100 crowns for each prior month for subscribers. (WOW! 250+ AGREES!)

Gidorick

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

badmojo wrote: »

We should get enough crowns to buy everything on the store when it launches. Technically our subscriptions paid for the development time that went into making all that stuff.

You paid for a subscription to the game. Why does everyone insist on claiming they paid for something else?

If I pay Target for a bath towel, and they use the profits from my sale to open a new store, I don't own part of that store. I own a bath towel.

You've been told many times before why that is so. We cannot help you any further and you should seek help understanding outside of this thread.

This is not target, nor is this about towels.

This is a business, and you paid for services rendered. I only employ analogies because people seem incapable of grasping that their subscription was a paid service, not an investment in future services.

oh.. and a towel isn't a service... it's a product. There's quite a bit of difference between the economics of production and service.

ESO is both Both a product AND a service with one revenue stream. The service funds the product... the product funds the service. It's a synergistic symbiotic relationship.

badmojo

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

badmojo wrote: »

We should get enough crowns to buy everything on the store when it launches. Technically our subscriptions paid for the development time that went into making all that stuff.

You paid for a subscription to the game. Why does everyone insist on claiming they paid for something else?

If I pay Target for a bath towel, and they use the profits from my sale to open a new store, I don't own part of that store. I own a bath towel.

We were told that the point of this game going with a subscription model, was so they could afford to pay developers who would develop content that would make the game better over time.

Target never made any claims that their towel sales are going towards new stores, and towel ownership would make you part owner of any new stores.

I don't feel like I'm owed anything for the money I paid, I understood the risks. I just feel like this company isn't sticking to their word about what our money was going to do. I don't feel like they're treating their loyal customers very well and I'm disappointed this is the way ZOS has decided to play it. I honestly expected better from the Elder Scrolls brand, my mistake.

I paid subscription money because I wanted to play an elder scrolls game online. I've listened to what ZOS had to say about their game, and now a year on I'm finding some inconsistency with their original statements. What's worse, is they are trying to act all political about it and put a positive spin on it, which then comes across to anyone who doesn't agree with it being positive, as insulting. Right from the B2P announcement, it seems like the more I look into it, the more disappointed I am. It's like a divorce is bad enough, but she didn't have to take my dog too!

I'm just not a happy camper and I want zos to know it. They do listen, I'll give them that.

Sarannah

Jiigen wrote: »

@Sarannah They've announced that all DLC will be included in ESO Plus for those that remain subscribers, and for all of those who don't, they can buy the DLC using Crowns, which will cost them $. Additionally, when a player stops subscribing, they lose their access to the DLC, even though they have previously been able to use it, and thus have toe still purchase that DLC using Crowns.

You say that, but look at how they carefully worded it. They mention downloadable content each time seperately from the crown store! Also they never specifically say you can use crowns to buy dlc. I've got this feeling about it...

I see people mention that we previously paid for access to the game. This however is not true, they changed their business model. In the new business model a month = 1500 crowns, so that should work retro-actively. If they wish to show their appreciation to previous subscribers, they should add those 100 crowns to each previously subscribed month, making it 1600 for each previous subscribed month.

Right now I feel like they simply "stole" the subscription fee from me, all the while knowing they would go b2p.

Digiman

Sarannah wrote: »

Jiigen wrote: »

@Sarannah They've announced that all DLC will be included in ESO Plus for those that remain subscribers, and for all of those who don't, they can buy the DLC using Crowns, which will cost them $. Additionally, when a player stops subscribing, they lose their access to the DLC, even though they have previously been able to use it, and thus have toe still purchase that DLC using Crowns.

You say that, but look at how they carefully worded it. They mention downloadable content each time seperately from the crown store! Also they never specifically say you can use crowns to buy dlc. I've got this feeling about it...

I see people mention that we previously paid for access to the game. This however is not true, they changed their business model. In the new business model a month = 1500 crowns, so that should work retro-actively. If they wish to show their appreciation to previous subscribers, they should add those 100 crowns to each previously subscribed month, making it 1600 for each previous subscribed month.

Right now I feel like they simply "stole" the subscription fee from me, all the while knowing they would go b2p.

