Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Coming Soon: Battle.net BalanceFollow

#1 Dec 09 2011 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
Soon, we’ll be introducing a new feature called Battle.net Balance that will give players an alternate way to purchase Blizzard products and services directly through their Battle.net account. Players will be able to “charge up” their Battle.net Balance using a variety of payment methods, and then use their Battle.net Balance to buy services like World of Warcraft character transfers, digital products like pets and mounts, and more. Players will also be able to use their Battle.net Account Balance to buy items and store their earnings from Diablo III’s currency-based auction house once the game is released.

We’ll be rolling out the new Battle.net Balance feature in the weeks ahead -- but in the meantime, check out our Battle.net Balance FAQ to find out more about how it’s going to work.


The FAQ:

Quote:
What is Battle.net Balance?
Battle.net Balance is a new Battle.net feature that will allow players to store value in their Battle.net account, which can be used to buy Blizzard Entertainment products such as World of Warcraft game time, paid services, digital versions of games, and in-game pets and mounts.

With the upcoming launch of Diablo III, players in certain regions will also be able to use their Battle.net Balance to acquire items from the game's currency-based auction house. Diablo III players will also have the option to store earnings from items they sell on the auction house in their Battle.net Balance, to be used on future auction house purchases or to buy Blizzard products. For more information on the Diablo III auction house, read the auction house FAQ.

How will I add value to my Battle.net Balance?
When you log in to Battle.net Account Management, you will be able to add value to your Battle.net Balance through a variety of different payment methods, such as debit or credit cards or a variety of region-specific payment methods. Please note that depending on the payment method, it may take some time for the Battle.net Balance you purchase to become available to use.

Can I convert my Battle.net Balance into cash?
Once funds or Diablo III auction house earnings have been added to your Battle.net Balance, you are not able to convert that Balance into cash. Battle.net Balance can only be used to buy designated Blizzard Entertainment products or to acquire items from Diablo III's currency-based auction house.

In certain regions, Diablo III players who wish to "cash out" the proceeds from the sale of an item from the currency-based auction house instead of storing it in a Battle.net Balance will be able to do so via PayPal for an additional fee. Players will need to determine which method they wish to use at the time they post their auction. For more information on the currency-based auction house, see the FAQ.

Will I need to use Battle.net Balance to make Diablo III auction-house purchases, or will other payment options be available?
Diablo III players will be able to make purchases on the currency-based auction house directly (without using Battle.net Balance) via several popular payment methods, such as major credit cards. A wider range of payment alternatives will be available for those who wish to use Battle.net Balance.

What currencies can I use to charge my Battle.net Balance?
In general, you will be able to add value to your Battle.net Balance using your local currency (in EU, for example, players will be able to use Euros, GBP, and RUB). In certain regions where game realms and servers are shared by players in multiple countries, you may also be able to use additional countries' currencies. However, please note that Battle.net Balances for different currencies are tracked separately and cannot be used interchangeably. For example, you cannot use Battle.net Balance purchased using U.S. dollars in a non-USD-based auction house, and you are not able to transfer Battle.net Balance purchased in one currency to or from Battle.net Balance purchased with a different currency. We'll have further details to share closer to release.

Will there be a limit to how much I can store in my Battle.net Balance?
Yes, there will be limits on how much can be stored in your Battle.net Balance. We'll have more information closer to release.

Can I transfer my Battle.net Balance to another Battle.net account, or give Battle.net Balance as gift?
Your Battle.net Balance is non-transferrable. At launch, there will not be a way to give Battle.net Balance as a gift to another Battle.net account holder; however, we're looking into the possibility of adding that feature in the future.

How long will my Battle.net Balance remain in my account? Will it ever expire?
Depending on local laws and regulations, we may be required to remove the Battle.net Balance from any Battle.net account that hasn't been accessed in over 3 years.

Will I be able to track purchases made with my Battle.net Balance?
Yes, you'll be able to track your purchases through Battle.net Account Management.

Can I use my Battle.net Balance as the automatic payment method for my recurring World of Warcraft subscription?
No, though you are able to pre-purchase World of Warcraft game time using your Battle.net Balance.

