The only people benefiting from a shared sub are people who are already playing retail, ''but you get it for free!''... wow what a logic.
You guys don't give a single F about us, you can't seem to be able to be in our shoes and understand for a minute that WE DON'T WANT RETAIL, WE DON'T WANT TO FUND IT, WE HAVEN'T DONE SO IN YEARS FOR A REASON.
How can you justify having to pay what current retail players pay for a product that wont get any new content/development. It obviously shouldn't be free but a shared sub shouldn't be the only option either. I would be happy even if it was just a single 1$ or 2$ off.
I will pay if it's vanilla. Sharding is not. From what I see so far I won't be playing. Hope they fix it.
Honestly, if y'all can't afford $15 a month for unlimited entertainment, then you really shouldn't be wasting time playing video games anyways. Focus on getting a job first. I know that won't happen though, so enjoy your illegal server experience. It's not "true wow" by any means, its just some slopfest a few random indie devs throw together lmfao.
11/02/2018 06:44 PMPosted by JohnnyderpI don't disagree with where you're going with this, but are you going to guarantee that they won't lose money because people switched from current WoW to classic?
What if they had to let people go because of this? Seems that this is the only way to guarantee that doesn't happen.Once per year, That's a free console system though. In ten years, that's an ounce of gold. Cost is relative, regardless of level of wealth. Some of the more wealthy from the village can be some of the biggest penny-pinchers.11/02/2018 06:40 PMPosted by SilmariGet a job lmao, even on federal minimum wage it's only 2 hours a month of work. Abloobloobloo it's not free
Bottom line is you can't say that it's an inconsequential value because the value of money is subjective, regardless of class.
A valid point could possibly be: "why must I pay the same price as current WoW when it's expected to have no updates?"
Is that not valid?
Any recurring fee will add up over long periods of time. Likewise, if you break down the price of a sub per-day, it's actually only 50 cents a day, which is the price of one turn on an arcade game. Buying a cup of Starbucks coffee in the morning every day would be significantly more expensive over time than a WoW sub.
I think, for the amount of entertainment we get from WoW; it's a pretty good deal. Like I said, the cost per-day is about as much as a turn on an arcade game. I get to play a whole lot longer and do a whole lot more for a whole lot less with a 15 buck a month WoW sub than even some kid with a weekly allowance would be able to get at an arcade.
11/05/2018 07:20 AMPosted by Bloodyshots$15 a month for unlimited entertainment,
Except it's one game. There are multiple other examples of being able to play many games for less.
11/04/2018 11:37 PMPosted by HankscorpioPosted this back in June. Looks like I was wrong about a one-time fee to buy the Classic game license, but the part about sub fees is still relevant.06/21/2018 09:09 PMPosted by HankscorpioGame and expansion sales are to recoup the cost of development, plus profit. Subscription fees generally go toward the maintenance and upkeep of the ongoing game (I'm sure there's also some profit built-in). The existence of a Classic development team and (likely) additional or dedicated GMs points to development costs (i.e. paid for by selling the license) and ongoing maintenance costs (i.e. sub fee). This does not rule out bundle deals with modern WoW expansions / subscriptions, but it does suggest a certain amount of cost to Classic players. I am happy to pay for that much entertainment.
They could have at least had a reasonable paywall for classic.
11/05/2018 07:08 AMPosted by ZildenDB0D4DWE DON'T WANT RETAIL, WE DON'T WANT TO FUND IT, WE HAVEN'T DONE SO IN YEARS FOR A REASON.
Then you have no say it how it's offered and have no business talking about it, since you don't want to pay for it at all.
Atleast from what I understand it doesn't require that you own the latest expansion, just that you have an active WoW subscription. Splitting the player base and creating a barrier for players from either side to enter the other is bad business, as much as the purist want nothing to do with retail it was inevitable considering we are talking about Blizzard(and Activision). At this point they have eased some of my concerns that I had going into blizcon, but there is still a long road ahead and hopefully they will stay true to the vanilla experience as best they can.
11/05/2018 07:36 AMPosted by Idun11/05/2018 07:08 AMPosted by ZildenDB0D4DWE DON'T WANT RETAIL, WE DON'T WANT TO FUND IT, WE HAVEN'T DONE SO IN YEARS FOR A REASON.
Then you have no say it how it's offered and have no business talking about it, since you don't want to pay for it at all.
That's not true at all.
I like my idea of having two different sub plans. $15 for classic and $15 for retail.
$30 for those of you that want to play both. For those of you that just want to play retail, then you only have to pay for retail.
