Should Subscribers have more benifits and if so what?

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

Raash wrote: »

No there is not any valid difference. People who choose to stay subbed after f2p have come up with this idea they are worth more then others and deserves more somehow.
Was that part of the official deal to be special or is it something that was pulled out of someones hat one day and spread and became a selfinvented "truth"?

Raash wrote: »

Conspiracy agreement?
Thats not at all what I am implying, I am implying that somewhere along the road people who choose to stay subed began to think their wants/expectations/thoughts holds more weight then non-subscribers and I asked if this was part of the sub-deal they signed or just something subscribers made their own truth.

Again, I'm quoting your post for clarity here- you are the one who implied that subscribers (i.e., "People who choose to stay subbed after f2P have come up with this idea...") have conspiratorially come up with an agreement.

What you're implying is that there's no difference between subs and non-subs and that the subscription agreement isn't the basis for that difference, when in reality- that's exactly the basis and there is a difference.

Your circular argument (nor trolling my responses) isn't going to change that- if you've got some proof other than your speculation and conspiracy theories, I think we'd all love to see it at this point. Your circular argument is not only becoming tiresome, but bordering on inciting and tedious.

Raash

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Raash wrote: »

No there is not any valid difference. People who choose to stay subbed after f2p have come up with this idea they are worth more then others and deserves more somehow.
Was that part of the official deal to be special or is it something that was pulled out of someones hat one day and spread and became a selfinvented "truth"?

Raash wrote: »

Conspiracy agreement?
Thats not at all what I am implying, I am implying that somewhere along the road people who choose to stay subed began to think their wants/expectations/thoughts holds more weight then non-subscribers and I asked if this was part of the sub-deal they signed or just something subscribers made their own truth.

Again, I'm quoting your post for clarity here- you are the one who implied that subscribers (i.e., "People who choose to stay subbed after f2P have come up with this idea...") have conspiratorially come up with an agreement.

What you're implying is that there's no difference between subs and non-subs and that the subscription agreement isn't the basis for that difference, when in reality- that's exactly the basis and there is a difference.

Your circular argument (nor trolling my responses) isn't going to change that- if you've got some proof other than your speculation and conspiracy theories, I think we'd all love to see it at this point. Your circular argument is not only becoming tiresome, but bordering on inciting and tedious.

I dont see where I am trolling you? I have tried to explain what I meant nice and easy since you apparently did not understand, yet you continue to go on about this conspiracy thing etc.
It makes no sense to me so i just take it i stepped at your tail or something

Edit:
forgot about this part

What you're implying is that there's no difference between subs and non-subs and that the subscription agreement isn't the basis for that difference, when in reality- that's exactly the basis and there is a difference.

i do imply that, exactly that. And no, I dont agree with you. Only difference I see is that you pay for what i get for free in exchange for 10% more gold, crowns and access to some future dlc.
Neither your wants, expectations or thoughts holds any more weight then mine or anyone elses.

jmoore59

I think subscribing should net a larger Xp bonus. It would act more as a time saver then giving someone a huge advantage.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

(previous quotes snipped for brevity, not to detract from content)

Raash wrote: »

i do imply that, exactly that. And no, I dont agree with you. Only difference I see is that you pay for what i get for free in exchange for 10% more gold, crowns and access to some future dlc.
Neither your wants, expectations or thoughts holds any more weight then mine or anyone elses.

Ah, you see this is the heart of the matter- not "there's no difference in subs versus non-subs".

My response to you was addressing that there indeed is a difference. Your responses continued to argue that there were not- although you could not provide proof of this. Now you get to what's really bothering you, which is you think there's a "weight" difference.

Now, I also disagree with you on this point- and I'll tell you why. If you come into my store but only window-shop, and I have a customer who's laying cash down on the counter- who do you think will be my priority? You might buy something- but who can I count on to keep me in business?

As to "carrying weight" you may want to give it some consideration- because in reality it really does make a difference. You can "promise" to do business with me- or you can do business with me. Which do you think has more effect on my company's bank account?

arena25

Again, I'm going to reiterate from the first page:

They already decided the benefits. 10% bonus to xp, gold, and APs.

Which is why I didn't vote.

Although it was quite amusing seeing whether or not differences should occur between subs and non subs.

n0l

if I'm subbing I want my dlc free, the in game perks from subbing don't add up to $15 a month in my honest opinion. thats the only real change I'd make though.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

n0l wrote: »

if I'm subbing I want my dlc free, the in game perks from subbing don't add up to $15 a month in my honest opinion. thats the only real change I'd make though.

