Page 36 of 51 FirstFirst ...
26
34
35
36
37
38
46
... LastLast
  1. #701
    Quote Originally Posted by Inahu View Post
    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.


    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.


    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.


    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.
    The only person that has zero understanding on the basics of what WOW is built on is you Mr. And you best show that when you call ppl that are not willing to pay extra as lazy... And idiots. No they are not. That sort of logic just shows how far YOU are from reality if you think Blizzard can come out with statement like that.

    Blizzard can not have it both ways. Thats just a fact. They can not both keep subscription and ingame cash shop. You might accept it.... but like I said... You dont get the logic of basic consumer rights. Blizzard WOULD be betraying players that have been paying for this game for years if they add the shop and still expect the same ppl to pay sub. Thats just a fact that not even you with your poor logic can not debate. Cause Blizzard said it THEMSELFS few years back. And thats just a fact they and you have to accept.

    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)


    It was not ME that said ppl have the right to feel betrayed. It was the Senior Vice President of game design at BLizzard. So putting "betrayed" in "" just shows your lack of real logics instead of accepting the bloody obvious that Blizzard can not come back few years later after adding few mounts and pets and rip the core out of the game - and still think 8 million players are willing to pay subs like nothing happened. It doesn't work like that Mister.
    Last edited by Duster505; 2013-07-16 at 04:50 PM.

  2. #702
    These cosmetic items aren't hurting anyone. It's more income for Blizzard, which in turn allows them to hire more developers and create more content. Win/Win.

    If you're so petty that you would quit because Blizzard found a (VERY ACCEPTABLE) way to earn extra revenue, then I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. They're a business. At least this way no one is forced to pay anything they don't want to spend. If you don't like the cosmetic items, don't buy them.

  3. #703
    The Patient Grevie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sabanilla, Costa Rica
    Posts
    321
    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.

    - - - Updated - - -



    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.
    I can try, but i read your post.. it will be a waste, you think you re right about your statements, and a bit angry about people thinking diffrent than you, you even are challenging me about it, it will be a waste of time, with you trying to close every argument, we can argue hours, that's seems a waste of time , but yeah #paymore is the new trend, it seems ilogical for the consumers, get more things for
    what you already pay make the money most valuable. IHMO.
    Last edited by Grevie; 2013-07-16 at 04:55 PM.

  4. #704
    Quote Originally Posted by Marxman View Post
    These cosmetic items aren't hurting anyone. It's more income for Blizzard, which in turn allows them to hire more developers and create more content. Win/Win.

    If you're so petty that you would quit because Blizzard found a (VERY ACCEPTABLE) way to earn extra revenue, then I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. They're a business. At least this way no one is forced to pay anything they don't want to spend. If you don't like the cosmetic items, don't buy them.
    There is no evidence that any extra profit generated from the item shop will be spent creating more content. We have had an item store since Wrath yet Cata had a lot less content and MOP whilst better than Cata still has less zones that are smaller, less dungeons and although, some will disagree, I do not think the raids are as good as Ulduar or ICC.
    Last edited by Pann; 2013-07-16 at 04:56 PM.

  5. #705
    Quote Originally Posted by SodiumChloride View Post
    Who said I was happy with TCG getting all the cool stuff?.
    I figured since you'd stuck around for 5-6 years with TCG stuff and Rob Pardo making a blatantly hypocritical statement that you were cool with it.

  6. #706
    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.

    The most important thing to realize is that Blizzard will NEVER make Tier Sets or any current content gear available for cash; they are not stupid enough to do that and you can mark my words that it'll never happen.

    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.
    Before preaching, perhaps you should research and post in one of the 10000 threads on the subject, especially since you complain about it yet entice the same responses in your very own created discussion.

    Also, despite what your unobjectionable mentality suggests, and by your theory, we pay a subscription for content but they can create content we have to pay extra for? Doesn't make much sense does it? That's because you contradict yourself.

    The notion is clear. The money used to create content is being used to create content we must pay AGAIN for. They are double charging you. It's pocket gauging and the silly defense "if you don't want it, don't buy it" is extremely lackluster. They have to justify charging extra with better quality, therefore anything above average WILL BE saved for the store.

    It's appalling.
    Static - US Arthas | Currently 13/13 HM | Art by ElyPop

  7. #707
    Quote Originally Posted by Marxman View Post
    These cosmetic items aren't hurting anyone. It's more income for Blizzard, which in turn allows them to hire more developers and create more content. Win/Win.

