Joke? Pc players have to pay for Imperial City?

Kaliki · July 2015

We did get more than 3k crowns for our 1 year subscription. I consider these crowns the credit for having been subscribed and I'll gladly use them to buy the DLC.
Even if one feels to have funded the expansion there is nothing to complain here. After all we got enough crowns to pay for this first expansion that was worked on while most people were subbed.

washlov · July 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

IC was supposed to be INCLUDED with the purchase of the base game, you bait and switched us into releasing it as a DLC over a year after you delayed it because "reasons"

IC was supposed to be free, but only available to the people who are active subscribers.

And guess what, if you are an active subscriber today, IC is free, just like you thought it would be.

I really don't understand the complaint here.

yes subscribe because we got so much content....
we paid a year got only promisses and now we have to pay again

JD2013 · July 2015

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

Vizier · July 2015

MCMancub wrote: »

Parrotbrain wrote: »

At university in one of my business subjects we learnt that in order to be successful and ensure a good business relationship, it is prudent for big enterprises to provide a certain amount of "goodwill" to their customers. Whether it be something free that they give, or double-your-money back for an defective product or perhaps a special thank-you gift for longstanding and loyal customers, most companies sometimes have to make sacrifices on the bottom line to ensure that the relationship with their customers remains strong, otherwise they might go to their competitors who do. Giving this DLC for free to those players or offering them a significant discount would go a long way into creating trust where previously it was destroyed. A mount does not cut in my opinion.

The problem with this argument is that you're assuming that old school subscribers are the primary customer. You're not! Subscribers are a failed model. They are an after thought. The "goodwill" provided to their customers is now focused towards B2P players on both PC and console. There are abundantly more of us, and we spend more on this game in the form of the cash shop. That is their focus. They do not care about you because your group of players are the reason they had to rebrand and go B2P. You are not what kept ESO alive, you're what turned it into ESO:TU.

I'd say it's the B2P / F2P crowd that forced ZoS to go this route since they wouldn't sub once the game actually launched. The mass exodus from ESO once they went live is evidence enough. I'm thinking the vast majority of that crowd spends next to nothing gaming and when push comes to shove they move on to their next free experience. That their spent lunch money on micro-transactions is about the same as a sub and along with the whales keeps the game afloat doesn't even occur to them.

So no, it's not the subscribers that brought on the F2P. LOL- it's the exact opposite. Oh and we can't forget to have ZoS shoulder the brunt of the blame. If they had put out a game with less problems and a better experience the sub base would have stayed, but their disregard of serious issues with the game and their customer service approach drove a huge segment of the subscribers away....just sayin.

I can't blame ZoS for trying though. Some games still have vibrant subscription models. If ZoS had succeeded it would have allowed for them to have a little more autonomy regarding content and direction. Too bad really.

Pman85 · July 2015

Rylana wrote: »

Pman85 wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

To all of the people in here saying "you knew it was going to be DLC"

Here is my answer.

In April/May 2004, just after launch of the game, we were informed that Imperial City was being delayed due to unforeseen issues with the game, but would still be released as a patch in a couple of months.

In September 2004 it was decided that the game was going to a B2P model.

None of us forgot that IC was promised to us as an expansion of the game we had already paid for. None of this is new news, many of us have been waiting on IC for 18+ months, it was actually meant to be out in patch 1.3 if you people forgot.

So im done, this is the final nail in the coffin. im done with the false promises, im done with kicking the can down the road, im done with all of the *** your development has *** us over with for the last year and a half.

IC was supposed to be INCLUDED with the purchase of the base game, you bait and switched us into releasing it as a DLC over a year after you delayed it because "reasons"

*** you ZOS.

complains that the DLC took too long, then quits when it gets here LOLOLOL. In the same post talks about It was coming "a few months after launch" then ends it with saying that it should of been in the release.

