Expanded Starter Edition Proposal

[Seranthor]

Keep players invested in their IP (old and new ones), to have a new stream of possible subscribers become invested in the IP that is World of Warcraft through social connections in game, such as guilds and friends.

This was always and has always been the strength of WoW. The amount of people who keep mentioning guilds or friends as a reason for staying longer in-game than they intended to is pretty high on different forums aimed towards WoW. Be it MMO-Champion or any other fansite. WoW's large hold on the MMORPG-scene has also put a stranglehold on more recent titles and forced them down a f2p-route to be competetive. Now, the tables turn and potential players don't see a value in picking up WoW compared to f2p titles that offer more for far less cost.

The key to an MMORPG is and always has been the community. An MMORPG's only advantage over a regular RPG is the social aspect of it. Ignoring that fact when you try to catch players' interest is about as competent as sitting backwards in the driving seat of a car.

A f2p alternative with some taste of what end-game content might be like with a legacy raid difficulty could easily catch interest if done correctly and at least put up some competition. As it is now, WoW will simply continue to decline. There is too much competition and not enough long-term interest around the IP for new players that enter the genre.

invested? how?
new stream of possible subscribers? where? OP is clearly not interested in subscribing.
Tables turn? how? explain in detail.
(silly analog ignored)
F2P takes money OUT of game development, it takes money AWAY from the game, Why should Blizzard do this?
Exactly what in OPs plan would encourage anyone to subscribe?
Not enough 'long term' interest is subjective at best, Why do you believe Blizzard continues to release expansions? to feed the masses? No, they do it to feed the company coffers.
Decline perhaps, but nothing in OP's proposal prevents that, in fact by virtue of carrying more non-subscribers I would say it hastens that decline.
So I'll ask yet again, Explain what financial gain is there for Blizzard to even consider this?

[Deleted]

Well, if you give F2P players incentives to spend money in the shop - might be some game-time tokens (possibly even on a weekly / daily basis?), or already existing mounts / pets / vanity items - then F2P actually brings money into the game. I surely have spent some amount on F2P games when I was playing them (almost) daily. Then, you have to keep people interested by providing content. That's it.

Neverwinter lost me when they have introduced their segregation system and deleted any possibility to farm astral diamonds for F2P players. They degraded me and thus I will never spend a dime on that game again after being a A+ customer for some time. They should have acknowledget previous spendings like LotRO does.

[Atelniar]

invested? how?
new stream of possible subscribers? where? OP is clearly not interested in subscribing.
Tables turn? how? explain in detail.
(silly analog ignored)
F2P takes money OUT of game development, it takes money AWAY from the game, Why should Blizzard do this?
Exactly what in OPs plan would encourage anyone to subscribe?
Not enough 'long term' interest is subjective at best, Why do you believe Blizzard continues to release expansions? to feed the masses? No, they do it to feed the company coffers.
Decline perhaps, but nothing in OP's proposal prevents that, in fact by virtue of carrying more non-subscribers I would say it hastens that decline.
So I'll ask yet again, Explain what financial gain is there for Blizzard to even consider this?

You are choosing to ignore the points I have written that address your questions. Re-read and try to comprehend the meaning of each paragraph.

Not enough 'long term' interest is not subjective, it has been proven by the fact that Blizzard adhere to their playerbase as cyclical in this day and age, if Blizzard adhere to that fact, you should too. Interest around the IP that was Warcraft is what made WoW relatively large to start with, interest around the community-driven fame of the title World of Warcraft is what made this specific MMORPG a phenomenon outside the standard achievements of any other MMORPG to date. That people somehow delude themselves to now think that what WoW achieved is perfectly common in the MMORPG-scene is laughable. It was as much community-driven as it was a success from a development stand-point.

F2p does not aim to make a profit solely on its own. Blizzard already had the audacity to have an in-game store and a subscription fee. No other MMORPG is capable of doing this as blatantly as WoW has done. The amount of good will the community showed, for such an extensive amount of money-grabbing which most f2p titles have to balance carefully to not be destroyed, is quite unreal in my experience it has never happened before.

You are an individual who seem reluctant to accept that f2p solutions can improve a dwindling trend. SWToR proved you wrong. WoW has no incentive to attract new players compared to its competition, I have earlier elaborated as to why. Asking what finacial gain there is to extend the life-time of WoW as a product is borderline naive.

[Deleted]

So the OP took what he likes and made a F2P game for him. Not just asking for incrased cap or AH acces, but also for the features he wants in. Amazing.

So I want F2P accounts to have acces to the world editor and be able to create content. And remove the human racials from the game. And force people in RP realms to RP full time. Because you know, that's what I like and everybody wants it too.

