Any Way for Existing Customers to get the Whiterun Wolfhound?

SHADOW2KK

Naw pink with big red spots and demonic fiery eyes, glaring at you as your laughing your head off at it:|D lol

Lyrro

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

it really doesn't matter how you try to spin it or justify it being content or how you're more important than steam players so deserve to have everything, or wtfever you've convinced yourself gives you a right to complain.

The bottom like is you are whinging about a virtual dog. And that is just dumb.

It really is refreshing to know that some people never learn, it gives us all something to laugh at. Yet again, you refuse to acknowledge the fact that so many people in here posting don't even care about the dog just so you can post your opinion, and I'll even go so far as to point out that you've still yet to offer anything factual to support your argument. You're like an 8 year old who just keeps saying "I'm right because I say so." despite his parents showing him multiple times why he's wrong.

It is funny , we can talk about how something that is INSIDE the game and cant possibly exist outside it in anyway , it is literally part of its code and yet is NOT part of its content.

One would think the phrase "content" in "vanity content" would suggest that the "vanity content" is "content". I say this, and yet some people still can't make that connection. All you can really do is shake your head as you now realize exactly why Zenimax gives the answer to almost every puzzle in ESO via stamps on the walls near, or a step by step guide in the form of a scroll sitting, next to the puzzle.

Mitharus

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

The bottom like is you are whinging about a virtual dog. And that is just dumb.

No, I'm... whining about the business practice. I don't care about the dog, but the fact that ZOS told their current subscribers: "Forget it, you can't have this new shiny even though you've been paying us for content." is what I have an issue with.

Matt Firor wrote (said?):
It's very simple - you pay once per month after the first 30 days and the entire game is available to you.

@smeeprocketnub19_ESO ... What does the above quote mean to you? Do you read "all content" into "entire game"? If not, what do you get with the "entire game" statement? Why wouldn't "entire game" mean all content?

If they had something that made some new pet, horse, whatever available for a limited time, and I didn't take the time to get it. Then I have no one to blame but myself. But to be locked out from even trying to get it on my current subscription...

-M

SHADOW2KK

Well well, @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ , looks like its not just me who is seeing through you:}

Probitas

To put this into easy to understand terms.

You go buy a car at a dealership.

Car comes complete, but some options require future work at dealership at no cost to you.

Couple months later, you find they are adding an option you didn't have to the car for new buyers, but your car is quite capable of having that option installed. You complain, arguing that you'd even pay for it. They tell you too bad, no soup for you! They don't even have plans to give you the option to after market the process, you are totally cut off.

In the real world, you just never do business with that company again (though any company that deals in real products would break their own backs before cheesing off a customer about something easily addressed if it keeps them coming back.)

What to do here?

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Well well, @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ , looks like its not just me who is seeing through you:}

seeing through me? lol What do you think I have some sort of hidden agenda or something? That my motivations are suspect?

None of your posts changes the fact that you are pissed off about a virtual dog. I really don't care if you think it technically falls under the category of content. It's a virtual pet that does nothing but bark and follow you around.

That is my honest to goodness opinion. There is nothing to see through. I am not trying to pull the wool over your eyes in some manner and I am perplexed how my posts would give that impression.

Lyrro

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Well well, @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ , looks like its not just me who is seeing through you:}

seeing through me? lol What do you think I have some sort of hidden agenda or something? That my motivations are suspect?

None of your posts changes the fact that you are pissed off about a virtual dog. I really don't care if you think it technically falls under the category of content. It's a virtual pet that does nothing but bark and follow you around.

That is my honest to goodness opinion. There is nothing to see through. I am not trying to pull the wool over your eyes in some manner and I am perplexed how my posts would give that impression.

Omg, seriously. I've been having a bad day all day today, but you just made me laugh to the point that I'm actually somewhat relieved.

Yes, we see through you. It's completely obvious to everyone here that you're, and I hate quoting myself here, "like an 8 year old saying I'm right because I'm right, despite his parents showing him multiple times why he's wrong.".

You're not trying to pull wool over our eyes, because I honestly don't think you know what that even means. Literally all you've done this entire debate is quote people and say "I'm right, you're wrong, because (insert your opinion here)" over and over and try to focus the debate on the dog despite so many people stating plainly that they don't care about the dog. The big concern here is how Zenimax handled the overall situation, but all you can see is the dog and you refuse to acknowledge anyone who posts facts to support their argument. Seriously, I think my seven year old nephew could make a better argument than you and he has the attention and memory span of a goldfish (he's severely adhd).

*Edit; would like to add that you also called everyone who opposed you on this debate incompetent, and yet you still refuse to offer up anything other than your opinion to support your opinion while ignoring anyone on our side who offers up facts or states clearly that they don't care about the dog.... so, yeah. We're incompetent.

nerevarine1138

Probitas wrote: »

To put this into easy to understand terms.

You go buy a car at a dealership.

Car comes complete, but some options require future work at dealership at no cost to you.

Couple months later, you find they are adding an option you didn't have to the car for new buyers, but your car is quite capable of having that option installed. You complain, arguing that you'd even pay for it. They tell you too bad, no soup for you! They don't even have plans to give you the option to after market the process, you are totally cut off.

In the real world, you just never do business with that company again (though any company that deals in real products would break their own backs before cheesing off a customer about something easily addressed if it keeps them coming back.)

What to do here?

What to do?

Well, you could always accept that you aren't getting that thing, sigh in regret and move on with your life.

SHADOW2KK

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Well well, @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ , looks like its not just me who is seeing through you:}

seeing through me? lol What do you think I have some sort of hidden agenda or something? That my motivations are suspect?

None of your posts changes the fact that you are pissed off about a virtual dog. I really don't care if you think it technically falls under the category of content. It's a virtual pet that does nothing but bark and follow you around.

That is my honest to goodness opinion. There is nothing to see through. I am not trying to pull the wool over your eyes in some manner and I am perplexed how my posts would give that impression.

As I clearly stated earlier, if you had bothered to read my post, I couldnt care less about the dog, and I am not pissed off about it at all, I was stating an opinion as you were and I respect your opinion even if I dont personally agree with it, relax, but you did state that it was dumb for people to voice their opinions, as you have, that was one of the points I was raising.

The dog is content, there will be more, and hopefully more for the people who have been there since before day 1, that was what I was imparting.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Lyrro wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Well well, @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ , looks like its not just me who is seeing through you:}

seeing through me? lol What do you think I have some sort of hidden agenda or something? That my motivations are suspect?

None of your posts changes the fact that you are pissed off about a virtual dog. I really don't care if you think it technically falls under the category of content. It's a virtual pet that does nothing but bark and follow you around.

That is my honest to goodness opinion. There is nothing to see through. I am not trying to pull the wool over your eyes in some manner and I am perplexed how my posts would give that impression.

Omg, seriously. I've been having a bad day all day today, but you just made me laugh to the point that I'm actually somewhat relieved.

Yes, we see through you. It's completely obvious to everyone here that you're, and I hate quoting myself here, "like an 8 year old saying I'm right because I'm right, despite his parents showing him multiple times why he's wrong.".

You're not trying to pull wool over our eyes, because I honestly don't think you know what that even means. Literally all you've done this entire debate is quote people and say "I'm right, you're wrong, because (insert your opinion here)" over and over and try to focus the debate on the dog despite so many people stating plainly that they don't care about the dog. The big concern here is how Zenimax handled the overall situation, but all you can see is the dog and you refuse to acknowledge anyone who posts facts to support their argument. Seriously, I think my seven year old nephew could make a better argument than you and he has the attention and memory span of a goldfish (he's severely adhd).

I have no idea what you are talking about. Part of a debate is arguing your side.

This isn't even a right or wrong thing, it's an opinion about how one should behave in general. Which is not to act like an entitled spoiled child.

And you quoted your own words, which is adorable.

The point is, it isn't important, it's a non-issue. And you are making an issue about it.

And you are raging because someone disagrees with you.

Who's the child here?

Lyrro

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

I have no idea what you are talking about. Part of a debate is arguing your side.

