StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

​

Before anyone panics, let's clear this up. Blizzard does not plan to have any type of subscription service for StarCraft 2 (or Battle.net) in the United States. However, according to a recent press release, Blizzard Entertainment is offering StarCraft 2 as a subscription-based sale. Players in "developing" countries can purchase the game for a suggested retail price of $20-30 which would allow them six months of access to the game. If they wanted further access, they would need to pay additional costs, similar to a subscription.

According to international sources this pricing will also occur in Russia and eastern Europe but those countries have not been confirmed. Players would still have the option of purchasing the full retail version (priced at USD $59.99) directly from Blizzard Entertainment via Battle.net. They would then have unlimited access to the game. Again, this subscription service will not be available to players in the U.S. Countries where the service is confirmed to be in play are Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Brazil.

According to Blizzard CEO Mike Morhaime the idea was to grant access to players with less disposable income who might not play the game long term.

One of our design goals for StarCraft II was to make it accessible to a wide range of players, from beginners to veterans. The same is true with regard to our pricing options -- we want to make sure players have the flexibility to experience the game according to their own preferences and play style.

Whatever their aim, we see this as a large-scale focus group to determine interest in subscription-based RTS titles. Clearly Blizzard has enjoyed huge success with their subscription based MMORPG World of WarCraft. It appears they might also attempt something like this down the road for the StarCraft series.

Release Date Update

In other news, according to StarCraft2.com, Blizzard has slightly inched their official release date. The site is now stating July 27th, 2010 as the official release. Only a 24 hour improvement, but we'll take what we can get!


Source: Blizzard

 

Oh, sure, they pretend to be caring about developing countries... but how can that be true when they don't have LAN support? Newsflash, people in 3rd world countries don't have a proper internet infrastructure, no matter what special deals you cut them.

But Yay! for the 24 hr release date improvement

 

To me this is very shortsited of Blizzard. If what JonX says (his part of the article not the quotes) is true then:

Blizzard just need to look at SC1 to see this is a bad idea. Sure Blizzard want to get more people who do not play SC2 in the long term. But that goes against why most people are buying SC2. They are buying it cause SC1 was still payed and supported and good for 10 years. And they hope SC2 will be the same. And poor people don't like paying for disposable things. As SC2 for 6 months would be disposable. Poor people like paying for something that will last through the ages. So they know it'll always be there and not have to pay money they do not have to keep replacing or subscribing to something all the time.

And with this mind set the poor people will look at SC2 and think a portential 10 years of gaming in it for $60 (I think that's the US price). So that's only $6 a year for 10 years. Sure it's $60 upfront but $6 a year is pretty good value for money gaming. And if Blizzard charge say htpothetically $20 per 6 months as JonX says them that is $40 a year so in 1 and a half years they'd have paid for the game in full $60. Sure it's not an upfront $60 but still.

And if Blizzard are trying to market the game in developing countries as "who might not play the game long term" as JonX says then Blizzard have lost the plot. SC2 I would assume is everything but a game with a short lifespan. And if Blizzard try to promote it this way it might just be taken as "hey Blizzard are trying to say SC2 won't last as long or be as epic as SC1". Sure that might not be right but that's how these poor people could take it. And would hurt Blizzard's reputation in those nations.

I would much rather have SC2 at $20 a year for 4 years (for standard edition) then you own it and play for free from then on. Sure $20 more but that the price you pay for not paying the ful $60 upfront. What Blizzard's pricing scheme is assumed to be for these nations is just ludicrous. I don't like it.

SC2 should be an epic game that till last for many many years of quality fun for many people. All the effort put into the map editor for the custom map/hacking community is proof of this.

And lastly, this thing does not talk about the SC2 expansions. How will they factor into this subscription scheme. Because when the expansions come out you'll practically need them to play multiplayer on Battle.net. Sure Blizzard will have the ability to make non-expansion games but no one will play them anymore one the expansions are out.

Blizzard really ned to rethink this strategy. Really think it a lot. And try to understand what poor people in developing nations really want. And how they like to and can afford to pay for things. It is a novel idea I will admit this. But one that really is no good in it's current form.

