What you’re doing is called false equivalence. He’s complaining about one thing that’s bothering him and you’re diverting attention to something else that isn’t related. Overpriced cosmetics and pay to win mechanics are two separate issues
1 Like
You mean I did whataboutism. You have to read the first reply I made here and understand the deeper meaning about the real sickness of the gaming industry right now and its relation to the alternative of cosmetics.
Most companies have the delusion they have to contaminate the gameplay with microtransactions; cosmetics are a cure to that; no matter their price they protect gameplay.
This may not be true, you can only guarantee that if someone bought it for 60 they would still buy it for 30. Unless you hired a marketing team to find out how many you would sell at $30 I don’t think you know if they would sell 20% more, 100%more, or 200%more.
My issue isn’t with them selling the skin or the price. My issue is that blizzard wastes time and resources on something like this when there are so many things that need to be addressed. For what they put into it, do they expect to recoup the cost? Personally, I’m not buying it, and I haven’t seen one in play yet so I don’t think many are.
Anyone spending $60 on this as an adult probably needs some actual adult supervision.
2 Likes
Unless you mean to imply you either aren’t an adult, or have never in your adulthood had $60 to spend, I’m fairly sure one could comb through your expenditures and find something equally egregious or trivial as a HS skin bundle.
Something something glass houses vs stones.
Because Blizzard’s templar knights order has not been eradicated…The only difference here is that they tend to try and use their brain , trying to look smart and objective while in the reality they are just clowns wiping the boots of papa “blizz”
1 Like
I am honestly baffled by the “how dare players spend their money!” obsession. It blows my mind that internet strangers are THAT invested in other internet strangers’ wallets.
It’s so weird.
1 Like
Making conclusions through assumptions.
This is the pinnacle of pro-Blizzard rhetoric on this site.
Let’s clear up any ambiguity then:
- Are you an adult?
- Have you ever spent $60 USD?
- Yes
- No, I am not American.
There you go. Congratulations, you are living in a glass house.
Person A: $2.50 is way too expensive for a cosmetic! If this continues, before you know it, it will be 50$!
Person B: Something something muh slippery slope, Stop being paranoid, it will never get that high.
Meanwhile 15 Years Later…
I think 60$ is stupid, I wouldn’t buy something virtual for that much unless it’s an entire game, so I just didn’t buy it, if people want to it’s a bit disappointing since it’s furthering the normalization of this asinine virtual goods economy, but ultimately it’s w/e, if someone actually wants it it’s their money, there is certainly worse things to waste money on like booze, drugs, or League of Legends skins.
don’t like it? don’t buy it. it’s cosmetic. what’s the problem. do you lack self control? or pity those who do? or fear for those who do? i hope nobody who can’t really afford spending on something ever buys something, because it would do them harm, but i can’t really blame a company for charging a lot for a cosmetic item that is purely for show. in real life we have fashion and art that cost a lot. in games there are often expensive cosmetics, well, some games at least.
1 Like
That $2.50 horse armor from 2009 you’re referencing was literally JUST a horse armor. Whereas the $60 skin bundle is, literally, BUNDLED with some card packs. Apples, meet oranges.
Both purchases are equally overpriced for what you get, in my opinion. But, I’m only saying that because I personally think the rag skin is ugly and I make my own Skyrim mods. So I’ve no skin in this game, so to speak.
The rationale against it, in the minds of those who think this way, would be that for-profit companies only care for profits, and if they can make a quick buck with some flashy pixels, they’ll become incentivized to prioritize said MTX instead of gameplay-oriented content. Forgo the bug fixes, rush the code, who cares about balance, don’t need a new level, etc. Just, here’s a horse skin, please give us tons of money, thx 
And, not for nothing, there ARE plenty of examples where this happens. D4, from what I hear, is “almost” a worthy product NOW, but a solid 9 months or so it was REALLY awful. But the MTX shop was ALWAYS up and running! I never once saw it down for more than 3 hours 
The flaw I see in this line of thinking though, is that it neglects to acknowledge the totality of the Yin-Yang. We decry MTX from 2009 because “if not for that, we’d not be in gacha-hell present day” but the flip side of it would be “if not for WW2, we’d never have the Highway.”
Both are horrifically flawed statements when subjected to a modicum of scrutiny, but they sound compelling at surface level.
I’d prefer if it costed 1 million dollars, if at the same time it removed all microtransactions that manipulate the GAMEPLAY (e.g. “buy this to get 2 more choices of Heroes in BGs” or “buy that to get all netdecks of Constructed immediately”).
I know “why not both?” is the worst scenario but at least this is more hopeful than gameplay contamination; yeah they made one expensive skin; so what: I don’t buy it and keep going: there’s hope it’s more of this than the alternative.
False equivalence and whataboutism are two names for the same thing btw
1 Like
No. Whataboutism is when a kid says “but mom my brother also did that other unrelated thing so I don’t deserve to be punished”. False equivalence is when she says “but mom you told me to eat my food so it’s good that I ate only chocolate”.
1 Like