I'm Confused by Resistance to Subscription/Expansion Costs

Rainwhisper · April 2017

I've been following several of the threads about Morrowind and about ESO Plus, some of which invariably come back to a claim that Morrowind should be treated as DLC, and others which make "pay-to-win" arguments.

As someone who has paid a monthly subscription fee for every MMO I've ever played, dating back to Ultima Online, I'm perplexed by just how much content people seem to expect to get for free. Likewise, I've always had to pay for expansions, and doing so always made sense to me. I recognize that server upkeep and customer service costs alone justify a subscription fee, much less the additional creative content and ongoing development work, including balancing. The massive content additions of an expansion, likewise, also require a significant financial outlay for art, writing, programming, area design, voice acting, etc.

Which prompts my question: What is the source of the expectation that a massive, virtual world (as opposed to an FPS arena environment like Overwatch) should be free?

I enjoy playing the game, and I recognize that the experience I enjoy costs money to create and maintain, so I pay a subscription. That seems perfectly reasonable. I also recognize that I'm subsidizing players who can't afford to pay a subscription fee at the moment, and I'm also okay with that since having a large player base benefits the game as a whole. What I don't understand is how some posters seem to think that the money to keep the game viable will simply come ex nihilo, without subscription and expansion fees.

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

It's not as you describe....you're misunderstanding comes from applying that you are a person whose decided to subscribe In 2014 that makes sense.

As of Tamriel Unlimited, the game developers and leaders of ZOS describe a new structure where the subscriber type can choose to continue this with uninterrupted access to future dlc.

The subscriber via time cards or whose similar to a B2P customer also found themselves in a sweet spot.

The B2P type can purchase crowns to unlock dlc
-In this design most all were extremely happy as it allows options for different types of customers.

Today the game structure as described forces the subscriber to be a B2P customer in part. The B2P customer is forced to be a subscriber in part.
The time card customer was eliminated entirely.

Specifically Morrowind and ESO Plus required QoL updates

It's actually not that people expect things for free, it's that people expect one concise structure whether that has options built in for many or few, but what you're reading isn't unwillingness to pay for content. It's an unwillingness to be taken advantage of for content.

Korah_Eaglecry · April 2017

Am I experiencing deja vu?

Nermy · April 2017

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

It's not as you describe....you're misunderstanding comes from applying that you are a person whose decided to subscribe In 2014 that makes sense.

As of Tamriel Unlimited, the game developers and leaders of ZOS describe a new structure where the subscriber type can choose to continue this with uninterrupted access to future dlc.

The subscriber via time cards or whose similar to a B2P customer also found themselves in a sweet spot.

The B2P type can purchase crowns to unlock dlc
-In this design most all were extremely happy as it allows options for different types of customers.
Today the game structure as described forces the subscriber to be a B2P customer in part. The B2P customer is forced to be a subscriber in part.
The time card customer was eliminated entirely.

Specifically Morrowind and ESO Plus required QoL updates

It's actually not that people expect things for free, it's that people expect one concise structure whether that has options built in for many or few, but what you're reading isn't unwillingness to pay for content. It's an unwillingness to be taken advantage of for content.

I really doubt they're putting that much thought into it tbh, there's just a sense of entitlement that a lot of people have in ESO (and the 1st world in general). It destroyed Imperial City and the way that was supposed to work.

Leandor · April 2017

Actually, OP has it perfectly right.

I am sick and tired of the constant crying for free stuff.

If you don't want to or are not able to fork out the cash, then don't. And then quietly leave. Don't bother those who can and want with inane arguments on why XY must be free or else.

In the end, this game is a paid-for service. The service provider sets pricing and decides on availability of services.

As a customer, your choice is to accept it or not. Same as any other service provided in any other business anywhere in the world. Deal with it.

Except soviet russia. There, service provide you.

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

Nermy wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

It's not as you describe....you're misunderstanding comes from applying that you are a person whose decided to subscribe In 2014 that makes sense.

As of Tamriel Unlimited, the game developers and leaders of ZOS describe a new structure where the subscriber type can choose to continue this with uninterrupted access to future dlc.