Of course you don't, because you choose to ignore anyone on my side of this debate who offers up facts or states "I don't care about the dog.". I've already done my share of arguing my side with you in the past and I don't like repeating myself to someone who clearly has no interest in anyone else but himself.

This isn't even a right or wrong thing, it's an opinion about how one should behave in general. Which is not to act like an entitled spoiled child...

The point is, it isn't important, it's a non-issue. And you are making an issue about it.

Yet again, back to my earlier point. You're focusing purely on the dog while most of the people here are focused more on the way the entire scenario was handled. Being honest, any debate is what you want it to be when you're determined to be right despite any lack of factual support on your side.

And you quoted your own words, which is adorable.

I wouldn't have to quote myself if you could read, or at least demonstrated that you knew how to before posting.

And you are raging because someone disagrees with you.

I'm not raging, I'm simply pointing out the obvious.

Who's the child here?

Quite obviously, from everything you've said during this entire debate, you.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Lyrro wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

I have no idea what you are talking about. Part of a debate is arguing your side.

Of course you don't, because you choose to ignore anyone on my side of this debate who offers up facts or states "I don't care about the dog.". I've already done my share of arguing my side with you in the past and I don't like repeating myself to someone who clearly has no interest in anyone else but himself.

This isn't even a right or wrong thing, it's an opinion about how one should behave in general. Which is not to act like an entitled spoiled child...

The point is, it isn't important, it's a non-issue. And you are making an issue about it.

Yet again, back to my earlier point. You're focusing purely on the dog while most of the people here are focused more on the way the entire scenario was handled. Being honest, any debate is what you want it to be when you're determined to be right despite any lack of factual support on your side.

And you quoted your own words, which is adorable.

I wouldn't have to quote myself if you could read, or at least demonstrated that you knew how to before posting.

And you are raging because someone disagrees with you.

I'm not raging, I'm simply pointing out the obvious.

Who's the child here?

Quite obviously, from everything you've said during this entire debate, you.

As usual you litter your post with personal attacks and then try to act like anything you say is valid.

Your anger at me disagreeing with you does not give you grounds to insult me on a personal basis which you have done during this entire thread.

Do you think if you shout at me and insult me enough that I will acquiesce and just agree with you?

Furthermore, you keep referring to facts. There are no facts involved here, the words of the dev are open to interpretation, and I honestly don't even care if you perceive the dog as content or not. It is not about the principle of the matter or there would be plenty of other things you would have raised a stink about. The issue isn't that deep.

Even if you feel that ZOS handled this poorly, then that's all there is to it. Maybe they could have handled it better. So what? Did that require the 20 or so rage threads and threats of unsubbing. I think the problem is ZOS overestimated the maturity of its playerbase.

I wouldn't even be bothering with this if my patcher hadn't decided to redownload the entire game.

Lyrro

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

As usual you litter your post with personal attacks and then try to act like anything you say is valid.

Your anger at me disagreeing with you does not give you grounds to insult me on a personal basis which you have done during this entire thread.

Do you think if you shout at me and insult me enough that I will acquiesce and just agree with you?

Furthermore, you keep referring to facts. There are no facts involved here, the words of the dev are open to interpretation, and I honestly don't even care if you perceive the dog as content or not. It is not about the principle of the matter or there would be plenty of other things you would have raised a stink about. The issue isn't that deep.

Even if you feel that ZOS handled this poorly, then that's all there is to it. Maybe they could have handled it better. So what? Did that require the 20 or so rage threads and threats of unsubbing. I think the problem is ZOS overestimated the maturity of its playerbase.

I wouldn't even be bothering with this if my patcher hadn't decided to redownload the entire game.

You really are determined, lol. I'm not angry at you, I'm simply pointing out that you keep quoting people and dismissing everything that they state simply by saying "I'm right, you're wrong, because I say so.". If I've offended you, I apologize, it seems dealing with my nephew during the day while working night shifts has my patience levels at an all time low and I have no interest in beating around the bush for a guy who can't take the time to think about what others are saying in their posts, or even what he's posting, before posting.

Facts have been pointed out many times, via quotes and even linked references. You simply refuse to acknowledge them because they prove their poster's view and you do not wish to see them. You are determined to find your witch and you don't care whether you have any proof or not before you tighten the noose.

