Can we please trade mounts, Zenimax?

marshill88

I like collecting things. For instance, comic books, coins, baseball cards. One of the joys of having a collection is being able to share it and trade it with another collector. You swap your rare baseball card for his rare baseball card.

Why can't we trade mounts? How would allowing this "hurt" the playerbase? Instead, I propose it would greatly please the playerbase, and probably make you (Zenimax) a lot more money as players may be buying more crates. It is an all around win-win.

You could easily code our mounts as "cards" in our collection, much like a baseball card. We bring up the trade window, and we can place a mount in there. This would be stellar.
Many, many gains to this idea, and few drawbacks. Any drawback surely is outweighed by the gains, and it would add fun and enjoyment. In fact, I would like to see furniture tradeable also. I love to SCRY, but I hate furniture. I couldn't care less about a house, zero interest. My fun in Scrying would be vastly improved if I could trade some of auto-bound stuff I scry up.

trackdemon5512

marshill88 wrote: »

I like collecting things. For instance, comic books, coins, baseball cards. One of the joys of having a collection is being able to share it and trade it with another collector. You swap your rare baseball card for his rare baseball card.

Why can't we trade mounts? How would allowing this "hurt" the playerbase? Instead, I propose it would greatly please the playerbase, and probably make you (Zenimax) a lot more money as players may be buying more crates. It is an all around win-win.

You could easily code our mounts as "cards" in our collection, much like a baseball card. We bring up the trade window, and we can place a mount in there. This would be stellar.
Many, many gains to this idea, and few drawbacks. Any drawback surely is outweighed by the gains, and it would add fun and enjoyment. In fact, I would like to see furniture tradeable also. I love to SCRY, but I hate furniture. I couldn't care less about a house, zero interest. My fun in Scrying would be vastly improved if I could trade some of auto-bound stuff I scry up.

No. You would easily create a secondary market where rare mounts would be traded for real world transactions. Mounts such as the Senche-Leopard, a pre One Tamriel reward Mount for having a subscription would fetch absolutely insane prices and be fought over. Radiant Apex mounts would also be contested over and in their case what happens if a person got one and traded it away? Could they then farm another if they had the crowns, obtained from gold, and sell it in the real world?

It’s a real slippery slope that can easily be abused so they’re bound like so much else.

Araneae6537

I agree that it would be much better for players if more things were tradable! Obviously not achievement items, but it would be great if Crate items could be sold and traded among players!

Lord_Wrath

Id love to trade all these mounts I dont use for crown gems thats for sure.

Snowstrider

Its simple. Its about money.

JKorr

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

Starlock

When physical goods can be restricted for trade, this is usually done as a consumer protections measure of some sort. For instance, we can't just freely trade dangerous substances or objects because it poses a risk to society. When digital goods are restricted for trade, however, it's not because the products are a danger to consumers or society. It is because the sellers of those digital goods want to control distribution in the name of their own profits even though this is not in the best interest of the consumer. On a certain level, this is fair - digital goods can (in theory) be infinitely replicated at low to no cost and are extremely easy to transfer compared to physical goods. If their trade is not in some way restricted, what value would they really have? What value to digital goods really have just in general?

That's a question worth a good, long think. Especially if this isn't something you've thought much about before.

Investing in digital goods is rather like paying rent instead of taking out a mortgage. Sure, both of these options put a roof over your head, but one of these is basically throwing your money away while the other is an investment you can get a return on. It's why digital distributions can't kill physical goods - folks like to actually OWN things and be able to trade what they OWN, yeah? It won't happen in this game. The landlords want their rent payments.

Ringing_Nirnroot

I’d totally trade my sorrel horse for the sunspire ice-fire senche

Xuhora

i wonder which MMOs you played before you came to ESO, seriously. From your two threads it seems to me that you are used to some kind of f2p korean cashgrab MMOs, and i dont mean that as an insult.

in my books, and i believe in many other books, MMOs should be kept free of anything "cardgame" related mechanics, and even the crowncrates are for my liking, nothing i appreciate in my MMOs.

the experience of an MMO should be arround your characters and the stuff you achieve with them, what ever that may be (Roleplay, PVP, crafting, PVE, Collecting, what ever really) but dont water it down with tradingcard mechanics, gamble mechanics, gear sunsetting mechanics, item goes *poof* mechanics. keep it pure and simple.