IF you play a game and think a expansion/dlc should come out within 6 months, you are a very new gamer. With that said, there seems to be so few of us that actually know what a true horrid launch or terrible updates or false promises truly are. Shoutout to those players and not these constant turds making posts that show us that have been around for a while, just how green and still on the *** they are.

Check my join date, noob.

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

If you are as half as pro as you think you are, you would realize that the forums are seperate from the ESO accounts.

Since you know more about my account that i do, take a look at the dates and think "what happened around the time he joined the forums" and then before you post another nonsense paragraph, think it out, then dont post about it.

washlov · July 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

think
may the lack of content forced them to B2P
why pay sub for nothing

crowfl56 · July 2015

I would say most of the complainer's in here, haven't been here all that long, they are using the free sub, and cry because they can't use the exploits to level fast.

Please go have fun, no real reason to complain, but if you do complain add a reasonable fix and time frame.

Psychobunni · July 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

Complaining for the sake of complaining. If you sub just like the "good ole pc days"...its the exact same, unsub and its gone.

Except ZOS already paid you the crowns to have it free if you did sub, and have announced this early enough to save the 2 months worth if you are current subbing, so you can own it forever.

Rylana · July 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

Principle.

Not only do I refuse at this point in time to fund a shithole development company that cant even solve the AOE lag issues in Cyrodiil 15 months after they caused them with the lighting patch and other visual "enhancements" but now they want even more money out of me after preorder, over a year of subscription, and enough patch note disappointment to fill the grand canyon.

For a PvP player this game isnt even worth paying for, but the new addition to the game is centered around our PvP zone, and since the level cap increased, plus new gear is entering the meta, it becomes a "must pay" scenario, something Zenimax does not deseve, not by a long shot.

They literally owe us this expansion for free (anything else they can go ahead and release DLC, as those were NEVER promised as part of the base game like IC was)

This is a special case, and squarely puts Zenimax into the same corporate sludgepile as EA and SOE as of this announcement.

Sharee · July 2015

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Rylana · July 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Because I already paid for ESO. 60 bucks
now give me the [SNIP] content I paid for.

(this is the purchase they said included the IC expansion, that is why its an 180, now the base game costs 85 dollars, if you want IC)

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Profanity]

Rhakon · July 2015

lathbury wrote: »

Rhakon wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

Rhakon wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

So much entitlement nobody made you spend all your crowns. what you thought after the game went b2p all content was gonna be free? If thats the case your the one whos been fooling yourself and you only have yourself to blame.

This is not about some Euros or Dollars, its about integrity loyality and fairness.

nope its about money check the thread title and the posts I have replied to all say something along the lines of I paid x amount for x months. so dont try and use emotive language to change your argument you are here complaining that you have to PAY to get the content.

again extra for you: I can afford the dlc but the handling of the PC customers is bad.

Please stop this close-minded postings, this does not contribute anything useful to the thread!

I have not heard a decent argument refuting the fact that if you subscribed for a year you have enough loyalty crowns to make this a free dlc for long time subscribers.

Pc players paid 130 € 10 month sub = 1000 crowns loyalty reward and 50€ for 500 crowns from game purchase + the need of 1 month sub at 1500 crowns when you want to play IC.

ca. 193€ until new content... when you play the game since launch. Thats a lot of money.
and a lot players supported more....

Sharee · July 2015

Rylana wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Because I already paid for ESO. 60 bucks
now give me the goddamned content I paid for.

(this is the purchase they said included the IC expansion, that is why its an 180), now the base game costs 85 dollars, if you want IC)

You paid them for access to the game during the months you were subbed. You got access to the game for the months you were subbed. You got exactly what you paid for.

You always knew(thought) that you would have to sub to be able to play IC for no additional cost.
You do get to play IC for no additional cost if you sub.

[EDIT] Sorry, i don't want to 'rub it in' or make you more angry, i just want you to see the whole issue my way.
The way i see it is that we got exactly what we thought we would get (free IC as long as we sub) and on top of that also got a second option: to not sub, and buy the IC separately. I think that is good!

