Ouch, coming from a publication like Forbes, that svcks:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/01/02/predicting-the-biggest-disaster-of-2014-the-elder-scrolls-online/

That being said, the article is full of terrible misinformation. Tear 'im apart, guys!

I saw a similar thread on TF about this and as far as I am concerned the Forbes article is crap.

That article has that title just to draw more readers in, it's full of the same nonsense we've heard before, so much false information too, only focusing on the negative.

Forbes? What is this "Forbes"? I guess there are reasons why you never hear of these things...

Besides, I only trust things from IGN or Machinima because they are well-known.

I would just like to point out two things:

1. The article has an update, admitting that what the author may have heard may not be entirely accurate.

2. This is the same section of Forbes that believed, without reservation, everything Micheal Pachter ever said. Including such gems as "Star Wars: The Old Republic will have fifty million players when they switch to f2p" and (my personal favourite) "Zynga will have more than 200 million users."

I'd take anything said on the opinion pages of Forbes with a very, very, very large grain of salt, whether it's for or against your favourite game.

thread svcks.. just saying..

Eh, I like Machinima, but I've never liked IGN, they publish so many articles and reviews that are so misinformed.

In all, I like to play games myself before making any judgement about them.

Wow. This "article" made me laugh my ass off.

It all boils down to non-Gamers and people who've never picked up a game in their life, commenting on how they think a highly anticipated video game will do based off nothing but conjecture.

End Result: the article is crap.

Some punk writing an article under a series of 'what if' scenarios: IF it costs $200 million (no one knows) and IF it will always be subscription ( I hope it stays so) and IF some players are 'less than impressed' (whatever that is suppose to mean). Its a cowardly way to write, don't go out on a limb yourself but give an interpretation of other's opinion, and only choose the ones that support your intent - to promote the importance of his prediction. The article panders to the stupid.

Wait wait... "SWTOR will have 50 million players when the switch to f2p"? hahahahahahahahahaha.

As someone who just started playing the free to play swtor (for the story of course) I can confirm that the community there is all but dead and whoever said that is an idiot. That game is literally WoW with lightsabers and a good story. Of course the subscription model was never going to work. There wasn't enough to keep people playing, not while the game it took everything from was still going strong.

Back on topic of course the article is crap and clearly the person who wrote it probably has never touched a video game in their life let alone played in the beta of ESO.

That website actually said Swtor would reach 50 million subscribers? Well, now I have to believe everything they say, obviously!

That's Michael Pachter for ya.

One of the world's only Investment anolysts who has close to an 80% rate of being incorrect in their chosen industry of investment (MP's being Gamiing and Technology) and who still has a job.

It boggles the mind why anybody would believe this clown.

the whole article is a rant against the P2P model. I guess this guy has never heard to difference in quality. Motel 6 and the Ritz, its all the same to him.

The article svcks but we cant deny the fact that its going to make people worried when they decide to google eso. They will see the link and be like well that svcks, moving on. In reality this won't affect the standard/hardcoe gamer but a general audience that dont delve deep into information and more or less skim headlines, its not looking good for them.

the article does make some good points, and the buzz around ESO has not been as good as it might be. And it is true that ESO has a clear challenge in balancing the wants of the typical Elder Scrolls player and the typical MMO player. They may end up disappointing both groups. Then again, there is a lot of overlap between those two groups (many Elder Scrolls players play MMOs, and many MMO players play Elder Scrolls, in fact I don't know many MMO players that DON'T play Elder Scrolls), so its also possible that ESO may hit a bonanza by getting players from both genres. It really all comes down to how good of a game it is at release, and how much of a compelling endgame it offers to keep players playing (and paying). The author of this article points to the disappointment of SWTOR, but its not that SWTOR was a bad game, far from it, it was a good game but one with no compelling endgame. IMO ESO has thought through the endgame issue much better than SWTOR and therefore I am much more optimistic about ESO, but on the other hand, I am not sure that ESO will offer the fluid gameplay, animations and interface that SWTOR offered (because ESO is trying to make the interface similar to Elder Scrolls).

