Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Ielenia]

Only a small part of it, but since it showed up on my facebook feed, here's some evidence for the t-shirt sale:

Ok. That part about the T-shirt proceeds going to charity is true, then. I concede that much.

[Pann]

Companies do that when they're going through rough times and sales are at a nearly all-time low. Blizzard is not going through rough times. Blizzard is still a very successful and profitable company, so they have no reason to cut their gross profits to boost sales.

No, they don't. Utter nonsense. It is a legitimate way to increase sales and thus profit. The fact that you do not seem to have grasped that reducing the price or adding additional value to a product or service as a way to boost sales can increase profit hints that you don't understand what you're talking about.

... Seriously? Is this a question that really needs answered? Let's build a house. Do you think having five people working on building the house will go just as fast as having, say, ten people?

Yes, it is a question, but I would have thought that the part of my post that you decided to omit would have shown that it doesn't really need answering. However despite attempting to answer it you've failed to do so by way of a silly analogy. Did you want another go?

There would need weekly maintenance, new game patches to support the new hardware that will be released, like monitor sizes and video cards.

Yet more nonsense. Seriously I'd love to hear how a monitor would require a new server side or client patch for WoW.

Do you honestly customer service is such a trivial thing that it wouldn't affect costs?

Did I say that? However since you've failed to grasp the concept of driving sales through offering additional value to the customer it is unsurprising that you've decided to cherry pick a few words from my post and come up with this.

[Halefire94]

What is everyone's over/under on a legacy announcement at Blizzcon?

A few things point to a possible announcement:

1. The murlocs this year are a callback to the classic pvp ranks.
2. Nost has mentioned a "big announcement coming"
3. Still haven't heard much about the meeting besides the fact that it was productive.

[Holtzmann]

Really? You can't actually be serious? In the proposed situation you are not paying an extra and you can play retail or legacy any time you like. What are you talking about built-in price? It makes no sense. You are argument is absolutely nonsensical.

You don't really understand how companies work, do you? If Legacy servers are released for "free" as part of the Retail World of Warcraft subscription service, the costs for the operation of Legacy servers will have to come from the same pool as Retail. That means the price of subscribing to Retail will include paying for Legacy servers, regardless of whether or not I will make use of that service.

I, as a consumer, would much prefer to pay separate fees for each service. Legacy realms would probably require fewer resources in general since outside of occasional hotfixes they would be fairly stable development-wise, so their subscription fee could be lower. Make it $10, for example. Then give players who are paying for one service but would also like to subscribe to the other service a discount on it (so both subscriptions at once would be $20, for example). Blizzard would still rake in the money from folks wanting to play Legacy, and anyone who wanted to play Retail only or Legacy only wouldn't be paying for the development and maintenance of a service they don't use.

I'm sure Blizzard won't go that route because offering Legacy realms cheaper than Retail would be competing against their own product. But having one subscription being $15 and two being $20 sounds perfectly reasonable to me. And it shouldn't bother you either, if all you want to do is play Legacy.

[Pann]

You don't really understand how companies work, do you? If Legacy servers are released for "free" as part of the Retail World of Warcraft subscription service, the costs for the operation of Legacy servers will have to come from the same pool as Retail. That means the price of subscribing to Retail will include paying for Legacy servers, regardless of whether or not I will make use of that service.

I, as a consumer, would much prefer to pay separate fees for each service. Legacy realms would probably require fewer resources in general since outside of occasional hotfixes they would be fairly stable development-wise, so their subscription fee could be lower. Make it $10, for example. Then give players who are paying for one service but would also like to subscribe to the other service a discount on it (so both subscriptions at once would be $20, for example). Blizzard would still rake in the money from folks wanting to play Legacy, and anyone who wanted to play Retail only or Legacy only wouldn't be paying for the development and maintenance of a service they don't use.

I'm sure Blizzard won't go that route because offering Legacy realms cheaper than Retail would be competing against their own product. But having one subscription being $15 and two being $20 sounds perfectly reasonable to me. And it shouldn't bother you either, if all you want to do is play Legacy.

