Micro-transaction model a possibility for WoW
by Griffin McElroy 
{ Jul 5th 2009 at 1:00PM } 
Don't get your dander up too fast -- Chilton merely said, "I certainly think it's possible that we could do some kind of micro-transaction stuff," later adding that, "whether we ever shift to a free-to-play model is really too hard to say at this point." It's unlikely they'll make the switch as long as the game continues to be a veritable assembly line for giant bags of money, however. What do you guys think? Would you support a transaction-based WoW?
_thumbnail.jpg "Lunar: Silver Star Harmony")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Demeter @ Jul 5th 2009 1:14PM
Meh, it'll just fill the game with more and more people whose dumbasses, resulting in the need for more realms which need to be supported and I doubt they can do that with microtransactions.
THE WICKER MAN (BWF) (GT: Dalek Prime) @ Jul 5th 2009 1:27PM
"Meh, it'll just fill the game with more and more people whose dumbasses, "
IRONY.
MystileArmor @ Jul 5th 2009 1:38PM
Yeah you might just want to proofread before you call someone a dumbass.
Jakka (Dead Space Face Defence Force!) @ Jul 5th 2009 2:44PM
On one hand 12,000,000 x 15 = Blizzard can fucking afford to if they want to. On the other hand it wouldn't be very profitable or anything unless they heavily crippled the game to the point where it screamed 'Upgrade for $15 a month!!!' every five seconds.
Demeter @ Jul 5th 2009 3:08PM
Why, thank you! I would have never guessed that having a curseword and a typo in the same sentence justified an insult, but hey, I know that now, don't I!
FYI, I wasn't referring to all of WoW's subscribers, but the masses of barely sentient beings coming from all of free-to-play (aka Korean Grindfest) MMOs that will flood the realms.
Is it more clear now?
Girugamuk (Moptimus Slimed) @ Jul 5th 2009 3:53PM
"but the masses of barely sentient beings coming from all.... Grindfest MMOs that will flood the realms."
delicious Ironing
MystileArmor @ Jul 5th 2009 3:58PM
I'm still looking for the part where someone insulted you.. cause I don't see it.
I'll put one in this post so I can stop looking. Better make it a good one so we all won't miss it.
FUCKTARD
ArchiGamer @ Jul 5th 2009 4:03PM
Advice=/=Insult.
Then again, you'd probably think this is also an insult so might as well make it one.
FUCKING IDIOT!!
MystileArmor @ Jul 5th 2009 1:13PM
Made me think of that video of the kid that flips out when his subscription got cancelled.
Foetoid @ Jul 5th 2009 10:45PM
Oh man, get me a link plz!
MystileArmor @ Jul 6th 2009 9:58AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YersIyzsOpc
There you go
Oh and watch this one for extra laughs after you've watched the original:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt5xx9fWOek
sane182 @ Jul 5th 2009 1:14PM
Ummm, i understood 3 words in that post!
Levi @ Jul 5th 2009 1:18PM
They'll never lose the subscription model... there are millions of WoW players, multiply that by $15, they are bringing in a shit ton of money from subscriptions. The only way they'll allow a microtransaction model as an alternative to subscription is if it would end up being more expensive for regular players.
Clinton @ Jul 5th 2009 1:20PM
that would be retarded for them
Cooper @ Jul 5th 2009 1:21PM
I doubt they will ever full on transition, maybe let you play for free as well though and have limited abilities and stuff and at a certain point you will have to pay.
-Donuts
Hyamzy @ Jul 5th 2009 1:22PM
I'll probably reinstall it and play in a little but the chances are slim seeming they are greedy rich fucks.
ArchiGamer @ Jul 5th 2009 1:23PM
The only time I found WOW interesting was on South Park.
Ashitaka @ Jul 5th 2009 2:01PM
Agreed. Perhaps Joystiq feels the same way and that's why the picture included in the article is from South Park :P
Damian @ Jul 5th 2009 9:22PM
I would rather have a good story, and fun gameplay, than wow.
Dom Sacco @ Jul 5th 2009 1:27PM
Flame me if I'm the only one thinking this, but what exactly is a "micro-transaction model?"
Pay per play rather than pay per month? i.e. like X-box live arcade downloads?
THE WICKER MAN (BWF) (GT: Dalek Prime) @ Jul 5th 2009 1:33PM
Horse armor. XBLA is not pay to play beyond the initial purchase of an arcade game.
Jonah Penne @ Jul 5th 2009 1:33PM
A micro-transaction model is when you play for free but have to pay for access to extra stuff. You'd have to pay real money to buy high-level weapons or something like that.
[tre] @ Jul 5th 2009 1:35PM
That is right.
sushibot12 @ Jul 5th 2009 1:37PM
No, its more like, general quests and storyline are free. Basic items are free. You would be paying for premium content, such as shiny looking gear, etc. You would have access to more content with premium content subscription. Here is an example, in Mabinogi, basic play is free, with premium, you get a bank that holds twice as much stuff, you get free items, and free rez daily. Hope that answers your question.
The Baron @ Jul 5th 2009 4:32PM
Even that's not microtransactions - that's an optional subscription.
Microtransactions are Battlefield: Heroes. It's free, but you only get a couple of basic designs for your character. If you want to make him look badass, you fork over a few quid.
In things like traditional MMOs, where putting hard work into earning epic gear is prized and the basis of the game, offering noobs with RL money a method to obtain them free is usually seen as a bad thing, because it upsets the in-game economy and undermines the work put in by 'honest' players. I mean you'd be pissed off if anyone could just buy themselves the best gear in the game, without any skill required, when it's supposed to be a reward for somebody who's risen to the hardest challenges the game has to offer.
Otis @ Jul 5th 2009 1:28PM
That'd be interesting, and I'd probably play it again for a tiny bit just for the hell of it.
BUT!
I won't really care until it, or any other MMO, gets a god damned "Fun" patch.
TwistedBishop @ Jul 5th 2009 1:38PM
That quote sounds more like they're planning to put in microtransactions alongside the standard subscription fee.
The Baron @ Jul 5th 2009 4:19PM
WoW? Move to a free to play model? I'm not sure the shareholders would be so happy with that.
Maybe if they made it so that you could have a free account that only went up to 60 and wouldn't allow you to put in Burning Crusade and WotLK. That way there'd still be people playing Classic content (it's empty these days), and the lack of cool shit compared to all the 80's riding around would give people an incentive to level up.
Jonny @ Jul 5th 2009 1:43PM
I could see them doing this for gold/levels for alts/badges.
It'll fuck the economy in the game yes, but it will probably put most of the farmers/account hackers out of business.
Snowblind @ Jul 5th 2009 1:50PM
Microtransctions PLUS subscription fee's is terrible, I can't think of any way a game developer can screw over their customers anymore. But having microtransactions as an alternative is a great idea, I think.
But it needs to be handeld well, you should't simply be able to purchase high-end content right off the bat, you should only be paying for access to said content..
That's the way I'd like to see Old Republic work, I'm not fond of paying monthly for a game I'll only ocassionally play.. but paying for DLC, like extra packs that add in new planets, quests, items, etc would be great. I'm sure they'd make just as much money off it, but the players have the advantage of only paying if/when we want more content.
Jakka (DSG Defence Force!) @ Jul 5th 2009 2:54PM
Don't you already pay to switch realms and...races I think?
That's micro-transaction in a subscribe-based game already.
Snowblind @ Jul 5th 2009 3:15PM
I believe they charge for things like that and renaming characters, etc, which is bad enough, but at least they're not charging for actual content. Although considering how much you pay, I don't see why expansions aren't free as well.
lotrfish @ Jul 5th 2009 3:18PM
Guild Wars?
Girugamuk (Moptimus Slimed) @ Jul 5th 2009 3:55PM
pay to change servers, gender, and soon factions
ArchiGamer @ Jul 5th 2009 4:14PM
And soon you will pay for how you want pay for everything.
Gibbeynater @ Jul 5th 2009 2:13PM
I quit WoW because I couldn't afford the monthly fee... if they come out with a free-to-play model, I will GLADLY return to the game. Go for it Blizzard.
tmacairjordan87 @ Jul 5th 2009 2:22PM
They make a billion dollars a year from subscriptions alone, and are merged with Activision.
Not. Happening.
Cheesus(Crust) @ Jul 5th 2009 2:42PM
one billion nine hundred eighty million to be exact
oxzid @ Jul 5th 2009 2:36PM
"What do you guys think? Would you support a transaction-based WoW?"
F**k No.
Snowblind @ Jul 5th 2009 3:17PM
I never understood this attitude? What is it you have to gain by paying monthly, rather than simply paying every time you want new content?