[Deleted]

So the OP took what he likes and made a F2P game for him. Not just asking for incrased cap or AH acces, but also for the features he wants in. Amazing.

So I want F2P accounts to have acces to the world editor and be able to create content. And remove the human racials from the game. And force people in RP realms to RP full time. Because you know, that's what I like and everybody wants it too.

Yeah cos those things are exactly the same as what he was proposing.

[Serenais]

Hm. While it sounds nice (and, honestly, I don't care how you have your fun as long as you allow others the same courtesy) and I agree with you that restriction to lvl20 is keeping too low, I see several potential pitfalls that would very likely make this either problematic, unfeasible, downright not working, or all three.
1) Different gameplay experience between a F2P lvl60 and a lvl60 from a paid version that stopped XP gain. I am not talking about the lack of flight, or similar restrictions on what came with WoW's expansions. I am talking about different mechanics and world interaction. Basically, in order to create a viable experience akin to vanilla, you would require different set of skills/spells/etc.; a paid-version lvl60 is one that is deep inside a leveling path, therefore their set of skills/spells/etc. is limited and incomplete. If you wanted a lvl60 raid environment, you would run headlong into a wall with this approach. While I am certain that there are lvl60 twink guilds that specialise on this, you could likely count them on the fingers of one hand of a lousy carpenter. You would need to amend the F2P skillset to solve this problem, otherwise you end up with the same BIG problem that Vanilla had - many, MANY specs would be unviable. However, if you DO amend the skillset, you effectively end up with a different game, that no longer reflects the paid version as much as it could (and should).
2) You can't allow F2P characters to /w, trade and access auction house. This would create a heaven for gold sellers and bots. While many already exist through paid versions of the game, allowing F2P characters to freely trade with each other and with players past the paid-version barrier, especially with the gold cap increased to 250k, would result in the game being beset by IMMENSE number of characters created with RL profit in mind. That would in turn end in near endless harrasment of paying players via whispers from gold sellers, fake GMs, etc., would flood AH with innumerable offers the type of "1 true iron ore". Also, on top of that, while it would make paid WoW playing a lot worse, it would make playing as F2P lvl60 nearly impossible, simply because on top of gold selling, they would become the prime target of a grey economy, simply because a lvl60 bot could obtain more than just gold that could potentially interest them. Finally, I probably do not have to tell you that the influx of F2P bots in this would effectively make any PvP on F2P totally moot.
3) You can't split communities. Pure and simple, this would create "two communities" - paying players playing at top of the current content, and people "stuck" at lvl60. Considering that vast majority of paying players would not enter the F2P community (your lvl110 characters would simply have nothing to do in there; and while some players might want to have a lvl60 twink in a F2P lvl60 guild, these would be far in between) and F2P players would not be able to get to paid-version endgame, you would end up with two split communities that would only trade (and ocassionaly RP) with one another, where they could find a way to safeguard themselves from the horrors of aforementioned item 2). As this would actively discourage F2P players from joining the subscribed players (for various reasons, but mostly social ones - once a F2P community starts to exist, players in it will mostly stay in it because of other players in it), it would actually defeat the reason for the existence of the starter edition - being a "trial" version of the full WoW. Not to mention that due to 2), the F2P community would likely be compared to a cesspit.

You could in theory get rid of 1) and 2) (although it would be HARD, and solving 2) would effectively defeat this thread's proposal), but getting rid of 3) would be nearly impossible. You might state that it's moot because the community around lvl20 starter version is nearly nonexistent, but that is because you don't get any sort of endgame content at lvl20 and because lvl20s can't communicate with each other (besides /say ), and, quite frankly, 3) is a very solid reason for Blizzard not to do anything akin to this thread's proposal.
All in all, I just don't see a F2P as envisioned here to be viable. It's nice idea and the initial thought is good, unfortunatelly, it would work only if "everyone played nice". And we all know that reality is very far from it.

[Seranthor]

You are choosing to ignore the points I have written that address your questions. Re-read and try to comprehend the meaning of each paragraph.

Not enough 'long term' interest is not subjective, it has been proven by the fact that Blizzard adhere to their playerbase as cyclical in this day and age, if Blizzard adhere to that fact, you should too. Interest around the IP that was Warcraft is what made WoW relatively large to start with, interest around the community-driven fame of the title World of Warcraft is what made this specific MMORPG a phenomenon outside the standard achievements of any other MMORPG to date. That people somehow delude themselves to now think that what WoW achieved is perfectly common in the MMORPG-scene is laughable. It was as much community-driven as it was a success from a development stand-point.