Personally I would settle for 400 crowns for each subscribed month, or add 100 crown bonus for each successive month subscribed. It's not like it will break the bank and they would be saying they actually appreciate the loyalty of those who subscribed and helped keep them in business.

This games launch was not without its problems, and true unbiased reviewers people trusted outright tore this game apart for its launch problems. They need to fire their PR team, because this doesn't say thankyou for making sure our families were supported. This just says "We are giving 100 cents so we won't get torn apart by Consumer watchdog and the Federal trade commission laws."

Nazon_Katts

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

badmojo wrote: »

We should get enough crowns to buy everything on the store when it launches. Technically our subscriptions paid for the development time that went into making all that stuff.

You paid for a subscription to the game. Why does everyone insist on claiming they paid for something else?

If I pay Target for a bath towel, and they use the profits from my sale to open a new store, I don't own part of that store. I own a bath towel.

You've been told many times before why that is so. We cannot help you any further and you should seek help understanding outside of this thread.

This is not target, nor is this about towels.

This is a business, and you paid for services rendered. I only employ analogies because people seem incapable of grasping that their subscription was a paid service, not an investment in future services.

Wrong analogies and badly posed rethorical question won't educate anyone. They won't proof a point, nor will they help driving the discussion. This is not a constructive way to participate in this thread.

nerevarine1138

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

badmojo wrote: »

We should get enough crowns to buy everything on the store when it launches. Technically our subscriptions paid for the development time that went into making all that stuff.

You paid for a subscription to the game. Why does everyone insist on claiming they paid for something else?

If I pay Target for a bath towel, and they use the profits from my sale to open a new store, I don't own part of that store. I own a bath towel.

You've been told many times before why that is so. We cannot help you any further and you should seek help understanding outside of this thread.

This is not target, nor is this about towels.

This is a business, and you paid for services rendered. I only employ analogies because people seem incapable of grasping that their subscription was a paid service, not an investment in future services.

Wrong analogies and badly posed rethorical question won't educate anyone. They won't proof a point, nor will they help driving the discussion. This is not a constructive way to participate in this thread.

Then report the posts that you feel aren't constructive.

But everyone here seems to be under the mistaken impression that they were investing in a business and not paying for a service. How ZO uses the money we paid for our subscriptions is none of our business; we got what we paid for in full.

And no, showing future content doesn't mean that my May subscription money was me paying for October's updates. My May subscription fee let me pay for the month of May.

nerevarine1138

Sarannah wrote: »

Jiigen wrote: »

@Sarannah They've announced that all DLC will be included in ESO Plus for those that remain subscribers, and for all of those who don't, they can buy the DLC using Crowns, which will cost them $. Additionally, when a player stops subscribing, they lose their access to the DLC, even though they have previously been able to use it, and thus have toe still purchase that DLC using Crowns.

You say that, but look at how they carefully worded it. They mention downloadable content each time seperately from the crown store! Also they never specifically say you can use crowns to buy dlc. I've got this feeling about it...

I see people mention that we previously paid for access to the game. This however is not true, they changed their business model. In the new business model a month = 1500 crowns, so that should work retro-actively. If they wish to show their appreciation to previous subscribers, they should add those 100 crowns to each previously subscribed month, making it 1600 for each previous subscribed month.

Right now I feel like they simply "stole" the subscription fee from me, all the while knowing they would go b2p.

I think the reason they aren't mentioning the Crown Store in conjunction with DLC is specifically because of consoles. Last I heard, they're still a little murky on whether ESO Plus will be a thing on consoles and how the crown store will function.

On PC, it makes perfect sense for them to consolidate everything in the Crown Store, like they already have with the Imperial Edition. I don't see them keeping DLC separate, as that would just make it harder for people to purchase DLC in-game, which is kind of a key feature in a B2P model.

firstdecan

The game has gone F2P (B2P, whatever). ZoS started with one model and switched to another. We will never know if this is by design (i.e. they intended a year of subs as a cash grab) or by circumstance (they tried to make the subs work but couldn't due to lack of interest \ Microshaft \ whatever).