Rhakon · July 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Because I already paid for ESO. 60 bucks
now give me the goddamned content I paid for.

(this is the purchase they said included the IC expansion, that is why its an 180), now the base game costs 85 dollars, if you want IC)

You paid them for access to the game during the months you were subbed. You got access to the game for the months you were subbed. You got exactly what you paid for.

You always knew(thought) that you would have to sub to be able to play IC for no additional cost.
You do get to play IC for no additional cost if you sub.

people get it.... the lack of new content does not vindicate subs!

PC PLAYERS ALREADY PAID FOR LONG PROMISED CONTENT

there could not be ANY argument or reason what mitigates this FACT

washlov · July 2015

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Because I already paid for ESO. 60 bucks
now give me the goddamned content I paid for.

(this is the purchase they said included the IC expansion, that is why its an 180), now the base game costs 85 dollars, if you want IC)

You paid them for access to the game during the months you were subbed. You got access to the game for the months you were subbed. You got exactly what you paid for.

You always knew(thought) that you would have to sub to be able to play IC for no additional cost.
You do get to play IC for no additional cost if you sub.

because you only pay for playing lol
think!!!
you pay for developing and for the future of the game (@GW2 you only pay for addons)

Fizzlewizzle · July 2015

For most people i assume (at least for me) this isn't so much about the price of the IC, but rather how it is brought to the players.

People (me included) payed and played during the subscription period, and when it ended we got SOME crowns for the game time we had before it went B2P. After that they introduced a new store with extra's, fun things and gimmicks.
They never said that futures update (especially the ones promised since launch) will be costing money from that moment onwards, with an advice to save the crowns for said releases.

It's like taking a kid out of town for a day, giving him a few bucks, putting it in the candy store saying "have fun", but not telling him that if he wants to go home at the end of the day he has to pay its own bus/ train ticket with the money you gave him.

They start something up, promise a few things. Some stuff goes wrong, they give you compensation for that and a new extra feature... and make you pay again for the stuff you were initially promised.
I can say for sure that 95% of us (me included) wouldn't have bought a Guar, pets and other cosmetic stuff if we knew that those items would require the same coins as future updates.

I would gladly refund my purchases (all cosmetical) for the Crowns needed to buy actual game content.
Would i miss my guar? yes. Would i buy it again?... probably. Has it a Higher priority than actual game content? NO.

I don't have problems with paying for extra content in a Buy to Play game.
There are people creating the stuff i play, and servers to maintain. Those things have to be payed.
Paying however for release day promises (which are 1.5 years late) is another thing.
This wouldn't be the first (and last) game where i pay to buy cosmetical or gameplay add-ons. But, stunts like this do make me wonder if this is really the type of game i should be spending money on.

MCMancub · July 2015

Rhakon wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

November 2003. I was beta testing this game more than a year before you even had it. We were told that IC was part of the original launch package (i.e. that no additional purchase was to be required, period)

Sub no sub, didnt matter, they literally said, verbatim "The IC expansion will not require an additional purchase above and beyond the base game"

Now it does, which is a complete 180 on what us old school players were told nearly 2 years ago.

They said the IC expansion will not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber (that went without saying since you had to be a subscriber to play at all)

Now? IC expansion does not require an additional purchase if you are an active subscriber.

How exactly is this a complete 180?

Because I already paid for ESO. 60 bucks
now give me the goddamned content I paid for.

(this is the purchase they said included the IC expansion, that is why its an 180), now the base game costs 85 dollars, if you want IC)

You paid them for access to the game during the months you were subbed. You got access to the game for the months you were subbed. You got exactly what you paid for.

You always knew(thought) that you would have to sub to be able to play IC for no additional cost.
You do get to play IC for no additional cost if you sub.

people get it.... the lack of new content does not vindicate subs!

