WoW - 1.5M Subscribers

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
> >
> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>
> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
> money :)

What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
other people, and would still do quite well with the large (expected)
player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take it?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
news:7tF_d.6467$hu3.1315@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>> >
>> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>>
>> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
>> money :)
>
> What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
> was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
> for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
> other people, and would still do quite well with the large (expected)
> player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take it?
>

Yes, $14.99, then you might save a buck or two a month if you subscribe longer.
 
S

Shadows

Distinguished
May 2, 2003
590
0
18,980
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-03-18, Jim Vieira <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote:
> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>> >
>> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>>
>> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
>> money :)
>
> What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
> was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
> for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
> other people, and would still do quite well with the large (expected)
> player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take it?
>

It was $15 at launch. Forget the monthly subscription though. If
they sold each box for $50 then it's 90 million in revenue. Of
course publishers and retailers take a cut but that's a very nice
injection of cash everytime one of their customers signed up.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:25:40 -0600, shadows wrote:

> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>> http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>>
>> Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>
> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
> money :)

But is that actual playing/paying past the first free month accounts?
Regardless even with half of them paying accounts that's some feat. Hell,
the box sales alone would make some of the other publishers cream.
--
RJB
3/18/2005 2:19:00 PM

I put instant coffee in a microwave and almost went back in time.
--Steven Wright
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Clogar wrote:
> http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>
> Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)

It could (and probably will) be argued that the success of an MMORPG can
only really be judged after it's been up for year or so :)

WoW's success, IMHO, will depend a lot on Battlegrounds. It's
Battlegrounds which is supposed to be the meat of the game for those who
have hit 60 but aren't heavily into raiding, and which will therefore
keep subscribers paying. If Battlegrounds fails, then I suspect that for
a lot of players, WoW will be no more than a 6-month diversion...

There's no doubt, though, that *is* popular :)

--
Remove the mess to reply.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Just a note, the people/guilds who are heavily into raiding is looking
foward to battlegrounds too. I don't see it as the meat of WoW. It's a
nice suppliment.

"Cataleptic" <cat.the.mess@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Msq_d.10695$1S4.1124673@news.xtra.co.nz...
> Clogar wrote:
> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
> >
> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>
> It could (and probably will) be argued that the success of an MMORPG can
> only really be judged after it's been up for year or so :)
>
> WoW's success, IMHO, will depend a lot on Battlegrounds. It's
> Battlegrounds which is supposed to be the meat of the game for those who
> have hit 60 but aren't heavily into raiding, and which will therefore
> keep subscribers paying. If Battlegrounds fails, then I suspect that for
> a lot of players, WoW will be no more than a 6-month diversion...
>
> There's no doubt, though, that *is* popular :)
>
> --
> Remove the mess to reply.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Battlegrounds, unless the top equipment can be gained by other means than
camping instances and raids, will be just like Trials of Atlantis was for
DAoC. For the player who can spend hour after hour doing raids over and over
to get that one last piece of uber-equipment Battlegrounds will be fun. For
the casual gamer who can only hope for the equipment that drops from quests
and random mobs, battlegrounds will be a place of frustration and
disappointment.

WoW starts out as a casual gamers paradise but quickly turns into a
hard-core, campers dream.
"luong" <bluong@onlinesupplier.com> wrote in message
news:VIq_d.12299$N15.11767@okepread06...
> Just a note, the people/guilds who are heavily into raiding is looking
> foward to battlegrounds too. I don't see it as the meat of WoW. It's a
> nice suppliment.
>
> "Cataleptic" <cat.the.mess@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:Msq_d.10695$1S4.1124673@news.xtra.co.nz...
> > Clogar wrote:
> > > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
> > >
> > > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
> >
> > It could (and probably will) be argued that the success of an MMORPG can
> > only really be judged after it's been up for year or so :)
> >
> > WoW's success, IMHO, will depend a lot on Battlegrounds. It's
> > Battlegrounds which is supposed to be the meat of the game for those who
> > have hit 60 but aren't heavily into raiding, and which will therefore
> > keep subscribers paying. If Battlegrounds fails, then I suspect that for
> > a lot of players, WoW will be no more than a 6-month diversion...
> >
> > There's no doubt, though, that *is* popular :)
> >
> > --
> > Remove the mess to reply.
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,alt.games.warcraft (More info?)

