Is blizzard becoming like capcom?

[Buu]

I think not YET. But they are trying Capcom/EA's waters in a disturbing manner. They shouldn't even TRY those.

[Otaka]

OP is so stupid.
Blizzard has reduced the cost of earlier expansions alot... also, there arent many pets and mounts to be bought...99% of the pets and mounts are obtained ingame.
Transmog items aswell...

None of these things they sell give any advantage ingame... so its stupid to even think about writing topics about it.

Infracted

[sourmonkey]

The thing is a majority of people will pay 2 win when giving the opportunity .
So companies are like hey lets make the best stuff cost extra and people will buy it .

That's most free to play mmos (eyes neverwinter)

Other games have DLC which is fine after time not on day 1 after spending 60 bucks .
Nor do I think codes should be charged for , but it all goes back to my first few lines

If people pay for it the company will continue to sell It only when the populous together stops paying for the extras will it get better.
We control products together if all Americans together decided to stop buying Oreos they would not be selling them

So blame the bad gamers for ruining games today cause they had to pay for the win .

[Celista]

The price point for transfers, faction changes, etc. is balance both against the total population regularly playing the game, and miscellaneous marginal costs involved with the change made, versus what people are actually willing to pay. If you have an active population of even say 5 million people, $5 per change-- you would have a logistics nightmare. When these options were originally released a char change was only 15 bucks, but it took half a day to process. The irony is that these services are not so easy to balance around given the sheer size of the player base.

Now if Blizz decided not to limit its assets, and say open up more job positions, or automate more of these features, costs could be cut.

Server transfers are 100% entirely automated. The costs are almost nonexistent. I think limiting server xfers to once a month would be sufficient for "logistics" issues (although I'm not really seeing any associated with an automated service)--Rift offers free transfers once a week and it's not breaking the game. And yes, WoW has a much larger sub base, but remember that servers are also divided up by region, with separate servers for NA, Europe, and the East (where the majority of the sub base is).

[Mawnix]

OP is so stupid.
Blizzard has reduced the cost of earlier expansions alot... also, there arent many pets and mounts to be bought...99% of the pets and mounts are obtained ingame.
Transmog items aswell...

None of these things they sell give any advantage ingame... so its stupid to even think about writing topics about it.

Isn't Burning Crusade literally included in the base game now? Along with the Pandaren, Talent Trees, and everything?

Plus don't Wrath and Cataclysm just cost like 10 bucks each or even less?

[Deleted]

They're rewards. The Challenge Modes themselves are content.

I don't consider gear as a whole "content". I consider what I do for said gear/rewards the content.

Content is Raids, BGs, Continents, Islands, Scenarios, Dungeons, Challenge Modes, etc..

Basically anything that rewards me and gives me something that makes me stronger or progress.

Wearing a helmet that does nothing for my character isn't content imo.

Maybe you're different from me, that's fine. Many people however play various parts of WoW to aquire that flashy set of armour. I like the flashy helms on the Blizzard store. I need to pay for them though, even though they're part of the game I pay to play.
Again, similar in a way to Capcom's DLC on disk that you needed to pay to unlock.

[Seefer]

why can't they have premium items just like all of the free MMO's you listed?

Because the others don't have a subscription fee and there is such thing as price gouging?

[Deleted]

OP is so stupid.
Blizzard has reduced the cost of earlier expansions alot... also, there arent many pets and mounts to be bought...99% of the pets and mounts are obtained ingame.
Transmog items aswell...

None of these things they sell give any advantage ingame... so its stupid to even think about writing topics about it.

wish the cinder kitten and moonkin pet was obtainable in game

[Boogums]

Where's the part that says it only pays for access to their servers? Where's the part that defies logical conclusion that sub fees from players go towards Blizzard's expenses, some of which are employees salaries, of which includes 3D artists as well as (what you seem to think exclusively) network department employees.

Didn't know you didn't know how to read. Not sure how we're communicating. Anyway:

SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONS
To play World of Warcraft, you need to either set up a recurring subscription or purchase chunks of game time.

The see Table of Features, shows you exactly what you're paying for.

Then we have a definition of subscription: "the action of making or agreeing to make an advance payment in order to receive or participate in something." So yea, you're paying your subscription to log into the game. No where was *I* able to find that your sub gives you the rights or entitlement to anything else.

What Blizzard does with their money =/= what you're paying for. I pay $20k for a car. The car doesn't cost $20k to make, this doesn't mean I get access to the houses of the employees who made that car, nor access to any cars that they make later on. It also doesn't mean they can't use that money to develop newer cars.

I don't think you quite understand the difference between "what I'm paying for" and "what the company then does with that money once I've paid for what I got."

Does dev use the money from the sub fees to develop new content? Officially, they haven't answered, they could use Activision's Skylanders money to fund WoW's developers. Unofficially? Maybe.

Does that mean you're entitled to anything other than the ability to log into the game? No.

- - - Updated - - -

A. You were talking about MY definition of a word. You described MY definition that I gave as "too-literal-to-the-point-of-trolling."

Yes. Again, the subject in the sentence is the definition of the word, not the person who made said definition.

[Amerissis]

A slippery slope is not so slippery when you don't move in many years.

I do wonder what they intend to bleed the players for next? new raids (download raids for $5 each)?, instant max level? there probably even charge us for character model updates when there finished, calling it now, this is what they will do.