    If you're so petty that you would quit because Blizzard found a (VERY ACCEPTABLE) way to earn extra revenue, then I have no sympathy for you whatsoever. They're a business. At least this way no one is forced to pay anything they don't want to spend. If you don't like the cosmetic items, don't buy them.
    Those cosmetic items also give Blizzard the chance to not release content at all. Or throw in more 4.1 patches with nothing but 2 old redone dungeons. And then hand the profit difference over to the shareholders.

    What we can be 100% sure of is that IF they will add this shop - they will loose subs. And they will ALSO loose alot of potential new players that have a choice between:

    a) Game that charges for the orginal box + expansions + sub + has ingame shop for cosmetic items and boosts (has already been announced in ASIA)
    b) Game that charges nothing but has ingame shop for cosmetic items and boosts.

    You know the answer to that. WOW would be stone dead in 2 years.

    So do NOT act like Blizzard can have it both ways unless they are JUST milking the current player base sucking them dry before they realise it.

  8. #708
    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post

    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)[/B]

    It was not ME that said ppl have the right to feel betrayed. It was the Senior Vice President of game design at BLizzard. So putting "betrayed" in "" just shows your lack of real logics instead of accepting the bloody obvious that Blizzard can not come back few years later after adding few mounts and pets and rip the core out of the game - and still think 8 million players are willing to pay subs like nothing happened. It doesn't work like that Mister.
    Sorry, but how does a couple of mounts, helms and pets and a handful of vanity items have ANY effect on the game itself exactly? Outside resources have no impact on the game itself. I can't buy gold, gear and currently I have no way of buying an easy way to level(I have saved my rage and indignation for that, as I believe a fair few people who actually look at things logically are waiting for).

    The only thing I don't want to see go live is the XP boost, if that gets announced I give about a week before Blizzard backs down.

  9. #709
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    I figured since you'd stuck around for 5-6 years with TCG stuff and Rob Pardo making a blatantly hypocritical statement that you were cool with it.
    There is nothing wrong with Pardo's statement. The fact is that he said AFTER you log into WOW.. you will NEVER have any gains from paying extra. That way he can safely say that Web store items and TCG are ok... but in game shop is not. Cause THAT would be in the game you are playing... not the real world where you buy the TCG and items in WEB store.

  10. #710
    The Patient Grevie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sabanilla, Costa Rica
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by Ansible View Post
    Sure is a lot of blizzard employees, trying make their cash shop look like a good thing, in this thread.
    Well, that will make it, i can see how the things works lately over here.

  11. #711
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    There is no evidence that any extra profit generated from the item shop will be spent creating more content. We have had an item store since Wrath yet Cata had a lot less content and MOP whilst better than Cata has less zones that are smaller, less dungeons and although, some will disagree, I do not think the raids are as good as Ulduar or ICC.
    This.

    Also, Blizzards revenue isn't a secret. They don't need the money to do this and they are testing the waters to see how much they can squeeze in. At first it was charity driven. But now there is development time and content being recreated and re-charged. At the very least make the items also attainable by in-game means. We also pay for automated services which equally a joke. By paying a subscription there should be extra incentive. Maybe 2 free transfers a year and $25 in blizzard store money for the year as a reward.

    There will come a time where the best item in someone's eyes will be the store. Why does THAT person have to feel that finally when something he really likes is created from the revenue of his subscription, it will cost him extra money?

    Even iphone app games allow purchasable items attainable in-game.
    Static - US Arthas | Currently 13/13 HM | Art by ElyPop

  12. #712
    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post
    There is nothing wrong with Pardo's statement. The fact is that he said AFTER you log into WOW.. you will NEVER have any gains from paying extra. That way he can safely say that Web store items and TCG are ok... but in game shop is not. Cause THAT would be in the game you are playing... not the real world where you buy the TCG and items in WEB store.
    That's quite some reinterpretation of his words.

  13. #713
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrena View Post
    Sorry, but how does a couple of mounts, helms and pets and a handful of vanity items have ANY effect on the game itself exactly? Outside resources have no impact on the game itself. I can't buy gold, gear and currently I have no way of buying an easy way to level(I have saved my rage and indignation for that, as I believe a fair few people who actually look at things logically are waiting for).

    The only thing I don't want to see go live is the XP boost, if that gets announced I give about a week before Blizzard backs down.
    XP boost has been announced in Asia already. Even tho both BLizzard and fanboys are trying to claim the game is not sub there.... it still is sub based cause you can not log in without paying sub for it. So some ppl thinking that 100% xp boost is not coming to US/EU is not thinking logical.