 

Err Ayanami i don't see where they say they are "caring" for developing nations i think its more a matter of cracking the puzzle in the entertainment industry of how to actually profit off developing nations+Russia etc instead of the whole country pirating everything.

And the8thark i doubt many people from these countries or even the majority of consumers planning on buying SC2 are only buying it because of a perception that this game will have years of support. People buy games all the time they know they won't be playing for years on end. Of course blizz will provide the hardcore SC fan base with years of updates and support and expansions. But from what i see everything at release is easily worth the price tag.

I would be fearful of forking out 60USD if i was poorer since quite often i only play games for a month or so, SC2 will hopefully be different BUT it is the same price as basically any other game and from someone who isn't a fanatic like all of us seems like any other game thus this pricing method may work.

It'll be interesting to see

 

This idea is awesome.

Really, Blizzard are a bunch of geniouses

 

Just remember SC2 does not cost $60 US in other countries. Australia for example it costs $100 Australian (standard edition) which is $90.64US dollars at today's exchange rates. So the prices in other countries for the full buy it now price could be very different to $60US.

 

Well by that same measure the subscription would probally be proportionately cheaper/ more expensive than 20-30 USD...same same

 

Would like to hear what happens after the 6 months. Do you then have to pay the difference for it, kinda like i payed demo?
Or do you have to pay 20(I dont have the dollar sign om my comp, sry) for every 6 months? That is a bad deal, i think.

 

Damnit!!!! July 27th is my final exam date while July 28th is the first day out of summer school.

WHY GOD??? WHY?????

 

What time is the exam? Can you walk to the store after the exam? That's sure be a nice present for yourself after the exam.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if gaming became arcade style, and in SC3 we have to pay a dollar for each hour of online play. (The game will be free and will be hosted on a very high speed extranet). Just theory. The more you play the more you pay. Not what I and many others would want but it is definitely a distinct possiblity.

 

I'm sure if that happened there would be a big rise in the private server sector to aviod this fee.

 

I'm a firm believer in paying for unlimited.

 

Well it looks like Blizzard are not giving you a choice JonX . Unless you want to move to Mexico or Russia.

 

if they have enough money to make a rig to run sc2 on high or even medium settings or even lose settings in my case..

wouldnt they be able just to pay for the whole game...

 

i thnk blizzard make it confussing

 

Not necessarily.

I work in an electronics store, and prolly 2-3 times a week, I have some Mexidude buying a laptop to send back to his family. Usually they're midrange ones (3Gb RAM, 1.8-2.0x2, Intel vid card), but a few times a month, it's one of the nicer ones with like i3's in them.

Then, for desktops, I'd imagine you've got either the grey market or Chinese knock-off brand parts.

I wonder if there's going to be something like IP detection for the subscription based services? IE, you have a relative buy the game in the US cause it's cheaper wif the exchange, but you live in a 'developing country'....Is it a different version of the game, or is it locked down through b.net?

 

I second your belief. If I can afford to pay for the full game at once, I want to play it indefinitely at no additional cost. Starcraft has become legendary as an RTS game, not a monthly-subscribed MMORPG like WoW. I highly doubt SC2 would benefit from the long-term success of SC if it were turned into a worldwide subscription-based MMO. I mean, there's a lot of people (whom I have witnessed in my developing homeland) are still playing DotA on Warcraft III simply because they can save money to afford for a 1-time payment of that game but not WoW monthly fees (not even mentioning pirated game copies). Besides, there are now heaps of free or low-cost MMORPGs out there, some of them are even home-grown games which no 'Western' gamers would ever hear of, but believe me they are more popular than Blizzard games. I do not oppose to Blizzard's sort-of "installment plan" for developing nations, however.

 

No "home grown" game is more popular than Blizzard's games. That's just simple logic.

Also, the subscription model is for developing and high-piracy countries. If you do not live in one of these, for **** sake, stop worrying about it.

 

No sir! I do not come from the US to call Blizzard games "home-grown". I grew up in a developing nation, and I have only left it for 3 years to seek the difference of the "developed" world, so I think I understand the situation.