Do you believe WoW is still Blizzard's biggest game?

[Deleted]

Why the fuck does it matter? What is it with you people? You have made this thread dozens of times at this point.

But of course. It's a very weighty issue, even a mindless yapper like you took time to respond.

[Gothicshark]

But do you think that WoW is still their shining glory?

Not really, it's their old cash cow which has seen better days.

[Lahis]

Definetly not.

Heartstone and Overwatch have more players and much bigger revenue.

[Deleted]

Do you guys even try to research a lil bit? Every year and monthly revenues are shared, you know that?



That's for August, for the overall year of 2016 WoW was on place 5 and Overwatch still on 8.

Not only that WoW is still the biggest thing for Blizzard, it's still one of the most grossing title overall. But it's dying of course, lel.
Only beaten by PUBG and LoL right now (these Asia mobile games can't really count)

[Lahis]

Wait what? How is wow having high production costs? Its a 13 years old game, their dev team is already pretty much familiar with the game. All they have to do is pay for art and some enhancments. The world creation on a 13 years game is advanced enough to not cost them a lot working on that engine.

The dev team is huge and upkeeping the servers and customer services around the world cost a ton of money too.

So yeah, WoW is very expensive game for Blizzard, and it currently lacks easily exploitable quick revenue stream.

- - - Updated - - -

Do you guys even try to research a lil bit? Every year and monthly revenues are shared, you know that?



That's for August, for the overall year of 2016 WoW was on place 5 and Overwatch still on 8.

Not only that WoW is still the biggest thing for Blizzard, it's still one of the most grossing title overall. But it's dying of course, lel.
Only beaten by PUBG and LoL right now (these Asia mobile games can't really count)

Overwatch is also on consoles. That's huge market WoW has no access to.

If that chart had actual number data, you could combine PC and console OW and see how they'll eclipse WoW.

[Deleted]

Blizzard does definitely not have a bright future ahead with their current lineup, WoW has lowering player count, Artifact is coming to take on Hearthstone and PUBG already wrecked Overwatch to the ground even in Korea where it was supposed to compete with League as top esport. Diablo 3, SC2 and Heroes and kind of irrelevant niche games with smaller communities than some indie games have on Steam.. but as the former 2 was sold full price they served their purpose for the company. They need new games to take on the new challenges of the industry and they need them ASAP.
I'd say currently Hearthstone is their only very healthy product, OW sold a lot but bleeding players badly with the shallow experience and lack of content.

Lel. This is what I mean. Throwing in some thoughts that are probably completely wrong.

Out of the article, in August Hearthstone made the highest gross since release, still only landing on overall place 11 for all games out there. Overwatch still in top 10 since release and never dropped out and WoWs lowest point was place 6 since years in overall gross.

[Deleted]

The dev team is huge and upkeeping the servers and customer services around the world cost a ton of money too.

So yeah, WoW is very expensive game for Blizzard, and it currently lacks easily exploitable quick revenue stream.

- - - Updated - - -



Overwatch is also on consoles. That's huge market WoW has no access to.

If that chart had actual number data, you could combine PC and console OW and see how they'll eclipse WoW.

Yes, sure, i couldn't find a proper picture that fast, but in OVERALL gross for the year 2016 WoW was on place 5 and overwatch on place 8. This COULD have changed now of course, but WoW is still stable af as you see. Since years. Since release.

But what I meant is that people talk about WoW as if it is worth nothing anymore. But the game is still doing insane amounts of cash for Blizz.

There is a reason Blizz is the 2nd most wealthiest gaming company if I remember correctly.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. I mean it's sub based so it's going to make more money than the other two let's say you've paid £120 for sub over a past year for WoW, have you spent that much on either hearthstone packs or lootboxes in overwatch?

There are people doing this. Probably more than you believe. Especially in Hearthstone as the use is more than just cosmetic with each expansion.

[Lahis]

Yes. I mean it's sub based so it's going to make more money than the other two let's say you've paid £120 for sub over a past year for WoW, have you spent that much on either hearthstone packs or lootboxes in overwatch?

Hearthstone drops few expansions every year. Plenty of people drop hundreds of dollars into them to get all the cards.

Same with Overwatch. All new skins are tied to limited time events, so people drop huge amount of money into lootboxes to get them.

[Elfezen]

Devinately not lol, Overwatch's lootboxes alone make 5 times the money than WoW's subscription makes

[tratra]

The dev team is huge and upkeeping the servers and customer services around the world cost a ton of money too.

So yeah, WoW is very expensive game for Blizzard, and it currently lacks easily exploitable quick revenue stream.

- - - Updated - - -



Overwatch is also on consoles. That's huge market WoW has no access to.

If that chart had actual number data, you could combine PC and console OW and see how they'll eclipse WoW.

What part of subscription didn't you get? That revenue easily pays for their dev team + makes money.

Keep on drawing stuff, you good at it, I've been managing Dev teams for years now, and large ones on big, impactful projects.

[Jalham]

Remember that OW is on both PC and console so you have to combine both together.
Ends up higher than wow.

[Mumba]

Overwatch has become the cute exhibition dog that always gets high scores while WoW is now that trusty golden retriever which will always be there to comfort you.

[Lahis]

What part of subscription didn't you get? That revenue easily pays for their dev team + makes money.

Keep on drawing stuff, you good at it, I've been managing Dev teams for years now, and large ones on big, impactful projects.

Sure, subs pay for WoW. Else it wouldn't be worthwhile business.


Doesn't mean the game's upkeep isn't expensive.

[Eurhetemec]

They're quite literally a research company. There is no reason for a bias, and the errors in methodology you are describing would have been disastrous for them as a company long before today. With the exception of that monthly sales report, you can't get any other information without paying a hefty fee for it. Much more than I'm willing to pay to prove you wrong. Suffice to say though, there isn't actually anything regarding how and where they collect their information.

