Players with store helmets being kicked out of LFR and LFG

[RoKPaNda]

I don't like them because they help support the idea that it is okay to pay extra for content in a subscription based game.

It IS okay to pay for extra vanity content in subscription based games. It's been pretty common practice in sub based games for years.

[Donair]

What the hell are you talking about?

Blizzard mentioned charging a small premium fee for the cross realm battle.net grouping feature when it was first announced. It was met with page after page of capped threads opposing it and countless canceled subs. Mine included. The message was received loud and clear: the feature needed to be included as part of our $15/mo sub. Which it was. You're welcome.

If people stand for nothing, they will fall for anything.

[ComputerNerd]

There was not kicking of ppl that had mounts... cause they couldn't use those mounts in the instances. So ppl didn't have to watch them all the time. I think you will find that alot of ppl created macros for /point/laugh.
Same goes for the pets. Very few had them - and even if they did... there was not the same obvious intent from Blizzard to add them in the numbers that ppl feel that the transmogs are coming ....and in an ingame store as well.

And lets not forget that LFR AND LFG? were NOT IN THE GAME when first mounts and pets were added.

Personally - I think its just healthy for a game community to talk these things out and find acceptable solution. Thats not what Blizzard is doing. And that is certainly not what is going on here on these forums where ppl are shouted out for either wanting to buy everything in WOW... or just being a hater.

I think its only a good thing that we talk this through and accept that everyone is allowed to have their opinion and that opinion should be honoured as long as possible. Thats something that I feel Blizzard is not doing if they are putting the ingame store into the game now. That is forced and some players that have played and paid for the game for a long time will react badly to it. Ofc .. that will affect the entire community. And the game developer should realise that before he makes big decisions like these.

It is exactly the same, whether you like it or not.
Kicking a player because you disagree with a decision blizzard made is being a bully, and making you a hypocrite.
Cancel your sub, state your reason and leave other players who had no bearing on the decision out of it.

Any action taken against other players is lashing out at the wrong people and is throwing a tantrum because they have something you don't.

An acceptable solution is NOT taking action against the players.
If you really feel this is about money, then take action there.
Cancel your sub and state the reason.
Any other action is simply proving you a liar.

[Duster505]

You know Day1-DLC used to be all included in the game, before DLC became a "thing"?

Now we have companies actually slicing portions of their finished game off because they know they can get extra dollars for it on the launch day.

Mass Effect ending anyone? Well it's optional. You got *an* ending, you don't need the real canon one.

Street Fighter x Tekken characters? Actually on the fucking disc, but locked away so you had to purchase them post-release.

Some of the first DLC was "Horse Armour" for Oblivion. Look where we are today. Every other week there's a shitstorm over some company overstepping "acceptable" DLC rules.

You'd have to truly be a sheep to believe that Blizzard is not going to exploit this shop as much as they can. Once the store is in the game, they can advertise to you nonstop. Literally every time you open whatever window it ends up attached to, you will get adverts for something you used to get for free. We wont wake up tomorrow to the graphic for T15 being on the store, but it's a possibility that they will save their best art (and artists) to design cash items, while the interns do the tier and PvP gear in the distant future if they think people would buy it.

Blizzard can STILL make these items obtainable in game through gameplay. Just because it is added to store does not mean it can not be gotten by other means. And that would automatically take care of ppl not being kicked from LFG and LFR cause then there are no ways to determine if ppl bought them or played to get them.

[Bulls191]

I don't like them because they help support the idea that it is okay to pay extra for content in a subscription based game.

Since when are some helms extra content.. You do not need this helmet for any other reason then some looks in the game! It has no stats nothing, just looks!

[Nerraw]

Oh it must be astronomical. We're lucky we aren't being charged $50/mo! It would still be a fantastic bargain! You would probably be willing to pay $75 per helm wouldn't you? As long as it's to support these poor developers simply trying to scrape out a living for themselves. We should be charged for every content update too, right? Since our $15/mo doesn't explicitly state it's to fund new content. It only entitles us to access the servers. The fact we get these updates for FREE is an incredible bargain! Wait, they aren't free if we're already paying... oh nevermind!

