Pc Players waited for content and fixes since release, often promised and never implemented.
These players supported the company and now they should pay twice.
Patronizing players what try to make the game better with hundreds of never mentioned ideas and tell them whiners is beneath contempt.

ZoS is responsible for the mood in the forums, the communication is not bad but intransparent and about the wrong things.

nathan_bri wrote: »

washlov wrote: »

after one year sub
after one year beta test for console
after one year without real content
after one year lag in cyrodiil
after one year paying for consol development
after one year following the carrot on the stick
after one year bad communication and promises
after one year ......

there have to be really much content in IC after this long waiting and for that price!

PC paid one year sub and console not, for what we paid?

You paid for content you have been enjoying... or not enjoying as it seems. Good thing no one is forcing you to subscribe nor play the game. One is always free to play other games or not play games at all. Welcome to freedom.

again: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/bethesda-elder-scrolls-online-MMORPG-subscription-zenimax,23954.html

Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

Firor added that the team is already working on content that will be rolled out once The Elder Scrolls Online goes live. This content will include new skills, quest lines, zones, dungeons and more – this is in addition to end-game content and the Player-vs-Player portion. An exact release schedule hasn't been etched in stone, but the team is shooting for a four to six week period between each content release.

washlov wrote: »

i dont get it i really dont get it may i am stupid but why is someone defending zos

zos simply messed around with us

and people like



and

nathan_bri wrote: »

"Rhakon wrote: »

"Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

With a subscription... yes. Now that the the subscription is optional... no.

IC will be behind a PAYWALL...

Rhakon wrote: »

nathan_bri wrote: »

"Rhakon wrote: »

"Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

With a subscription... yes. Now that the the subscription is optional... no.

IC will be behind a PAYWALL...

So continue to pay the subscription as if it were still mandatory. You will see functionally 0 difference regarding your access to DLC versus how it was when those statements were made. It's even cheaper if you only pay for the DLC and don't sub at all.

It's funny how the narrative, " the game is F2P now", colors expectations so that a better deal now looks like a worse one.

driosketch wrote: »

Rhakon wrote: »

nathan_bri wrote: »

"Rhakon wrote: »

"Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

With a subscription... yes. Now that the the subscription is optional... no.

IC will be behind a PAYWALL...

So continue to pay the subscription as if it were still mandatory. You will see functionally 0 difference regarding your access to DLC versus how it was when those statements were made. It's even cheaper if you only pay for the DLC and don't sub at all.

It's funny how the narrative, " the game is F2P now", colors expectations so that a better deal now looks like a worse one.

yes loyal customers are worthless and whiners because they demand long promised things....
sounds like you are a mature customer...

If you haven't realized it yet, this game is all about the "Cash grabs". There's still bugs in this game I know I reported and many others did from the beta that still haven't been fixed, but look here comes some DLC!!! The game is a cash grab.

Get ready for that $100 bear mount.

JD2013 wrote: »

Rhakon wrote: »

nathan_bri wrote: »

"Rhakon wrote: »

"Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

With a subscription... yes. Now that the the subscription is optional... no.

IC will be behind a PAYWALL...

So you expect everyone to just pay for the base game and get all DLC free?

Try telling that to other MMO's sub or pay for it. That's the way of the system.

yes pay sub a year get nothing thats the way...

JD2013 wrote: »

washlov wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

Rhakon wrote: »

nathan_bri wrote: »

"Rhakon wrote: »

"Mat Firor :
"Players will appreciate not having to worry about being 'monetized' in the middle of playing the game, which is definitely a problem that is cropping up more and more in online gaming these days," he said. "The fact that the word 'monetized' exists points to the heart of the issue for us: We don't want the player to worry about which parts of the game to pay for - with our system, they get it all."

With a subscription... yes. Now that the the subscription is optional... no.

IC will be behind a PAYWALL...

So you expect everyone to just pay for the base game and get all DLC free?

Try telling that to other MMO's sub or pay for it. That's the way of the system.

yes pay sub a year get nothing thats the way...

Yes, nothing. No 1.1 - 1.6 updates, maintenances, and how many hours did you play the game for? You were renting the game time with your sub. Like WoW, for example.

Don't be so dramatic. Yes IC should have been here with 1.6 or earlier. But complaining about it is not going to get you it for free. This is the reality.

