 |
|
Edge Online interviewed Blizzard PR Bob Colayco at BlizzCon. One of the questions aimed for a statement confirming if Battle.net 2.0 would have some monthly fee for gameplay. It’s not been confirmed, nor is official at this point. Colayco said they are following the same philosophy model with World of Warcraft when it comes to varying business models in each region.
That was somewhat vague. Whatever happened with “yes” or “no” simple answers? What do you think? Paid subscription fee would be ok with you for multiplayer? A Hellgate: London type of model with a free gameplay aspect, plus a paid subscription fee for extra bonuses? or a fee for tournaments only? I would vote for tournaments fee. After all the prizes go up to $50,000+. If they can pay that much for prizes, then its participants or the tournament committee could afford it. Share your comments.
 Blizzard Quote: (Source) |
||
| Edge: There are also a couple other things floating around from BlizzCon. Paying for extra services on Battle.net—what’s the story with that?
Colayco: We haven’t talked about specifics with Battle.net’s business model. Nothing is finalized. All I can say is that once we figure out and develop what it is, we’re going to look at it and come up for something that makes sense from a business perspective. It could be anything, and it could also vary a lot from region to region. We’ll take into account what the game is delivering, what’s the right value proposition, what’s worth it to players. And what are players expectations in different regions, because they’re different things. We follow the same philosophy with World of Warcraft. |
||
I sincerely hope they go against a paid subscription model for online multiplayer, especially if they are considering removing the LAN component (like D3).
In all honestly: it’s very unlikely. We know there’s a high chance D3 won’t have any LAN capabilities, and I just can’t see the devs forcing the casual user to pay for Battle.net 2.0 just to play co-op with the family. It’s also been mentioned in the past that Battle.net advertising could return.
Which leads us to the second possibility: the Hellgate schema. This worked (or didn’t work, depending how you look at it 
) for Hellgate because the devs could offer exclusive content to the players, such as elite items and new areas. I’m not sure how this would translate to an RTS, unless it’s frivolous things such as larger friends list and/or selectable channel avatars.
Right now, I’m wishing for a simple “yes” or “no” answer as well.
The hellgate model didn’t work, no matter how you look at it 
Their main problem with the model was resources so it might work for Blizzard but I wouldn’t like it one bit if they choose to do so.
The removal of LAN (tcp/ip) is sad any way you put it. Its not that hard to implement so its just because they don’t want us to have that option if they decide to do so.
I can imagine paying tournament subscription fees though (example).
The hellgate model didn’t work, no matter how you look at it Their main problem with the model was resources so it might work for Blizzard but I wouldn’t like it one bit if they choose to do so.
The removal of LAN (tcp/ip) is sad any way you put it. Its not that hard to implement so its just because they don’t want us to have that option if they decide to do so.
I can imagine paying tournament subscription fees though (example).
if i have to pay for Bnet… i will flip sh!t. it’s that simple. and many others would do the same.
if i have to pay for Bnet… i will flip sh!t. it’s that simple. and many others would do the same.
Yeah. I wouldn’t be happy about that either, but we had this discussion before. I think paying to create a league, and I mean paying a relatively small sum, or at least transactions related to leagues/tourneys might be the thing.
Or, ingame advertisement. They have done it in Korea. By that I mean ingame graphic changes in pro gaming mainly. Sigaty said in one of my older interviews with him that they would not have ingame ads though, other than fake ones, to buy new marine suits, or jet pack upgrades to Marauders. Like lore-ish “ads”.
I would strongly advice them not to charge for co-op play on Bnet. I would agree with tourneys but Co-op play is just a way for people to have fun with his friends. I cannot see this done for D3 either, free MP is very attractive.
What additional content can be given to people. I would not pay for a bigger friend list, avatars, etc…they would have to offer something really attractive and since they have already announced expansion packs…I cannot foresee what.
Guess the only choice we really have now is to wait…patience…
I would strongly advice them not to charge for co-op play on Bnet. I would agree with tourneys but Co-op play is just a way for people to have fun with his friends. I cannot see this done for D3 either, free MP is very attractive.
What additional content can be given to people. I would not pay for a bigger friend list, avatars, etc…they would have to offer something really attractive and since they have already announced expansion packs…I cannot foresee what.
Guess the only choice we really have now is to wait…patience…
Oh get over it already…
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/10/13/blizzcon-2008-rob-pardo-talks-battle-net-monetizing/
- StarCraft Videos |
Network sites: IncGamers.com | World of Warcraft | WoWUI | Guild Wars | Warcraft 3 | Diablo 3I | Diablo Wiki | Hellgate: London | StarCraft 2 |
| Copyright © IncGamers Ltd. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy |
I sincerely hope they go against a paid subscription model for online multiplayer, especially if they are considering removing the LAN component (like D3).
In all honestly: it’s very unlikely. We know there’s a high chance D3 won’t have any LAN capabilities, and I just can’t see the devs forcing the casual user to pay for Battle.net 2.0 just to play co-op with the family. It’s also been mentioned in the past that Battle.net advertising could return.
Which leads us to the second possibility: the Hellgate schema. This worked (or didn’t work, depending how you look at it
) for Hellgate because the devs could offer exclusive content to the players, such as elite items and new areas. I’m not sure how this would translate to an RTS, unless it’s frivolous things such as larger friends list and/or selectable channel avatars.
Right now, I’m wishing for a simple “yes” or “no” answer as well.