Youve been able to buy gold for ages anyway, and you can use gold in a huge variety of ways to get you 'FULL EPIC LOOTZ'
World of Warcraft Gets Microtransaction Pets, Players Freak Out
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
What he said, in triplicate.CantFaketheFunk said:
I'm a little puzzled by some of the wording here though.
Are we talking about something that annoys NPC's only here?
I can't really say anything bad about the money going to charity, but if it's a microtransaction within a pay-to-play game, it should realistically be a lot more than 50% going towards the charity.
Generally, I think that giving boasting rights to people with more money than skill is a bad idea. But then rewarding skill is seen as elitist and not rewarding anyone is seen as lazy.
Critters = the little mobs that are just there for flavor, have 5 HP, and won't attack anyone (unless there's a bug, which does happen). They're things like cockroaches, squirrels, frogs, stuff like that. No effect on actual gameplay whatsoever.The_root_of_all_evil said:
And I don't think these are bragging rights, they're just something cool you can get. Stuff like the titles or the rare mounts that you get in-game for doing the tough achievements? THAT sort of thing is bragging rights. Having $10 to throw around is not.
It's called the Slippery Slope Fallacy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope_fallacy] for a reason, you know.johnx61 said:I can name that tune in two notes: Slippery Slope. No, they aren't making people buy the crap. And true it has no in-game effect. But it's a stepping stone to making people buy in-game junk, and that's just BS.CantFaketheFunk said:Blizzard has been doing this since long before the Activision-Vivendi merger. TCG loot cards, collector's edition pets, BlizzCon pets. Did you have a problem with those too?johnx61 said:
It's been happening from the beginning, and we're no closer to getting actual in-game equipment from them than we've ever been. I honestly don't see the issue in giving players the option to get something that has literally no effect on gameplay if they want to plunk the money down. No one's forcing anyone to buy it, y'know
"It's a stepping stone to making people buy in-game junk?" You might have a case if they hadn't been doing this thing since the game came out. Spend $30 more on the collector's edition? Get a rare pet. Buy the TCG to get a loot card? Get a rare pet. Buy the $40 BlizzCon PPV stream? Get a rare pet.
Blizzard has been extremely careful to do things that are only cosmetic in nature as far as RMT is concerned. That's been the case for the past five years, and there's no reason that it would suddenly change now just because the middleman is being removed.
Yes but your making that claim on the assumption that this will lead to that kind of thing. And as Mr.Funk pointed out this has been happening for a long time now and has yet to get to that level. Of coarse if it did get to that level I could understand the opinion. But this has been going on for a long time and it hasn't happened yet so I don't see any evidence to support the slippery slope theory.johnx61 said:I can name that tune in two notes: Slippery Slope. No, they aren't making people buy the crap. And true it has no in-game effect. But it's a stepping stone to making people buy in-game junk, and that's just BS.CantFaketheFunk said:Blizzard has been doing this since long before the Activision-Vivendi merger. TCG loot cards, collector's edition pets, BlizzCon pets. Did you have a problem with those too?johnx61 said:
It's been happening from the beginning, and we're no closer to getting actual in-game equipment from them than we've ever been. I honestly don't see the issue in giving players the option to get something that has literally no effect on gameplay if they want to plunk the money down. No one's forcing anyone to buy it, y'know
Fair enough, thought I'd check that.CantFaketheFunk said:
I just remember the Arby and Chief episode where Master Cheef(sic) gets the Recon armour and runs around desperate to show it to everyone. Peer pressure in Guilds can be stronger than it used to be in the playground, and accusations of "being poor" can have you ostracized.
But...like I said, any "extras" can be seen in that way. See Halos in TF2. Perhaps they just need to build a "BL1SSARD R KILLIN MAH GAME" section into the forums just before they release a new expansion.
One thing though, does only the Panda count towards the charity?
it's the same argument used by crazies against gay marriage.robert632 said:
'Well, if we allow men to marry men, next the men who want to marry animals will demand to, then the ones who want to marry their furniture, we can't let one thru or we won't be able to stop it!
Uh no, vanity items for cash is fine, I'd like either of them, but I'd just feel weird knowing people knew I paid for it.
Vanity pets is not 'a slippery slope' to a level 80 in full epics for $100.
Personally I'd like em, but I'll just wait til I can see someone elses, and save myself the cash.