PC PLAYERS ALREADY PAID FOR LONG PROMISED CONTENT

there could not be ANY argument or reason what mitigates this FACT

If you didn't sign a contract saying that you would get new content for the subscription you were paying then all you had was the hope that new content would come. You can't make that binding. Things happen. I.C. was delayed, like, twice. That doesn't entitle you to anything because both you and ZOS hoped this content would come sooner.

If I promise to pay you $100 in 5 years and I'm broke and penniless at that time, unable to pay, that doesn't mean you're entitled to anything if we don't have a binding contract.

Sharee · July 2015

washlov wrote: »

because you only pay for playing lol
think!!!
you pay for developing and for the future of the game (@GW2 you only pay for addons)

If you buy bread, you pay for the bread, not for the future development of the bakery.

JD2013 · July 2015

They did tell us the moment they announced B2P that all future content would cost. Either sub or separately. This was made abundantly clear.

lathbury · July 2015

Rylana wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

Principle.

Not only do I refuse at this point in time to fund a shithole development company that cant even solve the AOE lag issues in Cyrodiil 15 months after they caused them with the lighting patch and other visual "enhancements" but now they want even more money out of me after preorder, over a year of subscription, and enough patch note disappointment to fill the grand canyon.

For a PvP player this game isnt even worth paying for, but the new addition to the game is centered around our PvP zone, and since the level cap increased, plus new gear is entering the meta, it becomes a "must pay" scenario, something Zenimax does not deseve, not by a long shot.

They literally owe us this expansion for free (anything else they can go ahead and release DLC, as those were NEVER promised as part of the base game like IC was)

This is a special case, and squarely puts Zenimax into the same corporate sludgepile as EA and SOE as of this announcement.

yeah cant think why ppl are calling you qq'ers entitled.

NobleNerd · July 2015

One more nail.... one more nail.

Imperial City was promised to be in game shortly after launch. It was delayed mostly because of console and now you want to charge us?

For one thing I do not see the value in a mostly pvp zone. There is not enough content here to justify a DLC.

ZOS you will be losing players over this.

So if players choose not to buy your lack luster DLC do they stay at VR14 and if not where will those players go to level 2 more VR levels?

MCMancub · July 2015

NobleNerd wrote: »

One more nail.... one more nail.

Imperial City was promised to be in game shortly after launch. It was delayed mostly because of console and now you want to charge us?

For one thing I do not see the value in a mostly pvp zone. There is not enough content here to justify a DLC.

ZOS you will be losing players over this.

You still have the option to not pay for it via subscription. You know, the way it would have been introduced a year ago.

OR you can NOT pay a subscription and purchase it instead. How are people seriously so obtuse they can't see this?

Imhotep71 · July 2015

If you want it for free then [snip] sub and quit crying. [snip] If you aren't subbed, then you are part of the problem. You don't get to bail and then demand something you aren't entitled to.

If you are subbed then again, you don't have to purchase it separately.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on cursing]

washlov · July 2015

from time to time you pay for a ADDON but IC is no ADDON its long PROMISED CONTENT

Sharee wrote: »

washlov wrote: »

because you only pay for playing lol
think!!!
you pay for developing and for the future of the game (@GW2 you only pay for addons)

If you buy bread, you pay for the bread, not for the future development of the bakery.

sure you do
if you don't buy the bread the bakery will be gone
if there is no bread in bakery you will wait there because you love bread but you don't have to pay while waiting

kupacmac · July 2015

Rylana wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

Okay. Let's have a theoretical here.

Imagine that the sub was still mandatory to play. How would that be any different to having a sub to access it now? If you lapsed your sub if it was mandatory, you wouldn't get to play it. Same applies here.

But now you can buy it with crowns that you get if you sub, crown packs if you don't. Either way you have to pay just as you would have had to pay if the sub was still mandatory.

Principle.

