Page 35 of 51 FirstFirst ...
25
33
34
35
36
37
45
... LastLast
  1. #681
    Quote Originally Posted by dacoolist View Post
    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
    This. You don't even have to think anything about the super-rich. If the sub or cost of the items is what worries you, straighten out your priorities.

  2. #682
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamez View Post
    What YOU need to realize is the difference between
    a mandatory fee to be able to play a game.
    an optional fee to make your character look better(taste/opinions apply)
    Why is it better to pay for something than an optional questline or dungeon reward INGAME? Tell me your logic as to why a cashshop isn't making the game worse.
    You won't find an expanded version of my avatar here.

  3. #683
    Ribbon Guru Simca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    9,521
    Disappointed slightly, I thought the OP was going to make an economic argument based around inflation.
    Global Moderator | Forum Guidelines

  4. #684
    I don't get it. Blizzard is testing something to make more money that has barely any benefit for the consumers. People here are defending it with the only arguments "it doesn't affect your or my gameplay" or "I have plenty of money".

    Can someone explain to me how this can makes sense to someone? Why do you people want this ingame store so badly? Why do you want to get rid of your money so badly?

    It's seriously mind boggling... Blizzard seriously wants to claim that players asked for this and that the big benefit is that it's convenient because you don't have to alt-tab to your webbrowser anymore?

  5. #685
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilian View Post
    I don't get it. Blizzard is testing something to make more money that has barely any benefit for the consumers. People here are defending it with the only arguments "it doesn't affect your or my gameplay" or "I have plenty of money".

    Can someone explain to me how this can makes sense to someone? Why do you people want this ingame store so badly? Why do you want to get rid of your money so badly?

    It's seriously mind boggling... Blizzard seriously wants to claim that players asked for this and that the big benefit is that it's convenient because you don't have to alt-tab to your webbrowser anymore?
    I honestly have no idea, why do people want to pay MORE money? What kind of backwards world is this?

  6. #686
    The Patient Grevie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sabanilla, Costa Rica
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempeste View Post
    I honestly have no idea, why do people want to pay MORE money? What kind of backwards world is this?
    I was thinking exactly the same, total ilogical, people wants to pay more that's a new trend! come on we wants pay more! I can't believe we
    reach this point when people are getting brainwashed per se? what's next? I don't know, not hard feelings about WoW i got my fun, but the people
    ... they always found a way to surprise the logical with ilogical arguments.

  7. #687
    Quote Originally Posted by Grevie View Post
    I was thinking exactly the same, total ilogical, people wants to pay more that's a new trend! come on we wants pay more! I can't believe we
    reach this point when people are getting brainwashed per se? what's next? I don't know, not hard feelings about WoW i got my fun, but the people
    ... they always found a way to surprise the logical with ilogical arguments.
    Yeah, nothing against WoW, it is just weird to see people who defend paying more money. Like, it's just something you don't really see... I think that is the weirdest part of this entire store item event to me. It kind of boggles the mind.

  8. #688
    Brewmaster
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewslii View Post
    I think the biggest complaint about these newest additions is that these are items you can only have if you pay for it and that isn't fair.
    Now while i personally don't care, if i want it i will pay for it, i do see the point of view of the people that may love one of those helmets but be unable to pay for it.
    Blizzard should just up everyones sub by 50c and give away these items.
    So, would you be sympathetic to me - a mount collector - if I said that Blizzard should let me have a 100% drop chance and Master Looter privileges for mounts that drop in LFR (something I don't participate in)? Or, should I be given my own personal method of obtaining the ridiculous and arbitrary PvP ranking required to get PvP mounts?

    If you do, you're stupid. Those are unreasonable expectations. There are those of us who have come to terms with the fact that the balance between cost (in time) and the benefit (in desired content) is not weighed in our favour, so we won't get the things we want. Now, Blizzard's store has occasional sales on certain mounts and pets which makes it easier to obtain some of these items, which is a damn sight better than what those of us pining away for, say, the old Zul'Gurub Tiger will ever get. Microtransactions are a reality, and an increasingly popular method of delivering content for almost all video games these days.

