Blizzard: F2P not the best model for WOW

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 27 October, 2011

Value from a subscription "unmatched".

A free-to-play business model isn't right for gargantuan MMO World of Warcraft right now, Blizzard has said.

So confident is Blizzard in the value offered by the £9-a-month subscription fee that boss Mike Morhaime has described it as "unmatched".

Games that have switched to free-to-play recently include Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, Lord of the Rings Online and DC Universe Online.

Some analysts believe this shift puts pressure on Blizzard to follow suit with World of Warcraft, which has seen subscriber numbers stall in recent months.

But Morhaime is defiant.

"For us, and even for EA with the Star Wars game, I think that the value that you get for the $15 a month is just unmatched," he told Eurogamer in an interview published this morning.

"I don't think you can get that amount of entertainment value anywhere. I'd put the $15 up against anything.

"I think that there's an underlying, a fundamental assumption right now, that the less you charge, the more money you make. Which isn't true. And it doesn't necessarily make for a better game. I mean, everybody likes free... I think that definitely, players have seen a lot of really great quality free-to-play experiences, but I'm not sure it's the best model for us right now."

Sony Online Entertainment boss John Smedley recently said that he thought Star Wars: The Old Republic, due out this December, would be the last large-scale subscription-funded MMO.

Responding to the suggestion, Morhaime told Eurogamer that he understood Smedley's point.

"I think it is a very difficult market to compete in, I think it's very expensive to make these games, especially if you're expecting people to pay a monthly fee just to play the game," he said.

"And so there are very few companies that can compete at that high level with those types of budgets.

"Definitely if you're not charging anybody, they're going to be a lot more forgiving about the experience they have. They haven't paid anything. So in terms of developers entering the market, I can understand why a lot of games might choose to go free-to-play."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (20) Latest comment 4 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • apoc_reg #1 4 months ago

    "revenue from subscriptions is unmatched"

  • Flipper79 #2 4 months ago

    I always prefer the reassurance of knowing exactly what I'm going to have to pay and what I get in return. That being said, I think if the sub was closer to the £5 mark I'd probably have a lot less breaks from the game, or at least keep the sub running even if I wasn't playing so much.

  • StuDevo #3 4 months ago

    So basically we will get more money from subs.
    Not really a surprise though.

  • Nasty #4 4 months ago

    "I think it is a very difficult market to compete in, I think it's very expensive to make these games, especially if you're expecting people to pay a monthly fee just to play the game," he said sitting on a chair made of money throwing bundles of cash on the fire to keep warm.

  • Tyronne #5 4 months ago

    Free?!...FREEEEE?!....mawahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah /strokes cat

  • Apaar #6 4 months ago

    The free to play model tends to be really hazy with MMOs in particular. I don't think it's ultimately very customer friendly.

    Not just all the hidden costs, but the general uncertainty in terms of knowing what do I have access to, and what do I have to pay for separately.
    Edited by 1 at 27/10/11 @ 09:43

  • Buran #7 4 months ago

    The time of the MMOs with monthly fees is nearly over. The huge success of League Of Legends and the inminent arrival of Dota 2 and Guild Wars as massive popular online games free of monthly fees -sometimes even free to play themselves- will kill the old subscription model.

    Is not that those games will force other MMOs to leave the monthly fees, is the fact that a lot of people that in the past did play juggernauts as WoW is now playing or planning to play games as LoL or Dota 2 or Guild Wars 2.

  • Arsecake_Baker #8 4 months ago

    The only true F2P game i have come across is league of legends.

    All the other "free to play" games include hidden costs for maximum character progression, these costs pop up constantly and you are continually reminded that there is a "shop!"

    It's completely destroyed LOTRO, it's taken out all immersion, so yes Blizz i could not agree more.

  • Freek #9 4 months ago

    Wich is what every publisher says, right up untill the point where they change to F2P.

  • Ap3xx #10 4 months ago

    Post deleted at 12:25:39 14-12-2011

  • Softie2k #11 4 months ago

    WoW is a little like Windows. You pay, you know what to expect and know there will be someone there when it goes wrong.