This is a really good point as well- there is no real "DLC" to speak of currently- only Crown Store offerings in the form of mainly cosmetic items. We've yet to see "DLC" (expansive content of some sort, etc.) but according to the subscription clause it's included. I think the biggest question is- "What exactly does it mean?"

Heromofo

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising, preference over non subscribers and bonus gold each renewal

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

n0l wrote: »

if I'm subbing I want my dlc free, the in game perks from subbing don't add up to $15 a month in my honest opinion. thats the only real change I'd make though.

This is a really good point as well- there is no real "DLC" to speak of currently- only Crown Store offerings in the form of mainly cosmetic items. We've yet to see "DLC" (expansive content of some sort, etc.) but according to the subscription clause it's included. I think the biggest question is- "What exactly does it mean?"

Aah it means you rent it bud for as long as you sub you have access to it. But if you stop subbing you have to pay the full amount to be aloud back in the dlc.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

Heromofo wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

n0l wrote: »

if I'm subbing I want my dlc free, the in game perks from subbing don't add up to $15 a month in my honest opinion. thats the only real change I'd make though.

This is a really good point as well- there is no real "DLC" to speak of currently- only Crown Store offerings in the form of mainly cosmetic items. We've yet to see "DLC" (expansive content of some sort, etc.) but according to the subscription clause it's included. I think the biggest question is- "What exactly does it mean?"

Aah it means you rent it bud for as long as you sub you have access to it. But if you stop subbing you have to pay the full amount to be aloud back in the dlc.

Eh, yeah I know what the renting part means- sorry, I should have been more specific- I mean what exactly will the DLC entail/contain/consist of, etc.

Heromofo

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising, preference over non subscribers and bonus gold each renewal

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Heromofo wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

n0l wrote: »

if I'm subbing I want my dlc free, the in game perks from subbing don't add up to $15 a month in my honest opinion. thats the only real change I'd make though.

This is a really good point as well- there is no real "DLC" to speak of currently- only Crown Store offerings in the form of mainly cosmetic items. We've yet to see "DLC" (expansive content of some sort, etc.) but according to the subscription clause it's included. I think the biggest question is- "What exactly does it mean?"

Aah it means you rent it bud for as long as you sub you have access to it. But if you stop subbing you have to pay the full amount to be aloud back in the dlc.

Eh, yeah I know what the renting part means- sorry, I should have been more specific- I mean what exactly will the DLC entail/contain/consist of, etc.

Aaah sorry bud lol what has me more worried tho is not just the size of the said dlc. But how much they will charge if one motif is 5000 crowns how much would they charge for dlc.

ItsGlaive

No options there that I would pick, I don't think anyone, sub or non-sub should be subjected to in-game advertising.

One thing I would say though, subs should get all DLC that is active during their sub applied permanently to their account, not this rental agreement they seem to be going with currently.

If I was subbed when it was live in game, I've paid for it, I don't want to have to pay for it again if I ever unsub.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

Well, if we're subscribing- then it's supposedly included in the subscription- here's an excerpt from the FAQ

https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/tamrielunlimitedfaq

What are the benefits of ESO Plus membership?
... and access to all downloadable content (DLC) game packs for the duration of membership:

Kalifas

Lionxoft wrote: »

Terrible options that are seeking out one goal. Even non-subscribers shouldn't have to deal with bogus advertisements. They bought the game and that's that. Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind or any of the other previous TES games flash ads. Ads reek of desperation and cheapens the quality of the broken and buggy game further.


Better subscriber options would be:

• 50% more inventory space (% modifier allows the gold sink to work in it's current form still)
• 50% more bank space (% modifier allows the gold sink to work in it's current form still)
• Free travel to wayshrines
• No CoD or mail tax
• Lifetime sub - Might be a bit early but if the content production keeps to a crawl it would be a good recourse. The current content release schedule and record is completely atrocious and unacceptable.
• Free horse mount or 1g on first subscription payment. (Not Imperial mount)
• Reduced cost for respecs both attribute and skills.
• Crown Store discount of 15%-20%.

I don't think subscribers should get any bigger boost, but constant boost while subscribed. And the B2P camp should get one time payment unlocks forever on any type of boost.If a subscriber buys the one time unlock it is added to his current boost. That will make it fair and people who don't sub will not be crying about prices. The 1500 crowns equal out in money for subscribing so you aren't really paying more for the other boosts.

