Blizzard opened its new "Pet Store" last week, offering in-game vanity pets for real cash. Is it finally what players want, or has Blizzard gone too far by bringing micro-transactions into WoW?

For better or worse, it's finally happening; Blizzard took its first big step into the ever-expanding world of micro-transactions earlier this week, offering two in-game vanity pets for World of Warcraft in its online Blizzard Store. Many players said this day would never come (or at least feared it), while others recognized the company's already-existing services like paid server transfers and faction/race changes, considering them precursors of what's to come.

But did the majority of Blizzard's customers think it would ever come to this, even after the announcement of the company's newly-improved, marketplace-ready Battle.net service, announced at BlizzCon 2009? We knew that Blizzard was prepping alternate revenue models to offer saleable content like maps and mods for games like StarCraft 2 and Diablo III, but many longtime World of Warcraft subscribers assumed their favorite MMO would continue to remain off-limits when it came to buying actual in-game content, even as ineffectual as vanity pets.

As we reported on Wednesday, Blizzard announced the opening of its new "Pet Store" within the already-existing Blizzard Store. Official forums rep Nethaera made a simultaneous announcement in this thread, but failed to preface it with an explanation of the events leading up to this decision, or Blizzard's rationale behind it (despite the obvious). However, the post includes a link to the Pet Store FAQ, which says the Pet Store is a "new way for players to obtain unique companion pets outside of the game, which is something that has been requested by many players who enjoy World of Warcraft's non-combat companions."

Most Blizzard fans would have expected the company to explain such a landmark event with an official release (or a couple paragraphs, at least), but it's as if Blizzard didn't want to draw attention to the significance of occasion itself, which probably would have drawn an undesirable amount of negative publicity before it even launched. Instead, in what probably seemed out-of-the-blue (pun definitely intended) for many WoW players, the forum post directed readers to the Pandaren Monk and Lil' K.T., the first two in-game items currently available at Blizzard's new Pet Store.

The cost of each pet turned out to be a rather-surprising $10 USD, considering the price of relative digital content sold by most other game publishers and micro-transaction-backed MMOs. For an in-game item that now, apparently, has a real-money value of $10, Blizzard sure hasn't had a tough time handing them out to us for free in the past.

The announcement also noted that 50 percent of the proceeds from sales of the Pandaren Monk pet will benefit the Make-a-Wish Foundation until December 31, 2009. Although it's a worthwhile charity, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the non-altruistic benefits behind this move, either. As pointed out by one of our own forum members, it helps Blizzard soften the initial blow and provides substantial tax breaks. It's also a great way to collect marketing data, as another member suggests.

Initial reactions are mixed, to say the least; thousands of players have already jumped onboard and bought a pet or two, seemingly in support of Blizzard's newest venture. Others weren't quite as accepting, claiming that Blizzard has finally crossed the line, sullying WoW's status by tossing it in bed with the likes of those greedy, micro-transaction MMOs. But is this merely the "next logical step" for the biggest MMO publisher in the world, leaving WoW's actual gameplay unaffected, and its integrity intact? Or is this just the tip of the iceberg, with an eventual mall-sized storefront—filled with in-game items like mounts and clothing—just over the horizon?

It seems as if the biggest fear shared by players is that game-affecting items like XP boosters, stat enhancers or actual gear will make their way into the new Blizzard marketplace, leaving those who don't pay at a disadvantage. But honestly, I can't see this scenario ever happening, especially when you consider how many of the most-prominent free-to-play MMOs recognize how important it is for players to be able to stay competitive, regardless of how much money they have.

Of course, there are dozens of MMOs out there that do offer performance-enhancing content via micro-transactions, but most of the major titles backed by publishers that want their games to stay relevant and succeed don't practice this. It's even more important for MMO publishers that use the dual-revenue model, relying on both a monthly subscription and micro-transactions, like Champions Online (and now, WoW as well, apparently). And when established MMOs do stray from the path―as many accused SoE of doing when it sold its new EverQuest 2, LoN "instance-entry" loot cards online―fans get angry.

As difficult as was for me to imagine that Blizzard would ever adopt any form of micro-transactions, it's infinitely tougher for me to imagine that it would ever begin selling performance-enhancing gear or items. With the kind of competition World of Warcraft is facing these days, many players wouldn't stand for it, and Blizzard realizes that.

It can, however, get away with quite a bit. This is something Blizzard probably realized years ago, when free-to-play MMOs finally began catching on here in North America and Europe. Since then, Blizzard has gradually revitalized its online store and revamped the upcoming Battle.net client, which promises to offer a more Web 2.0-oriented experience and marketplace capabilities influenced by services like Xbox Live and the App Store. Almost every other MMO publisher is getting its share of the "micro-transaction pie;" so why shouldn't Blizzard, right?

That's one of the most important questions debated today, in an era when the days of simply paying for a game's "box price" are nearly gone. Gamers become especially heated about the issue when they're already paying a monthly subscription fee to play a game, like World of Warcraft. Since we're already paying $15 per month, is it right for Blizzard to "up the ante," expecting us to shell out even more cash? As most proponents will point out, you don't have to pay anything extra since they're "cosmetic" items that don't influence gameplay. If you have the cash to burn, great; otherwise, it's not something you could normally get in-game, anyway.

But most opponents disagree with that idea, arguing that it fosters segregation between players. Regardless of whether or not an in-game item enhances your progress, there's obviously more to its appeal, otherwise no one would be interested in buying it in the first place. Casual- and role-players might find more personal value in vanity pets and non-combat items than raiders, for example. Is it right to deny another player any in-game item when he or she is already paying retail box prices and a monthly subscription?

These are the questions that seem to have divided the community in two, judging by extremely-heated and opinionated comment threads like this one. Plenty of WoW subscribers interpret this as a sign of the times; just another nail driven into the WoW coffin by Activision's exploitive influence. Some players don’t mind, though; they're more than willing to pay 10 bucks for one or both of the new pets and they can't wait to see what's offered next. But all ideology aside, micro-transactions do favor individuals with more disposable income, which especially includes younger players. Still, some would say it's better to have the choice to buy extras, rather than none at all.

Game designer and Blizzard guru Tom Chilton confirmed that the new micro-transaction model is still in its infancy in the latest episode of The Instance (a WoW podcast). During the interview, Chilton said that Blizzard is taking the sale of in-game items slow and steady, and reassured players that it would refuse to sell performance-related items for actual money. However, he didn't go into detail when it came to other items besides vanity pets that might be offered in the future.

So far, Blizzard is just testing the waters, or "Dipping it in to see what flavor the Kool-Aid is," as my buddy would say. We still don't know exactly what Blizzard's "grand scheme" is, or whether it will involve items beyond just vanity pets. Many fans are already suggesting that non-combat gear, like decorative Tabards and special clothing, might be in the works. Others speculate that exclusive mounts, emotes and dances might someday be available. It's still too early to tell, and much of it probably depends on how this "trial run" works out.

As community members have pointed out, though, a precedent is being set. Despite Blizzard's marketing department tip-toeing around the actual concept, this is the company's first real venture into the world of micro-transactions, excluding services like faction changes. Ultimately, it's the customers who decide the fate of micro-transactions in WoW. Depending on the interest shown by the player base throughout the next few months, Blizzard will eventually learn exactly what its customers are willing to buy, and how much they're willing to pay.