The Cash Shop is about to get more crowded

[Jetstream]

Because paying 25 dollars for an unlimited resource is absolutely retarded and antithetical to basic economics and capitalism.

Horseshit. The basic principle of value from an economic standpoint is that a good or service is worth exactly what consumers are willing to pay for it.

[DarkAmbient]

I don't mind if they put more cosmetics in the cash shop... as long as they also remove the subscription fee.

[Rotted]

Well first the store and the TCG are two separate things, The TCG is published by the Upper Deck Company, not Blizzard, Blizzard are just partners with them. Blizzard were also not getting the majority of the profits from the TCG, thats why we have a shop in the first place.

Also People were complaining about the TCG stuff back when they were out. I know, I was one of them complaining on the official WoW forums back in 2006, there were many of us... although they don;t look so bad today compared to the store.I think a lot of people gave the TCG a pass because Blizzard were still in people's good graces, if the TCG was released today people would be pissed. :P

It;'s not my job to tell people how to spend their money, but that doesn't mean I cannot express how shitty the practices are.

thats the thing though,

Its not a shitty practice. Theres a market for it there, they are cashing in on it. Its literally how the world works.

[Sinaa]

Ppl will say that it's just cosmetics, yada yada, but quite a few will not come back if this really happens.

When Blizz first introduced the mount shop I quit collecting mounts, if Blizz does this to armor I will quit the game for good.

[Aucald]

When it was originally datamined it was flagged as a shop mount, like every other shop mount.
https://wow.gamepedia.com/Reins_of_the_Grove_Warden

Hmm, I don't know if that necessarily implies Blizzard was reacting to some outcry about the other two mounts - it's certainly possible, but this doesn't support that notion directly in my estimation. Mounts have been flagged as a lot of things previously, like the Beryl Flametalon mount that existed in the game as far back as Cata but didn't actually become available until late in MoP I believe.

[Dziubla]

Because people want to pay for a game, not for the opportunity to spend more money on digital items you'll never own and which you can't resell.

Yes, an ongoing MMORPG such as WoW requires more support from the players than just a box-price / expansion-price. But that's what the subscription is for. If you want to support the game further, you don't need an in-game shop. You can buy additional copies of the game for instance, or buy merchandise.

Cosmetics ARE part of the gameplay of a MMORPG. Customizing your character and how it looks, including "accessories" such as mounts and pets ARE an essential part of WoW. Not for everyone, sure, but surely still a part of it. Especially nowadays that WoW is more of a collectathon than ever, it is complete bullshit that there's so many items which are not obtainable in-game.

I used to play WoW every day, be immersed in it and invested in my character and the game. Now I only subscribe for a few months every expansion, because I just can't care about the game, much less feel immersed in it. And honestly the increasing presence of the store is part of that.

As far as ethics go, even if you are to accept that it is ethical to include an in-game shop in a subscription-based game: That's not how WoW started. We aren't talking about a game who included this business model from the get go. It was added over time, when at start you were able to obtain everything in-game.


But of course, you are entitled to your opinion. It's up to you whether you want to defend a future where every game is riddled with shop items, or a future where you just play the damned game you payed for. Personally, I'd like the second.

But since you are keen to ask, are you able to give a good argument as to why in-game store should be part of WoW?

What you're saying could make some sense, except for the fact that you're actually, factually incorrect. Since, guesss what - you CAN obtain everything in-game. You don't have to spend a single dollar from your own pocket. I didn't in over 2 years, and I have all the store mounts. Few years ago they introduced this little thing called WoW Token, and later on they allowed you to not just get gametime with it, but also to convert it to battle.net balance, which allows you to buy all the store things with in game gold. If it wasn't for tokens, I could agree with you about the inability to earn things in-game, but since the token is there, that argument is simply WRONG.

I know that inevitably you will tell me how someone still have to buy tokens with real money, how it's actually better for Blizzard since the converstion rate is profitable for them, and all the other usual things - and yet, somehow...I can't seem to care. It gives me the ability to not spend my own money, and if someone else wants to spend theirs? That is their money, and their choice.

And yes, it's not how WoW started, and yet, things change, things evolve. You either accept it. or you don't, it's as simple as that. Game is getting older, subs are dropping, so the company looks for other revenue streams. It happened in a million other games, and guess what - in most games it happened in ways much, much worse. A lot of games went pay2win way, instead of simply offering consmetics. If you played any such games, you might understand why people don't have a problem with WoW's cash shop. Compared to alternatives, it's REALLY a non-issue.