What payment methods are available to charge my Battle.net Balance?
All of the payment methods we currently support through Battle.net will be available to charge your Battle.net Balance, with a few exceptions. We'll have more details to share closer to launch.

Can I use Battle.net Balance in combination with other payments to make a purchase?
You will be able to use Battle.net Balance in combination with another payment type to make certain purchases through Battle.net Account Management, such as World of Warcraft paid services. However, you will not be able to combine payment types to make Diablo III auction house purchases.

Are there any fees associated with using Battle.net Balance?
Blizzard Entertainment does not charge additional fees to add to your Battle.net Balance or to use it to buy Blizzard Entertainment products. However, there are listing and transaction fees associated with the Diablo III currency-based auction house, regardless of the payment type.

Where can I see my Battle.net Balance?
Your Battle.net Balance will be visible in Battle.net Account Management, as well as in-game in Diablo III.

Is Battle.net Balance available in the Diablo III beta test?
In the Diablo III beta test, we are currently testing the in-game functionality of Battle.net Balance. Players are given a limited number of "beta bucks" to use on currency-based auction house purchases. These "beta bucks" reflect how Battle.net Balance might be displayed and/or used when Diablo III is ultimately released, though as with all things in the beta, this is subject to change. Please note that any "beta bucks" earned in the beta test will not be retained when Battle.net Balance is released.


Yeah, that's it. I'm out.

Edited, Dec 9th 2011 8:04pm by IDrownFish
#2 Dec 09 2011 at 7:19 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,148 posts
Hmm why are you out now?
I'm pretty sure there isn't anything new to this. Might be the first time they put it all together but either from D3- or WoW-related news-sites I already knew all of this. Have not yet decided if I hate it or remain indifferent.
#3 Dec 09 2011 at 8:36 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Quote:
Can I convert my Battle.net Balance into cash?
Once funds or Diablo III auction house earnings have been added to your Battle.net Balance, you are not able to convert that Balance into cash. Battle.net Balance can only be used to buy designated Blizzard Entertainment products or to acquire items from Diablo III's currency-based auction house.

In certain regions, Diablo III players who wish to "cash out" the proceeds from the sale of an item from the currency-based auction house instead of storing it in a Battle.net Balance will be able to do so via PayPal for an additional fee. Players will need to determine which method they wish to use at the time they post their auction. For more information on the currency-based auction house, see the FAQ.


Quote:
Will I need to use Battle.net Balance to make Diablo III auction-house purchases, or will other payment options be available?
Diablo III players will be able to make purchases on the currency-based auction house directly (without using Battle.net Balance) via several popular payment methods, such as major credit cards. A wider range of payment alternatives will be available for those who wish to use Battle.net Balance.


Those two reek to me. I was slowly thinking about playing some D3 but I grow hesitant the more Blizzard pulls these moves. Smiley: disappointed
#4 Dec 09 2011 at 8:45 PM Rating: Good
Can we cash out via anybody who DOESN'T lock accounts for being used?
#5 Dec 09 2011 at 9:33 PM Rating: Excellent
This kind of thing has become common practice in the video game industry. You have Microsoft and Sony to thank for that with DLC. Blizzard has become as big as many of the mainstream console franchises, and frankly it's surprising that it took them this long to jump on board.

Edited, Dec 9th 2011 10:34pm by MooMooKitty
#6 Dec 09 2011 at 9:40 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,882 posts
It just sounds like a real money sink. I was almost tempted to get the 1yr subscription thing to try out Diablo. But this just convinces me its another way to make us dump lots of money into an imaginary pixelated world. I fell into the trap in TF2...but I'm not going to do it again.

The problem becomes that they price things so cheaply that most people don't notice they are nickle and diming their money away. Over months of spending 2-5 bucks a shot I ended up spending almost 50 dollars on a "free to play" game. I take full responsibility for that, but I'm avoiding anything with that temptation. With some extra cash and a credit card its really easy to say "Ah heck, I can spare a couple of bucks for the shiny!"

