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

[lupii]

Another instance of people overreacting.

Ill say it one more time:

By selling RAIDING GEAR and PVP GEAR they would lose money. It would drive away PVPers and PVEers, causing sub losses and thus a gigantic loss of money.

Can you name a game where the developers sell actual raiding/PVP gear?

Can you? Because I would actually like to know. o.o

[Lomak]

The same could be said of many games nowadays.

The difference is that the content you're locked out of is purely aesthetic novelties, rather than any truly meaningful content (read: content which is part of the core of the game). If they were selling unique DPS potions or high-end armor, you might have a meaningful point.

Otherwise, you're just making a mountain out of a molehill.

Telling people they are just locked out of the "aesthetic" content, not the content that truly matters, is such bullshit.

Some people just enjoy collecting shit. In fact thats the reason that stuff like mounts and pets were on the item shop first. You think blizzard just made a lucky guess? They can see that "hey, look people really love collecting these mounts and pets" They purposefully targeted that play style and monetized it.

"Oh you like collecting mounts and pets?! Great , here are some more for you to collect, get to it".

[Deleted]

Of course it's wrong. It's not illegal but they're still using questionable, greedy and just bad business practices. What you're saying is pretty much that the goal of every business is to milk every cent out of their customers without picking how to do it. Everything goes as long as the suckers keep paying, right?

[Deleted]

The number of people who play WoW and think they know how business works and the inner workings of Blizzard gives me a headache.

The short version; Subs may no longer cover cost of running game/massive company->Blizzard sets a SMALL team to make cash items->Blizzard gets profit from small-scale items with minimal production cost->More money to spend outside bills and wages->More content for us.

The long version; http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/7805630495

I swear to god if I see yet another person ranting off about how "evil" or "greedy" Blizzard is or making claims about how they work with no citation, sources or any real knowledge of the matter I'm going to punch through my monitor.

- - - Updated - - -

Can you? Because I would actually like to know. o.o

Rumble Fighter(s).

It's not popular. At all.

[Mawnix]

Can you? Because I would actually like to know. o.o

That's the thing: I can't think of a single game.

People enjoy making juggernauts look like the villains. I've learnt that since I first started on this site.

[lupii]

Of course it's wrong. It's not illegal but they're still using questionable, greedy and just bad business practices. What you're saying is pretty much that the goal of every business is to milk every cent out of their customers without picking how to do it. Everything goes as long as the suckers keep paying, right?

$15 a month plus $40 for an xpac every 2 years...yep, we really are dem cash cows. Shame on us. /sarcasm

[Rekiara]

Considering the amount of talk circling around this topic and ignoring this fact, I would say a thread reinforcing this is absolutely warranted.

Ignoring *what* fact? The "fact" that a subscription fee's value takes a minor, but still notable, hit in value for each item in the game that cannot be earned or accessed via subbed playtime alone? A hit in value that is not, nor has it ever been, reflected by a corresponding drop in cost?

Sure, we "pay to access the game" and "that's it" - but when there's comparatively less game each go round, without a corresponding drop in sub price, threads like this serve only as an outlet for blizzard bootlickers.

[The Madgod]

It's an insult to peoples intelligence to try and spin that any other way, and it's disingenuous to give the excuse "oh they are only cosmetic".......

99% of the things in the game are cosmetic. From the way my character looks, the way he attacks, casting animation, the way gear looks. "It's only cosmetic" is a piss poor excuse for a disgusting business practice that is only succeeding because of the gullibility of the majority of blizzards "fanbase".

It's not disingenuous, it's pointing out the truth.

The difference between that 99% and the stuff that is sold in the store is that something being cosmetic doesn't inherently mean it gives you a bonus.

Almost all of those "cosmetic" things you pointed out aren't purely cosmetic; they have stats on them. They are used to make your character more powerful. They are part of the core of the game.

All the rest? Purely flavor. A mount from the store isn't inherently better than a mount you get from a rep vendor. It's purely aesthetic.

That's why pointing out something is purely cosmetic isn't disingenuous... it means a lot. The bad part of a game store is when it becomes pay to win... or in other words they sell things that give your character an increase in power. Selling only purely aesthetic items isn't pay to win because if you buy it you aren't given a significant advantage over other players.

[lupii]

Ignoring *what* fact? The "fact" that a subscription fee's value takes a minor, but still notable, hit in value for each item in the game that cannot be earned or accessed via subbed playtime alone? A hit in value that is not, nor has it ever been, reflected by a corresponding drop in cost?

Sure, we "pay to access the game" and "that's it" - but when there's comparatively less game each go round, without a corresponding drop in sub price, threads like this serve only as an outlet for blizzard bootlickers.

And the Evil-corporation-activision conspiracy theorists.

[melodramocracy]

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

And exactly how far would this game have gotten if every single patch / update also cost additional money? You guessed it.

While your point is, on paper, accurate, that is not the historical intent of the subscription fee. And what an increase in cash shop items tells players is that they're actually getting less value for their sub fee than they used to.

