Monetization of Battlenet (article inside)

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/104/1044979p1.html

Quote:

---

It's definitely an aspiration that we see potential in, particularly as we look at different business models to monetize the online gameplay. There's good knowledge exchange happening between the Blizzard folks and our online guys.

We have great experience also on Call of Duty with the success we had on Xbox Live and PlayStation Network. A lot of that knowledge is getting actually built into the Battle.Net platform and the design of that. I think it's been mutually beneficial, and you should expect us to test and ultimately launch additional online monetization models of some of some of our biggest franchises like Call of Duty.

Our gamers are telling us there's lots of services and innovation they would like to see that they're not getting yet. From what we see so far, additional content, as well as all the services Blizzard is offering, is that there is demand from the core gamers to pay up for that.

---

---

In short, the people behind the IWnet MW:2 shitstorm are now collaborating with the development of battle.net, with the intent on creating additional ways B-net2 can be monetized. Yes, The same people behind a 75 ms online play increase from its predecessor, no ability to make custom user created content, no dedicated servers, relying only on p2p, 48 less supported players in one game, and no ability to kick hackers out of your games.



Just beyond the horizon

Lan capabilities unlocked for 10$ USD. Not just to play demagogue, but look at this logically.

-Private server support dropped without any reasonable explanation

-Private server support possibly returned in form of dlc.

----

-Lan support dropped without any reasonable explanation

-???? (guess)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

I know it has. People have been predicting this trend for a while. Thats why its funny when people think this is where microtransactions will end.

---

Microtransactions trend -> low product quality-to-price ratio.

IWnet needs to me dragged out back and shot. they destroy all that is unique to pc gaming.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/maps/...onusmaps.shtml

remember these pages of pages of quality blizzard made content, not to mention a full fledged bonus RPG campaign released for absolutely nothing?

expect the SC2 versions to cost .99$ each.

I (hereby known as Party A) do not condone the following. Should anyone act upon the information I am about to supply, I hereby have no foreknowledge of it. Clicking on the link means that the user (Hereby known as Party B) agrees that I did not coerce, encourage, or inspire any action, legal or illegal. As far as I can tell, the above makes me ironclad in a court of law...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_killing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quirel

I (hereby known as Party A) do not condone the following. Should anyone act upon the information I am about to supply, I hereby have no foreknowledge of it. Clicking on the link means that the user (Hereby known as Party B) agrees that I did not coerce, encourage, or inspire any action, legal or illegal. As far as I can tell, the above makes me ironclad in a court of law...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_killing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide

---

fatwa?

?

too soon?

Well, I got the sniper, but I'm missing someone who can pull the trigger for me... My hands need power to pull it... if you all understand...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newcomplex

fatwa?

?

too soon?

---

A fatwa is simply an Islamic ruling. It can be used for anything. It's probably not supposed to be used for murder, but clearly it has been used for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kimera757

A fatwa is simply an Islamic ruling. It can be used for anything. It's probably not supposed to be used for murder, but clearly it has been used for that.

---

you're probably right.

This is what I get for watching cable news.

This is way to much speculation to be drawing such large conclusions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamshank

This is way to much speculation to be drawing such large conclusions.

---

Agreed. Looks like this could be a source of internet backdraft.

I wonder (speculation alert!!!) if Blizzard went to another company for help due to, you know, the whole battle.net 2.0 taking way too long to develop thing.

Quote:

---

Microtransactions trend -> low product quality-to-price ratio.

---

Considering that the quality-to-price ratio on previously free things was infinity, it's kinda hard for charging for something that might have previously been free to not be lowering the ratio down from infinity.

Quote:

---

remember these pages of pages of quality blizzard made content, not to mention a full fledged bonus RPG campaign released for absolutely nothing?

expect the SC2 versions to cost .99$ each.

---

The industry is growing up. That means game developers have families. And that means that they're not going to be spending 16 hour workdays making random crap that gets given away for free. They don't have the time for that.

You buy the game, you get the game; that's the deal. If they want to take the time and effort to add new content to the game, you buy that too. Or not, if you don't feel it's worth the asking price.

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, the above makes me ironclad in a court of law...

---

Which shows that your knowledge of courts of law doesn't even meet the Boston Legal standard.

No, that doesn't do crap for you in a court of law. Any jury will see through the "I'm not saying X, I'm just saying," BS a mile away.

And seriously, IT IS JUST A VIDEOGAME! If you don't like what they're charging you, DON'T BUY IT!

I mean seriously, is anyone in the PC gaming community an actual adult?

