2020 the year of the Blizzard-Pass?

[Rinnegan2]

nvm mods can delete this thread

user @Xar226 pointed out the flaws and he is right:

$25/month is very unlikely to happen. The furthest I could see it stretching would be to Netflix levels, which is about $15/mo near the top I believe. Meaning essentially that for WOW players, it's free.

Overwatch launched with 7 million units sold in the first week at $39.99 = $279.3million. To make this a financially justifiable decision based on that game alone this service would need to bring 3.1 million new subscribers (people who wouldn't have subscribed otherwise) and they each would need to stay 6 months. Just to make up for the revenue of that single game launch over its first week. (Since you threw out $25/mo, even though I think that's unrealistic it would be 1.8 million subscribers who stay six months.) That's not counting the fact that they're basically losing all the revenue from current WOW subscribers since it would now just be a free feature to this new subscription.

If they believe that would increase other factors (paid services, loot box sales, etc) and attract enough non-WOW players to pay for development and maintenance of both WOW (now covered under the same umbrella) and other properties, it's not impossible. But if you're asking me? I don't see it happening. They'd lose too much money if they're at a price point people would actually want to pay and get too few subscribers if they're at a point where it makes financial sense. Heck, I'm not even sure $25 makes financial sense for either party.

[Justpassing]

ladies and gentlemen of mmo-champion!

it's time for the community - for every Blizzard gamer out there - to start the discussion on what the Blizzard subscription model will look like in a few years (they might announce it this Blizzcon).

so what is the 'Blizzard-Pass'? the Blizzard-Pass is basically a subscription that allows you to play EVERY Blizzard game in its entirety as long as you have an active subscription. WoW did it first, then Mobile Phones followed, then Spotify and Netfilx came around, then the Console Pass emerged, then Amazon Prime happened, now there is Apple Music and all that jazz and in the future there will be Cloud Gaming Pass for Google Stadia and Xbox Scarlett.

EVERYTHING, ALL DIGITAL GOODS, are becoming subscription based. At least since Assassins Creed:Odyssey DLCs it is clear to even the most hardcore PC gamers out there: in a few years, every single game on the market that intends to produce ANY ADDITIONAL content in the future, will be EITHER:

subscription based
OR free with cosmetic micro-transactions
OR subscription based AND with cosmetic micro-transactions.

So what does that mean for us? for us Blizzard gamers? This Blizzcon, Blizzard will announce the next generation of their franchises: Diablo 4, potentially Overwatch 2, massive revamps for World of Warcraft, old games are being REmastered, and so on. The timing is perfect for them to announce the 'Blizzard Pass'!

The 'Blizzard Pass' could look like this: you pay 24.99$ monthly (you have to subscribe for at least 2 months) and then you get to play the latest versions of ALL Blizzard games => no more buying expansions for WoW and Diablo, no more upfront cost for REmastered games, you get to play the updated versions of all Blizzard partner games without having to purchase them (CoD, Destiny), you get the entire Hearthstone card collection to play with AND the other standalone games like Overwatch, Starcraft and HoTS are all included as well.

25 bucks a month for this amount of entertainment seems plausible to me.

Now, because WoW players would be on the fence if they had to pay extra after all these years, it will still only cost 13 bucks / month to play WoW only.
All the other new Blizzard games, though, will be exclusive to the 'Blizzard Pass'.

What do you guys think? Will they announce the 'Blizzard Pass' this Blizzcon? And if yes: what would your ideal 'Blizzard Pass' look like?

Why charge just 25$ and give your games away when you can just sell them retail and make more money?

[Kyphael]

Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2?

And 25 dollars a month my dick. I'd prefer if the game went FTP with things to purchase in the store like new races. I don't play anything else but WoW and have no interest in Diablo, Overwatch, StarCraft, or any of the awful Activision games.

[Aggrophobic]

But why though?

[Dracullus]

But why though?

[Rinnegan2]

But why though?

it's less expenses for the individual player => way more players over all => more money for Blizzard. it's a win-win. that is why it works everywhere else (spotify, netflix, phones etc.)

[Xar226]

$25/month is very unlikely to happen. The furthest I could see it stretching would be to Netflix levels, which is about $15/mo near the top I believe. Meaning essentially that for WOW players, it's free.

Overwatch launched with 7 million units sold in the first week at $39.99 = $279.3million. To make this a financially justifiable decision based on that game alone this service would need to bring 3.1 million new subscribers (people who wouldn't have subscribed otherwise) and they each would need to stay 6 months. Just to make up for the revenue of that single game launch over its first week. (Since you threw out $25/mo, even though I think that's unrealistic it would be 1.8 million subscribers who stay six months.) That's not counting the fact that they're basically losing all the revenue from current WOW subscribers since it would now just be a free feature to this new subscription.

If they believe that would increase other factors (paid services, loot box sales, etc) and attract enough non-WOW players to pay for development and maintenance of both WOW (now covered under the same umbrella) and other properties, it's not impossible. But if you're asking me? I don't see it happening. They'd lose too much money if they're at a price point people would actually want to pay and get too few subscribers if they're at a point where it makes financial sense. Heck, I'm not even sure $25 makes financial sense for either party.

[derpkitteh]

how about instead we string up every CEO and take back our FUCKING HOBBIES AND ENTERTAINMENT so it's no longer multi-million dollar businesses and just fun again?

this is the stupidest idea i've ever heard, and i'd never touch another fucking blizzard game.

[Justpassing]

it's less expenses for the individual player => way more players over all => more money for Blizzard. it's a win-win. that is why it works everywhere else (spotify, netflix, phones etc.)

