. Will ESO deliver on these promises? Time will tell. I will be in on the ground floor of this game for sure though. I am guardedly optimistic that this game will be a good one.

As for people complaining about the $15 a month cost, I really think that people should put it in perspective. If you pay for the game and play for a year, thats $225 (first month free). If you are playing the game 30 hours a month, thats 360 hours in the year. Thats a value gaming proposition when you look at the cost in relation to the hours spent. When I was playing WoW, I was in the game for more than 30 hours a month, but I digress.....

In the end, anyone predicting this game is going to be a hit or a miss at this stage is really just guessing.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
reply to Mike
said by Mike:

Why is DayZ going insane right now? Non-traditional open world mmo.

That game does look interesting, but the servers are limited to 40 players at a time from what I read. I also don't know how I feel about a game that rewards people being dicks. I am not a dick so I guess that game wouldn't appeal to me.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
reply to cat666
said by cat666:

The result, as RIFT and SWTOR found out, is you have an near empty MMO

Rift and SWTOR sucked badly. In order for a MMO to be successful with a subscription today, it has to have a lot of content and variety. Rift and SWTOR didn't have those things. They had a story and a limited endgame, which isn't enough.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
reply to Nightfall
Life awards people for being dicks. It's totally open world.

Then go be a vigilante. Get some friends and chase down the bandits.


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to Nightfall
Im not buying it, so it doesn't matter to me I don't have a horse in this race...its not a TES game to me because all the freedom that has made the TES is not in this game, it couldn't be, else it would have no game play balance at all...

Those who want to play this game, and pay for it. more power to you...its your money, and its a free country as far as I know, but I'll be surprised if this game can sustain the numbers with a subscription...its just hard now days to do that no matter what the genre...

They should have just had a one-time online fee like Borderlands, Homefront, etc, where you pay $10 dollars ONE TIME and you can play the online portion forever....If they would have done that, I probably would have picked up the game. however subscriptions are just being greedy plain and simple...and im not paying 15 dollars a month to play a game...no game is worthy buying and having to pay 15 dollars a month...least not for me....
--
Tech Tips


Savious
Premium
join:2012-03-05
Belgrade, MT
kudos:4
reply to shinjuru
I don't put a lot of stock in people saying "subscription is a thing of the past".

Any student of history will tell you history repeats itself.

Previous subscription based games have failed because they were not good games, not because they were subscription based. SWTOR and Rift both went F2P, but people still aren't playing them.

If they weren't being played because of the subscription cost, wouldn't people be playing now?

F2P and micro transactions work, but they are not the only choice.

If ESO is a good game, it will spread via word of mouth and people will pay.
--
Gaming with me is better than sex.


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
reply to Mike
said by Mike:

Life awards people for being dicks. It's totally open world.

Then go be a vigilante. Get some friends and chase down the bandits.

I guess that I have been winning at the game of life without being a dick then. Maybe I found a way to hack life.

I need to find some people to play the game with then.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
Reviews:
·ooma
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
reply to Savious
said by Savious:

I don't put a lot of stock in people saying "subscription is a thing of the past".

Any student of history will tell you history repeats itself.

Previous subscription based games have failed because they were not good games, not because they were subscription based. SWTOR and Rift both went F2P, but people still aren't playing them.

If they weren't being played because of the subscription cost, wouldn't people be playing now?

F2P and micro transactions work, but they are not the only choice.

If ESO is a good game, it will spread via word of mouth and people will pay.

This right here....

Gamers will pay for and play a quality game. If ESO fits the bill, then it will be successful. If not, it will go F2P and then disappear.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net


Savious
Premium
join:2012-03-05
Belgrade, MT
kudos:4
^


Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
reply to Savious
Agreed. Games fail because they fail to engage the user and keep them coming back for more. Free or paid it doesn't matter. If the game can't hook the user, then the user moves on.

Currently I play a few games, but none of which am I hooked on.
Back in the mid 90's I played a game, and I was hooked on it. To the point that I quit a job so I could play the game longer.
Thanks to that game, I've sorta have yet to find a MMO that can hold my interest.
Maybe Shroud of the Avatar will be the one. Or maybe Star Citizen.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?.


SixOfNine
Brake In A Ladylike Manner.
Premium
join:2001-08-30
Sterling, VA
reply to shinjuru
Also, it seems like there's only one price book for every game that tries the subscription model, i.e., $15/month for monthly payments. One of these companies should try halving that price.
--
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.


Ast1

@80.79.208.x
Can't say I am interested in this MMO but it has nothing to do with the fact it has a sub. I don't like F2P, they are F2P for a reason usually - because they are crappy and they attract a crappy sort of crowd. Sure, you get big numbers fast but they leave just as fast.
Given a monthly sub is less than a cinema ticket I have no issue paying that pitance for a lot more hours of entertainment.

The only reason WoW is preventative of new games with a sub model is because people keep trying to immitate the same shitty game WoW was - the mass market crowd pleaser, but they can't match WoW because:
a) Blizzard had such a giant following it was inevitably going to sell a lot
b) If you make an easy 'casual friendly game' you are directly competing with WoW which is an established mammoth of a game, while in theory you open your game up for 'the most people' they are already happy in a game so you are not dragging them away
c) Blizzard clearly sold its soul to the devil to make that game a success

If they keep making baige games, it doesn't matter if you F2P or subscription the game, it's going nowhere.