Parrot1986

Only way if support this is ZoS introduced in game content related mounts that could then be traded. The idea of selling mounts gained from crates or crown store is terrible though.

KalyanLazair

Furniture is tradeable. The only non tradeable furniture that I know of is the one obtained through antiquities, which I do believe should be tradeable because I have more sixth house tables I know what to do with. I honestly see no reason why these aren't tradeable, specially since they don't seem to stop dropping and don't affect gameplay in any meaningful way.

Horses? Meh, I honestly couldn't care less. I'm not going to pay millions for a reskin of a horse. Whether it is done or not, it's not going to change anything for me. I don't think this will be implemented, though.

marshill88

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

I like collecting things. For instance, comic books, coins, baseball cards. One of the joys of having a collection is being able to share it and trade it with another collector. You swap your rare baseball card for his rare baseball card.

Why can't we trade mounts? How would allowing this "hurt" the playerbase? Instead, I propose it would greatly please the playerbase, and probably make you (Zenimax) a lot more money as players may be buying more crates. It is an all around win-win.

You could easily code our mounts as "cards" in our collection, much like a baseball card. We bring up the trade window, and we can place a mount in there. This would be stellar.
Many, many gains to this idea, and few drawbacks. Any drawback surely is outweighed by the gains, and it would add fun and enjoyment. In fact, I would like to see furniture tradeable also. I love to SCRY, but I hate furniture. I couldn't care less about a house, zero interest. My fun in Scrying would be vastly improved if I could trade some of auto-bound stuff I scry up.

No. You would easily create a secondary market where rare mounts would be traded for real world transactions. Mounts such as the Senche-Leopard, a pre One Tamriel reward Mount for having a subscription would fetch absolutely insane prices and be fought over. Radiant Apex mounts would also be contested over and in their case what happens if a person got one and traded it away? Could they then farm another if they had the crowns, obtained from gold, and sell it in the real world?

It’s a real slippery slope that can easily be abused so they’re bound like so much else.

how in the world is this a good argument? There is nothing wrong with creating markets. How would that take away your fun? If anything, it would allow you the ability to trade your mount with someone else. This argument makes no sense to me. Real world markets are good for business. GOod for zenimax, good for players. You could put up a mount on a guild trader.

People already buy crowns with gold, and that doesn't hurt the game one bit. Trading mounts (and scry furniture, while we are at it) would be fantastic, and would hurt far, far less people than it would add enjoyment to.

marshill88

JKorr wrote: »

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

a good argument. my take is there are already so few of the apex mounts out there, that this wouldn't affect crate buying at all. The guy who spent 1000 bucks to get his mount, do you really think he's going to trade it for some gold? most likely he will trade his apex mount for another apex mount (which wouldn't even be available in the store anymore). I just don't see it as having a negative effect on Zenimax profits. In fact, i believe it is the opposite. Zenimax would make even more money allowing us to trade mounts.

• John Doe: Never buys crates. He is a Non-Customer to Zenimax.
• Rich Rick: This guy buys tons of crates. Zenimax loves him.
• John Doe wants a mount that Rich Rick bought. John Doe will never buy a crate. Rich Rick sells John a mount for gazillions of gold.
• Now John Doe has one mount. Rich Rick has one less mount.
• Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.
• By allowing tradeable mounts, Zenimax made even more money that it would not have made.

Are there people out there who buy crowns with cash simply for the advantage of trading them to players for gold? Of course there are. Many crowns would not be purchased if items could not be gifted. Same logic for mounts.

heaven13

Only way I could potentially see this working in a way that doesn't infringe on ZoS's profits is by keeping the crown cards when you get them in a crate. You can trade a radiant card for someone else's radiant card, your blue pet for another blue card, etc. Even then, it would likely still affect sales as you could potentially trade for a season you missed thus making you skip that season when it comes back as a limited time reappearance. Basically, highly unlikely that this would ever be introduced.

Blacknight841

marshill88 wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

a good argument. my take is there are already so few of the apex mounts out there, that this wouldn't affect crate buying at all. The guy who spent 1000 bucks to get his mount, do you really think he's going to trade it for some gold? most likely he will trade his apex mount for another apex mount (which wouldn't even be available in the store anymore). I just don't see it as having a negative effect on Zenimax profits. In fact, i believe it is the opposite. Zenimax would make even more money allowing us to trade mounts.

