The Blizzard Store and the Monthly Fee. What you need to realize.

[Kaleredar]

No you're not going to 'stop me there', you patronizing twat.

Your entire POINT was predicated on a completely subjective claim. So you're damn straight I'm going to "stop you."

Based on how item store mounts have for some time now been more labour-intensive than the majority of mounts from the game (very special mounts like Invincible being an exception).

Yeah, it also took two patches for the helmets to be released, and that's only after they made it into the game files to be datamined. That you THINK "special mounts" took as much work as store mounts doesn't make it so.

Namely because:

Firehawks use a recycled proto drake skeleton. But you know what, Invincible uses a recycled hippogryph skeleton, and I'm pretty damn sure the Firehawks took more time to design than invincible, seeing as they're bursting with particle effects. Ever see what a firehawk looks like in the raw game files? It took a hell of a lot of particle effect tempering to make it look the way it does in-game. And I can guarantee you that the sky serpents took a LOT more work than Invincible did.

You just THINK that invincible "looks on par" with store mounts, and therefore OBVIOUSLY must have required as much work to design.

They often have more attention to detail, particle effects and other stuff DESIGNED TO MAKE PEOPLE WANT TO BUY THEM (how strange?).

The mounts are going to look like what they're going to look like. Do you think the recent PvP mounts or the Engineering mech mount look poorly detailed and or sloppily done? And if you do, guess what... the key part of that is: You THINK.

The helmets they have shown now are ALSO of outstanding quality.

Actually, I think the flame one looks stupid (wouldn't match a thing,) the blue one is cartoony (think how stupid it would look on a bald character,) and the red one looks like that old warlock tier helm.

The reason is obvious; if they weren't, people wouldn't be inclined to buy them. But because they ARE, they have a very REAL value in the game while only being available for EXTRA money compared to the subscription.

This is not functionally different from gear that has stats on it and THEREFORE also has a REAL value in the game (which appears to be why people have a problem with stat gear in the item shop).

Frankly, I'd think it stupid to pay for cosmetic items. But hey, if people want to, it doesn't make them any "better" or place in a better position to play the game than I'd be in for not buying them, so I don't particularly care.

[Dragon2K]

Frankly, I'd think it stupid to pay for cosmetic items. But hey, if people want to, it doesn't make them any "better" or place in a better position to play the game than I'd be in for not buying them.

Because cosmetics aren't important to you. That is fine, but it is not everyone's view. Whether you can pay to get better gear (hey, it could be just as good as other gear, but you wouldn't have to spend any time on it! How does that sound?) has little effect on *me*, because I'm not one for hardcore raiding or PVP. So try to stop reasoning from such a self-centered perspective.

[Kaleredar]

Because cosmetics aren't important to you.

Whoa whoa whoa, when did I say that?

Oh, cosmetics are VERY important to me. The design details of a game are some of my biggest hot buttons. I'm incredibly peeved that there are run of the mill owls and wolves running around in Outlands, that they tried to pass off as "native species." I'm irked there are no female fel orcs, or female ogres, or female stone vrykul/kvaldir, or Tuskarr, simply because it leaves a void in the game consistency. I'm very annoyed by the recurring trend of making Death Knight gear that looks like pointy paladin sets. I think it a lost opportunity that they gave the orange shado-pan tiger green armor, instead of red. I really do wish they had given Alani a unique skin, as opposed to the red one... but with Lightning. My bank and void storage are literally FILLED to the brim, almost entirely with transmog sets and pieces of armor I THINK I might need.

But my very deep concern for cosmetics has allowed me to SEE that there are NUMEROUS avenues to pursue looking "good" in game. There are any number of good looking mounts in the game, and I see NO reason to believe that new ones wont continue to appear in the game. And the same goes for armor sets, and pets, and any other cosmetic fluff they might offer on the Blizzard store as well.

That is fine, but it is not everyone's view.

And it ain't mine either, bub.

Whether you can pay to get better gear (hey, it could be just as good as other gear, but you wouldn't have to spend any time on it! How does that sound?) has little effect on *me*, because I'm not one for hardcore raiding or PVP. So try to stop reasoning from such a self-centered perspective.

And if there were any reason that cosmetic gear gave you an advantage in game over other players that was concrete and objective, then I'd probably have a few problems with having it be sold.

But it doesn't.


And I can't help but notice you failed to address my other points.

