This is a divide and argument that I dont think will ever go away.

People who are too cheap to pay for a sub will employ ANY argument they can find against it to try to justify their cheapness and their absolutely entitled belief that they should get a a product for free "just 'cuz".

Have you followed. any media: cnn, nbc, msn, fox? Just the facts reporting has been extinct for a while. It's even more so for gaming media, with development turn around times just the facts style of reporting on games wouldn't garner enough stories or clicks to pay their staff.

Bias and opinion are one way to turn out stories and garner revenue. It's never going to be just news.

I never do, they get more hits/clicks for the big head lines. Besides the games they give 9-10/10 are junk lol.

It's amazing how not only gaming sites but people complain and moan about the $15/mo sub fee for ESO but yet no one complains about WoW costing $15/mo to play. And it's not like Blizzard still needs the money. They have enough cash to buy a country by this time.

ESO has gotten more flack for the sub fee then just about any other game recently, even wildstar and ff14 ARR didnt get it as bad, so wierd.

Not sure why anyone would expect gaming news sites to report the good aspects of, well, anything. Mainstream media news has taught us that a) reporting factual unbiased news doesn't sell and that bad news is sixier than good news, for some messed up reason. The worst part of it is that we, the masses, the sheeple, are the ones who have shown them that this model is successful.

The gaming news sites are simply following in the footsteps of the evening news, newspapers, etc.

Good Lord! Someone with a different opinion? On the internet? Break out the pitchforks and man the conspiracy theories.

This also.

People love to proclaim that the subscription model is dead while conveniently ignoring that the most successful and popular MMORPG both historically and currently is using a subscription model.

Confirmation Bias ftw.

Opinions are fine, but biased ones not so much.

I think it's a matter of people and/or gaming sites complaining about the $15/mo sub fee without giving good reasons as to why there shouldn't be a fee.

I do not like to use gender type words for one does not know what gender the read it is. I also like to use 3rd person and / or plurals not to point fingers at the reader -- the word "you" can be taken as the reader or as people in general. Best to avoid it. Just so happens, my writing style is very close to the talking of my Khajiit char. I was really talking out of char -- lol.

On topic:

It seems the like to stir the pot and throw out a negative or a hunt point just for comments seem kind of cheap way of doing? Why don't ask more of a "safe" question? graphics, TES feel, game play, crafting?

Because 'Blizzard continues to charge fee', like 'Generalissimo Franco Still Dead,' is not news. A new game, taking the relatively unusual and risky step of charging a big box price, plus a sub, is.

have you checked out FF14's box price? $50 for the digital collector's edition. $40 for the regular version. How much was TESO again?

Maybe because they didn't charge a sub fee and have a cash shop at the same time

How is it any more "risky" by charging a $15/mo fee than having it f2p? If the game svcks, people will leave regardless.

Tbh..it just strikes me as they mentioned the sub fee because its a hot debating issue atm,a nd people are starting to get used to the F2P (p2w) models.

15￡ on ps3 20￡ pc ? Price for standard ff14

Which is amusing because generally speaking people end up spending MORE money in f2p models than subscription based models. Irony.

Just assuming that is a serious question, just for the sake of argument. In the former case you are in TESO's case a minimum of ￡40 out of pocket. In the latter case you are nothing out of pocket. The box cost is a lost cost buy in to try the game and the risk is people simply won't buy in. I know two people who have made that choice having been exposed to bugged beta's.

And the same applies to each month of a sub fee.

Cash shop? give me a break....

On topic i think its more about people not actually playing the game and doing a review during beta.... worst idea ever. same goes for players and game sites.

Meh, how much respect do gaming journalists really deserve? I'm not saying to bad mouth them or anything, but they aren't exactly putting themselves in danger or affecting major social change by reporting on video games.

Some of us want news in their news shows and their ideas in their ideas shows, not a mix of the two....

I'm actually happy the game is sub based, for various reasons.

- on average the game will have less clowns because of it, not saying that being able to pay 15 bucks makes one intelligent it not being able to pay 15 bucks generally has a reason

- F2P business model is based on making the game annoying and then removing that annoyance through paying, but as the core of the game is still based on being annoying it's just not a worthwhile game even if you pay

So yeah, finally a normal western MMO with a sub system again.

I used a rough anology, but my point being that i know plenty of f2p games out there that absolutely svck and i won't play them even though they're FREE and cost me nothing. But yea I see what you're saying. I think more often than not people are using the $15/mo sub fee argument as a crutch to try to downgrade the potential success of the game persay, and then try to use arguments like "how dare them make us pay $15/mo to play" as if it costs them a ton of money when in fact that with f2p games the cash shop is WAY more expensive.

Game of the Year for PC on 2013? Path of Exile, an F2P game. No surprise.