I’ma be soooo disappointed if it does turn out to be a reskinned pandaria Yak mount :’(
Again, I’d like see you convince ONE person to try this game by showing them a mount or any other 15 year old game by saying “it has no micro transactions”.
Having no micro transactions would generate zero PR.
Having an extra in game mount will bring back zero players.
You honestly think Blizzard would be better off with 80 in game mounts and zero store mounts compared to the extra $3 million they make off of a single store mount? Get real. So until you can prove that your made up, personal principal code can produce $3 million+ quarterly from a 15+ year old game I’ll take the store mounts.
Win for Blizzard
Win for people that want to buy mounts with money
Win for people that don’t want to buy mounts with money because they can use the tokens (which are a win for those that are willing to use real money to buy gold and a win for those that want to use gold to buy other games and real stuff)
Lose for people that can’t see the bigger picture and are scared of the micro transaction boogey man
Over 10 years and this game is nowhere near pay to win.
Alright.
Here’s a game where it’s you have to put in the work to get rewards, but be showered in rewards for doing the work, all without spending real money. No catches or gimmicks, just a good ole fashion unlock that doesn’t take too long or too short to unlock it.
Funny, because CDPR said this years ago and it generated good PR for them by going by the amount of likes that tweet (in that artcle) has.
And there’s that time where CEO of gearbox, Randy Pitchford, at the time he said “there’s gonna be no microtransactions”, he got a round applause for that.
https://youtu.be/C26U4IRlP0A?t=126
While both (or to be generous, Gearbox) did lied about not having microtransactions or “leaving the greed to others”, the very fact they said that got them either a round of applause or 25k likes is proof enough that it does create positive PR.
Yes, because like i said. PR works.
Way to misrepresent the people who hate microtransactions as “scared”… totally makes you look creditable. 
And even then, you’re acting like it’s not a valid thing to be afraid of because this became normal because people like you allowed them and defended it. Your part of the problem why the companies keep putting microtransactions in. It’s a lose for everybody but the corporation. And honestly, what do you gain from defending a corporation and it’s microtransactions? Really? What do you gain? You don’t get higher quality titles, because microtransactions pretty much stops that from happening. What is the actual benefit for you for thinking from a business perspective here?
You’re ignoring the WoW Tokens, that allows you to buy gold with real life money. (Middleman aside and “positive” effect aside, because they only exist to make it look different then the others.)
Borderlands 3 is a new game.
WoW is not.
Go tell people WoW Classic has no microtransactions, see how many fish you get. Go show them that sick little Netherdrake mount they can get with all their “hard” work. See how many sub.
So again, no microtransactions will generate ZERO PR because WoW is a 15 year old game that isn’t bringing in any significant number of new players no matter what it does and if you’re some fool that thinks WoW could hold 10+ million subs over 15 years by “just be a good game” I’d like you to show me a single 15+ year old game that has managed to maintain or increase it’s subs without needing to go to mobile.
EDIT: LOL… you probably shouldn’t have brought up Cyberpunk as a demonstration of a game that did well.
That’s not relevant.
And i would be correct in saying that because it doesn’t have any microtransactions.
Yea, because Classic didn’t get like 223% subs at it’s launch and in some of it’s parts, better then retail, like some of it’s class design, it’s focus on leveling, professions…
Why exactly do people like you demonize just playing the game with no microtransactions?
“ugh, working 30-20 minutes on a questline?! who needs that! ugh! that’s garbo! in a game that you have to put in the work and effort to get rewards because that’s been the concept of this game since it’s inception? Poppycock! I want to pay $25 to circumvent playing the game just to get stuff! I don’t want to spend 30-20 minutes on a questline! i don’t want to use google to look up how to this this easy secret! i just want to pay $25 to get mounts!”. /exaggeration
If you’re gonna use time here for your arguments then so i will. Why are you complaining about a Questline that you, yourself said it’s 20 to 30 minutes? It’s just 20 to 30 minutes. Why are you complaining about a secert that you can google it up? It only takes… what 10 minutes?
Nice job denying the evidence i’ve bought forth. 
Whether Cyberpunk did or did not well is irrelevant to the point and to the statement you said that “saying no microtransactions will not generate any positive PR”.
It is 100% relevant. Context is everything. Go tell everyone Mario Brothers 3 has no microtransaction. See who cares. Go tell them Halo has no micro transactions, GTA 3, Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past, any game that’s 15+ years old and see who cares. You can’t ignore context.
And where are they now? Exactly. Classic might as well be a dead game until a new raid opens.
You really don’t get it do you? No one’s demonizing it but it contributes NOTHING to the overall game. No one’s gonna sub just to play that questline to get that mount, no one’s gonna extend their sub just to get that mount and those that do play wouldn’t have noticed if that quest line never existed. Blizzard profits nothing from some 20-30 minute distraction. I’ll sure as hell do it but they aren’t making any money off it.
Nice job ignoring basic context and not understanding how things work.
The last game you ever want to mention around the word “PR”.
Year of the Ox?
I mean. just make Baine a rideable mount imo
What does a game’s age has to do with microtransactions? Why are you trying to justify microtransactions by saying “it’s an old game, nobody cares”.
Still doing good, last time i check.
That’s your opinion. Classic is still alive and kicking, objectively speaking. You are still able to get on to the game and play it.
And you know that how?
Of coarse they do, it’s not immediate, but it’s overtime. The enjoyment people get, even if it’s short, will incentivize them to stay longer on the game.
You don’t even have any links or evidence on how microtransactions are good. Meanwhile i’l gladly give you a bunch of evidence on why people hate microtransactions here with a bunch of articles and such.
Like i said, PR works. You are constantly denying that, acting like i’m ignoring “basic context”, because apparently the minor details like that are so important to you.
You said “saying it has no microtransactions doesn’t generate any positive PR” and i’ve posted evidence showcasing that it does. And you’re still going “nuh uh!” and accuse me of not getting any basic context because the age of the game or how well a game does literally does not matter to the statement you made.
I’m only going to respond to this because you just don’t get it if you really don’t understand how a games age effects EVERYTHING.
Yes, I agree. A brand new game should avoid microtransactions as much as possible. People are absolutely deterred by games that are heavy on microtransactions.
Now let’s look at WoW. WoW has lost close to 9 million players between Cata to now. Those players aren’t coming back. New players are barely coming in. Neither of those situations has anything to do with the store or microtransactions. WoW did not lose 9 million players because micro transactions were introduced. WoW didn’t lose ANY (significant amount) of players over microtransactions considering that the store was introduced during WotLK which only saw an increasing trend in subs. Removing the store and announcing “Hey guys, we have no microtransactions now!” does nothing. That is that I mean by saying that it will not generate any PR.
Now, because WoW has lost all these players and has no real way of bringing them back (and if you think they do, again… find a 15+ year old game that has done so without going mobile) they need to supplement their income to make up for the loss subs. That’s where the store mount comes in and they’ve maintained a healthy balance of store mounts to in game mounts.
So if you can’t understand why WoW’s age is so important, we can’t continue this conversation and you can continue being a naive idealist who doesn’t understand why WoW would need to supplement their income.
Nope.
I Am excited for the Year of the Ox mount 
I hope that it uses the Tauralus model from Maldraxxus, only not zombified. Lots of potential there.
And if the pattern holds true (and I highly doubt that they’ll stop doing these) Then that means in a couple years, we’ll have the Year of the Rabbit mount! I’ve been hoping for one ever since they put a little saddle on a bunny and filmed it as an April Fools joke.
1 Like
actiblizzion is a multibillion dollar company.
Fine then, i suppose it would be unproductive to skip it, so let’s take a look.
And People are absolutely deterred by games that has microtransactions at all. Some People just don’t accept optional cosmetics like sadly a lot of other people does, and it doesn’t make them wrong for doing it. Especially since you’re bringing up the age thing and mentioned a bunch of old games, old games had this as part of the full package, where you can unlock costumes by just playing the game. You can’t pay 99 cents to get a tux or things like that.
