Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Would you pay to play offical WoW legacy servers?

12346

Comments

  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    laserit said:

    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    I am wrong because? 

    And who says merely profitable will interest Blizz. If it is not as least as big a ROI as hearthstone, why would they even care?
    Jeez.. What happened to caring about the community? Profits alone don't make a company great.
    Nari doesn't give a shit about communities. By his own admission, he treats other players as NPC's.

    By his other comments in other threads, I would wager to guess that he cares not much for real life communities either. 
    If you been around these forums a while you will know that Nari is special and you will block him like I have.  It's all about him and there is no one else in the world but him.  
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Maquiame said:
    Absolutely, I'd pay 30 to play on a legacy server that went no farther than Wrath
    I too would pay more for this.
  • UltimaJenkoUltimaJenko Member UncommonPosts: 35
    laserit said:

    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    I am wrong because? 

    And who says merely profitable will interest Blizz. If it is not as least as big a ROI as hearthstone, why would they even care?
    Jeez.. What happened to caring about the community? Profits alone don't make a company great.
    Nari doesn't give a shit about communities. By his own admission, he treats other players as NPC's.

    By his other comments in other threads, I would wager to guess that he cares not much for real life communities either. 
    Haha thanks for the heads up! :)
  • VarkingVarking Member UncommonPosts: 542
    Again, as others continue to say, its not just about being profitable. Even the video that was linked about a former Blizzard lead confirms this. It would have to make enough profit according to Blizzard to be worth not having those people invest their time into developing something else for them. 
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    tawess said:

    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    You keep saying that... but that does not make it true.

    Several people over several threads have pointed out how monumental of investment this is if it is to be done "right" by Blizzard standards. All you can offer in return is "it will be profitable" based at best at some joypill estimate extrapolated from a online petition and WoW sub numbers. 

    I can make math like that work too... but ain´t no biz in the land that will take that budget. 
    Monumental investment, lol, yeah because they couldn`t just get the private servers to pay them a licencing fee. Hell even if they did official servers they wouldn`t be offering anything more than what volunteer teams that had no funding at all did.

    Then you have people saying this would cost Blizzard millions, come on you seriously want to spin that zero funded volunteers could do what Blizzard would takes millions... LOL

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

  • tawesstawess Member EpicPosts: 4,227
    danwest58 said:
    stuff
    C: If you say. 

    B: The second that 75% vote goes in a direction the vanilla people do not like... We will be back where we are today. So that will not work. Then we still will have a group of people demanding vanilla vanilla servers. 

    A: As someone who have done research at university level... The sentence " why did you not do that" in regards to documenting and archiving data comes up WAY to often. Again i can not say you are wrong, just that you seem to put way to much trust in the humans behind the code. My experience is that anything that is not absolutely vital and costs money will be shunted to the side. Keeping a working version of a old, dead version of the game would fall under that i´d imagine. 

    This have been a good conversation

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,193
    danwest58 said:
    Sovrath said:
    He essentially said it, it's not that they wouldn't make some money but they could take the same amount of money and use it to make more money.

    Some of us have been saying this ad nauseum.

    I'd be curious if you saw that a company within your investment portfolio took "your money" (obviously it's not your direct money) and used it to make a bit more money but then you found out they could have taken that money and more than doubled it, if you would be cool with that?

    I wouldn't.
    And this is exactly the reason why publishers don't belong being publicly traded.  First there is 0 guarantee in the gaming world you will make massive amounts of money off of games if you invest in making them.  SWTOR, ESO, Thief, Caslevania, Sims4, Aliean Isolation, Driveclub, Destiny, farcry 4, Sword Cost Legends and so on.  All of these games didnt turn out what they were hyped up to be.  A lot based around trying to get as many people into the game as possible so the company can min max their profits.  Take Sword Cost Legends for example, the D&D crowd didnt like the ruleset and it was likely done to make it easier for new players to get into D&D.  When trying for a larger player base the game had issues.

    Publishers should make games because they love to, and their direction should be driven by developers who love games not by stockholders.  
    I can't disagree with this. Heck, I would even say that I would never invest in a game company unless my investment was more about supporting the company and less about actually making some profit back.

    But, going public is a large cash infusion and it's tempting to companies that want to stay in business. 
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Sovrath said:
    danwest58 said:
    Sovrath said:
    He essentially said it, it's not that they wouldn't make some money but they could take the same amount of money and use it to make more money.

    Some of us have been saying this ad nauseum.

    I'd be curious if you saw that a company within your investment portfolio took "your money" (obviously it's not your direct money) and used it to make a bit more money but then you found out they could have taken that money and more than doubled it, if you would be cool with that?

