Players with store helmets being kicked out of LFR and LFG

[Hughes]

Hrmmm so they got a /W saying I am kicking you because of your helm or something? I mean people get kicked all the time and it seems if the vote to kick pops up a lot of people just say yes and move on. How often does ANY vote kick fail really? Not disputing it I am just curious how they knew THAT was the reason for the kick and not just the normal trolling that goes on.

TBH that opens up a lot to speculation. A good hint is people calling you out and making fun of you, I suppose.

[Flower Milk]

Hrmmm so they got a /W saying I am kicking you because of your helm or something? I mean people get kicked all the time and it seems if the vote to kick pops up a lot of people just say yes and move on. How often does ANY vote kick fail really? Not disputing it I am just curious how they knew THAT was the reason for the kick and not just the normal trolling that goes on.

I assume it was talked about in the chat because it takes 5 people to initiate a vote kick against someone for the vote to even show up for the rest of the group to then vote on. So my guess was someone said something like "That guy is wearing a cash shop helm" in chat and it went from there. I wasn't there, so I don't know, but I assume they wouldn't tell me "I was kicked for my helmet" if they didn't actually know that was why they were kicked.

[Archangel Tyrael]

Being mad at people for buying cosmetic items and mounts etc.

Those of you who are, you need to see a shrink. Or grow a pair.

Opinions, opinions, opinions.

[Darsithis]

I didn't get kicked. No one said a thing about my helmet. I think this is blown out of proportion.

[shanthi]

None of the in depth finances and accounting at Blizzard or Activision mean a damn thing to me as a consumer. What you and the other apologists are trying to do is an appeal to emotion. I don't care what their overhead is if I see one of their business practices ripping people off.

Um, no, quite the opposite. We're pointing out that it costs money to run a business, which you apparently were unaware of. You and the other angry townsfolk with pitchforks are the ones using appeal to emotion. "Blizzard is greedy and evil and stupid and how dare they."

To be clear, I'm not saying you should feel sorry for Blizzard (no one said that, which is why I found your sarcasm silly). Just that as a company, obviously they're only going to do things that provide them a profitable return on investment. Making models costs money from highly-paid specialized workers. Since I don't think they're producing less subscriber content than they have in the past (and no one has made a compelling case that they are), these are extra, which means they cost extra and they recoup that extra cost by charging. Much like virtually any company.

Blizzard isn't noble, almost no company is. They have a profit incentive. But no one has made a good case that they're doing something unethical so, absent that, I don't have a problem with it.

[PaladinBash]

I dunno it kinda makes me want to make a premade of people with the transmog helms and to sign up for LFR (or LFD) and vote kick everyone who doesn't wear one.

[Hipnos14]

Tormenting people who bought the helm isn't going to fix anything.

Somebody brought up an excellent point in another thread: in 9 years, the subscription fee for Blizzard has not changed. In 9 years, the price of resources and wages and all that good stuff has changed. Blizzard probably uses the store to fund some of their side projects that they can no longer afford with just $15 subscriptions. They chose to make a store where you can choose whether or not to buy things, and that money likely goes toward projects like Hearthstone.

Would you "protestors" somehow feel less betrayed if Blizzard suddenly wanted $20 a month for subscription? Or $25 in the future? I would much rather choose to spend a little money in their store for some fairly high-quality graphics that I enjoy than have a mandatory hike in my subscription fee.

Why some of you don't understand that they don't do this because they need money? just, why?

They have an MMO with subscription fee with more subscriptors than every other MMO in the world, and when I say more I say like 5 or 6 times more.

Diablo 3 was the fastest-selling game of all time + the RMAH. Over 12million copies sold in 2012 and prepare for the console version.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthi...e-of-all-time/

And Starcraft 2 was the fastest-selling strategy game.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/08/...tegy-game-ever

And some of you actually think that Blizzard do this because of inflaction and s**t??

[urasim]

I assume it was talked about in the chat because it takes 5 people to initiate a vote kick against someone for the vote to even show up for the rest of the group to then vote on. So my guess was someone said something like "That guy is wearing a cash shop helm" in chat and it went from there. I wasn't there, so I don't know, but I assume they wouldn't tell me "I was kicked for my helmet" if they didn't actually know that was why they were kicked.

I vote to kick people without any discussion with other players. Although, I only vote to kick people who are AFK, being rude to the raid, or making it take longer than it's supposed to.

[Asmekiel]

I didn't get kicked. No one said a thing about my helmet. I think this is blown out of proportion.

Hooray for our crash dummy. However I wouldn't be surprised if it actually did happen, there are a quite a few people who only seem to play to harass others.

[Thimagryn]

And yet CAPCOM managed to make money with every other previous Street Fighter (or they certainly wouldn't have made *so many*) WITHOUT charging for the characters. Eh, funny that.

