Haha. You know that's not gonna happen.

I can dream...

What's your point? The slippery slope of micro transactions and small, niche services that you have to pay a premium for are bad. I pay $15/month to play already, these features SHOULD be part of it. Valid argument is valid.

@Don - what valid argument are you talking about?

1.) Slippery Slope is commonly accepted as a fallacy. The primary reason behind this is the argument assumes that all future decisions are based solely on the outcome of previous decisions, and not on their own merit.

2.) Why do you assume your $15/mo adequately pays for an additional service? Do you have any information about the manner in which it was implemented, or how much it cost Blizzard in development, or how much it will cost in maintenance? Today, you can't group cross-realm, and you pay $15/mo. Tomorrow, you will be able to, and you think that should be free? So, basically, you want something for nothing?

Oh God, no! It's happening on a post specifically designated to prevent it!

That comment to me means they haven't decided 100% on making it premium. They came out of the gate with information on premium and now they're backing off and saying they'll supply those details later.

I haven't come across too many people who are excited that they're charging extra for things like this. I think a lot of people feel WoW this stepping over the line.

Either way, not a WoW killer or anything. If the outcry is large enough, they'll just offer it for free and be done with it.

Why shouldn't folks be able to comment on the increasing frequency of premium services? Blizzard is rolling out a new premium service, one of many over the past three years or so, and so it warrants discussion if people feel so inclined.

The idea that this is all part of a "slippery slope," too, has merit. Certainly as players we receive a ton of content as part of our subscription fee, no question. The subscription fees cover server costs, content updates, character rebalancing, etc., but never forget the fee you paid at the gate. Between the Battle Chest (if you got in late) and expansions WoW is already the most expensive video game in existence.

This particular service is not like previously introduced "Premium" services, either. Grouping with your RealID friends is an integrated social function within the game. You are effectively gating social functions once they become available by charging a fee thereafter. Mobile Guild Chat is external to the game. Sparkle ponies and non-combat pets are in-game but have arguably no direct impact on gameplay. RealID and dungeon grouping has a direct impact on how you play the game because it impacts with whom you get to play.

I'm actually really surprised that Blizzard is considering giving this a price tag considering that it didn't charge for RealID itself.

All I'm saying, Iirdan, is that valid points about premium services can be made within the context of this new service. Well, that's not ALL I'm saying, but it's mixed in there with a bunch of other stuff.

I appreciate your attempt to thwart outright trolling, but those suckers have Regeneration!

@JBluntz
He may not be expecting something for nothing. In addition to the cost of the game itself that $15 pays for a lot of things, like content updates in the form of new raids and dungeons, but it also pays for additional services like RealID, an improved LFD interface, and similarly improved UI functions (like simplified Powerauras). It is reasonable to expect a service like the one being introduced here be included with our current subscription.

This is, of course, purely a matter of opinion. Blizzard can try and charge for it and see if it sticks, and it may, but I don't think it's the right move from a customer service standpoint. Epic Games, for example, releases new maps and content for Unreal Tournament players all the time for "free," meaning it was included in the cost of the game. Offering customers better service for existing prices is good business.

"Valid argument is valid." lol

It's technically possible to have a valid slippery slope argument, but you almost never actually see one.

The only way to make a "slippery slope" argument valid is to demonstrate that the current decision leads *inevitably* to the later thing you don't want. In other words, you must prove that it is impossible to implement the current thing without also implementing the latter thing. If you cannot prove that, it is an invalid argument. For example, if you cannot prove that it is impossible to sell cosmetic items without inevitably also selling items that make you more powerful, then the argument is invalid. You may have very valid reasons to oppose selling the latter, but they do not form a valid argument for opposing the former until you prove the impossibility of doing the former without the latter.

In order to oppose something relatively harmless on the basis of "where it leads", you must prove that it actually does lead there. Without that, it's an invalid argument, and almost always, it's impossible to prove that because the current act does not require the supposed follow-up. If you don't want that follow-up, then oppose it, but don't oppose the current thing if there's nothing wrong with it other than you see it as "a step in the direction of ..." Every step westwards is a step towards drowning in the Pacific, but whatever you arguments may be against downing oneself, they do not constitute an argument against walking west, despite the true fact that walking west is indeed a step in that direction.

@Don

If $15 per month is a rip-off without pets, mounts, cross-server groups, and mobile chat/auctions, you've been choosing to get ripped-off for years.

Lordy, I do hate it ever so much when someone tries to stifle discussion of...ANYTHING.

Use your damn scroll wheel if you don't want to read it.

Alright, Artificial, I really like where you've gone with this!

"The only way to make a "slippery slope" argument valid is to demonstrate that the current decision leads *inevitably* to the later thing you don't want." -Artifical

Given your guidelines, let's try to "prove" that by introducing one premium service - of any kind - that Blizzard has caused a slippery slope, find evidence that the slippery slope has occurred, and that it will continue in perpetuity.

*Tinfoil Hat On*

1 - Blizzard introduces Realm Transfers (or was it faction transfers that came first? I can't remember), augmenting profits.
2 - Now that Blizzard has successfully introduced one premium service, its future sales targets are similarly increased. In order to meet those targets it has to introduce additional premium services.
3 - Faction Transfer introduced, also successful, so future sales targets are made both more firm based on existing sales data of the prior services and higher based on the expectation that Blizzard will find additional services to charge.
4 - Non-Combat Pets go on sale, wildly successful. Shareholders cheer. Gross sales targets continue to rise. Bobby Kotick takes a swim in his Money Bin.
5 - ...I think I can stop here.

*Tinfoil Hat Off*

By introducing one premium service Blizzard is obligated to grow its sales going forward, and to do so is somewhat limited. It cannot charge higher subscription fees, already being the most expensive online MMO, and it can only release expansions as development permits. Premium services for vanity items and in-game conveniences make the most sense.

This most recent service, therefore, is not a "slippery slope" in itself, but further evidence of the pressure on Blizzard to meet sales goals. If the report of a decrease in subscribers are accurate, SW:TOR on the horizon, and RIFT showing it has some fighting spirit, that pressure is only increased to draw greater profits from the remaining customer base.

-----

I'm not sure this "proves" anything, because there are a lot of underlying assumptions here, but I do think the slippery slope discussion has compelling arguments, and reasonable conversation can be had with a little effort.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts, Artificial, if you're still around.

Everyone who thinks these services should be included in our $15/mo should take a look at what's happening with netflix and their 60% price increase, and be glad we have the option to continue paying only $15/mo. You're living in a dream world if you don't think Activision said "Let's make those suckers pay more a month", thankfully someone at Blizz stuck up for the little guy.

JBluntz: "2.) Why do you assume your $15/mo adequately pays for an additional service? Do you have any information about the manner in which it was implemented, or how much it cost Blizzard in development, or how much it will cost in maintenance? Today, you can't group cross-realm, and you pay $15/mo. Tomorrow, you will be able to, and you think that should be free? So, basically, you want something for nothing?"

Besides the fact that you can already group cross-realm? Since 3.3? For $15/mo? The only difference is that it's random.