    Though, honestly, I could understand if people were complaining about new hats being added as DLC for Team Fortress 2. Couldn't give a fuck about that game, I just want my god-damn Half-Life 3.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Grevie View Post
    I was thinking exactly the same, total ilogical, people wants to pay more that's a new trend! come on we wants pay more! I can't believe we
    reach this point when people are getting brainwashed per se? what's next? I don't know, not hard feelings about WoW i got my fun, but the people
    ... they always found a way to surprise the logical with ilogical arguments.
    Please, self-deetermined arbiter of logic, explain what is illogical about anyone asserting that a business broadening its income streams by offering a larger variety of content in exchange for real currency - thereby accomplishing the stated objective of every business ever - is illogical. Go ahead, I would love to see you try this one.
    #GamerGate has as much to do with misogyny and hatred as atheism has to do with the Big Bang Theory - belief in the BBT is completely separate to the assertion that there is no conclusive proof that any god exists. #GamerGate is about ethics in video game journalism. Misogyny is an optional extra of a vocal minority.

  9. #689
    High Overlord Gren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    R'lyeh
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by neanoa View Post
    You're ignorant if you think it'll stop at purely cosmetic stuff. You'll be seeing different sort of buffs to ingame currencies soon enough. Be that honor, conquest, valor, justice, charms - you name it.

    I unsubbed today, been playing since early 2006 - and this is where I get off. It's the principle and the lack of integrity on Blizzard's side - not the current content.
    Nah, they will stick to strictly cosmetic/vanity items sold through that store.
    Players are not going to see those type of in game currencies in the store, there are already far to many easy ways to acquire them in game.
    Cthulhu 2016, why vote for a lesser evil

  10. #690
    Quote Originally Posted by Inahu View Post
    So, would you be sympathetic to me - a mount collector - if I said that Blizzard should let me have a 100% drop chance and Master Looter privileges for mounts that drop in LFR (something I don't participate in)? Or, should I be given my own personal method of obtaining the ridiculous and arbitrary PvP ranking required to get PvP mounts?

    If you do, you're stupid. Those are unreasonable expectations. There are those of us who have come to terms with the fact that the balance between cost (in time) and the benefit (in desired content) is not weighed in our favour, so we won't get the things we want. Now, Blizzard's store has occasional sales on certain mounts and pets which makes it easier to obtain some of these items, which is a damn sight better than what those of us pining away for, say, the old Zul'Gurub Tiger will ever get. Microtransactions are a reality, and an increasingly popular method of delivering content for almost all video games these days.

    Though, honestly, I could understand if people were complaining about new hats being added as DLC for Team Fortress 2. Couldn't give a fuck about that game, I just want my god-damn Half-Life 3.
    No - Im not any more sympathetic to you as a mount collector to have exactly the same chance as everyone else to get a mount you need. But I am sympathetic to every mount collector that does not want to spend real life money on the mounts that are ONLY available through web store.

    If you can not see the difference... then I can't help you.

    Up until now EVERY subscription based game has been built around giving EVERY SUBSCRIBER the same chance. Everyone plays on equal grounds when it comes to drops for example. The only thing that is stopping you is your detication and skills. But you have SAME chance as all the others that are paying the exact same amount of money.

    Here is the basic of it directly from BLizzard.

    We chose to go with the subscription-based model instead of that approach. We've taken the approach that we want players to feel like it's a level playing field once they're in WoW. Outside resources don't play into it -- no gold buying, etc. We take a hard line stance against it. What you get out of microtransactions is kind of the same thing and I think our player base would feel betrayed by it. I think that's something else you have to decide on up-front instead of implementing later.

    --Rob Pardo, Blizzard's Senior Vice President of Game Design (2/20/2008)
    http://wow.joystiq.com/2008/02/20/gd...pproach-to-mm/

    If Blizzard is adding new ways to gain MORE for extra money - Including 100% EXP boost and ways to gain lesser charms for real money... ppl that are paying more are getting more. And that means the basic principle of a subscription based game is no longer valid... and it should be removed.