The subscriber via time cards or whose similar to a B2P customer also found themselves in a sweet spot.

The B2P type can purchase crowns to unlock dlc
-In this design most all were extremely happy as it allows options for different types of customers.
Today the game structure as described forces the subscriber to be a B2P customer in part. The B2P customer is forced to be a subscriber in part.
The time card customer was eliminated entirely.

Specifically Morrowind and ESO Plus required QoL updates

It's actually not that people expect things for free, it's that people expect one concise structure whether that has options built in for many or few, but what you're reading isn't unwillingness to pay for content. It's an unwillingness to be taken advantage of for content.

I really doubt they're putting that much thought into it tbh, there's just a sense of entitlement that a lot of people have in ESO (and the 1st world in general). It destroyed Imperial City and the way that was supposed to work.

@Nermy

I'm pretty sure it's that simple. It doesn't require thought as it prompts for payment. Any product where the company changes how or what payment access determines relates and most all people have had that experience at least once even if it's as simple as a price change to a restaurant or membership, gas, clothes, coffee,etc.

Other games do this and people react negatively.....phone games and F2P is where it's seen most often but now it's shown up on console too in 2014. People tend to
Move from game to game when something makes them unhappy or is no longer fun.

DaveMoeDee · April 2017

If it is a sense of entitlement, it is a feeling of entitlement to receive what was advertised and to not have the service play semantics games.

While I agree that this was a bait and switch (though possibly unintentional as they may have truly expected to release 4 quarterly DLC a year before reality set in), I don't consider this an unreasonable model. The sub is take it or leave it. People are getting upset because it is now more obvious than ever that the sub is mostly just paying for crafting bags and now there are other costs on top. It is what it is. Take it or leave it. Personally, I subbed one month for DB/crafting bags and subbed again this month to have crafting bags for all the anniversary mats. I don't do reoccurring and suffer through inventory management in between.

What other games have done is irrelevant. Other games have had all sorts of ways of monetization. What is relevant is how ZOS advertised ESO+ and the word games they played to back out of their communicated terms.

idk · April 2017

There is a part of gamers that do not want to pay. It's that simple. Before this game launched there were threads tha people wanted to play the game but didn't want to pay. It's really to the point the pure sub model no longer supports games well though some games are pushing harder to increase game play specific revenue like ESO+ perks and locking items behind the expansion.

Others have good reason to at least be concerned. ESO recently announced their changing their business model for a second time in a mere 3 years. Both times were accompanied by a long drought of meaningful content. Last time was a year in which Zos didn't add anything meaningful content and I think this time it'll be close to 9 months which is counter to each and every means of delivering content Zos has said they'd do.

Kodrac · April 2017

They just want they're money for nothing and chicks for free.

Lythandra · April 2017

I don't mind paying a subscription fee if the game is working well and is also well balanced.

I don't find the game to be working well in end game and it is badly balanced there as well.

They want it all. You buy the game, then subscription fee and then micro/macro transactions.

Tornaad · April 2017

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

ADarklore · April 2017

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

Maff · April 2017

I don't mind Morrowind being an expansion and sold as such. I can see why some people take issue with it not being a DLC included in the sub, and won't disagree with their complaints either.
Personally I do mind having to buy Morrowind as well as additional character slots just to play the Warden class. It's like I'm being charged extra for playing the game a lot.
It's nothing to do with being entitled, I just don't feel like I should have to pay extra just because i already filled up my 8 character slots before knowing an additional class would be added to the game.

Wreuntzylla · April 2017

This has nothing to do with undeserved entitlement. The story went something like this:

Concert Promoter: Pay us $50/mos and you can get into concerts without any other charge. You also get concessions without charge..
Consumer: Any concert? Any concessions sold?
Concert Promoter: Yes.
<time passes>
Consumer: Hey Concert Promoter, I can't get tickets for your upcoming "show" which is described just like a concert. Your ticket issuers say I have to pay.more money. What's going on?
Concert Promoter: Of course you can't, it's a show and not a concert. If it was a concert, you wouldn't have to pay more.
Consumer: Wtf you talking about, it's the same thing we got before under a different name.
Concert Promoter: No it's not, we are giving out t-shirts in addition to the concert-like show and concessions. It's different.