[Ichifails]

This seems to be a better debate to throw around. This new system seems like a bandage. I think they need to really focus on bringing out either some new content that will either shut down other mmo's or get more people in. I honestly think they are just gonna bandage wow until 2016 and titan comes out

The problem is that we can't know for sure and we probably never will. I won't argue that the "helms" weren't for another purpose maybe even for the meta gems... there is a chance that thing might have gone: WE NEED MORE MONEY SO MILK THIS SHIT from Blizzard or Vivendi but there's also a chance that seems plausible:


"We will make some helms for meta procs - there are cloak procs, it's entirely reasonable to assume that metas would have these helms; the 3 helms are Blue(Xuen), Yellow(Niuzao), Red(Chi'Ji) and the Green(Yu'lon) one is missing"
Helms start getting data mined at that point; sweet bro metagem procs!
Vivendi comes in between and tells Blizzard they are basically leaving them with 400mil in debt starting June.
Reasonable reaction:
Abandon work on metagem procs, can't get them ready for the next tier and focus on the raiding tier.
Finish work on the current 3 helms and risk with adding them to the "Pet Store"

And I can say (and most people can agree) that this was one of the best raiding tiers WoW has ever seen. It had "them feelz", I remember first time stepping in ToT and those thunders shocking me... it was GOOD.
ToT(mostly) and SC2 Expansion ARE THE BEST THING THAT HAPPENED TO BLIZZARD. Share values haven't been so high since SPETEMBER 2008, for 4 and a half years shares were an average of 11 and in February, the start growing... and kept growing and are now around 15 peaking 15.6.
Do you really believe that a company that starts getting some of it's value back would just make a suicide move for no reason?


I hope and want to believe that the store items are there because some (a few) people wanted and also because the next expansion/minor content patch needs funding and that would pretty much be one of the only ways to fund it.
I'm not going to say that it is that way, there's a huge chance I am wrong and if this is just paving the way for free to play or items that give advantages I will probably be one of the first people with a pitchfork and torch in front of Blizzard's HQ.

[Dragon2K]

Whoa whoa whoa, when did I say that?

Oh, cosmetics are VERY important to me. The design details of a game are some of my biggest hot buttons. I'm incredibly peeved that there are run of the mill owls and wolves running around in Outlands, that they tried to pass off as "native species." I'm irked there are no female fel orcs, or female ogres, or female stone vrykul/kvaldir, or Tuskarr, simply because it leaves a void in the game consistency. I'm very annoyed by the recurring trend of making Death Knight gear that looks like pointy paladin sets. I think it a lost opportunity that they gave the orange shado-pan tiger green armor, instead of red. I really do wish they had given Alani a unique skin, as opposed to the red one... but with Lightning. My bank and void storage are literally FILLED to the brim, almost entirely with transmog sets and pieces of armor I THINK I might need.

But my very deep concern for cosmetics has allowed me to SEE that there are NUMEROUS avenues to pursue looking "good" in game. There are any number of good looking mounts in the game, and I see NO reason to believe that new ones wont continue to appear in the game. And the same goes for armor sets, and pets, and any other cosmetic fluff they might offer on the Blizzard store.



And it ain't mine either, bub.




And if there were any reason that cosmetic gear gave you an advantage in game over other players that was concrete and objective, then I'd probably have a few problems with having it be sold.

But it doesn't.


And I can't help but notice you failed to address my other points.

Tell me the objective difference between these two situations:
A) Blizzard offers high iLevel gear on the real money store, BUT you can also get it through playing the game (but that will take considerably longer of course).
B) Blizzard offers great looking gear on the real money store, but you can also get it or similar-looking gear through playing the game (which, again, will take considerably longer).

The ONLY potential difference is things like PVP rankings, but if that's the problem it's solved by only offering the high iLevel gear after a few weeks, so people have already been able to get the same rank by playing. If it's not about ranking but simply 'having to fight people who bought their gear', it's practically the same as meeting people who have cooler armor than you because they bought it. It's not like losing a pvp battle is a terrible setback or anything.

If situation A is not a problem to you, I do not see why B would be.




And.. what other points?

[Deleted]

Completely agreed @ OP.

[Kaleredar]

Tell me the objective difference between these two situations:
A) Blizzard offers high iLevel gear on the real money store, BUT you can also get it through playing the game (but that will take considerably longer of course).

So they can objectively offer good gear

B) Blizzard offers great looking gear on the real money store, but you can also get it or similar-looking gear through playing the game (which, again, will take considerably longer).

Or they can subjectively offer "good" gear.


Yeah, that's where the difference is.

The ONLY potential difference is things like PVP rankings, but if that's the problem it's solved by only offering the high iLevel gear after a few weeks, so people have already been able to get the same rank by playing.

