I don't gain anything out of defending Blizzard's store mounts except for the occasional hate or harassment (which is rare because I'm small). I don't get money. I don't get famous. I don't even get that many likes for tweeting about it. I'm just saying my piece on the matter.pic.twitter.com/0ShiEm9sBH
One of my friends made a good point that WoW is still $15 a month and has been that way since 2004 and that hasn't changed. But the operating costs have gone up. So they could've charged us more a month or they give us optional mounts and pets that aren't a requirement.
-
-
Did you forget the bumped up the price of WoW by 10 bucks?
Dziękujemy. Twitter skorzysta z tych informacji, aby Twoja oś czasu bardziej Ci odpowiadała. CofnijCofnij
-
-
-
Operating Costs going up doesnt excuse an influx of cash shop options, especially when the operation costs are directly controlled by the company. It's not some unmanageable beast that is out of their control. They chose to increase their team with no apparent increase in quality
-
That doesn't stop the fact that they're optional and you don't need to purchase them to play the game.
- Pokaż odpowiedzi
Nowa rozmowa -
-
-
I wanna add this... activision blizzard last year (Or was it this year?) announced record and history breaking Revenue, and the best it has done in years.. guess what? It laid off 800+ people. The “costs” aren’t the problem it’s CEO greed and that’s that.
-
100% That argument is also made in the age where WoW's expansions were bumped up from 40 to 50.
Koniec rozmowy
Nowa rozmowa -
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.