February 7: Blizzard Conference Call

[Nerraw]

Because often enough there isn't anything else to do. If i pick up shit outside for a job and keep doing it doesen't mean its a great job, I just can't get anything better at the time. Surely you've seen all the people who play WoW whining about pretty much everything. There aren't many good games out there atm but that doesen't mean WoW doesen't suck at all.

I have plenty of other enjoyable games to play. I just play WoW because it's more enjoyable to me at the given time than the other games. I assume I'm not the only one not only playing WoW?

[Hakto]

okay no problem

Q4 2010 at 12 million players world wide reported by blizzard http://investor.activision.com/relea...leaseID=548900

Q1 2011 - Blizzard reported a 600,000 subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/relea...leaseID=575495 this would bring subs down to 11.4 million world wide

Q2 2011 - Blizzard reported a 300,000 subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/relea...leaseID=596540 this would bring subs down to 11.1 million world wide

Q3 2011 - Blizzard reported a 800,000 subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/discl...eventid=104674 this would bring subs down to 10.3 million world wide

Q4 2011 - Blizzard reported a 100,000 subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/event...eventid=108428 this would bring subs down to 10.2 million world wide

Q1 2012 - Blizzard reported Subscribers remained flat (no lost reported) http://investor.activision.com/event...eventid=112584 this would keep the subs at 10.2 million world wide

Q2 2012 - Blizzard reported 1.1 Million subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/discl...eventid=116427 this would bring subs down to 9.1 million world wide

Q3 2012 - Blizzard reported 10 Million Plus players (900k plus player gain) http://investor.activision.com/event...eventid=120047 this would bring subs up to 10 million plus world wide

Q4 2013 - Blizzard reported 9.6 Million subscribers lost http://investor.activision.com/discl...eventid=124455 this would bring subs up to 9.6 million plus world wide


Do I need to break anything else down for you with proof?

---------- Post added 2013-02-09 at 01:27 PM ----------



Wrath had 12 million is fact

You are continually seeing what you want to see and nothing more, I asked you to prove that ONLY 2.4 million people left during that period - ONLY.

You are choosing to take only the quarterly losses without balancing them with the quarterly gains over that 2 year period. Try this with your tax return.

I guarantee you that more than 2.4 million people left over that 2 years but in each quarterly period there were either new or returning players that resulted in the total number of losses or gains for that quarter, the nett result is the important factor here whether you are looking at a quarterly period or a yearly period.

I get that the results for the last 12 months did not fit your agenda and you went back another year to the highest peak wow experienced by some margin to somehow support your argument that wow is bleeding subs, using this logic it is fair to say that wow has recovered some from the dive that happened a year ago and the losses are slowing.

Wow has sold over 30 million copies, with 9.6 million current active subs, this means more than 20 million losses have occurred at some point, show me those numbers from the quarterly reports (loss numbers that is - not sales numbers).

No one except blizzard can definitively say this many players quit in a certain time period, because it is offset by returning or new players.

I plead with you to start looking at things objectively instead of twisting the numbers to suit your own agenda.

[Aquamonkey]

Personally, I suspect well over 20 mill people have played and left Wow at some point, again completely irrelevant, all that is relevant is the nett number of subs over any given period.

At the end of 2009 when WoW had 11.5M, Pardo said "I don't know what the exact number is off-hand, but the total number of subscribers we've had is easily more than double - maybe closer to triple - the current subscriber base."

That's about 23-34.5M, 3 years ago. Rough extrapolation would mean close to 50M have played WoW at some point.

[Hakto]

At the end of 2009 when WoW had 11.5M, Pardo said "I don't know what the exact number is off-hand, but the total number of subscribers we've had is easily more than double - maybe closer to triple - the current subscriber base."

That's about 23-34.5M, 3 years ago. Rough extrapolation would mean close to 50M have played WoW at some point.

Exactly, using only losses to argue wow is somehow dying etc is cracked logic at best.

[But I Hate You All]

You are continually seeing what you want to see and nothing more, I asked you to prove that ONLY 2.4 million people left during that period - ONLY.

You are choosing to take only the quarterly losses without balancing them with the quarterly gains over that 2 year period. Try this with your tax return.

I guarantee you that more than 2.4 million people left over that 2 years but in each quarterly period there were either new or returning players that resulted in the total number of losses or gains for that quarter, the nett result is the important factor here whether you are looking at a quarterly period or a yearly period.

I get that the results for the last 12 months did not fit your agenda and you went back another year to the highest peak wow experienced by some margin to somehow support your argument that wow is bleeding subs, using this logic it is fair to say that wow has recovered some from the dive that happened a year ago and the losses are slowing.

Wow has sold over 30 million copies, with 9.6 million current active subs, this means more than 20 million losses have occurred at some point, show me those numbers from the quarterly reports (loss numbers that is - not sales numbers).

No one except blizzard can definitively say this many players quit in a certain time period, because it is offset by returning or new players.

I plead with you to start looking at things objectively instead of twisting the numbers to suit your own agenda.

I put fourth fact. You put Fourth what you think happened. Any proff of your claims? thanks

---------- Post added 2013-02-09 at 01:56 PM ----------

Exactly, using only losses to argue wow is somehow dying etc is cracked logic at best.

Denying wow did not start bleeding subs till cata and that trend did not stop with mop than trying to say wow only lost 400k subs is flat out bullshit.

[Aquamonkey]

I put fourth fact. You put Fourth what you think happened. Any proff of your claims? thanks

---------- Post added 2013-02-09 at 01:56 PM ----------



Denying wow did not start bleeding subs till cata and trend did not stop with mop than trying to say wow only lost 400k subs is flat out bullshit.

Even at its peak, WoW only retained 1/3 of the total number of people who played it.

[But I Hate You All]

Even at it's peak, WoW only retained 1/3 of the total number of people who played it.

*citation needed

[Aquamonkey]

*citation needed

Shows how little you are paying attention to this thread... I just posted this:

At the end of 2009 when WoW had 11.5M, Pardo said "I don't know what the exact number is off-hand, but the total number of subscribers we've had is easily more than double - maybe closer to triple - the current subscriber base."

That's about 23-34.5M, 3 years ago. Rough extrapolation would mean close to 50M have played WoW at some point.

It was even in the quote of a post you replied to.

[Hakto]

I put fourth fact. You put Fourth what you think happened. Any proff of your claims? thanks

---------- Post added 2013-02-09 at 01:56 PM ----------



Denying wow did not start bleeding subs till cata and that trend did not stop with mop than trying to say wow only lost 400k subs is flat out bullshit.

Another thought I have is that you have to also remember that the subscriber base of WoW today is not just the one we had when we launched. There's a whole bunch of people who tuned out of WoW two years ago or four years ago, but who really enjoyed it, and when another MMO comes out that tickles their fancy, they'll jump into it. I don't know what the exact number is off-hand, but the total number of subscribers we've had is easily more than double - maybe closer to triple - the current subscriber base.

This was in 2009, when wow had 11.5 currently active subs. A direct quote from Rob Pardo as linked previously.

Wow lost 400k subs from Q3 2012 to Q4 2012, that is fact.

10.2 mill subs at end of Q4 2011.

Q1 2012 subs remained static.

Q2 2012 1.1 mill subs lost (9.1 mill active)

Q3 2012 900k gained (10 mill active)

Q4 2012 400k lost (9.6 mill active)

A nett loss of subs for 2012 of 600k - these are the facts.

[MoanaLisa]

At this point in time, I think the only sensible way to think about subscriptions is to treat them a bit like a stock and look at them both long-term and in, for lack of a better example, something like a trading range. So WoW at this point in time is running somewhere between X and Y million subscribers for such and such a time period. Your range would change based upon where you set the time period. Movement within that range might signal something but probably not. Movement outside of that range would certainly require a closer look if you had any analysis tools and data that would be meaningful.

Really, trying to parse out individual events is the same as trying to put single-day stock ups and downs into a longer range context. Yes, Blizzard stock went up by 11% the other day but at the end of the month it's still likely to be trading between 11 and 14 like it has for the last 4 years. So shifts like that are essentially meaningless.

When people say that 400K loss isn't a big deal it's probably in that framework that they're thinking about it. And that has some validity. If patches and expansions do something to the numbers (as they clearly do) then all of this arguing over short-term stuff is pretty much BS unless the variability falls outside an established range. It's obvious that people return for an expansion and to a lesser degree for a patch but the ups and downs don't matter nearly as much as the overall range over say 18-24 months and whether or not the shifts are inside or outside that range.

Just a thought.

[But I Hate You All]

Shows how little you are paying attention to this thread... I just posted this:



It was even in the quote of a post you replied to.

I do not find www.warcry.com a credible source. I went by what blizzard reported

---------- Post added 2013-02-09 at 02:23 PM ----------

This was in 2009, when wow had 11.5 currently active subs. A direct quote from Rob Pardo as linked previously.

Wow lost 400k subs from Q3 2012 to Q4 2012, that is fact.

10.2 mill subs at end of Q4 2011.

Q1 2012 subs remained static.

Q2 2012 1.1 mill subs lost (9.1 mill active)

Q3 2012 900k gained (10 mill active)

Q4 2012 400k lost (9.6 mill active)

A nett loss of subs for 2012 of 600k - these are the facts.

Back to Cherry picking?

Q4 2010 at 12 million players world wide reported by blizzard
Q1 2013 - Blizzard reported 9.6 Million subscribers

2.4 million lost

[Aquamonkey]

I do not find www.warcry.com a credible source. I went by what blizzard reported

So you are dismissing that citation even though it is a direct quote from Rob Pardo?

[Nerraw]

So you are dismissing that citation even though it is a direct quote from Rob Pardo?

Don't bother. Some people are blind.

[MoanaLisa]

I do not find www.warcry.com a credible source. I went by what blizzard reported

They're credible enough to score an interview with Rob Pardo. That means something. Quotes from interviews with people like Pardo, Morhaime and Street are exactly that and not subject to a lot of parsing based on site credibility.

[Lemmiwink]

It's your opinion that it is terrible, not fact, it is mine it is far from terrible.

Wrath had 12 million, BC had 8, so you're saying BC was terrible because it had 50% less subs than wrath?

8x1,5=12 Wrath had 50% higher player base than TBC.
12X0.5=6 TBC had 50% fewer players than Wrath.

Hmmmmmm

Actually, TBC had 11m+ at the end of it and Wrath only briefly surpassed TBC. I'm also pretty sure that WoW was never more active on a day to day basis than it was during TBC. It was the way it felt at least.

[Orange Joe]

Do we really have to repeat all this every three months? Has anyone accomplished anything in this thread?

[Loaf Lord]

Do we really have to repeat all this every three months? Has anyone accomplished anything in this thread?

Not really no. Just sit back and let them have their psychotic arguments, it's fun to watch.

[Nerraw]

They're credible enough to score an interview with Rob Pardo. That means something. Quotes from interviews with people like Pardo, Morhaime and Street are exactly that and not subject to a lot of parsing based on site credibility.

And faking an interview with someone so prominent is usually journalistic suicide. Remember that guy faking a BioWare interview a couple of months ago?

[Orange Joe]

Not really no. Just sit back and let them have their psychotic arguments, it's fun to watch.

It's kind of funny and sad at the same time. All this hate and fighting over numbers they can't do anything about. Numbers that even though some say otherwise have no effect on them. They are just fighting to fight......

[MoanaLisa]

Has anyone accomplished anything in this thread?

Weirdly enough I have. My post up the thread a bit about viewing subscription numbers in an analog of a stock trading range is a new idea for me and something that I want to give some thought to. And perhaps someone else will see it that had never had that idea before and will think about it as well. I'm not saying that I'm the very first to ever have the idea; I'm sure I'm not. But it's a different perspective than what a lot of the thread has been about and challenging people to drop their agendas and consider the information we have in a different way is something I like.

For the rest, I don't know. But it's something to talk about.

-------------------------------------

It's kind of funny and sad at the same time. All this hate and fighting over numbers they can't do anything about. Numbers that even though some say otherwise have no effect on them. They are just fighting to fight......

I will gently remind you that this is a bit off-topic. Please either continue to read, or better, contribute to what is on-topic. Thanks.