    If you are ready as a mount collector to spend 250-500$ in the next 3 years on ingame store mounts.... Then thats fine. Just dont expect those ppl that are paying subscription and have NO MEANS to get those items to not feel betrayed in a game that was built around having equal chance to gain ANY items in a subscription driven environment.
    Last edited by Duster505; 2013-07-16 at 02:49 PM.

  11. #691
    Quote Originally Posted by Inahu View Post

    Please, self-deetermined arbiter of logic, explain what is illogical about anyone asserting that a business broadening its income streams by offering a larger variety of content in exchange for real currency - thereby accomplishing the stated objective of every business ever - is illogical. Go ahead, I would love to see you try this one.
    Do you own stock in actibliz? Because otherwise you're rooting for the wrong team, bud. The Blizzard branch in particular is already making profits of epic proportions, they're not some struggling indie company just trying to eek by and keep their doors open. As a consumer, you should be thinking about how these decisions impact the consumer, and understand that the money is already there to funnel into development if the company chose to do so . . . the profits from this will in no way benefit the consumer. No value is being added to the game.

  12. #692
    Quote Originally Posted by Gren View Post
    Nah, they will stick to strictly cosmetic/vanity items sold through that store.
    Players are not going to see those type of in game currencies in the store, there are already far to many easy ways to acquire them in game.
    Even if its cosmetic - its still going to be pay to win. Like someone here explained. If you are mount collector you can not get certain mounts without paying extra. So any person that pays extra will always have advantage on gaining mounts over a person that isn't paying more. Thats pay to win. Pure and simple.

  13. #693
    Quote Originally Posted by Inahu View Post
    Please, self-deetermined arbiter of logic, explain what is illogical about anyone asserting that a business broadening its income streams by offering a larger variety of content in exchange for real currency - thereby accomplishing the stated objective of every business ever - is illogical. Go ahead, I would love to see you try this one.
    Because we already pay real currency for a large variety of content.

    A Store mount or transmog gear might please what... 200K+ people? But if you add these things ingame to reward more gameplay i.e time spent in game and more reason to stay subscribed then that will benefit all 8 million and future WoW players.

    You just might see players shut up about dailies if you added quality items added to them as rewards.

    This is another accessibility issue. It wasn't OK for Blizzard to design Raids for few people, why is it OK for them to design quality items for few people wililng or able to shell out that extra cash?

    The argument goes like this: they're using our subscription fees to make content exclusive for other people.

  14. #694
    Quote Originally Posted by Whiskra View Post
    Why is it better to pay for something than an optional questline or dungeon reward INGAME? Tell me your logic as to why a cashshop isn't making the game worse.
    They've already set the precedent that SOME of the things that look nice are going to be in the shop, be it mounts, pets, or what have you. At this point, it would be illogical for them not to continue down that path since they know it works and people will pay for it. I'm not saying I approve of this, but since it's already started, there's no going back. Just like some people think they'll get rid of flying in-game if they argue and plead enough.

    Avatar by Ely
    My deviantART

  15. #695
    Quote Originally Posted by Inahu View Post
    Please, self-deetermined arbiter of logic, explain what is illogical about anyone asserting that a business broadening its income streams by offering a larger variety of content in exchange for real currency - thereby accomplishing the stated objective of every business ever - is illogical. Go ahead, I would love to see you try this one.
    Blizzard is totally free to change their business model. What they can not do is to think they can have two different business models for the same game and expect both to be a fair way for players to enjoy the game.

    If they think they can bring in the very worst of F2P (ingame stores where ppl pay more to get more) and also have the very worst of sub based game (pay for just login into the game) they are welcome to try to bring that forward in a logical way. But thats just not possible. Cause that "logic" is filled with holes and is a direct betrayal (like Blizzard has pointed out) to the basics that WOW is built on.

  16. #696
    Brewmaster
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post
    No - Im not any more sympathetic to you as a mount collector to have exactly the same chance as everyone else to get a mount you need. But I am sympathetic to every mount collector that does not want to spend real life money on the mounts that are ONLY available through web store.

    If you can not see the difference... then I can't help you.