But there should be more boost:
Subscriber boost:
1500 Crowns
+10% experience boost
+10% crafting research boost
+10% gold boost
+10% mount speed
-10% wayshrine cost
-10% repair cost
+10 Bank slots
+10 Inventory slots

The Buy to play person could purchase up to what a subscriber who doesn't buy boost has, but if the subscriber buys the boost he always stays 10% above the buy to play players. If the subscriber unsubscribes his sub bonus adavantage goes bye bye until/unless he resubscribes.

And they shouldn't put advertisements anywhere but in launcher screen. I have enough advertisements in the rest of the world, subscribers or buy to play players don't need it here cheapening our experience. Swtor tries it's best to make you quit with it's credit/cartel system.

Kalifas

Xabien wrote: »

No options there that I would pick, I don't think anyone, sub or non-sub should be subjected to in-game advertising.

One thing I would say though, subs should get all DLC that is active during their sub applied permanently to their account, not this rental agreement they seem to be going with currently.

If I was subbed when it was live in game, I've paid for it, I don't want to have to pay for it again if I ever unsub.

That isn't subscription, that is buy to play. You don't get to keep all your channels when Time Warner cuts your cable subscription do you?

Raash

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

(previous quotes snipped for brevity, not to detract from content)

Raash wrote: »

i do imply that, exactly that. And no, I dont agree with you. Only difference I see is that you pay for what i get for free in exchange for 10% more gold, crowns and access to some future dlc.
Neither your wants, expectations or thoughts holds any more weight then mine or anyone elses.

Ah, you see this is the heart of the matter- not "there's no difference in subs versus non-subs".

My response to you was addressing that there indeed is a difference. Your responses continued to argue that there were not- although you could not provide proof of this. Now you get to what's really bothering you, which is you think there's a "weight" difference.

Now, I also disagree with you on this point- and I'll tell you why. If you come into my store but only window-shop, and I have a customer who's laying cash down on the counter- who do you think will be my priority? You might buy something- but who can I count on to keep me in business?

As to "carrying weight" you may want to give it some consideration- because in reality it really does make a difference. You can "promise" to do business with me- or you can do business with me. Which do you think has more effect on my company's bank account?

No, you just intentionally choose to misinterpret what I am saying over and over again.

My point stands, and you can disagree with it. But thats all.

ItsGlaive

Kalifas wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

No options there that I would pick, I don't think anyone, sub or non-sub should be subjected to in-game advertising.

One thing I would say though, subs should get all DLC that is active during their sub applied permanently to their account, not this rental agreement they seem to be going with currently.

If I was subbed when it was live in game, I've paid for it, I don't want to have to pay for it again if I ever unsub.

That isn't subscription, that is buy to play. You don't get to keep all your channels when Time Warner cuts your cable subscription do you?

That's a very valid point, but it's also the only reason I'd ever consider a sub. Not to mention the fact that all "dlc" up until this point had been exactly that - free to keep to subscribers, so why change it? GW2 did it too with living story, in fact all f2p games have done it (excluding full xpacs of course).

Otherwise why bother subscribing? Just buy them outright and own them.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

Xabien wrote: »

Kalifas wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

No options there that I would pick, I don't think anyone, sub or non-sub should be subjected to in-game advertising.

One thing I would say though, subs should get all DLC that is active during their sub applied permanently to their account, not this rental agreement they seem to be going with currently.

If I was subbed when it was live in game, I've paid for it, I don't want to have to pay for it again if I ever unsub.

That isn't subscription, that is buy to play. You don't get to keep all your channels when Time Warner cuts your cable subscription do you?

That's a very valid point, but it's also the only reason I'd ever consider a sub. Not to mention the fact that all "dlc" up until this point had been exactly that - free to keep to subscribers, so why change it? GW2 did it too with living story, in fact all f2p games have done it (excluding full xpacs of course).

Otherwise why bother subscribing? Just buy them outright and own them.

You can't really "own" content in an online game, anyway. What happens if the company folds and/or the server shuts down? What exactly do you "own"?

ItsGlaive

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

Kalifas wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

No options there that I would pick, I don't think anyone, sub or non-sub should be subjected to in-game advertising.

One thing I would say though, subs should get all DLC that is active during their sub applied permanently to their account, not this rental agreement they seem to be going with currently.

If I was subbed when it was live in game, I've paid for it, I don't want to have to pay for it again if I ever unsub.

That isn't subscription, that is buy to play. You don't get to keep all your channels when Time Warner cuts your cable subscription do you?

That's a very valid point, but it's also the only reason I'd ever consider a sub. Not to mention the fact that all "dlc" up until this point had been exactly that - free to keep to subscribers, so why change it? GW2 did it too with living story, in fact all f2p games have done it (excluding full xpacs of course).