And thankfully there are still games that do this, because some publishers and devs, despite being in the business to make money, don’t felt the need to put them in. Granted 33% of them are remakes/remasters, but the last time somebody put MTX in a remake, it made the game terrible as a result. CoD 4 Modern Warfare remastered is that game.
The Games that don’t have Microtransactions are of coarse (and keep in mind, some of these games, while they have like cloth packs, these are more of akin to traditional DLC packs back in the old days of Xbox 360 where games launch with excessive amount of reskin packs and such.) are, The Witcher 3, Spyro Reingitied Trilogy, Cities Skylines, Dying Light, Ark Survival Evolved, Destroy All Humans Remake, Mafia 2 Definitive Edition, Skyrim (2011), GTA SA and Left for Dead 2.
Now i know what your going to say here about my inclusion of Skyrim (2011), GTA SA, and Left 4 Dead 2 here. These are, even my own admission, old games. But these are still for the most part, still relevant. Value released an update for Left 4 Dead 2 on September 24, 2020, and by the by, it’s for free. Infact, all their DLC now is free. And it’s a game that has 97% reviews on steam. Chances are, this is making Valve money here, simply because valve is still continuing to update their online games with free updates. (Though to be fair, Valve is the owner of Steam and it makes them way more money then really any of their games.)
Speaking of Valve, yes, let’s talk about the obvious ones, that being TF2 and CS:GO. Talking about TF2 only since i have experience on that, somebody will tell you about CS:GO, but once upon a time, you had to pay for the game here and you get all the content. Now it’s F2P with it’s microtransactions. Which honestly, despite my dislike with MTX, it does make actual sense to be there because the entry fee is free. And the Microtransactions are there to what’s ideally, to do enhance your experience if you are enjoying the game. You can play TF2 just fine for free. But anyways, back on track, The game went F2P on the “Meet the Medic” update, that being June 23, 2011. Tracing back to the first appearance of a lootbox, was in September 30, 2010, with the first appearance of the Mann co Supply crates. So for 8 months, TF2 was a Premium priced game with microtransactions until it went F2P. And this game is still being supported, along with CS:GO, with free DLC updates and such. 94% on steam.
Skyrim (2011) and GTA SA here are being kept relevant by other means, that being the mod community (or fans essentially), considering how popular and amazingly these games are, according to steam’s. It is understandable if you want to disqualify Skyrim here, since it’s 64 bit version (special edition, 2016), has paid mods, or simply put microtransactions. Regardless, all three of those games still have glowing reviews.
To guess the reasons why, it would be the lack of quality over the years in their expansions, atfer Wrath.
I suppose in the interest of fairness, the MTX is the result of because the lackluster quality here, it just don’t do much to help the quality of said game, it only exists to make much money they can, essentially a liferaft where you throw money on it. Especially since WoD just pretty much tanked subs, and adding WoW Tokens into the mix doesn’t really help at all, since now you can pay real money to get gold now. An idea that was once vilified by the community and even Blizzard themselves. Some might say that the subs were so low, they stop showing the subs, but i honestly believe that it’s the introduction of WoW Tokens being thrown in the mix that blurred the line of who is subbed and who paid for the token, and in what i assume is the blizzard fashion here, instead of keeping a tab on that, they promptly discard it.
Is it a theory that sounds plausible?.. is it any true? Who knows? Unless Blizzard is willing to share meta data on that that implies that they had that sort of trouble. 
Makes me wonder why then you bought it up in the first place, but i digress.
That is fair to say, correlation does not mean causation.
Again… correlation does not mean causation here, i think it’s important to note that it has go be applied both ways here. I don’t think people looked at Wrath having MTX and going like “Oh wow, i want to play the game so i can… spend more money.”. They probably looked at the game and go like “Oh wow, i can be a hulking cow monster, freezing everybody in sight with my sword and be indestructible”.
