Furnishing Request: Dragon's Treasure Trove

spartaxoxo · March 22

alternatelder wrote: »

People are asking for things just for existing...The main item being asked here was an exclusive to Elsweyr owners, it was awarded for the event for that chapter. That's not rng, that was actually earned.

You didn't have to do anything to get it but own the chapter at the time it was available in the crown store for free. The free item was unlocked by participation in the event. But, it was not required at all to claim the prize and was not one of the event ticket items.

And even the chapter was deeply discounted at the time so you didn't even have to pay full price for it. It's a participation trophy for existing at the time of the event.

tomofhyrule · March 23

This is a very interesting argument, considering that we literally just got the reward house from the Greymoor community event to go on sale in the store. For the second time.

Look, I get the "it's exclusive so therefore the only thing that makes it special is that other people don't have it!" idea. However, as has been mentioned, this one in particular is really not special. Seriously, can anyone - without googling - remember the date that it was released?

The big Chapter prizes for the Summerset and Greymoor events have come by in the store for those who were not playing at the time and have loads of Crowns to spend on houses. I see nothing wrong with making the other event rewards available too (particularly if this game is going to need to make up revenue since they've stopped Chapters).

I can understand the beta monkey being exclusive for playing at a specific time. But "I just happened to log in during the event even though I didn't contribute to it in the slightest" is really not something that should be celebrated. Seriously, that is not something you worked toward.

TaSheen · March 23

tomofhyrule wrote: »

I can understand the beta monkey being exclusive for playing at a specific time. But "I just happened to log in during the event even though I didn't contribute to it in the slightest" is really not something that should be celebrated. Seriously, that is not something you worked toward.

Well... I DETEST monkey/apes of all sorts. So I'm REALLY glad I missed it. I would have had to ask support to delete it from my accounts....

I.... really don't have much in the way of "funsies/cosmetics" that I use any more. I.... am somewhat revolted by most of it.

Except my indriks. Which I have quit displaying because the current background just makes them all ugly.... AND it's coldharbour, which I despise, along with the entire game MQ.

Nomadic_Atmoran · March 23

There is no real reason for any furnishing to be exclusive. No one has earned something because they pulled their wallet out or because they just so happened to be participating in the game during a certain event.

The whole point of houses and furnishings is to carve out a personalized space for yourselves and that should come with the freedom of accessing the furnishings that exist in the game. What is so prestigious about the dragons treasure trove that makes it so vital to horde it and prevent others the opportunity to add it to their homes? I've owned the thing since it was awarded and I've used it a grand number of 1 times because of all the houses I own theres only 1 house it really fit in for me. I enjoy looking at it when I go into that home and love that I was able to use it for its intended purpose. Certainly the house would not feel the same without it and the treasure horde would be ultimately lackluster without it. But it does not give me any further pleasure knowing people don't have access to it. I don't feel special or unique for having been apart of the event that lead to my possession of it. I was quite literally just a miniscule cog that lead to the furnishing being awarded to the community of Elsweyr Chapter owners.

The item becoming available in the Crown Store would certainly not harm anyone.

freespirit · March 23

Back in January there was this thread...

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/672127/2025-reminder-to-bring-back-dragons-treasure-trove

At the time I posted this....

"I'd like a non collectable version but of the same quality as the original version, sometimes one pile of treasure just isn't enough!!"

I stick by this, a new version but non collectable so we can have more than one treasure pile per house, my dragon NEEDS more treasure!

I too would pay crowns for this and Seals also, in game gold would be super awesome but I feel a less likely option!!

katanagirl1 · March 23

Nomadic_Atmoran wrote: »

There is no real reason for any furnishing to be exclusive. No one has earned something because they pulled their wallet out or because they just so happened to be participating in the game during a certain event.

The whole point of houses and furnishings is to carve out a personalized space for yourselves and that should come with the freedom of accessing the furnishings that exist in the game. What is so prestigious about the dragons treasure trove that makes it so vital to horde it and prevent others the opportunity to add it to their homes? I've owned the thing since it was awarded and I've used it a grand number of 1 times because of all the houses I own theres only 1 house it really fit in for me. I enjoy looking at it when I go into that home and love that I was able to use it for its intended purpose. Certainly the house would not feel the same without it and the treasure horde would be ultimately lackluster without it. But it does not give me any further pleasure knowing people don't have access to it. I don't feel special or unique for having been apart of the event that lead to my possession of it. I was quite literally just a miniscule cog that lead to the furnishing being awarded to the community of Elsweyr Chapter owners.

The item becoming available in the Crown Store would certainly not harm anyone.

Actually, people did earn something by doing just that, and that is why we are having this discussion. The ones who didn’t feel left out.

I can kind of relate to the feeling that I was there when it happened and now I have this cool thing. It’s why these things are offered during events. I missed out on the first Anniversary cake so I understand not having them too. I guess it’s been long enough timewise to open them up since there is so much demand for them. I also have the clouded senche mount and have enjoyed it as well, and it was a limited collectible long ago.

Sarannah · March 23

As someone who has all the exclusive, limited, and event items, I do think they should ALL be available in the shop at some point(excluding the beta monkey). The reason: If I ever wanted to start a second account or multiple accounts, I would also like to be able to get all that stuff still.

PS: This includes all the twitchview items being available as well.

JiubLeRepenti · March 23

DenverRalphy wrote: »

While this is an item that I'm very envious over and wish I had, I'd rather it doesn't make a reappearance. Requests like this post come around every few months or so.

And I'm very happy for those who have it and hope their precious claim piece of the game is never watered down or diminished by a re-release.

100% agree with this. And I don’t have this furnishing neither.

It’s good to have some exclusive content you can’t get later. This is how you motivate people to participate to events or to play the game often and check free rewards/gifts.

This is why I was pissed to see you could buy 10th anniversary style pages that were so hard to get, for 10 event tickets a few months ago. It just ruins the satisfaction of having looted them during the event imo.