I don't get how dense some of you are. Some of us dont like wasting money. Regardless if its 100 or 1. And a prime example of why some of you still pay for retail.
You're being fleeced.
I can't think of any other form where this type of pricing is reasonable.
If I go to Wendys and I want just a beverage, I don't have to buy a burger and fries to get it. I can just buy the drink.
Fools like the ones saying that this is fair is why business like car dealerships are as successful as they are instead of being able to get the law changed to buy straight from the manufacturing company.
"Sticker price is $44,000 even though the MSRP is $33,000? Sure I'll buy it anyway. Where do I sign?"
If you think in any way this is reasonable then I question your adulthood.
Its actually quite comical to be honest.
Unsubbed player, "I don't want to pay for a product that I don't care about and will not use".
Subbed player, "You're poor".
Unsubbed player, "No, read my last statement"
Subbed player, <blank stare> SHUT UP AND PAY......STOP BEING POOR".
(Subbed player gets the game for free)
"See...I paid".
Who cares? That $15 isn't expensive for 2 versions of WoW.
I don't like it, but I'll pay it.
I would rather pay closer to what I paid originally which I believe was like 14$ canadian where now days its like 18 or something higher
I would rather pay closer to what I paid originally which I believe was like 14$ canadian where now days its like 18 or something higher
11/02/2018 03:30 PMPosted by Yazfizbash11/02/2018 03:28 PMPosted by Osirus...
K bye.
I bet you have given blizzard at least $2,500 for WoW alone.
I have, I love this game. I will keep adding to it as long as they keep giving me content to play. Thats all classic is, content. Sure its old, but if they keep it pure (no added QoL that we have now) it will be well worth it. If you donât wanna pay, thatâs your decision to make. But to bash those of us that enjoy the game... grow up
11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by JoynalI wouldn't have any problem paying $15 a month for Classic.
I refuse to pay $15 a month for the current retail game and since I have to pay for the current retail game in order to play Classic, I won't be playing Classic.
So you think people who enjoy retail should have to pay both to play both? get out of here with that
he doesnt realize this time around you actually going to get your $15 worth.. youve been getting ripped off since Cata.... sheesh
11/04/2018 09:36 PMPosted by HexagonNow considering I'm not dumb enough to pay for the current state of the game and requests a smaller sub fee for just vanilla, how is this not reasonable?
Why would you pay a smaller fee for Vanilla? Is this kid serious?
11/05/2018 09:10 AMPosted by JugajrWhy would you pay a smaller fee for Vanilla? Is this kid serious?
*Retail player getting classic at no additional cost whatsoever*
11/05/2018 09:02 AMPosted by Jugajr11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by JoynalI wouldn't have any problem paying $15 a month for Classic.
I refuse to pay $15 a month for the current retail game and since I have to pay for the current retail game in order to play Classic, I won't be playing Classic.
So you think people who enjoy retail should have to pay both to play both? get out of here with that
Why not? If I want to play classic I have to pay $15 why shouldn't you?
11/05/2018 09:02 AMPosted by Jugajr11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by JoynalI wouldn't have any problem paying $15 a month for Classic.
I refuse to pay $15 a month for the current retail game and since I have to pay for the current retail game in order to play Classic, I won't be playing Classic.
So you think people who enjoy retail should have to pay both to play both? get out of here with that
I think it might have to do with the majority of development money goes to retail and classic just ends up being a way to hold the door open during content droughts. It's a bandaid for retail being to bad to stand on it's own merit pretty much. Almost certain the majority of the 15 sub will be used for expansions concerning retail, and profits of course. People understand profits being part of business but not why they have to subsidize another game.
It's like going to a theme park and most theme parks have tickets for specific sections of the park and all access passes. We have to pay for the all access pass to only access a small part of the park that is never going to be under development with anything new.
11/05/2018 09:14 AMPosted by HexagonWhy not? If I want to play classic I have to pay $15 why shouldn't you?
I already do pay $15
11/05/2018 09:13 AMPosted by Thermiss*Retail player getting classic at no additional cost whatsoever*
15 is 15, sorry
11/05/2018 09:16 AMPosted by GattzIt's a bandaid for retail being to bad to stand on it's own merit pretty much.
Hmmm no, retail is making plenty of money as is. This is more a way to not punish those already paying retail who also want to check out Classic.
Why in the hell do you want a paywall for classic?11/05/2018 07:32 AMPosted by ThermissThey could have at least had a reasonable paywall for classic.