Will there be any pro-store-mount players on the Community Council?

[Chipped coin]

Gee, that sounds an awful lot like a completely baseless generalization which you have no hope of ever substantiating.

You know, kind of like I told you from the beginning.

What sucks about it? Promotional/cash shop mounts have more effort put into them in game mounts. This isn't a controversial statement it's simple fact. From texture, animation ,and spell effects it takes normal mounts one to two expansions to catch up.

Hell the 9.1 glory of the raider mount is just a reskinned cashshop mount from wod even has the same animations and that is roughly on schedule.

- - - Updated - - -

Er... No. That's what you took from my point? Assuming that was just a misunderstanding and you are here to argue in good faith: There is an infinite amount of potential resource which could be put into anything. Resources are allocated (imperfectly, but to the best of their abilities) according to what brings in money. I.e. base game has a certain amount of content which brings in a certain amount of money. They could spend twice as much and double the amount of content but that wouldn't double the sales so an equilibrium is found. This equilibrium is largely independent from the store.

There is a separate (but contingent) market for mount sales. Mount sales increase with expansion sales but not vice versa. They create resource to allocate to the creation of store mounts because this generates additional profit. Again an equilibrium is found - they don't hire infinite artists to make an infinite amount of mounts. The existence of store mounts does not divert resources which otherwise would be put into the game.

I agree though I believe the resources spent on ingame mounts are intentionally left lagging behind the store mounts to make them more appealing to buyers.

[Relapses]

Just ignore that guy. Hes so fried he has no idea what hes talking about, he just likes to make up his own arguments that have no basis or credibility. Whatever you say, his argument will be the exact opposite no matter how wrong he is. Hes just a troll. If you say WoW sucks he'll literally argue that it blows.

Man, the irony of you calling me a troll after refusing to acknowledge any of the points I made is off the scales. Enjoy your negativity circlejerk.

[MoanaLisa]

I mean blizzard has gotten mountains of useful feedback especially with sl. Their response was to say they thought the endgame community was full of shit and shoot themselves in the foot banking on early 90s era text rpgs.

Blizzard is going to be the weak link in the council program not its members even if membership was determined by lottery.

I don't doubt this. However, if Blizzard imagines that something like this can reduce the "90% of everything is crap" to some lower percentage they should be allowed to at least try. A lot has changed there over the last few months and people there might be trying to restart with a few fresh initiatives. Perhaps this is overly optimistic but it's better than dismissing it out-of-hand due to raw cynicism.

[Fenrys]

What sucks about it? Promotional/cash shop mounts have more effort put into them in game mounts. This isn't a controversial statement it's simple fact. From texture, animation ,and spell effects it takes normal mounts one to two expansions to catch up.

Hell the 9.1 glory of the raider mount is just a reskinned cashshop mount from wod even has the same animations and that is roughly on schedule.

- - - Updated - - -



I agree though I believe the resources spent on ingame mounts are intentionally left lagging behind the store mounts to make them more appealing to buyers.

This is possible, but seems unlikely (and veers slightly towards the conspiratorial - not that all conspiracies are wrong) - I suspect it is more the case that in-game mounts just don't add much to the balance sheet directly.
The exclusivity point is more compelling, but still doesn't suggest that the cash store is reducing the quality of in-game mounts. Whilst recolouring would certainly be easy once the mounts exist, if the in-game store didn't exist it is far more likely that there would be nothing to recolour (as there isn't a business case for the more detailed mounts)

[Relapses]

What sucks about it? Promotional/cash shop mounts have more effort put into them in game mounts. This isn't a controversial statement it's simple fact. From texture, animation ,and spell effects it takes normal mounts one to two expansions to catch up.

Hell the 9.1 glory of the raider mount is just a reskinned cashshop mount from wod even has the same animations and that is roughly on schedule.

You know, just writing that something is a "simple fact," doesn't make it true. You're generalizing something which you have absolutely no way of knowing unless you know how Blizzard works internally. You seem completely unwilling to understand this important detail so I doubt anything I say will get through to you.

[Dch48]

And what exactly is wrong with store mounts? I have every one of them. Buying one is a decision and has no reflection on your worth or ability as a player. It does show that you support the game.

[Beefhammer]

Imagine thinking that despite the drastic drop in WoW's subscribers over the last few years that people will still play it NO matter what. Imagine that there is no useful feedback in the piles of manure that count as 'feedback' and that Blizzard is auditioning people who might be able to do better. Imagine that people who don't play the game at all will be able to pass judgement on new features. Just imagine all of that.

Reasonable people have know the best way to give feedback is to be polite, articulate your issue, and leave feelings out of it. There is a problem of people who submit feedback like that is that they act as if it should be implemented just becasue it was clearly layed out for devs then return to bitching about devs not listening.

Id rather listen to players playing than those that have left. I used to be in a business that worried too much about growth in new customers while screwing over existing customers just to get new ones. On my way out of that place I encouraged all my customers to quit and find a local company to take over. 450 of my 580 customers left what I stopped working for that company. There is wisdom in taking care of your current customers than worrying about bringing in new ones.

- - - Updated - - -

And what exactly is wrong with store mounts? I have every one of them. Buying one is a decision and has no reflection on your worth or ability as a player. It does show that you support the game.

Oh to them it is a personal affront as everything should be available in game. I get that to some point. Personally I find most of the store mounts to be gaudy or hideous so I'll save my monies.

[Fenrys]

You know, just writing that something is a "simple fact," doesn't make it true. You're generalizing something which you have absolutely no way of knowing unless you know how Blizzard works internally. You seem completely unwilling to understand this important detail so I doubt anything I say will get through to you.

As a point I don't think it is too controversial to say that store mounts are higher on detail/ more unique than most in-game mounts. That being said, as my previous post notes that does not mean that in-game mounts are being reduced in quality to accommodate the store. It is far more likely that without the additional revenue brought by the store, those mounts just wouldn't exist.

[OrangeJuice]

And again, who is to say that the amount of "resources" Blizzard uses to invest into the dozens and dozens of in-game mounts isn't equal or greater than the amount of "resources" used to create the one-to-two store mounts every couple months that we see? You certainly can't. Nobody else on this forum can, either. It's a pointless thing to discuss.

Imagine not knowing what resources are.

[draugril]

And again, who is to say that the amount of "resources" Blizzard uses to invest into the dozens and dozens of in-game mounts isn't equal or greater than the amount of "resources" used to create the one-to-two store mounts every couple months that we see? You certainly can't. Nobody else on this forum can, either. It's a pointless thing to discuss.

Pointless to you by your personal, arbitrary measure. Not pointless to those discussing it. Or they wouldn't be discussing it. If the existence of a single store mount is an affront to someone and they want those resources to be allocated to gameplay-driven content, that's completely fair.

Resources exist.
They were allocated.
Players disagreed with that allocation.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. You are essentially stating that opinions can differ and therefore it is pointless to discuss those opinions. Which is... quite a take.

[Gaidax]

Store mounts are fine.

[Beefhammer]

I don't doubt this. However, if Blizzard imagines that something like this can reduce the "90% of everything is crap" to some lower percentage they should be allowed to at least try. A lot has changed there over the last few months and people there might be trying to restart with a few fresh initiatives. Perhaps this is overly optimistic but it's better than dismissing it out-of-hand due to raw cynicism.

That ship has sailed for far too many who post here. Too many are here just to shitpost while others don't see the hypocrisy in ragging on Blizzard and it's business practices while still playing, even bragging about using gold to pay for their sub, being completely ignorant that the token supports a premium sub model giving Blizzard more money.

The final nail in their coffin, is that they have claimed that Blizzard doesn't listen or do anything. Being totally cynical about this Council, but here it is. Blizzard is doing something and is seeking advise from players. Not just garbage feedback from forums.

[Fenrys]

Pointless to you by your personal, arbitrary measure. Not pointless to those discussing it. Or they wouldn't be discussing it. If the existence of a single store mount is an affront to someone and they want those resources to be allocated to gameplay-driven content, that's completely fair.

Resources exist.
They were allocated.
Players disagreed with that allocation.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. You are essentially stating that opinions can differ and therefore it is pointless to discuss those opinions. Which is... quite a take.

Resources exist in response to profit that can be made. They aren't static. If a new market exists they will acquire resources to capitalise on it. Its not a zero sum game. If the store didn't exist it is far more likely that the resources spent on it wouldn't either.