Because they didn't earn that gear, or what that gear grants you stat-wise.

Are you going to argue people didn't earn "coolness?" I refer you back to this: I think the basic green raptor is one of the best looking mounts in the game. Great colors, cool model, nice animations... and yet all I'd have to do is level a troll to level 20 to get it. Meanwhile, I can think that whatever is going to drop off heroic Garrosh looks like utter crap. Do I then not deserve the level 20 mount, and should instead receive whatever garrosh drops off heroic because I didn't put in enough effort to "earn" something that looked cool?

If it's not about ranking but simply 'having to fight people who bought their gear', it's practically the same as meeting people who have cooler armor than you because they bought it.

I can be of the opinion that gear (mounts, pets, etc) that's on the store is automatically "not cool." And people can think it's cool despite that.

I can't be of the opinion that gear bought off the store gives you less strength, or intellect, or haste or agility or crit than it actually does.

And.. what other points?

So then you're admitting that the whole "They're just going to invest work on store stuff now" was a bullshit claim on your part?

[Theendgamelv3]

While I agree with most/all of your points, you can't really say this unless you're part of the design team or executive leadership at Blizzard (and even that would be debatable). Based on your first point, if at some point that route is the most viable revenue stream, that's what they'll do. That's the nature of enterprise, and it's fine, because it's their intellectual property to do with as they please.

Otherwise, people are - as usual - blowing this whole thing out of proportion. The math of the situation is not difficult to understand, but people being threatened by it sure is.

People would quit in droves if this game ever became pay 2 win. It will ruin the integrity of the game. Also if you can just buy the best gear, what is the point of raiding at all? Why raid when that person over there just bought the gear? This is why it won't happen, people will quit and any profit they saw will be gone. True that businesses will try to make money, they won't try to make money that will in the long run kill their business.

[Dragon2K]

OP is missing the point and sidestepping the argument. It's not a question of Blizzard CAN do what they're doing, of course they can. The question is whether paying consumers should put up with it. And for many of us the answer to that is no or will be no at a point soon in the future.

[Tydrane]

The Blizzard store is not a slippery slope, it is a smart business move to bring in more money for the company. The more resources Blizzard has, the more content they can develop and the better off we are as players.

You might say that those of us purchasing items from the Blizzard Store are subsidising content for people who choose not to!

[Alithia]

Blizzard should do it like Rift:

Put T3-T6 into the store, but with no stats on it, only usable for transmogging. Add Archimonde's staff and Cataclysm blade as well.

[Dragon2K]

So they can objectively offer good gear



Or they can subjectively offer "good" gear.


Yeah, that's where the difference is.

Considering for instance that I don't care that much about stats and more about the looks of a certain item, and that what kind of stats I would need is also a matter of playstyle, the value of that item is ALWAYS to some extent subjective. It's a virtual item in a virtual world; how the hell can it be objective?

Are you going to argue people didn't earn "coolness?" I refer you back to this: I think the basic green raptor is one of the best looking mounts in the game. Great colors, cool model, nice animations... and yet all I'd have to do is level a troll to level 20 to get it. Meanwhile, I can think that whatever is going to drop off heroic Garrosh looks like crap.

That's great for you, but another person might think heroic Garrosh drops look great and represent great value to them. This is ALSO subjective.

I can be of the opinion that gear that's on the store is automatically "not cool." And people can think it's cool despite that.

Yes, but you can't turn off seeing gear that's on the item store. The people in the "not cool" gear will still be running around in front of you, symbolizing a direct disconnect from the ingame universe to the 'paid content' part.

I can't be of the opinion that gear bought off the store gives you less strength, or intellect, or haste or agility or crit than it actually does.

You can definitely have differing opinions on HOW IMPORTANT that is, though. Or even which stats are more important than others.

So then you're admitting that the whole "They're just going to invest work on store stuff now" was a bullshit claim on your part?

That's not what I claimed in the first place. Are you claiming they are investing NO work in the store then?

- - - Updated - - -

What I claimed was that real-money store items represent REAL VALUE in the game world, whether they are 'just cosmetic' or have stats. How important that is to you is of course subjective, but that does not make another's point of view ANY LESS VALID.

[MoanaLisa]

Everyone on this server has a line.. lets say hypothetically tomorrow they introduced LFR level gear on the store.. then would you have a problem with it.. From what im seeing a lot of people's line is at stats on gear.

And it might never happen, but if it did, if it did, would you be okay with it? just because your line is at stats, doesn't make other's whose line is at moggible gear somehow lesser people than you, or wrong. That is what they want to fight against.

in the hypothetical world, if there was stat gear, you wouldn't be able to fight that either, because blizzard is a company and you can always do normal or heroic modes for better gear.

