Content drought and monthly subscription

[Cracked]

Indeed - and a lack of food doesn't mean there isn't stuff to eat.

I'm with your now.

Kidding - I'm totally confused now

Hints:
We pay $ every couple of years <-- expansions i.e. new content
We pay $ every month <-- access fee i.e. to play the game

Food shortage doesn't mean there isn't stuff to eat indeed, just like drought doesn't mean there is no water to drink. It means there is not enough of it to go around and satisfy the majority.

[rda]

We're not paying for content, we're paying to access the servers, so no, there's zero reason to drop the sub fee during a so-called "content drought". Even in the worst of them I still always find something to do. If you can't, unsub... no one is holding a gun to your head.

We are absolutely paying for content, or at least I and a lot of others with you possibly excluded do. That "paying to access the servers" is just lawyer-speak and since nobody here is talking about legal charges, it is completely irrelevant.

If there was no content being added, nobody would have paid anything. Statistically speaking. This means that we are paying for content.

[schwarzkopf]

Food shortage doesn't mean there isn't stuff to eat

I'm outta here

[SirBeef]

Dropping sub fee during content drought implies confession of the fact that there is a content drought going on. Not gonna happen.

But this ignores the fact that Blizzard as apologized for content droughts and has said they try to prevent them. Also, they have said multiple times that players should stop paying if there is nothing to do for them and come back when new content is released.

[Deleted]

Content drought doesn't mean there aren't things to do, hello. It means there is no stream of new content coming in while you keep paying for it.

Really?
Pvpers play on years-old maps. What would they say?
People coming late to expansion, expansion is still new for them...

Also, what you are saying, there are things to do, you are just not interested to do that part of content, right?

[Vozzek]

We are absolutely paying for content, or at least I and a lot of others with you possibly excluded do. That "paying to access the servers" is just lawyer-speak and since nobody here is talking about legal charges, it is completely irrelevant.

If there was no content being added, nobody would have paid anything. Statistically speaking. This means that we are paying for content.

Blizzard is a business. If you want them to change their behavior, vote with your dollars and consume their competitor's products instead.

[ethelfleda]

As someone has pointed out before, you paid for content by buying the legion xpac, you pay sub-fee to get access to servers, where you can enjoy your game without lags, and possibly without bugs, but even when that's happens, there is technical support at your service and this is where your sub fee kicks in again.
P.S. And actually why complain about sub fee in a game, which can be paid even without playing with in-game gold, I don't the AH.

[SirBeef]

I like content drought cuz I get achievements and everything else done and don't have to worry much about raids and shit.

I just don't care nor worry about silly things like "content droughts". Only playing a few days a week there is plenty of stuff to do if I choose to do it. Most of the stuff I choose not to do. I gave up on trying to get every skin for every class a long time ago. Targeted the ones I really wanted and got those. Raiding really only appeals to me at this point. We don't push the mythic content we go at our own pace so we still have while before we kill Argus.

[Cracked]

We are absolutely paying for content, or at least I and a lot of others with you possibly excluded do. That "paying to access the servers" is just lawyer-speak and since nobody here is talking about legal charges, it is completely irrelevant.

If there was no content being added, nobody would have paid anything. Statistically speaking. This means that we are paying for content.

Paying to access servers is something people who saw the internet last in 1999 can say, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Even if we take the most expensive amazon AWS instance and say that every connected realm needs a compute unit (they don't) and there are 100 instance servers (there aren't), we end up with 230 server instances for EU (there aren't), which would cost around $828,000 dollars to run on demand via Amazon with the most optimized setup, e.g. with just 1 mil subs in EU, the costs of running would be about 80 cents per sub. Let's generously TRIPPLE that to account for EU customer support, that's $2.4. Notice that if you run the servers yourself and own the hardware, the costs are probably maybe like 20% of that.

If you advocate server access fee... where are the other $13 dollars going?

[rda]

Blizzard is a business. If you want them to change their behavior, vote with your dollars and consume their competitor's products instead.

Thanks for your valuable insight, I don't know where I'd be without it.

(Really, buddy. There is no need to post truisms. You could as well have posted that 2+2 equals 4.)

[SirBeef]

As someone has pointed out before, you paid for content by buying the legion xpac, you pay sub-fee to get access to servers, where you can enjoy your game without lags, and possibly without bugs, but even when that's happens, there is technical support at your service and this is where your sub fee kicks in again.
P.S. And actually why complain about sub fee in a game, which can be paid even without playing with in-game gold, I don't the AH.

Not true at all. You had to play to get that gold in the first place, even if you paid for tokens with gold made in WoD form Garrison farming, it was still playing the game.

