This article worries me :-/

http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/02/25/elder-scrolls-online-inviting-millions-for-stress-test-while-f/

Free to play will ruin this game IF it happens. IF

ffs how do you get free to play out of that. Stop worrying the game isnt out yet, and when it comes out im sure it will give you your monies worth.

Haha I hear yah. The plus side is, that the game itself has been on the up swing opinion wise with a lot of people. Just bad when you hear crap like that from people inside the company.

Well, aside my disgust for my sub paying the marketing team, the dev team so far listens to players, they seems to consider our opinions worth their jack and not just "oh cool idea... yea sure..."

So far they're worth the money, hopefully they just use the community as a idea base and not depend on it to make more content as the game progresses.

But I wouldn't worry about the content, not for 6 months, after that there are a few fears that i'll have to check to see a potential future.

With their actions so far, it's going a good way, unless they allow their marketing team to completely screw the game with their money making "strategies".

Go to the article they got that from. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/450862/interviews/interview-bethesdas-pete-hines-on-the-legacy-of-wolfenstein-and-the-eso-subscription-model/

Elder Scrolls is probably your flagship series at Bethesda. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/pc/mmo/10596/star-wars-the-old-republic/ didn't work with a subscription model and that's one of the biggest entertainment brands in the world. Is there any anxiety about this model not working?

Anxiety? I would say yes, because I'm anxious about everything all the time [laughs]. I don't get paid to sit around and assume that everything is fine, so I tend to worry about everything and I want to make sure that we're doing things in the right way for the right reasons. But I guess, to answer your question, I don't know whether or not previous games that have done subscriptions haven't succeeded because they were subscription-based, or because of the game that they were and the value that the customer got, and that's ultimately what we're talking about.

If you feel like you're getting your money's worth for whatever you're paying - whether it be $15 for a month or $2 for a DLC - then you're going to be happy. If you're not, then you won't. You could do a free-to-play game where somebody wasn't happy, because maybe they don't feel like they're getting value for the money that they played upfront, even if it's not a pay-by-month subscription. We felt like the subscription model fit best what we wanted to do, not because we want you to pay per month to play the game, but because we want to provide real and meaningful content support on a regular basis.

That's not just a few items or a thing here and there, that's real significant stuff that adds to the game in a whole host of ways, and doing so needs a good sized group of people who are working on and creating new stuff. That's stuff we can start working on now, as well as stuff we can work on when we start to get player feedback.

There's a couple of Guild quest lines in the game at the moment, but there are certainly noticeable Guilds that aren't in the game - there's no Dark Brotherhood, for example. You can't set aside a bunch of people to work on a cool Dark Brotherhood quest line unless you've figured out a way that you're going to pay those bodies to spend that time. Otherwise you'd just put them onto something else. We feel like this approach is going to give people who want to play the best value, and reason to look forward to the next new thing that's coming out. The Elder Scrolls is our crown jewel and it's the series that made everything we do possible, so it's a big triple-A title that demands huge, ongoing triple-A support.

Hopefully they will look beyond a quick buck to see that people who will play this game long term will make it more financially viable, and also not kill off Elder Scrolls in general.

Uh, I felt like it pretty obvious based upon what he said. I was by no means saying that it WILL go free to play. But he is exec status so what he says no matter how/what he says does have a little weight. I certainly don't want that to happen.

Thanks Talaran, context is key.

Even... EVEN if it goes f2p, it's not the end of the world. Free to play does not necessarily mean pay to win.

With how the marketing team handled the pre-orders, I can say that once....well... IF...IF it goes f2p they will just release these poopholes of a marketing team and it will go pay to win within a month.

Sub is the only thing holding those guys in chains, remove that security layer and a great game will get slaughtered, mauled by them.

I think he needs to borrow Frior's clean up team.

I'd be worried if they WEREN'T anxious over a project with this much hype and uncertainty after a little over half a decade of development time and god only knows how much money invested.

They'd be fools to not be worried.

Pretty sure the payment model conversation was in regards to Xbox One forcing Gold on people who want to ESO.

Swtor was involved with EA... EA!!! I mean I honestly saw swtor and said meh it's an EA game I'll just try it when theirs a trial.

So, I have to ask the obvious question: why didn't you just go to the original argument in the first place, instead of immediately leaping to conclusions and panicking?

Watch this from a completely different perspective: if (any) game goes free 2 play...its because it is already is destroyed.