I do thanks very much. So what? How does ATVI's internal accounting systems make any difference to you,as a consumer? The suggestion was that the price of Legacy would be included in the current sub fee, the majority of people will see this adding additional value to the service they pay for rather than being upset that their money is part funding another service they can play for no extra money, some would even call this for free. Does the fact that the money from WoW goes on such mundane things as the staff canteen or stationary produce such irrational feelings? I mean after all you've part paid for, maybe, a pen or a paper clip that you won't make use of?!?

That is a completely separate and different situation to what was suggested and being asked, although there was nothing in what was suggested that precludes a separate sub fee for Legacy.

[Ielenia]

No, they don't. Utter nonsense. It is a legitimate way to increase sales and thus profit.

Lowering profits to boost sales is a tactic that is only used when a product is not doing well in sales, which is not the case for WoW. It's still one of the biggest MMOs around, and still brings in a lot of cash, especially if you consider the cosmetic cash shop.

Yes, it is a question,

Then I might have to question your sense of logic, here.

Yet more nonsense. Seriously I'd love to hear how a monitor would require a new server side or client patch for WoW.

Open up WoW's graphic menu and tell me if they have 'resolution' and 'refresh rate' options. That'll be your answer.

Did I say that?

You did:

There might be a need for additional non-development staff, customer service reps, server maintenance, etc, but none of them would slow down the development of retail WoW.

However since you've failed to grasp the concept of driving sales through offering additional value to the customer it is unsurprising that you've decided to cherry pick a few words from my post and come up with this.

And what you fail to grasp is the fact that such a tactic means lowering your profit, oftentimes substantially, and is employed the vast majority of times to: a) help advertise a product, or b) help boost the sales of a product. None of those cases apply to WoW. Blizzard has no reason whatsoever to lower their profits to please a small minority of people who barely agree on what patch version of the game they want.

[Holtzmann]

I do thanks very much. So what? How does ATVI's internal accounting systems make any difference to you,as a consumer? The suggestion was that the price of Legacy would be included in the current sub fee, the majority of people will see this adding additional value to the service they pay for rather than being upset that their money is part funding another service they can play for no extra money, some would even call this for free. Does the fact that the money from WoW goes on such mundane things as the staff canteen or stationary produce such irrational feelings? I mean after all you've part paid for, maybe, a pen or a paper clip that you won't make use of?!?

That is a completely separate and different situation to what was suggested and being asked, although there was nothing in what was suggested that precludes a separate sub fee for Legacy.

Okay, dude. I'll just cut this line of discussion right here. I've said my piece: I prefer different subscriptions with the option to get both at a discounted price, because they are both different games that I won't be playing at the same time. You disagree. Good. Let's agree to disagree and move on.

[Pann]

Lowering profits to boost sales is a tactic that is only used when a product is not doing well in sales, which is not the case for WoW. It's still one of the biggest MMOs around, and still brings in a lot of cash, especially if you consider the cosmetic cash shop.

For starters I talked about lowering gross profit this is not the same as bottom line profit. But what do you think boosting sales does? You are aware that there is a relationship between what you sell and how much money (profit) you make?

Open up WoW's graphic menu and tell me if they have 'resolution' and 'refresh rate' options. That'll be your answer.

How does that answer why WoW would need additional patches?

You did:



And what you fail to grasp is the fact that such a tactic means lowering your profit, oftentimes substantially, and is employed the vast majority of times to: a) help advertise a product, or b) help boost the sales of a product. None of those cases apply to WoW. Blizzard has no reason whatsoever to lower their profits to please a small minority of people who barely agree on what patch version of the game they want.

Uhm, no I didn't. I am now left questioning your ability to read along with your understanding of how sales and profit are related.

I have not talked about lowering profit in fact quite the opposite.

[echoSAW]

Another possible point to consider; if something were to ever happen on a legacy server that would potentially end in a lawsuit or crime (and with that many people in one place, it would), Blizzard would guaranteed find itself involved somehow. Imagine the headline "Drug trafficking group found to be communicating in World of Warcraft" The article, no doubt pieced together from the most basic information would take no steps to separate this type of server from one actually owned and operated by Blizzard. Therefore, even if Blizzard was somehow not involved in an investigation or lawsuit, they would get negative worded press coverage linking them to something bad.

This is the type of nonsense that major corporations have to consider in situations like this. People WILL do stupid things, and when a company as large and influential as Blizzard is even tangentially involved they will be held responsible, if nowhere else but the court of public opinion. This is just another of myriad reasons why "classic" servers to probably not worth it in a cost/benefit analysis.

[Halefire94]

Another possible point to consider; if something were to ever happen on a legacy server that would potentially end in a lawsuit or crime (and with that many people in one place, it would), Blizzard would guaranteed find itself involved somehow. Imagine the headline "Drug trafficking group found to be communicating in World of Warcraft" The article, no doubt pieced together from the most basic information would take no steps to separate this type of server from one actually owned and operated by Blizzard. Therefore, even if Blizzard was somehow not involved in an investigation or lawsuit, they would get negative worded press coverage linking them to something bad.

This is the type of nonsense that major corporations have to consider in situations like this. People WILL do stupid things, and when a company as large and influential as Blizzard is even tangentially involved they will be held responsible, if nowhere else but the court of public opinion. This is just another of myriad reasons why "classic" servers to probably not worth it in a cost/benefit analysis.

I think you are misunderstanding. Legacy servers WOULD be run by Blizzard. Not a third party. It would be under Blizzard's name.

[Holtzmann]

I think you are misunderstanding. Legacy servers WOULD be run by Blizzard. Not a third party. It would be under Blizzard's name.

I think he meant that as an argument regarding third parties. AKA, the "just let Nost/some other private server operator run the game!".

In a sense, that's one of the reasons they went after Scapegaming. They were offering a pretty shoddy (and blatantly pay-to-win) World of Warcraft experience, which probably drew Blizzard's attention just as much as how much money they were raking in. A lot of large private servers accept donations, but Blizzard hasn't gone after them yet, likely because they don't draw attention to themselves the way Nostalrius did.

[echoSAW]

I think you are misunderstanding. Legacy servers WOULD be run by Blizzard. Not a third party. It would be under Blizzard's name.

Well, then other things I have said in this thread would still need to be considered; how much of finite time and resources does Blizzard give to something like this? Which exact version of WoW would it run? How could they possibly please everyone with their specific favorite patch/version? If nothing else, putting resources into something entirely different than the current or future expansion would the definition of "costing a raid tier." How does Blizzard decide who it would rather upset with this type of decision?

[Ielenia]

For starters I talked about lowering gross profit this is not the same as bottom line profit.

Which is worse.

But what do you think boosting sales does? You are aware that there is a relationship between what you sell and how much money (profit) you make?

It's still a practice that lowers your overall profit per item sold, which is why is not a tactic used ad nauseam. And it's not a tactic that Blizzard needs to employ because WoW is still selling strong.

How does that answer why WoW would need additional patches?

... Why don't you just admit you don't know what you're talking about? Seriously, that question there is so telling. New, better hardware means the game needs to be updated to run on said hardware. Otherwise we'd still be playing on 320x240 screens, with old MS-DOS quality graphics. Speaking of which, why don't you try running an old game? Like, games from the MS-DOS/Windows 3.1 era. See if they run on Windows Vista, 7, 8, 10 or whichever Windows version you're using.

I have not talked about lowering profit in fact quite the opposite.

The moment you spoke about bundling two products together, offering one for free, you are talking about lowering profits.

[Deleted]

I'm sure Blizzard won't go that route because offering Legacy realms cheaper than Retail would be competing against their own product.

If wow vanilla servers do compete with legion servers then it would indicate a severe issue in legion's game design. People really need to understand that most player who'd enjoy wow vanilla aren't the players who enjoy legion .And most of the players who enjoy legion wouldn't enjoy wow vanilla. The two games are mutually exclusive and as further appart as they can get.

People really need to grasp that post 3.0 wow is tailor made for the people who didn't like TBC and vanilla.

Well, then other things I have said in this thread would still need to be considered; how much of finite time and resources does Blizzard give to something like this? Which exact version of WoW would it run? How could they possibly please everyone with their specific favorite patch/version? If nothing else, putting resources into something entirely different than the current or future expansion would the definition of "costing a raid tier." How does Blizzard decide who it would rather upset with this type of decision?

How do you know it would upset people ? Did you make any customer study ? Do you have hard facts ?

Also, the most logical thing to do would be to implement the latest pre 2.0 patch, so blizzard can put the legacy server in maintenance mode and be done with it. You re seeing issues where in truth there are none.