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

The only thing that would really be fair to players upset that this game has "jumped the shark" is for ZoS to offer you a year of your life back, which is not even remotely feasible. If you're going to keep playing, simply accept that the game has changed.

For anyone who really wants to make a statement to ZoS, you should drop your sub the day the game goes F2P. Even if you intend to stay subbed, drop it and renew it a week later. That kind of action is something that will make their accounts mess their pants, and give them something to consider.

nerevarine1138

firstdecan wrote: »

The game has gone F2P (B2P, whatever). ZoS started with one model and switched to another. We will never know if this is by design (i.e. they intended a year of subs as a cash grab) or by circumstance (they tried to make the subs work but couldn't due to lack of interest \ Microshaft \ whatever).

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

The only thing that would really be fair to players upset that this game has "jumped the shark" is for ZoS to offer you a year of your life back, which is not even remotely feasible. If you're going to keep playing, simply accept that the game has changed.

For anyone who really wants to make a statement to ZoS, you should drop your sub the day the game goes F2P. Even if you intend to stay subbed, drop it and renew it a week later. That kind of action is something that will make their accounts mess their pants, and give them something to consider.

Exactly.

Vote with your wallet, folks. If you really feel that you were deeply betrayed and that the payment model change makes the past year worthless, then vote with your wallet.

Nazon_Katts

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

The game has gone F2P (B2P, whatever). ZoS started with one model and switched to another. We will never know if this is by design (i.e. they intended a year of subs as a cash grab) or by circumstance (they tried to make the subs work but couldn't due to lack of interest \ Microshaft \ whatever).

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

The only thing that would really be fair to players upset that this game has "jumped the shark" is for ZoS to offer you a year of your life back, which is not even remotely feasible. If you're going to keep playing, simply accept that the game has changed.

For anyone who really wants to make a statement to ZoS, you should drop your sub the day the game goes F2P. Even if you intend to stay subbed, drop it and renew it a week later. That kind of action is something that will make their accounts mess their pants, and give them something to consider.

Exactly.

Vote with your wallet, folks. If you really feel that you were deeply betrayed and that the payment model change makes the past year worthless, then vote with your wallet.

That's something we can agree on.

OTOH, if ZOS doesn't want that to happen, people have been very upfront they would accept bigger bribes.

Jiigen

firstdecan wrote: »

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Exactly.

It's the exact opposite of that. As it is being marketed as being a loyalty reward, we have to treat it as such. And as such, the loyal subscribers deem it not a reward of any kind, but rather an insult to their loyalty as it puts a price on our loyalty of $12 for 12 months of subscribing and paying that in tenfold.
That's why this discussion exists, that's why people complain.

As said before, they didn't have to, it wasn't asked for, yet they did it and branded it as a loyalty reward.

Varicite

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

badmojo wrote: »

We should get enough crowns to buy everything on the store when it launches. Technically our subscriptions paid for the development time that went into making all that stuff.

You paid for a subscription to the game. Why does everyone insist on claiming they paid for something else?

If I pay Target for a bath towel, and they use the profits from my sale to open a new store, I don't own part of that store. I own a bath towel.

You've been told many times before why that is so. We cannot help you any further and you should seek help understanding outside of this thread.

This is not target, nor is this about towels.

This is a business, and you paid for services rendered. I only employ analogies because people seem incapable of grasping that their subscription was a paid service, not an investment in future services.

Our fifteen bucks a month went toward access to the servers and development of new content.

Maybe I need to reiterate that last part: development of new content.

If Target showed you commercials about their bath towels, told you that if you paid continued to pay them, those bath towels would be yours, and you believed them.

Yeah, that would be a much more appropriate analogy.

You don't really seem to grasp what subscription fees are for. When asked numerous times why they decided to stick w/ a subscription model, I can assure you that not a single time was the answer "just for access to the server".

Do you know what the answer was, though? Yeah, for the continued development of new content so that they could deliver us that content frequently and in a timely fashion.

So yeah, when you TELL me that's what I'm paying for, then I'm going to assume that's what I'm paying for. And if you later put that exact same content in a storefront and ask me to pay for it, I'm going to call bullspit.

It was a shady thing to do, pure and simple. Justify it all you like, but when somebody tells me one thing repeatedly and then when it comes time to deliver, does something completely different, I'm going to have trust issues.

nerevarine1138

Jiigen wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Exactly.

It's the exact opposite of that. As it is being marketed as being a loyalty reward, we have to treat it as such. And as such, the loyal subscribers deem it not a reward of any kind, but rather an insult to their loyalty as it puts a price on our loyalty of $12 for 12 months of subscribing and paying that in tenfold.
That's why this discussion exists, that's why people complain.

As said before, they didn't have to, it wasn't asked for, yet they did it and branded it as a loyalty reward.

Then they should take it away entirely.

No one did anything to deserve this reward. And it isn't part of the loyalty rewards system. It's just a little boost to give people some incentive to use the Crown Store once it goes live.

I'll keep repeating this until people get it: you got what you paid for already. You already had a price put on your subscription: $15 for a month of access to the game. Anything else you're getting now is a gift, not an indication of how much your subscription was worth.

Jiigen

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Then they should take it away entirely.

First time I've seen you say anything sensible in this topic.
They should do one of two things; the first is to indeed take it away entirely as it has no added value, nor does it does what it is announced to do. Or they should up that reward so that it is indeed something that loyal players can feel appreciated for. Without us, there is no crown store.

Varicite wrote: »

So yeah, when you TELL me that's what I'm paying for, then I'm going to assume that's what I'm paying for. And if you later put that exact same content in a storefront and ask me to pay for it, I'm going to call bullspit.

It was a shady thing to do, pure and simple. Justify it all you like, but when somebody tells me one thing repeatedly and then when it comes time to deliver, does something completely different, I'm going to have trust issues.

Thank you for making that clear.

Varicite

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

I'll keep repeating this until people get it: you got what you paid for already. You already had a price put on your subscription: $15 for a month of access to the game..

And again, when asked what that 15 bucks a month was going toward, never was the answer "access to the game". You know what the answer was.

You act as though people are making things up here. ZOS told them a lot of things that simply turned out not to be true, and they have every right to be upset about that.

/shrug

firstdecan

Jiigen wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Exactly.

It's the exact opposite of that. As it is being marketed as being a loyalty reward, we have to treat it as such. And as such, the loyal subscribers deem it not a reward of any kind, but rather an insult to their loyalty as it puts a price on our loyalty of $12 for 12 months of subscribing and paying that in tenfold.
That's why this discussion exists, that's why people complain.

As said before, they didn't have to, it wasn't asked for, yet they did it and branded it as a loyalty reward.

Believe it or not, I don't disagree with you. ZoS is marketing it as a loyalty reward, because if they marketed it as a means of manipulating players into buying junk from the cash shop, it would be even less well received. The one part of your response I will disagree with is this statement: it is being marketed as being a loyalty reward, we have to treat it as such. We can treat it exactly how we perceive it. I think it's an insult. To be honest, because I think it's done just to manipulate people, I think it's doubly insulting.

I'm not trying to stifle the discussion, I hope this thread goes to 100 pages. What I do see is a lot of people emotionally hurt \ insulted because they feel ZoS doesn't appreciate their loyalty. IMO, they should feel that way, ZoS has shown they do not appreciate player's loyalty. Posters to this thread will simply be in different phases of their SARA response (Shock, Anger, Resistance, Acceptance).

The only point I see us disagreeing on is this concept of a loyalty reward. You are accepting it at face value and are insulted that it's not enough. I don't accept it at face value, think it's something else, and am insulted all the same.

Soulshine

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Jiigen wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Exactly.

It's the exact opposite of that. As it is being marketed as being a loyalty reward, we have to treat it as such. And as such, the loyal subscribers deem it not a reward of any kind, but rather an insult to their loyalty as it puts a price on our loyalty of $12 for 12 months of subscribing and paying that in tenfold.
That's why this discussion exists, that's why people complain.

As said before, they didn't have to, it wasn't asked for, yet they did it and branded it as a loyalty reward.

Then they should take it away entirely.

