Blizzard Introduces Buying in-Game WoW Items

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

anamaniac

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2009
2,447
0
19,790
[citation][nom]Ribwich World Tour[/nom]Pandaren were introduced in Warcraft 3: TFT, which came out in 2003.[/citation]
Thank you.
WC3 TFT is still great by the way. DoTA is horrible though...

I hope it remains harmless... useless shit or barely useful shit only please...
I haven't played it for around 2 years now, but I don't want to see Blizzard ruin its Warcraft franchise (I loved the lore, at least before the first expansion).
 

lashabane

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2009
184
0
18,680
[citation][nom]Ribwich World Tour[/nom]Pandaren were introduced in Warcraft 3: TFT, which came out in 2003.[/citation]

Oh, I didn't play that game nearly as much as I played Warcraft II. The picture just made me think of Kung Fu Panda.
 
There is no need for all you wow players to get your panties in a bunch. So far its only the release of a collectible pet. Lets just say they do impliment a limited content buying system.. would that upset all the people who wasted endless hours grinding/pvping for your "special" gear when you could have just bought it for $10? That is the trouble in a game where all of the "special" gear you have equipped is important to how well you do. If this upsets you, play a skill based game like GW and the soon be be released GW2.
 

skora

Distinguished
Nov 2, 2008
1,498
0
19,460
People already have access to buying items for real money outside the game. I see accounts on craigslist all the time and I'm sure there's other outlets go buy what you want. If Blizzard can cash in on it, donate some money, and make the game better, support the idea.
 

Toddosan

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
46
0
18,530
I have no problems with buying "cosmetic" items, but once they start selling epics and other gear that affects PvP and the whole attitude of the game, im out! I can see it now, "Looking for group must have epics bought from web store, i will check armory before invite!" sigh me thinks star wars the old republic is looking better and better every day.
 

eccentric909

Distinguished
Oct 4, 2006
388
0
18,780
[citation][nom]redgarl[/nom]In a single player experience you got a story, an experience... in a MMO you got gameplay only. [/citation]

You do know there is a huge story behind WoW, right? It's not only gameplay, a lot of people play the game for the lore of Warcraft. Now, differing opinions will either say that they've ruined the lore or have moved it forward nicely, but neither opinion discounts that there is a huge story going on, just as much, if not moreso than a lot of single player games.
 

enforcer22

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2006
1,692
0
19,790
[citation][nom]sKiT75[/nom]This is the beginning of the end actually. Ask the folks still playing SWG how well the "harmless" microtransaction gear from the TCG went over. It started off with seemingly useless crap such as the items mentioned above and has evolved into a downward spiral of "lets see how much more money we can milk from this game before it's toast" I'm sure from a business perspective, it is a good money maker for an aging title but it has left a bad taste in my mouth as a player. I just lose all interest in a game when this happens. These gimicks take time away from real developement of the game, especially in its later years. I flat out refuse to even try games like Cabal and Hero specifically because of the that business model. If this is the future of gaming.../puke I guess I won't be a gamer anymore.P.S. I've never played WoW but was a 66-month veteran over at SWG.[/citation]


It wasnt buying items that killed SWG (besides the fact it sucked in the first place.) sont ruins EVERY game they touch. eventualy they strip it down to a carebear bradybunch pussywhooped version of its self. and everyone stops playing.

and lol@gw being skill based.... or a game for that matter.
 

ltgrunt

Distinguished
May 19, 2009
26
0
18,530
The overreactions to this news are a bit much.

There is a yawning gulf of difference between being able to buy purely ornamental, completely useless gimmicks and being able to buy game-breaking, raid-level epics. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Blizzard will ever move toward selling in-game equipment. There's no need to get all alarmist over this.

If Blizzard were going to sell in-game gold, equipment, leveling, etc., they would have started doing it a lot sooner. The anti-cheating, anti-gold buying messages on the main worldofwarcraft.com website sum up Blizzard's stance on players who try to gain an unfair advantage, and I very much doubt that they would throw away their credibility and a significant chunk of their 11+ million subscribers for a quick buck. They've already initiated enough other optional charges for things like server moves, faction changes and other character changes.
 

Jarvis

Distinguished
Jan 15, 2004
20
0
18,510
Blizzard just took over the gold farming industry in my opinion. Always about money. Like 8 million monthly paying subs isn't enough. My problem with microtransations is it takes away resources from the rest of the game. I don't see any problem with them in a free game, but why should these paying customers have to lose that artist or that programmer for a month when they receive no benefit?
 

invlem

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2008
580
0
18,980
Honestly, this is no different than the special items you get when you purchase a BlizCon ticket.

So long as the pay items are cosmetic only and give no actual in-game advantages I see no problem with this marketing strategy.
 

jellico

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
622
0
18,980
[citation][nom]Jarvis[/nom]Blizzard just took over the gold farming industry in my opinion. Always about money. Like 8 million monthly paying subs isn't enough. My problem with microtransations is it takes away resources from the rest of the game. I don't see any problem with them in a free game, but why should these paying customers have to lose that artist or that programmer for a month when they receive no benefit?[/citation]
When will you people get it through your heads?! BUSINESSES EXIST FOR THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF MAKING MONEY! It's not about the art, it's not about the gamer, it's about the money. Like it or not, there it is. And let's face it, that's how stuff gets done. Point me in the direction of a game like WoW, or Mass Effect, or Fallout 3, or Dragon Age or (insert your favorite game here) that is FREE? And I don't mean, free to play but that gets click-revenue. I mean totally free. There isn't one. That's because games take a lot of time and effort from a lot of people, and those people want to get pair for their work.

The next issue is this whole notion of, "isn't it enough?" Isn't X dollars per year enough? Isn't 8 million monthly paid subscriptions enough? Well, let's answer your question this way. What if they said yes, it's enough? Ok, all of the game creators are millionaires now. The programmers are all getting a six-figure bonus. Everyone involved has made a pile of money... we're done here. So what then? They shut the servers down? They stop making new games? Afterall, they've made enough haven't they? Imagine all of the companies that make billions of dollars a year. Now imagine all of them ceasing operations because they've made enough. The founders are rich and decided to call it a day. When you put things into proper perspective, you quickly realize the foley of saying, "haven't they made enough?"
 

tester24

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
415
0
18,780
This goes to show you how lame the gaming community is becomming, not only do you have the monthly fee, they pretty much compelle you to pay more money for stuff you can get IN GAME. Played WOW for a few months found too much BS in the game, got boring fast... some game huh.. Oh well if some loser wants to keep chucking cash into a game with no real life gain fine by me.
 

balister

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2006
403
0
18,790
[citation][nom]wira020[/nom]FINALLY!!... I almost gone crazy from seeing no comments about that... its fking obvious!!![/citation]

Uh, no. The Pandaren has been around the game since WC3, much, much before Kung Fu Panda ever came out. If anything, I would say Kung Fu Panda is more of a rip off of Blizzard than the other way around (as Blizzard has had the Pandaren for close to 10 years now).
 

balister

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2006
403
0
18,790
Those of you complaining do realize that in the case of the Pandaren Monk, half of the proceeds are going to a worthy cause. So far they have only introduced pets and probably eventually mounts (like what can be gotten through the card game). Most likely it will be little innocous things that have no effect on the game play outside of looks.
 

balister

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2006
403
0
18,790
Those of you complaining, you do realize that half of the money is going to a worthy cause when purchasing the Pandaren Monk. To me, it's no different then giving $5 to some charity, in this case you get a keepsake for doing so.

Also, with the way Blizzard has been doing things, all these little add ins and such from the pet store (which will probably expand to mounts and innocuous toys) and the card game just add little bits of flavor, but don't actually change the way the game is played.
 
sorry to get off topic but....

[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]and lol@gw being skill based.... or a game for that matter.[/citation]

Guildwars hasn't done bad for itself. 3 campaigns and one expansion later and it is still truckin'. And yes, the game is skill based. Any user can get max-level equipment; the "epic" items being fancy armor, dyes, and super rare weapon drops. What counts most in the game is skill, strategy, and what skills (spells, attacks) you bring to the table. Oh and its free per month so I cannot complain.
 

bildo123

Distinguished
Feb 6, 2007
1,599
0
19,810
Thank god I never got into this game. This game is such a joke, in fact, it doesn't even deserve the Warcraft in the title. They should Change it too World of Pixar KiddieKraft. They are just adding crap that they know the general population of yuppies that play this game will buy. But more power to em', more money for Diablo 3.
 
[citation][nom]kami3k[/nom]So because what a dead, SWG, MMO did that is ran by a idiotic company, and now what the most overrated MMO is doing. You are going to quit ALL of gaming.Lol.... Talk about a overreaction.[/citation]
I don't think I'm overreacting at all. These are some of the biggest titles in the MMO world going this direction. If this is the direction they are going, I'm just saying it continues without me. It is a personal choice and I never said "all gaming". We are talking about a specific genre of gaming here which is changing its business model. Many people obviously embrace the new model. I'm just not one of them.
I prefer a MMO where gear is available to those who invest the proper time. That is how these games(WoW & SWG) were originally marketed. They have now become hybrids of the microtransaction games such as Cabal & Hero. This is not what most of the users originally signed up for but, it is what they have now. If you have a comment about the story, let's hear it. If you want to continue to prod me for a reaction, have fun kami3k.
 

csmithson

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2009
17
0
18,510
How purchasing an item in game that has 0 impact on the environment is "the beginning of the end" is... odd at best.

I have heard so many comments about this being the "end of WoW". It wont end until blizz kills the lore. Then they will take the play style and business modle to a new mmorpg.

If/when they start implimenting purchasing raid-level loot. thats when you have an issue.

Lastly, everyone rips on how bliz has made this game uber care-bear... they have done no such thing. The high level raiding is still there. hard modes are what just plain raiding was back in vanilla wow. they simply ADDED easier content for people who arent quite as skilled.
 

jellico

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
622
0
18,980
[citation][nom]sKiT75[/nom]I don't think I'm overreacting at all. These are some of the biggest titles in the MMO world going this direction. If this is the direction they are going, I'm just saying it continues without me. It is a personal choice and I never said "all gaming". We are talking about a specific genre of gaming here which is changing its business model. Many people obviously embrace the new model. I'm just not one of them.I prefer a MMO where gear is available to those who invest the proper time. That is how these games(WoW & SWG) were originally marketed. They have now become hybrids of the microtransaction games such as Cabal & Hero. This is not what most of the users originally signed up for but, it is what they have now. If you have a comment about the story, let's hear it. If you want to continue to prod me for a reaction, have fun kami3k.[/citation]
So, then, you feel okay about excluding a portion of the gamer population who would really enjoy playing these games, but don't have the time to keep a regular raiding schedule? These games are only for those who can devote a portion of their lives to it, and if they can't, screw them?

I agree, the Chinese Gold Farmer effect needs to be rained in. In the days before the gold farmers, people with extra cash or gear might sell stuff in the auction house, or they might sell it on eBay. The gold farmers introduced an element where large groups of people would basically play non-stop to get items to sell, and then finally started resorting to stealing accounts and hacking the game environment to do things like getting below the map so they can hit every ore node while standing in one place.

That's not to say I don't think there's a place for real world transactions for in-game merchandise. The destablizing effect comes from the sudden influx of gold out of nowhere. That's basically the counterfeit effect. If you flood a country with counterfeit money that is indistinguishable from real money, then it will cause hyper inflation. This would happen if Blizzard just materialized any amount of gold to fill a microtransaction order. However, if there is an exchange, then that doesn't happen. And, if you've got loads of free time and have a huge gold balance in your bank box. Isn't it up to you to decide what to do with that? You might decide to help out some guildies or some newbs. Or maybe, you'll decide to give a bunch to a "friend" who decided that your time is worth something and sent you some cash via PayPal. Maybe your guild owns 25-man ToC on a stick and you decide to start charging non-guild members a few thousand gold to run them through and get them some gear. I see that going on and it's perfectly legal. Change that few thousand gold to a PayPal payment and all of a sudden, "OMFG, it's going to destroy the game!!!!!!!"

Just a little food for thought.
 

csmithson

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2009
17
0
18,510
[citation][nom]jellico[/nom] However, if there is an exchange, then that doesn't happen. And, if you've got loads of free time and have a huge gold balance in your bank box. Isn't it up to you to decide what to do with that? You might decide to help out some guildies or some newbs. Or maybe, you'll decide to give a bunch to a "friend" who decided that your time is worth something and sent you some cash via PayPal. Maybe your guild owns 25-man ToC on a stick and you decide to start charging non-guild members a few thousand gold to run them through and get them some gear. I see that going on and it's perfectly legal. Change that few thousand gold to a PayPal payment and all of a sudden, "OMFG, it's going to destroy the game!!!!!!!"Just a little food for thought.[/citation]

Keep this in mind. Your time is yours, and belongs to you. The items in WOW, all items and gold actually BELONG to Blizz. From that perspective, a freind paying you as a person to take the TIME to run them through a dungeon, in a transaction that doesnt actually equate to anything in game other than time spent... is (or should be) legal.

Tradeing gold (blizz property) for real-world cash is a no-no.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.