This is pretty poor speculation at best, just because Blizzard is looking around for ways to make B.net 2 better doesn't meant hey are going to companies and taking everything that sucked and using it, which sounds just like what someone is saying. Your looking at it too pessimistically, I'm very sure Blizzard wouldn't take ideas like that, that are so obviously wrong and cheap. They have said many times that they wouldn't make you pay extra for more content other than expansions, the only thing you will have to pay for is bonus things that do not directly effect the game, ie name changing, rank clearing etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

Considering that the quality-to-price ratio on previously free things was infinity, it's kinda hard for charging for something that might have previously been free to not be lowering the ratio down from infinity.

---

Previously the price was 20 dollars for a game and 10 years of continued support.

You tell me if thats changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supersonic

They have said many times that they wouldn't make you pay extra for more content other than expansions,

---

http://www.worldofraids.com/images/n...textured-s.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

http://www.worldofraids.com/images/n...textured-s.jpg

---

Tho, this is not extended content of WoW since it doesn't help or give any kind of gameplay upgrade to the player, this is really a gift people can buy if they cant go to Blizzcon and get their "super" pet.

Still, I do not agree with these stupid techniques Blizzard are making to get more money from their already addicted players.

I take all these Battle.net news/discussion with a grain of salt. Because, today, I don't see myself as a Blizzard addict. And in the end, if Blizzard force me to pay to play, I will still have the choice to NOT play. That is it.

If you are feeling screwed because you feel you will have to pay any battle.net fee, than you need to take a break from Blizzard.

On a final note : Never forget guys, we are the money here, if you don't agree with Blizzard about having to pay for any kind of DLC. Just DONT buy it. They probably won't make it free, because there will always be people who doesn't realise what it means to give the more money for something that you already bought once. But at least, you won't participate in these stupidities.

It's so simple, if you feel it's not right, don't pay. It's like anything else in life.

First, Nicol Bolas has some fantastic points on this subject and I feel no reason to repeat his points as I was going to say much of the same thing.

Also, while many of you may think of Activision influencing Battle.net, it's more that they're a resource. They've done micro-transactions on multiple games successfully. Blizzard would be making a large mistake to move forward with the micro-transation model they have chosen without collecting solid input from an experienced force in the industry that they've partnered with. That's like purchasing a house without an inspection.. it doesn't make sense.

Also, it's important to note that they haven't talked about the level which they've assisted Blizzard on the micro-transaction technology. From what I understand from both companies, this exchange is something that is more built on improving the decisions which Blizzard has already made which is different than the implied "Activision is corrupting Blizzard" from the original post. I wouldn't be surprised if much of the information exchange involves the large spectrum of subjects relating to implementing a new system. It could range from "monetary/privacy security methods" to "What items are worth monetizing and what items don't sell well and should be provided for free"?

I know that Blizzard has always proven themselves a company that provides a great playing experience first and foremost. I would hardly run around calling that the sky is falling because they're seeking business knowledge about business model they have never built before. And they're receiving knowledge from a company that has proven successful at it and have learned some valuable lessons along the way. I'm slightly relieved to be honest.

Frankly, micro-transactions are here to stay in Blizzard. I'd rather see it done with more experience/knowledge behind it instead of something that may flop or have to be revised later.

I highly suspect that Blizzard intends to provide a micro-transaction model that involves customers feeling like they're getting a bargain.. not a burden.

Nothing we can really do, is there?

I just hope they put the maps into packs for discounts.
Im not buying maps seperately. too lazy.

Maybe they should make those gift cards, like itunes cards, that you can buy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KillaKhan

Nothing we can really do, is there?

---

Not really. They have a very good product and sooner or later they are going to realize just how much they can chop it up and still get people to buy it. There procedeing slowly which is good (for now) but the writing is on the proverbial wall.

I feel its important to say that I dont think this depreciation of value is really a conscious move. I doubt there is someone sitting in a dark corner of Blizzard saying "oh we can squeeze them dry muwahahaha." Instead this is, like allot of bad things, done with the best of intentions and justifications.


Out of curiosity anyone here play 40K? Remember the "Plastic Crack" price hiking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Not really. They have a very good product and sooner or later there going to realize just how much they can chop it up and still get people to buy it.

---

Exactly, we can complain, or we can do fun stuff while we wait for the beta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

http://www.worldofraids.com/images/n...textured-s.jpg

---

LOL way to take what I said way out of context and only fight with worlds you want to make someone look bad, come on that's low even for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bisso

On a final note : Never forget guys, we are the money here, if you don't agree with Blizzard about having to pay for any kind of DLC. Just DONT buy it. They probably won't make it free, because there will always be people who doesn't realise what it means to give the more money for something that you already bought once. But at least, you won't participate in these stupidities.

It's so simple, if you feel it's not right, don't pay. It's like anything else in life.

