Weren't we promised senche mounts?

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO

Audigy wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

How am I supposed to take it? I personally handed them over $300.

I would assume the tiger arrives this week or next. It would be great to get an ETA by the CM´s though, if that's possible?

Besides that try to relax, so far we got all our rewards, some a bit late sure, but it all arrived. I got my pre order pack a month after release, but I got it! *laughs*

Not sure if Gina & Jess still have to feed the little tigers so that they get strong enough for us to ride them..., but I am sure they try their best.

I dont care about the senche mount. They can keep it. I was interested when it was a long term perk. Now that everyone will have it just seems silly anymore.

UrQuan

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

wraith808 wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I know I guess its all first world problems etc. Still I feel betrayed by a company I and many like me helped put food on the table for these guys. In return we are told we are second class. All our exclusive perks will be given to anyone with a couple bucks on a credit card. I just cannot accept being lied to. It doesnt matter its just a game to me.

Honestly, you should leave and not come back. You complain about absolutely everything, no matter how minor, or how much it clearly makes sense (like this thread: as I've already explained in detail, once they listened to the players and changed the eligibility model for the senche mount it clearly would make absolutely no sense to ever have them sent out prior to TU). You'd obviously be a lot happier without playing the game or coming to the forums.

Edit: I just realized this post might sound mean, or like I'm trying to pick a fight with you. It's not meant that way, I just honestly feel like you're not having fun and it would be better for your own happiness to stay away from this game.

You arent trying to pick a fight you are just saying exactly what zenimax is saying to us long term subscribers. They would rather we just leave.

Correct that with that's what YOU think that Zenimax is saying to YOU. I've spent more than that number that you keep throwing around. And I don't feel that they value me any less than anyone else, and I definitely never saw the message that they'd rather we just leave. I understand that in many cases arguments are made from a personal perspective- but really, when made, if that is so, then that should be stated clearly rather than lumping in everyone into your own world and interpretation.

Well I mean they did treat us all the same. Its all good tho. I cancelled my ESO account and am currently downloading SWTOR until another game comes along. So ya all you new people have fun.

I'm glad to hear it. I hope you enjoy SWTOR: I know it's had some bad press, but I've heard good things about it from one of my best friends who plays it (he keeps trying to get me to play it, but I just don't have the gaming time to get another game in).

Best of luck with it, and I hope that if you do decide to come back to ESO you find it more enjoyable than you do currently.

Zrakie

pvpaddict42 wrote: »

Don't mistake me, I don't particularly care about the mount, and if you prefer to believe it's free, that's fine. I am simply pointing out that people that argue it's not free have valid points. Do you think that ZOS mentioning the tiger mount when they did was simply random timing? Of course not. They said it when they did because they wanted to entice players to continue paying the subscription fee when they knew many people would be cancelling in light of the fact that they could simply play it for free in a month. Again, it was a marketing strategy. If you want to believe that means it was free, please do so. However, understand that as soon as they made it known ahead of time that it would be there if you subscribed all the way up to the time, then that became part of the expected content release of the game, and your subscription is indeed for the in game content ZOS releases.

No matter how you want to twist it, it is a free gift. How you get your hands on the free gift does not matter.

This is the same situation like a shop would have a promotion that buy something and get let's say a custom lighter for free.

I go to that shop and buy candles because I have run out and get the lighter on top of that. I tell someone else about it and they find the lighter really cool and want one, so they go to the shop to buy something just to get the lighter.

And here is the main argument that I think you are trying to pull aka you need to pay to get the lighter and here is the reason why it's flawed. You did not pay anything for the lighter itself what makes it a free gift, if you need to buy something in order to get it doesn't change the fact that it's a free gift that you get on top of your purchase that you don't need to pay anything extra for. If the gift would add any additional cost to your main purchase then it would no longer be a free gift or a gift what so ever.

So in the case at hand, if you wanted the mount you paid for game-time and nothing for the mount.

Troneon

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We are currently planning on sending the Senche mounts into the wild by this weekend.

pvpaddict42

Zrakie wrote: »

pvpaddict42 wrote: »

Don't mistake me, I don't particularly care about the mount, and if you prefer to believe it's free, that's fine. I am simply pointing out that people that argue it's not free have valid points. Do you think that ZOS mentioning the tiger mount when they did was simply random timing? Of course not. They said it when they did because they wanted to entice players to continue paying the subscription fee when they knew many people would be cancelling in light of the fact that they could simply play it for free in a month. Again, it was a marketing strategy. If you want to believe that means it was free, please do so. However, understand that as soon as they made it known ahead of time that it would be there if you subscribed all the way up to the time, then that became part of the expected content release of the game, and your subscription is indeed for the in game content ZOS releases.