[plosion]

I remember back when CCP tried to sneak microtransactions into EVE: players got mad as a hell, and organized a strike by occupying Jita for weeks.
The same happens to wow? People run with money in their hands to buy the latest skin. Depressing.

Paying a sub fee entitles you to the game as a whole. You just have to play it and get what you like the most out of it, be it raids, dungeons pvp whatever suits you.
Charging extra for something developed with the players' own money is a borderline scandal.

[Lomak]

And the Evil-corporation-activision conspiracy theorists.

I wouldn't say evil so much as I would say "greedy to the point of stupidity".

I don't even find blizzard capable of creating compelling gameplay anymore, the exception being Sc2, and thats only because they mostly stuck to the framework that sc1 had laid out.

[Deleted]

$15 a month plus $40 for an xpac every 2 years...yep, we really are dem cash cows. Shame on us. /sarcasm

Obviously. You have to realize what you're paying for. Most games cost only $20-60 or have a small subscription fee or are free and supported by cash shop. Blizzards wants it all though..

Even though you might think it's the "greatest game ever", it's not and hasn't been for a long time. If it was released today in it's current form, I doubt it would even reach a million players.

[The Madgod]

Ignoring *what* fact? The "fact" that a subscription fee's value takes a minor, but still notable, hit in value for each item in the game that cannot be earned or accessed via subbed playtime alone? A hit in value that is not, nor has it ever been, reflected by a corresponding drop in cost?

How much would a handful of pets and mounts and three items really decrease the subscription's value by? When we have how many pets and mounts and items in the game?

And considering we've got more content than ever I don't see why there needs to be a decrease in the cost.

Sure, we "pay to access the game" and "that's it" - but when there's comparatively less game each go round, without a corresponding drop in sub price, threads like this serve only as an outlet for blizzard bootlickers.

You haven't been paying attention if you truly think that there's less game in Mists than in previous expansions.

[melodramocracy]

All the rest? Purely flavor. A mount from the store isn't inherently better than a mount you get from a rep vendor. It's purely aesthetic.

One of the mounts required me to participate in the game, and accomplish any number of tasks, from something as trivial as earning gold, to acquiring enough rep, all the way up to completing a heroic raid.

The other simply let me press an 'add to cart' button.

Which do you think is collectively better for the long term health of the game, in the context of motivating people to actually play?

[Blupparen]

Yeah sure, thats why the tier gear looks so good.

Oh wait, not, they look like fucking garbage, and these helms look good enough to be from a completely different game.

Fuck you and your corporate apologies.


[Infracted]

Well if I paid real money for an item then I except it to look really good or be really good.

[nodq]

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.

When they start selling XP, Honor, Valor etc. then im worried.

[Asrialol]

The only people complaining tend to be the 25 year olds living in their moms basement who doesnt work for their own cash.

I'm fine with the store. I'd be fine if gear equal to heroic gear was in the store.

[The Madgod]

One of the mounts required me to participate in the game, and accomplish any number of tasks, from something as trivial as earning gold, to acquiring enough rep, all the way up to completing a heroic raid.

The other simply let me press an 'add to cart' button.

Which do you think is collectively better for the long term health of the game, in the context of motivating people to actually play?

The game isn't about mounts so I would say as long as both options remain it wouldn't make a real difference.

The game is about beating bosses and getting more powerful gear. Until such a time when Blizzard sells that, the in-game store shouldn't do anything to change people's motivation to play.

[Serpenth]

You have any source on that ? and no a blue post is not enough, well maybe if it is from Ghostcrawler.

It's stated in the TOS, the terms of service, which you are required to agree to upon purchase of the game, any expansion, and usually after a large content update. The ToS states that the montly $14.99 free grants you access the servers. Not in those exact words because I didn't quote it, but it's very clear and has been brought up in this topic very many times. Not in this specific thread, but every time a new pet is introduced there are threads about this, which is the point the op is making.

However, Blizzard is VERY close to crossing the line. I'm a huge Blizzard fan boy myself but I know foul when I see it. The RMAH in D3 crosses the line in my opinion. Now, keep in mind I actively play D3 (I have a p100). I do however strongly disagree with the rmah. The simple solution is I don't use it, and don't let it bother me. It really works, it sounds so simple, almost too simple, to just ignore the fact that it exists. But I do and it works. I bring this up because Blizzard mentioned they considered the RMAH for MoP but ultimately decided it wasn't right and did the black market AH instead.

As a loyal Blizzard fanboy I have even come to realize, Blizzard isn't the same company it was 5-6 years ago. While you can't buy buffs now, it won't surprise me if you can one day. And I hate it. I really, really, really hate the micro transaction model. It honestly has ruined PC gaming for me. I've been putting off upgrades on my build for about 8 months now because I haven't bought any new games in over a year. It's all free to play microtransaction bullshit. And quite honestly, Blizzard is part to blame, because they started it years ago with the pets and mounts. I don't know when Blizzard started it, but SOE started it with Everquest II in 2008. Alah beginning in 2010-11 you see this model start to really explode. Now in 2013 it's unavoidable.

Probably ranted too much, sorry.