    I wouldn't.
    And this is exactly the reason why publishers don't belong being publicly traded.  First there is 0 guarantee in the gaming world you will make massive amounts of money off of games if you invest in making them.  SWTOR, ESO, Thief, Caslevania, Sims4, Aliean Isolation, Driveclub, Destiny, farcry 4, Sword Cost Legends and so on.  All of these games didnt turn out what they were hyped up to be.  A lot based around trying to get as many people into the game as possible so the company can min max their profits.  Take Sword Cost Legends for example, the D&D crowd didnt like the ruleset and it was likely done to make it easier for new players to get into D&D.  When trying for a larger player base the game had issues.

    Publishers should make games because they love to, and their direction should be driven by developers who love games not by stockholders.  
    I can't disagree with this. Heck, I would even say that I would never invest in a game company unless my investment was more about supporting the company and less about actually making some profit back.

    But, going public is a large cash infusion and it's tempting to companies that want to stay in business. 
    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,193


    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    I am wrong because? 

    And who says merely profitable will interest Blizz. If it is not as least as big a ROI as hearthstone, why would they even care?
    Jeez.. What happened to caring about the community? Profits alone don't make a company great.
    While that's true, profits make a company stay in business and make "you" the shareholder happy.

    And that's the problem, players have a difficult time putting this in perspective as many argue from a purely "games are awesome" point of view.

    Sure, "games are awesome" but that doesn't mean that these companies don't struggle.

    Once a company is a public  company they have to be operating with the good of their shareholders. "You" are a shareholder (in something) and I bet that if you found out your money made a pittance in dividends because they were "caring about community" you might be like "heyyyy waiiiit a minute!"

    It's kind of the Devil and the Deep Blue sea or "pick your poison".
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Sovrath said:


    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    I am wrong because? 

    And who says merely profitable will interest Blizz. If it is not as least as big a ROI as hearthstone, why would they even care?
    Jeez.. What happened to caring about the community? Profits alone don't make a company great.
    While that's true, profits make a company stay in business and make "you" the shareholder happy.

    And that's the problem, players have a difficult time putting this in perspective as many argue from a purely "games are awesome" point of view.

    Sure, "games are awesome" but that doesn't mean that these companies don't struggle.

    Once a company is a public  company they have to be operating with the good of their shareholders. "You" are a shareholder (in something) and I bet that if you found out your money made a pittance in dividends because they were "caring about community" you might be like "heyyyy waiiiit a minute!"

    It's kind of the Devil and the Deep Blue sea or "pick your poison".

    Either you give free money to game development without strings or you accept that you have to live with investment in games for profit.
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Horusra said:
    Sovrath said:
    danwest58 said:
    Sovrath said:
    He essentially said it, it's not that they wouldn't make some money but they could take the same amount of money and use it to make more money.

    Some of us have been saying this ad nauseum.

    I'd be curious if you saw that a company within your investment portfolio took "your money" (obviously it's not your direct money) and used it to make a bit more money but then you found out they could have taken that money and more than doubled it, if you would be cool with that?

    I wouldn't.
    And this is exactly the reason why publishers don't belong being publicly traded.  First there is 0 guarantee in the gaming world you will make massive amounts of money off of games if you invest in making them.  SWTOR, ESO, Thief, Caslevania, Sims4, Aliean Isolation, Driveclub, Destiny, farcry 4, Sword Cost Legends and so on.  All of these games didnt turn out what they were hyped up to be.  A lot based around trying to get as many people into the game as possible so the company can min max their profits.  Take Sword Cost Legends for example, the D&D crowd didnt like the ruleset and it was likely done to make it easier for new players to get into D&D.  When trying for a larger player base the game had issues.

    Publishers should make games because they love to, and their direction should be driven by developers who love games not by stockholders.  
    I can't disagree with this. Heck, I would even say that I would never invest in a game company unless my investment was more about supporting the company and less about actually making some profit back.

    But, going public is a large cash infusion and it's tempting to companies that want to stay in business. 
    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
    They only made money when both games went F2P with making anything worth playing the game in the cash shop.  They failed as P2P games.  F2P is not a sustainable model.  
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    edited April 2016

    Horusra said:
    Sovrath said:


    If you don't think it would be profitable, you're wrong.  It's that simple.  Drag up all the irrelevant comparisons you want.
    I am wrong because? 

    And who says merely profitable will interest Blizz. If it is not as least as big a ROI as hearthstone, why would they even care?
    Jeez.. What happened to caring about the community? Profits alone don't make a company great.
    While that's true, profits make a company stay in business and make "you" the shareholder happy.

    And that's the problem, players have a difficult time putting this in perspective as many argue from a purely "games are awesome" point of view.