Sub, buy it or don't, then you're not getting Imperial City.

ZOS's management of the game hasn't been good. At all. But the levels of entitlement among some in this community are way too high.

its not the fault of the customers
the customers where loyal and paid cause ZOS showed us nice things
now its ZOS turn to be loyal

RadicalSpirit wrote: »

Tbh, we should get the PTS and not PC.

@RadicalSpirit

How would you test abilities, passives or mechanics to see if they are working correctly? This is probably the stupidest and most detrimental suggestion that I have heard heard for this game... EVER.

My goodness... I can't even add to my complete dumbfoundedness right now. You can't see damage numbers and you can't see buff timers or any other information regarding your character yet you want to be able to test the game solely on platforms that have all their information withheld from them?!

Hopefully, you are trolling otherwise - Geez, I can't even finish this statement.

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

SorataArisugawa wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

Incarnatus wrote: »

I have to pay nothing for the DLC because I just subbed ....

Your subscription is paying rent. Once you stop paying rent you lose access to the content. It's cheaper to just buy 3000 crowns than to buy two months of sub time. Who the hell knows when the next content update is so it's better to buy it outright with crowns since the subscription benefits are still lackluster and there are no content DLC yet.

What?

If your pay 2 month sub you get 3000crowns and you can play IC in this time. After that you can leaf it and buy things from the shop for the crowns or the IC DLC if you liked it. How is it cheaper to buy just 3000 crowns?

@SorataArisugawa

It's really just simple math and comparative operators at work here. 2 months of ESO+ is the minimum to accrue the complimentary 3000 crowns (1500 p/m). 2 months of an ESO subscription is $30 correct? The time you gained renting the DLC while an ESO+ member is negligible when comparing that to just buying it day one.

• 2m of ESO+ yielding 3000 crowns = $30
  VS
• 3000 crown pack purchased from the store = $24.99

So on which planet or reality is $30 < $24.99? The Twilight Zone? (Duh nuh nuh nuh Duh nuh nuh nuh) Even if you bought 90 days of that "Premium" membership (lol) you'd find yourself at a 1000 crown deficit when compared to the person that bought the 5500 crown pack for $3 cheaper than your 90 day "Premium" membership (lol).

Are you really trying to give them unearned money? That's probably the most foolish thing a consumer can do. 10% gold and xp is a washout benefit really.

That is something every player has to judge for himself. 10% xp bonus, for 2 months, and for only $5, may have value for someone trying to level fast.

Additionally, subbing for 2 months instead of buying outright grants you a 'preview' of the content before you commit to it. If you buy it with crowns outright, then you are stuck with it. If you sub, and don't like IC, you can then after 2 months decide to keep your 3000 crowns and save them for something else.

If you want to level fast then it only takes 3 days from lv1-vr14. Tried and true method. As a PC player, I'll be able to test and see the Imperial City in it's fullest for free on the PTS. Whether that changes or not will remain to be seen. I think the PTS will become a subscriber only perk but for Imperial City they will need to load test so it makes sense for it to be open to all account types. A preview is not necessary though even then since Twitch streams/YouTube Let's Plays exist and you can ask all the questions you want in a Twitch stream while watching someone check out the content. Usually it's welcomed with open arms. By giving them money for a 'preview' of a DLC you actually end up still paying for that DLC in some aspect regardless of whether or not you keep it. I'll elaborate on that a bit here later in the post. This is an MMO and it will be content you experience over and over. Checking out someone playing it essentially as a demo and asking questions is one of the oldest referral methods and it's still used now because it just works. If you want an honest no frills opinion on Imperial City when it comes out then check out Erlexx's stream on Twitch. I respect him more than some of the other notable streamers because he's not going to butter up to Zenimax. He will be honest and give feedback without ulterior motives from an merited MMO player's point of view. Definitely one of the respectful streamers out there too. /plug

Let's work out another example here to further display the lack of value that a subscription has for this game for players in our current situation:


6 Months:
6 months yielding 9,000 crowns = $77.94
Two 5,500 crown packs yielding 11,000 = $79.98

So that preview and 10% experience boost and gold you might have used for a cumulative 3 days if you're trying to 'level fast' ended up costing you an extra 2,000 crowns or just a little over $20 but with the packs set up the way they are it's about $22*. We will call it $20 because of the $2.04 cent difference. Which essentially buys you a DLC pack or something else you want on the store. I doubt the 2500 recurring DLC price tag will be a recurring theme.