Most of this debate probably would've died a long time ago if Zenimax at least acknowledged that they screwed up with this whole event and maybe offered an apology to the players who have supported them through thick and thin for giving them the finger with the steam client and exclusive pets thing. Some people want the Steam client support but have been told plainly that they will never be allowed to have it because they are not a new player.

Don't even know why I'm bothering though, I doubt you'll read past the last sentence of the part where I quoted you before replying.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Lyrro wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

As usual you litter your post with personal attacks and then try to act like anything you say is valid.

Your anger at me disagreeing with you does not give you grounds to insult me on a personal basis which you have done during this entire thread.

Do you think if you shout at me and insult me enough that I will acquiesce and just agree with you?

Furthermore, you keep referring to facts. There are no facts involved here, the words of the dev are open to interpretation, and I honestly don't even care if you perceive the dog as content or not. It is not about the principle of the matter or there would be plenty of other things you would have raised a stink about. The issue isn't that deep.

Even if you feel that ZOS handled this poorly, then that's all there is to it. Maybe they could have handled it better. So what? Did that require the 20 or so rage threads and threats of unsubbing. I think the problem is ZOS overestimated the maturity of its playerbase.

I wouldn't even be bothering with this if my patcher hadn't decided to redownload the entire game.

You really are determined, lol. I'm not angry at you, I'm simply pointing out that you keep quoting people and dismissing everything that they state simply by saying "I'm right, you're wrong, because I say so.". If I've offended you, I apologize, it seems dealing with my nephew during the day while working night shifts has my patience levels at an all time low and I have no interest in beating around the bush for a guy who can't take the time to think about what others are saying in their posts, or even what he's posting, before posting.

Facts have been pointed out many times, via quotes and even linked references. You simply refuse to acknowledge them because they prove their poster's view and you do not wish to see them. You are determined to find your witch and you don't care whether you have any proof or not before you tighten the noose.

Most of this debate probably would've died a long time ago if Zenimax at least acknowledged that they screwed up with this whole event and maybe offered an aopology to the players who have supported them through thick and thin for giving them the finger with the steam client and exclusive pets thing. Some people want the Steam client support but have been told plainly that they will never be allowed to have it because they are not a new player.

Don't even know why I'm bothering though, I doubt you'll read past the last sentence of the part where I quoted you before replying.

Generally when someone personally attacks me throughout a thread, I will dispute those attacks. I really don't care what is happening in your real life, it's not even relevant since you have done it through out the thread. But even if it were only this incident, trying to appeal to my emotions and feel sorry for you isn't going to work.

you have linked all your "facts" and what I am saying is, your facts are merely interpretations of statements by zos. Those interpretations are ones I do not agree with.

I want steam access too, but I am willing to wait, or even never get it, because it is not that big a deal.

I have read your posts each time, and have responded, but any chance to put me in a lower position than you in your eyes is something you seem all too eager to jump at.

Wasn't it you that implied that if my debate skills were like my parenting it would be a positive if my baby got eaten? Can you justify how that is an acceptable thing to say even in a joking context? Or will you just insult me some more?

Kos

randolphbenoit wrote: »

KOS you sound like ZOS...

Yes KOS and ZOS are alike

radiostar

Probitas wrote: »

The easiest thing Z could do is create a quest line to gain a pet in game. Content that takes an effort and bamm, you gets the dog.

Or a choice of this dog, the brown one already ingame, the yellow one already ingame, or the black lab already ingame. In all cases, they're all already ingame. Not so complicated, Z!

Lyrro

Despute me all you want, all I want is for you to offer up something other than opinion to support your side. Just because, in your opinion, said facts are not facts does not change the fact that they are facts. Just because you do not agree with them, does not mean they are not facts. You may not like what other people are posting, but just because you don't like a fact, doesn't mean it's not a fact.

