Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsBreakfast Topic: How far would you let WoW microtransactions go?
by Zach Yonzon 
Nov 9th 2009 at 8:00AM
At any rate, it looks like the Pet Store is here to stay. Besides, Blizzard has already been hawking in-game services for real money, so it's not as if these vanity pets are any different. I personally don't find anything wrong with these pets, and seeing the number of diminutive liches and kung fu pandas showing up all over Azeroth, it really seems like a lot of other people don't, either.
Blizzard states that these items, similar to the TCG loot cards, are "purely cosmetic and just for fun." They say that they'd be loathe to introduce things that are "detrimental to the game and (detracts) from the gameplay experience for players who choose not to use the service." So that probably means no epic weapons or anything of the sort.
How far does that go, though? Are heirloom items considered detrimental to the game? How about buying levels? Premades? I personally wouldn't mind paying a fair price to skip the painful leveling process (an attitude that might admittedly change during the Cataclysm). What's do you think is next for Blizzard? Armor dyes, perhaps? Vanity outfits such as the complete Brewfest set or gag items such as those found on the TCG? Titles? Now that the microtransactions gate has been opened, how far do you think Blizzard will go?
Filed under: Items, Blizzard, Economy, Breakfast Topics
Reader Comments (Page 4 of 7)
WoWie Zowie Nov 9th 2009 8:36AM
i admit i would really get bored with wow if people could buy levels.
i wouldn't feel like i've accomplished anything and i'd probably look to a different mmo tbh, aion maybe.
i'd probably stick around to see some content and whatnot, then i figure i could cancel my subscription, come back when there is new content, and put an extra $15 down to skip levels.
and just rethinking what i just typed, back to my first thought. i would get bored with wow =\
Kromus Nov 9th 2009 12:59PM
I think it should stay at vanity items, i think armour dye is a pretty good idea though.
Mau Nov 9th 2009 8:42AM
I like leveling more than reputation grinding at 80 QQ
I would have a no tolerance policy to microtransactions. If I wanted a game where I paid for buffing my character, I'd play all those "free" MMORPGs that are out there...
hillbillyrod Nov 9th 2009 8:43AM
It's the beginning of the end. Of course they are going to sell armor and weapons. Business is money, and if this brings in money they will expand. Of course you don't earn anything with buying things, that what makes wow what it is now. You get where you are from working at it. Not from laying down a few bucks and BAM you have things more than the average guy who actually works and learns how to play his character to get what he has. I will not buy anything from them, because I did not earn them, same with the TCG.
loop_not_defined Nov 9th 2009 9:08AM
If this is the beginning of the end, then the end was at the beginning. Collector's Editions reward people with in-game pets for spending extra cash.
Dart Nov 9th 2009 8:44AM
It's already too far. Microtransations are supposed to be for free games.
Sleutel Nov 9th 2009 8:45AM
Anything that's the equivalent of TCG loot is fine. In other words, they should only sell vanity items like mounts, pets, tabards, shirts, and silly usable items like the pet biscuits.
Things to be sold that will ruin the game: armor (with stats, as opposed to simply cosmetic), weapons, 310% flying mounts, levels, class changes, achievements, buffs that will make bosskilling easier, etc.
PictoKong Nov 9th 2009 8:51AM
These models are nice... Well for the ones who pay them
I don't care about selling pets or vanity stuff, as long as "having x mounts/pets" can still be done without it
Oh and http://www.wow.com/2009/11/05/patch-3-3-ptr-get-a-pug-when-you- anyone??
Nearly the same HD definition, and it's free!!!
Mitawa Nov 9th 2009 8:48AM
I didn't want them to go this far. Sure the pets don't "help" you fight or do anything in game, by why do I have to pay for something that's been covered in my $15 a month this whole time so long as I was willing to work for it?
If they can get $10 for a new pet, are they really going to want to keep developing pets for us to get with only game gold/faction/quests?
What if they look more closely at the micro-transaction model and see that MapleStory and others like it only give you an item for three months? Would you be as happy to to pay $10 to "rent" your pandaren?
I don't know. I never had to pay to get an in game pet before unless it was as a bonus because I was enjoying the card game. (Yes, people who actually play the game can find cards too.)
Yes, this stance is extreme, but it's hyperbole. I'm intentionally exaggerating to make a point. I'm not crying about it, I'm just uncomfortable with it. Enjoy your pixels.
Storm Eagle [Resident Capcom Megafan] Nov 9th 2009 8:50AM
At this point, I'd buy a straight shot to level 80...depending on the price of course. I have limited time to play WoW as it is. I have on level 80 DK but I want to expand into other roles....healing perhaps, or a more dependable tank. I simply don't have the time....or will really, to level all the way to 80 again, not to mention the time it takes to get adequately geared.
Rugus Nov 9th 2009 8:57AM
I'd buy a "Class change" for a fee (for those who already have a level 80 toon, for example). That's something hard to accept, because you could level 1-80 as hunter (easy class to level) to switch over a priest, for example. Paying for that would allow some advantage to people who can pay more than regular subscription.
Don Jose Nov 9th 2009 8:55AM
I'd rather not see this sort of thing, although i respect that other people feel differently. I think pets/mounts are more special when they are rewards for in-game activity or random, like the time I was cleaning up some old quests in Grizzly Hills and I happened upon a school of fish. I thought to myself, "might as well make sure you have that school covered for 'Northrend Angler,' " and fished it. First cast...sea turtle mount! I almost fell out of my chair with excitement...and proceeded to hearth & parade around Dalaran on it for about 20 minutes, basking in the glow of /bow & /cheer and responding to whispers of "where'd you get that?" =)
Sadly, my opinion of the $10 pets has led me to /spit on many a Pandaren Monk in the last few days, despite the fact that I think they're adorable... =/
cmichaelcooper Nov 9th 2009 8:56AM
I want to know why they are called microtransactions? When I go to the store and spend $10 on something I don't call it a microtransaction. I think this terminology attempts to trivialize the act of spending $10 on something that doesn't really exist.
Otherwise, I see no problem with selling vanity items. Players will all recognize that you spent money for item-x and they will either respect you for it or they won't. Hard-won vanity items will still be the focus for those players that care about that sort of thing.
It seems like these days any one thing will either be the best thing ever, or it will ruin the world (of warcraft). The truth is that Blizzard selling vanity items will have no major effect on the game at all.
berry Nov 9th 2009 9:04AM
If Blizzard is going to sell anything other than vanity stuff for real money, I am gone for good. Don't even have to think too hard about that one.
The moment they sell XP or Items they will kill the game (at least for me) and I dearly hope they know that.
NightSide.iPhone Nov 9th 2009 9:10AM
The first I heard of the Pet Shop was when people started selling the codes for gold in trade chat. Regardless of if this was a scam or not, Blizzard have just given people an easy way to convert cash to in game gold.
Eric Diaz Nov 9th 2009 9:11AM
I would say no further than novelty pets and novelty outfits (outfits that look cool but give no real stats)
Keith Nov 9th 2009 10:04AM
Whatever your opinion, if the other servers looked anything like mine on Saturday, people have already voted with their wallets. I saw plenty of Pandarens out and about.
I'm like many people: I'm perfectly happy for there to be a store selling pets, and regular (i.e. normal and fast) mounts, and maybe even "dressing up" clothes for those who want something other than the tuxedo for their bank alt. It's not something *I'm* going to spend money on, but it does no harm to anyone else. If you have a rare mount as a reward for raids/whatever, it doesn't devalue your achievement.
Items which affect the way the game plays is much more dangerous and should be avoided, unless Blizzard plans to switch WoW to the free-to-play model.
Faladril Nov 9th 2009 9:20AM
Anything that can affect an achievement should NEVER be purchasable. Pets, mounts, and the like... if they are purchaseable, they should be like the Magic Broom. It doesn't count. Achievements won't mean anything if you can just buy them.
On other fronts, I can hear it now... "But, honey, all my other guildies have the tier 10 gear, and they didn't have to work for it. All they had to do was buy it. It was only $50 for the WHOLE set! I gotta get it or I'll look out of place when we storm Ice Crown Citadel. They won't want to be seen with me if I don't have that gear! I know it's almost Christmas! This can be your gift to me. I won't ask for anything else, I promise! Oh, you weren't planning on spending that much?"
It's called "Keeping up with the Joneses." If it ever comes to that point, then it's not a game anymore, it's a mad dash to see who can spend the most money. The game will become very clique-ish and elitist.
Let's hope that if they do offer more items for sale, they will keep things like this in mind. They seem to give a lot of consideration to everything else so far.
loop_not_defined Nov 9th 2009 9:42AM
Do you think they should get rid of Collector's Edition pets? Or Blizzcon/WWI pets? How about the TCG pets and mounts? They can all be bought with $$$ and affect Achievements.
Achievement points don't affect anybody's gameplay (even yours), so I'm not sure why you're up in arms over this.
Dude Nov 9th 2009 9:26AM
I'm looking around for another subscription MMO just in case WoW MT goes loco.
LOTRO is ok, but the avatar animation can be a bit weird and broken, even on lowest settings on a reasonable PC. If they fixed that so avatar animation is better and smoother like WoWs are, I could be tempted back.
Warhammer - Maybe. The limitless free trial is tempting.
Conan - Hmmm. Perhaps.
Aion - Nah, bots, goldseller spam, queues, and well, nah.
Champions Online - Like the look, but worried about replayability. The different WoW races are a blessing for that.
Older games? DAoC? Will see. Guild Wars is definitely an option and so will be GW2.