StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

DeckardLee · May 16, 2010

Not sure I understand what you're saying but I'm pretty sure you misunderstood me.

BreadBucket · May 24, 2010

the8thark said: ↑

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.
Click to expand...

Because blizzard doesn't spend any money in marketing, to like figure these kinds of things out.

MPower · May 24, 2010

I will simply sell starcraft if this happens.
I refuse to Pay to Play for RTS. Sure WoW was worth it for the 2 casual months I played but never again. Blizzard is a greedy, greedy corp. For the money they are getting from WoW you would think they would provide better service.
Took my friend 4 days to get his info changed(credit card) 4 days on hold....

Log in or Sign up

StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

Discussion in 'General StarCraft 2 Discussion' started by MeisterX, May 10, 2010.

DeckardLee Guest

BreadBucket New Member

MPower New Member

Log in or Sign up

StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

StarCraft 2 Subscriptions; Release Date Update

Discussion in 'General StarCraft 2 Discussion' started by MeisterX, May 10, 2010.

DeckardLee Guest

BreadBucket New Member

MPower New Member

Useful Searches