12 Months:
12 months yielding 18,000 crowns = $155.88
Four 5,5000 crown packs yielding 22,000 crowns = $159.96

So that preview and 10% experience boost and gold you might have used for a cumulative 3 days if you're trying to 'level fast' ended up costing you an extra 4,000 crowns or just a little over $32-34 yet with packs set the way they are it's in reality $39.99 or more. That's two DLC packs that you threw down the drain for 10%xp that you might use for 3 days if you're trying to 'level fast'. Worth it to note the $4 overall difference between the sub time and purchases of course.


As common logic would show over a year the crown deficit from the "Premium" ESO+ membership actually becomes more. You're right about it being about preference though. I prefer to make better decisions with my money.

Another aspect of this is just how much DLC will they be releasing? Will it be quarterly content releases? That's definitely something to note as well.

I will note again in this thread even. It would be incredibly foolish to think that ZOS will continue to allow DLC packs to be purchasable via crowns. Sure, it's player friendly however it's leaving money on the table and we all know that Zenimax Media Inc., Bethesda and Zenimax Online Studios loves to line their pockets.

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

If you want to level fast then it only takes 3 days from lv1-vr14. Tried and true method.

How many of the TESO player population level their characters from lv1-vr14 in 3 days? My bet is on less than 0.001%.
An XP bonus should not be dismissed just because it is useless to less than 0.001% of the playerbase.

This is why i said the value of the bonus XP 'is something every player has to judge for himself'

Lionxoft wrote: »

Also, previews are a negligible reason since Twitch streams/YouTube Let's Plays exist

Saying that the difference between hands-on experience and watching videos is negligible is not something i can agree with.

Lionxoft wrote: »

6 Months:
6 months yielding 9,000 crowns = $77.94
Two 5,500 crown packs yielding 11,000 = $79.98

So that preview and 10% experience boost and gold you might have used for a cumulative 3 days if you're trying to 'level fast' ended up costing you an extra 2,000 crowns

You only need to 'preview' IC for two months before you have enough crowns to buy it. Therefore any exercises calculating how much you lose when previewing it for a longer time are meaningless.

Remember we are not evaluating whether subscription is better as a whole, we are just evaluating whether the specific case of subbing for just 2 months and then buying IC with the earned crowns is better than buying it with crowns outright.

My conclusion is a 'yes', if either previewing the content for 2 months or getting 10% xp/gold for 2 months (or both) are worth $5 for the buyer.

I'm just in the interest of saving people money. All of the examples I've provided save you money and make your dollar more powerful. I'm not sure why any consumer would willingly choose to depreciate their dollar's power. You don't owe them squat and they don't deserve your charity. I gave you some pretty good examples showing just how much you lose immediately and also over time yet you chose to whittle the post down to a point where it's context was completely absent. I still proved that the subscription is an inferior method.

You also removed the parts of text where I explained that as a PC player I will have plenty of time to play the content for free in order to preview it. Also, it's a damn MMO DLC. The hands on experience isn't going to be any different than what you already know or can see via stream. The combat isn't changing. ZOS has already stated they will not charge for game systems or mechanic changes/upgrades. You're paying $5 extra to 'preview' something that you could preview for free. If you're in the interests of just flushing away money then I'm sure I can hook you up with some organizations that could make better use of it. You'd be surprised how many times the streamer I mentioned gets asked "Is this game worth it?" to gamers looking to pick up the game. A new level to a game is not going to change how spells fire or how combat responds. It will not change the game's core so therefore a $5 preview is ultimately wasteful. That's my opinion though.

At the end of the day it's your money so it's your choice but I think the picture was painted in my original post. Not the mutilated version you composed to try and prove your non-existent point but the original that displayed with contrast and in context as to how one method is better than the other in the 60, 90, 180 and 360 day examples.

Don't mind me though. Only trying to help the players save money. All of this is subject to change if they add more benefits to the subscription or nerf the non-members.

Just know that I'll be spending less money for more game entitlements on my account than you.

I wonder if this is how the Geico Gecko feels some days after watching people refuse to save money. Before you say it. Yes, I know he's fictional.

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

Don't mind me though. Only trying to help the players save money.

Your suggested way makes people pay $5 less, that much is true.