Not only do I refuse at this point in time to fund a shithole development company that cant even solve the AOE lag issues in Cyrodiil 15 months after they caused them with the lighting patch and other visual "enhancements" but now they want even more money out of me after preorder, over a year of subscription, and enough patch note disappointment to fill the grand canyon.

For a PvP player this game isnt even worth paying for, but the new addition to the game is centered around our PvP zone, and since the level cap increased, plus new gear is entering the meta, it becomes a "must pay" scenario, something Zenimax does not deseve, not by a long shot.

They literally owe us this expansion for free (anything else they can go ahead and release DLC, as those were NEVER promised as part of the base game like IC was)

This is a special case, and squarely puts Zenimax into the same corporate sludgepile as EA and SOE as of this announcement.

Nobody is forcing you to play and you can even play the game now without spending a dime. You're not forced to buy IC either, AND they even compensated you more than enough in crowns to get it.

You are the epitome of "sense of entitlement syndrome".

Ley · July 2015

I thought they made it pretty clear that we'd have to pay for any additional content, once the game went b2p so I'm confused about why this thread was made. Then again people here love complaining almost as much as they love thinking that they deserve everything being given to them for free, so I guess this thread makes sense.

Enodoc · July 2015

BeardLumber wrote: »

Of course we have to pay for IC, it's new content. Just because we've been paying for this game from the start doesn't mean we deserve free things.

Everyone needs to stop feeling entitled, it's not a very attractive look.

@BeardLumber It's not about entitlement. At least, not for me. It's about access:
(This is from a thread a few weeks ago)

Enodoc wrote: »

First of all, there has been no confirmation either way on whether IC will be paid content or not. I would like to put forward the case to ZOS on why it should not be, and why it should be free to everyone under the promise of "regular updates and new gameplay [that] will be offered to all players to enjoy free of additional charges", as essential "new gameplay" for PvP rather than the paid-for "optional extras".

They said, when giving examples of paid DLC, that they would be scaled to your level and accessible straight away when you buy them. This cannot happen with IC, as you have to own all the Home Keeps to get in. Meaning, even if you own the content, you may not be able to access it. Conversely, those who do not own it would not be able to get in despite spending hours earning the access in Cyrodiil.

And here's a situational case study of what would happen if it was a paid DLC with access requirements:

Enodoc wrote: »

Situation 1:
"Hey guys! I just bought Imperial City! Let's go check it out!"
"Sorry dude, our alliance doesn't own all our home keeps right now, you can't get in."
"Seriously? I can't check out content that I just paid $15 for?" /ragequit

Situation 2:
"Awesome, we only have to get one more keep to get Imperial City access!" *Keep flips*
"Everyone into Imperial City! Go go go!... Except you. You haven't bought Imperial City."
"Seriously? I just spent 3 hours capturing keeps and now can't check out the reward for all that effort?" /ragequit

Summary:
Content with an in-game access restriction/reward system cannot also be behind a paywall, as it will create animosity.

Earning IC access by control of keeps has always been promoted as "the way it will work", like Darkness Falls in DAoC, so I don't see them changing that aspect of it now. It would also be detrimental if they did, as there would be no incentive to capture keeps if you couldn't cut off the other Alliances' access (and therefore had to restore your own).

Sharee · July 2015

washlov wrote: »

if there is no bread in bakery you will wait there because you love bread but you don't have to pay while waiting

If there is no bread in the bakery, why would i wait there? I would leave, and come back once the bread is ready.

If you just stayed there waiting and paying for the waiting, you have no-one to blame but yourself.

DenMoria · July 2015

2 Questions:

1) What's a SUB?
2) What's the point of crowns and the crown store since it's all cosmetic and/or stuff you can get in the game anyhow?

lathbury · July 2015

DenMoria wrote: »

2 Questions:

1) What's a SUB?
2) What's the point of crowns and the crown store since it's all cosmetic and/or stuff you can get in the game anyhow?

1)subsciption
2) you can buy DLC with them too