FrumpyCourage wrote: »

[snip]

Whatever you try to suggest is not something that would be accepted by any bank as a business plan. If you run a business you want to make a profit - end of story. ESO is in the first instance a product made by a business. Ergo, they want to make a profit.

And the membership is not that expensive - anybody can budget for it or get a paper round...

[snip]

They are willing and able to pay for something (direct slot upgrades) and they are expressing that desire in this thread.
If anything, it's the anti-OP posts that are anti-capitalists because they want to maintain artificial gates in the free market.

And the 'ZoS profit' arguments are just concerns that were already disproven. Or, people are of course allowed to elaborate if they disagree, but which example has higher profit margins: If someone pays 15$ for a 1500 Crown DLC upfront and gets nothing else; or if someone pays 15$ for a sub, gets all DLCs, Craft bag, storage and other bonuses, and double furnishing slots for the month and still has 1650 Crowns on top of that so they can buy what the nonsub person bought and more. Buying things directly is always more profitable for ZOS and less economic for the player.

SilverBride wrote: »

FrumpyCourage wrote: »

You want extra, you pay for it.

Some things just bear repeating.

Even after repeating it, it doesn't accurately describe what's being discussed in OP's post.

'You want extra, you pay for it'. Well... yeah??? They want extra, and they want to pay extra for it (more than what the ESO+ sub bundle furnishing upgrade costs, just like direct DLC purchases and direct Dye purchases and direct Crown purchases pay extra for it compared to subs).

newtinmpls wrote: »

bluebird wrote: »

just to clear it up (sorry if you already knew this, but just in case): they do want to pay extra for something they want to have.

Unfinished sentence. Let me finish it for you:
"Something they want to have that is not for sale".

Yeah.... that's the point of the thread? To express to ZOS to desire to buy something that's not currently for sale.
They want to pay extra for something they want to have that is not for sale at the moment... just like every single other thread asking for stuff that's not for sale right now.

newtinmpls wrote: »

I appreciate the wide ranging discussion, but I am curious about the accuracy and origin of some of the statements.

bluebird wrote: »

• double transmutation crystal limit: subs and nonsubs receive transmute stones at the same rate; they spend them at the same rate
• double bank limit: Bank slots don't require any real currency, all of them can be bought with gold
• Craft Bag: the function of materials is to gather, sell, or use them. Not to store them. Furniture slots in housing are an essential functional part of housing gameplay.

To address your points:
1-Transmute crystals - I have no idea if subs and non-subs tend to participate in crystal-gaining activities at the same rate, or spend them at the same rate. Where is your source or what is your logic for this?

2-Bank limit. Yes, slots can be purchased, but "double total bank slots" means that subs will have double the space. So this is huge.

3-Craft bag; if you somehow think that storing materials is NOT an essential part of "crafting gameplay"...well then I question your logic and reasoning.

1 - 'receive transmute stones at the same rate' doesn't mean that an equal nonsub and sub players participate in activities at the same rate it means they receive the same quantity stones for the same activity; they can spend the same quantity stones for the same function, despite their different monetary investment. So a sub and nonsub can transmute a full set of gear after the same number of Cyro campaigns/nrds.

Not to mention that the new transmute stone limits (introduced after the fact) are so generous that they're barely an inconvenience anymore - which is clearly very different from the housing limits (the conversation would likely be different if nonsubs could get 600 slots and subs 1200 in their 600-size houses for example; but right now even subs complain that even 700 isn't enough. It's the most frequent complaint about houses).

2-3 More slots is a convenience. A big convenience, even, but just a convenience. 'Having more stuff in the bank or bag' isn't the essential feature of any gameplay. The gameplay and results of PvE, PvP, questing, crafting, RP, Housing, and trading , etc, don't depend on 'how much extra stuff do you have stored away unused'. I'm not saying it's not useful to have; but it's more comparable to having furnishings in the bank or in Storage Chests (which is equally convenient since ESO encourages furnishing hoarding due to the Luxury weeks and the LTO furnishing packs) It's not like having furnishings in housing which is the essential point of housing.

The housing limit is punishing and crippling to housing gameplay more than any other limit to any other gameplay. Comparably, if nonsubs get 350 slots for a 120$ house purchase while subs get 700, nonsubs should get half the Necromancer or Warden skills as subs get for the same 1,500 Crown Class purchase, or do it like SWTOR does where nonsubs are only allowed to equip 3 epics and such ridiculous limits. Putting furniture in your houses is the point, the purpose of end goal of housing which is capped in half; so it's not comparable to storage bonuses which are a convenient step in the process of other gameplay. So if we want a comparable bonus, it should be a Furnishing Storage Bag (or chest or whatever) which would similarly be one convenient step of Housing but not a hard limit at its core function.

[Edited to remove Inappropriate Content]