Cataleptic wrote:
> If Battlegrounds fails, then I suspect that for a lot of players,
> WoW will be no more than a 6-month diversion...

What about the traditional alternatives of lifting level caps, new
quests, and/or additional worlds ("Brave explorers recently discovered
a third, unknown continent in Azeroth")? I didn't jump into WoW
because of Battlegrounds; I jumped into it because I heard really good
things about the overall game experience in the here and now. If
Blizzard can provide more of the same if/when my 24 Paladin hits 60
I'd be inclined to stick around.

I expect that journey to 60 to take many months anyway, as I certainly
don't have time (or even desire) to play for hours every single
day. And isn't Blizzard clearly focusing on (and, as 1.5M subscribers
demonstrate, apparently succeeding) bringing more people like me, as
opposed to the stereotypical Everquest Widowmaker/failing college
student, on board?

--
<URL:http://www.pobox.com/~ylee/> PERTH ----> *
Cpu(s): 3.4% us, 1.9% sy, 0.5% ni, 90.5% id, 3.3% wa, 0.4% hi, 0.0% si
Mem: 515800k total, 405732k used, 110068k free, 71068k buffers
Swap: 1052216k total, 40788k used, 1011428k free, 145604k cached
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>
> A lot of people eat big macs and followed Hilter too

And a lot of people don't start the day jumping off the roof too.
 
N

nostromo

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2004
681
0
18,980
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Thus spake "James_" <no@spam.com>, Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:02:15 -0700, Anno
Domini:

>"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
>news:7tF_d.6467$hu3.1315@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>>> >
>>> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>>>
>>> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
>>> money :)
>>
>> What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
>> was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
>> for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
>> other people, and would still do quite well with the large (expected)
>> player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take it?
>>
>
>Yes, $14.99, then you might save a buck or two a month if you subscribe longer.

I'd just like the 1c they fall short of to round it up per mth! ;-)

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Nostromo <nostromo@spamfree.net.au> once tried to test me with:

> Thus spake "James_" <no@spam.com>, Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:02:15 -0700,
> Anno Domini:
>
>>"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
>>news:7tF_d.6467$hu3.1315@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>>> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>>> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>>>> >
>>>> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>>>>
>>>> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
>>>> money :)
>>>
>>> What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
>>> was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
>>> for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
>>> other people, and would still do quite well with the large
>>> (expected) player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take
>>> it?
>>>
>>
>>Yes, $14.99, then you might save a buck or two a month if you
>>subscribe longer.
>
> I'd just like the 1c they fall short of to round it up per mth! ;-)


It's about $16 per month to my card after taxes.



--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> once tried to test me with:

> On 2005-03-18, Jim Vieira <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote:
>> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd3lp7o.i9c.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>> On 2005-03-18, Clogar <clogarnot@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> > http://www.blizzard.com/press/031705-worldwide.shtml
>>> >
>>> > Love it or hate it, World of Warcraft is a success. :)
>>>
>>> That's a gigantic revenue stream. Those guys are swimming in
>>> money :)
>>
>> What did the montly fee end up being? During the beta there
>> was much debate on what it should be, with many people arguing
>> for $9.99 based on the fact that Blizzard would undercut so many
>> other people, and would still do quite well with the large (expected)
>> player base. But it's probably like $15 a month I take it?
>>
>
> It was $15 at launch. Forget the monthly subscription though. If
> they sold each box for $50 then it's 90 million in revenue. Of
> course publishers and retailers take a cut but that's a very nice
> injection of cash everytime one of their customers signed up.

How do you get $90 million from 1.5 million times $50?

By my math that's $75 million.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom