Figured I clear some things up after seeing some discussion on the topic during DPL last night.First, the quote that scared everyone.
"We are going to monetize features so that we get to make them," said Wilson. "We kind of have to."
Notice that keyword. Features. Now, let's look at a quote from Rob Pardo on clarifying things Jay Wilson said.
With Battle.Net we're definitely looking at possible different features that we might be able to do for additional money. We're not talking about Hellgate or anything like that. We're not going to tack things on. I think World of Warcraft is a great example to look at. We charge people if they want to switch servers or if they want name changes, things that aren't core to the game experience, they're really just optional things that some people want. It takes us some development work to do it, so it makes sense to charge for it. We would never do something like say to get the full game experience, you'll have to pay extra.
I bolded the important part. Server and name changes are monetized features, like having your Gamertag changed on XBL. Are they important to the game experience? Aside from RP servers, no.So now we know that, at the very least, Blizzard is looking at adding monetized, non-essential features to the new Battle.net, just as Jay Wilson had said.But no, that doesn't remove the chance of a subscription model also being tacked on, and the fact that they referenced WoW is scary. But then Pardo goes on further about Diablo III.
We're definitely not looking at turning Diablo into a subscription based game. It's clearly not an MMO, so it's not appropriate to do a business model like that.
Now, put two and two together. Diablo III, the most likely candidate for a subscription model, isn't getting one. Blizzard hasn't given a quote regarding StarCraft 2 subscriptions, but I think it's safe to say that they won't be asking people to pay $15 a month to play an RTS game online.Take that for what you will, but to me it seems pretty obvious that Blizzard is looking to add monetized, non-essential features to Battle.net (which makes sense given the crazy popularity these games will get in Asia, a market consumed in the micro transaction model), but is not looking at charging people to actually go online with Diablo III or StarCraft II.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Let's clarify the whole Blizzard and Battle.net subscription thing
11 years 1 month ago #346953