This isn't the first time consumers were given false information that they relied on to their detriment. There was a time when we were told that the game would stay subscription and not go B2P or F2P or any of those things.

Turelus · April 2017

I think most issues I have seen which were not just people complaining for the sake of complaining came from people wondering when ZOS will every actually settle on a business model.

We've had a change now every year since launch, I really hope next year we're not told yet another one.

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

ADarklore wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.

The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.

Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.

The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore

ADarklore · April 2017

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.

The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.

Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.

The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore

You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.

WalksonGraves · April 2017

Subscription is a "pay to pay" system. You get nothing more than inventory and costume dyeing, morrowind is behind another paywall.

HatchetHaro · April 2017

It's not about the money.

It's about the lies.

WalksonGraves · April 2017

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Actually if you stop feeding birds once they are used to it during the winter or they will starve to death.

ADarklore · April 2017

HatchetHaro wrote: »

It's not about the money.

It's about the lies.

I think you take things far too seriously... there were no 'promises' or 'guarantees' and businesses are free to change their business model and businesses practices at any point in time, you agreed to it when you agreed to the TOS- did you not read it before agreeing?

HatchetHaro · April 2017

ADarklore wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

It's not about the money.

It's about the lies.

I think you take things far too seriously... there were no 'promises' or 'guarantees' and businesses are free to change their business model and businesses practices at any point in time, you agreed to it when you agreed to the TOS- did you not read it before agreeing?

You are confusing "business practice" with "ethics". Having free speech does not entitle you to freely insult anyone you want.

Same thing here. They may be allowed to change their business practice, but the way they did it is blatantly dishonest. I can go on for hours about this, but there have been plenty of points raised by many people who are irked by this.

ADarklore · April 2017

HatchetHaro wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

It's not about the money.

It's about the lies.

I think you take things far too seriously... there were no 'promises' or 'guarantees' and businesses are free to change their business model and businesses practices at any point in time, you agreed to it when you agreed to the TOS- did you not read it before agreeing?

You are confusing "business practice" with "ethics". Having free speech does not entitle you to freely insult anyone you want.

Same thing here. They may be allowed to change their business practice, but the way they did it is blatantly dishonest. I can go on for hours about this, but there have been plenty of points raised by many people who are irked by this.

That is you OPINION that it was 'dishonest'... it isn't a fact, because I have a different opinion and believe what they did was fully acceptable and within their rights and TOS to do. Also, I think you just proved my point about taking things too seriously by feeling like I insulted you by making an interpretation of your statement.

Betheny · April 2017

I blame Asia for this f2p scourge.

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

ADarklore wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.

The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.

Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.

The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore

You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.

@ADarklore

No I'm not implying anything. I'm just reading Zubokos comment and your response.

Regardless of the use of words for add-on, dlc, chapter.....different terminology is not the cause of discontent with what we see in the forums or websites.

It's literally not semantics it's a distinct required change in structure to access content so semantics isn't accurate or a way to mention people's situations.

Zubokos comment that you responded to in which I quoted above, very accurately captures 2017 as a whole. It also involves a large portion of 2016 in terms of structure and the absence of paid content so the free example applies.

If it's OK, I'm going to use your recent comment that the players haven't been here that long....

This means for those new customers, who are either buying the gold edition or the base game and gold dlc via crowns as well as playing under a console options where one buys and few others share. Pc would only have base or base and gold considered.

Of those, other than eso plus being for those other benefits, they haven't had any need to pay for anything else.

What's important, those recent customers made decisions based upon the outlined structure which has drastically changed for them to require not only a chapter, dlc, add-on purchase but it creates uncertainty in the future as there's only ambiguous suggestions without details of if dlc for eso Plus will always come outside of a chapter.

While there are some who may just want something for nothing, logically the complaint threads have very few of those of that opinion as free was never a model suggested

ADarklore · April 2017

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.

