The best part is the retailers who suggest that we want it "free" when they themselves will literally be getting it at no additional cost. Literally FREE.
A combined WoW sub, which one is 'free'? How do you know the breakdown of the 15$?
But honestly isn't the whole idea to be able to play on legit servers? More than a few have stated that they would pay anything to do this over the years too.
But as I have stated , I am all for a cheaper Classic only sub option.
11/02/2018 08:02 PMPosted by
Joynal
No mental gymnastics involved at all. I dislike what they've done to modern WoW so I refuse to pay for it. I'm not going to give financial support to a bad product and let shareholders think the development team is doing a great job that should be encouraged to continue.
You don't have any say where the money you give goes though, never have, and they can easily see who is playing what version.
*cough*
Hi, how are you, you little whining no life baby.
You spend 15$ a month for retail AND classic "once classic drops" .You get one game with two different skins/modes."
Next thing.
I last year spent 30$ " two 15$" to sub up for a even older "and better in some ways" game then WoW. Called Dark age of Camelot. You might thought that would be a waste but I had fun so money well spent for me.
No one is forcing you to spend money on a old mmo. You can easy save that money and take yourself out.
11/02/2018 04:52 PMPosted by
Joynal
Never played on a private server. Just gave up playing the refuse heap WoW turned into. Have zero interest in supporting that game financially.
I'm pretty much in the same boat. I'm not the least bit interested in BfA, but I will pay to play a Classic game that is actually Vanilla WoW, not a stripped down version of the current game with its CRZ/sharding and scaling.
I think I'd only pay $15/mo for perfection (which the demo was not) and if there was a (small) paywall between live and classic.
Otherwise I want a discount to encourage classic-only players to play and let me overlook faults.
PvP ranking sounds terrifying to me now too. One month there's 5 times as many 15HKs, the next there's only the no lifer nerds.
In what universe did you think Classic was going to be a free to play game? This allows them to keep Classic from having an entry fee (Which many expected it would have), whilst simultaneously allowing players to cross contaminate between retail and Classic.
If you want to play, play.
If you dont want to play, dont.
Im right where i want to be for all of this. I did say this was the most logical route for Blizz.
1 Like
What they should have done:
Bundle Classic with regular WoW for $15/month
OR
Classic-only for $5/month.
$15/month for Classic alone isn't going to hold very many players. That's a good way to drive a bunch of them back to those "other" servers.
What they should have done:
Bundle Classic with regular WoW for $15/month
OR
Classic-only for $5/month.
$15/month for Classic alone isn't going to hold very many players. That's a good way to drive a bunch of them back to those "other" servers.
wouldnt you not be a trust classic wow player then? Private servers are not the classic experience, everyone who wants it has played it whiched means they paid 15 a month for it. no changes right
11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by
Joynal
I 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.
I mean, technically you're paying for one and getting the other for free.
11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by
Joynal
I 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.
I mean, technically you're paying for one and getting the other for free.
There's the functional difference of not coming up as a live wow subber when it comes to earnings reports and not having any paywall between classic and live.
11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by
Joynal
I 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.
this has to be the dumbest reasoning I have ever heard of. The $15 gets you retail AND classic, I am positive I understood that properly. Thus you are getting classic for $15 a month. as you have stated is fine. You are suggesting that giving you retail free in this case, vs getting classic for free if you have an active retail account, is somehow going to ruin the game.
Could you explain what you mean because it either makes no sense and needs clarification, or I honestly did misunderstand what htey said and I need to pay $15 for both games, and the right to pay for classic access is dependant on paying for retail access.
$15 a MONTH and you're upset? Lmfao
It's not worth even $5 if it'll be changed into franken patch that they have in the demo.
11/02/2018 03:29 PMPosted by
Joynal
I 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.
this has to be the dumbest reasoning I have ever heard of. The $15 gets you retail AND classic, I am positive I understood that properly. Thus you are getting classic for $15 a month. as you have stated is fine. You are suggesting that giving you retail free in this case, vs getting classic for free if you have an active retail account, is somehow going to ruin the game.
Could you explain what you mean because it either makes no sense and needs clarification, or I honestly did misunderstand what htey said and I need to pay $15 for both games, and the right to pay for classic access is dependant on paying for retail access.
A number of people who want classic will gladly pay $15 for a paywall, even though it is an ancient game, so only people who want to pay to play can play. A combined sub has no paywall between live and classic.
11/02/2018 10:47 PMPosted by
Koushi
...
this has to be the dumbest reasoning I have ever heard of. The $15 gets you retail AND classic, I am positive I understood that properly. Thus you are getting classic for $15 a month. as you have stated is fine. You are suggesting that giving you retail free in this case, vs getting classic for free if you have an active retail account, is somehow going to ruin the game.
Could you explain what you mean because it either makes no sense and needs clarification, or I honestly did misunderstand what htey said and I need to pay $15 for both games, and the right to pay for classic access is dependant on paying for retail access.
A number of people who want classic will gladly pay $15 for a paywall, even though it is an ancient game, so only people who want to pay to play can play. A combined sub has no paywall between live and classic.
To this, I say the World's smallest violin is to be played for those people.
I'm a roleplayer, who has been cynical enough of how the Classic community wants Classic to be like, and how I saw Classic playing out.
In Vanilla, people who I didn't want playing on my server would routinely invade to complain about their servers not being available for play.
Some of the most ardent vanilla players here basically tried to tell me that they were going to get special treatment because they have been petitioning Blizzard for years for Vanilla servers, and when they finally arrive, that they were going to be segregated and paywalled to themselves.
They tried to convince me and others that they would have to pay to play the same game, despite the fact that it made zero business sense, and was going to work against Blizzard's interests.
The one that these people kept saying was "You're not going to get a free milkshake with your diet coke."'
Is this real?
I'm not paying $180 a year for ANY game,let alone a almost 15 year old game that doesn't get content updates.
I won't either. With one exception: Classic.
That is, provided Blizzard does what they said they'd do and delivers the game as it was in 1.12. None of this sharding nonsense. Or other such corruptions.
11/02/2018 11:06 PMPosted by
Manzo
11/02/2018 10:47 PMPosted by
Koushi
...
A number of people who want classic will gladly pay $15 for a paywall, even though it is an ancient game, so only people who want to pay to play can play. A combined sub has no paywall between live and classic.
To this, I say the World's smallest violin is to be played for those people.
I'm a roleplayer, who has been cynical enough of how the Classic community wants Classic to be like, and how I saw Classic playing out.
In Vanilla, people who I didn't want playing on my server would routinely invade to complain about their servers not being available for play.
Some of the most ardent vanilla players here basically tried to tell me that they were going to get special treatment because they have been petitioning Blizzard for years for Vanilla servers, and when they finally arrive, that they were going to be segregated and paywalled to themselves.
They tried to convince me and others that they would have to pay to play the same game, despite the fact that it made zero business sense, and was going to work against Blizzard's interests.
The one that these people kept saying was "You're not going to get a free milkshake with your diet coke."'
So basically you're mad that some non-RPers ruined Vanilla for you during a handful of server outages and you want it to be 10 times worse in classic because you want it to fail. Makes perfect sense.
11/02/2018 11:11 PMPosted by
Koushi
11/02/2018 11:06 PMPosted by
Manzo
...
To this, I say the World's smallest violin is to be played for those people.
I'm a roleplayer, who has been cynical enough of how the Classic community wants Classic to be like, and how I saw Classic playing out.
In Vanilla, people who I didn't want playing on my server would routinely invade to complain about their servers not being available for play.
Some of the most ardent vanilla players here basically tried to tell me that they were going to get special treatment because they have been petitioning Blizzard for years for Vanilla servers, and when they finally arrive, that they were going to be segregated and paywalled to themselves.
They tried to convince me and others that they would have to pay to play the same game, despite the fact that it made zero business sense, and was going to work against Blizzard's interests.
The one that these people kept saying was "You're not going to get a free milkshake with your diet coke."'
So basically you're mad that some non-RPers ruined Vanilla for you during a handful of server outages and you want it to be 10 times worse in classic because you want it to fail. Makes perfect sense.
Nah, laughing that I've been telling people that this could happen for months, and people like you are upset that it might be a reality for Classic.
The people here have built Classic up as the relaunch of Vanilla, when every sign pointed to that not being the case.
Every complaint that you non-RPers have complained about is something I've been through, and hasn't stopped me or my community from progressing.
"No sharding, it will ruin community!" I've got sharding on my RP servers, hasn't done anything bad to my community. The nature of RP servers is that people are extra flighty. I know a few people, but there are so many people who come and go that it's impossible to know everyone.
"No transmog, it will cause inflation!" RP server - people inflated the prices of gear because they look cool long before transmog was even a thing.
I'm saying is that I'm laughing at how these complaints are going to stop people like you from playing Classic. You're going to find a reason not to play.
I'll happily pay it if it's the real experience.
This game requires servers - servers require upkeep.
Upkeep = money.
I don't think the pricing model is unreasonable whatsoever considering Blizzard are offering both Retail and Classic in one price.