Oh, and that still doesn't change the fact that all those characters were created BEFORE shipping and simply locked away on the disk. If it's that expensive that they'd go bust without charging $80 for their full game, then they shouldn't have designed those characters AT ALL. Or made the less popular ones (and they know which ones are popular, they aren't fucking stupid. There's like 900000 SF games' worth of data to show what gets played the most) DLC afterwards.

If you look at their roster of games, they made a lot of money off of sequels that incorporated assets that were already created as well. Look how many iterations of Street Fighter 2 there were. Look at how many Street Fighter 3's there were. There was no such thing as DLC back then, and if you wanted the extra 4 characters you had to buy the new game that was released.

Also, development of content back then was not as expensive as it is now. The technology required to create content now is a lot more expensive. People don't ever factor in R&D as a cost, but it's a huge cost to development as well, and you can't fund new projects without being profitable on your current ones.

To tie it back into the main topic, you're assuming all the money that WoW makes goes directly back into WoW. WoW wouldn't even exist if it wasn't built on the backs of their previous games.

[Bayuriel]

mouthbreathers kicking people from groups only for their helm purchase? Wow those people need to take a permanent vacation from the game, and re-evaluate their lives.

[shanthi]

Why some of you don't understand that they don't do this because they need money? just, why?

I hope you're kidding. Do you really think that any company operates under a "As long as we're not at risk of going bankrupt, we shouldn't make any more money?" I mean, no one could really be that naive, right?

Of course, Blizzard doesn't need the money. They didn't even need to make WoW in the first place, they were quite profitable without it and almost certainly would have been with just their other products. They're driven by making more money via making stuff that people want to buy. I get that you and some other angry people don't want to buy cosmetic items. I don't want to buy Starcraft. So I don't. But plenty of people are buying those store items, and consensual transactions are what drive a market economy.

[Duster505]

I vote to kick people without any discussion with other players. Although, I only vote to kick people who are AFK, being rude to the raid, or making it take longer than it's supposed to.

I also vote kick every person that is exploiting the game mechanics to top the meters. Be that sitting on boss while raid is dying cause of adds... Or standing in dmg and self healing.

If all ppl would just do that ... then it would ruin the game for everyone. While one or two are doing it.. its ok.. Maybe abit like with the store helmets. If BLizzard can just throw in some transmog set every 3 months... then there wont be much of a game long term wont it....

But as some ppl are claiming here... This is the industry.. where its all just about money... So why should I trust BLizzard not to do that and then send out another 4.1 patch now?

Answer... I dont.

[Destinas]

But as some ppl are claiming here... This is the industry.. where its all just about money... So why should I trust BLizzard not to do that and then send out another 4.1 patch now?

Answer... I dont.

...what? What does patch 4.1 have to do with anything at all?

[Hipnos14]

I hope you're kidding. Do you really think that any company operates under a "As long as we're not at risk of going bankrupt, we shouldn't make any more money?" I mean, no one could really be that naive, right?

Of course, Blizzard doesn't need the money. They didn't even need to make WoW in the first place, they were quite profitable without it and almost certainly would have been with just their other products. They're driven by making more money via making stuff that people want to buy. I get that you and some other angry people don't want to buy cosmetic items. I don't want to buy Starcraft. So I don't. But plenty of people are buying those store items, and consensual transactions are what drive a market economy.

Okay, I will explain it in a different way so you can understand it...

"Why some of you don't understand that they don't do this because they are in red numbers?"

[Goldfingaz]

You're not really quick, it's already taking you 5 years (or longer, not sure how long the Blizzard store sells pets and mounts already)

It's been 4 years and three months and eight days. First pet introduced to the Pet Store was the Pandaren Monk April 11th, 2009. On top of that, 50% of the profits were donated to make a wish foundation for the remainder of the 2009 year.

I suggest just doing the basic research before making comments. Also, it is quick to that person as Blizzard has finally broken the threshold of things they can stand. In relevance to the helms being released for money, they are walking away quickly.

Now, I imagine you thought you were being witty/clever, but you're just hindering the discussion.

[Duster505]

...what? What does patch 4.1 have to do with anything at all?

2 re-done old dungeons, followed by mount and pet to pay for the sub loss.

[Destinas]

2 re-done old dungeons, followed by mount and pet to pay for the sub loss.

They redo a lot of dungeons and add pets and mounts in all venues they can, be that the Pet Store or in-game. Any source for the reason they added those thing to compensate for the sub loss, or is pure speculation on your part?

[McNeil]

Damn how did this get 41 pages in such short time

I've yet to even see someone with the Store helmets. Not sure if I would kick them in LFR... I'd have to see their DPS first atleast

[CrossNgen]

This is petty and stupid as hell, if you don't like what a company is doing to the game you enjoy, then just stop paying, that's the only way they'll listen, stop ruining somebody elses enjoyment.