Except people buy Blizzard games regardless of the price tag, and in droves.

[Kumorii]

yeah, Overwatch 2 won't happen... Overwatch content is a different story.

[Kyphael]

Lol

/thread

- - - Updated - - -

Except people buy Blizzard games regardless of the price tag, and in droves.

I'm people. I don't buy every Blizzard game just because it's made by Blizzard. I just play WoW.

[Zentail]

yeah, Overwatch 2 won't happen... Overwatch content is a different story.

Didn’t Blizzard practically confirm another Overwatch game? I could have sworn they did. Idk if it would be called Overwatch 2, though.

[Dracullus]

Didn’t Blizzard practically confirm another Overwatch game? I could have sworn they did. Idk if it would be called Overwatch 2, though.

Blizzard confirms games through Kotaku leaks now?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

how about instead we string up every CEO and take back our FUCKING HOBBIES AND ENTERTAINMENT so it's no longer multi-million dollar businesses and just fun again?

this is the stupidest idea i've ever heard, and i'd never touch another fucking blizzard game.

If you made gaming no longer a business you’d have less and less games as people wouldn’t be able to live off of it.

Sure there would still be indie games but no one is going to invest years of there life to make big games as no one would fund them and people need to eat.

[Thetruth1400]

it's less expenses for the individual player => way more players over all => more money for Blizzard. it's a win-win. that is why it works everywhere else (spotify, netflix, phones etc.)

It's not though. $25 a year = 300 a year. $15 a month for WoW = $180.

WoW - we get an expansion every 2 - 3 years, so lets split the difference and say 2 years.
Overwatch - it's been 3 years and no talk of an expansion. Even if 2020 is an expansion, that'll make it 4 years.
Diablo - it was 12 years between releases and D2 and D3 each had one expansion about 2 years after the initial launch. Even if D4 is announced for 2020, that'll have been 8 years since D3's release. So we'll just give it an extreme reduction to 6 years between releases.
Starcraft - Another 12 years between SC1 and SC2 releases. SC2 had 3 releases overall, over a 5 year period. A 2020 release would mean 5 years between them.

So what does all that mean? It means you might see a better price in 2020 if they release all their titles in the same year like that, but for how long?

Let's just assume that all of the games would be full retail, $60 games. That's 4 games at $60 each or $240. So $240 + $180 for WoW Sub = $420 in year 1 for WoW subs and all those games. Sure, the $300 a year for the battle pass you talk of seems like a good deal, but what happens in year two?

In year two, there will be no new games, and just a WoW sub. That $420 now goes to $600, the same price as the battle pass.

In year three, let's be gracious and add in 1 game, which is likely. The total now goes to $840 for a WoW sub plus that new game, but the battle pass is now at $900.

As time goes on, the only one winning is Blizzard. It's also making the massive speculation that everyone wants to play every Blizzard game. For me, I play WoW and occasionally Overwatch. I have no desire for either Starcraft nor Diablo, so no, I don't want to pay for them in any way, shape or form.

I'd rather pay my $180 a year to play WoW, and an extra $60 every 2 - 5 years for WoW and Overwatch.

[Rinnegan2]

It's not though. $25 a year = 300 a year. $15 a month for WoW = $180.

WoW - we get an expansion every 2 - 3 years, so lets split the difference and say 2 years.
Overwatch - it's been 3 years and no talk of an expansion. Even if 2020 is an expansion, that'll make it 4 years.
Diablo - it was 12 years between releases and D2 and D3 each had one expansion about 2 years after the initial launch. Even if D4 is announced for 2020, that'll have been 8 years since D3's release. So we'll just give it an extreme reduction to 6 years between releases.
Starcraft - Another 12 years between SC1 and SC2 releases. SC2 had 3 releases overall, over a 5 year period. A 2020 release would mean 5 years between them.

So what does all that mean? It means you might see a better price in 2020 if they release all their titles in the same year like that, but for how long?

Let's just assume that all of the games would be full retail, $60 games. That's 4 games at $60 each or $240. So $240 + $180 for WoW Sub = $420 in year 1 for WoW subs and all those games. Sure, the $300 a year for the battle pass you talk of seems like a good deal, but what happens in year two?

In year two, there will be no new games, and just a WoW sub. That $420 now goes to $600, the same price as the battle pass.

In year three, let's be gracious and add in 1 game, which is likely. The total now goes to $840 for a WoW sub plus that new game, but the battle pass is now at $900.

As time goes on, the only one winning is Blizzard. It's also making the massive speculation that everyone wants to play every Blizzard game. For me, I play WoW and occasionally Overwatch. I have no desire for either Starcraft nor Diablo, so no, I don't want to pay for them in any way, shape or form.

I'd rather pay my $180 a year to play WoW, and an extra $60 every 2 - 5 years for WoW and Overwatch.

yeah, you are right. I'm not that good with maths ^^

[Zentail]

Blizzard confirms games through Kotaku leaks now?

There was definitely more reports than just Kotaku after doing a quick google search. That didn’t answer my question though. I thought someone from Blizzard talked about an Overwatch sequel in the same interview where the mentioned the cancelled StarCraft game. Again, I could be wrong obviously.

[iamthedevil]

$25 a month would kill this game. Looking back on it, even 15 was a lot for the time, UO and other games included.

[Aggrophobic]

it's less expenses for the individual player => way more players over all => more money for Blizzard. it's a win-win. that is why it works everywhere else (spotify, netflix, phones etc.)

Doubt it'll add much more while they would lose out on the insane money they gain from box sales.