This over commercialization of everything is really driving me nuts. You buy a $400 phone and you end up paying 2, 5, even 10 bucks for "apps". I remember one of my last phones charged PER RING for certain ring tones. The dang phone is covered in advertisements for the paid products when I'm already charging out my butt for service, texting, and the phone itself. Buy an $1000 computer and its littered with trials of games that 10 years ago came by default.

/rant

Enough is enough.

Edited, Dec 11th 2011 12:09pm by ekaterinodar
#7 Dec 09 2011 at 10:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Can't say I'm especially shocked or appalled by anything I read there. I can't imagine they really want to process thousands of $0.05 dollar transactions, plus the fees will earn them money. The amounts of the various fees will make all the difference to me in the end. But really I get free diablo by playing WoW, and get the most bang for my money by using Blizzard Bucks earned in diablo to pay for the WoW subscription.

Do you call that synergy or a death spiral? Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#8 Dec 09 2011 at 10:30 PM Rating: Good
TherealLogros wrote:
Hmm why are you out now?
I'm pretty sure there isn't anything new to this. Might be the first time they put it all together but either from D3- or WoW-related news-sites I already knew all of this. Have not yet decided if I hate it or remain indifferent.


You're right, this is nothing new to the industry at all, and I'm surprised it took them this long.

The reason I say I'm out is because this is a symptom of the underlying problem, that Blizzard isn't the Blizzard we fell in love with any more. This is simply another way to squeeze money out of their franchises, something that I'm not interested in. I'm going to be working on Heroic Dragon Soul, then after that it probably won't be too long before I move on to TOR/whatever tickles my fancy.

Edited, Dec 10th 2011 2:41am by IDrownFish
#9 Dec 10 2011 at 12:48 AM Rating: Good
***
1,996 posts
Quote:
Blizzard isn't the Blizzard we fell in love with any more.


Fish, that sounds just creepy. They're a business, not my ex wife. I don't "fall in love" with a business, I buy their product. On a good day, I get a product that I like and they get my money.

Quote:
This is simply another way to squeeze money out of their franchises


I'm going out in search of booze. Apparently I've awoken to find myself stranded in an alternate universe where businesses don't behave in the manner I'm accustomed to. Actually, given the practices that many businesses use, Blizzard pretty much is unicorns and rainbows. Consider this. How many other companies haven't raised the price of the service they provide in the last seven years?
#10 Dec 10 2011 at 1:08 AM Rating: Good
****
7,732 posts
Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
Hellbanned

idiggory wrote:
Drinking at home. But I could probably stand to get laid.
#11 Dec 10 2011 at 1:33 AM Rating: Good
Rhodekylle wrote:
Quote:
Blizzard isn't the Blizzard we fell in love with any more.


Fish, that sounds just creepy. They're a business, not my ex wife. I don't "fall in love" with a business, I buy their product. On a good day, I get a product that I like and they get my money.

Quote:
This is simply another way to squeeze money out of their franchises


I'm going out in search of booze. Apparently I've awoken to find myself stranded in an alternate universe where businesses don't behave in the manner I'm accustomed to. Actually, given the practices that many businesses use, Blizzard pretty much is unicorns and rainbows. Consider this. How many other companies haven't raised the price of the service they provide in the last seven years?


This is pretty much where people are divided in their opinion at the moment, and I don't really won't to get into that debate. So here's what I think, then I'm not going to be posting about this topic any more.

Yes, they are a business, and yes, they do have a right to make a profit. They have an obligation, in fact, to make as much profit as possible. But the Blizzard a lot of long time fans "fell in love with" (read: became long time, die hard fans of) was the one who valued putting out a good game as more important than putting out something to print money. Somewhere along the lines, those two priorities got switched. I think Blizzard is more concerned with printing money than they are with making a good game, and I believe that shows in the products and services they've been producing.

In Blizzard's mission statement, the very first thing listed in large bold letters is "Gameplay first." The point I'm trying to make is that this isn't the Blizzard that wrote that, nowadays. Old Blizzard made lots of money because it made great games, not it made good games so it could make a lot of money.

Like I said, this is entirely debatable. A lot of people are still having fun with the products they are putting out, and a lot of people think what's on the horizon looks fantastic. I don't. It's my opinion, and debating it would really open a can of worms that we on these forums have gotten into before, and I don't think we should again any time soon. So let's just drop it.