[qwerty123456]

The perfect example are the WOD mounts. All those store mounts with the expansion thematic should have been in the game and instead of those we got tons of stupid ass recolored boars as ingame rewards.

And how do you know they would have even made them? Without the extra money from the cash shop what makes you think they wouldn't have put the artist on some shit for the next expansion instead of making an extra mount? And the fact is most store mounts have a theme tied to the expansion it releases in or the next one. The only ones that don't exist theme wise or as other art assests (like the vulpine familiar being a tamable hunter pet in shadowlands) in an expansion are the Chinese ones.

Look at all the fucking horses and bland basic shit Alliance got this expansion. Do you really think if they didn't have the cash shop they would have gotten anything better? No they wouldn't have.

The Grove Warden was put in at the end BECAUSE of the mount backlash. You do realize that, right?

Did you not play during WoD?

I like how Aucald gives you over half a dozen examples and you have to pick apart one. Do you seriously think that Blizzard saw some backlash and then just said "oh shit toss them a single new mount and they'll be happy?"

[Buliwyf the Omen]

I am a very willing-to-pay customer for anything that is fancy.

The thousands I already spend into League of Legends, probably far more than I ever have put into WoW...

[Kolvarg]

If it wasn't for tokens, I could agree with you about the inability to earn things in-game, but since the token is there, that argument is simply WRONG.

Is it really? If it's the same thing, why not just add the store mounts as purchasable in-game through gold? And then IF someone wants to buy them with real cash, they could buy a token to get gold to buy them.

But it's not the same thing, because it wouldn't really make them nearly as much money otherwise, and it would also not be very popular because it's a lazy non-engaging way to introduce a mount to the game.

I think that's a cheesy cop-out, that only unveils a potentially far worse can of worms (the fact you can buy in-game gold with real money). To get just the currently available store mounts, you'd have to spend 355$, or 24 tokens. At the current rate that would be roughly 4.5M gold in US realms, or 5.5M gold on the EU realms. I don't know about you, but I'd wager for the average player that's a pretty big amount of gold. That's excluding the other hundreds of dollars worth of pets, Collector's Editions and RAF rewards. The point is not even that they're not obtainable in any way in-game, but that they aren't simple in-game items period. They are clearly designed to make money, and not to be obtainable through in-game gold. It's like saying the new Call of Duty is technically free because you "can" buy it with tokens - a hell of a stretch.

But honestly the fact that you "can" obtain it in-game through grindy ways, or pay to skip the grind, only makes it worse in my eyes. Makes it sound even more like a predatory mobile cash shop.

And yes, it's not how WoW started, and yet, things change, things evolve. You either accept it. or you don't, it's as simple as that. Game is getting older, subs are dropping, so the company looks for other revenue streams. It happened in a million other games, and guess what - in most games it happened in ways much, much worse. A lot of games went pay2win way, instead of simply offering consmetics. If you played any such games, you might understand why people don't have a problem with WoW's cash shop. Compared to alternatives, it's REALLY a non-issue.

Well I don't, and I don't think it's ethical. It has led to the current state of the industry where AAA games feel free to charge full-price for a new game without mentioning any further monetization models, and one or a couple months after launch (after all the reviews and initial purchases are done) introduce micro transactions that were planned from the get-go but hidden to increase sales and get better reviews. It led to AAA singleplayer games with micro-transactions, and yes it even helps normalize pay2win games in which you "can" obtain the same stuff in-game (except it's intentionally made a chore or very time consuming so you are compelled to just buy it).

Blizzard is a big, famous and (at least until recently) well beloved company. Everything they make essentially prints money. I think it's fair to hold them to the high standards they are supposed to stand for, and compare them to the best examples in the industry, not the worst. Tokens or no tokens, no matter how you wish to frame it, micro transactions don't scream "Gameplay first".

You not caring about it personally does not make it a non-issue. Don't take me wrong, it's not a huge issue for me. Even though it does help disconnect me from the game and feel alienated by it, I'll freely admit I'm fully able to ignore them and buy and play the next expansion, at least for a bit. But they do make the game worse, as far as I'm concerned, and I do think they're nothing more than cash grab attempts that prey on those with either poor self control, too much spending money, or both.

I'll be the first to defend a company's right to make money from their game. I have pirated games in the past when I had no means of paying, but for years now, ever since I got a stable job and therefore spending money, I've made it a point to not pirate any game and to support the games I've enjoyed the most. I've bought additional copies of games I really love, I've bought expansions and DLC and merchandise.

But give me a fair deal. Don't sell me a game that appears to be complete and then offer additional pieces for outrageous prices (I mean, a WoW mount is essentially half the cost of an expansion box). Just give me a fair deal, instead of trying to extort every penny I own in each game. That's all I ask. And I think box price + subscription is more than fair for an MMORPG.

[Kharadin]

I want a good game that's worth paying full price for. And I am allowed to express my distaste with a company I loved to pieces since 1993. I am sorry I am not a corporate bootlicker who will eat up any shit Blizzard sell you.

So vote with your wallet and stop playing. I'll keep consuming the content I believe is reasonably priced and reasonably structured.

- - - Updated - - -

It ain't free if you pay a subscription + expansion packs


If you want microtransactions, go free to play.
Team Fortress 2 did just that and it's still kicking

I disagree, spontaneously releasing cosmetics would be free content. Buying the box gives you access to the game, paying a sub gives you access to the servers. Anything outside of the usual patch cycle is free content.

Not sure what makes TF2 relevant to the discussion, is it an MMO that requires tonnes of resources to continually update with large swathes of content?

[Maljinwo]

Not sure what makes TF2 relevant to the discussion, is it an MMO that requires tonnes of resources to continually update with large swathes of content?

Simply a comment on how to have mictrotransactions and not asking to buy a game only to keep paying for content that should be included in game.

WoW Already has a subscription + priced expansions. It does not need microtransactions

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

I’m glad. End the subscription. Bring in the cash shop. Just keep a subscription for classic

[Kharadin]

Simply a comment on how to have mictrotransactions and not asking to buy a game only to keep paying for content that should be included in game

Which, again, is not a valid or relevant comparison to make.

[Maljinwo]

Which, again, is not a valid or relevant comparison to make.

How is this not a valid comparison when we are discussing microtransactions between 2 different models that use them?

[Itori]

Good, I'd be totally down with buying some cosmetic sets.

I love the shop in FFXIV!

Glams are love, glams are life xD

[Kharadin]

How is this not a valid comparison when we are discussing microtransactions between 2 different models that use them?

Feel free to read the first post of mine you quoted. But just in case you need further explanation...

TF2 does not have the upkeep costs that WoW does, it does not have anything even remotely resembling it's update structure or content cycles. It's not even the same genre, I am absolutely baffled as to why you chose it for a comparison.

If you want to play a WoW that can be kept afloat with just MTX or just box payments or just the subscription then that's cool, but I like the WoW I am playing now.

[Villager720]

My concern with cash shop cosmetics/mounts/etc is that it is absolutely taking art/development time away from in-game, earnable rewards.
While yes, you can use gold to get the money to buy the cash shop stuff thus “earning” it in game, I’m still fundamentally against selling anything exclusively in a game I’m already actively paying for.

[Lolites]

Probably the worst example you could have picked. WoD is notorious among people who hate the shop specifically because not only did it take two mounts that were CLEARLY supposed to be for the factions and turn them into shop mounts, but it had fucking 11 boar reskins.

Absolute insanity.

on this one i gotta agree, WoD was terrible when it comes to mounts (well, all of WoD was terrible tbh ) and if that was continuous trend i would be mad

[Maljinwo]

Feel free to read the first post of mine you quoted. But just in case you need further explanation...

TF2 does not have the upkeep costs that WoW does, it does not have anything even remotely resembling it's update structure or content cycles. It's not even the same genre, I am absolutely baffled as to why you chose it for a comparison.

Im NOT comparing the games expenses or their genre. Simply on how they use microtransactions due to different business models.
WoW already has a Subscription model, which is why, in my opinion, it doesn't need microtransactions on top of it.

Take Fortnite or any other current "live service" game and most of them have microtransactions but are either free to play or don't ask a subscription on top of it's asking price

[Redroniksre]

I mean any micro transaction change would have to be on an industry wide scale. With every single other MMO doing it (including FFXIV) it would be stupid for Blizzard not to do it. That said, with the token you can buy anything in the shop via. in game means. Also in terms of mounts/armor looking better, sure in some cases, but when the barrier for entry is lower what are people going to be more impressed with, sparkle pony or a new Mythic only mount?