DONT LIKE THIS @ Jul 6th 2009 3:25PM
I usually think of it this way:
Do you go see a movie (in theaters) once a month, or something of similiar value (dinner, mini-golf, bowling) ?
1) No - don't pay for WoW
2) Yes - the average ticket (in MA) is $11USD, so for 2 hours of entertainment, you pay $5,50. For $15, you get an unlimited amount of game play, and are not forced to listen to the 17 year olds who think they're cool by keeping their cell phones on, yelling at the screen, and talking during the movie.
If you want a game with amazing replay value, I'm sorry to say, WoW is the best option.
It's all relative, if you play for 15 hours in a month, then it really is worth the entertainment value.
spirit1969 @ Jul 5th 2009 2:42PM
Cannot see them abandoning the monthly fee unless they did both. I could see this ending up being more expensive seeing has they have numerous other ways to take your money already that have nothing to do with the monthly fee. Blizzard trying an additional way to get more money on top of subscription and between expansions? I could see it happening.
Tony Montana @ Jul 5th 2009 4:50PM
They could do a two-tier model to let people dive in with micro-transactions.
It'd probably turn a lot of people on the micro transactions model onto the game without micro-transactions because WoW is just simply e-crack once you get addicted to it you'll be spending a lot more through micro transactions than you would with a one off payment.
With the amount of gameplay hours you can pour in a month into WoW the 15 dollar fee is not a rip off in any sense of the word compared to your average 10 hour 60 dollar romp but thats a barrier you have to cross to see and thats where a lot of hesitation exists.
With over 260 million online gamers on the PC WoW is far from at its peak.
MalkavianLogic @ Jul 5th 2009 3:11PM
I think Blizz understands that WoW will eventually die down, and in that case they'll be ready to shift it into f2p with micro transactions mode. They'll release their new mmo, most of the people will jump to either that or another shiney mmo, WoW's subscriber base will look like EQ1 and in a year or so after that Blizz will shift it to F2P since they'll have another subscription mmo they're developing for going full steam.
opifex @ Jul 5th 2009 3:25PM
Micro-Transaction on WoW = Fail.
I will never support that, it can cause sooo much unnecessary shit.
Xi80r6 @ Jul 5th 2009 3:28PM
No.
Goji54 @ Jul 5th 2009 3:29PM
Would I play it if it had Micro-Transactions? No. That is all.
Falcon6 @ Jul 5th 2009 4:30PM
The inherent problem I could see here is the idea that this would benefit them more than the $15 a month deal.
Look at it like this: There is a reason we have so many people playing WoW and paying for it. The content seems to make the $15 a worthy investment. Honestly, there are games out there for $60 I'd get done with in 12 hours, when there's WoW where I can get a whole lot more content out of it for only $15 a month. It's a very nice investment when I think of it in those terms.
With micro-transactions, it can create some difficulty. $15 a month is one thing, but having to pay $10 to go to each new raid instance can be a bit hallowing. And even worse would be paying $15 for a complete tier set instead of working on it through the raid instance. Sure, it would net some revenue, but the best player isn't always the richest. It would create an air of unfair advantages.
And adding micro-transactions to the $15 a month fee? Ehh...already, they have $25 for server transfers, around the same amount for gender transfers, and now they're planning a faction switch service.
All I know is, if they do think about that model, I hope they really figure out what they'd do with it to make sure people aren't given unfair advantage or make it so the basic content is always given to people. I don't want to pay $10 extra dollars to go into Icecrown, and I don't want to fall behind while everyone else is rolling with T9 gear without even working for it.
A better idea for these micro-transactions would be a non-combat pet, or a special mount, or a vanity set. It would be fantastic if the only thing I'm missing would be a murloc graphic tabard.
....
A murloc graphic tabard?! *buys*
The Dark Wayne @ Jul 5th 2009 4:40PM
Blizzard does a lot of things that upset their playerbase, but i dont think they'd be stupid enough to make it for people to just buy raid gear.
MalkavianLogic @ Jul 5th 2009 4:47PM
I agree, I don't think they'll micro-transaction gear. Possibly something to level faster and unlock content that subscribers get for free, I'm sure they'll refine what Turbine's doing if WoW ever goes microtransaction, because I don't think Blizz is ballsy enough to throw microtransaction while the game is still in subscription mode only. In any case, it's easy to upset a player base of millions; can't please everyone. But Blizzard didn't make their cash by being stupid and unresponsive to what the majority of their players want, and I don't think they'll start anytime soon.