Edited, Dec 10th 2011 2:40am by IDrownFish
#12 Dec 10 2011 at 1:53 AM Rating: Good
***
1,882 posts
Well, I've made the argument that they are a business so they are obviously going to try and make money...but that argument only carries so much weight.

There are plenty of businesses which thrive because they try to squeeze as much money out as possible. Other businesses on the other hand thrive not because of the volume of business, but because of the quality product they produce.

Now the question is this: Is Blizzard aiming to make money by making a great game? Or is it it now just great IP?

And I think that's where the point of conflict comes. I have no problems giving my money for a great game. But I do have a problem when I feel like I'm getting milked for my money.

What does Blizzard want? Happy long term customers? Or lots of money from short and cheap transactions? Who are they pandering to? Loyal fans? Or fair weather kiddies who will drop WoW for the next best thing?

I'm divided on this... I'm still holding out some hope that this LFR thing is just an example. That when I get to actually use it to help train guildies to raid current content that it'll become an invaluable tool that will make raiding much more manageable for us casuals.

I'm still trying to be positive. Its hard, but I think its important we try to look for the positives instead of griping endlessly about it. I mean there are two solutions: leave the game or stay with the game. And I'm not quite sure if constantly harping on what we hate about the game is appropriate for this forum. There is a point where, even with a high post number to the left, we're just as guilty as the WAR/Conan/Aion/Rift groupies who pop in and troll us.

I know I'm guilty of it...but I'm wondering if our outlook on the game would be better if we weren't so busy having a pity party and spent more time discussing what we do like about it. Just my thoughts.
#13 Dec 10 2011 at 4:12 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,996 posts
Quote:
Now the question is this: Is Blizzard aiming to make money by making a great game? Or is it it now just great IP?


I wonder, however, why that should be seen as the question. I play a game to relax and have something to amuse myself with; I suppose I've just never had much of a fan mentality. Blizzard is like a lobster; it would eat me if it had the chance, but all I really care about is that it will taste good with drawn butter and a bit of white wine.

Quote:
I know I'm guilty of it...but I'm wondering if our outlook on the game would be better if we weren't so busy having a pity party and spent more time discussing what we do like about it.


Probably, but the pity party seems to lend itself better to +1 churning.



#14 Dec 10 2011 at 4:19 AM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,443 posts
Rhode, if you've followed Blizzard from the early days to now, you'll have noticed a paradigm shift from "we're a bunch of gamer heads who wanna have fun" to "hive mind is telling us to suck you dry."

Whether it's Activision or just plain ol' greed, I don't know and I don't care. I just don't like the new Blizzard.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#15 Dec 10 2011 at 5:05 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,877 posts
Pretty much what Mazra says. I enjoy WoW for what it offers, relatively easy leveling and end game, but I am starting to despise the company. It feels as though it is less about "How can we make this game great" and more along the lines of "How can we make this game print more money".
#16 Dec 10 2011 at 6:38 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,441 posts
RE: Criminy: They are charging you for directing the funds to PayPal because there's usually fees that need to be processed when you move cash around. Either they pay the fee, or you do. SOMEONE has to pay the fees, and if we the consumers don't like it, then we need to tell the banks and credit card companies to stop charging the stupid fees already. It is the same reason why a lot of vendors will not allow credit card purchases for less than $5. The fee makes it simply not profitable to do so.

RE: Everyone else: This is something a LOT of players have asked for on O-boards. They are implementing this because we (playerbase, collectively) asked for it. Numerous suggestions/inquiries/etc were made on O-boards asking for this sort of feature in WoW. They refused to do this to their flagship MMORPG, but they thought "Hmmm, we could make Diablo more Online, and then add an AH that allows people to do what they've been asking to do" and they went ahead and did it.

Don't like Diablo's Real-Money AH? You're not forced to use it -- you can buy and sell in pure in-game gold if you like. Heck, that's an improvement over Diablo2 which had no AH and you had a .00001% drop rate on anything worth talking about! I, for one, didn't like the idea of killing Pindleskin or whatever his name was 5 million times before I saw a gold item worth mentioning, only to probably be scammed out of it anyways.