[Vozzek]

Paying to access servers is something people who saw the internet last in 1999 can say, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Even if we take the most expensive amazon AWS instance and say that every connected realm needs a compute unit (they don't) and there are 100 instance servers (there aren't), we end up with 230 server instances for EU (there aren't), which would cost around $828,000 dollars to run on demand via Amazon with the most optimized setup, e.g. with just 1 mil subs in EU, the costs of running would be about 80 cents per sub. Let's generously TRIPPLE that to account for EU customer support, that's $2.4. Notice that if you run the servers yourself and own the hardware, the costs are probably maybe like 20% of that.

If you advocate server access fee... where are the other $13 dollars going?

Did you know that it costs a few cents to make soda? A couple more for the can? Add in overhead, and that can of soda costs maybe 15 cents to make. But they charge a dollar. Where are the other 85 cents going? I'm starting to think the companies aren't charities after all.

[rda]

Did you know that it costs a few cents to make soda? A couple more for the can? Add in overhead, and that can of soda costs maybe 15 cents to make. But they charge a dollar. Where are the other 85 cents going? I'm starting to think the companies aren't charities after all.

Marketing, transportation, storage, etc. There is nothing of that besides marketing with a virtual thing. And marketing for WoW stopped being a big expense a decade ago.

The guy you are replying to is exactly right - operating servers is very cheap, not even $1 per person per month.

[Vozzek]

Thanks for your valuable insight, I don't know where I'd be without it.

(Really, buddy. There is no need to post truisms. You could as well have posted that 2+2 equals 4.)

No need for the condescension, guy. Maybe you just don't like my point. Perhaps you would have preferred for me to simply say "you should unsubscribe then".

[Cracked]

Did you know that it costs a few cents to make soda? A couple more for the can? Add in overhead, and that can of soda costs maybe 15 cents to make. But they charge a dollar. Where are the other 85 cents going? I'm starting to think the companies aren't charities after all.

You are talking about material goods, where distribution and store cuts have to go into pricing. That AWS price comes with full internet connection and electricity included (aka distribution with your soda) and the electricity bill is paid by you and your ISP when you run the game (aka store where you get your soda).. And yet the increase was lower in the soda case. There is a difference in charity and robbery )

[FelPlague]

^^^

I habitually unsubscribe after I've done what I want in the last patch. Earlier in WoW's life I had more to do (then-new alts to level, etc) but from Mists on, I don't really have all of that to do. Honestly, even if the sub was free I wouldn't play that much because, well, I was out of things to do.




*And yes, by 'out of things' I mean out of things I want to do. Fuck off if you're about to type "did you clear mythic" or any of that. I play to do the things I want to do, not what someone here thinks people should do.

but did you get insane in the membrande on all your characters?

[Deleted]

Do you agree with me that they should drop the sub fee during the content drought?

Why dont YOU just UNSUB when you feel your in a "content drought"? this is clearly a YOU problem which only YOU can solve

[Vozzek]

Marketing, transportation, storage, etc. There is nothing of that besides marketing with a virtual thing. And marketing for WoW stopped being a big expense a decade ago.

The guy you are replying to is exactly right - operating servers is very cheap, not even $1 per person per month.

That is irrelevant, as are your responses to what else constitutes extra costs. Businesses don't charge based on costs. They charge based on what consumers will pay. It is $15 because that is the amount that Blizzard must believe will maximize their profit.

[rda]

That is irrelevant, as are your responses to what else constitutes extra costs. Businesses don't charge based on costs. They charge based on what consumers will pay. It is $15 because that is the amount that Blizzard must believe will maximize their profit.

Yes, that's what it is. But you were previously talking about "business is not a charity" and trying to make strange comparisons to other products which have lots of costs that Blizzard products don't have.

You are alternating between posting nonsense, getting a reply explaining that what you posted is nonsense, then posting something opposite to what you said (and true) like it was your point all along. Could you state your point clearly instead of jumping all over the place? Frankly, it doesn't seem like you have one.

[Vozzek]

You are talking about material goods, where distribution and store cuts have to go into pricing. That AWS price comes with full internet connection and electricity included (aka distribution with your soda) and the electricity bill is paid by you and your ISP when you run the game (aka store where you get your soda).. And yet the increase was lower in the soda case. There is a difference in charity and robbery )

Soda manufacturers make spectacular markups and profit, which was my point. But they don't base their prices on what it costs to produce, they do so based on what will maximize their profits. My point is that Blizzard charges $15 to access their servers because they can; because people will pay for that service. Why 15? Because that is what they believe will maximize their profits. It has nothing to do with what it costs to provide that service.

I understand your point that you think this is harmful to the game. I get that. But it seems that enough other people disagree with you, because Wow still has a strong base of subscribers.