No one did anything to deserve this reward. And it isn't part of the loyalty rewards system. It's just a little boost to give people some incentive to use the Crown Store once it goes live.

I'll keep repeating this until people get it: you got what you paid for already. You already had a price put on your subscription: $15 for a month of access to the game. Anything else you're getting now is a gift, not an indication of how much your subscription was worth.

I think there is a little perspective needed here on both sides.

I agree with the idea I got what I paid for (to a point, which I will get to in a minute), and to some degree the game itself is definitely a product, not some abstract service that someone provides me.

I came to this game because it was an MMO with a sub to begin with, as I detest F2P games and what they do to their communities, let alone their IPs. There have been many titles out there that looked interesting to me, but I refuse to play them if they are F2P (yeah, obviously that means my choices have been dwindling subtantially the last few years, especially since I don't and never have played WoW...).

However, I was not paying month-to-month. I paid upfront 6 months at a time, and I know I was not the only person who did this. Some paid for 3 months at a time, then you had your monthlies - who incidentally paid more for their access than I did.

Yet of all those forms of payment, that means there is a substantial amount of money which was given for a service not yet received since many of us paid ahead. I like many others, considered that money an investment in the game's future, not just the current access. This is part of what people are referring to as invested money in the content teased at QuakeCon but not yet seen.

Now, I suppose you can say we were all idiots for paying money to a game beyond month to month - but then you may as well throw yourself in that boat too, since technically it could be argued that even paying for a service from day 1 to day 30 is an act of faith.

That being said, it is obvious that the crown allotment is nothing more than a sales incentive, albeit a bad one, to tempt people into spending in the CS and nothing more. A better incentive to motivate people funding the service - be that for payments during all last year or in the future when the sub is no longer even needed - would actually be a permanent unlock to DLCs, not some random crown allotment which will no doubt be insufficient to cover a DLC purchase.

Enodoc

Varicite wrote: »

Our fifteen bucks a month went toward access to the servers and development of new content.
Maybe I need to reiterate that last part: development of new content.

Sure, I can go with that. Access to current content, and development of new content. No mention of access to that same new content though

Based on the prices, what they are essentially giving us is three extra cosmetic rewards that we can choose from a selection of more than three, and I think that's quite reasonable. Alternatively, assuming a DLC will cost 2100 crowns, anyone who has subbed for the whole sub period gets 3100 crowns and will have 1000 left over for cosmetics after purchasing (eg) Wrothgar.

Jiigen

Enodoc wrote: »

Alternatively, assuming a DLC will cost 2100 crowns, anyone who has subbed for the whole sub period gets 3100 crowns and will have 1000 left over for cosmetics after purchasing (eg) Wrothgar.

Where did you get the 3100 crowns for the whole sub period from?

Varicite

Enodoc wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Our fifteen bucks a month went toward access to the servers and development of new content.
Maybe I need to reiterate that last part: development of new content.

Sure, I can go with that. Access to current content, and development of new content. No mention of access to that same new content though

Based on the prices, what they are essentially giving us is three extra cosmetic rewards that we can choose from a selection of more than three, and I think that's quite reasonable. Alternatively, assuming a DLC will cost 2100 crowns, anyone who has subbed for the whole sub period gets 3100 crowns and will have 1000 left over for cosmetics after purchasing (eg) Wrothgar.

I do fully understand all of this, and agree (which I did mention a couple times thus far).

That doesn't stop me from being distrusting toward the company in the future due to the way that they handled almost the entirety of the past year, and the 12 dollar price tag they put on my loyalty for putting up w/ being misled numerous times isn't making me feel very compensated.

Me: "Dude, I told everybody you were totally cool and gave you money because I believed in you, and you lied to my face.. Not cool."

ZOS: "Here's a buck, kid. Now go get lost."

Like I've said, I totally get that they don't "owe" anybody anything. In the same way that if somebody lies to my face, he doesn't "owe" me anything either.

But if he cares at all what I think of him, he's probably going to give me a more sincere apology than "I gave you a buck, what more do you want from me, kid?"