• John Doe: Never buys crates. He is a Non-Customer to Zenimax.
• Rich Rick: This guy buys tons of crates. Zenimax loves him.
• John Doe wants a mount that Rich Rick bought. John Doe will never buy a crate. Rich Rick sells John a mount for gazillions of gold.
• Now John Doe has one mount. Rich Rick has one less mount.
• Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.
• By allowing tradeable mounts, Zenimax made even more money that it would not have made.

Are there people out there who buy crowns with cash simply for the advantage of trading them to players for gold? Of course there are. Many crowns would not be purchased if items could not be gifted. Same logic for mounts.

This example is not entirely accurate. Take someone like me, I like to roll about 100 crates each dlc to see if I get any of the mounts. I don’t spend until I get the mount I want. I could spend more but I chose not to (too many issues left unfixed). If I can just use gold to buy a mount I want (because let’s face it, trading mounts = selling mounts), I would no longer need to buy crown crates. You are assuming that the people who do have crown crates have the ability to make up for everyone that now chooses not to buy crown crates. It is easier to let someone else gamble and you to buy what you want with certainty. Then let’s couple that with all the mounts already in players inventory that they don’t use. There would be a huge flood of available mounts and technically no player can use more than 18 different mounts, so there will be a huge market of mounts that are unused. Thus once there is a certain amount of mounts out there, there will be no need to buy more crates, as it only devalues the saturated market.

marshill88

Blacknight841 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

a good argument. my take is there are already so few of the apex mounts out there, that this wouldn't affect crate buying at all. The guy who spent 1000 bucks to get his mount, do you really think he's going to trade it for some gold? most likely he will trade his apex mount for another apex mount (which wouldn't even be available in the store anymore). I just don't see it as having a negative effect on Zenimax profits. In fact, i believe it is the opposite. Zenimax would make even more money allowing us to trade mounts.

• John Doe: Never buys crates. He is a Non-Customer to Zenimax.
• Rich Rick: This guy buys tons of crates. Zenimax loves him.
• John Doe wants a mount that Rich Rick bought. John Doe will never buy a crate. Rich Rick sells John a mount for gazillions of gold.
• Now John Doe has one mount. Rich Rick has one less mount.
• Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.
• By allowing tradeable mounts, Zenimax made even more money that it would not have made.

Are there people out there who buy crowns with cash simply for the advantage of trading them to players for gold? Of course there are. Many crowns would not be purchased if items could not be gifted. Same logic for mounts.

This example is not entirely accurate. Take someone like me, I like to roll about 100 crates each dlc to see if I get any of the mounts. I don’t spend until I get the mount I want. I could spend more but I chose not to (too many issues left unfixed). If I can just use gold to buy a mount I want (because let’s face it, trading mounts = selling mounts), I would no longer need to buy crown crates. You are assuming that the people who do have crown crates have the ability to make up for everyone that now chooses not to buy crown crates. It is easier to let someone else gamble and you to buy what you want with certainty. Then let’s couple that with all the mounts already in players inventory that they don’t use. There would be a huge flood of available mounts and technically no player can use more than 18 different mounts, so there will be a huge market of mounts that are unused. Thus once there is a certain amount of mounts out there, there will be no need to buy more crates, as it only devalues the saturated market.

I'm not agreeing with you here. Supply and demand is what drives economy. I'll try and make this as simple as possible.

• An Apex Mount is only generated through the purchase of crates. The total number of Apex Mounts in the world, X, cannot increase without Zenimax making money.
• The more Apex Mounts that generate in the world, the more money Zenimax makes.
• Allowing tradeable mounts suddenly gives everyone the ability to gain an apex mount without buying them from the store.
• But as stated above, it is impossible for more apex mounts to generate without them being bought from the store
• Someone has to buy the mounts from the store.
• As more players gain apex mounts, Zenimax makes bank.

It is really that simple. Zenimax obviously would love tons of people to be riding around on apex mounts because that means they are spending tons of cash on crates. Zenimax doesn't care who is buying the crates so long as someone is buying the crates.

And as soon as your problem is reached...namely that the world is saturated with TYPE Y apex mount, Zenimax does what it already does and releases TYPE Z apex mount and the entire cycle repeats.

I find it odd players actually don't want tradeable mounts, I can respect your view, but I'm sure I speak for many many players in saying we would love to see it.

