Combined sub is the way to go. Classic players can freely try out retail and retail players can freely try out classic.
When you say you want separate subs, you're really saying "I want less population and realms to die faster."
I think combined subs is likely. That said, you'll still have to pay for BFA and maybe even Classic separately for the install, so trying each of them willy nilly will still have a barrier.
Blizz is going to want a little more monthly revenue for their hard work hosting wow classic and BFA.
$15 for BFA, $5 for classic, $20 for both. $20 is pretty cheap for entertainment.
10/30/2018 11:04 AMPosted by
Amris
Blizz is going to want a little more monthly revenue for their hard work hosting wow classic and BFA.
$15 for BFA, $5 for classic, $20 for both. $20 is pretty cheap for entertainment.
That is the sweet spot IMHO. I would add an initial box cost as well.
10/30/2018 11:04 AMPosted by
Amris
Blizz is going to want a little more monthly revenue for their hard work hosting wow classic and BFA.
$15 for BFA, $5 for classic, $20 for both. $20 is pretty cheap for entertainment.
I'd be inclined to say $15 for BFA/Classic or $5 for just Classic. Plus box prices.
10/30/2018 11:04 AMPosted by
Amris
Blizz is going to want a little more monthly revenue for their hard work hosting wow classic and BFA.
$15 for BFA, $5 for classic, $20 for both. $20 is pretty cheap for entertainment.
I'd be inclined to say $15 for BFA/Classic or $5 for just Classic. Plus box prices.
*sigh*
Why are you inclined to think classic should be essentially free sub-wise to existing BFA players? Careful, Menard and Zyrius will call you cheap.
I'd be inclined to say $15 for BFA/Classic or $5 for just Classic. Plus box prices.
This. I can't see them charging more to sub to wow when you already sub to wow.
I'm doubtful blizzacti will settle for the same $15 a month when they could easily pull $20 from people who want to play both.
Wow classic will not need any further development and server upkeep/bandwidth will be low.
People already pay $20 for tokens.
I do think there will be a game purchase as well though.
Combined sub is the way to go. Classic players can freely try out retail and retail players can freely try out classic.
When you say you want separate subs, you're really saying "I want less population and realms to die faster."
There will be a very small amount of players that have never played one or the other that will actually stick around in the one they're "trying".
I think they'll do a combined sub with a purchase of Classic required. The sales of Classic alone will pay for the development of Classic and the combined sub will just help i keep going.
I could see them possibly bring it up to $20 a month for Retail players and then offer a separate sub for Classic-only players (like $10 a month for Classic-only). That way you can pay $10 for Classic only or $20 for BOTH games (regularly $25 if paid separately).
But having a combined sub mandatory to continue playing Classic (maybe give free 30 days if you purchase Classic) is just too good of a marketing/bragging opportunity for Blizz. They can literally then say "we have more subs than X past expansion" without having to compare the two games.
10/30/2018 10:32 AMPosted by
Ughash
I bet if blizzard does combined subs they’ll start releasing sub numbers like BFA is doing really good but secretly 50% or more of the subs are on classic.
The metric across the company is DAU/MAU.
Logging in every day means the game is doing fantastic.
To be fair, this is because they correlate activity with increased revenues (of all sorts and across all games). Simply put, they have the data that the more you play the more likely you are to spend money on
something. The subs part is factoring less and less into their overall revenue picture.
I 100% think Blizzard should link classic and retail subs. It makes the most economical sense. People who sub to classic may try retail because they can since they’re subbed. People to only want retail may try classic because they can since they’re subbed.
Also we WILL see record high subs if they link. 100% sure no questions asked
Sorry no sub for me if it required I pay for BfA. I didn’t cancel last month to have to pay for that cesspool at a later date.
<span class="truncated">...</span>
I'd be inclined to say $15 for BFA/Classic or $5 for just Classic. Plus box prices.
*sigh*
Why are you inclined to think classic should be essentially free sub-wise to existing BFA players? Careful, Menard and Zyrius will call you cheap.
I dont even know a game that charges $5 a month. $10 is normally minimum for online games.
But Im not sure if I'm explaining this correctly, apologies if it's getting lost in how I explain it.
New WoW account is called WoW1.
WoW1 will give you access to levels 1-110. (This is considered Vanilla - Legion).
This currently costs $15 a month. So to include Classic in this wouldn't require people to purchase BFA. This would just be the standard World of Warcraft sub that exists today.
By your logic. Since TBC hasn't changed. They should split up all of their expansions again and make people pay $5 separate subs for each expansion up until BFA.
So you're paying what.... $15 for 1-60 + $5 for BC, +$5 WotLK, +$5 CATA, +$5 MoP, +$5 WoD, +$5 Legion.
So by your logic of separating everything. WoW with everything should cost 15+30 for each expansion.
I mean what if a BC server comes up? $5 for access to that? Then a WotLK server? $5 for that? Cata Server? $5 for that? Where do you stop?
I would add an initial box cost as well.
Why should I pay an initial box cost when I already did fourteen years ago?
10/30/2018 12:27 PMPosted by
Celilis
I would add an initial box cost as well.
Why should I pay an initial box cost when I already did fourteen years ago?
Because it's a different game.
But.... it has to have the same:
Spells
Levels
Races
Classes
Talents
Gold values
Graphics
Debuff limit
....
Pretty much everything HAS to be the same for it to be different.
...
Charging the same sub cost as BFA would guarantee that PSs would not see a drop in populations.
I am shocked that you believe vanilla private servers will still exist.
It's not like Blizzard has ever allowed a private server to offer exactly what they offer or to make a legitimate amount of money off of them.
And when that server runs from Russia or China they can’t do a whole lot about it
6205
31 posts
1 hour ago
4
Blizz is going to want a little more monthly revenue for their hard work hosting wow classic and BFA.
$15 for BFA, $5 for classic, $20 for both. $20 is pretty cheap for entertainment.
"Wants a little more monthly revenue" then immediately states "Classic for $5" lol? You're deluding yourself if you think Classic by itself, if not linked to a current Warcraft subscription, is going to be anything <$10 USD.
Hey I'm cool with $10 a month for classic.
Its funny to see how everyone has a different stance on the logic they could take. I'm still betting it will not be a combined sub. Specially with Vanilla players not wanting Tokens in their game.
Hey google. Set a reminder for 1 year from now.
<span class="truncated">...</span>
I am shocked that you believe vanilla private servers will still exist.
It's not like Blizzard has ever allowed a private server to offer exactly what they offer or to make a legitimate amount of money off of them.
And when that server runs from Russia or China they can’t do a whole lot about it
China doesnt have any private servers and China will continue to not have any private servers. (That I know of, hence the large population on certain servers)
China doesnt have private servers because World of Warcraft is run by a Chinese company Netease in China. A Chinese company is better protected in China and isn't going to allow some private server to stay up there long.
So good luck without the chinese government coming and knocking on your door.
What is all this "tourist" discussion talk.
Feels like people talking about tourists destroying the landscapes and dropping litter in Iceland. Or like Swedes talking about refugees. Really. Is it really that important to keep them out?