It would depend on what the stats are. I think my bright line on all of this is gear with superior stats that's available for cash that is not available in the game. I wouldn't care a bit if they put T14 LFR gear in tomorrow. I might mind a little bit more if it was current tier LFR but even that is somewhat questionable. I'm not sure they should put normal/heroic gear in under any circumstances not because it's morally wrong or anything but because it would be monumentally stupid. But stats in and of themselves are not really a problem, especially if limited to catchup gear. People can call slippery slope all they want on that but that's been the bottom line on my position about this from the start. My feeling is that that is very far off though but even if not it wouldn't bother me overly much. Really, it's none of my business how other people do what they do. I would be extremely unlikely to avail myself of any of it. I play to play.

[loki504]

Believe me when I say this... 15$ a month is pathetic amount of money for as much time, and fun I get out of WoW.

All you haters need to understand how many billionaires are in the world, and find out HOW LITTLE 15 bucks is in 2013.

Seriously..

- - - Updated - - -



You're telling me you unsubbed for something that isn't even in the GAME yet...?? Dramaqueen

oke so if 90% of the people in my country can buy a new car i can to? what kind of stupid comment is that. sure for many people 15 euro is not alot. but from some its still alot.

[Kaleredar]

Considering for instance that I don't care that much about stats and more about the looks of a certain item, and that what kind of stats I would need is also a matter of playstyle, the value of that item is ALWAYS to some extent subjective. It's a virtual item in a virtual world; how the hell can it be objective?

Blizzard is quite clear on what constitutes "content;" PvP and PvE. That's what receives balances and tune ups. Those can be objectively measured. They don't shift around mounts or re-polish gear sets to "balance" them with the looks of other mounts and other gear sets.

"Patch notes: We came to the consensus that the new mage tier wasn't performing visually as well as expected; we're buffing the mage gear's appearance by about 20%. We also noticed that Shaman tier's appearance looked a little too good; as such we'll be nerfing its appearance by 5% to bring it in line with most of the other classes.

We also found that the Meta achievement mount was not performing as expected; we're applying a hotfix that will change it from a Wyvern to a gryphon, as we decided a gryphon was more in-line with the spirit of the patch."

I mean, if cosmetics are such a huge deal, then obviously they should receive the same amount of constant attention as class balances in PvP and PvE, right?

That's great for you, but another person might think heroic Garrosh drops look great and represent great value to them. This is ALSO subjective.

So then they should get the green raptor at level 20, and have to kill heroic garrosh for the mount, but I should get the heroic garrosh mount at level 20, and have to kill heroic garrosh for the green raptor?

Because that's what you're trying to say needs partitioning off here; "coolness."

Yes, but you can't turn off seeing gear that's on the item store. The people in the "not cool" gear will still be running around in front of you, symbolizing a direct disconnect from the ingame universe to the 'paid content' part.

And that was true of the spectral tiger and stuff that's been around for years. I can stare at the aforementioned guy bouncing around on his sparkle pony in his fire helm and go "It's nice that that looks good to him" and then sally forth on my merry way on my own mount that looks good to me in my transmog gear that looks good to me. Which is why I ride said mount and wear said transmog gear.

If someone's whomping my ass in PvP with gear that far exceeds mine that they bought, I can't really say "well they didn't really just win this arena match; they just bought the gear after all." But my rating is going to dive accordingly, and there's is going to go up.

If I get benched because someone bought gear that exceeded mine for PvE, I can't say "well they're not really earning that meta achievement right now, they just bought the gear after all" while I sit in Shrine of Seven Stars watching that tiger run in circles.

You can definitely have differing opinions on HOW IMPORTANT that is, though.

And if someone places the importance of looks above all else, then I can only imagine they're already a very, very unhappy customer. Especially if they dislike "disconnects" between in-game and out-of-game goings on.

"freakin' Blizzard makes an awesome mage tier set, but makes the hunter one look like crap! They're FORCING me to can my hunter and level a mage all the way up to 90, and THEN gear them so that I can get the set"

"Wow Blizzard, nice job, you make a terrible looking PvE set, but make the PvP set look fantastic. Now I'm going to have to gear up through honor gear and random battlegrounds JUST to have a shot at the PvP set. And if I don't make gladiator this season, I wont be able to obtain the best color scheme AT ALL. Way to go..."

"SURE, Blizzard, release one of the best looking pets in the game as a Starcraft collector's edition perk! Now I'll have to go out and PAY THEM for Starcraft; I don't even like Starcraft! But boy, do I want that pet..."