Otherwise why bother subscribing? Just buy them outright and own them.

You can't really "own" content in an online game, anyway. What happens if the company folds and/or the server shuts down? What exactly do you "own"?

Ok for the sake of splitting hairs "retain for the lifetime of the game".

LonePirate

Much like with ZOS, I am not seeing any PVP related benefits in the list of possible perks for subscribers. I can't vote until I see some love for the perpetually ignored PVP aspect of the game.

Sylveria_Relden

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising and preference over non subscribers

Xabien wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

You can't really "own" content in an online game, anyway. What happens if the company folds and/or the server shuts down? What exactly do you "own"?

Ok for the sake of splitting hairs "retain for the lifetime of the game".

Forest and trees, my friend- you do see my point, right? You wish to own instead of rent- I get that.

The reality here- is that none of us owns anything- at the end of the day we're all "renting" content- just a matter of for how long and how much we're paying to do so for what.

This is where a lot of the discontent/disagreements actually stem from- because when they introduce more methods of service and payment methods for those services- it causes a shift. We're a long way from the old "just pay your monthly sub to play" days- and providers have learned they have to be more competitive else they'll lose money.

That said- what exactly does the competition "mean" or "look like"? How do they provide offering to people that constitutes "value", especially when it comes to subs versus non-subs? How can you even keep it all consistent or project profit if you've got a constantly moving target? Just something to think about, I suppose.

Heromofo

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising, preference over non subscribers and bonus gold each renewal

LonePirate wrote: »

Much like with ZOS, I am not seeing any PVP related benefits in the list of possible perks for subscribers. I can't vote until I see some love for the perpetually ignored PVP aspect of the game.

Aaah but ptw comes in when it comes to pvp buffs

Sevalaricgirl

[quote="Heromofo;165965"

NOTE: Set aside your differences if your not subbed and remember that subbers surport your game so you want as many as possible
[/quote]

Actually...just because a person doesn't sub, doesn't mean they don't support the game. I've spent about 75.00 in the crown store in 2 months. That's equivalent to a 6 month sub.

And no, subs should not get anything more than they're already getting.

rotaugen454

I think non-subscribers toons should be programmed to bow and say "Good day/evening , my Lord/Lady" anytime a subscribers toon comes within 10 feet of them...

ItsGlaive

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

You can't really "own" content in an online game, anyway. What happens if the company folds and/or the server shuts down? What exactly do you "own"?

Ok for the sake of splitting hairs "retain for the lifetime of the game".

Forest and trees, my friend- you do see my point, right? You wish to own instead of rent- I get that.

The reality here- is that none of us owns anything- at the end of the day we're all "renting" content- just a matter of for how long and how much we're paying to do so for what.

This is where a lot of the discontent/disagreements actually stem from- because when they introduce more methods of service and payment methods for those services- it causes a shift. We're a long way from the old "just pay your monthly sub to play" days- and providers have learned they have to be more competitive else they'll lose money.

That said- what exactly does the competition "mean" or "look like"? How do they provide offering to people that constitutes "value", especially when it comes to subs versus non-subs? How can you even keep it all consistent or project profit if you've got a constantly moving target? Just something to think about, I suppose.

Sounds deep and meaningful but you understand my point, yes? Why have the DLC taken away if you unsub? It'll likely work out cheaper to buy the DLC outright and keep it for the life of the product, so how is "renting" it an incentive to sub?

Kalifas

Xabien wrote:

Sounds deep and meaningful but you understand my point, yes? Why have the DLC taken away if you unsub? It'll likely work out cheaper to buy the DLC outright and keep it for the life of the product, so how is "renting" it an incentive to sub?

Hey now, let's leave the deep and meaningful out of this discussion!

Why have the DLC taken away? Because you didn't pay for the DLC, you payed for access to it. ZoS throws that in as a bonus while you are paying. You are paying for boost and crowns. The incentive to sub is so"You don't have to worry about what you have or don't have, it is all there". Now if WHAT is there while you subscribe is not enough, you need to let your voice and wallet be heard!

The value is what is valuable to you. Yeah you might be able to figure a way out to get stuff cheaper than the sub model for good, maybe?.(/whistles) Maybe you will have to grind 30 jobs to level 10 so you can get even with all the subscribers and get your crap cheaper in another mmo.But is that worth it to you? Plus I believe subbers are always going to get a little bonus above non subbers. So what is worth to you?

Heromofo

subscribers benefits plus opt out of advertising, preference over non subscribers and bonus gold each renewal

Xabien wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

Xabien wrote: »

Sylveria_Relden wrote: »

You can't really "own" content in an online game, anyway. What happens if the company folds and/or the server shuts down? What exactly do you "own"?