F2p does not aim to make a profit solely on its own. Blizzard already had the audacity to have an in-game store and a subscription fee. No other MMORPG is capable of doing this as blatantly as WoW has done. The amount of good will the community showed, for such an extensive amount of money-grabbing which most f2p titles have to balance carefully to not be destroyed, is quite unreal in my experience it has never happened before.

You are an individual who seem reluctant to accept that f2p solutions can improve a dwindling trend. SWToR proved you wrong. WoW has no incentive to attract new players compared to its competition, I have earlier elaborated as to why. Asking what finacial gain there is to extend the life-time of WoW as a product is borderline naive.

Fair enough, handwave all you like, dismiss all you like. I accept your lack of answers as having no answers, thank you for saving me the time. I'm even more against this asinine plan than I was before. I will concede that its a well crafted ploy to get free vanilla wow again, but you can already have that... go play on one of the vanilla servers, Blizzard shouldn't be stupid enough to fall for this ploy.

[Atelniar]

Fair enough, handwave all you like, dismiss all you like. I accept your lack of answers as having no answers, thank you for saving me the time. I'm even more against this asinine plan than I was before. I will concede that its a well crafted ploy to get free vanilla wow again, but you can already have that... go play on one of the vanilla servers, Blizzard shouldn't be stupid enough to fall for this ploy.

You are handwaving, I am indicating that I answered your questions previously. If you can not draw the connection between a community and the MMORPG's sustainability, who are you to blame me for it? I elaborated on it, just go back and read it. You are being stubborn atm.

[Deleted]

The overall F2P experience is way too limited, especially for how much of an investment WoW is overall.

This is my opinion but if you play something so much that is an investment you should pay. F2P for trying it out is great.

[Seranthor]

You are handwaving, I am indicating that I answered your questions previously. If you can not draw the connection between a community and the MMORPG's sustainability, who are you to blame me for it? I elaborated on it, just go back and read it. You are being stubborn atm.

Exactly which questions did you bother to answer... I seem to be unable to find them in all the drivel you posted. Maybe you should explain it better.

[Cannibalus]

I agree all your ideas except one: 40-man raids. Flex 10-30 looks a lot better to me. Other than that, it's the best idea i have heard this year lol.

[Deleted]

Let me ask a deep and meaningful question: a tease of what?

A tease of WoW, the world and the fantasy.

Other titles do this in a far more competent manner.

what any other mmorpg with 5mil subs does it better?

And you try to ridicule a proposal of a solution to that? Your constant bickering about legacy servers through-out your post clearly shows your bias in this case.

Sorry but go back and read the orignal post and you see the op whants a form of a "vanilla server" free for all thats all his post is about - he doesnt care that none of his makes sense to be offered for free.
(no to mention that you can these days play the whole game once bought for free....)

You are an individual who seem reluctant to accept that f2p solutions can improve a dwindling trend.

There is no dwindling trend.You are an individual who seem reluctant to accept that WoW is fine WITHOUT f2p.

[Atelniar]

Exactly which questions did you bother to answer... I seem to be unable to find them in all the drivel you posted. Maybe you should explain it better.

Averagely formulated, with decent paragraphs and you can't find it? Ok.

TL;DR:

Invested?
Player retention is based on an interest in the IP, aka: title. If you have a f2p option that attracts new players and keeps former subscribers invested in the WoW community through the f2p solution you keep them engaged in the game.

new stream of possible subscribers? where?
The players currently trying out b2p or f2p models to fill their sparetime, because WoW as a product is not worth investing the money in when most of the content gets sidelined as irrelevant and it still costs more than a AAA-title. This can entail every player interested in the MMO-scene. They are currently flocking elsewhere. As subscriber trends showed before Blizzard stopped announcing numbers.

Tables turn? how?
See the above paragraph. Players look for value for money these days, there are so many competitors that are cheaper and do things better. Be it player-housing, PvP or story telling. WoW's dominant hold on the MMORPG-scene forced a shift in payment models for your average MMORPG title.

F2P takes money OUT of game development, it takes money AWAY from the game, Why should Blizzard do this?
F2p options will give incentive to keep logging on and perhaps renewing that subscription at some point. The players won't roam the very flooded market for a more appealing title. It keeps WoW relevant to players who can't be bothered with a subscription to some degree.