    Secondly... as a person who knows quite a few players in Asia... there is the EXACT same talk there about how both XP boost and cosmetic items in an INGAME shop should lead to WOW going F2P like in any other game there. Having both is just not logical at all from a consumer AND long term future success of the game.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    That's quite some reinterpretation of his words.
    Nope - Just go read it again. "We've taken the approach that we want players to feel like it's a level playing field once they're in WoW".

  14. #714
    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.
    Oh i get it, but no...I don't pay. I won't play wow again until its f2p. If thats never, good. More time for all the other games I want to play.

  15. #715
    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post
    Nope - Just go read it again. "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 come into it. Pretty important few words, it doesn't matter whether those outside resources are spent inside or outside the game, what matters is that inside the game, they're not a factor. The problem with his statement though, was that even as they were commited to print, outside resources were a factor via the TCG.

  16. #716
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    Outside resources don't come into it. Pretty important few words, it doesn't matter whether those outside resources are spent inside or outside the game, what matters is that inside the game, they're not a factor. The problem with his statement though, was that even as they were commited to print, outside resources were a factor via the TCG.
    Yes - outside resources dont come into it AFTER you log into the game. That includes any currencies that are connected to real money like buying gold or adding new one that you buy for real money to spend in ingame cash shop.

    TCG items and web store pets are not outside resources. They are part of the game. Just bought outside the game for currencies that are NOT accepted when you are inside the game. REAL MONEY or currency paid for with real money inside the game would be outside resource.

    So any ingame shop built around outside resources will break the basic of what WOW was built on. Thats why I do NOT want to see ingame cash shop but am 100% fine with Webstore one where very limited range of items can and will be added without ppl realising they are just milking it.
    Last edited by Duster505; 2013-07-16 at 05:18 PM.

  17. #717
    Quote Originally Posted by Crookids View Post
    There will come a time where the best item in someone's eyes will be the store. Why does THAT person have to feel that finally when something he really likes is created from the revenue of his subscription, it will cost him extra money?
    Like the bat mount that a lot of people, including myself, have been asking for since the introduction of flying mounts in BC? Yeah, I know that feel T_T

  18. #718
    Quote Originally Posted by Duster505 View Post
    Yes - outside resources dont come into it AFTER you log into the game. That includes any currencies that are connected to real money like buying gold or adding new one that you buy for real money to spend in ingame cash shop.

    TCG items and web store pets are not outside resources. They are part of the game. Just bought outside the game for currencies that are NOT accepted when you are inside the game. REAL MONEY or currency paid for with real money inside the game would be outside resource.

    So any ingame shop built around outside resources will break the basic of what WOW was built on. Thats why I do NOT want to see ingame cash shop but am 100% fine with Webstore one where very limited range of items can and will be added without ppl realising they are just milking it.
    So once you're in WoW, and you see someone with something bought outside of WoW and you want that thing, you think outside resources still don't come into it? I think they do, because I see Spectral Tigers and Feldrakes and wish I had the outside resources for their awesome. I'm not however prepared to gamble for them, or pay an extortionate fee to a third party.

    I think you're stretching his words' credibility further than he'd go to defend himself. Easier to just accept he was talking shit for PR, and that their position has changed and become untenable anyway thanks to the continued expansion of TCG stuff. I would much rather have things available from an in-game store than through the affore mentioned gambling.

  19. #719
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    So once you're in WoW, and you see someone with something bought outside of WoW and you want that thing, you think outside resources still don't come into it? I think they do, because I see Spectral Tigers and Feldrakes and wish I had the outside resources for their awesome. I'm not however prepared to gamble for them, or pay an extortionate fee to a third party.

    I think you're stretching his words' credibility further than he'd go to defend himself. Easier to just accept he was talking shit for PR, and that their position has changed and become untenable anyway thanks to the continued expansion of TCG stuff. I would much rather have things available from an in-game store than through the affore mentioned gambling.
    Im not trying to defend him at all I just see the logic that you should not be able to buy anything inside the game for outside resources. They have already broken this principle by adding web store item that you could sell ingame. That way you could buy 10 of those items and sell them in AH. That way real money was directly affecting the ingame market.

    I doubt they will allow resellable items again like that cause it really changed how ppl aproached the game. And that is the real danger if we will see any resource that is directly connected to things like real money and can be bought and sold inside the game like would happen in ingame store. The core of the game would change forever.

  20. #720
    The Patient Atlantean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    South Wales
    Posts
    344
    This is what I've been saying from the very beginning, although, it would of been nicer to see the helmets in game rewards for doing something challenging or difficult.

Posting Permissions

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