Small digression, but this is also why I love games like Baldur’s Gate 3, which doesn’t care about fulfilling every player’s wish, but force him/her to make choices and sacrifices instead. Frustration can be very positive in video games.

Personofsecrets · March 23

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to follow up here. The team is aware and thanks you for the feedback. What other promotional / Event collectibles would you like to see return? We can pass a list on to the team.

Say no more

Senche-Raht Statue, Battle-Bound

Shock Skin Salamander
Toxin Skin Salamander

Whiterun Wolfhound

Atmoran Bantam Guar

Nibenese Pony

Frostbane Bear
Frostbane Pony
Frostbane Pony Guar
Frostbane Sabre Cat
Frostbane Wolf

Bucket (not the style, the equippable item)
Broomstick (not the style, the equippable item)

Additionally, there are a number of items that were released and then removed from the game

"Lich Set" set and Dylora's Staff - Dolmens
"First Titan" set, Bestial Rampart, Staff of Zymel Hriz, Staff of Nomeg Haga - Dolmens
A number of non-set based equippabled like the Mask of Darkest Seducer - Dolmens
Relics of Rebellion - Dungeons
Treasures of the Earthforge - Dungeons
Arms of Infernace - Dungeons
Relics of the Physician - Dungeons
The Destruction Suite - Dungeons

The question mark items - |H1:item:45365:2:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:9:0:0:0:0:0|h|h

Unreleased personalities with their own emotes. For example, the Factotum Polymorph that was sold in the store comes with it's own emotes when that Poly is equipped, but it is possible to get those same emotes for use at any time. So there are potentially alot of assets needlessly locked behind polymorphs

And, because I can't help myself............
I want my unmophed ToT cards back. Give them to me. I will pay you personally hundreds of dollars to get them back.

Anyhow.....

Hey, I wish that I could get all of the item and collectibles in game item i.d. written down for you, but I'm not sure how I would get them all and it would take a ton of time. I hope that what I've provided above is good enough (though I did see the tot card codes when I was reviewing the LUA file, so I know that you can give me back my unmophed cards wink wink nudge nudge). Sorry though, I'm super crunched for time right now and have to get some raid setups together.

@ZOS_Kevin

Hey, I have one more collectible to share in addition to the above...

The Frisky Scrib.

Thank you for giving it a look.

tomofhyrule · March 23

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Small digression, but this is also why I love games like Baldur’s Gate 3, which doesn’t care about fulfilling every player’s wish, but force him/her to make choices and sacrifices instead. Frustration can be very positive in video games.

Remind me: what time-gated FOMO event item drop could you get in BG3 that is no longer available?

Or are you just saying that it's nice that players need to choose a path in an RPG, thereby locking themselves out of the rewards on the other path? You know, the kind of thing that you can do in a single-player RPG, but doesn't really work in an MMO which by nature requires world states to not change much due to the fact that players need to exist in the same place who may be at different stages of a quest or even have made different choices?
Yeah... that's not the same thing as "play this game at this time or no goodies for you!"

And I do like the idea that

Frustration can be very positive in video games.

It's like "No, see it's a good thing that we cancelled the NA event with no explanation, and now we're being so cryptic about what's next in the world of ESO to the point that players think the game is getting mothballed! Didn't y'all see how many people were frustrated by U35? That was really a positive for the game's health, especially among the endgame community!"

Malyore · March 23

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

This is why I was pissed to see you could buy 10th anniversary style pages that were so hard to get, for 10 event tickets a few months ago. It just ruins the satisfaction of having looted them during the event imo.

My satisfaction from the 10th anniversary collectibles comes from actually owning the collectable to use. Not how I got it.

Trueflame looks cool, that's why I wanted it and that's why I got it. Me having fished for it means nothing to me, other than a hoop I was told to jump through for ZOS. I'd rather players don't have to jump through those hoops to get cosmetics we mutually think looks cool. I was glad ZOS made them available for people who didn't get what they wanted.

cyclonus11 · March 24

IrelandTweaky wrote: »

- Anniversary cakes from years prior to participating in the event - My first year playing there was a lovely cake, but I was just figuring the game out and didn't quite grasp how events worked. The following year had a... less aesthetically pleasing cake. Maybe they could be available using event tickets?

This in particular for me. My apartment burned down in 2020 and the anniversary event happened right afterward and before I could get a new PC. I just need the 2020 cake

TaSheen · March 24

cyclonus11 wrote: »

IrelandTweaky wrote: »

- Anniversary cakes from years prior to participating in the event - My first year playing there was a lovely cake, but I was just figuring the game out and didn't quite grasp how events worked. The following year had a... less aesthetically pleasing cake. Maybe they could be available using event tickets?

This in particular for me. My apartment burned down in 2020 and the anniversary event happened right afterward and before I could get a new PC. I just need the 2020 cake

I am SO sorry to hear that. Yes. It was years back now.... but no one EVER gets over a life-altering situation like that.

I wish they could help you out here....

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

tomofhyrule wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Small digression, but this is also why I love games like Baldur’s Gate 3, which doesn’t care about fulfilling every player’s wish, but force him/her to make choices and sacrifices instead. Frustration can be very positive in video games.

Remind me: what time-gated FOMO event item drop could you get in BG3 that is no longer available?

That's why I said I was making a digression. 🙂

Actually, what you're saying wasn't my point at all.

My point was that frustration and its resolution (or lack thereof) are important and beneficial in games.

It can be a good thing in ESO when you obtain an exclusive item that was hard to get (e.g., the 10th anniversary style pages), just as it can be a good thing to say, 'Yup, I missed it. Too bad, at least I tried.'

It can also be a good thing in BG3 when you're faced with deep choices and moral dilemmas that prevent you from getting the best ending for every companion at the end of the game.

Sometimes, games don't give players exactly what they want, and I think that's a very good thing. In my opinion, some games try too hard to satisfy everyone all the time, and that’s how you end up with low-tier titles - in my very own opinion - like DATV, Avowed, Starfield, etc. No choice, no dilemma, no loss. One rule: to give the players everything they want and avoid any frustration".