"Nice job Blizzard, you make a weapon that would look FANTASTIC with my transmog set, and then make it for NPCs only. What the hell is my 15 dollars going towards? So you can make NPCs look pretty while you give us crap as usual for tier weapons?"


And obviously, these are perfectly valid complaints, right? Who would you be to say that these people, who's values include gear, pets, weapons, what have you, are unjustified in their annoying and trite complaints?

Or even which stats are more important than others.

More often than not, "which stat is most important" usually gets mathed out fairly quickly.

That's not what I claimed in the first place. Are you claiming they are investing NO work in the store then?

You seemed to state they'd be investing less and less effort on non-store items while investing more and more effort on store items, citing the "coolness" of the mounts appearances.

Which I quickly dispelled as bullshit, which you then promptly glided over.

What I claimed was that real-money store items represent REAL VALUE in the game world, whether they are 'just cosmetic' or have stats.

"coolness" cannot be quantified.

Stats can. Performance can. The relationship between stats and your performance can.

You're comparing the immaterial to something that can actually affect how you play the game, the degree to which you can play the game, and the degree to which you can meaningfully interact with others, whether you're helping them kill twin consorts or they're trying to kill you in Ruins of Lordaeron.

[Ichifails]

oke so if 90% of the people in my country can buy a new car i can to? what kind of stupid comment is that. sure for many people 15 euro is not alot. but from some its still alot.

If 90% of the people in your country can afford a 30$ car (obviously not a real number), you and the others that make that 10% don't really matter from a business standpoint.
90% paying for that helm would mean what? (Let's make it 90 to 10) 90*30=270; 270/10=27...
So you have the option to add a helm so many would buy with the risk of making 10% of your player base leave. That 10% would have to be subscribed for 27 months to basically make up for not adding the helm in the first place. There's a high chance you won't be subbed for 27 months (and it has to be every single one of those 10%) and the people that got the helm will also buy the NEW PRETTY SHOULDERS! making it a better investment to just drop 10% of your player base with each item.

Makes sense from a business point of view and that's what Blizzard is.

[Deadite]

Everyone on this server has a line.. lets say hypothetically tomorrow they introduced LFR level gear on the store.. then would you have a problem with it.. From what im seeing a lot of people's line is at stats on gear.

Blizzard know that they have no line they can cross with the majority of the player base will consider too far. Back when they released no content for a year and then 10 months the fan base actually defended them for it. When your players are that subservient it would be rude not to milk them for cash. I say good for Blizzard. They know their player base well. I look forward to how far they will take it.

[Ichifails]

Blizzard know that they have no line they can cross with the majority of the player base will consider too far. Back when they released no content for a year and then 10 months the fan base actually defended them for it. When your players are that subservient it would be rude not to milk them for cash. I say good for Blizzard. They know their player base well. I look forward to how far they will take it.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. If something is bothering you and you are completely free to leave at any point but you choose to stay... it's not really bothering you now is it? It would be a bad business move not to get as much profit as you can out of your business wouldn't it?
Same thing as with Apple iPhones, they get away with selling basically grossly overpriced paper weights but people buy them and enjoy them. Why can't people enjoy what they want even if they are milked like there's no tomorrow? Doesn't affect YOU now does it?

[Thelxi]

The more resources Blizzard has, the more content they can develop and the better off we are as players.

I agree with most of what you said, but this is very wrong. Blizzard makes more money than it could ever spend creating content for WoW.

You need to realize that WoW generates unfathomable profit, a very small part of which goes to the WoW budget. You need to realize that almost all of the money that WoW generates funds an enormous corporation that has little to do with the game itself.

[Thimagryn]

Tell me the objective difference between these two situations:
A) Blizzard offers high iLevel gear on the real money store, BUT you can also get it through playing the game (but that will take considerably longer of course).
B) Blizzard offers great looking gear on the real money store, but you can also get it or similar-looking gear through playing the game (which, again, will take considerably longer).

Unless it's meant as catchup gear and not current raid tier ilvl gear, pay2win's negative effects on gameplay can easily be shown by playing any game on the market that is pay2win. You will easily see the negative impact it has on the audience. There are many factors involved, including breaking game mechanics that are intended to be tuned for players of a certain ilvl.

In point B, there is no negative impact on the game because stats are not being affected. It is purely a visual aesthetic, and aside from the minor disadvantage someone with a giant glowy helmet would have in PVP (easier to identify) there is no major conflict with how the game plays mechanically.

tldr: you're using a bad example.