That's exactly what I thought. If I get my money's worth at 15 a month then I clearly have too much time on my hands and should be doing something more producive. And if I play it the way I intend to then I'm just wasting my $. I'll play the older games till TES6 comes out or till this goes F2P (and it will).

For about $110 I could get a year subscription of XBL and PSN+. Which allows me to play many games online and gives me "free" games.

Yet it cost a $180 for one year of Elder Scrolls Online. Fuck that, I'm not paying $15 a month to play a single repetitive game online.

this game looks so generic from what I've seen, I see no point paying for this game when there's tons of F2P MMOs that do the same things, even better in some cases I suppose. SOE seems to do great with it's MMOs once they went for the F2P model

Someo people should be wary of SOEs FTP model, especially if it becomes the standard. Without SUB there are major restrictions. Even the silver SUB level, there are pretty stiff restrictions. Such as not being able to have max level, losing certain skills/abilities. It's definitely restricted gameplay and in some cases no matter how much you pay in the store you can't get the same experience as someone who pays full SUB. On the other hand that may be perfect for lots of people who just want to play the lower level game with some friends. I wonder how much money those gamers make for the game and if its not the people who actually pay SUB that end up carrying those games to profitability.

Keeping in mind this is just anecdotal, but I have a theory that people who pay SUBs are often also the people who spend the most money in the game store because they are more invested in their characters. But that probably varies from game to game depending on what is for sale in the store, like extra char slots, extra companion slots, etc.

There's a reason why so many games go free to play. This game will go free to play in less then a year. They will run out of content and support like Star Wars KOTOR Online.

Nothing really competes against WoW if you look at subscription base in terms of pay to play, I believe the closest game is what, Final Fantasy online?

I play Planetside 2 which is a SOE game without a sub, the difference with a free player and player with sub is just the speed that u level up in, which is 1/3 faster for a subber. There's no limit on what u can/can't do as a free player in the game so it's not P2W. I don't see how they would do things differently with Everquest NEXT either. They've really fixed their act from their  older subscription days. People do like to put money in the F2P games they've invested time in and the best way to get people in the game is to let them play it for free.

I think they're nuts to ask $15 a month on consoles. Console gamers are already paying $50-$60 a year. I was mildly interested before this announcement, now not at all. $180 + console multiplayer subscription fees each year!

I actually like B2P MMO's as i absolutely hate to be bothered with money transactions in game.

With that said, its always a problem for the market because no one is willing to have more than one sub running.

With WoW declining maybe games like FFXIVARR and TESO will have a chance. Another good model is the hybrid SWTOR has. Actually i think thats the closest to beeing perfect because it doesnt pressure you to sub, but gives you benefits for doing it (like not beeing bothered by the restrictions/money grabing in-game). Those that dont mind it can still play F2P.

I think it is going to eb and flow. There's pluses and minuses, people hate the microtransactions in dead space 3, and diablo 3. And that's what in every F2P game.

Lots of subscriptions let you cancel while keeping the character for an extended amount of time.