Activision Blizzard Fourth Quarter Calendar 2013 Results Conference Call today...

[Heladys]

So can we put the 'the game is just old, nothing can be done' excuse to bed next time there's a loss?

Can we also put "store and hats have ruined this game and that's why people quit" to bed given the obvious?

[Thimagryn]

So can we put the 'the game is just old, nothing can be done' excuse to bed next time there's a loss?

The game is still old. People came back for reasons, but it doesn't stop the game from being old. I'm sure Blizzcon helped fuel some interest. I know a few friends who resubbed right around Blizzcon in anticipation of the news.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying WoW's gonna die because it's an old game, but you can't really excuse losses by saying the game's getting fresher by the minute.

[ringpriest]

So can we put the 'the game is just old, nothing can be done' excuse to bed next time there's a loss?

Oh hell no. Any sub loss is due to external factors beyond Blizzard's control, while any sub gain is due solely to the quality game Blizzard produces.

[Gheld]

Considering that they were practically giving away the game for free for the latter half of Q4 (As far as box sales go) as much as I've been feeding the trolls I was expecting the sub numbers to plateau instead of fall. And considering that the mean number of subscribers for the last 3 quarters has been 7.7 million, 7.8 million is actually only a 1.3% departure from that mean. So I'd call this a little bump on the plateau.

[wariofan1]

That's unexpected, but pretty good.

[Pann]

Transmog helms, pets and mounts don't count as content. IF you went that route then you could also argue that CCG items, promotional items, and everything else that you have to do something outside of logging on is less content. Which it isn't.

Inflation has gone up since the game came out but the sub fee hasn't so in essence you are paying slightly less today to log on to the game then you did in 2005.

Whether you regard them as content or not is neither here nor there, the fact remains that when I started playing WOW if I wanted all mounts and pets (apart from incredibly rare TCG mounts) that were available I could get them by playing the game now I can only do that by paying extra for them thus I receive less value for my sub money.

They have not raised the sub price in line with inflation because they would lose players by doing so not because they are doing us a favour and does it not suggest that as they can adsorb the effect of inflation that they were overcharging when the game was released? If games had increased in line with inflation since the days of the SNES and the Megadrive we would be paying in the region of £110 per game yet even the most hyped, new release can be bought for a fraction of that. Consumer electronics, as a whole, have been dropping price so I would assume that the hardware that Blizzard uses has also become cheaper since the game was released, as far as I am aware the main cost of running a commercial server is now cooling, couple this with staff cut backs it is likely that the cost of running the game has lessened yet the sub fee has remained the same.

[Deleted]

The fact remains that when I started playing WOW if I wanted all mounts and pets (apart from incredibly rare TCG mounts) that were available I could get them by playing the game now I can only do that by paying extra for them thus I receive less value for my sub money.

The fact remains you are 100% wrong.

Vanilla had Collectors Edition, if you wanted all 3 pets you had to pay $180.

After that there was TGC items, Blizz Con items, WWI items etc etc

[Seditian]

The fact remains you are 100% wrong.

Vanilla had Collectors Edition, if you wanted all 3 pets you had to pay $180.

After that there was TGC items, Blizz Con items, WWI items etc etc

This. Plus there's dozens of mounts that aren't available anymore, even if you wanted to pay money for them. If only Blizzard made these mounts account-wide..

[Pann]

The fact remains you are 100% wrong.

Vanilla had Collectors Edition, if you wanted all 3 pets you had to pay $180.

After that there was TGC items, Blizz Con items, WWI items etc etc

The collector's edition was a limited run and is rare enough that I can say in seven years I cannot remember ever seen any of the pets available. Again TCG mounts are incredibly rare, I had been playing over three years before I saw a Spectral Tiger, it was such a big deal on my server at the time that Horde players were creating Ally alts in order to see it in IF. I have no issue with incredibly rare pets or mounts being available by other methods as long as they are from one off events and remain rare, being on an EU realm this meant that Blizzcon pets were very rare, I can't recall ever seeing Murky nor the 2008 mount, until they were given away when they started to charge for streaming. I have no idea what you mean by WWI, World War I?