[draugril]

Resources exist in response to profit that can be made. They aren't static. If a new market exists they will acquire resources to capitalise on it. Its not a zero sum game. If the store didn't exist it is far more likely that the resources spent on it wouldn't either.

Which is completely true. And that doesn't take away from players that simply don't like the existence of store mounts. Full stop.

Again, I have no horse in this race. I'm ambivalent. I'm annoyed by much of WoW's monetization model, but I've also purchased my share of mounts. Long story short, you can't tell someone who has a distaste for something that their distaste is illogical and expect them to like it based on your explanation.
Emotions don't work like that.
Humans don't work like that.

[Relapses]

As a point I don't think it is too controversial to say that store mounts are higher on detail/ more unique than most in-game mounts. That being said, as my previous post notes that does not mean that in-game mounts are being reduced in quality to accommodate the store. It is far more likely that without the additional revenue brought by the store, those mounts just wouldn't exist.

There's a very real possibility that Blizzard simply has a team whose entire job description is making store mounts. In effect, the existence of this team has absolutely no impact on the development of in-game mounts as the in-game mounts are being developed by an entirely separate entity within the company. There's too many unknown factors to just come in and say that the existence of store mounts is somehow directly impacting the quality of in-game mounts.

- - - Updated - - -

Pointless to you by your personal, arbitrary measure. Not pointless to those discussing it. Or they wouldn't be discussing it. If the existence of a single store mount is an affront to someone and they want those resources to be allocated to gameplay-driven content, that's completely fair.

Resources exist.
They were allocated.
Players disagreed with that allocation.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. You are essentially stating that opinions can differ and therefore it is pointless to discuss those opinions. Which is... quite a take.

That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that we don't know how Blizzard works internally so it's pointless to squabble over how its resources are dictated.

[Fenrys]

Which is completely true. And that doesn't take away from players that simply don't like the existence of store mounts. Full stop.

Again, I have no horse in this race. I'm ambivalent. I'm annoyed by much of WoW's monetization model, but I've also purchased my share of mounts. Long story short, you can't tell someone who has a distaste for something that their distaste is illogical and expect them to like it based on your explanation.
Emotions don't work like that.
Humans don't work like that.

Sure, they can not like it - lots of people dislike things irrationally. I guess it doesn't make for much for a thread though.

[Chipped coin]

I don't doubt this. However, if Blizzard imagines that something like this can reduce the "90% of everything is crap" to some lower percentage they should be allowed to at least try. A lot has changed there over the last few months and people there might be trying to restart with a few fresh initiatives. Perhaps this is overly optimistic but it's better than dismissing it out-of-hand due to raw cynicism.

I admit I am biased towards them. Everything they were warned about happened nearly word for word and rather go back to this community that at the very least was effective at pointing out their problems they turned away from it to take what appears to be near random advice.

I fear blizzards arrogance far more then people with personal agendas trying to guide them. They come off as more upset the "hardcore" community was right then trying to fix the actual issues.

[draugril]

Sure, they can not like it - lots of people dislike things irrationally. I guess it doesn't make for much for a thread though.

And that's precisely my point. And their distaste - irrational or otherwise - is no less (or more) valid because we don't have Blizzard's internal budget.

[Fenrys]

I admit I am biased towards them. Everything they were warned about happened nearly word for word and rather go back to this community that at the very least was effective at pointing out their problems they turned away from it to take what appears to be near random advice.

I fear blizzards arrogance far more then people with personal agendas trying to guide them. They come off as more upset the "hardcore" community was right then trying to fix the actual issues.

You aren't wrong. Nearly everything they've had to change has been suggested to them many months prior. The problem is that community also suggests a huge amount of steaming shite too, and they need to sift through it (and also the community always suggests that things should be easier - which isn't always the best design decision). I don't blame them for having a poisoned well mentality of the community. Just take a look at r/wow. Nearly everything they say is systematically wrong.

[Chipped coin]

You know, just writing that something is a "simple fact," doesn't make it true. You're generalizing something which you have absolutely no way of knowing unless you know how Blizzard works internally. You seem completely unwilling to understand this important detail so I doubt anything I say will get through to you.

I mean I can clearly see the difference between promotional mounts and mounts earned in game from the same time period. If you play wow on graphic setting 1 maybe you can't tell.