Ok for the sake of splitting hairs "retain for the lifetime of the game".

Forest and trees, my friend- you do see my point, right? You wish to own instead of rent- I get that.

The reality here- is that none of us owns anything- at the end of the day we're all "renting" content- just a matter of for how long and how much we're paying to do so for what.

This is where a lot of the discontent/disagreements actually stem from- because when they introduce more methods of service and payment methods for those services- it causes a shift. We're a long way from the old "just pay your monthly sub to play" days- and providers have learned they have to be more competitive else they'll lose money.

That said- what exactly does the competition "mean" or "look like"? How do they provide offering to people that constitutes "value", especially when it comes to subs versus non-subs? How can you even keep it all consistent or project profit if you've got a constantly moving target? Just something to think about, I suppose.

Sounds deep and meaningful but you understand my point, yes? Why have the DLC taken away if you unsub? It'll likely work out cheaper to buy the DLC outright and keep it for the life of the product, so how is "renting" it an incentive to sub?

Its not and i hope they take a second look at this because its not a good idea. Say for some reason i cant sub for one month but i subbed for the past six months and plan to keep subbing. Why should i be removed from the dlc for that one month after paying so much.

Deome

subscribers benefits plus preference over non subscribers

My 2g:

Everything as it is now, but with ZOS paying attention to subscribers, as we're the ones with skin in the game. I've put a lot of my life in, in the past year, and I'm just getting tired of seeing the same broken mechanics a year later.

Look, I'm an addon author. Just last week I finished the addon I've wanted to be standard/vanilla in-game since my first beta weekend: it copies settings from one character to another (ie, new char). So, you know, I don't accidentally attack an innocent and get slaughtered by the guards in the first five minutes of play. Or so I don't have to click color panels repeatedly to set up my chat color preferences. Or...

I think far more people would prefer to see THAT feature than a flaming horse (which appears even though the DB is not yet implemented--lore would imply that one should be tied to the other...).

Rynier

I am now to the game but bought the collectors edition at launch. I have subscribed to get me going off the bat and feel this was a choice I made knowing what I receive extra for the funds I am allocating. I dont think that just because you can afford a extra few coins a month that you SHOULD be entitled to more than another person. But alot of the points here is very valid. And if you look at several other examples the best i can use to describe this exact scenario is Season tickets for a sport venue.

I love rugby so lets stick to that. I have Season tickets that allows me X amount of club/provicial games / X amount of league games and a international or 2. The other seats are all buy to watch and they get to see the same game as me. Even though I pay to be there every day but the rest only join every 3rd or 4th Weekend.

The Quality of the Game was not affected but my luxury because of my Season ticket was.

I got a Good Seat. I got pre booked tickets for sold out international Games and free parking.

If you had to translate this to in game i think that a Unique weapon skin or armour skin is a very Valid way to go. I would not change it stat wise as that is a game breaking change. But a freeby here and there on top of the current is sort of expected and is how it has been done around the game. But this is a business model that people need to be aware of before hand and a way to lure people to actually subscribing. This way you get money to IM PROVE YOUR GAME . NOT get new content managers to spam yellow text .

But fighting about this makes no sense. You were told WEEKS ago that subscription will end. You knew very well what the new subscription will be before renewing it. Any one that gambled on keeping their subscription up hoping to get free stuff. This is on you . Cant blame the game for not having extra stuff.


This weekend I saw people who didn't pay a sent to Zenimax running around with a unique pet. That adorable little monkey. I attempted 2 or 3 times to try and pick pocket or steal it so that I can have one. But I cant have it This is how it is. Crying about it wont help me. This was a beta incentive and that is where it stayed.

RealRobD

Heromofo wrote: »

I believe that Subscribing is pointless atm only difference is 10 percent more exp.
So i was wondering if some of these will work to increase subscriptions.

NOTE: Set aside your differences if your not subbed and remember that subbers surport your game so you want as many as possible

Please go back to school and learn the difference between your and you're.

Currently I'm a sub and I'm not sure why at this point. I thought things would be different by now, but it's the same old song and dance.

Subs should get more for their money.

A good start would be bumping all those measly 10% bonuses up to 20%.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

Subscribers have enough benefits now

The 'ad' issue is simply melodrama gone mad, advantages over non-subs is entirely not what B2P is about, nor should it be. We get 'free' Crowns, 'free' gold isn't desirable as it simply would be called GOLD SELLING by those crass enough to call the Store PAY TO WIN!