The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.

Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.

The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore

You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.

@ADarklore

No I'm not implying anything. I'm just reading Zubokos comment and your response.

Regardless of the use of words for add-on, dlc, chapter.....different terminology is not the cause of discontent with what we see in the forums or websites.

It's literally not semantics it's a distinct required change in structure to access content so semantics isn't accurate or a way to mention people's situations.

Zubokos comment that you responded to in which I quoted above, very accurately captures 2017 as a whole. It also involves a large portion of 2016 in terms of structure and the absence of paid content so the free example applies.

If it's OK, I'm going to use your recent comment that the players haven't been here that long....

This means for those new customers, who are either buying the gold edition or the base game and gold dlc via crowns as well as playing under a console options where one buys and few others share. Pc would only have base or base and gold considered.

Of those, other than eso plus being for those other benefits, they haven't had any need to pay for anything else.

What's important, those recent customers made decisions based upon the outlined structure which has drastically changed for them to require not only a chapter, dlc, add-on purchase but it creates uncertainty in the future as there's only ambiguous suggestions without details of if dlc for eso Plus will always come outside of a chapter.

While there are some who may just want something for nothing, logically the complaint threads have very few of those of that opinion as free was never a model suggested

ZOS has already stated that all DLC's will be included with ESO+, but Morrowind is NOT a DLC, it is a chapter; there will be one Chapter release per year which will require separate purchase. I think that is pretty straightforward and not ambiguous at all.

Ojustaboo · April 2017

Rainwhisper wrote: »

I've been following several of the threads about Morrowind and about ESO Plus, some of which invariably come back to a claim that Morrowind should be treated as DLC, and others which make "pay-to-win" arguments.

As someone who has paid a monthly subscription fee for every MMO I've ever played, dating back to Ultima Online, I'm perplexed by just how much content people seem to expect to get for free. Likewise, I've always had to pay for expansions, and doing so always made sense to me. I recognize that server upkeep and customer service costs alone justify a subscription fee, much less the additional creative content and ongoing development work, including balancing. The massive content additions of an expansion, likewise, also require a significant financial outlay for art, writing, programming, area design, voice acting, etc.

Which prompts my question: What is the source of the expectation that a massive, virtual world (as opposed to an FPS arena environment like Overwatch) should be free?

I enjoy playing the game, and I recognize that the experience I enjoy costs money to create and maintain, so I pay a subscription. That seems perfectly reasonable. I also recognize that I'm subsidizing players who can't afford to pay a subscription fee at the moment, and I'm also okay with that since having a large player base benefits the game as a whole. What I don't understand is how some posters seem to think that the money to keep the game viable will simply come ex nihilo, without subscription and expansion fees.

What happened was Zos told us that with the subscription, subscribers can expect exclusive dlc (dlc that non subscribers would have to pay for) approx every 3 months.

By the time Morrowind releases, a whole year would have past without subscribers getting any.

It really is as simple as that as to why most feel pissed off

I fully expect to have to pay for an actual expansion, but it would have been nice if Zos had also given us what they originally promised.

I did cancel my sub, not because I have to pay for a expansion, but because I didn't get what was promised (and this isn't the first time Zos has done this), however a few weeks without my crafting bag and I gave in and re-subbed

bulbousb16_ESO · April 2017

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

You know, this EXACTLY explains America's involvement in Afghanistan and what followed from it...

DaveMoeDee · April 2017

Why do commenters talk about F2P and not wanting to pay for games when talking about people who have been loyally subbing for $15/month with little benefit?

Another useless response is talking about TOS. The debate is not about legality (though details of many TOS are often illegal is some localities). It is about ethics and misleading statements and semantics games carefully crafted by lawyers to reneg on promises.

I personally feel that ZOS future model is completely reasonable. I also feel there was a bait and switch. Then again, I always thought a renewing sub post B2P was a horrible deal.

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

ADarklore wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

If you put a bird feeder out to give the birds in the area free food, then wait until the birds have gotten used to the free food, and then take that food away, you may find yourself getting attacked by angry birds wanting their free food.
I think that is similar to what is going on here.

