How much should a WoW sub cost now?

[ThePainTrain69]

Did you even think before writing that? No, seriously. "Make it free". And how would Blizzard pay for everything in WoW, then? Maybe make the game actually pay-to-win by putting actual tier gear in the cash shop for actual real life currency, and flood the AH with all the cosmetic items in the game, having them be earned solely thorugh the cash shop instead of by playing the game like it is right now? All the mounts and pets you can build in the forge of creation in Zereth Mortis? Instead of finding the schematics around, guess what? Gotta pay real dollars to buy them off the cash shop now!

Call the wambulance

[Nerph-]

Call the wambulance

"Ree, game is shit, make it free" - You.
"Ree, game has gone to shit after becoming free" - Future you.

You lot seriously do not seem to comprehend how going f2p would make the game a lot worse.

[Lochton]

"Ree, game is shit, make it free" - You.
"Ree, game has gone to shit after becoming free" - Future you.

You lot seriously do not seem to comprehend how going f2p would make the game a lot worse.

Many don't.

If they do not believe the game is worth their money, then they need to learn to unsubscribe during downtime, or in general if they do not wish to play. There are only ill tidings for WoW's structure if going B2P or F2P, and I know others are going to compare other MMOs, some have gone shit going F2P, others have a structure operating as B2P, and a third has all three and P2W stuff...

[Adamas102]

"Ree, game is shit, make it free" - You.
"Ree, game has gone to shit after becoming free" - Future you.

You lot seriously do not seem to comprehend how going f2p would make the game a lot worse.

So what's your angle on this? That Blizzard is making so much profit with the sub that it keeps their more greedy tendencies at bay (despite already quadruple dipping with the expansion cost, service fees, and cosmetic shop on top of the sub), or that if the game went F2P suddenly this 20 year old game would attract more "undesirables" than it already has?

The benefits of going F2P are pretty apparent; not having to spend over $150 each year to play the game whenever you want. If you think an expansion of micro-transactions would be the problem then budget out what you used to pay in sub costs to get whatever you feel compelled to buy. If you're worried about MORE toxic players (because there's no shortage of them WITH the sub fee) then take to heart the typical MMOC response; make you're own groups/guild. One would also logically assume that going F2P would attract plenty of people who aren't toxic and would be happy to play the game if they weren't required to pay a subscription fee.

[BetrayedOf52]

But why should WoW get away with 21.99$ CAD here when I can buy...

Amazon prime 9.99CAD for their streaming, twitch rewards, free games and one day shipping
Youtube music for 5 accounts we all split for 11.99CAD
Game pass ( Plus EA Plus and future blizzard games ) on 2 Xbox accounts , 3 PCS and my phone with 300+ games and a lot of day one big studio games that cost 79.99$, for 19.99$
Shudder 4.99$
Netflix 14.99$
Disney + included with my xbox prime but only 9.99$ usually
Humble Bundle 12.99$ which is like 7 games at a 100+ dollar value
Nintendo Expansion pack and online service 5$ a month
Elder scrolls online 14.99$ but also comes with a good chunk of monthly currency for their ingame store and a lot of in game perks.

Considering the expansion cost me 59.99CAD and then 131$ over 6 months for zero updates. Into a very lack lustre update. It's insane to me that everything listed above is MUCH cheaper and a lot more entertainment.

[pahbi]

The sub should cost $5 a month pre-flying in an expansion, and $15 a month post-flying.

[Phuongvi]

I would say a 5$ fee so the game would be infested with toxic tourist

[Nerph-]

So what's your angle on this? That Blizzard is making so much profit with the sub that it keeps their more greedy tendencies at bay (despite already quadruple dipping with the expansion cost, service fees, and cosmetic shop on top of the sub), or that if the game went F2P suddenly this 20 year old game would attract more "undesirables" than it already has?

The benefits of going F2P are pretty apparent; not having to spend over $150 each year to play the game whenever you want. If you think an expansion of micro-transactions would be the problem then budget out what you used to pay in sub costs to get whatever you feel compelled to buy. If you're worried about MORE toxic players (because there's no shortage of them WITH the sub fee) then take to heart the typical MMOC response; make you're own groups/guild. One would also logically assume that going F2P would attract plenty of people who aren't toxic and would be happy to play the game if they weren't required to pay a subscription fee.

My angle is that Blizzard will try to recoup the costs they lose removing the sub, by jamming the shop full of p2w crap. The game is already half way there with the token, being able to buy AH gear and boosts with the gold you've bought. It doesn't need to go the full mile.

As I posted previously, I'm all for reducing the expansion box costs. I think that is way too high. But leave the sub as it is.

[Faerillis]

~$10.99

Alternate means of monetization have become their main source of revenue. The subscription is literally a barrier to play, rather than providing bonuses. They have increased their access to more tools and development talent through the various mergers. The Hyperprofits are clearly Not being used to provide liveable wages nor equitable work distribution to the labourers and in fact is being used to undermine their labourers, making it impossible to justify any increased spending based on solidarity. They have done immense damage to their public and audience trust, losing them any benefit of the doubt.