[echoSAW]

If wow vanilla servers do compete with legion servers then it would indicate a severe issue in legion's game design.



How do you know it would upset people ? Did you make any customer study ? Do you have hard facts ?

Also, the most logical thing to do would be to implement the latest pre 2.0 patch, so blizzard can put the legacy server in maintenance mode and be done with it. You re seeing issues where in truth there are none.

When you're talking about that many people (tens of thousands, millions even) someone will be upset, no matter what the decision is. So, no matter which way Blizzard were to go with this, someone would be unhappy. My guess would be the majority of players would have no idea what it is/why they should care. But the vocal minority would certainly made themselves heard. So, the question is...which vocal minority does Blizzard want to deal with?

Also...while you may be right that would be the most "logical" place to put the servers at (I certainly don't know), I guarantee that someone, somewhere would loudly disagree with you. How likely do you think that if Blizzard were to "give the mouse a cookie" and create legacy servers, the request for further support, improvements, etc, etc, would not be far behind?

[Deleted]

When you're talking about that many people (tens of thousands, millions even) someone will be upset, no matter what the decision is. So, no matter which way Blizzard were to go with this, someone would be unhappy. My guess would be the majority of players would have no idea what it is/why they should care. But the vocal minority would certainly made themselves heard. So, the question is...which vocal minority does Blizzard want to deal with?

That argument is nonsensical, because if players ask for vanilla server they are obviously asking for the vanilla with all the content from the expansion (which mean naxx patch vanilla). Why would people ask for a wow vanilla without all the raids ?

Also...while you may be right that would be the most "logical" place to put the servers at (I certainly don't know), I guarantee that someone, somewhere would loudly disagree with you. How likely do you think that if Blizzard were to "give the mouse a cookie" and create legacy servers, the request for further support, improvements, etc, etc, would not be far behind?

I think we have to think with a baby steps mentality here. If wow vanilla is successful (again) then blizzard will have ample time to decide whether they want to dedicate a team expanding on wow vanilla or not (and eventually sell DLC for a vanilla server, clearly I think that it'd be great for blizzard to add new raids in the old wow with the old battle system). There is no point on speculating in something which hasn't been done.

[Holtzmann]

If wow vanilla servers do compete with legion servers then it would indicate a severe issue in legion's game design. People really need to understand that most player who'd enjoy wow vanilla aren't the players who enjoy legion .And most of the players who enjoy legion wouldn't enjoy wow vanilla. The two games are mutually exclusive and as further appart as they can get.

Don't underestimate how stingy videogame players can be. A 33% discount in price is enough to get a lot of people to buy something on Steam they otherwise wouldn't. Likewise, if someone is interested in getting into World of Warcraft for the first time, goes into Legacy because it's cheaper, and ends up not liking it because it's nowhere near as accessible as Retail (and that's not a claim anyone can dispute), there's a very good chance that player won't even try retail. Their first experience with World of Warcraft was negative, and thus they won't bother with it anymore.

That's what happened to me. I originally played World of Warcraft on a private server (one of the first, I suspect). It was free, and as far as I understood it fairly Blizzlike, but the experience in general was so negative I swore off World of Warcraft for three years. I only returned because a friend convinced me to give it a try in very late Burning Crusade, once a lot of the systems that annoyed me in Vanilla had been tweaked.

[Kyanion]

Well they won't be discussing Legacy at Blizzcon

[Deleted]

Don't underestimate how stingy videogame players can be. A 33% discount in price is enough to get a lot of people to buy something on Steam they otherwise wouldn't. Likewise, if someone is interested in getting into World of Warcraft for the first time, goes into Legacy because it's cheaper, and ends up not liking it because it's nowhere near as accessible as Retail (and that's not a claim anyone can dispute), there's a very good chance that player won't even try retail. Their first experience with World of Warcraft was negative, and thus they won't bother with it anymore.

Please, players aren't idiot and know full well that the diablo I, II or warcraft I and II experience (they can buy on the bnet shop) are nothing like the modern iteration of the game.

Well they won't be discussing Legacy at Blizzcon

Well actually the way it is phrased is quite positive. From a straight no we went to a "we re discussing the possibility".

[Kyanion]

Still not a no, however.