Leaving the store in does nothing either if were gonna go by this.
By the by, L4D isn’t on mobile. Neither any of the games i’ve talked about, barring San Andreas (And even then, it doesn’t have MTX, it’s just GTA SA on the phone, that’s it). Just putting that out there if you think games need to go to mobile in order to stay relevant or afloat with the cash.
Well i hope this comment will be seen as being somewhat enlightened on this since you want me to talk about it. And actually, now that that you mentioned the age thing… doesn’t it kinda hurt your point a little since there’s games without MTX being still relevant or being supported up to this day whether via official or unofficial means? I mean doesn’t this show you can have a game as old or almost about as WoW without MTX or without putting it on mobile?
And do you go around telling people “hey, play these games because it has no microtransactions!” No. Also, all of these games have not maintained their player base and only shown an increase in sales when they’ve gone cross platform (namely, to the Switch) so your point is moot. They’ve retained a core player base that is nowhere near comparable to their initial launch player base. They have not maintained their population at their height of popularity. They have not gained any significant number of players. They have gradually lost players until they’ve reached a solid maintaining point that they’re, admittedly, doing a great job at maintaining.
WoW is easily doing the same without the store. They could easily never put anything on the store and you wouldn’t notice. Those mounts/pets could never exist and no one would care because they give us so much already. The difference? They wouldn’t be making that extra $3 million+ per item.
It brings in $3+ million every time a pet or mount goes up on it. That’s the whole freaken point. You moral high ground does not bring in new players, does not bring in money and does not help maintain relevance (your new buzzword and direction you’re taking this). A store mount does and it honestly takes nothing away from the game to not have that store mount earnable when we already have 80+ mounts oozing from every corner of the game.
Edit: And just to be clear… if you want to talk about games with relevance, WoW is still relevant. It’s still clearly in competition as the number 1 MMO in the world (I’m not going to say it IS the #1 MMO since I don’t have the numbers to prove it) and it’s well past it’s prime. Most importantly, it’s doing better than every game you listed unless you can prove any of those games still has 3.7 million players.
1 Like
Here’s the steam charts for these games here, pretty sure people are still playing them.
Team Fortress 2
Left 4 Dead 2
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Destroy All Humans Remake
Cities: Skylines
Skyrim 2011
Mafia II: Definitive Edition
Spyro Reignited Trilogy
Dying Light
Lets be honest here, this goalpost you set here, is unrealistic here. Especially considering you want me to take in the basic context like you said, but your not taking in the basic content on the fact that these games get different numbers in differing sizes and such. And plus your not even willing to accept the fact that these games are still being supported officially or not. L4D and TF2 are still being updated.
This isn’t a very good argument. Who cares how it’s bought. The pixelated mounts were someone else’s money when they paid people to draw, design, build, and implement it.
Wait, wasn’t the argument that these games don’t allow microtransactions or am I missing something here?
Wasn’t TF2 a pay-to-win game at one point?
To be completely honest with you, i wasn’t there until atfer Meet the Pyro update.
If TF2 was something at one point, it was premium priced game with MTX. I honestly don’t know if there’s any pay to win stuff in there. What i do know is most weapons are unlockable via by achievements and can be randomly dropped if you didn’t get a crate to open, and to far as my knowledge the last time i played, i yet to see a weapon on there that offers an unfair advantage that you can pay for. So give me a few here. 
So you’re trying to use games that aren’t as successful as modern day WoW to explain why WoW should follow their model?
L4D has Free DLC and people still play it, and it’s still being supported by Valve. TF2 (and mostly CS:GO), while being a F2P, is still alive and kicking and still being supported by Valve.
Both these games show you can just sell a game, or you can just make it F2P and still support it for years to come and still get you money. You’re acting like this isn’t possible to do with WoW because it’s an old game, yet, these old games here can do it.
Maybe the difference here it isn’t because of age, but rather the genre and audience? Is that the point your trying to get at here?