Enodoc

Varicite wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Our fifteen bucks a month went toward access to the servers and development of new content.
Maybe I need to reiterate that last part: development of new content.

Sure, I can go with that. Access to current content, and development of new content. No mention of access to that same new content though

Based on the prices, what they are essentially giving us is three extra cosmetic rewards that we can choose from a selection of more than three, and I think that's quite reasonable. Alternatively, assuming a DLC will cost 2100 crowns, anyone who has subbed for the whole sub period gets 3100 crowns and will have 1000 left over for cosmetics after purchasing (eg) Wrothgar.

I do fully understand all of this, and agree (which I did mention a couple times thus far).

That doesn't stop me from being distrusting toward the company in the future due to the way that they handled almost the entirety of the past year, and the 12 dollar price tag they put on my loyalty for putting up w/ being misled numerous times isn't making me feel very compensated.

Me: "Dude, I told everybody you were totally cool and gave you money because I believed in you, and you lied to my face.. Not cool."

ZOS: "Here's a buck, kid. Now go get lost."

Like I've said, I totally get that they don't "owe" anybody anything. In the same way that if somebody lies to my face, he doesn't "owe" me anything either.

But if he cares at all what I think of him, he's probably going to give me a more sincere apology than "I gave you a buck, what more do you want from me, kid?"

Sure, fair enough.

Jiigen wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Alternatively, assuming a DLC will cost 2100 crowns, anyone who has subbed for the whole sub period gets 3100 crowns and will have 1000 left over for cosmetics after purchasing (eg) Wrothgar.

Where did you get the 3100 crowns for the whole sub period from?

From April 4th to March 17th (not including March 17th) is 347 days.
347 - 30 days included - 5 days complementary* = 312 days
312 days requires 11 months paid (330 days) = 1100 Crowns
+ 500 Crowns complementary for TU = 1600 Crowns
+ 1500 Crowns for the remaining 18 days of the 11th month = 3100 Crowns

*These 5 days were given to everyone, sometime around May 3rd.

Gidorick

firstdecan wrote: »

The game has gone F2P (B2P, whatever). ZoS started with one model and switched to another. We will never know if this is by design (i.e. they intended a year of subs as a cash grab) or by circumstance (they tried to make the subs work but couldn't due to lack of interest \ Microshaft \ whatever).

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

The only thing that would really be fair to players upset that this game has "jumped the shark" is for ZoS to offer you a year of your life back, which is not even remotely feasible. If you're going to keep playing, simply accept that the game has changed.

For anyone who really wants to make a statement to ZoS, you should drop your sub the day the game goes F2P. Even if you intend to stay subbed, drop it and renew it a week later. That kind of action is something that will make their accounts mess their pants, and give them something to consider.

While this is 100% true, the way in which ZOS has presented the 100C doesn't reflect this truth, and that's the issue I have. They say it's to thank us.... well it's an inadequate gesture. It's being offered so current players will buy *something*, but 100C will buy nothing.

nerevarine1138

Varicite wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

I'll keep repeating this until people get it: you got what you paid for already. You already had a price put on your subscription: $15 for a month of access to the game..

And again, when asked what that 15 bucks a month was going toward, never was the answer "access to the game". You know what the answer was.

You act as though people are making things up here. ZOS told them a lot of things that simply turned out not to be true, and they have every right to be upset about that.

/shrug

Maybe you should re-read the contract you signed when you paid your subscription fee. Your fee paid for access to the servers for a given period of time. Any perception of it paying for future content was a misunderstanding on your part. If the game were staying subscription-based, and you stopped subscribing, you would not be entitled to future content, regardless of whether you believe you helped pay for it or not.

And to the poster who was asking about the long-term subscribers: only those with time remaining after 3/17 have a horse in that race, which is a very small group (only six-month subscribers didn't get enough warning to cancel/change their recurring plan). I'm sure that those who are truly upset could ask ZO for a partial refund, although, as you pointed out, you signed a contract that included a contingency clause. All that said, it doesn't matter if you perceived that subscription as an investment: it was simply your vote of confidence in your still wanting to play the game in six months.

