Well I certainly didn’t vote for you.
@Xianwae: This entire conversation bleeds into the space of modern IP law and whether you believe it deprives the public trust or if it preserves the private interest.
It’s all good. Some watery bint lobbed a scimitar at me.
1 Like
Actually, NFTs are a more interesting subject in this context, since they occupy a weird space between easily reproducible digital items and the real world through artificial scarcity.
1 Like
Welcome to artificial supply and demand of economics…
Ah yes.
Reminders me entirely of when absolutely no one redeemed the wandering ancient.
Oh, and they totally didn’t redeem Bananas or Daisy.
ANd they DEFINITELY didn’t redeem Sarge.
Oh, the Deathwing mount from a few years ago? Psh, no one got that.
1 Like
NOW I HAVE IT.
I guess it wouldn’t be a bad mount for my dh, though currently I’m down on dhs. Definitely won’t use it with anything but a blood elf, come to think of it my blood elf frost mage could rotate it occasionally since it’s not flaming red like the horde dragonhawk.
The blue alliance one would be perfect for a blood elf frost mage, just saying.
One of the reasons I started over my frost characters as alliance is that blue goes with frost and red does not.
This topic seems mostly about salty people who wanted the Dragonhawk they just got to be some kind of flex, and now it’s an “ugly” “poverty” mount because they can’t, in your words, “show it off”. Honestly, if you’re trying to convince anyone it has nothing to do with lording “rare” pixels over those that don’t have them, you might want to stop using phrases like “show off” and “things not many people have”. Your Freudian slip is showing.
I’m sorry senpai didn’t notice your Invincible or whatever, but trying to flex pixels for randos in a vidya game is time (and money) better spent at best–and at worst, really sad when someone needs attention so hard they want to deny pixels to other people just so they’re…well, special. If only in their minds.
2 Likes
For a mount as ugly as the Doomwalker drop, it should def be a 100% drop rate.
1 Like
Except that in a game, you can make rewards tied to skill and having to complete content.
Buying a$5 lottery ticket is a horrid analogy for rewards when playing a game.
A perfect example of the gambling addicted Blizzard and other developers thrive off of.
No, but ask yourself does anyone else care how they feel. No, they don’t. That’s part of collecting something, you take a risk of it not being a collector’s item. I just wish they could find a middle ground. Leave the items in game, leave the requirements for them the same. One of the things I have always wanted but was removed was the Arcanote Ripper Axe. I just don’t understand, why put the effort into creating something only to remove it.
I mean I’m not saying that they are equitable in the sense that they have the same monetary value, but I do acknowledge why people like to collect rare things in general and that if one chooses to do that in a video game I am understandable as to what motivates them to do that.
And to that extent when you talk about diluting the rarity of an object you are directly screwing over anyone who put effort into getting it when rare. Now I don’t care about this anniversary mount as far as that goes, but the person I responded to scoffed at people liking rare things so I quipped about how we should just make all rare things not rare and see how that goes.
I can’t speak for the 300+ posts in this thread, but the anniversary mount seems simply to be the trigger to the thread because it was recently changed and now “everyone” can get it. The title of the thread is literally “If everyone has it, no one wants it” which points to the broad discussion about rarity and collecting. The OP doesn’t really read as concerned specifically about this mount in particular.
Why can that not be the reason?
That’s probably why some people collect those rare/unique things. Of course maybe they do think the thing looks or is cool, but sometimes people find rare things inherently cool whereas others don’t care if it’s rare they just want it to look what they perceive as cool.
Collectors probably took an interest in the thing they collect before they began intentionally collecting them.
Yikes dude. You seem to equate that anyone who wants to collect rare/unique things people who are inherently douchebags. You can be a humble collector, but yes they do exist. My dad happens to live next to one since one time when he mentioned he had a nice serving of some expensive bourbon the guy took it as a challenge, rought out a $1300 bottle just so he could tell him the glass he poured him was worth $130 whereas the entire bottle my dad had talked up “only” worth a few hundred. The dude is a douchebag solely because of how he chose to approach the situation.
…but also some people just want to collect rare things for the sake of collecting rare things and yeah maybe they do get to SHOW IT OFF (oh God I said it again!) and talk about their hobby when they have company over because they are proud of what they’ve done.
Personally given the way WoW works these days anyone thinking they can lord pixels over someone is a nincompoop if you ask me cause most people don’t pay each other any mind in cities.
But you take it to the next level so kudos to you I guess. You talk about how other people are salty but you’re definitely the most jaded.
Besides, most WoW-players are casuals and don’t know the story. They wouldn’t care if the mount even fits to the character they play.
As a collector, i want to show it off but at the same time i want changes to the “rare” concept on WoW, for example, i got Sha of Anger mount after 8000+ attempts, i wasted a lot of time, that kind of task can only be achieved by a big alt army, which is a meta among collectors, however that doesn´t promote things to new players.
Therefore, in the future you can´t show it off to other people because maybe the game will decline and also there’s no one new that’ll ask “How do you get that?” and that’s great but its also good to respond that he can get it too, but if i respond with a comment like, well this love rocket/headless mount can be achieved by years and years of farming and maybe you’ll get it, that person will lose interest on collecting.
We need a new “rare” concept around how you obtain the mount instead of the drop rate of the mount, otherwise we only promote the adiction on the game that leads to a meta of a bunch of alts in order to pull the sloot machine. Imagine if the whole content in WoW was evergreen, difficult like when it was release, the rare mounts could be the raid mounts because these can be 100% drop but you must defeat the last boss like when it was release.
I notice this with other MMORPGs and how these handle collecting cosmetics, some are 100% drops after a questline, boss fight and grinds, other’s have low drop % but a bad luck mechanic, so it’ll remain rare because only people that got it by loot or by farming it 100-200 times will get it but the goal is that you’ll eventually get it and only using 1 character instead of 50+
Also, Blizzard don’t care about collectors, we don´t have an achievement for mounts since BFA Prepatch 2018 for 400 mounts when they keep adding a lot of mounts each expansion, they used cosmetics as a time sink that won´t be appreacited by abroad playerbase.
Might I suggest 1% chance loot boxes. Instead of an alt army, you gear up your wallet army to buy $25 boxes that have a 1% chance of revealing a rare mount.
1 Like
With the last news around CEO, maybe you should apply to the open position. $$ 
1 Like
I’m glad they made it 100 % drop rate. All my mounts are trash and I don’t have a lot to begin with. I also don’t care about mount farming.
They should have hotfixed it before I got it. Now I feel my luck for the whole year has been wasted.
In the end, mount is ugly, and its only purpose is to have a +1 in my mount collection for my next achievement.
Took all the fun out of it
“If everyone has everything, nobody wants anything.”
I would agree with that expression; however, I feel the idea of any particular thing, the object of a collection, is easily conflated with the collection itself. And I see that same mistake being made when you conflate the collection (or the desire of a collector to collect all the objects) with the desire of a collector to collect any particular object.
The rare item either has value or it does not. If it does have value, that value is either intrinsic or extrinsic. It seems that you believe that rare items have intrinsic value. I disagree solely on the above misunderstanding that completion of a set places intrinsic value into the objects of the set, without regard to rarity. Rarity is an extraneous attribute in the value judgment. If I were to be convinced that any rare item has some kind of value, it would be solely an extrinsic value, in that social structure of conspicuous consumption – “Pete will be jealous when he sees I obtained this nigh unobtainable object”.
So again:
Is it why people like to collect? Or is it why rare things have value within a collection of other objects?
And if the latter, I still don’t see how you’ve answered that without taking it as a given–a technical form of ‘begging the question’.