Ah yes, the old "SW:TOR went F2P" thing where nobody puts things in context (such as issues with the game itself) and where somehow 700k subs was a failure - I admit, it was probably a failure to meet EA/Bioware's expectations but at the time it went F2P it still had a sub base that many MMOs would kill for.

People need to stop worrying about SW:TOR and assuming that, just because it went F2P, any MMO to follow has to go the same way.

I will also say that, whilst the Massively article did link to the CVG interview, it was a shame they choose to frame Pete's answer like that, making a personal character trait (which I'm sure many of us also share in our work) into a sweeping statement about ZOS. CVG could have also asked the question a little differently imo but, regardless, Pete gave a great answer as to why the sub model is better for ESO.

Massively consistently has such dramatic, poor quality posts. They certainly grind their axe against ESO any chance they get (seems to be some retaliation for not getting first dibs on a hand's on for the game).

Zero actual credibility there.

But teh DRAMA!!!!

The people who don't like the sub plan are going to click on the link. People who like the sub plan are going to click on the link. If they reported what was actually said, they wouldn't get so much traffic.

I remember when Todd said they weren't going to do another ES game. Except that wasn't what he said. But it sure did get attention for the site that reported it before Bethesda updated their blog and posted what Todd actually did say.

And then Oblivion was announced not too long after.

SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!

I forgot about that post honestly. You win?

Sometimes I wonder if a game going f2p is conclusive at all regarding a games health. Meaning, how can you possibly know that a game that went f2p did so because it otherwise would have gone belly up, or if it's because the bean counters see a business model that will simply make more money. Even though the game was very financially successful with a sub.

edit: personally i prefer the sub model for the official reasons given.

It's not a matter of winning. It's a matter of too many people see a truncated article, that mentions another article, then commenting on the truncated article without ever going to the original article to find out if what was said was in any way accurate. This contributes to an atmosphere of mis-information and outright lies. For instance, the article you linked to made mention of "anxiety" regarding the sub model. The reality is, there was nothing of the sort mentioned in the real article, except in the case of "which model do we go with?" But if all you read was the first article, you'd come away with the impression that Zenimax clearly doesn't have any confidence in their game, and are now starting to second guess themselves.

well anyone can see that most games that go F2P do so because they want to make more money, even though most games that go f2P make more than enough to sustain themsevles. its nothing but greed.

zenimax online seem like they generally are interested in making a good game rather than milking customers, so I would say that in order for the game to go F2P this game would have to bomb insanely hard, and I just don't see that happening. it doesn't matter that some people hate on forums, the pre-orders for this game have been at the top of sales charts where I am for a good amount of time, I believe their is sufficient interest to keep this game afloat as long as zeni hold up their end of the bargain.

the only way I see this game going F2P is if Zenimax get greedy (unlikely since theres a lot of reputation at stake) or they seriously somehow [censored] up. either way I want to clarify that I don't think it likely.

LOL since every game out there is free to play in some form or another (excluding WOW, FFXIV, and a few games over a decade old) I dont see how this idea that free to play 'kills' games became so popular. One of the stupidest comments and arguments ever made. Most games that go free to play give a lot more content and offer a lot more things to do. despite the mantra that sub based games uses sub money to advance content.

GW the original, while some might say wasnt an MMO was still a game millions of people played. GW2 is also free to play after you buy the box I dont see that game suffering all that much. sure theyre not holding people for months on end 12 hours a day but no game does that.

All a sub does is make the elite wannabes feel like theyre elite because theyre special enough to be willing to pay a sub for a game that isnt hardly worth the box price let alone the sub fee.

ESO fans better get used to it because this game will be at least buy to pay in pretty short order. if not outright free to download and free to access.

There is also a huge leap from free to play and pay to win. I know the zealots who love to hate monger dont think so and anything sold in a store that gives the hint of an 'advantage' makes the game pay to win. It doesnt make it so.

Either way subscription games arent dead, they just need to give a game WORTHY of having a sub. I havent seen any with that definition in awhile and no ESO isnt even close. Which might be the biggest irony because once it does become subworthy it will more than likely be free.

That's pretty normal in media. They only want to get as many clicks as possible.. it's biased and completely out of context, most of the time. They don't care about the people who went through the interview, they don't care about the company, they only care about themselves and the amount of money it'll potentially generate from people clicking their link.

Media svcks... I put more trust in a guy with 2 views on youtube than I do with media nowdays.