Yeah this guy gets it. Blizzard has it rough guys. We should think about that the next time we criticize something they do. We need to empathize with them better, gosh!

You're delusional. You need to start living in the real world.

[SirMeo]

Because of this:

Unhappy players uses VoteKickIdiotWhoBoughtHelms. It's super effective!

It's a message to Blizzard and it seems like it's working. Not only that it's like revenge on people who bought them.
It really does kill two birds with one stone.

I hope you are not an adult with this level of maturity.

How it's working against Blizzard?
Scratch that, even if it's working against Blizzard I'm still sure better ways would be unsubbing and/or contacting representatives directly instead of annoying some random person on lfr/lfg.


I wish I had the extra cash just now, I would buy all the helms even though I wouldn't use them ever because I always keep helms hidden or make my characters wear monocles.

[Pann]

That is just bandwith and technicians. They have 4000 employees and develop new games. But as I said...who here really has an insight into finances? You just prob´ved you'd rather be a smartass about it.

'tis funny...tell me where you live? Because I swear with your attitude you should be a hardcore socialist...

Do you honestly think that 4000 employees cost $87 million per month?

Why do you need to know where I live? To be honest based on your posts on these boards this scares me.

[shanthi]

You know Day1-DLC used to be all included in the game, before DLC became a "thing"?

That's an impossible statement to support (at least in any meaningful way--your implication seems to be that companies just gave you more for less back in the good ole days), simply because there's no way to know whether the games that offer Day 1 DLC would have been more expensive had they simply "included it all." That's why these critiques are so simplistic. If the companies that offered Day 1 DLC simply included it in the game but all charged more for the games, your objections would disappear despite nothing fundamental changing.

Or maybe you'd then complain that games are just too damn expensive, companies are way too greedy. That sounds likely.

[Duster505]

It is exactly the same, whether you like it or not.
Kicking a player because you disagree with a decision blizzard made is being a bully, and making you a hypocrite.
Cancel your sub, state your reason and leave other players who had no bearing on the decision out of it.

Any action taken against other players is lashing out at the wrong people and is throwing a tantrum because they have something you don't.

Thats your opinion. My opinion is that these items should not be only available in stores but also available through gameplay. And that will take care of all kicks since you can not say that ppl "bought" their way through the game or played it. Problem solved.

After all - this still is a sub based game so its only fair that ppl have a chance to get all things through gameplay.

[Nerraw]

It isn't It's me who's changed his views ... I was ok with the store in the past when I was a blizz fanbois that ate up all their shit because it's infallible blizz... Now, whilst still being a blizz fan I am actually pro-consumer and not an apologist for a corporation that has enough money to pump out 1 expansion per year + 1 single player game per year but instead take almost 2 years per wow expansion and 3 years for a fucking RTS expansion.

Good for you. However, how does a hat and a horse with no performance value affect your gameplay negatively?

[Ferocity]

Such a defense of cash-shop "improvements" is extremely upsetting. People don't even have a clue what they are condoning. It's very sad, but it will also be hilarious to see when cash-shop will become a sharp-blade, inflicting lethal bleeding wound in this game, it's quality and community. Blade, cutting down the very spirit of WoW... $$$ All that remains is just wait for the sad show.

So .. how is a person that wants those helmets supposed to get them through gameplay? And gameplay is not just about stats. Specially in a RPG social game. That was the case in WOW for now... 9 years... These are the first items that directly affects player look. Its different than pets and mounts. You can say it isn't... but it still is.

Even if it would be gear with stats, people would still blindly defend it - "Hey, it's just leveling gear" or "Hey, it's not max ilvl gear". I am sure that even if it would be BiS gear, we would still see some maddening excuses.

[RoKPaNda]

High five - that's the ONLY reason I'm wearing one. $15 is nothing to me, but I gasped at the price too - and I had no intention of ever buying one... then the QQ came rolling in and I just had to get in on that action. If wearing a hat can ruin someone's day, then that's someone who deserves to have their day ruined.

Just bought one of the hats for this reason also. I thought $15 was insane, but I'll support the less pathetic practice (Kicking users with helms vs selling vanity items) and so I bought a vanity helm. Go ahead, kick me bros, my queues are instant and my hat is awesome.

