So it begins (Character name changes coming soon)

[AsinineSeraphim]

In response to Sietsh -
While I appreciate that you want to make a name change in a video game akin to breathing oxygen, I'm not really getting. It is a -name change-. It is not essential for you to play the game. If I was 10 and decided to get the name Fartknocker to use as a handle because I thought it was hilarious but 5 years later decided it was enough of an issue to merit dropping 5 dollars of my hard earned cash (or my parent's cash because in this hypothetical I'd only be 15), then by all means let me drop the money.
And yes, it is arbitrary and asinine and it absolutely screams of Kotick's money grubbing plans - but at the end of the day, if you don't support it and think it's a bad way to do business, then don't utilize the feature. As I mentioned before, XBL does the same thing. I honestly think it's bat shit nuts to want to pay -any- money to change a name just so I can look just a little bit less of a dork when I let other friends play on my xbox. And as someone has already mentioned before - what else exactly has been made to be pay to play? Last time I checked, I don't have to make a micro-transaction in order to play Nexus Wars.
And honestly to top this all off, I know that it's just gonna piss a bunch of people off, but at the end of the day - it's all about the Benjamin's. It may suck, it may blow, it may make us nerds rage all over the SCII forums, but it is the fact that we have to face. Blizzard has to make money off these games, not just because Activision owns Blizzard, but because their ability to develop games is going to be directly linked to how much money they can pump into a project. Even taking into account the revenue generated from initial sales, I'm fairly certain it doesn't cover support for the game in the long term.

[MulletBen]

I wonder how many people are angry at Blizzard for charging for name changes who wouldn't even ever change their name.

I also wonder how many people wouldn't have ever given this a thought if Blizzard hadn't given the ability to change names, but now are outraged.

It seems to me that people are pissed off because Blizzard is charging for a feature they never needed to include in the game...

[Hav0x]

I wonder how many people are angry at Blizzard for charging for name changes who wouldn't even ever change their name.

I also wonder how many people wouldn't have ever given this a thought if Blizzard hadn't given the ability to change names, but now are outraged.

It seems to me that people are pissed off because Blizzard is charging for a feature they never needed to include in the game...

I totally agree with this.

[spychi]

It seems to me that people are pissed off because Blizzard is charging for a feature they never needed to include in the game...

and never should be charged for in the first place
such features should be free, no matter how much it seems useless for people who won't even consider their name change (for example me I won't use it), yet it's not right for them to take money for it
what's next? change your avatar for a buck?

Blizzard has to make money off these games, not just because Activision owns Blizzard, but because their ability to develop games is going to be directly linked to how much money they can pump into a project. Even taking into account the revenue generated from initial sales, I'm fairly certain it doesn't cover support for the game in the long term.

looking at SC2-WoL quality as a game...WoW profits must be small...
they have soo much money that if they developed and managed the game better there wouldn't be soo many pist off people complaining how the writing was bad and the plot cheap with holes between missions

[Sietsh-Tenk]

I wonder how many people are angry at Blizzard for charging for name changes who wouldn't even ever change their name.

I also wonder how many people wouldn't have ever given this a thought if Blizzard hadn't given the ability to change names, but now are outraged.

It seems to me that people are pissed off because Blizzard is charging for a feature they never needed to include in the game...

Have you ever considered you can be angry, upset or indignant about something that doesn't relate directly to yourself? I think it's one of the more interesting aspects of being human, but then I'm not a self-centered dick. Not saying you are either, just throwing it out there.

I've had this nick for about... ten years I suppose. I'm not gonna change it. But when you want to do something like that, you should be able to, without paying Benjamins.

As for those Benjamins contributing directly to development etc... perhaps. But some of the greatest games ever have been made before stuff like this was even considered an option. Think of SC1, which had everything free and even a free spawn so you could play with your friends.

Or to point out a more labour-intensive (because it's 3D, I guess – everyone always claims it takes more time and effort) example: the more recent Nintendo games, which were made purely from game sales, since Nintendo loses money on its hardware cause they keep it cheap.

Besides, most companies who use third party networks to provide an online component to their gameplay experience also don't see a dime of the money charged by those networks. Or do you really think Microsoft gives XBL fees to developers?

I'm just not convinced of the necessity to do this, and it seems to me to be just another way to squeeze money from gamers who will sheepishly, slavishly pay. Cause we're all addicts and don't you deny it.

At any rate, anyone who isn't expecting custom maps to become DLC for pay is nuts. Blizzard doesn't retain the rights over any custom map you upload for nothing.

And someone said he/she wasn't convinced these things are because of the Activision merger. Obviously this can't be proved, but it can be reasoned. For instance, the three-part split-up of SC2 came suspiciously concurrent with the A-B merger. Also, and I know I stress this point a lot, but that's because I think it really says something, also the quotes of Robert Kotick on how to run a business (fear, depression, cash-cow franchises rather than original development) does trickle down into Blizzard somewhat. We're talking about the CEO of the company here. And everyone knows how the Infinity Ward people were treated.

Everyone seems to think it's normal now for a company to go after profits regardless of necessity of a fee to get there. I don't think a company is the sum total of its balance sheet. It should be more than that, especially if it's a creative company. It wasn't like this when I was young, and I'm just twenty-two

[Hav0x]

and never should be charged for in the first place
such features should be free, no matter how much it seems useless for people who won't even consider their name change (for example me I won't use it), yet it's not right for them to take money for it
what's next? change your avatar for a buck?

You don't choose what is free. Blizzard does. It's Frazzlewahing optional and you even said you would never use it, so what is the problem? If someone wants to pay for something. What does it matter to you? It has no impact on your life at all.

[Noctis]

i agree with this, blizzard isn't going to let people make new profiles because of the ladder abuse, however letting people change their names for a fee is very fair.

stop crying

[spychi]

You don't choose what is free. Blizzard does. It's Frazzlewahing optional and you even said you would never use it, so what is the problem? If someone wants to pay for something.

I don't choose, yet as long as I bought the game I have the right to demand from them quality and features like name changes to be free

What does it matter to you? It has no impact on your life at all.

well it does as long as someone else is affected by it
because some things are just worth fighti....bitching for

[Pick]

If micro-transactions can help keep Battle.Net (and future Battle.Net improvements) free for the next ten years of the life of this game then I won't complain about name changes or special portraits. I won't be buying any of them either though. Some other chumps can pay for my Battle.net.

[spychi]

If micro-transactions can help keep Battle.Net (and future Battle.Net improvements) free for the next ten years of the life of this game then I won't complain about name changes or special portraits. I won't be buying any of them either though. Some other chumps can pay for my Battle.net.

if bn2.0 is going to have a fee
than I quit