Considering they're working on five separate (WoW, SC2, D3, unnamed MMO, unnamed other project) projects right now, as well as maintenace fees, legal fees, customer support, getting the new BNet up and running, continuing to maintain the old BNet (and patching SC1 and WC3) all while making a profit (which is the objective of a business, in case you forgot)?Slider2k said:
Probably.
The Murloc Marine they gave out at BlizzCon '09 will attack the Zergling from the CE of vanilla WoW. http://www.wowwiki.com/Gruntyshadow_pirate22 said:
In re: microtransaction, I figured that Blizzard would go there eventually for vanity items. I've been playing since beta, and most of what Blizzard does seems to be a logical progression of the business model, to maximize profits and keep the game 'fresh'- both appealing to potential new players as well as keeping the current subscribers engaged.
I'm sure that the Blizzard folks recognize that WoW won't last forever, but they're doing a hell of a job to keep it going this strong, this long. Purchasable vanity pets are a part of that. Race change, faction change, name change... those are all services geared towards renewing the interest of long-term players. I wouldn?t be surprised to see other 'vanity' changes as well, perhaps even monetized, like maybe non-elite mounts, tabards or something. But there is one thing that I doubt we will ever see: the ability to buy gear. Why? Because if Blizzard was going to go that route, they would've already dipped their hands into the gold-selling honeypot. That would actually have many, many benefits for them: not only would it be a huge moneymaker, it would also greatly reduce goldfarming along with nasty things like trojans, keyloggers, and viruses associated with gold-buying. But they haven't, so I'm relatively sure that we won't see "Buy your Tier 12 gear for $20/pc-- $35 for the chest!" any time soon, if ever.
Ultimately, however, as much as anyone might dislike changes made to the game, there is a simple fact that trumps all the QQing- Blizzard is a business, and they pay their people to figure out how to most efficiently and effectively monetize their products. You may not like or agree with what they do, but the only authority you have is to choose to participate or not.
So, you people who are screaming that this is the "beginning of the end", you should know, the people who actually have thought about this rather than simply reacting are amused by your antics.
Didn't see anyone else that may have pointed this out. I play Warcraft and no I'm not into wasting my real life money but it's well known on forums and various realms that the Spectral Tiger mount can fetch a whopping $900. Why anyone would do this is beyond me. More money than sense I suppose.Eric the Orange said:
When I think "Micro-transaction" I don't think "$10". I mean thats 25% of the cost of the entire WoTLK game itself, and almost a months subscription.
When I think micro-transaction I think along the lines of $.10, $.15, $.25 etc. Very cheap little upgrades, but lots of them, with millions of people buying them. Sort of an iTunes model.
Sorry Blizz. Not for me at that price.
When I think micro-transaction I think along the lines of $.10, $.15, $.25 etc. Very cheap little upgrades, but lots of them, with millions of people buying them. Sort of an iTunes model.
Sorry Blizz. Not for me at that price.
Yes...that's -very- troublesome, when you think about, the DLC mods for Oblivion when they came out, about $1-4.00 for an entire player home, the wizards tower etc. or a questline. In comparison, $10 for a single pet seems a little extortionate, so yeah, if you've got the money to burn, go ahead. I'm certainly not going to be 'taking advantage' of this service, or any of the others anytime soon.George Palmer said:
I collected over 75 pets in WoW on my main, including buying one from a trading card on E-bay (the super-cute chimp). As a pet lover, I can dig anything that allows others to increase the size of their menagerie.
I've recently moved over to Champions Online, and they have a similar store that allows purchases of costumes and other things that don't really affect the game. Interestingly, they also sell additional character slots for your account, and retcons (similar to WoW's respecs). They've stated that anything in the store that affects gameplay will also be available in-game somehow, as is the case with retcons. In-game, retcons are rather expensive right now, so I suspect they're making a nice sum. Evil money-grabbing, or just good business?
I've recently moved over to Champions Online, and they have a similar store that allows purchases of costumes and other things that don't really affect the game. Interestingly, they also sell additional character slots for your account, and retcons (similar to WoW's respecs). They've stated that anything in the store that affects gameplay will also be available in-game somehow, as is the case with retcons. In-game, retcons are rather expensive right now, so I suspect they're making a nice sum. Evil money-grabbing, or just good business?