Also anyone who tries to say "No it's underpriced because of inflation" does not understand entertainment goods, especially those require a broad base. See if Inflation goes up, and Wages go down (and yes, a wage that does not match inflation is decreasing not stagnant), then to maintain a player base your subscription rate needs to go down. Your other monetization efforts, especially low effort/virtually no cost options (see most of the ESO Crown Store), can increase to make up the difference. Bobby Kotick making a million less dollars a year won't kill a game nearly as fast as losing a player base because the game isn't worth its price tag.

- - - Updated - - -

My angle is that Blizzard will try to recoup the costs they lose removing the sub, by jamming the shop full of p2w crap. The game is already half way there with the token, being able to buy AH gear and boosts with the gold you've bought. It doesn't need to go the full mile.

As I posted previously, I'm all for reducing the expansion box costs. I think that is way too high. But leave the sub as it is.

Why would you ever need to give the game a single P2W item in its cash shop to make people spend money. WoW's primary revenue generation is already the in-game shop, hence them not focusing on subscription metrics, and it's all cosmetic. That line of thinking is massively hyperbolic and trying to blow things into the worst possible outcome. Normally I'd say "Yeah Blizzard sucks" because many of its decisions absolutely suck... but not one thing you can get for real money in OW gives you any advantage at all.

[Soon-TM]

What? 2004 was 18 years ago! If you aren't making double now, you have serious problems, let alone just 50%. I remember hiring people for $8 an hour then. Right now, unskilled labor can easily find a $16 an hour job (In my neck of the USA).

I'm not from the US, but I guess assumptions are fun.

[Temp name]

Call the wambulance

F2P games are intentionally designed to be annoying so they can sell you solutions.

[Tyranitar]

People bashing those who suggest WoW should go F2P really should take a look at games Like LoL and PoE to see how it can work.

[Nerph-]

Why would you ever need to give the game a single P2W item in its cash shop to make people spend money. WoW's primary revenue generation is already the in-game shop, hence them not focusing on subscription metrics, and it's all cosmetic. That line of thinking is massively hyperbolic and trying to blow things into the worst possible outcome. Normally I'd say "Yeah Blizzard sucks" because many of its decisions absolutely suck... but not one thing you can get for real money in OW gives you any advantage at all.

I'd argue OW only exists because of the financial success WoW brought Blizzard. I of course cannot prove that, like I can't prove that they'd jam the shop full of p2w stuff if the sub was removed, but I'd rather not find out.

People bashing those who suggest WoW should go F2P really should take a look at games Like LoL and PoE to see how it can work.

You mean PoE, the game that makes it inconvenient not to buy stash tabs and what not? Sure you can play it completely free, but it's frustrating.

[Soon-TM]

You mean PoE, the game that makes it inconvenient not to buy stash tabs and what not? Sure you can play it completely free, but it's frustrating.

While PoE stash tabs are P2W (iirc even devs themselves have admitted it), it is comparatively much milder than WoW's token-centric economy. Sure, you can raid even the highest difficulties without buying tokens... But it is Inconvenient™, unless you belong to the right tail end of the skill bell curve (aka a very small minority of the playerbase).

[Nerph-]

While PoE stash tabs are P2W (iirc even devs themselves have admitted it), it is comparatively much milder than WoW's token-centric economy. Sure, you can raid even the highest difficulties without buying tokens... But it is Inconvenient™, unless you belong to the right tail end of the skill bell curve (aka a very small minority of the playerbase).

Not sure you can compare those two. One is completely community driven (boosting in WoW) while the other is sold by the developers of the game (stash tabs in PoE). However as I said earlier WoW is already half way there with the token, and that is exactly why I wouldn't want the game to go f2p. It would be an incentive to go the full mile and essentially, in my eyes, ruin the game.

[Osmeric]

Not sure you can compare those two. One is completely community driven (boosting in WoW)

That's not community driven. It's driven by the difficulty of raids, and by the need to keep up with your competing PvE players. That's all a function of the game design; the community response is driven by that design. You can be unusually good (not possible for most players, by definition), you can buy boosts to keep up, or you can fall behind and be excluded.

[Aurabolt]

...Since no one's said it yet, here's a friendly reminder of what else is included with the subscription: WoW Classic, TBC Classic and WOTLK Classic when it's released (probably announced next month).

Even if you never use them yourself and have no plans to, the long requested/demanded release of WoW Classic gave Blizzard the perfect excuse to not only permanently have a "universal" sub but never raise or lower the price of it. They can simply say the 3 older versions of WoW are "included with your active subscription". Now, if Blizzard offered a separate lower subscription for the "Classic" games then yeah you might be able to make the case for retail WoW to eliminate its sub. I don't think anyone would mind paying a separate sub for the "Classic" games personally. Especially at this point.

[Nerph-]

That's not community driven. It's driven by the difficulty of raids, and by the need to keep up with your competing PvE players. That's all a function of the game design; the community response is driven by that design. You can be unusually good (not possible for most players, by definition), you can buy boosts to keep up, or you can fall behind and be excluded.

What if you don't play the game to raid?

It's not the same as GGG selling stash tabs.

[Lolites]

Into a very lack lustre update. It's insane to me that everything listed above is MUCH cheaper and a lot more entertainment.

thats highly subjective, if all that combined was for the same price as wow i would still go with wow as i have way more entertainment with that...

[Golforth]

To me? 30€.

That's how much Blizzard would have to pay me a month to play the game at it's current state.