I honestly don't see what the fuss and issue is, since they're giving us something we supposedly wanted for a long time. Then, then finally do give what a bunch of players asked for, and they get yelled at.

Quitting WoW because Diablo3 has a Real-Money AH is kinda stupid, IMO. Complaining about, and refusing to buy Diablo3 because you'll be charged a small fee for In-game to real money transactions is also kinda "meh", as lots of places charge you for similar transactions. Complaining about the real money AH itself in a non-MMORPG game is also something I just shake my head at. Nobody's forcing you to use real-money and if I recall correctly, you can tell what sort of funds the seller is going to receive for their goods, don't buy it if you don't want to give someone else real money.

You still have the choice to play the way you wish. Nobody is forcing you to participate in RMT.
#17 Dec 10 2011 at 7:21 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,764 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
RE: Criminy: They are charging you for directing the funds to PayPal because there's usually fees that need to be processed when you move cash around. Either they pay the fee, or you do. SOMEONE has to pay the fees, and if we the consumers don't like it, then we need to tell the banks and credit card companies to stop charging the stupid fees already. It is the same reason why a lot of vendors will not allow credit card purchases for less than $5. The fee makes it simply not profitable to do so.

RE: Everyone else: This is something a LOT of players have asked for on O-boards. They are implementing this because we (playerbase, collectively) asked for it. Numerous suggestions/inquiries/etc were made on O-boards asking for this sort of feature in WoW. They refused to do this to their flagship MMORPG, but they thought "Hmmm, we could make Diablo more Online, and then add an AH that allows people to do what they've been asking to do" and they went ahead and did it.

Don't like Diablo's Real-Money AH? You're not forced to use it -- you can buy and sell in pure in-game gold if you like. Heck, that's an improvement over Diablo2 which had no AH and you had a .00001% drop rate on anything worth talking about! I, for one, didn't like the idea of killing Pindleskin or whatever his name was 5 million times before I saw a gold item worth mentioning, only to probably be scammed out of it anyways.

I honestly don't see what the fuss and issue is, since they're giving us something we supposedly wanted for a long time. Then, then finally do give what a bunch of players asked for, and they get yelled at.

Quitting WoW because Diablo3 has a Real-Money AH is kinda stupid, IMO. Complaining about, and refusing to buy Diablo3 because you'll be charged a small fee for In-game to real money transactions is also kinda "meh", as lots of places charge you for similar transactions. Complaining about the real money AH itself in a non-MMORPG game is also something I just shake my head at. Nobody's forcing you to use real-money and if I recall correctly, you can tell what sort of funds the seller is going to receive for their goods, don't buy it if you don't want to give someone else real money.

You still have the choice to play the way you wish. Nobody is forcing you to participate in RMT.

How many hundreds, or hundreds of thousands of complaints do you think Blizzard gets over people being scammed by <insert Diablo II 3rd party auction site>? I'm willing to bet the number is astronomical, and there isn't anything Blizzard can do about it. By working with PayPal and setting up their own legit real-money AH, Blizzard can nip all the 3rd party real-money-for-loot sites in the bud.

As for the per-listing fee that Blizzard is charging, they already said there will be a limited number of free listing per day/week/month. The gold AH a small listing fee to discourage re-listing something 100 times and to provide an incentive to keep prices reasonable, else you may pay a listing fee a dozen times or more before the item sells.

Honestly, I think there are a lot of people that aren't happy with changes being made to WoW, which is fine, but blaming Blizzard for 'selling out' just because they're going in a different direction than what you want them to is ridiculous.
#18 Dec 11 2011 at 12:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
To be fair if you got Diablo III for free from the year subscription it's conceivable you could make enough to cover a portion of your WoW subscription from playing Diablo and pay very little for either game, assuming you're willing to farm stuff. Now, I have no idea what the Diablo III loot tables are like, how much Blizz will take as a cut on that AH, and what other incentives they're offering in the future, if that's even going to be possible, etc. etc.

In a way it feels a little like them testing the micro-transaction model a bit. Why not have people from your most popular game do that testing for you? It's a ready pool of testers who are going to be a little bored of WoW in a few months (if they aren't already).
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#19 Dec 11 2011 at 9:37 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,445 posts
MooMooKitty wrote:
This kind of thing has become common practice in the video game industry. You have Microsoft and Sony to thank for that with DLC. Blizzard has become as big as many of the mainstream console franchises, and frankly it's surprising that it took them this long to jump on board.

Edited, Dec 9th 2011 10:34pm by MooMooKitty



Even more to thank are the people who buy this stuff. If people didn't buy it they wouldn't still do it. I have never been a big fan of digital downloads. I mean there is some good such as an easier way for indie developers to distribute a game (Minecraft comes to mind). I don't have a problem when it saves on the overall cost and helps a small dev/company grow. I do have a problem with Digital Downloads from large companies that cost every bit as much as buying the game off the shelf of a store. Why would I want to pay $60 for a digital copy of the newest Call of Duty game when I can go buy it for the same cost in a local store? Now after I am tired of playing the game I can sell it, loan it to a friend, whatever. I know game companies hate for us to be able to do this but tough crap they have survived for decades using this format and they are just being greedy wanting to force us into buying digital downloads that we can't sell, trade, or return. Also with a hard copy I don't have to worry about not being able to play the game if my internet goes out and I want to play single player. Most of your Digital Downloads won't work if your not constantly connected to the internet.

I won't even go into the garbage they try to sell on PSN/Xbox live for DLC. Charging money for crap like a new outfit for the main character. This sort of stuff should just be included in the game to begin with. Just another way to milk people for more money.

____________________________
Hi
#20 Dec 11 2011 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
The Winged Guardian mount, look at the development of that mount it is absolutely amazing. T12 "Glory of" mount is a rehashed mount with its skin colour changed.


Rehashed legacy dungeons, non teir gear that looks exactly like teir, the list goes on and on. They are cutting corners on free content and putting their effort into extra services that generate additional revenue outside of the monthly subscription model. A lot of players aren't capable of communicating effectively about how they feel about this, or even necessarily tie it all together into one post. However the moment Blizzard changed their paradigm they lost the source behind their monolithic success.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#21 Dec 11 2011 at 11:17 AM Rating: Good
***
1,882 posts
bodhisattva wrote:
The Winged Guardian mount, look at the development of that mount it is absolutely amazing. T12 "Glory of" mount is a rehashed mount with its skin colour changed.


Rehashed legacy dungeons, non teir gear that looks exactly like teir, the list goes on and on. They are cutting corners on free content and putting their effort into extra services that generate additional revenue outside of the monthly subscription model. A lot of players aren't capable of communicating effectively about how they feel about this, or even necessarily tie it all together into one post. However the moment Blizzard changed their paradigm they lost the source behind their monolithic success.



And the rub is this: We pay $40 or 50 for a new expansion. So we're paying the same price everyone else pays for a new game. But it doesn't stop there. Now we end up spending $15 a month to continue to play it. There is absolutely no option for us to continue to play the game for that initial $40. So every month we're paying $15. In almost any other "Free to play" model that would include the premium services. That would be akin to a "gold membership". Yet with the new WoW, $15 a month is your basic subscription.

We're all paying an extra $180 a year (not adjusted for long duration purchases) to be treated like second rate customers. If you want the real, nice, well modeled, animated mounts/pets you have to pay more than your $180.

Putting that into perspective. Your subscription of $180 a year is enough to purchase 4 and a half A-list video games that you could play forever for free.

That's why people are upset that they are receiving half assed rewards for $180 a year.
#22 Dec 11 2011 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
19,369 posts
ekaterinodar wrote:
And the rub is this: We pay $40 or 50 for a new expansion. So we're paying the same price everyone else pays for a new game. But it doesn't stop there. Now we end up spending $15 a month to continue to play it. There is absolutely no option for us to continue to play the game for that initial $40. So every month we're paying $15. In almost any other "Free to play" model that would include the premium services. That would be akin to a "gold membership". Yet with the new WoW, $15 a month is your basic subscription.