I'm not going to bother requoting the post of mine a couple weeks ago where I ended up quoting myself and breaking down each fact I listed to demonstrate why they were indeed facts because, and echoing myself here, you refuse to acknowledge anything or anyone that who posts opposing you while offering up something to support themselves. All you do is state that your opinion is right because it's your opinion and how everyone else is wrong because, clearly, all they want is a free dog. You refuse to acknowledge anyone who posts opposing you, even if they post facts and links to said facts, and misquote people who don't just so you can give yourself another excuse to say "I'm right because I say so."

As I stated, you respond to my post with a bad joke, and I'll respond back with a bad joke. Perhaps it was in bad taste, but it actually stuck in your head, didn't it? Unlike everything else everyone else has said, that actually stuck in your head so you could use it in an argument later. I don't know if you've noticed or not, but this entire time, I've been goading you to actually state something other than your opinion to justify your side of the argument, and if I have to hand you the ammunition and the rifle, I'll gladly do so. I just want to hear you say something, anything, other than "I'm right, you're wrong, because my opinion is the only one that matters."

Mitharus

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

I have read your posts each time, and have responded, but any chance to put me in a lower position than you in your eyes is something you seem all too eager to jump at.

@smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌
Can you please respond to mine? Specifically this post just above, and this one on page 39. I really am interested in your opinion on them.

Sorry if this sounds snide, but a lot of the posts, to me, make you out to be obstinate. Without putting out how you came to the position you're defending, I can see it as no more than: "I'm right. Shut up about it now." So I would like to see how you came to your position.

Thanks,
-M

Edit: ... *no more; not "nor more" ... *sigh*

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Lyrro wrote: »

Despute me all you want, all I want is for you to offer up something other than opinion to support your side. Just because, in your opinion, said facts are not facts does not change the fact that they are facts. Just because you do not agree with them, does not mean they are not facts. You may not like what other people are posting, but just because you don't like a fact, doesn't mean it's not a fact.

I'm not going to bother requoting the post of mine a couple weeks ago where I ended up quoting myself and breaking down each fact I listed to demonstrate why they were indeed facts because, and echoing myself here, you refuse to acknowledge anything or anyone that who posts opposing you while offering up something to support themselves. All you do is state that your opinion is right because it's your opinion and how everyone else is wrong because, clearly, all they want is a free dog. You refuse to acknowledge anyone who posts opposing you, even if they post facts and links to said facts, and misquote people who don't just so you can give yourself another excuse to say "I'm right because I say so."

As I stated, you respond to my post with a bad joke, and I'll respond back with a bad joke. Perhaps it was in bad taste, but it actually stuck in your head, didn't it? Unlike everything else everyone else has said, that actually stuck in your head so you could use it in an argument later. I don't know if you've noticed or not, but this entire time, I've been goading you to actually state something other than your opinion to justify your side of the argument, and if I have to hand you the ammunition and the rifle, I'll gladly do so. I just want to hear you say something, anything, other than "I'm right, you're wrong, because my opinion is the only one that matters."

It wasn't a bad joke, it was entirely inappropriate and messed up. What if I had a baby? Would you actually say that in person to a mother? I hate kids and I still wouldn't say something like that to a parent. For some reason, they seem to get really sensitive when you talk about it being better if their children die.

You keep repeating the same things. The arguments you are making are entirely incapable of being facts because they are interpretations. It's a vague statement you construed a certain way.

Repeating it over and over again and arguing with me the person, instead of the point does nothing for your cause.

The problem here is, you expect me to imbue the subject with as much importance as you feel for it yourself. But I don't feel this is important, so I'm not going to bother to go back and re-quote myself 20 times to match every time you repeat the same thing via quotes and then act like it isn't just recycled content I already responded to.

@Mitharus what further response are you looking for? I've covered the issue as you stated it. The view isn't much different from the last however many pages.

The point is, almost none of you seem capable of debating this without resorting to attacking me personally. That's generally a sign you don't have an actual argument or are far too emotionally invested in the topic.

It's virtual dog, it's trading cards (which you can still get), it's achievements that don't exist on steam yet. If it is for steam, you should have bought the game while it was cheap and then logged into your actual account, and you would get at least some of the important steam features. Assuming it's that important, and many of you have said money is not the issue. Personally, I will wait until a potential future date when I can transfer to steam.