    Up until now EVERY subscription based game has been built around giving EVERY SUBSCRIBER the same chance. Everyone plays on equal grounds when it comes to drops for example. The only thing that is stopping you is your detication and skills. But you have SAME chance as all the others that are paying the exact same amount of money.

    Here is the basic of it directly from BLizzard.


    http://wow.joystiq.com/2008/02/20/gd...pproach-to-mm/

    If Blizzard is adding new ways to gain MORE for extra money - Including 100% EXP boost and ways to gain lesser charms for real money... ppl that are paying more are getting more. And that means the basic principle of a subscription based game is no longer valid... and it should be removed.

    If you are ready as a mount collector to spend 250-500$ in the next 3 years on ingame store mounts.... Then thats fine. Just dont expect those ppl that are paying subscription and have NO MEANS to get those items to not feel betrayed in a game that was built around having equal chance to gain ANY items in a subscription driven environment.
    Bolded part is a non sequitur. The premise that simply because one has the opportunity to pay for additional cosmetic benefits, the subscription model is made redundant is fallacious and you have failed to support this assertion in any way. In fact, your presentation suggests that all the logical work has been done simply by making the assertion.

    I don't care if people feel "betrayed" because they can't get certain mounts. They're idiots. They can get them, they're just not willing or able to pay the money for them, either because they're lazy, unsuccessful or they simply don't want it that much. What irritates me is people screaming that this is some kind of cosmic injustice. The reason I can't get certain mounts that, by your definition, I'm already paying for, is a combination of laziness, lack of time and not really wanting them that much.

    Quote Originally Posted by oplawlz View Post
    Do you own stock in actibliz? Because otherwise you're rooting for the wrong team, bud. The Blizzard branch in particular is already making profits of epic proportions, they're not some struggling indie company just trying to eek by and keep their doors open. As a consumer, you should be thinking about how these decisions impact the consumer, and understand that the money is already there to funnel into development if the company chose to do so . . . the profits from this will in no way benefit the consumer. No value is being added to the game.
    I don't need to be a stakeholder to recognise that it's good business. The additional revenue generated by the Blizzard Store more than counterbalances the number of people who claim they will quit over such a frivolous issue, which is itself mitigated by the fact that only a fraction of those claims are genuine, and more will undoubtedly come back at some point later.

    As a consumer, my position is no different. Okay, so Blizzard is making "profits of epic proportions". I'm just pulling numbers out of my arse here to make a point, but say that without the Blizzard Store, they make $100m, and with it they make $150m. Assume that the vocal minority of MMO-Champion is right, that they're all greedy fatcats lining their pockets - if they're making an additional $50m in profits, there exists the chance for a greater portion of their revenue to be cycled back into development. Now, you or anyone else can say (on no basis in fact) that they won't do that because they're "greedy fatcats". You might be right, too, for all we know. The simple fact remains that greater profits offer greater possibilities to direct greater real figures into development of new content, for all of Blizzard's projects.

    As an aside, I don't buy into the "Us Against Them" rhetoric in regards to business, I think it's toxic and the product of diseased minds jealous of the success of others, too incompetent and unmotivated to achieve success of their own.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrSteveBrule View Post
    Because we already pay real currency for a large variety of content.

    A Store mount or transmog gear might please what... 200K+ people? But if you add these things ingame to reward more gameplay i.e time spent in game and more reason to stay subscribed then that will benefit all 8 million and future WoW players.

    You just might see players shut up about dailies if you added quality items added to them as rewards.

    This is another accessibility issue. It wasn't OK for Blizzard to design Raids for few people, why is it OK for them to design quality items for few people wililng or able to shell out that extra cash?

    The argument goes like this: they're using our subscription fees to make content exclusive for other people.
    Supposition, supposition, supposition. You may speak to me when you can provide real data on the (according to you) infinitesimally small proportion of players who purchase items from the Blizzard Store. Until then, your words are worthless.

    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post
    Blizzard is totally free to change their business model. What they can not do is to think they can have two different business models for the same game and expect both to be a fair way for players to enjoy the game.