I haven't played a lot of free to play games but from my experience WoW's 'basic' subscription has been on par with their gold membership. What's also funny is you quote the 'gold membership' when free to play games call it that in their business model and yet you don't quote Blizzard's subscription but straight out call it a basic subscription. You've got it backwards. Blizzard does not offer different tier subscriptions, so why call it that?



ekaterinodar wrote:

We're all paying an extra $180 a year (not adjusted for long duration purchases) to be treated like second rate customers. If you want the real, nice, well modeled, animated mounts/pets you have to pay more than your $180.


Uh, no. There are some really nicely modeled and animated items that you can achieve in-game. You're talking like vanity items are somehow better than in-game items. I've seen some very cool items and mounts obtained purely from gaming.


ekaterinodar wrote:

Putting that into perspective. Your subscription of $180 a year is enough to purchase 4 and a half A-list video games that you could play forever for free.


You could do a lot of different things with $180 a year. What each person decides to spend that on is their choice. Nobody is making anyone pay for one service over the other.


ekaterinodar wrote:
That's why people are upset that they are receiving half assed rewards for $180 a year.


No, that's not it either.


WoW is no longer the game for me, but it's not half-assed. I'll be playing Diablo 3 just for the gaming experience. I will not be buying items for real money. If I start to feel like it's affecting my gameplay, e.g. purchasable items are required to play, or the auctions get out of hand, then I will quit. I'll cash in my chips and move onto the next game.

I will continue to pay $180 or whatever amount of money as long as I feel I'm getting the experience I'm playing for. Blizzard may or may not be that company that receives my support as a customer. It may go to a few choice A-list video games a year. It may go to a free to play with or without a 'premium' subscription. It may go to a MMO. The choice is mine. I'll speak with my voice and my money. Whether I'm heard or not doesn't matter.



#23 Dec 11 2011 at 8:58 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,441 posts
ekaterinodar wrote:
And the rub is this: We pay $40 or 50 for a new expansion. So we're paying the same price everyone else pays for a new game. But it doesn't stop there. Now we end up spending $15 a month to continue to play it. There is absolutely no option for us to continue to play the game for that initial $40. So every month we're paying $15. In almost any other "Free to play" model that would include the premium services. That would be akin to a "gold membership". Yet with the new WoW, $15 a month is your basic subscription.


WoW has 99.9% uptime, and very little latency. Last few F2P games I tried, had a lot less uptime, a lot more lag, and the game itself was a lot lower quality.

Also, one can gear up and participate in endgame PvE and PvP without using real money.

From what I've heard, F2P games are F2P and supported by an company-run/supported RMT market. If you want to compete at the top level, you gotta open your wallet....

Quote:
We're all paying an extra $180 a year (not adjusted for long duration purchases) to be treated like second rate customers. If you want the real, nice, well modeled, animated mounts/pets you have to pay more than your $180.


There are only three "paid" mounts in the game: Tyrael's Charger, Guardian Cub, and the Sparkle Pony. The Sparkle Pony is ridiculed and laughed at, and people said that Tyrael's Charger is nothing but a re-skinned hipogryff mount with some low-quality wings attached to it. The guardian cub is the only mount that was decently well-done, but it has a downside -- the wings leave trails which make it undesirable to herb/mine with.

Quote:
Putting that into perspective. Your subscription of $180 a year is enough to purchase 4 and a half A-list video games that you could play forever for free.


You could likely play WoW forever. Those 4 A-list video games might, maybe, last you 40-50 hours each until you've done everything and stopped playing them. Unless, of course, one of those "A-List" games is an Elder Scrolls game. Then you might get 100-150 hours out of it.

Quote:
That's why people are upset that they are receiving half assed rewards for $180 a year.


Buying Games vs WoW:

Buying Games: Let's say every game gives you 100 hours of playtime (usually much less for most games). Let's say you game 20 hours a week (that's ~3 hours a day). There are 52 weeks in a year, which means you need roughly 1,040, we'll round that down to 1000 hours of gaming to keep you occupied. That's 10 games. Each game costs you roughly $50.

Total: $500.

NOTE: Let's not forget that there might not BE 10 games in a year worth buying. This is assuming that there are actually 10 games that you are interested in.