---

Exactly. The reason why they keep bringing those kinds of DLC is because people buy them! Lets all stop buying those DLC and show the industry we don't want to pay and they will stop trying to sell us this stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supersonic

LOL way to take what I said way out of context and only fight with worlds you want to make someone look bad, come on that's low even for you.

---

The other option was for me to ask you to provide the source where blizzard said they wouldnt "make you pay extra for more content other than expansions".

Charging any value for "user created content" is ludacris.
If they sell 1 million copies of sc2 and then sell 3-10maps(pack)
which are created from the battle editor
for $1 then they just made 1 million dollars.

Skins, emblems, logos, .... $,$,$

I can't believe that we are nickeled and dimed to death by the government, and now the gaming industry.

When is enough enough.
I thought this was America.

Quote:

---

When is enough enough.
I thought this was America.

---

lol what? This IS America, I don't know what you're talking about but capitalism is the reason why this stuff happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pandonetho

lol what? This IS America, I don't know what you're talking about but capitalism is the reason why this stuff happens.

---

What happened to the American Dream man, what happened to it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

The industry is growing up. That means game developers have families. And that means that they're not going to be spending 16 hour workdays making random crap that gets given away for free. They don't have the time for that.

---

Anyone else agreeing with this?
I've actually been arguing this with Xbox 360 whineboys...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

Which shows that your knowledge of courts of law doesn't even meet the Boston Legal standard.

No, that doesn't do crap for you in a court of law. Any jury will see through the "I'm not saying X, I'm just saying," BS a mile away.

---

I don't even live on the eastern seaboard.
Wait... Boston Legal... isn't that a TV show?

So, yeah.
In reality, I severely doubt Blizzard would start nickel-and-diming us to death, or abusing DLC like some other companies have (What was it? A 120 Kilobite download that unlocked content on the GoW 2 disk?) but I wouldn't be sorry to see some sort of purchaseable MP skins.

So, I do not advocate contract killings against anyone who doesn't deserve it, in this case, Blizzard. I guess I should apologize for a joke that wasn't quite funny, and bow out.

and what about out us, the ppl who buy pirated games. if we ever want to play dlc, we have to delete the crack file and in 90 % of the time reinstall the entire game. do u know how much pain in the ass that is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mgcemir

and what ab out us, the ppl who buy pirated games. if we ever want to play dlc, we have to delete the crack file and in 90 % of the time reinstall the entire game. do u know how much pain in the ass that is?

---

This is either the best or worst post in this thread.

(also, companies make money, get over it, stop fearmongering, etc etc etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas

The industry is growing up. That means game developers have families. And that means that they're not going to be spending 16 hour workdays making random crap that gets given away for free. They don't have the time for that.

---

There is a significant difference between Console DLC and PC Microtransactions.
Console DLC is the type of content that on the PC was basically User-created, the realm of Mods. New teamcolours, maps charaacter models. There is demand for that stuff (otherwise the PC guys wouldn´t make it) but "fortunately" Console developers have a monopoly in this. Unlike the Consoles the PC developers have competition by the community. If Blizzard wants to charge for Maps they will only sell some if they are definetly better than the free copys made with the Editor.

Microtransactions are a Model developed for "free" Internetgames. They are a attempt to monetize a "free" game. Take League of Legends for example the comercial DOTA. They KNOW that they are too similar to the free original to demand money for the game itself. That is why they charge for content that you can but don´t have to pay for. You can get "Riot" points for money or Influence points for playing and both pay for shop content like using a Hero independently from Rotation.
The idea is that the hardcore fans subsidise the casuals.

I prefer Microtransactions since that Model allows developers to provide content for free they would have to chrage for under other payment-models.

Blizzard provides Battle.net for free but they certainly have costs. If these are paid by WoW addicts via stupid cosmetic pets instead of my via Battle.net fee I can´t really complain.

and exactly when did blizzard become the Man? fuck you blizz

Most dlc is usless crap anyway, don't buy it if it's so offensive. The option is always there, to buy or not to buy, don't take it away from the people that want that stuff.

Blizzard aren't going to charge for something you can live without.

Feel free to quote this if they ever do start selling essential stuff for extra, and i'll eat this hat hanging from my coatrack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mgcemir

and what about out us, the ppl who buy pirated games. if we ever want to play dlc, we have to delete the crack file and in 90 % of the time reinstall the entire game. do u know how much pain in the ass that is?

---

Lamest post in the thread. If you're not paying for the game anyway, why should Blizzard care what you think?