Hahahaha. Wow. You just have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't accused them of bias, but you defend them as if I have. Are you even reading my posts or just imagining them? The "errors in methodology" are extremely common in commercial research. How do I know? Because I worked in commercial research for a law firm for a long time. We had to buy commercial research reports from companies like SuperData, and yes, a lot of them contain some really, really dubious errors. No, it is not "disasterous" for them. Why would it be? Other research companies are in the same boat? They're half-bullshit, half-research, and the stuff that's free to the public? That's the mostly weakly researched stuff. I know because I have had to take lawyers aside and say "You can't trust this information, it's not sourced".

Re: the bolded bit, that's the point. Really high-quality research does have this kind of information. Half-BS half research usually doesn't. It still has SOME value. It saves you time on doing the same yourself. For example - a market research report based on publicly available data might cost $1000. Seems like a lot, right? Especially for publicly available data! Surely with a few hours, you could come up with that yourself? Well, perhaps - but say you're a lawyer, who charges $500/hour (and I worked with people who charged more like $1500 - I wish I was kidding!), then can you really do that level of research in two hours?No. So you kick it down to either BD (Business Development) or directly to your firm's Information and Research department (and BD likely kick it to them anyway). They might only be making $30-40/hour. But realistically to get the same level of detail as the report, they'll have to pay for access to some information (even though it's publicly available in the sense of in company reports, filings, stockholder reports, newspapers and so on, the sources that allow you to search it properly cost money - Google doesn't cut it). And it can take a long time - easily a few days for something really like a proper $1000 report. You might save money, or you might not. And what if you're a smaller firm, and don't have a proper BD department or proper I&R department? Well, then either you buy it or you don't. Usually you don't. But enough people do to keep these places running.

In any case... your metric is still SUBSCRIPTIONS, and yes that is "old data". Given the popularity of Tokens subs don't equate to dollars anymore. Now if tokens ONLY existed as a tradeable commodity between players that might be true. But in the absence of players selling tokens, Blizzard will offer them directly. Now you give a hypothetical min/max scenario which "supposedly" proves just how much revenue WoW could and does bring in. But that still doesn't PROVE anything. Because you still have nothing to compare that to.

Did I claim it "proved" anything? Quote me if so. You've repeatedly made assertions about what I've said, and this is the third time I've asked for a quote, and you still have failed to produce any quotes.

However, the amazing-ness continues, because I did mention tokens. Which apparently you missed. Given the value of tokens in the EU, and the initial value of tokens relative to their present value, claims that Blizzard are having to provide them are not very plausible.

The problem presented in this thread is nothing more than a guessing game.

Well yes... and the first step with a guessing game is to establish likely parameters.

- - - Updated - - -

Doesn't mean the game's upkeep isn't expensive.

It's been pretty cheap, actually, relative to how much money it makes.

Between 2004 and 2008 Blizzard spent 200m on all aspects of maintaining and developing WoW. That includes servers/hardware, staff salaries of both development teams and customer service, developing TBC and Wrath, bandwidth, etc. etc. - everything.

https://www.engadget.com/2008/09/16/...upkeep-on-wow/

Sorry for the shit source, the actual source was in Gamasutra but I can't find it at the moment.

So it was a $50m/year cost back then - and I believe in the Gamasutra article (again, sorry I can't find it right now, am looking) most of that was staff salaries.

[Kathranis]

Remember that OW is on both PC and console so you have to combine both together.
Ends up higher than wow.

Yeah, and also remember that mobile revenue excedes console and PC revenue, so even though Hearthstone might not make it into the top ten of mobile titles it still might pull in more than some of the top ten console and PC titles.

[Rudkobing]

Not any more. It's Overwatch and Hearthstone now.

[Gimlix]

Yes. I mean it's sub based so it's going to make more money than the other two let's say you've paid £120 for sub over a past year for WoW, have you spent that much on either hearthstone packs or lootboxes in overwatch?

I spend near 1000 euro on HS packs. (In the first 2 years before they ruined the game)

[A dot Ham]

https://www.engadget.com/2008/09/16/...upkeep-on-wow/

LOL. An article from NINE years ago. Lets go through your convincing argument of how you're dealing with relevant information again. One more time... just for good laughs.

- - - Updated - - -

Overwatch is also on consoles. That's huge market WoW has no access to.

If that chart had actual number data, you could combine PC and console OW and see how they'll eclipse WoW.

Remember that OW is on both PC and console so you have to combine both together.
Ends up higher than wow.

Does it? How exactly do you determine that given there aren't any actual numbers on this list.

I mean your logic is sound. But you'd have to know exactly what those numbers are in order to say it ends up higher than WoW. It could be... you can't be certain though.

e.g. If Overwatch made 6 million on PC, 7 million on console, and WoW made 15 million... it doesn't matter that you combine the 6&7 its still less than 15.

[Eurhetemec]

LOL. An article from NINE years ago. Lets go through your convincing argument of how you're dealing with relevant information again. One more time... just for good laughs.

So your data on WoW's cost is what? You also owe me three quotes for things you claimed I said, which I didn't.

[A dot Ham]

So your data on WoW's cost is what? You also owe me three quotes for things you claimed I said, which I didn't.

I'm not going to continue with your strawman bullshit.

My original point, and only reason for posting here is that NO ONE has access to complete, recent, reliable, and relevant data to make any conclusions about any single product that Blizzard supplies.

But you keep drudging up decade old information.



This guys was still president, that's how old your information is.

Hearthstone won't even be released for another 6 years. Overwatch another 8.

15% of the country was still on dial-up internet in 2008.

Blackberry was still relevant. I could go on and on.