Is Blizzard exploitative?

[vincink]

We live in an age where everything is now framed as "exploitation". No doubt, Marx would be proud. But I'll digress from that minefield.

I do not see Blizzard as exploitative. They have taken nothing from me as a customer that I did not agree to give up willing. I did not prefer purchasable mounts in the store; I did not prefer tokens sold in a store to make gold in-game. But my preferences versus Blizzard's decision making are not intertwined, nor is a mismatch between my preferences and Blizzard's preferences an instance of exploitation. So long as I find Blizzard's products agreeable and Blizzard finds my money agreeable, that will result in a transaction of money, and I will continue to willingly make that transaction. Should I ever change my mind, I can break the agreement by canceling my subscription and move on with my money with no risk inherited from the break.

Ancillary things like knowing subscription numbers-- I am not paying for those things. I did not ask to know those things as a part of the money transaction. And Blizzard never offered such things as a part of the exchange. If it ever becomes something I desire and am unwilling to negotiate on it, and Blizzard is unwilling to meet my terms, I will simply bid Blizzard farewell and move on with my money somewhere else.

[Powerogue]

Sub numbers gradually dropping over time is a given but this community's constant toxic obsession with "the game is DYING, doom doom doom!" I don't blame them for stopping posting them. They're clearly still listening to community feedback regardless, and between recent SL reveals of large scale unpruning, reducing the GCD changes, giving literally every player customization demand ever conceived to us, and then making a paid service (character sex changes) free, I really don't see a reason to gripe right now that they're being "exploitative."

When I buy Shadowlands, it'll be because I want to play it due to being very happy with what I've seen of it so far such as fixing everything I complained about from BFA outlaw rogues, adding everything I asked for to perfect WW monks, and adding all the character customizations I wanted (except slanted nightborne eyes, damn it!)

[Belloc]

So basically - i dont get affected so it is not a problem?

Basically. People can spend their disposable income on whatever they want. Some people spend it on super expensive cars, some spend it on art supplies, some spend it on drugs, and some spend it on lootboxes. I'm not going to presume to tell people how to spend their money. If they want to throw it away, that's their decision. Their parents should've done what good parents do and taught them the value of money.

[SirBeef]

Their parents should've done what good parents do and taught them the value of money.

No need to judge. If someone places value on digital items they want to buy with their money, they can. It has nothing to do with the value you place on money.

- - - Updated - - -

Revealing sub numbers was for marketing and they stopped when drops made them look bad. What's unethical?

Not true. Subs dropped and were reported for many years starting at the end of WotLK, people claimed it was bad for years and it didn't stop them. MAUs were a more relevant measure than subs so they switched.

[Asrialol]

This is one of those usual threads where OP says something pretty weird, everyone disagrees, and OP is never heard from again within the thread.

Sub numbers aren't relevant anymore. The only thing revealing them would bring out, is the people on this site and others who hate the game, hate Blizzard, yet dedicates their time to bash the game and the company whenever they can. Which is pretty fucking stupid.

[Hellobolis]

"exploitative" only to idiots and addicts though.

isn't that kinda the definition of exploiting though? you exploit a vulnerability.

[Aliven]

Basically. People can spend their disposable income on whatever they want. Some people spend it on super expensive cars, some spend it on art supplies, some spend it on drugs, and some spend it on lootboxes. I'm not going to presume to tell people how to spend their money. If they want to throw it away, that's their decision. Their parents should've done what good parents do and taught them the value of money.

By that definition world hunger is not a problem because you can eat a sandwich. Gotcha.

[dextersmith]

Not true. Subs dropped and were reported for many years starting at the end of WotLK, people claimed it was bad for years and it didn't stop them. MAUs were a more relevant measure than subs so they switched.

What's MAU?

[SirBeef]

What's MAU?

Monthly active users. Tracks how many different accounts log in to a game each month. It is a much more accurate metric of how many players ate engaged each month. As opposed to those that pay but don't play.

Of course, MAUs can vary from company to company and game to game. One may only count as a MAU if the log in once every week during the month or if you log in but don't play may count. I haven't looked to see if Blizzard said how they define MAUs.

[Daedius]

They exploit people's compulsion, so probably... particularly with FOMO stuff.

[Belloc]

By that definition world hunger is not a problem because you can eat a sandwich. Gotcha.

Except for the part where you don't already have the sandwich. Analogies are worthless when they don't make sense.

[Bakis]

One of the things that Blizzard didn't do that other MMOs did was reveal its sub numbers. That was really transparent. Unfortunately, they stopped doing that. That is bad ethical practice.

The top dog at the time Ever Quest, did not reveal sub numbers.
WoW did, all the way up to Draenor I believe.

So dont know what you are on about. Ontop of that no company not in need of investors would release sub numbers now anyway.