Exactly what in OPs plan would encourage anyone to subscribe?
Social connections. Did you ever resubscribe because an old friend wanted to try out a new expansion or do some arena? The premise is the same, when players form new social bonds in a f2p solution and those players grow together as a community they progress through content and might want to see the current end-game of the current expansion. The OP included this idea by allowing f2p-accounts access to guild management. If you allow f2p-accounts to interact with experience-locked avatars this interaction would increase. It was a trend on my server a few years back for players to form level 60 and level 70 guilds by locking experience. Imagine how popular it would be if new players could take part in such an experience for free without being locked out from interacting with them?

Not enough 'long term' interest is subjective at best, Why do you believe Blizzard continues to release expansions? to feed the masses? No, they do it to feed the company coffers.
Long-term interest among entirely new players. The current expansion model was only ever invented to keep the game relevant when content might expire for the current playerbase or grow stale. WoW has lost its ability to incite interest among MMORPG-interested gamers. The competition is too capable and much cheaper.

Explain what financial gain is there for Blizzard to even consider this?
Longer life-expectancy for the product.

[alucardtnuoc]

Would break the game, opening up F2P to allow trading and higher levels will just cause a very rapid increase in bots/gold sellers. They would get banned, but the damage would have already been done.

Your idea sounds nice, but it's not a smart decision.

[Atelniar]

There is no dwindling trend.You are an individual who seem reluctant to accept that WoW is fine WITHOUT f2p.

Hello, denial. Cyclical subscribers are now a thing.

In regards to "what any other mmorpg with 5mil subs does it better?", it's about the content, not about popularity which is still declining and built by the community as much as the game's success. You are utilizing a phenomenon among MMORPG's and arguing for its superiority in a day and age where there are MMO's with far better combat complexity and story-telling. WoW has been attempting to borrow these traits and put them into their product with WoD. Player housing was originally garrisons, but they watered it down in complexity. You can barely customize the look of your own garrison while you can own multiple player-hubs that are also instanced in SWToR, where every interior (table, chair, carpets, lamps, etc.) is customizable. Just because there are more players playing WoW does not mean that the content is superiour. WoW is a monstrosity still feeding on its former glory, at one point that luxury will come to an end. I think Legion's coming will establish how quickly that luxury comes to an end. If Legion is a success they will stave their competition off for another year, maybe three. If not, WoW will rapidly be put in the back seat.

[Seranthor]

*snip*

Thank you for your answers, you may be right. I however, do not agree with your opinions on this subject matter.

I'll tell you a short story, a fresh young druid is born is shadow glen... he has resisted the urge to play Wow for 7 years (so we are talking the last months of LK) he finally caves to the curiosity. He feels his way out of the the shelter of the great tree and heads for Dolanaar (he's probably been playing for 3-4 hours now, he's interested in the game enough that he continues) thru the quest hub and quests he goes... on to Darnassus, and finally to Darkshore... by now he's in his 2d or 3d day of playing and he's approaching level 20, having met a few folks (a member of the guild of which he would eventually join)... So he finally hits 20... He's got no looms (he's a new kid), He's got some gold (he doesn't waste that) and he's got a decision to make, He really wants to play and join the guild with his new friend and get a new cool cat to ride... so he subscribes and buys Blizzard's game. that transaction opens a new world of things for the young druid to explore and experience... AND it allows Blizzard to continue to develop the expansion that they are working on (which at that time is MOP) since Cata is alpha and soon to drop.

The druid made a commitment to the game, and Blizzard honored that commitment with the world...

What you are doing is encouraging people to make zero commitment because you are encouraging a situation where they dont have to pay.

I subscribed fall 2011... had the situation you are encouraging been the case when I started I probably wouldn't have subscribed until who knows... Late 2012, early 2013? Less ACTUAL paying subscribers equals slower and less content development. By encouraging a F2P model you appear to want to further weaken Blizzard's ability to produce and deploy content. Which appears to be the exact opposite of what you claim to want.

I trust I've explained my position and why I oppose OP's plan.

[thewallofsleep]

It still would be nothing like vanilla. If the classes were balanced around 60 and the leveling speed slowed down, maybe. Doing old raids in the current iteration of the game, even if you're at the relevant level, is still quite easy.

[Atelniar]

Thank you for your answers, you may be right. I however, do not agree with your opinions on this subject matter.