When I bring up BG3, it doesn’t mean the two games are similar. I'm simply highlighting that both involve situations where frustration plays a role.

I just feel like nowadays, people—especially in ESO—can't handle frustration and accept that they missed something. After every event, every update, there are always people begging for an item, a promotion, or something they missed for a million different reasons.

Another example: I missed the Summerset event with the Grand Psijic Villa. And that's fine. It really is. It was my own fault for not being there in time to take part in the event and get it, even though I really wanted it. I wanted it so badly that I even bought it later. Of course if you couldn't get it for a very good reason (for instance couldn't play because of a natural disaster, a passing, etc.) you should still be able to get it by opening a ticket.

Malyore wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

This is why I was pissed to see you could buy 10th anniversary style pages that were so hard to get, for 10 event tickets a few months ago. It just ruins the satisfaction of having looted them during the event imo.

My satisfaction from the 10th anniversary collectibles comes from actually owning the collectable to use. Not how I got it.

Trueflame looks cool, that's why I wanted it and that's why I got it. Me having fished for it means nothing to me, other than a hoop I was told to jump through for ZOS. I'd rather players don't have to jump through those hoops to get cosmetics we mutually think looks cool. I was glad ZOS made them available for people who didn't get what they wanted.

It means that you got the same result by buying it for 10 tickets as people who spent dozens of hours in-game farming dolmens. Does that sound fair to you? And I'm not talking about your personal satisfaction here, but about the principle.

tomofhyrule · March 24

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Small digression, but this is also why I love games like Baldur’s Gate 3, which doesn’t care about fulfilling every player’s wish, but force him/her to make choices and sacrifices instead. Frustration can be very positive in video games.

Remind me: what time-gated FOMO event item drop could you get in BG3 that is no longer available?

That's why I said I was making a digression. 🙂

Actually, what you're saying wasn't my point at all.

My point was that frustration and its resolution (or lack thereof) are important and beneficial in games.

It can be a good thing in ESO when you obtain an exclusive item that was hard to get (e.g., the 10th anniversary style pages), just as it can be a good thing to say, 'Yup, I missed it. Too bad, at least I tried.'

It can also be a good thing in BG3 when you're faced with deep choices and moral dilemmas that prevent you from getting the best ending for every companion at the end of the game.

Sometimes, games don't give players exactly what they want, and I think that's a very good thing. In my opinion, some games try too hard to satisfy everyone all the time, and that’s how you end up with low-tier titles - in my very own opinion - like DATV, Avowed, Starfield, etc. No choice, no dilemma, no loss. One rule: to give the players everything they want and avoid any frustration".

But as you're pointing out, the inability to get every good ending for every companion comes from your choices throughout the game. Not from you buying the game a year after it released. One of those is a way to make people care about the game and characters. The other one is just a way to frustrate players for the sake of frustrating them. These are not the same.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Another example: I missed the Summerset event with the Grand Psijic Villa. And that's fine. It really is. It was my own fault for not being there in time to take part in the event and get it, even though I really wanted it. I wanted it so badly that I even bought it later. Of course if you couldn't get it for a very good reason (for instance couldn't play because of a natural disaster, a passing, etc.) you should still be able to get it by opening a ticket.

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical. If you really believe that, you should definitely not have bought the house at all so you could allow people who did do the event have their special house, since you devalued their achievement of 'being there at the right time,' right?
Oh wait, that didn't change anything for people who already own it. They just got it for free since they were in the right place at the right time, but you had to pay money. Seems fair.

Also, "it was my own fault for not being there" for a bunch of people who were not aware of the game and started after it is a choice. What, are we to imply that it's my own fault that I didn't get to see the moon landing live, considering that I wasn't born for almost 20 years after it?

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Malyore wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

This is why I was pissed to see you could buy 10th anniversary style pages that were so hard to get, for 10 event tickets a few months ago. It just ruins the satisfaction of having looted them during the event imo.

My satisfaction from the 10th anniversary collectibles comes from actually owning the collectable to use. Not how I got it.

Trueflame looks cool, that's why I wanted it and that's why I got it. Me having fished for it means nothing to me, other than a hoop I was told to jump through for ZOS. I'd rather players don't have to jump through those hoops to get cosmetics we mutually think looks cool. I was glad ZOS made them available for people who didn't get what they wanted.

It means that you got the same result by buying it for 10 tickets as people who spent dozens of hours in-game farming dolmens. Does that sound fair to you? And I'm not talking about your personal satisfaction here, but about the principle.

And even at the time, we were all saying that the drop rates were bull. Again, there's a difference between "I put in weeks of progging to get this trifecta" and "I got a lucky roll!"

And if you want to go along those lines, I'm offended that I put in the time to farm all 5 of the pages and then I got hit with the PTS lockout immediately after I got my 5th. I think it's not appropriate that other people got to keep playing the game and collected loads of event boxes while all I got to show for it was the 5 pages I already had and endeavors for mounts I don't use. I think instead they should just have banned everyone for 11 days because that would be fair!
...that's about what that sounds like.

Even at the time, we said "make the drop rate based on achieves." And now they did. And I don't begrudge anyone who didn't have the RNG to get them, nor do I begrudge the people who did get to do the whole event because they didn't feel like helping ZOS by testing the latest content.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

But as you're pointing out, the inability to get every good ending for every companion comes from your choices throughout the game. Not from you buying the game a year after it released. One of those is a way to make people care about the game and characters. The other one is just a way to frustrate players for the sake of frustrating them. These are not the same.

If you join an MMO several years after its release, how can you expect to obtain as many exclusive items as those who have been playing since the beginning? Sorry, but this is something I don’t really understand. I started playing in 2017 and missed a lot of exclusive content due to FOMO, and that seems perfectly normal to me. The players who have invested a lot of time and effort since the very beginning and helped shape the game into what it is today deserve to have more exclusive content, items, and rewards than me.

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical.

Once again, you don't get my point (English isn't my mother tongue so maybe I'm not very clear btw).