Gidorick

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

firstdecan wrote: »

The game has gone F2P (B2P, whatever). ZoS started with one model and switched to another. We will never know if this is by design (i.e. they intended a year of subs as a cash grab) or by circumstance (they tried to make the subs work but couldn't due to lack of interest \ Microshaft \ whatever).

Everything that they're doing is in support of the new model. The 100 crowns per month you're getting is not a loyalty reward, nor is it an entitlement from subbing. It's being offered so that current players will buy *something* from the crown store and encourage other players to spend money on similar items. It has nothing to do with you, it's entirely for the purpose of stimulating demand for crown store \ cash shop items.

The only thing that would really be fair to players upset that this game has "jumped the shark" is for ZoS to offer you a year of your life back, which is not even remotely feasible. If you're going to keep playing, simply accept that the game has changed.

For anyone who really wants to make a statement to ZoS, you should drop your sub the day the game goes F2P. Even if you intend to stay subbed, drop it and renew it a week later. That kind of action is something that will make their accounts mess their pants, and give them something to consider.

Exactly.

Vote with your wallet, folks. If you really feel that you were deeply betrayed and that the payment model change makes the past year worthless, then vote with your wallet.

Oh, I intend to. I haven't made my final decision about ESO:TU subscription or even the game in general. With Star Citizen ramping up, I don't know how much free time I'll have.

Jiigen

Enodoc wrote: »

From April 4th to March 17th (not including March 17th) is 347 days.
347 - 30 days included - 5 days complementary* = 312 days
312 days requires 11 months paid (330 days) = 1100 Crowns
+ 500 Crowns complementary for TU = 1600 Crowns
+ 1500 Crowns for the remaining 18 days of the 11th month = 3100 Crowns

*These 5 days were given to everyone, sometime around May 3rd.

Fair enough, you're right to assume that everyone still has days left on their subscription the moment TU goes live.

I guess it's just hoping that DLC would be indeed 2100 crowns like the Imperial Edition is, however I'm afraid that won't be the case as what the Imperial Edition adds is no new content areas. The only two things added content wise is the Imperial Race and the Rings of Mara. With that said, I think that DLC will most likely be costing more than 2100 crowns.

Enodoc

Jiigen wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

From April 4th to March 17th (not including March 17th) is 347 days.
347 - 30 days included - 5 days complementary* = 312 days
312 days requires 11 months paid (330 days) = 1100 Crowns
+ 500 Crowns complementary for TU = 1600 Crowns
+ 1500 Crowns for the remaining 18 days of the 11th month = 3100 Crowns

*These 5 days were given to everyone, sometime around May 3rd.

Fair enough, you're right to assume that everyone still has days left on their subscription the moment TU goes live.

I guess it's just hoping that DLC would be indeed 2100 crowns like the Imperial Edition is, however I'm afraid that won't be the case as what the Imperial Edition adds is no new content areas. The only two things added content wise is the Imperial Race and the Rings of Mara. With that said, I think that DLC will most likely be costing more than 2100 crowns.

That assumption is based on cost of DLC from other games. Sizeable DLC ranges from $10 to $20. The Imperial Upgrade is $20, and that becomes 2100 Crowns after TU. If $20 becomes 2100 C, then 2100 C should be the upper limit for DLC cost.
Of course it also remains to be seen how much Crowns cost if bought separately from ESO Plus, but I think it will be close to $1 for 100 Crowns, as many other MMOs seem to be on a similar vein.

Varicite

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Your fee paid for access to the servers for a given period of time. Any perception of it paying for future content was a misunderstanding on your part. If the game were staying subscription-based, and you stopped subscribing, you would not be entitled to future content, regardless of whether you believe you helped pay for it or not.

"We want to do the version that we think is the best game and the coolest experience. And that means putting a lot of people and a lot of content creators towards having stuff that comes our regularly; every four weeks, five weeks, six weeks. Big new stuff that you want to do."

That's what ZOS said our sub fee was going toward.

If there was a "misunderstanding", it was not on my part. It seems pretty clear that it was going toward content that "comes out regularly". That didn't happen.

Where did that content go that our sub fee was implicitly stated to be going toward?

