They can't take away the mount from anyone who has it according to the last statement from ZOS.

Edit, grr... that would be a very stupid move considering that it is likely people have already spent money.

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

Here is the bottom, bottom line.

This mount costs at least $150 (10 months of sub),

Yeah... because all along I was on the payment plan for a Senche mount and only a Senche mount. When I get one, I can finally start a character and enjoy this game.

angel59 wrote: »

@starkerealm It does not affect me. I find it rather comical that those who would not have gotten it carried on as if it was the end of the world.

You have to admit, ZOS made a sound decision by modifying the criteria. It is definitely evident that the crown store will work. Look at the people who went head over heals to pay money to get a striped senche.

Full disclosure: I qualified through 2 × 6 month subscriptons. I am not concerned about the senche.My imperial horse has served my characters well.

It's a neat thing. Not a useful thing. Not a valuable thing. Just a neat thing. Nice to have, but not necessary.

The issue is that no one likes having a door slammed in their face. People who were here, but joined too late, suffered unavoidable payment issues, or couldn't participate for a while there, were literally being told, "no, you're just not loyal enough." (Not by ZoS, but by people on the forums here.)

In my case, I was told that I wasn't loyal enough because I wasn't willing to spend money on a game that was in non-functional condition for me. Which... isn't really so much loyalty as "blind faith" or stupidity.

On top of that, there was a long lag time, when all we knew is, "you guys are going to get an awesome thing," with no further clarification. Which is just begging people to invent something more amazing in their mind, and then get shut out of that.

Anyway, my 10th month bills on March 3rd, so I'm covered. My loyalty is: I came back to give them another chance, even after the gold sellers, rapid deterioration bug and their own payment system throwing tantrums at me. Or... you know, that might be my stupidity. Either way.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I was loyal to her. I mean I left her for months and didnt send her any money. I didnt like her flaws so I decided to abandon her. BUT I was loyal now that she is a winner!

Okay, but no one's asking about your "girlfriend..." The one with the restraining order.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

I was loyal to her. I mean I left her for months and didnt send her any money. I didnt like her flaws so I decided to abandon her. BUT I was loyal now that she is a winner!

Okay, but no one's asking about your "girlfriend..." The one with the restraining order.

Just an example of how distorted some people's sense of the definition of "loyal" is lol. BTW I dont have a girlfriend. I have a wife of almost 20 years.

Ah crap... I missed the sarcasm. *headdesks*

EDIT: If I'm honest, and don't care about leaving an open invitation for potential trolls...

I am getting pretty sick of this whole, "if you weren't approaching this game like an abusive relationship, you're not loyal enough to me," argument I've been seeing. I mean, I think we can all acknowledge that, at launch, this game was in very rough shape. Not, "unsuitable for use" or unplayable, but there were some real rough edges.

Anyway, sorry for slapping you upside the head there a bit ago.

lordrichter wrote: »

They can't take away the mount from anyone who has it according to the last statement from ZOS.

Edit, grr... that would be a very stupid move considering that it is likely people have already spent money.

What? Why would they take it away?

Hey there just tell me how much i need to pay to be loyal.

jelliedsoup wrote: »

Hey there just tell me how much i need to pay to be loyal.

Loyalty to a business is you keep spending money with them. They arent a date or a family member.

But But...Ive been coming to this restaurant and demanding water longer than anyone else here!!

Malpherian wrote: »

TheBull wrote: »

Malpherian wrote: »

roechacca wrote: »

This is going to lead to Math isn't it ?

The game released in June 2014. a Month is 30 days. 6 months would have been December, 6x30 is ONLY 180 days. Add 90 Days to that (March 30th) and you get: 270 Days.

Thats 1 Full Month (30 Days) short of the required Eligibility. And thats IF the game released on the first of June, which it did not.

April 2014 was release date.

Yea that was my bad, I was thinking of the original date for the console release, Still it's a bit unfair I've been around since beta (November 2013) but haven't been able to afford the sub for several months.

A fair system would be giving it to anyone who made an account during the first month of release or whatever. Requiring people to pay for something that is supposedly a reward for "Old Accounts" is bad PR at that very least. It's going to *** a lot of people off.

There is no "reward" included in your sub fee. Its totally a "free" thing Zenimax decided to give out.

Reward for "old accounts" they give by not forcing you to pay a sub anymore. You can play the game. That's quite alot of money you save per year if you keep playing.

What would you want. A "free" tiger or not have to pay anything to play the game? Choose one.

Everyone who don't use the new Sub and think its to expensive will pay a lot more in the Crownstore.

Sir, what makes people upset is DROPPING the sub requirement.
We LIKE ESO without goldsellers and "Pay-to-win" players.

Oh and thanks to consoles, we get less devs working on PC development, delayed content and according to Matt Firor, the next few months they focus on Consoles and how to intergrate different addons in the console version.
Would be nice if they did that focus on PC, dont you think?

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

Here is the bottom, bottom line.

This mount costs $150 (10 months of sub),

You also get 1500 crowns a month times 10.

that's only for the people that decide to buy it now. For those of us that have been since the beginning and paid our 150 dollars already, we only get a total of 1500 crowns...not per month.

i think its fair.

i play since early access.
i do think that anyone who is willing to pay now should get this mount.
its still before B2P - so whoever is paying now to get his 300 days full is supporting
the game. and is a subscriber.

this should not be about punishing people to join later.
this is about rewarding everyone who supported this game before march 17th.

i think its fair.

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

Here is the bottom, bottom line.

This mount costs $150 (10 months of sub),

You also get 1500 crowns a month times 10.

that's only for the people that decide to buy it now. For those of us that have been since the beginning and paid our 150 dollars already, we only get a total of 1500 crowns...not per month.

We are talking about people who pay up not people who already paid. Also you wont get 1500 crowns you will get 100 per mo subbed which equals 10 months or 1000 crowns.

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

geoffreyb14_ESO wrote: »

Here is the bottom, bottom line.

This mount costs $150 (10 months of sub),

You also get 1500 crowns a month times 10.

that's only for the people that decide to buy it now. For those of us that have been since the beginning and paid our 150 dollars already, we only get a total of 1500 crowns...not per month.

We are talking about people who pay up not people who already paid. Also you wont get 1500 crowns you will get 100 per mo subbed which equals 10 months or 1000 crowns.

+500 for purchasing the game.

And if you stay subscribed for the future, you'll get just as much as that person who purchased their gamecards now. They're simply claiming their crowns in advance.

I know you get 500 for purchasing the game. Its not what we are talking about.