Except there is a VERY large difference. The birds will still be getting free food, except that if they want access to even more food, then they have to pay for it. So the birds have to decide whether they can be content with the smaller amounts of food for free or willing to pay for access to the larger amount of food as well.
In other words, ZOS has stated that all DLCs will remain free for subscribers but CHAPTERS will have to be paid for... as an ESO+ subscriber, I don't have a problem with this.

I don't think your comment accurately describes Zubokos.

The free food are specific examples such as the housing dlc, new dungeons added I and II versions and Craglorn update with One Tamriel. Then look at the amount of time which has passed where a subscription wasn't needed to access content due to a very long span of time without dlc.

Taking the free food away then becomes equivalent to changing the terms of eso Plus for Morrowind to require payment for this upcoming add-on.

The reaction mentioned comes about by means of this @ADarklore

You're implying the someone has been here that long... and most of the arguments I've seen have not come from previous original release subscribers, they've come from players who came after B2P, subscribed, and are now complaining that CHAPTERS will have to be paid for when they believed all future DLCs would be free. Well, Morrowind is not a DLC, it is a Chapter that has it's own retail version and will not be available in the Crown Store like other true DLCs. There is a difference and those players don't like it and want to argue semantics instead of accepting what is and either live with it or move on.

@ADarklore

No I'm not implying anything. I'm just reading Zubokos comment and your response.

Regardless of the use of words for add-on, dlc, chapter.....different terminology is not the cause of discontent with what we see in the forums or websites.

It's literally not semantics it's a distinct required change in structure to access content so semantics isn't accurate or a way to mention people's situations.

Zubokos comment that you responded to in which I quoted above, very accurately captures 2017 as a whole. It also involves a large portion of 2016 in terms of structure and the absence of paid content so the free example applies.

If it's OK, I'm going to use your recent comment that the players haven't been here that long....

This means for those new customers, who are either buying the gold edition or the base game and gold dlc via crowns as well as playing under a console options where one buys and few others share. Pc would only have base or base and gold considered.

Of those, other than eso plus being for those other benefits, they haven't had any need to pay for anything else.

What's important, those recent customers made decisions based upon the outlined structure which has drastically changed for them to require not only a chapter, dlc, add-on purchase but it creates uncertainty in the future as there's only ambiguous suggestions without details of if dlc for eso Plus will always come outside of a chapter.

While there are some who may just want something for nothing, logically the complaint threads have very few of those of that opinion as free was never a model suggested

ZOS has already stated that all DLC's will be included with ESO+, but Morrowind is NOT a DLC, it is a chapter; there will be one Chapter release per year which will require separate purchase. I think that is pretty straightforward and not ambiguous at all.

@ADarklore

Did they? I believe they only clarified that eso Plus will give access to DLC IF it's outside of a chapter. With that they also said changes are planned for eso Plus at release of Morrowind so we have the bank confirmation but future changes are pending and will be announced at a later date.

Where did the devs confirm all future dlc will be outside of chapters and require crowns or eso Plus ?

Alchemical · April 2017

Subscribing is not a big deal to me. Buying an expansion pack in addition to subscribing isn't that big a deal either. But I'm the kinda psycho who spent a decade playing WoW and invested thousands of dollars in my account.

To me the big debate seems to be about semantics. Because expansion packs are DLC despite what anyone tries to say. Personally it seems obvious major expansions would be excluded from the sub system, since it includes multiple new areas and a swathe of new content (including an entire class) as opposed to a singular zone and skill line as with previous DLCs, which would be prohibitively expensive to distribute for free. But it does go against the most literal interpretation of the ESO+ subscription, which grants access to 'all' DLC.

I do find Morrowind's starting price of $60 extremely offensive. Expansion packs usually do not cost the same as a brand new game, since they depend on another game to function. Maybe if they gave subscribers a $15 discount on expansions, as a sign of good faith for their ongoing support, people would be a little less miffed. I know I'm sure as heck not paying full brand new video game retail for DLC.