As has been said many times, businesses do promotional sales all the time. We can go back and forth about what businesses would give you refunds or free stuff but how many months has it been since you bought the game? I pre-ordered and played the 5 day early access. Because of this I got established much more quickly and am pretty solidly ahead of any Steam players. The money I paid went to that. It was well spent.

Lastly, ZOS has posted and stated they will offer a tan dog in the future. You will at some point have access to all the content then if you interpret a pet as content. If the color is a problem for you... then yea, it's definitely about the dog and you are being silly.

Bazzakrak

Isnt it time for @ZOS_GinaBruno‌ or @ZOS_JessicaFolsom‌ come in and close this thread, seems it has become nothing more than personal attacks between a couple of people.

Arthur_Spoonfondle

I can't believe so many self-entitled people are getting so steamed-up over a silly pet.

Probitas

I think the whole intent of some of the posters in the thread is to get it locked. Same thing happened over at LOTRO. Fake posters raged into threads to derail and get it officially locked to halt debate on contentious topics the company did not want to address but could not afford to allow to continue.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Probitas wrote: »

I think the whole intent of some of the posters in the thread is to get it locked. Same thing happened over at LOTRO. Fake posters raged into threads to derail and get it officially locked to halt debate on contentious topics the company did not want to address but could not afford to allow to continue.

who exactly are you calling a fake poster? Everyone here has around 3 stars or more to their name.

Probitas

Arthur_Spoonfondle wrote: »

I can't believe so many self-entitled people are getting so steamed-up over a silly pet.

I can understand when this term is applied to people on welfare, not when people are paying for a product.

Lyrro

I keep arguing the same things because you've yet to offer anything other than your opinion to debunk them. You've dismissed everything I, along with many others, have stated despite us posting facts, quoting and linking sources, and even going so far as to break down what we said step by step to prove that they are indeed unbiased facts just because you do not agree with them.

As per my remark, like I said, if it gets you to say anything aside from "here's my opinion, you're wrong because you don't agree" then I'll gladly hand you the ammo and the rifle. You're not going to bother going back and quoting yourself because there's nothing to quote, you've not stated in any post through out this entire thread anything that supports your opinion or even debunks anything anyone else has provided fact wise. You dismiss what others say or ingore them completely, even when they provide quotes and links to sources simply because you don't agree with them. Literally, all you have said the entire debate is...

"I'm right. Shut up about it now."

Honestly, that pretty much sums you up as a person from what I've seen. Yes, I've sunk to some pretty low levels in my attempts to goad you, but I acknowledge this fact, I don't shift the blame or hide it by saying

The point is, almost none of you seem capable of debating this without resorting to attacking me personally. That's generally a sign you don't have an actual argument or are far too emotionally invested in the topic.

In fact, this is the first actual argument you've made this entire topic where you're actually offering up facts and morals to support your argument, so I'm actually really proud of you right now. I feel like you're finally making a stand where someone might actually stand with you. I'd stand with you, if I didn't have to resort to sinking so low just to get you to offer up something to support your side other than another "you're just a self-entitled brat who wants a free dog." argument.

If you actually stopped to think, maybe you'd notice the reason people keep bashing you is one or more of many reasons.

1) All you do is quote people, tell them they're wrong without offering anything to counter their argument, and then state your opinion.

2) When people do provide feedback on the topic, you try to make it sound like all they care about is the dog even when they plainly state that they don't care at all about the dog.

3) That's twice now you've called everyone who opposes you incompetent.

4) Every argument you've made thus far simplifies down to "I'm right, you're wrong, now go away." despite the fact that you simply refuse to, or cannot be bothered to, provide anything to support your argument.

5) You misquote people to further your own agenda on a regular basis and honestly, the only agenda you seem to have is to try to ruffle feathers while flaunting your own.

Mitharus

@smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ - Thanks for directly responding.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

@Mitharus what further response are you looking for? I've covered the issue as you stated it.

How, you came to the opinion that this is business as usual for a subscription MMO. If you could get ZOS to give an actual statement on what was meant by "entire game" I'd accept that as well... But I really would like to know how you can see this as SOP for a subscription MMO.

