The people subscribing to wow have bought the game a long time ago. Pretty sure people would more likely continue to pay a silent $15/mo than buy a new game upfront for $60.
I don't see how game sales are related to wow subscriptions.
I don't think it is economic issues.
The decline of WoW is mirroring the Subscription based MMO market, not the whole industry. The F2P version on the other hand is thriving, so is B2P games, digital providing is growing while classic retailers is having a rough time, at least in the PC section.
Last edited by zealo; 2013-06-25 at 07:37 PM.
I won't argue that F2P appears to be the next major trend in video games, but I can't imagine WoW goes F2P anytime soon.
F2P Thriving ??? LOL
Not in revenue...
Watch Zynga stock going down from 14.2 dollars Feb 2012 ... to 2.7 dollars June 25th 2013 ...
Why ? 82% of the 75 million players of Farmville never spend a dime in game. Only 3% of all free to play gamers in Farmville spend 20 dollars...
"Despite the game's popularity, 82 percent of FarmVille players do not spend any money in the free-to-play game. Around 5 percent spend $1-5 in the game, and about the same amount spend $6-10. 3 percent of FarmVille users, though, spend more than $20 a month. Those figures aren't surprising considering that 57 percent of players also said they don't like spending a lot of money on gaming (46 percent of "average console gamers" said the same).
Yeah these games are "thriving" alright.
With WOW raking in 275 million dollars in GAAP revenu (that's the ONLY official way that counts for official bookkeeping btw) in the first quarter of 2013 ... the rest gets the peanuts.
With the above average figures, WOW needs to go to 150 million to 200 million players in a free to play status to arrive at 275 million GAAP revenue.
And in an MMORPG development cycle .... going F2P from scratch is pure suicidal.
OLD subscription based MMORPG's turn F2P in order to get SOME funds back, but that doesn't mean they are "thriving" in revenue (read $$$ sugns).
F2P is good enough for CHEAP games with short development cycles and limited costs (example: Hearthstone, dota games) ... but MMORPG's are much too costly to produce as F2P or you have to resort to pure JUNK (cost effective games). Even GW2 had to resort to loading screens to replace fast travel mounts, open ended background loading worlds etc.
Did you know that a full 3D world you can fly over (with no borders or loading screens between zones) ... cost 3 times more than a game with seperate zoned loading screens. 3 times more, no wonder GW2 has only loading screens to jump from one instance to another...
Last edited by BenBos; 2013-06-25 at 08:27 PM.
So long as Purina and Quaker Oats don't release any new games we should be good. Last time they did, they heralded the endtimes of gaming and only good RPG's saved us.
Never mind their watered down updates because they need to squeeze their bag of grapes (playerbase) on an almost bi-weekly basis to make money, as opposed to something enriching. Compare MOP's patch notes to GW2's. Or even Vanilla's release timeline against GW2's. There is a marked difference in quality and quantity.
No one is going to copy WoW's success so long as WoW is around, and Blizzard would be stupid to let a built-in customer base that WoW provides vanish.
I hope F2P fails hard, because I look at it like an amusement park. I prefer good day admission parks like Busch Gardens and Kings Dominion. Most crappy ticket-to-ride parks are just that. Crappy. Poor quality. Run down. Poor customer service. With the exception of Angry Birds, I've never run into a F2P game that hasn't rubbed me the wrong way in its attempt to open my wallet.
You also seem to be confused on the difference between game design and whether a game's bussiness model is successful or not while maintaining a playerbase, worth noting is that these games that turn F2P gains more players than they ever had while being subscribtion based actually increasing their revenue compared to when they where subscription based, its more then getting "some" funds back. How they made their game can be discussed elsewhere and just boils down to personal opinions, if its maintaining a profitable playerbase is what defines if its a success or not.
Last edited by zealo; 2013-06-26 at 12:41 PM.
Also, the video game industry is declining as a whole because 99% of overhyped game titles are garbage. We occasionally get those super rare gems that don't involve FPSs and are good. Back during the 16-bit and 32/64-bit era (SNES/N64&PS1, etc.), this wasn't a problem because game companies went with innovation and gameplay. Now, everyone tries to copy CoD and adds their "little touches" on it in hope it will work. 99 times out of 100, it doesn't work. (In the same way that MMOs try to copy WoW).
As proof, notice the left side. Notice how the green bar has actually been INCREASING. The PC/Video Game bars are going down because of what I just said above. 2010-2012 have been quite possibly the worst years in the video game industry due to lack of innovation/just making rehashed garbage. We only got so few gems that were good.
Edit: Forgot to mention Blizzard is doing the same thing with WoW. They're sticking with their boring "winning formula" that worked in the past but no longer does so. Their newest innovation (to them) is dailies and scenarios.
Last edited by Polarthief; 2013-06-26 at 01:02 PM.
Especially when someone above u posted a graph showing that PC game sales have gone up in that period lol
Im pretty sure that EoS, Destiny and Wildstar will also launch as B2P.
and fyi Eve is the ONLY paying MMO subs based game which is increasing in subs, it has been for 5 years slowly but steadily. This is the opposite of whats happening in Wow.
The rest I'm all with you
You can tell the difference between the quality and content of F2P games compared to subs though. WoW set the bar higher for game development in it's early years and embarrassed many publishers by exposing the shit they were releasing.
You know FORMER subscription based AAA titles that turn F2P are not a good example for the MMORPG world...
These games were meant to be played with a fixed subscription fee and ... FAILED, so they needed to go to free to play in a last attempt to squeeze money from the players that FLOCK to the "free to p(l)ay" mechanics.
BUT, the initial development of these things was HUGE (because they thought they could earn subscription money back for the next 5 years or so).
For the most part a game like SW TOR did not even have a return on investment (costs around 150-200 million dollars) while the boxes alone in retail were somewhere along 2 million X 25 dollars = 50 million dollars (RETAIL and DISTRIBUTION profits are NOT going to the game makers (Bioware), I hope you all understand the basic mechanics of retail sales and revenue ...)...
So people who scream "F2P is the next big thing".
Nope it is NOT because MMORPG's are simply too costly to make.
Do you wanna see "real F2P" MMO's made with a lot less money? Go to all these cheap F2P Asian type of games, and you'll realise the MMORPG scene put itself in a corner where only death awaits... in the long run.
Some said I should not use the stats above of the TYPICAL free to play game on the internet like ... Farmville. On the contrary: this game without a world behind it was VERY easy to make, compared to an open world MMORPG like WOW and ... so it is TYPICAL for that kind of F2P market.
The MMORPG industry went into a crisis when the first AAA sub based games failed and went F2P as a last resort.
Now slowly but surely the money is draining out of this "open world" and "endless play".
The only thing that awaits are "loading screens", "instances" and fast play on line games like World of Tanks.
Nothing goes up for free. And Wow has to compete in this world of free to play TURDS.
In the short turn WoW will loose subs, in the long run, the QUALITY difference will be so huge, players will notice the difference as the money source will be drying up completely on these freebee MMO's.
Last edited by BenBos; 2013-06-26 at 03:14 PM.