{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/7/2015 11:19:47 PM
2
A lot of us are afraid that Bungie will start going down a terrible path
Microtransactions for emotes becomes popular > activision pushes for more
Bungie goes to ships, then sparrows, then engrams, then items, then exotics become microtransaction exclusive and destiny becomes pay to win.
personally after giving Bungie $200 for a half baked base game, 2 DLCs that didn't quite feel complete (numerous bugs, poorely performing weapons like Nechrocasm, no land beyond), and finally this DLC which felt like a good step in the right direction but still cost me $60; this just feels like a cash grab. I feel like microtransactions shouldn't exist in a AAA $100 AUD game at all, especially if the microtransaction result in an advantage for the person paying them
English
-
The slippery slope fallacy is not a logical argument.
-
Not by itself no, but you need to think about the nature of companies like activision and EA. Microtransactions were used in one game for cosmetics executives think this was great because they think their profit margin was raised and force the devs to put in more microtransactions to boost popularity more. Now depending on how greedy the higher ups at Activision are they may just push for more cosmetics or push Bungie to expand the people paying microtransactions by locking players from weapons behind a pay wall. This slippery slop actually works because we can see the logical progression of things and it has happened before with EA's games. We just have to hope that what ever higher up that's in charge realises that selling virtual weapons for real money to players in a AAA game would be disastrous .
