NewBlacksmurf wrote: »It's not as you describe....you're misunderstanding comes from applying that you are a person whose decided to subscribe In 2014 that makes sense.
As of Tamriel Unlimited, the game developers and leaders of ZOS describe a new structure where the subscriber type can choose to continue this with uninterrupted access to future dlc.
The subscriber via time cards or whose similar to a B2P customer also found themselves in a sweet spot.
The B2P type can purchase crowns to unlock dlc
-In this design most all were extremely happy as it allows options for different types of customers.
Today the game structure as described forces the subscriber to be a B2P customer in part. The B2P customer is forced to be a subscriber in part.
The time card customer was eliminated entirely.
Specifically Morrowind and ESO Plus required QoL updates
It's actually not that people expect things for free, it's that people expect one concise structure whether that has options built in for many or few, but what you're reading isn't unwillingness to pay for content. It's an unwillingness to be taken advantage of for content.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »It's not as you describe....you're misunderstanding comes from applying that you are a person whose decided to subscribe In 2014 that makes sense.
As of Tamriel Unlimited, the game developers and leaders of ZOS describe a new structure where the subscriber type can choose to continue this with uninterrupted access to future dlc.
The subscriber via time cards or whose similar to a B2P customer also found themselves in a sweet spot.
The B2P type can purchase crowns to unlock dlc
-In this design most all were extremely happy as it allows options for different types of customers.
Today the game structure as described forces the subscriber to be a B2P customer in part. The B2P customer is forced to be a subscriber in part.
The time card customer was eliminated entirely.
Specifically Morrowind and ESO Plus required QoL updates
It's actually not that people expect things for free, it's that people expect one concise structure whether that has options built in for many or few, but what you're reading isn't unwillingness to pay for content. It's an unwillingness to be taken advantage of for content.
I really doubt they're putting that much thought into it tbh, there's just a sense of entitlement that a lot of people have in ESO (and the 1st world in general). It destroyed Imperial City and the way that was supposed to work.
If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.
I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.
The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.
Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.
The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore
If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
HatchetHaro wrote: »It's not about the money.
It's about the lies.
HatchetHaro wrote: »It's not about the money.
It's about the lies.
I think you take things far too seriously... there were no 'promises' or 'guarantees' and businesses are free to change their business model and businesses practices at any point in time, you agreed to it when you agreed to the TOS- did you not read it before agreeing?
HatchetHaro wrote: »HatchetHaro wrote: »It's not about the money.
It's about the lies.
I think you take things far too seriously... there were no 'promises' or 'guarantees' and businesses are free to change their business model and businesses practices at any point in time, you agreed to it when you agreed to the TOS- did you not read it before agreeing?
You are confusing "business practice" with "ethics". Having free speech does not entitle you to freely insult anyone you want.
Same thing here. They may be allowed to change their business practice, but the way they did it is blatantly dishonest. I can go on for hours about this, but there have been plenty of points raised by many people who are irked by this.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.
I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.
The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.
Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.
The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore
You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.
I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.
The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.
Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.
The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore
You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.
@ADarklore
No I'm not implying anything. I'm just reading Zubokos comment and your response.
Regardless of the use of words for add-on, dlc, chapter.....different terminology is not the cause of discontent with what we see in the forums or websites.
It's literally not semantics it's a distinct required change in structure to access content so semantics isn't accurate or a way to mention people's situations.
Zubokos comment that you responded to in which I quoted above, very accurately captures 2017 as a whole. It also involves a large portion of 2016 in terms of structure and the absence of paid content so the free example applies.
If it's OK, I'm going to use your recent comment that the players haven't been here that long....
This means for those new customers, who are either buying the gold edition or the base game and gold dlc via crowns as well as playing under a console options where one buys and few others share. Pc would only have base or base and gold considered.
Of those, other than eso plus being for those other benefits, they haven't had any need to pay for anything else.
What's important, those recent customers made decisions based upon the outlined structure which has drastically changed for them to require not only a chapter, dlc, add-on purchase but it creates uncertainty in the future as there's only ambiguous suggestions without details of if dlc for eso Plus will always come outside of a chapter.
While there are some who may just want something for nothing, logically the complaint threads have very few of those of that opinion as free was never a model suggested
Rainwhisper wrote: »I've been following several of the threads about Morrowind and about ESO Plus, some of which invariably come back to a claim that Morrowind should be treated as DLC, and others which make "pay-to-win" arguments.
As someone who has paid a monthly subscription fee for every MMO I've ever played, dating back to Ultima Online, I'm perplexed by just how much content people seem to expect to get for free. Likewise, I've always had to pay for expansions, and doing so always made sense to me. I recognize that server upkeep and customer service costs alone justify a subscription fee, much less the additional creative content and ongoing development work, including balancing. The massive content additions of an expansion, likewise, also require a significant financial outlay for art, writing, programming, area design, voice acting, etc.
Which prompts my question: What is the source of the expectation that a massive, virtual world (as opposed to an FPS arena environment like Overwatch) should be free?
I enjoy playing the game, and I recognize that the experience I enjoy costs money to create and maintain, so I pay a subscription. That seems perfectly reasonable. I also recognize that I'm subsidizing players who can't afford to pay a subscription fee at the moment, and I'm also okay with that since having a large player base benefits the game as a whole. What I don't understand is how some posters seem to think that the money to keep the game viable will simply come ex nihilo, without subscription and expansion fees.
If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.
Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.
I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.
The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.
Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.
The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore
You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.
@ADarklore
No I'm not implying anything. I'm just reading Zubokos comment and your response.
Regardless of the use of words for add-on, dlc, chapter.....different terminology is not the cause of discontent with what we see in the forums or websites.
It's literally not semantics it's a distinct required change in structure to access content so semantics isn't accurate or a way to mention people's situations.
Zubokos comment that you responded to in which I quoted above, very accurately captures 2017 as a whole. It also involves a large portion of 2016 in terms of structure and the absence of paid content so the free example applies.
If it's OK, I'm going to use your recent comment that the players haven't been here that long....
This means for those new customers, who are either buying the gold edition or the base game and gold dlc via crowns as well as playing under a console options where one buys and few others share. Pc would only have base or base and gold considered.
Of those, other than eso plus being for those other benefits, they haven't had any need to pay for anything else.
What's important, those recent customers made decisions based upon the outlined structure which has drastically changed for them to require not only a chapter, dlc, add-on purchase but it creates uncertainty in the future as there's only ambiguous suggestions without details of if dlc for eso Plus will always come outside of a chapter.
While there are some who may just want something for nothing, logically the complaint threads have very few of those of that opinion as free was never a model suggested
ZOS has already stated that all DLC's will be included with ESO+, but Morrowind is NOT a DLC, it is a chapter; there will be one Chapter release per year which will require separate purchase. I think that is pretty straightforward and not ambiguous at all.