JKorr

marshill88 wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

a good argument. my take is there are already so few of the apex mounts out there, that this wouldn't affect crate buying at all. The guy who spent 1000 bucks to get his mount, do you really think he's going to trade it for some gold? most likely he will trade his apex mount for another apex mount (which wouldn't even be available in the store anymore). I just don't see it as having a negative effect on Zenimax profits. In fact, i believe it is the opposite. Zenimax would make even more money allowing us to trade mounts.

• John Doe: Never buys crates. He is a Non-Customer to Zenimax.
• Rich Rick: This guy buys tons of crates. Zenimax loves him.
• John Doe wants a mount that Rich Rick bought. John Doe will never buy a crate. Rich Rick sells John a mount for gazillions of gold.
• Now John Doe has one mount. Rich Rick has one less mount.
• Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.
• By allowing tradeable mounts, Zenimax made even more money that it would not have made.

Are there people out there who buy crowns with cash simply for the advantage of trading them to players for gold? Of course there are. Many crowns would not be purchased if items could not be gifted. Same logic for mounts.

No, the guy who literally spent thousands of dollars buying crates chasing that radiant apex isn't going to sell or trade that radiant apex. What he might sell or trade would be any radiant apex mounts (let's call them RA X, RA Y, and RA Z) he got while chasing his goal. So that means that player A who was desperately trying to get RA X now no longer has to spend thousands buying crates. He can simply buy the amount of crowns Player Apex Chaser wants for his RA X reject.Or he already has gazillions of in-game gold, and doesn't have to pay ZOS anything. Same deal for others who desperately wanted RA Y or RA Z. ZOS potentially makes little to nothing if they allow player to player selling and/or trading.

You are making a large assumption that someone who wanted a specific mount badly enough to spend literal hundreds/thousands of dollars to get would sell it, and then be daft enough to spend hundreds/thousands more praying that the gremlins of rng would smile on him again and let him get the same specific mount again. He sure isn't going to spend more money to try to replace the ones he wasn't interested in. The players who did want them now can pay exactly the asking price to the player. Even if they do have to buy crowns, it won't be as much as it would have been if they were trying to get that specific mount.

JKorr

marshill88 wrote: »

Blacknight841 wrote: »

marshill88 wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

If people can get the crown crate mounts they want without buying crates, they won't buy crates. No matter how happy that might make the player base, it won't make the marketing people happy because they won't be selling crates.

There have been threads from people who have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a mount they wanted. Who would get the price of the "traded" mount? ZOS, or the player? Why would marketing think it was a great idea to cost the company money?

a good argument. my take is there are already so few of the apex mounts out there, that this wouldn't affect crate buying at all. The guy who spent 1000 bucks to get his mount, do you really think he's going to trade it for some gold? most likely he will trade his apex mount for another apex mount (which wouldn't even be available in the store anymore). I just don't see it as having a negative effect on Zenimax profits. In fact, i believe it is the opposite. Zenimax would make even more money allowing us to trade mounts.

• John Doe: Never buys crates. He is a Non-Customer to Zenimax.
• Rich Rick: This guy buys tons of crates. Zenimax loves him.
• John Doe wants a mount that Rich Rick bought. John Doe will never buy a crate. Rich Rick sells John a mount for gazillions of gold.
• Now John Doe has one mount. Rich Rick has one less mount.
• Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.
• By allowing tradeable mounts, Zenimax made even more money that it would not have made.

Are there people out there who buy crowns with cash simply for the advantage of trading them to players for gold? Of course there are. Many crowns would not be purchased if items could not be gifted. Same logic for mounts.

This example is not entirely accurate. Take someone like me, I like to roll about 100 crates each dlc to see if I get any of the mounts. I don’t spend until I get the mount I want. I could spend more but I chose not to (too many issues left unfixed). If I can just use gold to buy a mount I want (because let’s face it, trading mounts = selling mounts), I would no longer need to buy crown crates. You are assuming that the people who do have crown crates have the ability to make up for everyone that now chooses not to buy crown crates. It is easier to let someone else gamble and you to buy what you want with certainty. Then let’s couple that with all the mounts already in players inventory that they don’t use. There would be a huge flood of available mounts and technically no player can use more than 18 different mounts, so there will be a huge market of mounts that are unused. Thus once there is a certain amount of mounts out there, there will be no need to buy more crates, as it only devalues the saturated market.