That's right, the Crown store. There's no misunderstanding here.

Enodoc

Varicite wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Your fee paid for access to the servers for a given period of time. Any perception of it paying for future content was a misunderstanding on your part. If the game were staying subscription-based, and you stopped subscribing, you would not be entitled to future content, regardless of whether you believe you helped pay for it or not.

"We want to do the version that we think is the best game and the coolest experience. And that means putting a lot of people and a lot of content creators towards having stuff that comes our regularly; every four weeks, five weeks, six weeks. Big new stuff that you want to do."

That's what ZOS said our sub fee was going toward.

If there was a "misunderstanding", it was not on my part. It seems pretty clear that it was going toward content that "comes out regularly". That didn't happen.

Where did that content go that our sub fee was implicitly stated to be going toward?

That's right, the Crown store. There's no misunderstanding here.

That content, the "Every 6 Weeks" content, came every 6 weeks as expected until December, which was when Update 6 would have been due. But 6 is two updates in one, so realistically we should give it 12 weeks. That would put it at the end of January. We're now about 4 weeks overdue for our regular content update if you take all this into account, and therefore there should be an Update 7 that would have fallen under the pre-TU time period. Time-wise it seems that it may not appear until after July (still personally hoping it will appear in May), but development-wise it would have appeared in March.

Therefore, any content delivered in Update 7 should not be a paid DLC, and if it includes the PvP updates we all hope it will (Imperial City at minimum, Justice PvP as well ideally), then there's a good chance that it will be free to everyone anyway. Perhaps the Imperial Prison dungeon will be a paid addition to it, but considering Imperial City is supposed to be a main part of the Cyrodiil PvP experience, that would suggest to me that it would be more appropriate as one of the "regular updates [which are] free of additional charges".

nerevarine1138

Varicite wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Your fee paid for access to the servers for a given period of time. Any perception of it paying for future content was a misunderstanding on your part. If the game were staying subscription-based, and you stopped subscribing, you would not be entitled to future content, regardless of whether you believe you helped pay for it or not.

"We want to do the version that we think is the best game and the coolest experience. And that means putting a lot of people and a lot of content creators towards having stuff that comes our regularly; every four weeks, five weeks, six weeks. Big new stuff that you want to do."

That's what ZOS said our sub fee was going toward.

If there was a "misunderstanding", it was not on my part. It seems pretty clear that it was going toward content that "comes out regularly". That didn't happen.

Where did that content go that our sub fee was implicitly stated to be going toward?

That's right, the Crown store. There's no misunderstanding here.

That's what your money was used for, not what you paid for. If I pay a magazine for a subscription, it doesn't mean that I actually paid someone's salary. I paid for the magazine. If the magazine used my money to help pay a writer, then great. But I didn't pay the writer.

Gidorick

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Your fee paid for access to the servers for a given period of time. Any perception of it paying for future content was a misunderstanding on your part. If the game were staying subscription-based, and you stopped subscribing, you would not be entitled to future content, regardless of whether you believe you helped pay for it or not.

"We want to do the version that we think is the best game and the coolest experience. And that means putting a lot of people and a lot of content creators towards having stuff that comes our regularly; every four weeks, five weeks, six weeks. Big new stuff that you want to do."

That's what ZOS said our sub fee was going toward.

If there was a "misunderstanding", it was not on my part. It seems pretty clear that it was going toward content that "comes out regularly". That didn't happen.

Where did that content go that our sub fee was implicitly stated to be going toward?

That's right, the Crown store. There's no misunderstanding here.

That's what your money was used for, not what you paid for. If I pay a magazine for a subscription, it doesn't mean that I actually paid someone's salary. I paid for the magazine. If the magazine used my money to help pay a writer, then great. But I didn't pay the writer.

Wow.

I guess according to you, when you pay for a funeral, you pay to have the stiff buried and not for the gravedigger to dig the hole. When you pay for a taxi, you pay for the ride and not the maintenance of the vehicle. When you pay for a sandwich you're paying for the bread, meat and cheese and not the assembly of the bread, meat and cheese.

You have a VERY narrow view of the economics and functioning of industry.