Dunno, cosmetic crap that doesn't influence gameplay in any way is okay by me. If that helps devs to get some revenue and allows them to continue developing the game after release and add new features, I'm saying go for it.
The truth is that 50% of revenue in F2P games comes from just 0.15% of total players.
This kind of sh*t saved Counter Strike from obscurity. LoL, DOTA and other MOBAs are thriving on this system. Team Fortress detto.
Destiny recently got this microtransactions system for cosmetic stuff and it works. Damn, people even seem happy, thanks to publisher first dicking around and claiming that these new cosmetics would be included only in some super limited super expensive re-release of the game. Now, since players can buy the cosmetics for a piecemeal price, they seem to be happy. Compared to spending 80 bucks or so on re-release of the game, a dollar a piece deal is much better. Activision suits may be dicks, but they are not stupid.
I am defending my master thesis, which deals with behavioral economics and video games, next week. I've been doing some research and from the reports I've got my hands on... there is nothing to lose by including microtransactions for cosmetic items. Unless you start selling sh*t that affects balance on battlefield and you'll be upfront about the plans for microtransactions for cosmetics, your reputation is safe.
More readings on the topic:
Monetization report by Swrve (I believe there is an updated version available somewhere, but this data is recent enough):
Report by Ethan Levy, expert on monetization (I've seen raw data behind some of his research and it's solid):
Here's a good article about cosmetics and Counter Strike:
P.S.: Don't do it PayDay 2 style. Those guys blew it. If you are as much as considering microtransactions in the future, be upfront about that. Don't include better weapons or powerups behind microtransactions.
! ! ! RUNNING THE BEST OS EVER ! ! !