I'm not agreeing with you here. Supply and demand is what drives economy. I'll try and make this as simple as possible.

• An Apex Mount is only generated through the purchase of crates. The total number of Apex Mounts in the world, X, cannot increase without Zenimax making money.
• The more Apex Mounts that generate in the world, the more money Zenimax makes.
• Allowing tradeable mounts suddenly gives everyone the ability to gain an apex mount without buying them from the store.
• But as stated above, it is impossible for more apex mounts to generate without them being bought from the store
• Someone has to buy the mounts from the store.
• As more players gain apex mounts, Zenimax makes bank.

It is really that simple. Zenimax obviously would love tons of people to be riding around on apex mounts because that means they are spending tons of cash on crates. Zenimax doesn't care who is buying the crates so long as someone is buying the crates.

And as soon as your problem is reached...namely that the world is saturated with TYPE Y apex mount, Zenimax does what it already does and releases TYPE Z apex mount and the entire cycle repeats.

I find it odd players actually don't want tradeable mounts, I can respect your view, but I'm sure I speak for many many players in saying we would love to see it.

You are also not taking into account there are players who have millions of gold. There are players who love trading and have billions in the bank. It would cost them no real world money at all to buy mounts for in-game gold.

what_the

marshill88 wrote: »

[*] Now RIch Rick has to buy more crates to recover the mount he sold. Hence Zenimax makes even more money.

lol, sooo..someone would be willing to sell one of their super rare mounts that took them god knows how many crates and cash to get, just so they can try all over again to get the same mount...uhh, no.

Lugaldu

heaven13 wrote: »

Only way I could potentially see this working in a way that doesn't infringe on ZoS's profits is by keeping the crown cards when you get them in a crate. You can trade a radiant card for someone else's radiant card, your blue pet for another blue card, etc.

What would be the difference between trading a radiant card or the mount itself?

heaven13

Lugaldu wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

Only way I could potentially see this working in a way that doesn't infringe on ZoS's profits is by keeping the crown cards when you get them in a crate. You can trade a radiant card for someone else's radiant card, your blue pet for another blue card, etc.

What would be the difference between trading a radiant card or the mount itself?

What I mean is that the "cards" are what is tradeable and what assigns the value. You couldn't trade a radiant apex for gold, only for another radiant. So if I got a radiant apex psijic horse and you had a radiant apex hollowjack senche and we wanted to trade, we could, but I couldn't just buy your mount for gold. This would ensure that people would still have to buy crates to trade for different items instead of just gold but would at least give some of us a way to get rid of some of the things we don't like. It's certainly not perfect but I can't see ZoS doing anything else because it's too much lost profit.

peacenote

I think because mounts (and pets, and skins) are often rewards for completing content, it just doesn't "mesh" with that model to make them tradeable. They are called "collections" for a reason.

Also I wouldn't like the pressure that could come with players trying to barter with me for something I have.

Lugaldu

heaven13 wrote: »

You couldn't trade a radiant apex for gold, only for another radiant. So if I got a radiant apex psijic horse and you had a radiant apex hollowjack senche and we wanted to trade, we could, but I couldn't just buy your mount for gold.

I see. Maybe not so bad idea, then the whole system can be seen as an exchange and not a trade, like the exchange of Panini stickers.
Then we could think the whole thing further: duplicate items from crown crates are no longer automatically converted into gems, but you can also keep duplicate items and then exchange them.

scorpius2k1

TL;DR - I like the idea but doubt it will ever happen.

A trading system probably wouldn't hurt the playerbase at all, it would likely be a fun QoL improvement, but it would definitely hurt ZOS' bottom line which is income - and that's first priority. The scales are tilted far in that direction and balancing those scales more in the players interest is a neverending struggle. ESO is in a constant "tug of war" with itself trying to do more for players and more for the company's return on investment. This is the definition of modern gaming imho. At the forefront, it's all about design choices and how well the company implements them to make those choices profitable and how well it's accepted by the players determines financial return. ESO being a "games as a service" (GaaS) model, anything and everything that can potentially make money in this type of system without risking too much of a negative ratio from the playerbase is where the balancing act sits. I highly doubt we would ever see something like a mount/pet trading in ESO without some sort of monetization system in play first.