OR

You could play WoW for a year. You'd do the same 20 hours a week (which is very easy to do in WoW and not run out of things to do).

Total: $180.

Do the math.

Edited, Dec 11th 2011 10:01pm by Lyrailis
#24 Dec 11 2011 at 9:33 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,764 posts
ME2 and DA2 offered a lot of tiny DLC packages with less gameplay total than what you get in a single WoW content patch, so there's that too. The large $8~ DLC only added a single mission that you could blow through in about an hour (ME2). I haven't looked at the DLC for DA2, but I want to get Mark of the Assassin. I don't expect more than a couple hours out of it, and it's $10, or about 20 days of WoW.

Also, the average retail for a AAA title these days seems to be $60, not $50. That's 3 games or a year sub to WoW, and most of those don't have 100+ hours of gameplay like Skyrim. Even at 120 hours per game, that's the equivalent of playing WoW for 2 hours a night twice a week, and 3 on the weekend. If you play WoW more, or get less than 120 hours out of each new title, WoW comes out ahead.
#25 Dec 11 2011 at 10:43 PM Rating: Good
***
3,441 posts
AstarintheDruid wrote:
ME2 and DA2 offered a lot of tiny DLC packages with less gameplay total than what you get in a single WoW content patch, so there's that too. The large $8~ DLC only added a single mission that you could blow through in about an hour (ME2). I haven't looked at the DLC for DA2, but I want to get Mark of the Assassin. I don't expect more than a couple hours out of it, and it's $10, or about 20 days of WoW.

Also, the average retail for a AAA title these days seems to be $60, not $50. That's 3 games or a year sub to WoW, and most of those don't have 100+ hours of gameplay like Skyrim. Even at 120 hours per game, that's the equivalent of playing WoW for 2 hours a night twice a week, and 3 on the weekend. If you play WoW more, or get less than 120 hours out of each new title, WoW comes out ahead.


This is one of the reasons why I have all-but stopped playing console games.

I remember when a console J-RPG (Final Fantasy, et. al.) would take at least 40 hours if not 50-60 to "complete".

Complete, in quote marks, is when I've exhausted the game of every reasonable challenge.

The last J-RPG that I bought... well, okay, last two, were Final Fantasy 12 and Lost Odyssey. FF12 had 25 hours... twenty-five hours logged on the clock when I sent the last story boss packing (and he wasn't even all that hard). What was left for me to do in the game? Nothing, except for start a new game because I messed up getting the "best" weapon, and a bunch of stupidly overpowered mobs that would have taken hours of grinding to be able to kill.

After you do all of this you get... what... a little pat on the back and a weapon I believe it was? I just killed the most powerful thing in the game and I get a weapon to... use on what, exactly? Right.

So yeah, 25 hours and that was about it. And I paid $50 for that. That's $2 per hour. Well, okay, we'll say $1 per hour if you count up time not counted on the clock (dying and reloading) but still.

Lost Odyssey? I played a little of it and it just never really... grabbed me.

Haven't bought a J-RPG since, and console games... well, I keep my eye open for Metroid and Zelda titles (need to get Skyward Sword and that little wiimote attachment here soon) but otherwise? I won't touch a console game because of this stuff.

Computer games are starting to go the same route, I fear. Skyrim (like all other Elder Scrolls games) are the exception to the rule.

Without WoW, I would be one bored and quite insane (from boredom) person, or a very poor one.

WoW has kept me occupied and sane for years and I'm thankful to see it still going strong. Getting Diablo3 for Free is just freaking awesome. Another game I can play on the side, who knows, maybe I could play WoW for Free by selling stuff on the AH and accruing BNET Balance points (and using those to buy WoW time).

So that $180 a year?

Heck, that might be $0 a year (or a lot less than $180).

Meanwhile, "A-List Games" continue to be $500-600 a year.
#26 Dec 11 2011 at 10:48 PM Rating: Good
I'll take a shorter good game over a longer one filled with padding any day. Skyward Sword is relatively short (forgot to check logged time before I started a Hero Mode run) but what is has is extremely polished. Most games advertising "100 hours of gameplay" have 75 of that running through interchangable locations or grinding levels to keep up.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 446 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (446)