I hope not. That would seriously devalue the items for those people who received them in the first year.

For me, the point of being an ESO Plus member is to try-before-you-buy for the DLCs. If you like it, you can use the ESO Plus Crowns to buy it; if you don't, when you're sub ends you can save the Crowns for something else. There's also the upcoming ESO Plus Crafting Bags which many crafters would say was a good reason to sub to ESO Plus.

No. Those items were for early, long term supporters of the game; people that stuck with it through the bugs and other issues early in the game

Disclaimer: I don't own any of these items.

The only way I could see them bringing them back is if it was done under the same conditions: You subscribe to ESO+ for 3 months and you get a High Hrothgar Wraith, 6 months to get a Dwemer Sphere, 9 months to get the Mask of Cheerful Slaughter...and so on.

The problem would be whether they make it retroactive - if you've subbed for 9 months or more since the game went B2P do you get the rewards right away? Or would it be starting from scratch so everyone who doesn't already have them has to sub from the point they're reintroduced onwards? And if it's not retroactive what about people who subbed before and already have the first round of rewards? Does that count or are they starting from scratch and have to earn those again before they can get new ones?

I'm also not sure what they'd do about the senche-tiger. It was technically a loyalty reward like the others but it was presented as being much more special and specifically for people who subbed during the first year when you had to. (Which is also why it was a 10-month reward instead of a 12-month one.)

In that case it might be better to do a new variant to be a 12-month loyalty reward instead of making the tiger available to new people.

Edit: Edited to remove redundant and repetitive sentence structure.

As someone who did miss out on the tiger ( I was on a hiatus due to work and wasn't aware of the tiger ) I wouldn't be opposed to the same conditions for the items.

After all if they can just "sell" the Imperial edition for a measly $20 on the crown store where as I paid nearly x2 as much for the Collectors edition ( Imperial Edition ) hard-copy of the game. Surely the same rule can apply? I mean the base game was what $60 for most, add $20 that's $80! I paid $159.99 so yeah quite the unfair feature there if all I wanted was to play as an Imperial & have a white horse.

This was not disclosed @ launch that they would be making it free. I am not sour about it and glad others also get to experience the nice features / racial passives that Imperials have to offer. My point though is if they want to make it fair they should make it all fair not discriminate and decide - we will screw these guys who bought exclusive things but we will not allow other players what we rewarded these guys...

IF you really have to put up a "paywall" for it then make it so that a player has to purchase x6 months in one go at least. OR be subscribed for 1 year without end ( like it was ).

So given my valid argument about the Imperial edition which was also "exclusive" do you other posters think it fair?

They arent going to put the striped senche in the store but the other senche mounts are exactly the same. Only difference is the skin.

Are consoles getting loyalty pets when TG dops @Enodoc ?

Enodoc wrote: »

Duiwel wrote: »

After all if they can just "sell" the Imperial edition for a measly $20 on the crown store where as I paid nearly x2 as much for the Collectors edition ( Imperial Edition ) hard-copy of the game. Surely the same rule can apply? I mean the base game was what $60 for most, add $20 that's $80! I paid $159.99 so yeah quite the unfair feature there if all I wanted was to play as an Imperial & have a white horse.

This was not disclosed @ launch that they would be making it free. I am not sour about it and glad others also get to experience the nice features / racial passives that Imperials have to offer. My point though is if they want to make it fair they should make it all fair not discriminate and decide - we will screw these guys who bought exclusive things but we will not allow other players what we rewarded these guys...

So given my valid argument about the Imperial edition which was also "exclusive" do you other posters think it fair?

The Imperial Edition is not free, and they never said the in-game bonuses would be a limited time offer. The extra cost for the physical version was for the stuff that was limited; the art book, the statue, and the map. The digital portion of the Imperial Edition has always been available for $20 (since April 2014), for anyone who "wanted to play as an Imperial and have a white horse" without getting all the in-box stuff.

Regardless on whether or not it was made available at launch day in game. They didn't advertise on the standard box of the game that you can buy imperial edition in game pre-launch.
$20 is free compared to $100 extra so yeah free...

And instead of pointing out minor things in my post ( which you actually just misunderstood by what I meant with "free" I didn't mean it as literal as you took it ) how about answering the question which was :

Duiwel wrote: »

do you other posters think it fair?