  • sonicyoda #12 4 months ago

    "A free-to-play business model isn't right for gargantuan MMO World of Warcraft right now, Blizzard has said."

    Well of course not. It wouldn't make them millions upon millions of dollars.

  • ballshock #13 4 months ago

    "value" LOL

  • FortysixterUK #14 4 months ago

    I don't agree with him, it's always a case of renewing / not renewing my sub at the last minute as I have to assess if I can benefit from the paid time at the end of each subs period.

    If the game, and for that fact, any other MMO were just £3.99 per month, then I'd be much less inclined to cancel the sub for a month or two & THEN go back when I think about it. The fact that you can't do this has worked to the detriment of every other MMO I have ever played _ PSO, Age of Conan, Star Trek online, & Warhammer online. Having read the stuff about this poxy rubbish child attracting kung Fu Panda race in wow, and now realising it is NOT an early April Fools joke, I shall simply NOT be renewing my sub after the current period. I'll go off and play my single player stuff and wait for the Star Wars mmo to hit.

    A real shame as I've been with wow on and off since launch. If it were cheaper
    ( much cheaper) to remain subbed I would just be able to swallow the stupid new race,( by not rolling one of course ) but as it stands, I have felt my interest just drain away for WOW since the announcement at Blizzcon, and frankly I'm gutted. All of a sudden Wow seems really hollow and un-appealing. The cost of the sub is part of that.

  • Nephirion #15 4 months ago

    Value for money is subjective, for those that have the time it probably is however for the casual player I wouldn't say it is at all. I recently unsubscribe because like many I do not like the direction Blizzard are taking the game. Once TOR hits I doubt anything could bring me back.

  • nimzy #16 4 months ago

    The subscription model is predicated on the assumption you'll be getting something other than access to the server to play the game. In Blizzard's case it's lousy customer support and... constant patches to change game balance. No new content. You see, when they finally come out with content, you have to go out and buy that as an expansion, regardless of the fact you're a current subscriber.

  • KanePaws #17 4 months ago

    Although Blizzard sells tons of mounts, pets, and now, even items that can be traded and sold in-game in exchange for real-life cash - in addition to their monthly fee. So, in reality, Blizzard is riding both the subscription model and the "micro" transaction model at once. :\

  • Kremlik Verified Co-Founder, Crash To Desktop #18 4 months ago

    Basically adding to what Kane just said - the Pet/Mount shop is a goldmine for them in itself, add the TCG stuff (now partly owned by Blizzard), the arena tournament fees, transfers, faction and pallet swapping prices...

    There is FAR more revenue then they need if they dropped the £9 a month, which all in all gives us a weeks worth of content every 4-6 months these days, that is hardly 'value' when we can easily buy another game for about the same price with the same hours of content worth - we are basically paying for a chat function every month most of the time as a large volume of content comes in with expansions which we are funding dev time with our subs and yet we still have to pay £30-£60 for them..

    This is the reason why I left and many others - it's paying for 'the waiting game' for content, there is not enough content 'for free' as most of our money is going to premium item/service development.

    IF WoW was to go F2P - why not take a page from Turbine and go with the 'pay by dungeon' approach - that's what they do with DDO, and it works, WoW's 'world' is basically a glorified levelling area as it serves no other use then that as everything high end is dungeons which you just have to stand in the cities for...

    As Blizzard already admitted they want EVERYONE to farm the 'current' dungeons and little else, why not just make the 'world' itself free and the high end content as said pay per unlock? They'll have a LOT more returning players and the current 'hardcore' wouldn't leave the game at all even if 'the next big thing' makes them play another title for a bit, as long as they are paying you for the dungeons, who cares! £2-3 per heroic, £6-7 per raid, more people pay for a one off charge then sub all the time, Blizzard you have Activision holding hands with you, and you tell us F2P doesn't work?

  • levitate #19 4 months ago

    It looks like a lot of things are "gargantuan" these days. I quite like that word though, has a retro 50s horror movies kinda feel to it.

  • ircaddicts #20 4 months ago

    The only thing thats unmatched in wow is the GRIND and stupidity of its player base
    Edited by 1 at 05/11/11 @ 14:46