Personally, it's frustrating seeing how games are nowadays versus even 10-15 years ago, I either accept or find another form of entertainment. The current state of gaming will continue to evolve into other things, who knows what's next, but that's a whole other topic.

scorpius2k1

peacenote wrote: »

I think because mounts (and pets, and skins) are often rewards for completing content, it just doesn't "mesh" with that model to make them tradeable. They are called "collections" for a reason.

The other and priority model is monetization which a trading system would likely reduce that greatly. Players would look to see what could be gained for free first before another purchase. As far as in-game earnable, there isn't much in that area. IIRC, ESO has a total of two earnable mounts (and basic horses for gold), a small amount of skins, and a small handful of pets (which aren't actually earned, but a reward for gaining paid DLC access). The rest are in crates or purchased with gems gained from crates or through promotion events on Twitch, email marketing subscriptions, etc.

Elvenheart

KalyanLazair wrote: »

Furniture is tradeable. The only non tradeable furniture that I know of is the one obtained through antiquities, which I do believe should be tradeable because I have more sixth house tables I know what to do with. I honestly see no reason why these aren't tradeable, specially since they don't seem to stop dropping and don't affect gameplay in any meaningful way.

Horses? Meh, I honestly couldn't care less. I'm not going to pay millions for a reskin of a horse. Whether it is done or not, it's not going to change anything for me. I don't think this will be implemented, though.

I agree that furnishing antiquities should be tradable, just because it makes sense that someone might go dig up an antique and then sell it, just like in the real world! It would certainly add an interesting new dynamic to antiquities and the market place. But I suspect the reason that ZOS hasn’t made them tradable is that it they want players who want the furnishings to have to get the required DLC for antiquities and go through the process of leveling the related skill lines instead of having another way to get them.

Me, I think it would actually add a reason for players who to get antiquities, so they could find leads, dig them up, and then sell them to the people who would like to have them but who don’t have the time or patience to wait for the lead to drop. I wonder what a player would be willing to spend to buy Echoes of Aldmeris? 🙂

AlnilamE

heaven13 wrote: »

Lugaldu wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

Only way I could potentially see this working in a way that doesn't infringe on ZoS's profits is by keeping the crown cards when you get them in a crate. You can trade a radiant card for someone else's radiant card, your blue pet for another blue card, etc.

What would be the difference between trading a radiant card or the mount itself?

What I mean is that the "cards" are what is tradeable and what assigns the value. You couldn't trade a radiant apex for gold, only for another radiant. So if I got a radiant apex psijic horse and you had a radiant apex hollowjack senche and we wanted to trade, we could, but I couldn't just buy your mount for gold. This would ensure that people would still have to buy crates to trade for different items instead of just gold but would at least give some of us a way to get rid of some of the things we don't like. It's certainly not perfect but I can't see ZoS doing anything else because it's too much lost profit.

This would be my suggestion as well. The only thing I'm not sure is if mounts should go to collections when first acquired, as they do now, and only duplicates would become "cards". That would be more in the spirit of "gotta catch them all" that the OP is suggesting, but would be detrimental to the players who really only want one mount out of a set.

But keep it as a "like for like" trade, not as a trade for gold.

Sevalaricgirl

I agree with the people who are saying no. I only buy crates if I see something I like, mount, pet etc. Otherwise, I don't buy them. If I could get them some other way, I would do that instead.

kaisernick

id prefer the option to gem everything i get in crates, i have 100 of tattos ill never use and lots of mounts i had no desire for.

Minyassa

This would make me buy more crates because I would need to get mounts to trade for ones I actually wanted. I cannot afford to buy hundreds of crates, they're expensive and I have a strict budget for entertainment that I have to stick to no matter what. I don't spend it all on ESO, and I don't buy crates anymore because I learned I cannot get the mounts I want from them. I will not waste money on a tiny chance for something I want, I know my luck. So I don't spend that money on crates anymore. The only apex mounts I've gotten were a middle finger from the RNG, which seems to know exactly which mounts I hate on sight so it can give them to me. But I have them. Someone else would love them. I *know* someone else who would trade me a mount she hates and I love for the stupid bear I hate that she loves. I know there are people out there who would want the one radiant mount I got that I hate, and they might have a radiant mount that I love that they would be willing to trade for it. THAT would get me buying more crates, because that means even if I get a radiant drop that's horrible and I will never use, there's a chance I could trade it to someone for one I like, and that means I *need more to trade*.