    Sure, "games are awesome" but that doesn't mean that these companies don't struggle.

    Once a company is a public  company they have to be operating with the good of their shareholders. "You" are a shareholder (in something) and I bet that if you found out your money made a pittance in dividends because they were "caring about community" you might be like "heyyyy waiiiit a minute!"

    It's kind of the Devil and the Deep Blue sea or "pick your poison".

    Either you give free money to game development without strings or you accept that you have to live with investment in games for profit.
    Why could't the Publisher not be a privately held company like Blizzard was before WOTLK release and be successful?  Why does a Publisher have to be a publicly owned company where stockholders are more important that the company surviving?
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    laserit said:

    Nari doesn't give a shit about communities. By his own admission, he treats other players as NPC's.


    Not in video games. I play fun games .. not participate in community that play said games. In fact, LFD is a great invention .. you can totally treat other players as NPCs (and they treat u as such).

    No community or toxic community .. still can have fun in games. 
  • UltimaJenkoUltimaJenko Member UncommonPosts: 35
    laserit said:

    Nari doesn't give a shit about communities. By his own admission, he treats other players as NPC's.


    Not in video games. I play fun games .. not participate in community that play said games. In fact, LFD is a great invention .. you can totally treat other players as NPCs (and they treat u as such).

    No community or toxic community .. still can have fun in games. 
    I'm curious, why do you play MMORPG's if you don't like the 'community' or playing with people? Why don't you just play a single player RPG? 
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,193
    Horusra said:

    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
    Well Star Wars the Old Republic has done well but I haven't seen anything about Elder Scrolls Online. Unless you are privy to something we are not? Zenimax is a private company so unless you have reason to believe otherwise, I would say we don't really know what the game has brought in compared to what it cost to develop it.

    I would add that for every "successful" game there seem to be many that don't do as well.

    Would you really invest your money in a game company with the idea of making a profit? I wouldn't I think it's too risky.
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,193

    danwest58 said:


    Why could't the Publisher not be a privately held company like Blizzard was before WOTLK release and be successful?  Why does a Publisher have to be a publicly owned company where stockholders are more important that the company surviving?
    One of the differences is that public companies can usually raise more money. They can also raise even more money by offering an additional public offering.

    They are also under greater scrutiny. A public company can go private by buying back stock.

    Privately held companies don't have an immediate need to make shareholders happy and can concentrate more on growing the company. But again, there could be less money to do that.


    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    laserit said:

    Nari doesn't give a shit about communities. By his own admission, he treats other players as NPC's.


    Not in video games. I play fun games .. not participate in community that play said games. In fact, LFD is a great invention .. you can totally treat other players as NPCs (and they treat u as such).

    No community or toxic community .. still can have fun in games. 
    I'm curious, why do you play MMORPG's if you don't like the 'community' or playing with people? Why don't you just play a single player RPG? 
    Because *some* has unique gameplay & IP. For example, there is NO single player action RPG that let me play 58 marvel characters. The only game is Marvel Hero, and just happened to be a mmorpg. Hence, I play that game as a single player game.

    Ditto for STO. There is no Star Trek TNG era RPG with both ship & ground combat. STO is the only option.

    Or if you want to play a Chinese martial arts RPG .. there are few single player version (because of piracy).


  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Sovrath said:
    Horusra said:

    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
    Well Star Wars the Old Republic has done well but I haven't seen anything about Elder Scrolls Online. Unless you are privy to something we are not? Zenimax is a private company so unless you have reason to believe otherwise, I would say we don't really know what the game has brought in compared to what it cost to develop it.

    I would add that for every "successful" game there seem to be many that don't do as well.

    Would you really invest your money in a game company with the idea of making a profit? I wouldn't I think it's too risky.
    I would .. been doing it for 20 years .. and have done very well ...
  • azmundaiazmundai Member UncommonPosts: 1,419
    edited April 2016
    i think the problem is, most people will say yes. the number of initial people they would have jump at this would probably be quite staggering.

    the question is, how many of them would continue to pay to play on a vanilla server 2-3 months after it was out? my guess is not that many. i think almost certainly not enough to make opening them a reality.

    LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
    I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already :)

  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn Member EpicPosts: 3,430
    No.  It was fun for a long time.  Like other titles, I've moved on.  It's not that it's bad or outdated (graphically) or anything specific.  It's just part of the past for me.

    I self identify as a monkey.

  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 3,026
    edited April 2016
    Get this straight people: This is about Blizzard officially supporting a vanilla emulator. It wouldn't be a main stream launch like a new game. They set the rules for (officially) SOMEONE ELSE TO RUN THEM!

    This would be supported by donations and something very close to crowd funding. If development options opened up they too could be crowd funded so the development cost is covered prior to development. This would not be a locked in monthly sub like retail wow although a premium sub option should be available with likely account perks and guaranteed services not related to in game bonuses (again ... that would go entirely against the concept of vanilla Wow).

    Debating over Blizzard using vanilla Wow as a main stream launch game like their modern premium products is pure ignorance. Blizzard rewrote they own game each expansion and that is what created this whole mess to begin with. They need to open their eyes to the reality THEY created and offer older versions of wow as hobby alternatives because it was Blizzard who started this entire shit storm to begin with. 

    What is needed is policy change so official "emulators" can exist within a self-sustaining model. Thinking Blizzard needs to launch vanilla or TBC as premium games along side their core products is ridiculous.


    You stay sassy!

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Tamanous said:
    Get this straight people: This is about Blizzard officially supporting a vanilla emulator. It wouldn't be a main stream launch like a new game. They set the rules for (officially) SOMEONE ELSE TO RUN THEM!

    This would be supported by donations and something very close to crowd funding. If development options opened up they too could be crowd funded so the development cost is covered prior to development. This would not be a locked in monthly sub like retail wow although a premium sub option should be available with likely account perks and guaranteed services not related to in game bonuses (again ... that would go entirely against the concept of vanilla Wow).

    Debating over Blizzard using vanilla Wow as a main stream launch game like their modern premium products is pure ignorance. Blizzard rewrote they own game each expansion and that is what created this whole mess to begin with. They need to open their eyes to the reality THEY created and offer older versions of wow as hobby alternatives because it was Blizzard who started this entire shit storm to begin with. 

    What is needed is policy change so official "emulators" can exist within a self-sustaining model. Thinking Blizzard needs to launch vanilla or TBC as premium games along side their core products is ridiculous.


    Not gonna happen .. I dont see any chance of that , maybe after Blizz gathers all data from Legion , 12-18 months from now , they may consider Vanilla if there is still interest and if Legion fails miserably .. And they will absolutlely keep it in house ...
  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,149
    Likely for 3-4 months.

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,193
    Scorchien said:
    Sovrath said:
    Horusra said:

    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
    Well Star Wars the Old Republic has done well but I haven't seen anything about Elder Scrolls Online. Unless you are privy to something we are not? Zenimax is a private company so unless you have reason to believe otherwise, I would say we don't really know what the game has brought in compared to what it cost to develop it.

    I would add that for every "successful" game there seem to be many that don't do as well.

    Would you really invest your money in a game company with the idea of making a profit? I wouldn't I think it's too risky.
    I would .. been doing it for 20 years .. and have done very well ...
    eh, that's kind of a loaded reply. Then again, my post sort of invited it so fair is fair.

    If you invested in Blizzard - Activistion/Blizzard (whatever they were) 10 years ago you would have done very well. If you invested in EA then not so much and you would have been better off investing in Home Depot.

    If 10 years ago you invested in Blizzard/ - Activision Blizzard you would have made a bit more money investing in Sherwin Williams.

    For every juggernaut like our Activision/Blizzard friends there are so many game companies that didn't do well.

    But good on you for doing well and not losing your shirt.




    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Sovrath said:
    Scorchien said:
    Sovrath said:
    Horusra said:

    SWTOR and ESO seem to have made money for investors.....makes me question the posters intellectual integrity
    Well Star Wars the Old Republic has done well but I haven't seen anything about Elder Scrolls Online. Unless you are privy to something we are not? Zenimax is a private company so unless you have reason to believe otherwise, I would say we don't really know what the game has brought in compared to what it cost to develop it.

    I would add that for every "successful" game there seem to be many that don't do as well.

    Would you really invest your money in a game company with the idea of making a profit? I wouldn't I think it's too risky.
    I would .. been doing it for 20 years .. and have done very well ...
    eh, that's kind of a loaded reply. Then again, my post sort of invited it so fair is fair.

    If you invested in Blizzard - Activistion/Blizzard (whatever they were) 10 years ago you would have done very well. If you invested in EA then not so much and you would have been better off investing in Home Depot.

    If 10 years ago you invested in Blizzard/ - Activision Blizzard you would have made a bit more money investing in Sherwin Williams.

    For every juggernaut like our Activision/Blizzard friends there are so many game companies that didn't do well.

    But good on you for doing well and not losing your shirt.




       I invested in Vivendi/Blizz...(hmm think it was 7$ )..  EA (08 when it plummeted to 15$ ) FCMKF when it dropped to .22 and then shot to 4$ .Nokia 9when it dropped to 2.80 ) .. etc ...    And many others .. just gotta watch / be patient there are many oppurtunities ...
Sign In or Register to comment.