Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

I'm Confused by Resistance to Subscription/Expansion Costs

  • ADarklore
    ADarklore
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ojustaboo wrote: »

    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 :)

    You had Shadows of the Hist released in August 2016. While it may not have been content for ALL players, it still was a DLC release. Plus, we also received One Tamriel which took a ton of development time and the free Homestead update. So it's not like we didn't receive anything, it is just that some players didn't receive anything that applied to how they play the game. There is a difference between not receiving anything and not receiving anything you personally wanted to play.
    CP: 1930 ** ESO+ Gold Road ** ~~ Stamina Arcanist ~~ Magicka Warden ~~ Magicka Templar ~~ ***** Strictly a solo PvE quester *****
  • ADarklore
    ADarklore
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Alchemical wrote: »
    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.

    Well, Morrowind is not technically a DLC for those who buy the boxed retail version. It's only 'downloadable' for those that buy the digital version. So in that respect, there is a difference... it's not 'DLC' for all players.
    CP: 1930 ** ESO+ Gold Road ** ~~ Stamina Arcanist ~~ Magicka Warden ~~ Magicka Templar ~~ ***** Strictly a solo PvE quester *****
  • Dark_Aether
    Dark_Aether
    ✭✭✭✭
    I have no problem paying for expansions, I know they take more resources to create them. It's the principle. You cannot go and make a bold claim that subscribers will get all DLC for free and then turn around and be like "these are Chapters"

    Screw your terminology! They are downloadable content that you add to the base game to expand the experience = DLC. Do not make promises you cannot keep.
  • DaveMoeDee
    DaveMoeDee
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    ADarklore wrote: »
    ADarklore 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.

    Yes, their lawyers gave them an out by playing semantic games.

    In the future, they can change it to 2 DLC a year, 1 chapter, and 1 act. Because an act is clearly not a DLC. No ambiguity, right?

    Of course there is ambiguity. That is why they can move the goalposts. There is no ambiguity about what ESO+ means right now. We know what we can and cannot access right now. But there is incredible ambiguity about what it will mean in a year or two. Just as how they promised quarterly DLC access with ESO+ and changed it to 3 a year, they can change it to 2 a year. 6 month ago, ESO+ meant you would have access to ALL content in the game. They changed that.

    But if anyone was expecting 4 paid DLC/year, they haven't been watching. 5 quarters of DLC was great, but even before the 2 dungeons dropped there was a notable lack of hints at new paid DLC -- silence that was not the norm in the past.
  • Alpheu5
    Alpheu5
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ADarklore wrote: »
    ADarklore 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.

    Since when did honesty become subjective?
    Dalek-Rok - Argonian Sorcerer || Dalek-Shād - Argonian Nightblade || Dalek-Shul - Argonian Templar || Dalek-Xal - Argonian Dragonknight || Mounts-the-Snout - Argonian Warden || Dalek-Xul - Argonian Necromancer || Two-Spires - Argonian Arcanist || Dalek-Nesh - Argonian Sorcerer || Dalek-Kör - Argonian Dragonknight
    Don't incorporate bugs into your builds, and you won't have [an] issue.
  • Ojustaboo
    Ojustaboo
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ADarklore wrote: »
    Ojustaboo wrote: »

    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 :)

    You had Shadows of the Hist released in August 2016. While it may not have been content for ALL players, it still was a DLC release. Plus, we also received One Tamriel which took a ton of development time and the free Homestead update. So it's not like we didn't receive anything, it is just that some players didn't receive anything that applied to how they play the game. There is a difference between not receiving anything and not receiving anything you personally wanted to play.

    OK in a year you will have had one piece of DLC, One Tameriel doesn't count as it was free to all whether you subbed or not.

    We also had months of no content when Subs were mandatory and it turned out they had been working on the console release.

    I don't mind what they are now offering (and it looks like subscribers will get double the bank space too), had that been their initial offer, I would have happily subbed.

    What I don't like is companies saying if we pay xyz we will get abc and them constantly not delivering.

    Anyway I've re-subbed and am now over it, but I understand others who are not.
  • Alchemical
    Alchemical
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ADarklore wrote: »
    Well, Morrowind is not technically a DLC for those who buy the boxed retail version. It's only 'downloadable' for those that buy the digital version. So in that respect, there is a difference... it's not 'DLC' for all players.