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums...g=topics;title

So, yeah, I knew about this but I didn't want to alarm people with something so obviously not going to happen. I don't know why TC wanted to do such a thing but since he has I guess I'll touch up some past comments:

Blizzard has already told us what exactly they're going to be charging for. Anything we're used to having for free, we will get for free. They've already confirmed this and repeated the same words many times. What the article is referring to is something quite different. They specifically say "as well as all the services Blizzard is offering" which means name/server/characteristic changes. Nothing more.

Relax people!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TychusFindlay

Blizzard has already told us what exactly they're going to be charging for. Anything we're used to having for free, we will get for free. They've already confirmed this and repeated the same words many times.

---

Source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emikochan

Most dlc is usless crap anyway, don't buy it if it's so offensive. The option is always there, to buy or not to buy, don't take it away from the people that want that stuff.

Blizzard aren't going to charge for something you can live without.

Feel free to quote this if they ever do start selling essential stuff for extra, and i'll eat this hat hanging from my coatrack.

---

Before you commit to eating any other articles of clothing, you might want to double check that sentence :P I do believe you have a typo in there lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kimera757

Lamest post in the thread. If you're not paying for the game anyway, why should Blizzard care what you think?

---

His post was obviously a joke, same as the contract killing post which Nicolas Bolas got all up in arms over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Source?

---

Well, I can't remember where they've said it, but it does seem very familiar, and it is the same as their stated map-store policy.

Anyway, I'm FINE with microtransactions, if they want to sell maps and skins and all that, then fine. As long as they don't stop other people from making maps, then I don't care.

The only thing I wouldn't be fine with, is if we had to pay for things like LAN support. If they do that, I can honestly say that I will not buy the game simply out of protest. I really do not think this is the case, but I'm just throwing it out there as an example of what I don't think is fine.

I still think they should go the way of Pokersites, and host automated tournaments that you pay X$ to play in, with Y% of the money going to Blizzard and the rest going into the prize pool. Good way to make money and make people happy imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrozenArbiter

Well, I can't remember where they've said it, but it does seem very familiar, and it is the same as their stated map-store policy.

---

To my knowledge the only thing theve said was an extremely vauge statement that Battle.net will be free to use to anyone who buys the game. What that entails well...

Well, I have a memory of them saying that things that were free in SC/WC3 would be free in SC2 as well, and that their example of things you'd pay for is like, transferring an account between servers in WoW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrozenArbiter

Well, I have a memory of them saying that things that were free in SC/WC3 would be free in SC2 as well, and that their example of things you'd pay for is like, transferring an account between servers in WoW.

---

So new features are fair game. I could buy that.

What about maps? Do you think they would do a free "map of the month" program or are they going to package a bunch together and sell it as a map pack?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kimera757

Lamest post in the thread. If you're not paying for the game anyway, why should Blizzard care what you think?

---

i am rubber and you are glue :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur

Source?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrozenArbiter

... Well, I can't remember where they've said it, but it does seem very familiar, and it is the same as their stated map-store policy. ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrozenArbiter

Well, I have a memory of them saying that things that were free in SC/WC3 would be free in SC2 as well, and that their example of things you'd pay for is like, transferring an account between servers in WoW.

---

This is quoted in at least 4-5 interviews, with Rob Pardo, Chris Sigaty and Dustin Browder all.

FrozenArbiter's memory is working for him as I think those were the words of Rob Pardo specifically he's recollecting. I don't have the sources on me as I do not have the time to look them up, but I believe they are referenced in the Beta Link Repository.

In short, if it effects gameplay itself, it will not be paid for. The only thing announced as potential microtransactions at this time are:

• Maybe custom decals is speculated, and when approached, Blizzard has not denied the possibility.
• The confirmed information about premium maps. The referenced idea they had so far (in early scope which could have changed) is that it's maps with custom models and completely reworked interfaces. The comparison of Half-life to Counterstrike.
• When approached about custom avatars, they said a cryptic response that seemed to deny purchased avatars, but examining the line, it could be misunderstood.

That's what I remember overall from it. If it's going from their WoW microtransaction model... I think it'll be fine. I never purchased one of their microtransactions there though I completely understand why people would buy them.

If their maps are low cost, such as the cost of an iTunes song, then I think it'll be fine. I find that as a macro bargain for a micro cost as I honestly like the idea of supporting people who provide higher than average gaming experience, even if it's small change.

EDIT:

Quote:

---

What about maps? Do you think they would do a free "map of the month" program or are they going to package a bunch together and sell it as a map pack?

---

From their interviews, it sounds like if the maps are as they have been.... no custom art or models, just a new map... then it would cost nothing additionally. If it has something like a custom song or custom art.. then it could be something they might charge for. This is based on the information they provided in their interviews that they explained was the intended model (which is subject to change)