Grand Psijic Villa was available for free during an event.
I missed the event.
Rather than asking to get the house free again, I paid 12k Crowns for it instead of having it for free.

So no, it’s not hypocritical because it aligns with my point: I missed out on exclusive content (a free house) and had to pay for it instead, unlike others who got it for free. And I’ll even say this: if the house were no longer available and I couldn’t buy it at all, I would accept it.

Also, "it was my own fault for not being there" for a bunch of people who were not aware of the game and started after it is a choice. What, are we to imply that it's my own fault that I didn't get to see the moon landing live, considering that I wasn't born for almost 20 years after it?

Yep, and it’s the same for any game. If you start playing GTA Online in 2025, you’ll miss out on tons of items compared to those who have been playing since the beginning. The same goes for WoW, Fortnite, LoL, CS2, etc. That seems perfectly normal to me.

As for the moon landing metaphor—well, yeah, that’s life. You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

And even at the time, we were all saying that the drop rates were bull. Again, there's a difference between "I put in weeks of progging to get this trifecta" and "I got a lucky roll!"

Well, yeah, that’s the principle of drop rates. Before the RNG change with Blackwood, I did at least 300–400 solo runs in Arx Corinium to get the Inferno Staff. Never got it. And I was okay with that since it wasn’t something essential for me.

tomofhyrule · March 24

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical.

Once again, you don't get my point (English isn't my mother tongue so maybe I'm not very clear btw).
Grand Psijic Villa was available for free during an event.

I missed the event.

Rather than asking to get the house free again, I paid 12k Crowns for it instead of having it for free.

So no, it’s not hypocritical because it aligns with my point: I missed out on exclusive content (a free house) and had to pay for it instead, unlike others who got it for free. And I’ll even say this: if the house were no longer available and I couldn’t buy it at all, I would accept it.

How is this not the same?

You:

You missed an event reward
It came out in the store
You bought it

Others:

They missed a different event reward
It hasn’t come out in the store
They want to buy it when it does

Literally nobody is asking it to be free. They want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

How can you argue that people should not be able to get something when you did precisely that?

sans-culottes · March 24

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

But as you're pointing out, the inability to get every good ending for every companion comes from your choices throughout the game. Not from you buying the game a year after it released. One of those is a way to make people care about the game and characters. The other one is just a way to frustrate players for the sake of frustrating them. These are not the same.

If you join an MMO several years after its release, how can you expect to obtain as many exclusive items as those who have been playing since the beginning? Sorry, but this is something I don’t really understand. I started playing in 2017 and missed a lot of exclusive content due to FOMO, and that seems perfectly normal to me. The players who have invested a lot of time and effort since the very beginning and helped shape the game into what it is today deserve to have more exclusive content, items, and rewards than me.

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical.

Once again, you don't get my point (English isn't my mother tongue so maybe I'm not very clear btw).
Grand Psijic Villa was available for free during an event.

I missed the event.

Rather than asking to get the house free again, I paid 12k Crowns for it instead of having it for free.

So no, it’s not hypocritical because it aligns with my point: I missed out on exclusive content (a free house) and had to pay for it instead, unlike others who got it for free. And I’ll even say this: if the house were no longer available and I couldn’t buy it at all, I would accept it.

Also, "it was my own fault for not being there" for a bunch of people who were not aware of the game and started after it is a choice. What, are we to imply that it's my own fault that I didn't get to see the moon landing live, considering that I wasn't born for almost 20 years after it?

Yep, and it’s the same for any game. If you start playing GTA Online in 2025, you’ll miss out on tons of items compared to those who have been playing since the beginning. The same goes for WoW, Fortnite, LoL, CS2, etc. That seems perfectly normal to me.

As for the moon landing metaphor—well, yeah, that’s life. You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

And even at the time, we were all saying that the drop rates were bull. Again, there's a difference between "I put in weeks of progging to get this trifecta" and "I got a lucky roll!"

Well, yeah, that’s the principle of drop rates. Before the RNG change with Blackwood, I did at least 300–400 solo runs in Arx Corinium to get the Inferno Staff. Never got it. And I was okay with that since it wasn’t something essential for me.

@JiubLeRepenti, I appreciate your careful attempt to distinguish between “exclusive content” earned initially versus content obtained later through purchase. But consider carefully what you’re defending here.

You argue about exclusivity motivating engagement, yet by your own admission, you later bought the Grand Psijic Villa for Crowns after missing the event. In doing so, you implicitly acknowledge something important: you valued the ability to obtain a previously exclusive reward at your convenience. Paying Crowns didn’t diminish the original players’ achievement. They got the house free by being there at the right time, while you paid a significant premium. Isn’t this exactly how rereleasing limited content should work—accessible, but at a cost proportional to missing the initial opportunity?

You’re also frustrated seeing anniversary pages once farmed tirelessly now available for event tickets, but here’s the issue: the original method wasn’t challenging, merely tedious RNG. Dolmen-farming wasn’t rewarding skill; it rewarded sheer time and luck. Is your frustration with accessibility—or that the barrier (tedious repetition) has been reduced for newer players?

@tomofhyrule’s moon landing analogy is quite fitting precisely because you dismissed it. Players don’t reasonably choose their date of joining a game any more than they choose their birthdate. The distinction between meaningful frustration (as in narrative choices you cited with BG3) and arbitrary frustration (not knowing a certain week’s login bonus years ago would never reappear) is key.

The question ultimately is: do we want a healthy game community focused on rewarding meaningful player investment, or are we simply clinging to arbitrary exclusivity? Your own actions suggest you recognize the value in letting players—at some personal cost—access previously missed rewards. Your enjoyment clearly wasn’t diminished by it. Perhaps extending that courtesy to others isn’t so terrible after all.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

How is this not the same?

Very simple:

I've never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store. It was there, so I bought it
If the house hadn't returned to the Crown Store, I wouldn’t have complained or made a thread asking for it to come back
I paid for it, while the people who got it during the event didn’t pay for it

Literally nobody is asking for it to be free. They just want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

Once again, I’ve never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store.

Grand Psijic Villa is back in the Crown Store? Nice, I'll pay for it
Grand Psijic Villa isn’t back in the Crown Store? Too bad, I missed it for good, but it’s not a big deal

You're focusing on the fact that I paid for this house, even though it wasn’t something I was begging for. That’s just a minor detail in my whole point.

I just feel like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. If the Grand Psijic Villa hadn’t been available for purchase, I would never have complained about it—just like I previously said that, even though I don’t have the Dragon’s Treasure Trove in my collection, I still think it shouldn’t come back.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

But as you're pointing out, the inability to get every good ending for every companion comes from your choices throughout the game. Not from you buying the game a year after it released. One of those is a way to make people care about the game and characters. The other one is just a way to frustrate players for the sake of frustrating them. These are not the same.

If you join an MMO several years after its release, how can you expect to obtain as many exclusive items as those who have been playing since the beginning? Sorry, but this is something I don’t really understand. I started playing in 2017 and missed a lot of exclusive content due to FOMO, and that seems perfectly normal to me. The players who have invested a lot of time and effort since the very beginning and helped shape the game into what it is today deserve to have more exclusive content, items, and rewards than me.

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical.

Once again, you don't get my point (English isn't my mother tongue so maybe I'm not very clear btw).
Grand Psijic Villa was available for free during an event.

I missed the event.

Rather than asking to get the house free again, I paid 12k Crowns for it instead of having it for free.

So no, it’s not hypocritical because it aligns with my point: I missed out on exclusive content (a free house) and had to pay for it instead, unlike others who got it for free. And I’ll even say this: if the house were no longer available and I couldn’t buy it at all, I would accept it.

Also, "it was my own fault for not being there" for a bunch of people who were not aware of the game and started after it is a choice. What, are we to imply that it's my own fault that I didn't get to see the moon landing live, considering that I wasn't born for almost 20 years after it?

Yep, and it’s the same for any game. If you start playing GTA Online in 2025, you’ll miss out on tons of items compared to those who have been playing since the beginning. The same goes for WoW, Fortnite, LoL, CS2, etc. That seems perfectly normal to me.

As for the moon landing metaphor—well, yeah, that’s life. You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

And even at the time, we were all saying that the drop rates were bull. Again, there's a difference between "I put in weeks of progging to get this trifecta" and "I got a lucky roll!"

Well, yeah, that’s the principle of drop rates. Before the RNG change with Blackwood, I did at least 300–400 solo runs in Arx Corinium to get the Inferno Staff. Never got it. And I was okay with that since it wasn’t something essential for me.

@JiubLeRepenti, I appreciate your careful attempt to distinguish between “exclusive content” earned initially versus content obtained later through purchase. But consider carefully what you’re defending here.

You argue about exclusivity motivating engagement, yet by your own admission, you later bought the Grand Psijic Villa for Crowns after missing the event. In doing so, you implicitly acknowledge something important: you valued the ability to obtain a previously exclusive reward at your convenience. Paying Crowns didn’t diminish the original players’ achievement. They got the house free by being there at the right time, while you paid a significant premium. Isn’t this exactly how rereleasing limited content should work—accessible, but at a cost proportional to missing the initial opportunity?

You’re also frustrated seeing anniversary pages once farmed tirelessly now available for event tickets, but here’s the issue: the original method wasn’t challenging, merely tedious RNG. Dolmen-farming wasn’t rewarding skill; it rewarded sheer time and luck. Is your frustration with accessibility—or that the barrier (tedious repetition) has been reduced for newer players?

@tomofhyrule’s moon landing analogy is quite fitting precisely because you dismissed it. Players don’t reasonably choose their date of joining a game any more than they choose their birthdate. The distinction between meaningful frustration (as in narrative choices you cited with BG3) and arbitrary frustration (not knowing a certain week’s login bonus years ago would never reappear) is key.

The question ultimately is: do we want a healthy game community focused on rewarding meaningful player investment, or are we simply clinging to arbitrary exclusivity? Your own actions suggest you recognize the value in letting players—at some personal cost—access previously missed rewards. Your enjoyment clearly wasn’t diminished by it. Perhaps extending that courtesy to others isn’t so terrible after all.

I think this is just about point of vue and personal opinion. I think I understood quite correctly the metaphor about the moon landing, and I think that my first reply to it still makes sense to me:

You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

Basically, it’s like I’m seeing a 6 while you’re seeing a 9, and each of us is trying to convince the other that our perspective is the correct one. But I keep defending my view: I think exclusive content is a good thing because I see it as something tied to a specific moment in time. Bringing it back would just erase its value for those who originally obtained it.

sans-culottes · March 24

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

How is this not the same?

Very simple:
I've never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store. It was there, so I bought it

If the house hadn't returned to the Crown Store, I wouldn’t have complained or made a thread asking for it to come back

I paid for it, while the people who got it during the event didn’t pay for it

Literally nobody is asking for it to be free. They just want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

Once again, I’ve never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store.
Grand Psijic Villa is back in the Crown Store? Nice, I'll pay for it

Grand Psijic Villa isn’t back in the Crown Store? Too bad, I missed it for good, but it’s not a big deal

You're focusing on the fact that I paid for this house, even though it wasn’t something I was begging for. That’s just a minor detail in my whole point.

I just feel like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. If the Grand Psijic Villa hadn’t been available for purchase, I would never have complained about it—just like I previously said that, even though I don’t have the Dragon’s Treasure Trove in my collection, I still think it shouldn’t come back.

@JiubLeRepenti, you keep insisting there’s no contradiction here, but the contradiction isn’t in whether you asked for the Villa to return—it’s in the principle you’re defending. You say exclusivity is good, and that items like the Dragon’s Treasure Trove “shouldn’t come back,” because the people who were there “earned” them. Yet when the Villa did come back, you bought it without hesitation and without concern that doing so might diminish anyone else’s achievement. You didn’t decline on principle. You participated.

That’s the point.

No one said you begged for it to return. The issue is that your behavior demonstrates a practical acceptance of the very thing you’re arguing against. You valued the opportunity to obtain a previously exclusive reward even after missing the initial window. You weren’t outraged it had returned. You didn’t say, “No thanks. I missed it, and it should stay that way.” You bought it. Which is perfectly reasonable. But it means the entire argument you’ve built about exclusivity loses coherence. You made use of the system when it benefited you, but you want others to forgo that same opportunity.

This isn’t about “putting words in your mouth.” It’s about pointing out that your own actions undermine your claimed position. You’re defending a principle you’ve already conceded doesn’t apply universally. The only difference seems to be whether the item is one you want or not.

That’s the contradiction. That’s what everyone’s been pointing out.

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

But as you're pointing out, the inability to get every good ending for every companion comes from your choices throughout the game. Not from you buying the game a year after it released. One of those is a way to make people care about the game and characters. The other one is just a way to frustrate players for the sake of frustrating them. These are not the same.

If you join an MMO several years after its release, how can you expect to obtain as many exclusive items as those who have been playing since the beginning? Sorry, but this is something I don’t really understand. I started playing in 2017 and missed a lot of exclusive content due to FOMO, and that seems perfectly normal to me. The players who have invested a lot of time and effort since the very beginning and helped shape the game into what it is today deserve to have more exclusive content, items, and rewards than me.

Wait. So... you missed an event and you really wanted the reward for that event, so you bought it. Ok, but you're campaigning against other people being able to do the same?

That's a bit hypocritical.

Once again, you don't get my point (English isn't my mother tongue so maybe I'm not very clear btw).
Grand Psijic Villa was available for free during an event.

I missed the event.

Rather than asking to get the house free again, I paid 12k Crowns for it instead of having it for free.

So no, it’s not hypocritical because it aligns with my point: I missed out on exclusive content (a free house) and had to pay for it instead, unlike others who got it for free. And I’ll even say this: if the house were no longer available and I couldn’t buy it at all, I would accept it.

Also, "it was my own fault for not being there" for a bunch of people who were not aware of the game and started after it is a choice. What, are we to imply that it's my own fault that I didn't get to see the moon landing live, considering that I wasn't born for almost 20 years after it?

Yep, and it’s the same for any game. If you start playing GTA Online in 2025, you’ll miss out on tons of items compared to those who have been playing since the beginning. The same goes for WoW, Fortnite, LoL, CS2, etc. That seems perfectly normal to me.

As for the moon landing metaphor—well, yeah, that’s life. You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

And even at the time, we were all saying that the drop rates were bull. Again, there's a difference between "I put in weeks of progging to get this trifecta" and "I got a lucky roll!"

Well, yeah, that’s the principle of drop rates. Before the RNG change with Blackwood, I did at least 300–400 solo runs in Arx Corinium to get the Inferno Staff. Never got it. And I was okay with that since it wasn’t something essential for me.

@JiubLeRepenti, I appreciate your careful attempt to distinguish between “exclusive content” earned initially versus content obtained later through purchase. But consider carefully what you’re defending here.

You argue about exclusivity motivating engagement, yet by your own admission, you later bought the Grand Psijic Villa for Crowns after missing the event. In doing so, you implicitly acknowledge something important: you valued the ability to obtain a previously exclusive reward at your convenience. Paying Crowns didn’t diminish the original players’ achievement. They got the house free by being there at the right time, while you paid a significant premium. Isn’t this exactly how rereleasing limited content should work—accessible, but at a cost proportional to missing the initial opportunity?

You’re also frustrated seeing anniversary pages once farmed tirelessly now available for event tickets, but here’s the issue: the original method wasn’t challenging, merely tedious RNG. Dolmen-farming wasn’t rewarding skill; it rewarded sheer time and luck. Is your frustration with accessibility—or that the barrier (tedious repetition) has been reduced for newer players?

@tomofhyrule’s moon landing analogy is quite fitting precisely because you dismissed it. Players don’t reasonably choose their date of joining a game any more than they choose their birthdate. The distinction between meaningful frustration (as in narrative choices you cited with BG3) and arbitrary frustration (not knowing a certain week’s login bonus years ago would never reappear) is key.

The question ultimately is: do we want a healthy game community focused on rewarding meaningful player investment, or are we simply clinging to arbitrary exclusivity? Your own actions suggest you recognize the value in letting players—at some personal cost—access previously missed rewards. Your enjoyment clearly wasn’t diminished by it. Perhaps extending that courtesy to others isn’t so terrible after all.

I think this is just about point of vue and personal opinion. I think I understood quite correctly the metaphor about the moon landing, and I think that my first reply to it still makes sense to me:

You can’t participate in everything, everywhere, all the time. That’s just how the world works. You have opportunities tied to your own time, and those are the ones you should engage with rather than asking for access to something that happened in the past (again, just my opinion).

Basically, it’s like I’m seeing a 6 while you’re seeing a 9, and each of us is trying to convince the other that our perspective is the correct one. But I keep defending my view: I think exclusive content is a good thing because I see it as something tied to a specific moment in time. Bringing it back would just erase its value for those who originally obtained it.

I appreciate the gesture toward mutual understanding, but this isn’t a matter of “point of view.” You’re not defending a preference for tea over coffee. You’re defending a principle—that exclusive content should never return, because its value lies in being unrepeatable.

That principle would be coherent if you had consistently acted on it. But you didn’t. You missed the Grand Psijic Villa, then purchased it when it reappeared. You didn’t treat its unavailability as sacred. You saw it was available and bought it. Which is entirely reasonable. And yet, you argue that others should not have that same opportunity for items they missed. That’s not “just opinion.” That’s a contradiction.

When Tom invoked the moon landing, he wasn’t trying to say people should get everything they want. He was pointing out that “not being there at the time” is not a moral failing. Players don’t choose when they find a game. Missing a login event in 2020 isn’t comparable to failing a moral choice in Baldur’s Gate 3. One reflects player decision-making. The other reflects a calendar.

You keep returning to the idea that you wouldn’t have asked for the villa if it hadn’t returned. That’s beside the point. You bought it. You didn’t boycott its availability. You didn’t argue that it was unjust to offer it again. You simply took the opportunity—just as others are asking to do now.

This isn’t about denying that time can shape opportunity. Of course it can. But in a live-service MMO, clinging to arbitrary exclusivity does nothing to reward effort or skill; it just preserves a sense of having something others can’t. If exclusivity is about merit, then it needs to be tied to meaningful achievement, not time zone, server outage, or life circumstances.

You argue for scarcity. But what you’re defending is artificial scarcity. You yourself have demonstrated that access with a cost can work. The real question is whether we want a game that rewards participation—or one that punishes belatedness.

And that’s not a 6 or a 9. It’s a fork in design philosophy. Only one path actually leads forward.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

How is this not the same?

Very simple:
I've never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store. It was there, so I bought it

If the house hadn't returned to the Crown Store, I wouldn’t have complained or made a thread asking for it to come back

I paid for it, while the people who got it during the event didn’t pay for it

Literally nobody is asking for it to be free. They just want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

Once again, I’ve never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store.
Grand Psijic Villa is back in the Crown Store? Nice, I'll pay for it

Grand Psijic Villa isn’t back in the Crown Store? Too bad, I missed it for good, but it’s not a big deal

You're focusing on the fact that I paid for this house, even though it wasn’t something I was begging for. That’s just a minor detail in my whole point.

I just feel like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. If the Grand Psijic Villa hadn’t been available for purchase, I would never have complained about it—just like I previously said that, even though I don’t have the Dragon’s Treasure Trove in my collection, I still think it shouldn’t come back.

@JiubLeRepenti, you keep insisting there’s no contradiction here, but the contradiction isn’t in whether you asked for the Villa to return—it’s in the principle you’re defending. You say exclusivity is good, and that items like the Dragon’s Treasure Trove “shouldn’t come back,” because the people who were there “earned” them. Yet when the Villa did come back, you bought it without hesitation and without concern that doing so might diminish anyone else’s achievement. You didn’t decline on principle. You participated.

That’s the point.

Sorry, but I still don't see any contradiction here.

There's a big difference for me between explicitly asking or lobbying for an item to return—regardless of what the people who originally got it during an exclusive period may think—versus simply obtaining the item you wanted but missed when it becomes available again.

And that’s not a 6 or a 9. It’s a fork in design philosophy. Only one path actually leads forward.

Strongly disagree on this. There are as many "one path" as there are humain beings. Being convinced that your point is valid and mine not is OK though, I'm thinking the same.

Tensar · March 24

DenverRalphy wrote: »

While this is an item that I'm very envious over and wish I had, I'd rather it doesn't make a reappearance. Requests like this post come around every few months or so.

And I'm very happy for those who have it and hope their precious claim piece of the game is never watered down or diminished by a re-release.

Totally this, if everything if available to everybody then it's not interesting. Collector items make me want to stay in a game or play it, and I totally accept if I missed something because it only make everybody, every accounts more uniques.

sans-culottes · March 24

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

How is this not the same?

Very simple:
I've never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store. It was there, so I bought it

If the house hadn't returned to the Crown Store, I wouldn’t have complained or made a thread asking for it to come back

I paid for it, while the people who got it during the event didn’t pay for it

Literally nobody is asking for it to be free. They just want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

Once again, I’ve never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store.
Grand Psijic Villa is back in the Crown Store? Nice, I'll pay for it

Grand Psijic Villa isn’t back in the Crown Store? Too bad, I missed it for good, but it’s not a big deal

You're focusing on the fact that I paid for this house, even though it wasn’t something I was begging for. That’s just a minor detail in my whole point.

I just feel like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. If the Grand Psijic Villa hadn’t been available for purchase, I would never have complained about it—just like I previously said that, even though I don’t have the Dragon’s Treasure Trove in my collection, I still think it shouldn’t come back.

@JiubLeRepenti, you keep insisting there’s no contradiction here, but the contradiction isn’t in whether you asked for the Villa to return—it’s in the principle you’re defending. You say exclusivity is good, and that items like the Dragon’s Treasure Trove “shouldn’t come back,” because the people who were there “earned” them. Yet when the Villa did come back, you bought it without hesitation and without concern that doing so might diminish anyone else’s achievement. You didn’t decline on principle. You participated.

That’s the point.

Sorry, but I still don't see any contradiction here.

There's a big difference for me between explicitly asking or lobbying for an item to return—regardless of what the people who originally got it during an exclusive period may think—versus simply obtaining the item you wanted but missed when it becomes available again.

And that’s not a 6 or a 9. It’s a fork in design philosophy. Only one path actually leads forward.

Strongly disagree on this. There are as many "one path" as there are humain beings. Being convinced that your point is valid and mine not is OK though, I'm thinking the same.

@JiubLeRepenti, the contradiction isn’t about whether you “asked” for the Grand Psijic Villa to return. It lies in what your behavior reveals about the principle you’re defending.

You say exclusivity is valuable because it ties rewards to a moment in time, and that bringing items back erases their meaning. But when the Villa returned, you bought it without hesitation. You did not abstain on principle, nor did you express concern that this might “diminish” the accomplishment of those who were there during the event. You simply acted as any player would: you saw a desirable item and acquired it. That action demonstrates something important. The supposed sanctity of exclusivity was, at that moment, not compelling enough to override your desire.

This matters because it shows that what you call “principle” is, in practice, a mood. It’s invoked to deny others access, not to regulate your own conduct. Your stated belief—that “bringing it back would erase its value”—was quietly set aside when you stood to benefit.

This isn’t about 6s and 9s. It’s not relativism. It’s about coherence. You frame exclusivity as a design good in itself, but your own behavior reveals it as a preference shaped by convenience and affect. There is no shame in that, but we should be honest about it.

If exclusivity truly matters, then its cost must fall on all players equally. If it only matters when other people gain access, but not when you do, then it isn’t a design value. It’s just a feeling.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

sans-culottes wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

How is this not the same?

Very simple:
I've never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store. It was there, so I bought it

If the house hadn't returned to the Crown Store, I wouldn’t have complained or made a thread asking for it to come back

I paid for it, while the people who got it during the event didn’t pay for it

Literally nobody is asking for it to be free. They just want the chance to buy it. Exactly like you did for the Grand Psijic Villa.

Once again, I’ve never asked for it to come back to the Crown Store.
Grand Psijic Villa is back in the Crown Store? Nice, I'll pay for it

Grand Psijic Villa isn’t back in the Crown Store? Too bad, I missed it for good, but it’s not a big deal

You're focusing on the fact that I paid for this house, even though it wasn’t something I was begging for. That’s just a minor detail in my whole point.

I just feel like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. If the Grand Psijic Villa hadn’t been available for purchase, I would never have complained about it—just like I previously said that, even though I don’t have the Dragon’s Treasure Trove in my collection, I still think it shouldn’t come back.

@JiubLeRepenti, you keep insisting there’s no contradiction here, but the contradiction isn’t in whether you asked for the Villa to return—it’s in the principle you’re defending. You say exclusivity is good, and that items like the Dragon’s Treasure Trove “shouldn’t come back,” because the people who were there “earned” them. Yet when the Villa did come back, you bought it without hesitation and without concern that doing so might diminish anyone else’s achievement. You didn’t decline on principle. You participated.

That’s the point.

Sorry, but I still don't see any contradiction here.

There's a big difference for me between explicitly asking or lobbying for an item to return—regardless of what the people who originally got it during an exclusive period may think—versus simply obtaining the item you wanted but missed when it becomes available again.

And that’s not a 6 or a 9. It’s a fork in design philosophy. Only one path actually leads forward.

Strongly disagree on this. There are as many "one path" as there are humain beings. Being convinced that your point is valid and mine not is OK though, I'm thinking the same.

@JiubLeRepenti, the contradiction isn’t about whether you “asked” for the Grand Psijic Villa to return.

Well, yes, to me it's 100% about it as it makes all the difference in that situation.

JiubLeRepenti · March 24

Tensar wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

While this is an item that I'm very envious over and wish I had, I'd rather it doesn't make a reappearance. Requests like this post come around every few months or so.

And I'm very happy for those who have it and hope their precious claim piece of the game is never watered down or diminished by a re-release.

Totally this, if everything if available to everybody then it's not interesting. Collector items make me want to stay in a game or play it, and I totally accept if I missed something because it only make everybody, every accounts more uniques.

100%

BetweenMidgets · March 24

I'd love to see old anniversary cakes - the ones that actually look nice.

They may be plain and simple, but some of us like that. Plus the recent cakes are just abominations in my opinion. I feel they are SO ugly.

Would be nice to have some good looking cakes to put in my bakery build, instead of spending half my item slots cobbling something together because the recent cakes are far to garish.

I honestly don't even care if they're the original cake designs. Make something with some slight change, if people want to "retain the value of having been there to get them" or whatever all the back and forth in this thread is about.

spartaxoxo · March 24

I think at least the cakes released from the first anniversary to 2021 or so (I forget which year exactly) should be made available to everyone. When they introduced the cakes, they made having an achievement that you can never get again retroactively required for the cakes. This means that people who were playing and participating in the previous anniversary events missed out on being able to claim because they trusted zos when they said the memento was just for exp and didn't claim it despite being present.

I this probably only affects a minority of users but it's still totally unfair.

DreamsUnderStars · March 24

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Mavloc wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Mavloc wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

sans-culottes wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

While this is an item that I'm very envious over and wish I had, I'd rather it doesn't make a reappearance. Requests like this post come around every few months or so.

And I'm very happy for those who have it and hope their precious claim piece of the game is never watered down or diminished by a re-release.

I am unclear on why rereleasing this would somehow cheapen or “diminish” other players having this furnishing—a purely cosmetic item.

The item obviously holds some intrinsic value. Otherwise threads like this wouldn't keep popping up asking for it to be made available to more players. If more players get it, that value is diminished.

It has no intrinsic value. I've never seen it in a home and thought "Oh wow, they have that!"

I want it because I want a treasure room in my home, and this is the only treasure furnishing in the game.
If they made a different version of it, that would be perfectly fine, and people would continue to not care if you have the "original" because most of those people dont even play the game anymore.

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

Mavloc wrote: »

It has no intrinsic value.

Correct.

If it didn't, then getting it wouldn't be such a hot button issue to some players. Anecdotally claiming to have never seen it in a home means nothing. You're aware of it, you've seen it somewhere, and you want it. There's the value.

You are claiming that me being able to get it devalues other people who already have it.
And that's simply false.

Do you have this furnishing? Is that why it's a hot button issue for YOU?

Because if not, there is no point arguing with you on how imaginary people feel.

If you'd read my earlier response, you'd see that no I do not have the furnishing. But I am happy for those that do.

And yes. Making it available again does devalue it. Because it becomes less special the more players that have it.

Rationalize your logic any way you wish. The value is in the fact that it's a prized item that others desire to have.

It's an imaginary item (it's just 1 and 0s) it has no value or worth. Therefore has nothing to devalue, especially when it was a free item (I think).

Telling people it has a high value because it was a "special" give away is one of the reason why we have a fomo store in the first place.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi All, just wanted to follow up here. The team is aware and thanks you for the feedback. What other promotional / Event collectibles would you like to see return? We can pass a list on to the team.

I would very much like to have the Azura mini statue.

twisttop138 · March 24

I have this item. I would love it for other people to have it. It feels weird to tell others they shouldn't have some furnishing because it would cheapen its "value" to me. It would not. This was not some mount earned by doing the hardest content in the game or something. It seems some derive some feeling of superiority from having things others can't have. I never understood this. I would not be against them making a similar furnishing available as a compromise but I'm not against the actual furniture being made available either. This is just my opinion though, and it does not matter really. In the grand scheme of things, ZOS will do what they please in this matter.