Nobody looks to see the history of [censored] MMOs these days.

GOOD MMOs will continue to be able to support a sub.

Swtors content is the same couple of events rotated out every so often. the latest update it got that actually added stuff other than the cash shop was the first stuff in a long time. The rest is stuff added to the cartel market.

Smurf? What smurf?! rofl

Told you, bro. Remember that convo we had not too long ago? We called it.

Who can remember the last 5 years of copycats trying to steal WoW's customers. Ohhhh man its been so long, how can this terrible cycle of 5 years ever be broken? Woe unto the entire genre.

How many of them are actual games and not just apps? I have Angry Birds Space, but I don't think it will keep my attention as long as well done game with an Elder Scrolls setting.

To be fair it was probably Zenimax Media's decision, and not ZO. It's always the publishers that want to screw over games for profit.

Why would you go B2P and have 3 million people play...when you can go P2P, and have 1 million people play, but earn way more money!!! Good for the company, but bad for players

Why are you quoting a section dedicated to the revenue stream of apps games? No one denied that "Farmville" and similar games were insanely successful. For a bit. How's Zynga doing again these days?

I,m actually going to be paying 45$ a month that's 3 accounts cause the wife wants to play and my son wants to play on xbox1 but that's okay I don't mind if it's a good game.

I'm also thinking of going multi-month for the first time myself and I've been doing the sub thing since 2002. I haven't been this relieved in awhile, but assumed as much once Wildstar made their announcement.

You lost the moment you agreed with me. Good luck failing debate class then.

Anyway, app games are still games. If you don't think so look at the struggling pc market trying to fight the advent of phones. Oh it's just a phase! They cried. As such they also have a large population. Large enough to run statistics like the above. There are more examples. Feel free to find them. Don't feel like it? Then you have no right to say that pay to play is more profitable because the evidence speaks otherwise.

Bethesda Softworks is the publisher.

If Zenimax can do what they say they want to, they might make a go of a subscription game.

+1

Though it's going to be only $30/mo for me and my wife. But when Sushi twice a month costs $75 ($150/mo) skipping just one month pays for ESO for 5 months.

Or skipping one movie a month pays for ESO for a month

Or skipping one starbucks a week pays for ESO for a month

Or me not grabbing a burger three times a month pays for ESO for a month

etc.

What? You don't see the direct correlation between apps, facebook games and MMOs?!

Only 3 million subscriptions? However will they survive.

And Wow, old and imitated as it is, still has 7 million or so subscribers.

The people who don't want to deal with a subscription won't. If the game ever goes to f2p then they might. Or they could have moved on to the latest greatest f2p and will never touch ESO. No one can tell at this point.

So what does Zenimax Media do?.... *sigh* there's too many zenimaxes and bethesdas out there to keep track

I'm as big of a TES fan as anyone here, hell I've been on these forums since 2002 lol, and I really want this game to do very well. I just think they made a very bad decision with P2P. They're a theme park MMO with swords, quests, and magic, and no matter how different it's going to be for us, a majority of the people who play the game won't see it that way, and will leave as soon as something else comes out.

Like I said, they're choosing profit over large player numbers. Probably won't notice a difference in game cause of the mega server, but it's the principal of the thing.

I think you misread my post buddy. I know you're on autopilot to disagree with me at this point, but at least read my posts before you flame them

How come nobody is answering the question on how if F2P/B2P are "better moneymaking models", then people are calling P2P the cash grab model? You're either refusing to admit that longterm P2P is better profit, or you're admitting that you're the types of players that don't support and pay for a game and just want to play for free. Which is it, guys? Real talk time.

I don't think I did. You've been saying all day that an MMO with a subscription pretty much needs WoW numbers to survive. Which is wrong. 3 million is actually alot for the average MMO, sub or not (concurrent users, not "accounts").

Okay, we'll completely ignore the rather bizzare logical argument you made there, and instead concentrate on the other part of my argument that you conveniently overlooked. Yes, Facebook and smartphone apps games make huge piles of money. At first. And then they stop making that money very, very quickly. As in, within months. Why would Zenimax (or any developer) spend years to develop a game, only to have it stop generating income after a short time?

Actually, I lied. I'm not going to ignore it. Are you seriously equating an apps game with an MMO? Seriously? And by the way, the PC market isn't in any danger of going the way of the dodo due to smartphones and tablets. Laptops might be, but desktops definitely won't. Unless you're also trying to tell me that a smartphone or a tablet is able to equal (if not surpass) a desktop in maximum potential.

F2P and B2P aren't better moneymaking models, which is why companies go P2P. When numbers drop though, they usually remove the fee, and open up a cash shop, or open a limited F2P mode. I don't want this to happen to TESO at all. I feel that if they went B2P right out of the gate yes they would make less profit which would upset their publishers, but who cares about the publisher, the devs would be able to focus on making a good game for the players, publisher be damned.

At some point down the line the publisher is going to start telling ZO to build the game to keep subscribers, and they'll do just that. They'll try to rush out content that isn't finished, and push back bug fixes, pretty much a lot of things that aren't conducive to making players happy. It's happened many times before, and as much as I don't want it to happen here, the first step of that process started just this morning

Wait, so are subscriptions supposed to me more or less profitable than cash shops/microtransactions? Because you're saying that fewer sales but subs is more profitable, and the OP is saying that more sales and no subs is more profitable. It can't be both.

This isn't the post you asked clarifying who is who, but here goes anyway: Bethesda Softworks is the publisher. Bethesda Game Studios and Zenimax Online Studios are the developers (TES and ESO, respectively). gamesas, BGS, and ZOS are all owned by Zenimax Media. For all intents and purposes, ZM is a holding firm, and more or less under control of BGS.

Which does not address the inherent flaw with calling the decision to go with a subscription payment model as being greedy.

Greedy means you do whatever gets you the most (in this case, money).

If a cash shop is more profitable, then a subscription must be less profitable. Ergo, the subscription must be less greedy than the cash shop.

"But who cares about the publisher." "Publisher be damned."

Oh. You know, all you had to do was let us know from the beginning that you weren't taking the discussion seriously.

Player's happiness > Publisher's happiness. Can't remember many times I've heard people root for the EAs and Activisions out there. The rose tint is strong in this one!

Kind of like the rose tint on those who think that "publishers be damned" is a viable business strategy.

DAOC, Eve, Wow...3 successes with subscriptions. ESO will be far superior to all these games in many aspects thus being even more successful.

you have no idea about that though, it is only guesswork and opinion, the game still has 8-9 months till official release.

yeah lol, absolutely!