I'll tell you a short story, a fresh young druid is born is shadow glen... he has resisted the urge to play Wow for 7 years (so we are talking the last months of LK) he finally caves to the curiosity. He feels his way out of the the shelter of the great tree and heads for Dolanaar (he's probably been playing for 3-4 hours now, he's interested in the game enough that he continues) thru the quest hub and quests he goes... on to Darnassus, and finally to Darkshore... by now he's in his 2d or 3d day of playing and he's approaching level 20, having met a few folks (a member of the guild of which he would eventually join)... So he finally hits 20... He's got no looms (he's a new kid), He's got some gold (he doesn't waste that) and he's got a decision to make, He really wants to play and join the guild with his new friend and get a new cool cat to ride... so he subscribes and buys Blizzard's game. that transaction opens a new world of things for the young druid to explore and experience... AND it allows Blizzard to continue to develop the expansion that they are working on (which at that time is MOP) since Cata is alpha and soon to drop.

The druid made a commitment to the game, and Blizzard honored that commitment with the world...

What you are doing is encouraging people to make zero commitment because you are encouraging a situation where they dont have to pay.

I subscribed fall 2011... had the situation you are encouraging been the case when I started I probably wouldn't have subscribed until who knows... Late 2012, early 2013? Less ACTUAL paying subscribers equals slower and less content development. By encouraging a F2P model you appear to want to further weaken Blizzard's ability to produce and deploy content. Which appears to be the exact opposite of what you claim to want.

I trust I've explained my position and why I oppose OP's plan.

While I respect your opinion, I believe you misinterpret the idea of my opinion completely. Level 20 simply is not enough anymore. It was limited to that range because of the investment spent in revamping Cataclysm's Azeroth. As much of the revamp could be considered actual content. In today's title that view is completely irrelevant, once you get to TBC you actually travel in time. The level process is outdated and can be very confusing. You might get lucky from level 1-20, but the chances of getting lucky from level 1-60 with a small token of level 60 end-game through a legacy raid difficulty is even higher. Yea?

Did you notice that your own emphasis was also on the social connection you would make? The f2p model suggests the very same concept, just with more content and a bigger chance to grasp a player and truly immerse them in the community without having to run the initial gamble. If implemented correctly (and how that should be done can be debated for years, at this rate) it is a big improvement.

So, with all due respect, I have to disagree with you. I think a partial f2p model, note the word partial as what currently exists is barely a fraction, can be good for WoW.

[thewallofsleep]

Thank you for your answers, you may be right. I however, do not agree with your opinions on this subject matter.

I'll tell you a short story, a fresh young druid is born is shadow glen... he has resisted the urge to play Wow for 7 years (so we are talking the last months of LK) he finally caves to the curiosity. He feels his way out of the the shelter of the great tree and heads for Dolanaar (he's probably been playing for 3-4 hours now, he's interested in the game enough that he continues) thru the quest hub and quests he goes... on to Darnassus, and finally to Darkshore... by now he's in his 2d or 3d day of playing and he's approaching level 20, having met a few folks (a member of the guild of which he would eventually join)... So he finally hits 20... He's got no looms (he's a new kid), He's got some gold (he doesn't waste that) and he's got a decision to make, He really wants to play and join the guild with his new friend and get a new cool cat to ride... so he subscribes and buys Blizzard's game. that transaction opens a new world of things for the young druid to explore and experience... AND it allows Blizzard to continue to develop the expansion that they are working on (which at that time is MOP) since Cata is alpha and soon to drop.

The druid made a commitment to the game, and Blizzard honored that commitment with the world...

What you are doing is encouraging people to make zero commitment because you are encouraging a situation where they dont have to pay.

I subscribed fall 2011... had the situation you are encouraging been the case when I started I probably wouldn't have subscribed until who knows... Late 2012, early 2013? Less ACTUAL paying subscribers equals slower and less content development. By encouraging a F2P model you appear to want to further weaken Blizzard's ability to produce and deploy content. Which appears to be the exact opposite of what you claim to want.

I trust I've explained my position and why I oppose OP's plan.

Can't say I disagree with you here, but I can't see even a brand new player taking two or three days to reach level 20. Even without heirlooms, sub 30 leveling is so fast. The quest log and map quest tracker make exploration a non issue, even for brand new players.

[Atelniar]

It still would be nothing like vanilla. If the classes were balanced around 60 and the leveling speed slowed down, maybe. Doing old raids in the current iteration of the game, even if you're at the relevant level, is still quite easy.

I thought the issue people had was that a true Classic Realm would be a side-product competing with the actual live realm? And that it would be outdated? This concept gives incentive for Blizzard to renew Azeroth's content by adding minor content from level 1-60 every now and then. Just to change things up. You could have events targeted at zones for the appropriate level. Introduce new named elites that roam the world (a thing that has been reduced with the revamp from the original Azeroth). It would be minor tweaks, that barely take any resources from current development of a new expansion. Heck, maybe a small-scale dungeon with a new theme where none exists? Like Stromgarde? Make it scale, like heroic deadmines?