Bottom line: the jury is out until late summer at least. A month of two after release we will have a good feel for how well ESO has met expectations for animations, gameplay and interface. But it wont be for a couple months after that until we know how well they dealt with the endgame. Remember that a month or two after release, SWTOR looked very successful, but after 2-5 months it became clear that people were quitting in droves.

I guess somebody doesn't have enough gold to pay subscription.

Most of the bad press comes from people who haven't played it, are misinformed or who think sub based models are a guaranteed failure. Most those that are informed, open to any model, and most press that has actually playe dthe game are generally positive about the game.

Not even gonna click the link... let me guess, another anti-subscription diatribe?

Well statistic shows that any MMO will fail no matter if it's F2P or P2P. And to be honest I never think MMORPGs will be a successful mainstream product ever. The MMORPG concept are designed for the gamer nerds and should stay as such.

Pretty much.

I didn't see much in there that wasn't a rant against monthly subscriptions.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/10860-The-Evolution-of-Games-Journalism

The article is ridiculous, but sadly, it is tacked on to a respectable publication about business and money (you younger people probably haven't heard of it because that isn't an issue for you yet...lucky you). Bad press is bad press I'm afraid.

On yesterday's ESOTR podcast Evarwyn made an excellent point:

Zenimax need to lift the NDA now so that the people with positive things to say can say them in public. Right now the only people breaking NDA are people who having negative things to say and don't care about not getting back into beta.

They need to let the positive word-of-mouth spread. The whole "it's really great, I can't tell you why but it's really great" thing is not working. I have so many positive things to say about ESO but I can't because I am NDA'd on it. Sure, it ain't perfect, but man there are so many things you guys don't know about that are so awesome and I can't say crap! Word of mouth from the beta testers is what will save this game's reputation before launch. Otherwise all we will get is these uninformed articles spewing BS and hyperbole to drive traffic to their sites. Sad.

Well yeah, the entire publication's focus is business and money, not games. Unfortunately it is one of the most well-respected in the world.

Intelligent observations @justin. The odds are against a new MMO suceeding today, especially being subscription, or is today's common 'wisdom'. For an MMO to have a consistent at least 500k-1m paying subscribers in the long run it has to have a good fanbase to start. does indeed starts out well and continues to give ~reason~ for people to play in the long run. The 'realm' model that ESO is based (DAoC's) MAY do the trick, it was simply brilliant and exciting model 2001-2004 till WoW came out, with its fresh look and depth (late 2004). The subscription model is also when endgame (non-PvP) IS imperative and I hope ESO has it from the start. And 'endgame' gives players the feel of a frontier that is endless, versus an end that is inevitable, the difference when a player hits it is only dependent on how fast he goes through the content.

I am betting there is enough MMOers today clamoring for a dynamic, quality MMO where a lousy $15 a month price is a none factor. IF the economics are not too out of whack, meaning costs of making the actual game, gives it time to go into the black, it will work. Since most other MMOs are going the 'mass market approach' by going F2P, one taking the opposite approach may 'discover' something which is not really nothing 'new'. Content will be everything.

The guy admits he's not a PC gamer or an MMO gamer. Discredits him right there.

Lets take some of his points though:

SWTOR Failed Because of Its Subscription: False. SWTOR failed because it was a carbon-copy WoW clone and it added nothing new to the table (also lack of endgame and post-launch updates). ESO is very different from that. ESO is innovating in a lot of ways and bringing back things that have been missing from the MMO market. Their progression system, the Alliance War, the story, the exploration based gameplay, the combat, ect. is all refreshing even if its not 100% new.

Who ever asked for an Online TES game? Well, lots of people. I'm not sure people were asking specifically for an MMO, but lots of people wanted multiplayer. This guy has obviously never read the Bethesda boards. I think the almost 2 million Facebook fans and the over 3 million beta applications suggest that there is an audience.

Bethesda isn't known for making bug free single player games... Bethesda isn't making the game.

Honestly, I think its only good for the game that expectations and hype aren't overly high. The higher you set the bar, the easier it is to disappoint. As is, I think many people will be pleasantly surprised.

It just came down to the guy hating pay to play model. Im the opposite, Ive found f2p games are not really worth the time.