No matter how you want to twist it, it is a free gift. How you get your hands on the free gift does not matter.

This is the same situation like a shop would have a promotion that buy something and get let's say a custom lighter for free.

I go to that shop and buy candles because I have run out and get the lighter on top of that. I tell someone else about it and they find the lighter really cool and want one, so they go to the shop to buy something just to get the lighter.

And here is the main argument that I think you are trying to pull aka you need to pay to get the lighter and here is the reason why it's flawed. You did not pay anything for the lighter itself what makes it a free gift, if you need to buy something in order to get it doesn't change the fact that it's a free gift that you get on top of your purchase that you don't need to pay anything extra for. If the gift would add any additional cost to your main purchase then it would no longer be a free gift or a gift what so ever.

So in the case at hand, if you wanted the mount you paid for game-time and nothing for the mount.

I'm not trying to twist or pull anything. I'm just stating the reasons to support the argument. To me your reasoning seems more of a "twist" than what I put forth. You're seeking to divorce intent from the equation as means to justify your stance. In your example, the candle seller wants to make money, they do this by selling candles and offering a lighter with the purchase. They have, by their own admission, thus packaged the candles and the lighter together. They aren't offering the lighter just because they are "good guys" or because "they care", they are doing it so that you spend your money with them. The lighter has a cost, and that cost is that you buy candles, therefore it's not free regardless of what is on the receipt tape.

Your main argument seems to be that unless money is paid directly for an item, it has no cost. This is a very child like mentality and flawed. Even in your own example that you suggested the person was seeking to purchase the lighter, but had to purchase the candles to do so, you went on to use the term "main purchase". Well if your intent was to buy the lighter, then the main purchase was the lighter, and the candles were incidental.

In any case, believe what you like, and we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Zrakie

pvpaddict42 wrote: »

I'm not trying to twist or pull anything. I'm just stating the reasons to support the argument. To me your reasoning seems more of a "twist" than what I put forth. You're seeking to divorce intent from the equation as means to justify your stance. In your example, the candle seller wants to make money, they do this by selling candles and offering a lighter with the purchase. They have, by their own admission, thus packaged the candles and the lighter together. They aren't offering the lighter just because they are "good guys" or because "they care", they are doing it so that you spend your money with them. The lighter has a cost, and that cost is that you buy candles, therefore it's not free regardless of what is on the receipt tape.

Your main argument seems to be that unless money is paid directly for an item, it has no cost. This is a very child like mentality and flawed. Even in your own example that you suggested the person was seeking to purchase the lighter, but had to purchase the candles to do so, you went on to use the term "main purchase". Well if your intent was to buy the lighter, then the main purchase was the lighter, and the candles were incidental.

In any case, believe what you like, and we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

I agree that it's time to agree to disagree when the conversation sinks to personal insult levels.

SlaaMM

Children get hostile when they perceive the slightest injustice.
The Devs etc could have said sorry you on your own not given us anything, no crowns , nothing.
In other game that has happened. I'll spare you the list. Mods if this is inflammatory clean it up but that just how I feel.

Moiskormoimi

SlaaMM wrote: »

Children get hostile when they perceive the slightest injustice.
The Devs etc could have said sorry you on your own not given us anything, no crowns , nothing.
In other game that has happened. I'll spare you the list. Mods if this is inflammatory clean it up but that just how I feel.

The difference is there is real money involved for those rewards so yes, they absolutely have a right to be pissed off about things they were promised but not received. It's very telling that the mods went completely silent other than 'stay on course' comments once they were called out.

Soulshine

They gave an answer already. They will be on people's accounts by the weekend, yeesh.

nerevarine1138

amber_picchiottino_ESO wrote: »

SlaaMM wrote: »

Children get hostile when they perceive the slightest injustice.
The Devs etc could have said sorry you on your own not given us anything, no crowns , nothing.
In other game that has happened. I'll spare you the list. Mods if this is inflammatory clean it up but that just how I feel.

The difference is there is real money involved for those rewards so yes, they absolutely have a right to be pissed off about things they were promised but not received. It's very telling that the mods went completely silent other than 'stay on course' comments once they were called out.

Real money? For the free reward?

Do. Tell.