    Expansion packs are a type of DLC. They predate modern DLC and the ability to reasonably digitally download content, but that does not change their function as 'additional paid content' which is the understood, if not literal, meaning of 'DLC'.

    Even if you buy a box, the box will consist of a key that merely 'activates' your right to enter the new areas. Surely every ESO player will be 'downloading' Morrowind, since the landmass will need to be patched in to everyone's client on release. Only the ones with keys will be able to access it, but it is still, technically, downloaded for everyone.
  • BigBragg
    BigBragg
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I find is funny that some people think others want stuff for free, when it is quite the opposite. They want what they have paid for with the original terms of ESO+. I called out the semantic change by ZOS before it was announced, so it didn't surprise me. I have picked up the collectors edition of Morrowind for a friend and myself. I do like the quality of life improvements that the do for everyone. However, I do not think this was handled well by Zeni, in regards to their most loyal supporters. But you know, I just want things for free.....
  • NewBlacksmurf
    NewBlacksmurf
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BigBragg wrote: »
    I find is funny that some people think others want stuff for free, when it is quite the opposite. They want what they have paid for with the original terms of ESO+. ......(removed some of the reply)....But you know, I just want things for free.....

    @BigBragg

    Yeah, it's bothersome. I too pre ordered the Morrowind upgrade and use to subscribe but if so express logical discontent it seems I too want things for free.

    Guess I'm unable to want what was advertised and express discontent when the terms are changed every year.
    -PC (PTS)/Xbox One: NewBlacksmurf
    ~<{[50]}>~ looks better than *501
  • BigBragg
    BigBragg
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    @NewBlacksmurf

    Exactly. I can still like a company or a person, while being verbally unhappy with an action they've taken. It is in fact because I like them and believe in what they are doing that I both subscribe and take the time to point out my disapproval.
  • Asardes
    Asardes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I've put 100 CP in Stingy. That's why my resistance is so high :D
    Beta tester since February 2014, played ESO-TU October 2015 - August 2022, currently on an extended break
    vMA (The Flawless Conqueror) | vVH (Spirit Slayer & of the Undying Song) | vDSA | vAA HM | vHRC HM | vSO HM | vMoL | vAS+1 | Emperor

    PC-EU CP 3000+
    41,000+ Achievement Points before High Isle
    Member of:
    Pact Veteran Trade: Exemplary
    Traders of the Covenant: God of Sales
    Tamriels Emporium: God of Sales
    Valinor Overflow: Trader
    The Traveling Merchant: Silver


    Characters:
    Asardes | 50 Nord Dragonknight | EP AR 50 | Master Crafter: all traits & recipes, all styles released before High Isle
    Alxaril Nelcarion | 50 High Elf Sorcerer | AD AR 20 |
    Dro'Bear Three-paws | 50 Khajiit Nightblade | AD AR 20 |
    Veronique Nicole | 50 Breton Templar | DC AR 20 |
    Sabina Flavia Cosades | 50 Imperial Warden | EP AR 20 |
    Ervesa Neloren | 50 Dark Elf Dragonknight | EP AR 20 |
    Fendar Khodwin | 50 Redguard Sorcerer | DC AR 20 |
    Surilanwe of Lillandril | 50 High Elf Nightblade | AD AR 20 |
    Joleen the Swift | 50 Redguard Templar | DC AR 20 |
    Draynor Telvanni | 50 Dark Elf Warden | EP AR 20 |
    Claudius Tharn | 50 Necromancer | DC AR 20 |
    Nazura-la the Bonedancer | 50 Necromancer | AD AR 20 |

    Tharkul gro-Shug | 50 Orc Dragonknight | DC AR 4 |
    Ushruka gra-Lhurgash | 50 Orc Sorcerer | AD AR 4 |
    Cienwen ferch Llywelyn | 50 Breton Nightblade | DC AR 4 |
    Plays-with-Sunray | 50 Argonian Templar | EP AR 4 |
    Milariel | 50 Wood Elf Warden | AD AR 4 |
    Scheei-Jul | 50 Necromancer | EP AR 4 |

    PC-NA CP 1800+
    30,000+ Achievement Points before High Isle
    Member of:
    Savage Blade: Majestic Machette


    Characters:
    Asardes the Exile | 50 Nord Dragonknight | EP AR 30 |
  • vyndral13preub18_ESO
    vyndral13preub18_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I guess I more concerned about the people who can't see and understand what the people on the other side of this fairly simple issue think. It isn't rocket surgery.

    Not saying you have to agree with the other side, but to not even understand? Come on now, there can not be that many simpletons running around.
  • Yolokin_Swagonborn
    Yolokin_Swagonborn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    As long as this misunderstanding keeps popping up, I am going to keep posting this. This is my my complete and total answer analyzing all the factors involved that I compiled from a few previous posts with all evidence included. Hopefully this will demonstrate that is not a resistance to costs, its about morality and principle. It's a bit of a read, but it's worth it. Allow me to explain.

    DLC vs Expansion:
    Morrowind is about twice the size (in landmass) of previous DLCs and about 1.5x as long of a storyline as Wrothgar (30hrs vs 20). So its about the size two wrothgars. People would't mind paying twice the Wrothgar price in crowns (6000 vs 3000) for Morrowind and subscribers wouldn't mind waiting two quarters (with no DLC) for its release instead of the usual 4 DLCs per year they were expecting because that's what they were told to expect.

    But for subscribers, it stings a little bit that ZOS is changing their business model again, (and not really admitting they have changed anything) while also playing fast and loose with the definition of DLC vs "chapter." If you compare the substantial difference between morrowind and previous expansions like wrothgar, they look pretty similar. Both add landmass and new gameplay styles (like Maelstrom, trials, etc) and only differ in size so the semantics argument of "Expansion vs DLC" isn't that compelling. Also, the warden isn't a completely new concept, it was a class cut out of early beta in 2013.

    Change in Business Model
    So it feels to a lot of subscribers that something they already pay for, (and monetarily helped develop) is being stripped out of the business model and sold back to them as something different (bundled with a few other things ZOS had lying around), when it really isn't that much different. Here is an example:

    If I was a magazine company, and I sold you a yearly subscription that gave you 12 magazines per year at $40 per year, then for the next year, still charged $40 but only delivered 10 magazines, but also produced a double sized "Booklet" with a holographic cover that I sold separately for $20, you would feel a bit ripped off. Explaining that the "Booklet" isn't a magazine because its twice the size and has a fancy holographic cover wouldn't be a compelling explanation. Better I just admit I changed the business model and selling 12 magazines for $40 just didn't cut it for me so I would rather you pay $60 per year for the same amount of content just bundled differently.

    The real reason people are upset
    Most subscribers are die-hard fans of this game and would appreciate the honesty and gladly shell out the extra money for Morrowind if ZOS just admitted they made a mistake and needed to change the model again. But instead, they pretend nothing has changed and we are given semantic word acrobatics and an unnecessary physical release of morrowind complete with a silly statue just to dance around the fact that this is really a DLC which literally means "Downloadable Content." Very few people buy physical game copies anymore. Making Morrowind a physical distribution seems like a completely bizarre business move unless you realize that ZOS already told subscribers they would have access to ALL DLC. Oops. Better crank out a special addition with a shiny statue. Shiny objects will distract them, won't they?

    Back when "Tamriel Unlimited" Launched, Pete Hines said something to the effect of "Just subscribe and you won't EVER have to worry about purchasing new content. Subscriber's will be taken care of." If you don't believe me, you can watch it HERE. That's what subscribers were expecting for the foreseeable future so it is no surprise people are a little upset that this was changed with very little communication, sympathy, or appreciation for current subscribers and what they have done to help fund the game.

    Now lets get some preemptive arguments out of the way:
    • Yes, ZOS can change their mind or business model at any time. They are not legally obligated to deliver anything they promise. Unlike almost every other industry that is held to external standards of ethics and quality from Movie Theaters to Vegas Casinos, the videogame industry is still in the regulatory wild west and can anything it wants to its customers - even unregulated gambling. But should they still voluntarily follow some ethical guidelines? I think so. This argument is a moral argument, not a legal one.
    • Yes, Zenimax is a business and business's are designed to make money. Since we don't know their financial situation, this is irrelevant as this has NOTHING to do with the amount of money their are charging and everything to do with ZOS not sticking to their word and their PERCEIVED promises.
    • Yes, other MMOs do offer DLC and charge extra for expansions but the expansions are usually so much bigger and game changing than morrowind will be and usually continue the main storyline which AFAIK, morrowind will not.

    So the issue that many subscribers have is three fold.
    • ZOS isn't admitting (in a straightforward way) that they changed their business model again, and they are breaking their promise to subscribers (of delivering 1 DLC every quarter) and pulling Morrowind out of that subscription model by using a semantic technicality.
    • ZOS isn't admitting that the Value of a subscription is decreasing as they have changed from 4 DLCs/year to 3DLCs and 1 "bigger DLC you have to buy separately" per year.
    • Also the cost of items in the crown store (motifs) and mounts have kept creeping up although ZOS has said originally, (when Tamriel Unlimited came out) that subscribers would have more than enough of a crown stipend to fully enjoy the crown store. On top of that, there are now exclusive items you cant even get with crowns unless you gamble, which is just more price creep.

    TL;DR: The bottom line is that the value of being a subscriber was slowly decreasing and Morrowind being published somewhat arbitrarily outside of the subscription model is a final straw for some that is getting them to re-evaluate the benefits of subscribing.

    Just remember that ESO subscription money helped fund the Morrowind DLC.

    Edit: Read this original article from MMORPG.org from February 20, 2015 if you want even further proof of how far ESO Tamriel unlimited went off the mark. Mounts would be priced 900-1300 crowns. LOL.
    Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on April 20, 2018 8:23AM
  • MadLarkin
    MadLarkin
    ✭✭✭✭
    Its not about the money. Its about ZOS's increasing focus on nickel and diming us for everything they do. When ESO+ was offered, the language said "access to all current and future DLC" (or something to that effect), and they quietly edited the terms on the store page before announcing Morrowind and saying "you see, the reason why this ISN'T standard DLC is..."

    Let me be clear. I would have had no problem paying for an expansion and may have even bought their explanation that Morrowind is so much bigger than standard DLC and that's why they need to charge separately for it. However, everything else they've done recently instead indicated to me that their semantic shell game was purely to squeeze as much money out of everyone as possible. For instance...

    *Introducing the Warden class as new when it was in the game as far back as alpha/beta.
    *Charging $40 for the expansion and still expecting people to pay more for extra character slots.
    *Housing having very little functionality and it constantly pushing us to pay outrageous prices for homes on the store because the decoration/gold grind is so crazy.
    *The addition of things like exclusive motifs to the crown store, which to my knowledge, had not happened until recently.
    *Pricing of some of the items on the crown store. Laughable.
    *No solutions offered for things that damage the fun factor of the game, such as the inventory management nightmare. Their response has been "only 3% of the players have maxed out their storage" which means they expect us to either pay the high gold prices for bag upgrades, or, surprise surprise, pay for them from the crown store.
    *Crown crates. Nuff said.

    So, as I have asked before, what exactly is free in this game? Just how much are we supposed to spend before we get the full experience without being made to feel like have-nots and having our fun dampened by easily remedied (but intentional) issues that are designed to make us pay more money? Its not the money that's the issue, it is the continuous moving of the financial goalposts by ZOS and them saying "if you REALLY want the full ESO experience, buy this" every time they slice something off to be sold separately.
  • Dark_Aether
    Dark_Aether
    ✭✭✭✭
    d9ef72cde52021b94606d0e9d217d30f6daf6a03085b414d198af19cabf98f29.jpg
  • butternutbutt
    butternutbutt
    ✭✭
    This is an enormous, open world game, with a huge amount of content. I paid like $40 bucks for it eight months ago and I'm still playing it. Most games that offer 10-20 hours of play from start to finish cost that much and don't have anywhere near the amount of content. I don't mind at all paying a subscription and buying special items as long as I'm still interested in playing, (which at this point doesn't seem likely to end anytime soon) when I'm getting hours and hours of play and consistently getting new content. Things won't always be perfect and I understand that it's a massive undertaking to manage such a complex game.
  • Yolokin_Swagonborn
    Yolokin_Swagonborn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    MadLarkin wrote: »
    Its not about the money. Its about ZOS's increasing focus on nickel and diming us for everything they do. When ESO+ was offered, the language said "access to all current and future DLC" (or something to that effect), and they quietly edited the terms on the store page before announcing Morrowind and saying "you see, the reason why this ISN'T standard DLC is..."

    THIS is what they showed us when they introduced Tamriel Unlimited. The even renamed the entire game to Tamriel Unlimited for a time changing the entire name of the game in twitch so you had to go to this newTamriel Unlimited page which now just redirects to The Elder Scrolls Online. Guess they didn't want Tamriel to be Unlimited anymore. Limitations make far too much money.

    Here is Another Clip from a Tamriel Unlimited Video in 2015 where Matt Firor talks about what upcoming DLC will look like. You see Orsinium mentioned, then look what the very next "DLC" is shown after Wrothgar. Oooh its Clockwork City! I wonder where Clockwork City is located geographically. I guess now they are calling it the "Halls of Fabrication" and making it a trial but this is solid proof that ZOS took content originally intended to be released inside the subscription model as DLC and ripped it out of that model and is now selling it separately. THIS SHOWS THAT ZOS WAS PLANNING TO RELEASE PARTS OF MORROWIND FIRST AS DLC. Subscribers were promised access to ALL DLC, so lets pull a fast one and rename it to a chapter so we can charge extra for it.

    Again, I wouldn't mind if they just said, "Hey we had to change the business model again" but its the dishonesty and weasel language that really sours this for me.

    Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on April 11, 2017 5:31PM
  • DaveMoeDee
    DaveMoeDee
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    As long as this misunderstanding keeps popping up, I am going to keep posting this. This is my my complete and total answer analyzing all the factors involved that I compiled from a few previous posts with all evidence included. Hopefully this will demonstrate that is not a resistance to costs, its about morality and principle. It's a bit of a read, but it's worth it. Allow me to explain.

    DLC vs Expansion:
    Morrowind is about twice the size (in landmass) of previous DLCs and about 1.5x as long of a storyline as Wrothgar (30hrs vs 20). So its about the size two wrothgars. ...

    Can people please stop talking about the landmass size? It has a big mountain in the middle that you can't access!!! Might as well include how far out over the slaughterfish infested sea you can see to the horizon when talking about size.

    Cyrodiil shows that landmass is not a reasonable way to evaluate content. Your post is thoughtful, but we need to stop with the marketing speak about landmass.

    50% more than Wrothgar is less of a gap than comparing Thieve's Guild and Wrothgar. Battlegrounds though seems to be a lot more engineering effort than Maelstrom Arena. The extra class is also a lot of work to design and balance, even if it was originally meant for the initial launch and then shelved. Thing is, they could have dropped the Warden in many other ways. Grouping multiple things together to require a different payment while downsizing DLC deliveries is a conscious choice to give less value to subbers in order to get additional revenue. Think about it. If there was a "chapter" concept when Wrothgar dropped, they likely would have saved Maelstrom Arena for a chapter to make a DLC seem larger. Or maybe they just add Warden to Wrothgar and that is now called a chapter.

    All those details don't matter though. ZOS decided they needed another revenue stream. They got it by removing one quarterly DLC from their plans and replacing it with additional paid content that would not be included in the sub. If that is what they need to do to remain sufficiently profitable to have a future, so be it. But it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
  • DaveMoeDee
    DaveMoeDee
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    This is an enormous, open world game, with a huge amount of content. I paid like $40 bucks for it eight months ago and I'm still playing it. Most games that offer 10-20 hours of play from start to finish cost that much and don't have anywhere near the amount of content. I don't mind at all paying a subscription and buying special items as long as I'm still interested in playing, (which at this point doesn't seem likely to end anytime soon) when I'm getting hours and hours of play and consistently getting new content. Things won't always be perfect and I understand that it's a massive undertaking to manage such a complex game.

    I think the point is that people who have subs paid $120 over those 8 months just replay the same content over and over.

    This gave is an amazing value for the $20 gold sale price right now (on GMG) or for the $10 vanilla on steam/zos. That in no way addresses the complaints about those who have been loyal ESO+ subscribers.
  • DaveMoeDee
    DaveMoeDee
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    MadLarkin wrote: »
    ...
    Let me be clear. I would have had no problem paying for an expansion and may have even bought their explanation that Morrowind is so much bigger than standard DLC and that's why they need to charge separately for it. However, everything else they've done recently instead indicated to me that their semantic shell game was purely to squeeze as much money out of everyone as possible. For instance...

    "Charging extra because it is so large" is marketing speak for the reality that they tried to make it larger to justify charging separately.
  • Yolokin_Swagonborn
    Yolokin_Swagonborn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    DaveMoeDee wrote: »
    All those details don't matter though. ZOS decided they needed another revenue stream. They got it by removing one quarterly DLC from their plans and replacing it with additional paid content that would not be included in the sub. If that is what they need to do to remain sufficiently profitable to have a future, so be it. But it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

    More specifically by pulling content they had already promised would be included in the subscription model and going back on their word bundling that content in a different way. Then going out of their way to play semantic gymnastics to the ridiculous extent of having a physical release to cover their tracks.

    This has nothing to do with the money. They way they handled this just smells so bad and has rotten marketing all over it. This is all the legal team and marketing team playing defense and very little care for the actual customer. You make a good point about the volcano though.

    But every few days like clockwork, we get a thread like this that basically says "why are people so cheap, i dont get it, its only $40" and completely misses the point of why people are upset.

    Zenimax the company has changed so much since this game launched. It seems entirely run by marketers, lawyers, and Monetization Departments and no longer by artists that have a passion for a true Elder Scrolls game.
    Edited by Yolokin_Swagonborn on April 11, 2017 5:56PM
  • butternutbutt
    butternutbutt
    ✭✭
    DaveMoeDee wrote: »
    This is an enormous, open world game, with a huge amount of content. I paid like $40 bucks for it eight months ago and I'm still playing it. Most games that offer 10-20 hours of play from start to finish cost that much and don't have anywhere near the amount of content. I don't mind at all paying a subscription and buying special items as long as I'm still interested in playing, (which at this point doesn't seem likely to end anytime soon) when I'm getting hours and hours of play and consistently getting new content. Things won't always be perfect and I understand that it's a massive undertaking to manage such a complex game.

    I think the point is that people who have subs paid $120 over those 8 months just replay the same content over and over.

    This gave is an amazing value for the $20 gold sale price right now (on GMG) or for the $10 vanilla on steam/zos. That in no way addresses the complaints about those who have been loyal ESO+ subscribers.

    I can't address the feelings of people who've been playing longer than me and I get what people are saying about the changes, but I am a subscriber and what I'm saying is I feel I'm getting my money's worth. How many hours of gameplay did you get for that $120? Myself, prob over a thousand, and I still have lots left to do. This is my first MMO but If I had been playing other games I would've probably spent twice that much at least for that amount of play. I'm just offering a perspective it doesn't seem like many are taking into account. Based on that, I think it's reasonable for a company to do what ZOS is doing; trying to offer a great game for a reasonable cost and make a reasonable profit after paying the salaries of all the people working hard to make it possible. We get a lot of perks for subscribing and I think the value is there.
    Edited by butternutbutt on April 11, 2017 5:57PM
  • jircris11
    jircris11
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Alchemical wrote: »
    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.

    Actually if you look at wow each new pack was 60-80 bucks, the fact that we only pay 40-60 to add it to an account is nice. And buying it new gives you the game+exp.
    IGN: Ki'rah
    Khajiit/Vampire
    DC/AD faction/NA server.
    RPer
  • Wrekkedd
    Wrekkedd
    ✭✭✭✭
    Agreed
  • Rhoric
    Rhoric
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Morrowind is not a DLC so get with it or don't. But it is not gonna change the fact that it is an expansion. There is nothing in ESO+ that you get expansions for free.
  • Yolokin_Swagonborn
    Yolokin_Swagonborn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rhoric wrote: »
    Morrowind is not a DLC so get with it or don't. But it is not gonna change the fact that it is an expansion. There is nothing in ESO+ that you get expansions for free.

    So if ZOS took all the previously planned DLCs (like clockwork city), that they have identified in previous videos as DLCs, and renamed them to "expansions" in order to get people to pay more for them, you wouldn't have a problem with that?
  • Cpt_Teemo
    Cpt_Teemo
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Lythandra wrote: »
    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.


    To be fair they also give back your 15$ a month by giving you 1500 crowns a month then basically the other stuff is free
  • Rhoric
    Rhoric
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    You should go learn the difference between expansion and dlc first.
  • SnubbS
    SnubbS
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I don't really care about Zo$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ *** me over—changing the language due to estimated outrage, calling Morrowind a "Chapter" instead of a "DLC" even though 'DLC' applies to Morrowind, as well as the prior language. No real issue with that—the issue I have is that I'm $40 for an expansion that is 100% going to be broken upon its release.

    Can we get a #YouKnowYouDontHaveToBeHereRight?
    Edited by SnubbS on April 11, 2017 6:20PM
    Xbox NA: SnubbS
    GoW eSports player & part time ESO Pug Ball Zerger.
    GB
  • Tornaad
    Tornaad
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    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.

    The work the birds put into gathering the food is what they pay for it. The bird feeder allows them to completely bypass the work they would otherwise do. The analogy is meant to apply to those who are complaining. If you are fine with it (like I am) then the analogy does not apply to you.
Sign In or Register to comment.