Why should a game with close to 10 mil subs go f2p? I know you mentioned it's only to lvl 60, but i really don't think Blizzard are that desperate to make it f2p up to lvl 60.
From a players point of view, sure....From Blizzards point of view, I have no idea why they'd do this.
There is no "unrestricted access to lvl 20". These are the restriction on the free version:
A level cap of 20
A maximum of 10 gold
Trade skills are capped at 100 ranks
Unable to trade via the Auction House, mailbox, or player-to-player
In-game access to public chat channels unavailable; players are limited to communicating using only say, party, or whisper
Characters will be unable to create or join guilds
Characters are not able to send whispers to other characters unless they have been added to the characters' friends' lists or have received a whisper from a character first
Characters will not be able to invite other players into a party
Characters will be unable to disable experience gains
Voice chat is disabled on Starter Edition accounts
Realms experiencing login queues will prioritize players who have full, paid accounts
Starter Edition accounts are not eligible for character transfers
RealID features are disabled on all Starter Edition Accounts
Btw, as someone already mentioned: if your suggestion gives access to the AH (well, at least the same AH as subscribers), this will mess up the economy completely, which alone is a reason for me to say no to this. There may be other issues to consider, but nothing major comes to mind right now.
Originally posted by sniperman248 It would be a great idea. And for the oh they have 9.1million subs here's the thing Aion had 11 million yet they went f2p and now their population went up to 16million and they are making more money than they did off of subscriptions alone. People are willing to spend more on a cash shop a week than what blizzard is making now just in one month.
Where did you get those numbers? NCSoft took a loss in Q2 and partly blamed Aion and it's loss of subs and microtransactions. Nowhere those numbers that I've seen on any site, including NCSoft. Closest I have seen was back in 2009 when it had 4 mil in Korea and about 3 mil in Europe and America combined. They had a bit of a jump when it went FtP, but nowhere near that.
As for WoW it peaked at just over 12 million players in 2011 and now a year and a half later down to 9.1 mil. That's the sharpest drop yet. Hell even before the polished turd Cata hit (and yes I played it and still play once in a while), it jumped almost a half a mil players. This time it's dropping. Looks like the rats are deserting the sinking ship. People are getting tired of the "same stuff, new package" thing.
As for the "freemium" set up, it might keep it from bleeding all the way out. Up to 60, no restriction except maybe limiting how many mails or auctions can be done. Yea, it would mess with the economy for a short period, but would be better in the long run. Most of the economy in WoW now is higher level stuff anyway. Would actully improve the economy for the low range, Hell, I would make an account for just the 60 raids alone.
Why would they need to? Nearly everyone who wanted to try WoW already has. F2P is what you do when nobody will pay to play the crap you put out, as long as people are still paying for WoW AND buying stuff from the online store, I'm not really seeing the upside for Blizzard. Maybe after they lose another 8 million subs or so.
Giving players free to play from levels 1 though 60 isn't such a bad idea. This would add more activity to the game in lower levels. Also, the fun factor increase quiet a bit when comparing when comparing content at level 20 and level 60. This will increase the likelyhood of those free to play players from wanting to buy other expansions and maybe even subscribing to the game in order to check out other content.
Why should a game with close to 10 mil subs go f2p? I know you mentioned it's only to lvl 60, but i really don't think Blizzard are that desperate to make it f2p up to lvl 60.
WoW is already F2P, it's not a question of "why". He is just suggesting to increase the F2P cap from 20 to 60 to gett F2P customers more invested in the game.
To be honest I am suprised the article calls it the #1 MMO. I mean they lost almost 4 million subscribers over the last 2 years, and the only thing that makes them look like the #1 MMO is the sheer amount of money they dump in to advertising it. Still level 60 cap or not is sitll not there max level and there the ONLY MMO to do this. Not to mention the game engine itself has not seen any real updates since release.
For comparision on that last statement lets address something recent.
SOE has recently released SOEmote for there EverQuest 2 game. This required updateing the game engine itself to allow for webcame facail recognition. Which is someting that SOE wouldn't do for a game with a low player base, one just has to look at there past business conduct to see this.
