@faerigirl As I said this would be done by just linking purchases of one credit card. If you bought the accounts on it and bought crown items, they would be unlocked across all those accounts.

@NewBlacksmurf These computers are already bought and we do much more than gaming on them. It's true that it is probably not the most easy option for most, but for those that have this set up, it would fair well.

Yeah that server issue is absolutely ridiculous. I get that they're probably discouraging being on both servers, I'm pretty sure this is same for computer to console. So it's really a hard hit for anyone with just 1 account.

AishavariStarling wrote: »

@NewBlacksmurf These computers are already bought and we do much more than gaming on them. It's true that it is probably not the most easy option for most, but for those that have this set up, it would fair well.

@AishavariStarling

Annndd....my family has an iPad for each kid and myself as well as two Xbox ones and three seperate laptops.

Logically each device has to fulfill a use other devices cannot, thus, customers would need to purchase what best fits their desires.

It may result in multiple devices....
Those are the options today.....at the end, you have to pay to play. I don't consider ZOS's model in adverse to your desires.

Your desires don't exist at all is the actual situation. Having grown up around larger families (not my own), they had some things and didn't ave others. They shared or just didn't do stuff on a case by case basis.

I think this applies to your situation if it's not a good fit...you just don't do it at all or do it for some and not others.

As a parent if I can share this....it seems like you're at the point of needing to have some of those "time to grow up" conversations with different members and share "the world isn't designed just for us" talks.

By all means I'd enjoy spending less but that's not anyone's design in our entertainment interests.

Look, some players have decided that ESO is all about being the "best" and having the "best".
Those who look at it that way need to consider how many of us play instead solely for the joy of having a good time together with like-minded folk.

Since the beginning, my family have vested literally thousands of dollars into the ESO experience.
When I purchase a Crown Store unlock, I would not only like to be purchasing the 'privilege' to utilize these collection items for my characters, but would also like to be purchasing the privilege to share them when I'm online.

If I want to help new players, lend them a mount and take them around Tamriel, then later when I'm offline and those players no longer have a mount to get around conveniently, they'll be that much more eager to acquire one for themselves.
Same goes for wearing a bunch of mismatched looted gear, having a costume to look decent, then I'm not around and they look insane again. More, not less likely to purchase a costume.

If I have just the right mount to compliment a friend's character, but the mount is no longer available, to lend them that mount while I'm online will in no way discourage them from wanting to purchase another mount that works for their character.
It's essentially advertising for ZOS; not so different from the Crown purchase page featuring pics of Crown Store items which are no longer available. It piques interest, and that's all it takes to sell unlocks—an active interest.

My goal in ESO is to have and share a fun experience.
It borders on mental illness to be offended by that lol

I'm honestly confused what is more concerning, the fact that so many disapprove because simply "ZOS is a business" or how many tried to one up each other about how stuff they have and how much they give all the time and how that's so cheap.

There's been some major decisions that have proven to lose a lot of the more dedicated players of the Elder Scrolls series simply based on "business" efforts, and since the loss of loyalty rewards they have even less in terms of rewarding those who contribute a lot, let alone often. If they allotted special discounts/shared system/or rewards upon contributing a set amount to them (based on the credit information to maintain a correct sum, not per account) they would open a gate to more profits from those setting goals to reach their desired rewards and those looking to spend more but settling for less because of the exclusion.

Acrolas wrote: »

AishavariStarling wrote: »

As I said this would be done by just linking purchases of one credit card. If you bought the accounts on it and bought crown items, they would be unlocked across all those accounts.

As somebody who has seen somebody steal somebody else's identity so he could impersonate his imaginary sister online, no.
No.
No.
Entirely too much potential for abuse and fraud of both personal and payment information.

It's your burden that your entire family enjoys the game. If that is indeed that case. Either find new ways to fund your hobby (legally...of course), or be happy with the few things you're each able to add to your accounts through your own contributions.

I'm not even on board with short-term loaning of purchased cosmetic items, because somebody will figure out a way to ruin that for everybody else.

There's a segment of players on each platform who choose to manipulate the system for their own gain. That is why we will have fewer, not more, account privileges. But we have enough. And I'm sure there are those people who don't want people to touch any of the items they've leased from the crown store, and don't want to deal with the harassment when somebody inevitably comes demanding to borrow rather than asking politely to.

"Teen calls bomb squad when mother refuses to lend her magic-farting cat"
Let's just not even start down the road that can lead to those levels of train wreck headlines.

So you have quite a bit of experience in that realm, don't you? Your level of paranoia is also highly concerning. A simple idea for group sharing is to be able to trade these things if you're in group (these things no longer being available when the lender goes offline or is gone from the group.)