    If they think they can bring in the very worst of F2P (ingame stores where ppl pay more to get more) and also have the very worst of sub based game (pay for just login into the game) they are welcome to try to bring that forward in a logical way. But thats just not possible. Cause that "logic" is filled with holes and is a direct betrayal (like Blizzard has pointed out) to the basics that WOW is built on.
    I don't know why the likes of you continue to invoke logic when you seem to have absolutely no understanding of it, whatsoever. Logic has nothing to do with this, bar perhaps the wingnut response it has generated, such as the ludicrous "slippery slope" posts. You should have stopped after your first sentence, that was the last time you wrote anything correct.
    #GamerGate has as much to do with misogyny and hatred as atheism has to do with the Big Bang Theory - belief in the BBT is completely separate to the assertion that there is no conclusive proof that any god exists. #GamerGate is about ethics in video game journalism. Misogyny is an optional extra of a vocal minority.

  17. #697
    The bright and intelligent posts are starting off early today.

    Quote Originally Posted by paralleluniverse View Post
    So how do world first guilds raid in the first few weeks of new tiers? Raid gear is NOT mandatory. Many people raid without the best raid gear, like trials to raid guilds. Raid gear is helpful. And I think you should update your words so that they articulate what you really mean.
    With raid gear? They come into the new tiers with BiS raid gear from last tier. At the start of an expansion, there is no raid gear to utilize, but whatever, your post is still just flat out silly.

  18. #698
    Sure is a lot of blizzard employees, trying make their cash shop look like a good thing, in this thread.
    Armory
    You are not your role. You are not how much gold you have on your account.
    You are not the mount you ride. You are not the contents of your bank.
    You are not your epic purples. You are not a special and unique snowflake.
    You are the all-grinding, all-farming crap of Azeroth.

  19. #699
    Quote Originally Posted by ACES View Post
    Every time Blizzard announces something new for the pet store we see the same threads come up about how a game with a monthly sub fee shouldn't have a microtransaction store. I get really frustrated when I see these posts because some people just don't get it.

    You pay a monthly fee to be able to log in to your account and play; nothing more, nothing less.

    Blizzard is a business and they have to do with that money whatever they feel will be most profitable. This can be anything from developing PvE and PvP content to developing items for the Blizzard store. The purpose of the former is to keep people subscribed to WoW and maybe even bring old people back/new people in. The latter is designed to bring in additional revenue to be able to develop more content.
    Your points are correct. Up to a point. Blizzard releases content patches in between major Expansion Packs. These are available without any additional charge. As in also new gear set and new mounts from new raids. Most people assumes that these content patches are paid for from the subscription fees.

    So when Blizzards releases new pets, mounts or whatever which requires a charge, one would then asks, who paid for these development cost initially? If it was from the subscription fees, then it is a bit cheap to charge for it a second time. If, on the other hand, it was not from the subscription fees, then of course there should be a charge.

    We, the subscribers, does not know. And will never know.

  20. #700
    Brewmaster
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by kinneer View Post
    Your points are correct. Up to a point. Blizzard releases content patches in between major Expansion Packs. These are available without any additional charge. As in also new gear set and new mounts from new raids. Most people assumes that these content patches are paid for from the subscription fees.

    So when Blizzards releases new pets, mounts or whatever which requires a charge, one would then asks, who paid for these development cost initially? If it was from the subscription fees, then it is a bit cheap to charge for it a second time. If, on the other hand, it was not from the subscription fees, then of course there should be a charge.

    We, the subscribers, does not know. And will never know.
    You're describing funding as a pretty inflexible arrangement. The initial capital and resources may have come from revenue generated by subscriptions (it could have also equally come from revenue generated directly from the Blizzard Store), but the costs could be recouped from sale of the items. Any revenue generated after the development costs have been recovered can easily be cycled back into development for content that your subscription gives you access to - but you never hear people who purchase from the Blizzard Store complaining about subsidising content for those who don't make similar purchases, do you?
    #GamerGate has as much to do with misogyny and hatred as atheism has to do with the Big Bang Theory - belief in the BBT is completely separate to the assertion that there is no conclusive proof that any god exists. #GamerGate is about ethics in video game journalism. Misogyny is an optional extra of a vocal minority.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •