Wargaming CEO: “We have to tolerate Xbox Live Gold subscriptions”

Monday, 24th June 2013 16:16 GMT By Sherif Saed

Victor Kislyi, CEO of free-to-play giant Wargaming, has said he’s “not happy” with Xbox Live Gold subs, following the E3 announcement that World of Tanks will be coming to Xbox 360.

In an interview conducted by at E3, Kislyi said: “We have to tolerate [Xbox Live Gold subscriptions], which I am not happy about.”

He added: “I would rather add another 30-40 million non-golden members.”

Xbox Live Silver members will be offered a trial for the game, but playing the full thing will require Gold membership. The PC version has more than 45 million registered users.

Despite the obstacles, Kislyi was pragmatic about dealing with platform holders.

“Everybody knows Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are traditional console companies which are huge in their own merit,” the exec said. “They have lots of divisions, lots of departments, lots of regulations. We respect that, and whining and complaining about that structure does not help.”

Kislyi said a console version of World of Tanks was important for western growth.

“Different territories have different tastes. China, Korea, Russia, they have no consoles. Obviously, North America, UK and Europe are heavy console markets. We have to cater to our players, whatever they use.”

World of Tanks is coming to Xbox 360 this summer.



  1. Ge0force

    No payed subscription is required for F2P-games on Sony’s platforms. Seems you picked the wrong platform mister Wargaming CEO!

    #1 2 years ago
  2. OlderGamer

    “Everybody knows Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are traditional console companies”

    Not true.

    I say this a lot. MS and Sony are NOT game companies. They are multi media companies, in the game industry because they smelled profit. Both companies have a pay wall for their online gaming. They constantly look for new ways to monitze. Nintendo isn’t as bad, they figure if you make a great game, people will buy it.

    MS is really bad, but in truth I feel that Sony is only better because they aren’t in first place.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. MCTJim

    Sigh, I understand his comments and with all dev’s, they want the most reach for their game. But XBox Live is an online service on which you pay to play online. Its a great service and is rarely down.
    I get PC is completely free with no online fee. But now Sony’s model is pushing PS+ and all new online games for the PS4 you will have to pay for it. Its only 5 bucks a month..5 bucks.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. Cobra951

    And 5 bucks a month is exactly what MS charges, 12 months at a time. I see nothing wrong with charging for a service. The reality is that good bandwidth and infrastructure are costly. We have other choices if we feel strongly about it, though we are losing Sony to the same reality.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. OlderGamer

    I have been a Live Gold member for 10 years. Even at 50usd/year I have paid 500usd to do something that should have been free imo.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. SplatteredHouse

    Free-to-play on PS4, actually is.
    @3 Which still presents an opportunity to reconsider, for a would-be player.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. ps3fanboy

    so its beyond the pay wall of xbone, i can just see all the customers queuing up to pay twice to play this game, LOL!

    #7 2 years ago
  8. karma

    Wow, I think this is the first developer I have heard complain about it. I always assumed most developers would not look on it too kindly for the simple reason that it reduces the value of their game, when a game owner cannot access his / her paid for content on the disc, unless they fork out the toll for a premium subscription.

    I’m guessing that F2P and subscription based devs are even less happy with it, since its a huge barrier between them and any potential customers.

    As I keep saying, basic online access needs to be like PC, with it allowed for everyone. And then if Sony and MS want to run a subscription premium membership as well, with all the extra social tools and whatnot, then let them charge for that. But all gaming platforms need to have basic online access.

    Its because of this restriction on xbox 360, gamers like myself stopped buying / playing online games.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Sylrissa

    Looks like Wargaming backed the wrong horse in this race.

    Since Sony have already said their published F2P games will not require a PS+ subscription, and I imagine they would allow Wargaming to do the same with world of tanks if they wanted to.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. MCTJim

    @7 game is free.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. ps3fanboy

    @8 finally someone fucking get it… give this guy a cigar!… and sony hire this one.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. Lengendaryboss

    They should hire you as a PR person first :D

    #12 2 years ago
  13. Sang2

    It’s funny how PS4 PS Plus subscription doesn’t affect free to play games or viewing apps such as netflix and Xbox Gold subscription is the contrary, sometimes Micro$oft only thinks about itself, F*ck you Microsoft.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. nollie4545

    Why in the hell SHOULD XBL be free?

    All those servers and staff running the network aren’t free you know. It is a SERVICE, you can choose to use or not to use this SERVICE, however, you generally have to pay for SERVICES.

    Seriously, 50 bucks a year is sod all, considering the quality of the service. You pay for cable TV which again is just access for content you would not otherwise be able to have. XBL is exactly the same. The cost of XBL must be pretty substantial for MS to operate, and considering it is nearly always up and running that is fair enough I would say.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. Christopher Jack

    @14, The majority of games on Xbox 360 used p2p rather than dedicated servers… Now who in their right mind would just pay for p2p games or that ad filled overlay known as XBL?

    #15 2 years ago
  16. OlderGamer

    CJ +1

    #16 2 years ago
  17. DSB

    @14 They may not be free to run, but those services are still free everywhere else. If it isn’t hurting hundreds of other businesses, then why should it be hurting Microsoft or Sony?

    Surely running Messenger, Hotmail and Bing, or delivering updates for Windows isn’t free either, but I don’t see them charging for that.

    To say nothing for services that offer the exact same features as Origin, Steam, Desura, GOG or GamersGate.

    Xbox Live has been a goldmine for Microsoft, so it should really be pretty obvious that the cost has very little to do with their expense, and everything to do with how much they love an easy profit.

    Fair enough if you rejoice in paying more for something that’s free everywhere else, but I think it’s easy to see how others might feel kinda screwed over.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. CyberMarco

    I want to know, do any money from XBL Gold go to the devs (in this case to Wargaming) for server maintenance and the likes?

    Do game developers get a cut in general? I suppose no. Then why the f*ck should I pay MS/Sony for being able to access the online portion of a game that I bought, and thus payed for its servers/maintenance?

    That was the reason I didn’t paid any € for XBL Gold, and I despise Sony for putting MP behind PS+. Yeah, I’m already a PS+ member and would have been despite PS4 multiplayer pay-wall, but that doesn’t change the fact that I’m not going to criticize their ass off.

    #18 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.