The items you mention are extreme examples and I do not believe that they are comparable to the current store items, rarity of all them meant that it was not practical for the average player to attain them, it would cost several thousand dollars to do so through unsupported channels, in fact most players could go through several years of playing WOW without knowing they exist.

[Deleted]

well dont really understand why people would expect a big sub loss

SoO is a certainly good quality raid with a few very interesting encounters (looking at you siegecrafter) and it isnt THAT old (in comparison to Dragonsoul, its way better)
so not really a reason to unsubscribe

new PvP season announced, so pvp player have sth to do and well the good old achievement / gold farming is also present

[bluspacecow]

I'm reading the press release and it doesn't mention WoD. How can that be? It says

"Blizzard Entertainment has an expansion to the top-selling PC and console game Diablo® III and another major new release." Did I miss it? Also what is the 'major new release'?

Possibly WoD.

Expansions have been referred to as releases in past investor conference calls.

Nothing about WoD. I'm confused. Are they holding WoD beyond 2014?

If you go to investor.activision.com there's documents there for Q4 2103 specifically referring to a World of Warcraft expansion.

Don't worry about it LOL

[Deleted]

The collector's edition was a limited run and is rare enough that I can say in seven years I cannot remember ever seen any of the pets available. Again TCG mounts are incredibly rare, I had been playing over three years before I saw a Spectral Tiger, it was such a big deal on my server at the time that Horde players were creating Ally alts in order to see it in IF. I have no issue with incredibly rare pets or mounts being available by other methods as long as they are from one off events and remain rare, being on an EU realm this meant that Blizzcon pets were very rare, I can't recall ever seeing Murky nor the 2008 mount, until they were given away when they started to charge for streaming. I have no idea what you mean by WWI, World War I?

The items you mention are extreme examples and I do not believe that they are comparable to the current store items, rarity of all them meant that it was not practical for the average player to attain them, it would cost several thousand dollars to do so through unsupported channels, in fact most players could go through several years of playing WOW without knowing they exist.

WWI = World Wide Invitational.

The 100% fact is that since day one of WoW you could pay more money to get vanity items, always been the way always will.

Rift did it SW:ToR both did it when they launched (as sub model).

The simple fact of the matter is.

If you don't like the shop, don't use it.

[Deleted]

Subs go down, thread upon thread, page upon page of "WoW is dying, new talent trees caused sub losses, gogo Wildstar".

Subs go up, hardly a peep from anyone.

Gotta love the internet.

[Vintersol]

I didn't expected an increase, but i higly doubt it lasts long. Release of SoO was before this quarter so it's no surprise.

[Deleted]

Release of SoO was in this quarter so it's no surprise.

No it was not.

[Vintersol]

No it was not.

edited my post. It was quite before.

[Deleted]

edited my post. It was quite before.

lols, so let me check...

the reasons subs went up was that the last tier was released 4 months before the end of the quarter?

Really?

That is whats your saying?

If you had said RaF relaunch, The WoW Box sale they did over xmas, Flex etc etc sure I can buy all that.

I don't buy that SoO has anything to do with the sub increase.

[Pann]

WWI = World Wide Invitational.

The 100% fact is that since day one of WoW you could pay more money to get vanity items, always been the way always will.

Rift did it SW:ToR both did it when they launched (as sub model).

Ah, thanks.

I am not arguing with that, the difference is with the items you mentioned they are cross-promotions designed to raise awareness for both the product they come from, Blizzcon, TCG, etc, and WOW the store items are designed to make more money from players that are already paying a sub fee. I know that some players like and welcome the store but in my opinion this lessens the value we all receive from our sub fee.

Anyway we are running the risk of dragging the thread off topic so this will be the last I say on the matter.

[Vintersol]

lols, so let me check...

the reasons subs went up was that the last tier was released 4 months before the end of the quarter?

Really?

That is whats your saying?

Yes, thats what i'm saying. What is your presumption about that? Because the game was becoming supercool, where nothing has really changed?

[Pann]

lols, so let me check...

the reasons subs went up was that the last tier was released 4 months before the end of the quarter?

Really?

That is whats your saying?

I believe that is one of the reasons Blizzard gave for subs going up but you are free to disagree with them.