Of course I do. Maybe, instead of doubling down, you need to take an honest look at your argument and try and come up with something better.
You do understand how market forces work right? The current prices of these things are a direct response to the natural market forces at work when you're talking something like this - a rare collectible item that is no longer being produced.
The only thing you got right here is that I am suggesting that they recognise the facts of the situation. I am not suggesting they make any effort to not disrupt it. I am asking them to not make an effort to change the status quo. It's a fundamentally different proposition that you're trying to sell. Hence why you're strawmanning.
No I do not. Again, you're misrepresenting what I have said. My claim is that it is in the best of interest of the customer for Blizzard to remain consistent in their 10 year long, hands-off approach of not trying to actively do things that would disrupt this perfectly normal market.
Small, sure, but also extremely committed to the game. In essence, Blizzard most valuable customers. Throwing them under the bus would be terrible PR for the Blizzard.
Why? On what basis? Who exactly would really benefit from this?
Let's consider the scenario: Blizzard gives everyone a free Spectral Tiger mount. Who would this benefit? This mount is desirable primarily because it of its scarcity. So sure, everyone wants one, but if you actually gave everyone one, then suddenly it would lose its desirability. By giving everyone what they want, you essentially end up giving no one what they want. The only people who end up feeling anything in the end are those who already had it.
No. That was a contractual obligation.
This is such a puerile argument you're trying to make. Blizzard are in the computer games market. It is their bread and butter. It would just be incredibly stupid of them to start finger-wagging and punishing a bunch of people who are spending their money on their game out of passion and commitment.
Let's speak specifically about the TCG mounts (other discontinued mounts involve other arguments).
No, I do not agree with you. In fact I vehemently disagree with you.
Let's say Blizzard put the spectral tiger on the shop for $25. It would sell in droves. This would massively piss off pretty much every player who has spent either gold or cash in the last 10+ years to acquire one for their collection. So there you're already going to have a bunch of players who have already demonstrated a high level of passion and commitment to the game.
Now, how do you think the rest of the community would react? I can see a shitstorm of thread with buzzwords like "cash grab" and "greedy Blizzard" in the titles.
And like I said before, once they do become common, those who have acquired them won't even end up really caring about them anyway. This literally fails on every level to improve the player experience, while actively harming it for some. Blizzard would make a nice bundle of cash, but at the expense of their already wavering public image.
- - - Updated - - -
Sure. But this is an invalid comparison.
Because it is known up front - it is expected even - that those transmogs and mounts will become easier to obtain in the future. No one raids mythic when it is current on the basis that they want to obtain a mount that they know will be impossible to acquire down the line.
A more valid comparison would be to limited time mounts. Things like the proto-drakes from the Undying/Immortal achievements. Or the seasonal gladiator mounts. Or the challenge mode mounts from MoP.
And even then, if Blizzard did decide to release these mounts at a later date, I don't believe for a second that those who got them back in the day would be pissed about the fact that other people are getting them now. No, what these people would be pissed about is the fact that they had to do in order to get them back in the day. About the efforts they went to, the sacrifices they made, and to be told they, hey, if they'd just sat on their asses and waited, they would have got it anyway.
Imagine you go to McDonalds and fork out $10 for a meal. Then when you are sitting down and eating, they proudly announce that everyone else buying a meal will get it for free. No rational person will be upset at the recipients of the free meals. No, you'd be upset about the fact that you had to pay.
Yeah, that's not the only reason. In fact it has pretty much nothing to do with the argument at all.