Therefore this holds no merit.

[Boogums]

Isn't Burning Crusade literally included in the base game now? Along with the Pandaren, Talent Trees, and everything?

Plus don't Wrath and Cataclysm just cost like 10 bucks each or even less?

Almost, Wrath is included in the base game now too.

[Deleted]

Didn't know you didn't know how to read. Not sure how we're communicating. Anyway:

SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONS
To play World of Warcraft, you need to either set up a recurring subscription or purchase chunks of game time.

The see Table of Features, shows you exactly what you're paying for.

Then we have a definition of subscription: "the action of making or agreeing to make an advance payment in order to receive or participate in something." So yea, you're paying your subscription to log into the game. No where was *I* able to find that your sub gives you the rights or entitlement to anything else.

What Blizzard does with their money =/= what you're paying for. I pay $20k for a car. The car doesn't cost $20k to make, this doesn't mean I get access to the houses of the employees who made that car, nor access to any cars that they make later on. It also doesn't mean they can't use that money to develop newer cars.

I don't think you quite understand the difference between "what I'm paying for" and "what the company then does with that money once I've paid for what I got."

Does dev use the money from the sub fees to develop new content? Officially, they haven't answered, they could use Activision's Skylanders money to fund WoW's developers. Unofficially? Maybe.

Does that mean you're entitled to anything other than the ability to log into the game? No.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes. Again, the subject in the sentence is the definition of the word, not the person who made said definition.

You seem to have missed my point altogether and went into a lengthy and unnecessary reply.
I'm well aware they pay for the subscription fees. I already said that. I never disputed it.
What I am saying is that additional to that, it pays for Blizzard's other expenses. You seem to be under the impression that Blizzard's only expenses are the networking department.
It defies the logical conclusion that the 3D artists making those items on the Blizzard store earn a salary funded in part by the game's subscription fees. Perhaps you have insider accounting information relating to how those sub fees only go towards their networking department. In which case I'd admit my conclusion was wrong.

[Boogums]

Almost, Wrath is included in the base game now too.

FIRST TWO EXPANSlONS FOR FREE AND THEN HALF OFF THE THIRD?! WHAT GREEDY FUCKERS.

[Deleted]

Yes. Again, the subject in the sentence is the definition of the word, not the person who made said definition.

The subject came from me. I used the definition you described as "too-literal-to-the-point-of-trolling". You describing my definition as that directly says it's trolling.

[Deleted]

I fully agree. It's gotten to the point where unless the next expansion to be revealed is something insanely awesome I'm probably gonna pull the plug. Shit's getting too expensive when all I really do anymore is raid on the weekends.

I've been playing since TBC and the money I'm spending on the game has been, well, the same ever since, the montly sub and the new expansions. It's quite a cheap game, not sure which 'shit' you're refering to that's becoming too expensive... I'm actually positively surprised that neither the monthly sub nor anything has gone up in prices (which things usually do such as food and electricity etc).

[Boogums]

You seem to have missed my point altogether and went into a lengthy and unnecessary reply.
I'm well aware they pay for the subscription fees. I already said that. I never disputed it.
What I am saying is that additional to that, it pays for Blizzard's other expenses. You seem to be under the impression that Blizzard's only expenses are the networking department.
It defies the logical conclusion that the 3D artists making those items on the Blizzard store earn a salary funded in part by the game's subscription fees. Perhaps you have insider accounting information relating to how those sub fees only go towards their networking department. In which case I'd admit my conclusion was wrong.

Actually, what you said was, "They're charging for content on top of the subscription fee we already pay for content." - You.

YOU. DO. NOT. PAY. FOR. ADDITIONAL. CONTENT.
YOU. PAY. TO. PLAY. THE. GAME.

Again, what you pay for =/= what the company uses that money for.

[rinleezwins]

I really don't mind Blizzard growing greedy. Those micro transactions do not give any advantage to anybody and as long as subscription costs won't change, I see nothing wrong.

By reading posts in this thread I came to a conclusion that a lot of you folks feel obligated to buy those pets/mounts and transmog pieces...

[Boogums]

The subject came from me. I used the definition you described as "too-literal-to-the-point-of-trolling". You describing my definition as that directly says it's trolling.

You are correct, I was talking about your definition to the word and not about you, glad we could come to an agreement.

[Deleted]

"They're charging for content on top of the subscription fee we already pay for content." - You.
YOU. DO. NOT. PAY. FOR. ADDITIONAL. CONTENT.

Again, what you pay for =/= what the company uses that money for.

The only basis for your argument is that the cosmetic content on the Blizzard store is not content.

I like the helms on the Blizzard store. I want them. They're in the game right now. It's among the game's content. I cannot do a challenge mode in the game and get them though like I can with the armour sets. So I need to pay money for additional content on top of the money I already pay which goes towards paying the salary of the people creating those helms and armour sets.

[Boogums]

The only basis for your argument is that the cosmetic content on the Blizzard store is not content.

I like the helms on the Blizzard store. I want them. They're in the game right now. It's among the game's content. I cannot do a challenge mode in the game and get them though like I can with the armour sets. So I need to pay money for additional content on top of the money I already pay which goes towards paying the salary of the people creating those helms and armour sets.

That sucks. Welcome to life.