To me if Warcraft wants it's vunted title back in a real sense, and not by padding there numbers with dead accounts (yes I know folks that can confirm this). They need to do more then release a new race, they need to totally change there business model for the times, and actually do things players want and actually support things in game live like every other company out there does.
Till that happens I think there increase to 60 for F2P very likely won't change a thing.
With as many subs a WoW has they still have no need to do anything they dont want to. Unless something happens new in the market, like GW2 sells 8 mill copies in 6 months. Thing is Blizzard is still the company that makes the most money and untill that changes there is no reason to change. Unless they want to lol
Originally posted by purewitz WOW needs to either go F2P or die a slow painful death. As much as some people may not want it, F2P & B2P are becoming the standards of MMO business models. P2P is going going the way of the dinosaurs. In the beginning P2P saved people from having to pay by the hour to play a game, but people don't want to pay a monthly subscription any more in today's world economy. Alot of people also don't want to throw away money on something they might not like, because they don't have the money to lose.
Riiiiiight...
There are nearly 10 million subscribers to WoW alone, not counting the number of people that still pay subs to LotRO, TOR, and others.
I hope you're not an analyst, because you are terribad at it.
LOTRO is already F2P and TOR is going F2P later this year. Plus the recent numbers for WOW is 9 million. Which still is number 1, but in years past we have seen higher numbers from WOW is on a steady decline. If they don't go F2P soon, they'll continue to lose a million or two every 3 to 6 months. Plus just found out today. The Secret World is going F2P at some point as well and its a brand-new game too and their already talking about going F2P. So I really don't see P2P being the norm in the near future. On a side note: No I'm not an analyst, but it doesn't take genius to see how the MMO market is changing. For the better or the worse, only time will tell.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
their biggest competitor is going f2p, this is a overstatement. ever since relase SWToR was not WoW's competitor, it was it's own competitor. and i think that blizzard should allow unlimited playtime upto the contentexpanison a player has bought excpet for MoP. if someone has bought upto cataclysm, let them play contents upto that point for unlimited time. but do take monthly fee for MoP until the next expanison comes. take monthly fee only for the contents of newest expansion, it is more than enough.
This relates to a question i asked elsewhere, since wow is about end-game and not the levellnig process, is it not pointless giving a trial of the levelling process? trial should surely be at max level/end-game so you can see what the game is really like?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
To be honest I am suprised the article calls it the #1 MMO. I mean they lost almost 4 million subscribers over the last 2 years, and the only thing that makes them look like the #1 MMO is the sheer amount of money they dump in to advertising it. Still level 60 cap or not is sitll not there max level and there the ONLY MMO to do this. Not to mention the game engine itself has not seen any real updates since release.
Maybe because it is the #1 MMO regarding subs? They may have lost a substantial amount of subs, but when they still have more than four times as many as their nearest competitor it's a bit foolish to try and claim it's not the top MMO.
The starter edition is nothing more than a free trail. It is so limited that nobody can actually play it. Blizzard already gives away vanilla and BC when you buy the Northrend expansion.
Given all that it really wouldn't hurt Blizzard to open up all of the vanilla and BC content to a F2P model. However, it will dump a ton of asshats into Azeroth that the players will have to deal with. Although, WoW already has the loin's share of asshats.
The arsehats will all be in GW2 as WoW ios yesterdays news and they are the new hipsters.
Personally for me its the way to go as others have mentioned 1-20 doesn't really get you invested in you character but 60 levels should. I play from time to time on a medium pop server and thes tarter zones are dead and when you search the players base it seems 90%+ are 85 and they'll probably stick to a sub.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Originally posted by sniperman248 It would be a great idea. And for the oh they have 9.1million subs here's the thing Aion had 11 million yet they went f2p and now their population went up to 16million and they are making more money than they did off of subscriptions alone. People are willing to spend more on a cash shop a week than what blizzard is making now just in one month.
Thats weed you're smoking there must be mighty fine.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
If WoW is F2P till level 60 AND you can use the AH, then you'll see an even more screwed up economy with botters going on a 24/7 rampage because "You can just make a new account".
Does 1-60 really matter when you can complete the content in 2 days? Blizzard has already devalued the experience so that "new" players can get to the cap faster.
i have 4 85s, got rather good at pvp, and have played MoP beta. i quit because of the talent tree, i will not pay for that garbage; wrecking almost 2yrs of what i did best in that game and making me start over does not go over very well with the pocketbook. but i would reopen my account if it were free. free tends to lower the standards of a lot of people, im no different.
It doesn't matter if they buy expacs all at once or one at a time, they will end up spending close to a $100. More than $100 if they use the Blizzard store. Blizzard has pretty much tapped the market for people who would be willing to buy the game and all the xpacs. They didn't have 10 million people playing since 2006, they've just stopped gaining as many new players as they have been.
Now, I don't think Blizzard needs to do a longer free trial, I just don't think it would hurt the game to do it. It could possibly benefit the game by getting more people playing.
Absolutely false, it does not cost over 100 for the full purchase through the Blizzard Store.
Starter Edition = Free
Battle Chest (Vanilla and TBC) = $19.99
Upgrade Package (WOTLK, Cata and Pandaria) = $49.99
49.99 + 19.99 = 69.98
* No tax is charged if you are a US or Canadian resident*
Originally posted by Kost Originally posted by lizardbones It doesn't matter if they buy expacs all at once or one at a time, they will end up spending close to a $100. More than $100 if they use the Blizzard store. Blizzard has pretty much tapped the market for people who would be willing to buy the game and all the xpacs. They didn't have 10 million people playing since 2006, they've just stopped gaining as many new players as they have been. Now, I don't think Blizzard needs to do a longer free trial, I just don't think it would hurt the game to do it. It could possibly benefit the game by getting more people playing.
Absolutely false, it does not cost over 100 for the full purchase through the Blizzard Store.
Starter Edition = Free
Battle Chest (Vanilla and TBC) = $19.99
Upgrade Package (WOTLK, Cata and Pandaria) = $49.99
49.99 + 19.99 = 69.98
* No tax is charged if you are a US or Canadian resident*
Math is hard!
WoW Battle Chest (Base game + Burning Crusade content) + Wrath of Lich King + Cataclysm = $79.97. The MOP xpac will cost $39.99 at a minimum. That's $119.96. Below is a link to Blizzard's store.
It has those things listed. I'm sure it's possible that you can get into the game for less, but anyone using the Blizzard store will spend $80 now, and another $40 or so when the MOP xpac hits. This is all in addition to spending money on a monthly sub when they go past the first 30 days of game time.
I certainly don't think having a trial from 0 to level 60 would not hurt the game. Especially since you can get the base game and the BC xpac for $20.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
From a players point of view, sure....From Blizzards point of view, I have no idea why they'd do this.
Sorry Bill, but you kinda screwed up. Again.
There is no "unrestricted access to lvl 20". These are the restriction on the free version:
Where did you get those numbers? NCSoft took a loss in Q2 and partly blamed Aion and it's loss of subs and microtransactions. Nowhere those numbers that I've seen on any site, including NCSoft. Closest I have seen was back in 2009 when it had 4 mil in Korea and about 3 mil in Europe and America combined. They had a bit of a jump when it went FtP, but nowhere near that.
As for WoW it peaked at just over 12 million players in 2011 and now a year and a half later down to 9.1 mil. That's the sharpest drop yet. Hell even before the polished turd Cata hit (and yes I played it and still play once in a while), it jumped almost a half a mil players. This time it's dropping. Looks like the rats are deserting the sinking ship. People are getting tired of the "same stuff, new package" thing.
As for the "freemium" set up, it might keep it from bleeding all the way out. Up to 60, no restriction except maybe limiting how many mails or auctions can be done. Yea, it would mess with the economy for a short period, but would be better in the long run. Most of the economy in WoW now is higher level stuff anyway. Would actully improve the economy for the low range, Hell, I would make an account for just the 60 raids alone.
<InvalidTag type="text/javascript" src="http://www.gamebreaker.tv/cce/e.js"></script><div class="cce_pane" content-slug="which-world-of-warcraft-villain-are-you" ctype="quiz" d="http://www.gamebreaker.tv"></div>;
WoW is already F2P, it's not a question of "why". He is just suggesting to increase the F2P cap from 20 to 60 to gett F2P customers more invested in the game.
To be honest I am suprised the article calls it the #1 MMO. I mean they lost almost 4 million subscribers over the last 2 years, and the only thing that makes them look like the #1 MMO is the sheer amount of money they dump in to advertising it. Still level 60 cap or not is sitll not there max level and there the ONLY MMO to do this. Not to mention the game engine itself has not seen any real updates since release.
For comparision on that last statement lets address something recent.
SOE has recently released SOEmote for there EverQuest 2 game. This required updateing the game engine itself to allow for webcame facail recognition. Which is someting that SOE wouldn't do for a game with a low player base, one just has to look at there past business conduct to see this.
To me if Warcraft wants it's vunted title back in a real sense, and not by padding there numbers with dead accounts (yes I know folks that can confirm this). They need to do more then release a new race, they need to totally change there business model for the times, and actually do things players want and actually support things in game live like every other company out there does.
Till that happens I think there increase to 60 for F2P very likely won't change a thing.
LOTRO is already F2P and TOR is going F2P later this year. Plus the recent numbers for WOW is 9 million. Which still is number 1, but in years past we have seen higher numbers from WOW is on a steady decline. If they don't go F2P soon, they'll continue to lose a million or two every 3 to 6 months. Plus just found out today. The Secret World is going F2P at some point as well and its a brand-new game too and their already talking about going F2P. So I really don't see P2P being the norm in the near future. On a side note: No I'm not an analyst, but it doesn't take genius to see how the MMO market is changing. For the better or the worse, only time will tell.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Maybe because it is the #1 MMO regarding subs? They may have lost a substantial amount of subs, but when they still have more than four times as many as their nearest competitor it's a bit foolish to try and claim it's not the top MMO.
The arsehats will all be in GW2 as WoW ios yesterdays news and they are the new hipsters.
Personally for me its the way to go as others have mentioned 1-20 doesn't really get you invested in you character but 60 levels should. I play from time to time on a medium pop server and thes tarter zones are dead and when you search the players base it seems 90%+ are 85 and they'll probably stick to a sub.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Thats weed you're smoking there must be mighty fine.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Does 1-60 really matter when you can complete the content in 2 days? Blizzard has already devalued the experience so that "new" players can get to the cap faster.
If you don't worry about it, it's not a problem.
Absolutely false, it does not cost over 100 for the full purchase through the Blizzard Store.
Starter Edition = Free
Battle Chest (Vanilla and TBC) = $19.99
Upgrade Package (WOTLK, Cata and Pandaria) = $49.99
49.99 + 19.99 = 69.98
* No tax is charged if you are a US or Canadian resident*
Math is hard!
Starter Edition = Free
Battle Chest (Vanilla and TBC) = $19.99
Upgrade Package (WOTLK, Cata and Pandaria) = $49.99
49.99 + 19.99 = 69.98
* No tax is charged if you are a US or Canadian resident*
Math is hard!
WoW Battle Chest (Base game + Burning Crusade content) + Wrath of Lich King + Cataclysm = $79.97. The MOP xpac will cost $39.99 at a minimum. That's $119.96. Below is a link to Blizzard's store.
http://us.blizzard.com/store/browse.xml?f=c:1
It has those things listed. I'm sure it's possible that you can get into the game for less, but anyone using the Blizzard store will spend $80 now, and another $40 or so when the MOP xpac hits. This is all in addition to spending money on a monthly sub when they go past the first 30 days of game time.
I certainly don't think having a trial from 0 to level 60 would not hurt the game. Especially since you can get the base game and the BC xpac for $20.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.