All this is doing, IMO, is to start segmenting the player base. This is not a single player game where they can go and give Gamestop one exclusive for pre-orders, give Best Buy a different exclusive, etc... and it really not matter at all. Players are going to be running through the world together, and for some, seeing an item that they have no way of getting even though they're paying for the privilege of playing the game, will cause issues at some point.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

As has been said many times, businesses do promotional sales all the time. We can go back and forth about what businesses would give you refunds or free stuff but how many months has it been since you bought the game? I pre-ordered and played the 5 day early access. Because of this I got established much more quickly and am pretty solidly ahead of any Steam players. The money I paid went to that. It was well spent.

And I agree that businesses do promotional sales all the time. I would not expect a normal store (though some will, say within a couple weeks) to give you the promotion price, or free item X, on an item you purchased previously. The promotion wasn't running when you bought the item, to bad for you. Of course, most likely you can go out and buy item X if you want it bad enough. That isn't the case here. We couldn't purchase the game again if we wanted the mutt bad enough, and use a code on our main (non-Steam) subscription account.

I also pre-ordered; The physical Imperial CE. Got a 3 day code sent instead of 5, but was working a lot at the time, so... oh well. And yes, you are a head of Steam only players because it was not available on Steam at the time. So if a Steam user really wanted the game, they could have purchased it before it went onto Steam, got all the bells and whistles .... and still been out this promotional content.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Lastly, ZOS has posted and stated they will offer a tan dog in the future. You will at some point have access to all the content then if you interpret a pet as content. If the color is a problem for you... then yea, it's definitely about the dog and you are being silly.

Correct. And as I've said, it isn't the dog for me. It's the principle behind it. So, unless ZOS is going to restrict Steam users who bought the game during the promotion from getting the new dog, then you still have users who have more usable content than others. But I can't see that happening.

They may not be able to get codes (i.e. Explorers pack, Beta keys, etc...) through "official" channels, but that doesn't mean that they could not end up with more usable "content" than those that purchased the game early, and have been paying a subscription since release.

Thanks for the time.

-M

Edit: It's a 'a'; not an 'I' ... Those are so close on the keyboard too.

Nox_Aeterna

Probitas wrote: »

I think the whole intent of some of the posters in the thread is to get it locked. Same thing happened over at LOTRO. Fake posters raged into threads to derail and get it officially locked to halt debate on contentious topics the company did not want to address but could not afford to allow to continue.

Right now it is only going back and foward like it did plenty of times.

The simple reality is , zen did lie and added content only to new players , which they said would not happen, we would pay the monthly and get all content.

What we did not know , is that only the content they consider is part of the deal.

So hey , if they do it with dungeons/classes/zones ... ANYTHING , from now on , it is clearly fine to tons of player here :P. So atleast they can keep those subs.

There is no real point on keeping this going , zen did not and does not even now give a damm about all this.

So to those that wanted to quit about this it is past the time to do so , those that wanted to complain and turn others from buying the game , like me , also can do it with no worry that they will come back about it heh and so on.

In the end , zen only cares about who is giving them more money , like any other business really , so either they start losing it or they really dont give a damm.

SHADOW2KK

Hehe guys relax, as I said ages ago in this thread, we all have opinions, we are all paying customers, relax, and give @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ the dog, just to wind him up hehe.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Hehe guys relax, as I said ages ago in this thread, we all have opinions, we are all paying customers, relax, and give @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ the dog, just to wind him up hehe.

While I wouldn't mind the dog, I wasn't one of the ones arguing for it. you must be confused.

SHADOW2KK

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

SHADOW2KK wrote: »

Hehe guys relax, as I said ages ago in this thread, we all have opinions, we are all paying customers, relax, and give @smeeprocketnub19_ESO‌ the dog, just to wind him up hehe.

While I wouldn't mind the dog, I wasn't one of the ones arguing for it. you must be confused.

Well laddie, back earlier in this mighty saga, you said about not caring about the dog etc, and saying people who were ranting about it as being dumb, shrugs, I just thought it funny to give you the dog, but regardless of all this, things are getting a bit heated and that, so lets just remember and respect we all have opinions on the game and relax, kill each other on pvp or something with a beer:P