The phrase that has been tossed around for ages has been "I have to pay $5 for live/PSN, and $15 for ESO!?!?!? but whyyyyyy?" ALT+Q+Q

Where was the outrage when you had to pay $5 and PC gamers had to pay $0 for online games? $5 vs $0 is much more of a difference than $20 vs $15.

The funny part is any serious console gamer is going to be paying this sub regardless of if they play TESO or any other MMO that is on a console. The disconnect comes at them feeling entitled to play the MMOs for less because of it, though.

The difference between 0 and 5 is 5, the difference between 15 and 20 is 5, but you say 5 > 5

Uh, no, the "difference" is still $5. You might mean something like "percentage difference."

I probably wouldn't pay for the PSN online subscription if it wasn't for TESO, however, that ￡3.50 a month, I think, will at least get me discounts on downloadable games and I think you get the occasional game for free that you can keep for a month or so. Which is cool. Overall it will be just less than ￡15 a month? And ￡350 for the console still most likely, and ￡40 for the game. So it's not all too cheap overall really. But I'll get to explore Tamriel and hit things. Good stuff.

Well if you go by percentage difference it would be 0/5 versus 15/20, there by making the percentage difference greater for the 15/20, which would disprove his point

$5 is over a billion times more than $0

$20 is only 33% more than $15

0/5 = 1 billion percent?

I never had to pay for online before and I'm cool with that.

Still it's a bit of a letdown that Microsoft and Sony can't include that into the price of their services, or it be free to play over PSN/Live instead of having to go through PS+ and Live Gold (because that is an option still). I'm still in wait and see mode, as the current MMO's I play on console are really good but I've done so much in both that I might need to go casual on them soon and find something else. DCUO had great staying power for a couple of years and it was F2P unless I wanted extra stuff, which I never got.

Still no word from either Microsoft or Sony on the issue yet. So we'll wait and see.

Pretty sure console gamers understood that already, even though you give absolutely no credit to them whatsoever in that regard for figuring it out on their own which is showcasing your expertise on them (which would be ~none btw). And what would cause them to play them for less? Nobody wants to play it for less, just be the same. Hence it's up to the console manufacturers to see it through, and if they were smart, they wouldn't charge for Gold or Plus to play ESO. Of course, anybody playing this game on console is probably playing other multiplayer games already and paying for that anyways.

So what does it matter? (nothing really).

Over a billion times more.

1,000,000,000 x 0 = 0

5 > 0

5 > 1,000,000,000 x 0 (more than a billion times greater)

this.

If you're dedicated to the series , you'll pay.

Me? I'll pay it. Money is money.

Why not factor in the cost of ownership on PC's versus Consoles.

All of my home PC purchases have been for entertainment. The average cost of a gaming rig that would be compaible to the PS4 is what like 800-1000 range?

Thats roughly 500 bucks more than a PS4. Thats 100 months at 5 bucks a month to equal out the difference in ownership right there.

I realize this is a gross oversimplification but PS4 console gamers don't really have it soo bad only paying 5 bucks a month extra if you look at it this way.

No. If you did it well, you could get a compatible PC for much less than $800.

That's a good point. My PC cost over 2 grand, so why should I have to pay for any games ever?

The difference is about 60 more a year if you include consoles. I don't see a point in Console gamers getting TESO at the price of 20 a month basically. It's not much but it does add up.

Yeah, I was just guessing at what he meant. The "arithmetic" that we are seeing is, uh, interesting.

I think the bottom line is, they made a great game, in theory. If you want to play that game, you must pay what they ask.

I know you are trying to bargain, but I see no real reason for them to lower their price when they know they already did their research into what the price should be.

Most people with an XboxOne or PS4 will pay for the online service anyway. Trying to tack that onto your "fee" for playing ESO is absurd and illogical.

By that logic, we should complain that PC's are more expensive than consoles, and how it's so unfair to be a PC gamer because our upfront cost is considerably more. ESO should be free for PC players because we already spent so much money on our computers!

Lower hardware prices are one of the things console owners claim is an advantage to their platform choice. It's a valid claim. Just that now, your $400 console has an added cost of $5 a month to get the full use of your hardware. The cost of Live/PSN memberships is part of the deal, and since it's a completely unrelated service to ESO, has no bearing on how much the game will cost per month--It would be like someone living in a rural area (such as myself) saying they should get subscription games for less because their internet costs more.

You know what, I shouldn't have to pay for ESO. My cheapest decent internet option is $45 a month.

Does that sound about right?

Guess, I'm in the same boat as you are. I pay about the same price. Never mind the fact that I stream movies, surf the web, take a couple college courses, I should be able to play ESO for free simply because I pay more than others for internet...lol. If only it worked that way...

I suppose ZOS could change the payment plan based on your yearly wage. Just send in your W2 forms and they will send you a bill based on what you can afford.

let me put this simply for you. $5 is less than $20. Why would I want to pay 4 times more to play a game? I don't give a [censored] how much pc gamers have to pay (actually, i'm a pc gamer as well as a casual console player), paying for the live/ps+ service as well as a monthly fee doesn't work well on consoles. Show me current subscription based console games that are doing well.

Hell, I'll be playing this game (after I check it out and make sure it's not WoWwannabie #15232) on PC and I still think subscription based won't work on consoles.

The fee to play the game isn't a PC or a console thing.

Its an MMO thing. Its an industry standard (omg facebook gaemz r free y I can't play liek that). Contrary to popular belief the model is not dying.

Archaic? Maybe. But not all of us agree that F2P or B2P are the right way to go. If console players want to enjoy these types of games, they'll have to get on board with the way they work, because consoles aren't going to change fundamental things about them anytime soon. Console can either join the party, or go away as far as MMOs go. PC players are fine either way.

Let me put this simply for you: That $5 is a different service, offered by a different company. Not one cent of it goes to ZOS. As an unrelated service, it has no bearing on the cost of ESO.

MMORPGs on consoles are largely untrodden ground--The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are Phantasy Star Online, FF11, DCUO, and FF14. Of those, PSO is a dead game (RIP Dreamcast), FF11 and FF14 are cross-platform and subscription based (FF11 has an alternate payment method, but someone still has to buy the Crysta), and DCUO is F2P. The market is largely unproven and untested. There's no saying for certain how console players will react ultimately. Sure, the sub will put people off, but it puts people off in the PC market as well.