But it also needs to be said that if you choose the other way, you are not automatically 'wasting' $5, because there are benefits that may or may not be worth $5 to the player.

What i did not like about your post is that you projected your own feelings/experience onto these benefits, suggesting that those benefits are just as useless to any other player as they are to you.
But not every player levels 1-max in 3 days. Not every player gets as much from watching videos as from playing himself. Not every player can attend PTS(and even then, PTS experience and live experience usually vastly differ because they are different social environments)

Whether the $5 are wasted or not strongly differs depending on who you ask. Only trying to help the players understand that.

You'd be a great propagandist. It's like taking things out of context to manipulate them for your purpose is your profession. It's hard to lead the sheep away from their shepherd even when he's leading them to the slaughter. I will never understand why players will give charity to corporations like they owe them something because that's exactly what you're doing.

Lionxoft wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

Don't mind me though. Only trying to help the players save money.

Your suggested way makes people pay $5 less, that much is true.

But it also needs to be said that if you choose the other way, you are not automatically 'wasting' $5, because there are benefits that may or may not be worth $5 to the player.

What i did not like about your post is that you projected your own feelings/experience onto these benefits, suggesting that those benefits are just as useless to any other player as they are to you.
But not every player levels 1-max in 3 days. Not every player gets as much from watching videos as from playing himself. Not every player can attend PTS(and even then, PTS experience and live experience usually vastly differ because they are different social environments)

Whether the $5 are wasted or not strongly differs depending on who you ask. Only trying to help the players understand that.

You'd be a great propagandist. It's like taking things out of context to manipulate them for your purpose is your profession. It's hard to lead the sheep away from their shepherd even when he's leading them to the slaughter. I will never understand why players will give charity to corporations like they owe them something because that's exactly what you're doing.

Look, stripped to the very basics, our arguments look like this.

You: Do not spend the extra $5, what you get is not worth it.
Me: If you spend extra $5, this and this is what you get. Now make up your mind whether it is worth the price for you or not.

People are already too liable to take anything they read online for gospel. I think they should be given the facts, and encouraged to make their own decisions, instead of being offered pre-cooked solutions. I respectfully disagree with your insinuation that doing this is 'leading sheep to slaughter'.

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Lionxoft wrote: »

Don't mind me though. Only trying to help the players save money.

Your suggested way makes people pay $5 less, that much is true.

But it also needs to be said that if you choose the other way, you are not automatically 'wasting' $5, because there are benefits that may or may not be worth $5 to the player.

What i did not like about your post is that you projected your own feelings/experience onto these benefits, suggesting that those benefits are just as useless to any other player as they are to you.
But not every player levels 1-max in 3 days. Not every player gets as much from watching videos as from playing himself. Not every player can attend PTS(and even then, PTS experience and live experience usually vastly differ because they are different social environments)

Whether the $5 are wasted or not strongly differs depending on who you ask. Only trying to help the players understand that.

You'd be a great propagandist. It's like taking things out of context to manipulate them for your purpose is your profession. It's hard to lead the sheep away from their shepherd even when he's leading them to the slaughter. I will never understand why players will give charity to corporations like they owe them something because that's exactly what you're doing.

Look, stripped to the very basics, our arguments look like this.

You: Do not spend the extra $5, what you get is not worth it.
Me: If you spend extra $5, this and this is what you get. Now make up your mind whether it is worth the price for you or not.

People are already too liable to take anything they read online for gospel. I think they should be given the facts, and encouraged to make their own decisions, instead of being offered pre-cooked solutions. I respectfully disagree with your insinuation that doing this is 'leading sheep to slaughter'.

You're stripping context and data to show your view of the topic. You also state that my suggestion somehow doesn't allow players to make their own decisions. The entire basis of my view on the subject is based on the players having a choice and one that rewards them by giving them what interests them or what they want/need while saving them money and 4k crowns a year compared to the monthly subscription rewards.

I supplied facts supported by data showing just how much money you save per 60, 90, 180 and 360 day periods. You just decided to skip over those parts and omit them from your responses despite the actual numbers being obviously damning towards a subscription. I supplied the information with a suggestion and that's if you want to save over $40 a year and have ultimate authority over what you're purchasing (Not renting) and your overall game experience then the option provided is best.

And I thought the console crowd were whiners lol, grats guys you proved me way wrong.