[potis]

Buying those items, means you agree with what Blizzard is doing, some people dont want that maybe?

Generally this is the problem with the world generally, since someone buys something, it remains at that price and the cycle continues.

As example of Iphones, the new iphone that comes out in my country is costs like 700 euro and 850 euro, which is high, now if no one ever buys those phones, including USA etc etc, the company will wake up and make them what they actually should be, aka at least 30% cheaper.

Same logic here , buying those Helms means you agree that Blizzard should be ripping off players (12 euro for a helm is a total ripoff, those helms shouldnt cost more than 4-5E) and you support them, which people dont like.

At least that would be my reasoning why to kick someone for owning a helm.

[Windfury]

Yeah, that'll show them. I think I'll go buy three of the Firelord helm and send 'em to some friends, just because I know it pisses people like you off.

See, I can be petty too, and I've got the wallet to send a louder message.

Ok, then do that. That's your choice as a consumer. Complaining how other people chose to use their choice/whatever's within their power, as long as it's within the rules, seems unreasonable in that case though.

There's nothing wrong with consumers being active in having their opinions heard. It's a positive thing, even if you disagree with the message personally.

[ACES]

Blizzard can STILL make these items obtainable in game through gameplay. Just because it is added to store does not mean it can not be gotten by other means. And that would automatically take care of ppl not being kicked from LFG and LFR cause then there are no ways to determine if ppl bought them or played to get them.

If they're obtainable in game then people won't buy them from the store and Blizzard won't make money and this defeats the purpose of having them in the store in the first place.

[ComputerNerd]

Thats your opinion. My opinion is that these items should not be only available in stores but also available through gameplay. And that will take care of all kicks since you can not say that ppl "bought" their way through the game or played it. Problem solved.

After all - this still is a sub based game so its only fair that ppl have a chance to get all things through gameplay.

Then your action is achieving absolutely nothing towards the cause.
It is not impacting on how blizzard approaches the store, but if this proves to be a substantial issue then what it will do is impact on how vote-kicking works.

[MoanaLisa]

I do not understand how people seem to think Blizzard is Broke and hard up for money. They have reported Record profits for a while now.

Blizzard has a budget and corporate goals that they need to meet both internally and for the greater whole. It's not mysterious. Oversimplifying it to make forum debating points doesn't make it not true. They are preparing for their revenue streams to change, probably drastically while their current budgeting and revenue goals will likely be either unchanged or continue to be increased in the future. This is no different from how any other billion dollar company works. It's clear that running the company purely on subscription money is not a likely or viable option for the long term. So, change.

I don't actually understand how people seem to think that it's so simple. And quoting magazine articles from five years ago doesn't carry a lot of freight either. A lot has happened in five years.

This business of booting people out of social groups because they've purchased something from the store is something that Blizz should worry about a great deal. While they're at it, perhaps they can start to address other things that contribute to the somewhat loathsome community that is the part of the iceberg that sticks up above the water as well. Nothing else has ever much motivated them; maybe this will.

[Nerraw]

Because of this:

Unhappy players uses VoteKickIdiotWhoBoughtHelms. It's super effective!

It's a message to Blizzard and it seems like it's working. Not only that it's like revenge on people who bought them.
It really does kill two birds with one stone.

So an eye for an eye. How medieval.

Do you people really expect Blizzard to listen to morons who act like 3-year olds who didn't get the piece of candy they wanted?

[hablix]

I support this. If purchasing these items leads to those buying them having negative gameplay experiences, it's one more thing that will make Blizzard reconsider their strategy and think twice before continuing to expand their pet store without reforming their payment model. I have no sympathy for the people who are spending their $15 in support of a policy that I believe is betraying the values of the Blizzard that I once knew and loved.

Putting my money where my mouth is, I have unsubbed. I'll probably return for a month to see Siege of Org. But the magic of WoW has fizzled for me. Not saying I'll never be back, but I'm much less interested in this game than I was only a couple weeks ago, I'm no longer excited for its future, and I'm not even sure I'm a Blizzard fan any longer.