1. #1
    The Patient KaNNis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    United Kingdom

    Content Payment Idea

    As my subscription ended again I was thinking of how I mostly stop playing WoW due to it being a monthly subscription game and just not having the desire anymore to deal with that, but that's my own problems, but it got me thinking.

    Let's say in a few years the game isn't as active as now, it's hard enough these days to keep people playing, not to mention paying and I know tons that regret it after a week or so. I've seen other MMO's going with the "Game-time" model where you pay for certain hours and you get to play them whenever and however you want and I found it as a great idea, but these days outside of the MMO world there's been a DLC trend amongst games.

    Now before you bash me with the whole DLC'S ARE GOD'S EVIL CREATIONS THAT WERE SENT UPON GAMING TO DOOM IT AND EVERY LITTLE PART OF IT LEFT. Think about how people complain about the Call of Duty series having shit DLC and charging for content, that's at the same price as WoW's MONTHLY subscription.

    So my idea is, probably discussed millions of times before but I couldn't find it anywhere: Let's say WoW goes on a non-subcription model, you still need to buy the games, but not pay monthly in order to play. This next part is entirely in favor of the players so yes its a bad business plan for Blizzard but I'm looking at a cheaper perspective for players here. :

    What if Blizzard charges us for content patches, instead of monthly subscription? If you didn't play during a certain patch, you can skip paying it and pay for the latest one, instead of slowly grinding to the last patch with payment even when content will be irrelevant.

    I certainly hope I don't end up getting bashed to death here, I just want to see people's opinion on this, I know the whole "12$ ain't much and it keeps the kids away" story but sometimes it keeps players who really just want to check the game back out and don't want to pay for an entire month to do so, I repeat, this is in financial favor for the players, not Blizzard's business. 12$ Ain't much but, not having to think about it is better than that.
    Last edited by KaNNis; 2013-01-03 at 12:52 AM.

  2. #2
    Moderator MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    From what I hear, they apparently have plenty of people that are willing to pay monthly. If I were them, I wouldn't change it either.

    How much are you expecting to pay for a content patch?
    If you bought 5.0 and bought 5.2 how would you catch up with the stuff that's in 5.1?

    It's really not a very workable idea.
    To contact global moderators with moderation issues please PM any of the following:
    Tziva ■ Radux ■ Simca ■ Elysia ■ Zaelsino ■ xskarma ■ Arlee ■ Venara

    Issues specific to WoW General Discussions/BfA/Classic can be sent to any forum moderator or globals.
    Please report problem posts. Site rules can be found here.

  3. #3
    The Patient KaNNis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    United Kingdom
    Well since you didn't pay for 5.1, you wouldn't get what 5.1 offers, a daily quest zone lets say, but last time I checked, lets get 4.2 - 4.3 to compare with, I wouldn't need to get 4.2 in order to play 4.3 or when people started in 4.3 hardly anyone went Firelands on that point, and if they did they'd just have to get the content, but seeing how a lot of the players are PvP based, those wouldn't even care, as long as they pay for the Battleground they wish to have in their selection.
    Edit: If you weren't interested in 5.1, you wouldn't get 5.1, if you were, you'd get it

  4. #4
    Wouldn't work for WoW especially since it's been pay-to-play since launch. Since there's still people who are willing to pay, Blizz won't change that. Plus paying for individual patches would get more confusing. At least with $12 a month, I can rest assured that whenever there's a new patch, I can auto-download it and play instantly without having to worry about money.

  5. #5
    That's basically what D&D Online did for a while. You could pay for content or you could just keep playing the old stuff. EVENTUALLY the content would also become free, if you were willing to wait.

    I still personally don't see any similarity between CoD DLC and WoW. Console games, unless you enjoy pvp, don't have the longevity of an MMO.

    I still see it this way.

    $15 = WoW for 720 hours a month, give or take based on 30 vs 31 days and maintenance down times.
    $15 = 2-3 hours in a movie theater a month.
    $15 = 1 meal at a lower end restaurant (Chili's TGI Friday, etc)
    $15 = 3 meals from fast food, give or take depending on what you get.
    $15 = 1/2 of a hand held game (Vita, 3DS)
    $15 = 1/4 of a console game. One game with about 30 hours of content once every 4 months!
    $15 = 2/3 of a hardback new release book, maybe full book if on sale. 1 book every 1.5 months to compromise. Might be a week of reading, depending on your speed.
    $15 = 2 paperback books.

    You get the idea. I still think the subscription MMO model is entirely valid and reasonable if the game and content are of good quality.

    The micro transaction model is actually wildly popular for businesses because of how quick it is to nickle and dime people into $15, $20, $25, and $50 in a month before they realize it because "it's just a dollar" adds up quick if you don't pay attention. Purchasing each content patch would be a type of micro-transaction model and would surely open the door to more options you can pay for.

  6. #6
    I prefer to pay monthly, because you actually spend less than you would in a Micro-Transaction game. Look at the statistics, its insane how much people spend on games that offer microtransactions for new content like the LOTRO quest packs

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts