The way Blizzard tried to justify their price increase smacks of hasty ass-covering. Half of the reasons they gave are retarded as they come.

WoW of course can earn more, but on the flipside they need 100+ staff constantly working on the dev teams. SC2 has 40 assigned to it, and for the first few years of the development they were assisting the WoW team. Also, when WoW launched, it was priced identically to Sony Online's Everquest 2, which was its biggest competitor then.

They are profit oriented all the while, and I have no problems with that. Just that they now start adopting Activision's business strategies, which are ruinous in the long term. You can find lots of similarities with MW2's pricing schemes and messing up multiplayer, and every surefire hit is squeezed dry like a cash cow. While they can't meddle with Blizzard's development patterns, I'm pretty sure their bosses have the final say over prices.

Funds will still be needed to develop other games, WoW can't last forever.

Hi

Just correction for your statement 
WoW Classic release in November 2004
Burning Crusade release in January 2007 (that after 2 year and 3 months after classic)
Wrath of the Lich King release in  November 2008 (that after 1 year and 11 month after BC)
Cataclysm release in sometime (maybe) in 2010 (that after 1 year and few months

I dont think Blizzard spam they game no? 

resources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warcraft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warc...Burning_Crusade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warc...f_the_Lich_King

not to mention free contents from time to time ^.^

Wow, how many MMO are you playing exactly?

I doubt even the devs want to concentrate on one game for so long.

@kianweic

Since when RTS have dedicated servers anyways? Games have always been P2P what.

Simple, it is all about the bottom line.

If there's money to be made, somebody / some company will do it.

Blizzard can always outsource development on WoW if they want. Or could just get new people to do it.

next-gen mmo wwwww

---

Added on June 3, 2010, 5:48 pm

i dont think so. as much expacs WoW can release, the core of the game is essentially the same thing.

as for the dedicated server thing, pros and cons. any prob with bnet = no game LOL

server goin down? during game? too bad. you get insta-boot.

---

Added on June 3, 2010, 5:49 pm

AFAIK, cata may be delayed to 2011, cuz lol sc2 too busy kthxbai

---

Added on June 3, 2010, 5:51 pm

they 'specifically' mentioned the subscription is for server and shit. so... its not too far fetched to consider it as a bonus. by content, look at major content patches.

and those aside, almost every patch WoW releases is a huge TLDR WALL O TEXT

is this a WoW thread?? i'm.... i'm must be dreamin...

*mods b!tch slapped noodlez back to reality*

my 'hate' for SC2 is still about the pricing for SEA edition although i really don't mind matching up with ah beng commenting about HIGH latency (well, TMNut... sg players stated i'm either rerouted from india or europe when joining any sg hosted games playing WC3) that made them lose the game.

Did you read their reasoning? I shall highlight the salient points for you:

1. You're paying for a Blizzard Game that's bound to last for a long, long time.
2. Local competitive/non-competitive event support.
3. Better latency.

Of the 3, only reason no.1 sounds even relatively palatable.

The rest is pure rationalisation and BS. SC1 survived and prospered) without their "support". So, trying to justify a price increase with this reason is lol to say the least.

As for better latency, you can ask any of the SCII beta players here. They don't have any problem playing on the US server. So massive fail reason there. Why confine our player base to SEA and Aus/NZ when we clearly can and should be allowed to compete against players globally?

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessag...topic_id=128926