Cata > MoP

[ro9ue]

Cata started with 12m subs, ended with 10m, a loss of 2m. Mop started at 10m and is currently at 6.8m, a loss of 3.2m, and we're likely to have at least 1 more quarter of losses before WoD. (Unless they have an amazing cinematic that makes people flood back in).

So while people want to rip on Cata, I think it's safe to say that Pandaland was even worse.

[Abstieg]

That's not how it works. It isn't necessarily a direct correlation.

[MetroStratics]

Worse for subscriber drop off, but that's about it.
If you need to see a list of all the content MoP added to the game you can find it here: http://wow.stratics.com/guides/mop-r...ose-returning/

You'll quickly see that MoP added more content in 5.1 then Cata did the entire expansion.
An overhaul of the classic zones was very very important though. But its max level content was not the best.

[Amozabael]

Actually, Pandaria was better, just a lot of immature man-children couldn't handle Pandaren, so they cried up a storm and left.

And the game was better for it.

[Gurushock]

Cata sucked. MoP has been so much better, at least in terms of pve. I did like cata pvp over MoP though but you can't really say that cata was better because of sub numbers. The game is old, we will probably never see the day where it has more than 10-13mil subs again. Even if wow dropped down to 4-5mil it would still be going strong.

[ro9ue]

Worse for subscriber drop off, but that's about it.
If you need to see a list of all the content MoP added to the game you can find it here: http://wow.stratics.com/guides/mop-r...ose-returning/

You'll quickly see that MoP added more content in 5.1 then Cata did the entire expansion.
An overhaul of the classic zones was very very important though. But its max level content was not the best.

More != Better

Add this dog poop to your spaghetti and let me know if it made it better.

[Jshadowhunter]

Calling it BS. MoP had more to offer than Cata. Sub drops have nothing to do with it.

Not to mention the reason why Deathwing was a bad villain wasn't just the boss battle in DS, but because considering the exp was focused aground him, Grunthilda theory wasn't applied like it was on WotLK.

[ro9ue]

Actually, Pandaria was better, just a lot of immature man-children couldn't handle Pandaren, so they cried up a storm and left.

And the game was better for it.

If anything it was the pandas that brought the kids.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

MoP=Wrath>TBC=Cata

[Gimlix]

Actually Cata ended with 9,1M subs.
And it's just if you still enjoy the game, not the other 12.000.000 people.

People getting older so is the game. Not much the best expansions can do about it, all Blizzard can do is make content and hope people enjoy it.

[MetroStratics]

More != Better

Add this dog poop to your spaghetti and let me know if it made it better.

None of those features added have made the game worse.
That's the last time I refresh this page if you actually think that.
Have a nice day.

[Calfredd]

More != Better

Add this dog poop to your spaghetti and let me know if it made it better.

Going off this, what did they add that you thought was crap?

[Darsithis]

I prefer MoP over Cata. While I liked Cata and liked the initial difficulty, overall it wasn't my favorite expansion. It felt so broken. I never felt like I knew what was going to happen next and there was no clear end goal.

[Aucald]

Not necessarily sure you have a primary causation here. Subs have fallen off from WotLK (the all-time high) slowly but steadily, all through Cata and into MoP. Cata also has no upswings in subs unlike MoP (200K from Sep. to Dec. 2013). In terms of descents both Cata and MoP share similar decreases over time, excepting the aforementioned small upswing in MoP. WoD will probably return a million or so subs upon release and have similar losses throughout.

That being said I would say MoP >= Cata.

[Keyboard Champion]

I disagree, there is nothing worse than Cata.

[hYrsch]

More != Better

Add this dog poop to your spaghetti and let me know if it made it better.

exactly: more!= better.

Just because cata had more sub, doenst mean it was a better expansion.

[Deleted]

DS & Firelands (apart from Raggy) are two of my least favorite raids in WoW history.

T11 was ironically my favorite raid tier in WoW history though.

All raids in MoP have been really really good.

So MoP > Cata for me

SoO has been going on for to long ofc but it is still way better than DS.

[Seefer]

Cata started with 12m subs, ended with 10m, a loss of 2m. Mop started at 10m and is currently at 6.8m, a loss of 3.2m, and we're likely to have at least 1 more quarter of losses before WoD. (Unless they have an amazing cinematic that makes people flood back in).

So while people want to rip on Cata, I think it's safe to say that Pandaland was even worse.

Couldn't be content drought could it? Cata was a shitty expansion pure and simple.

[ro9ue]

Going off this, what did they add that you thought was crap?

• Pandas x10
• Scenarios
• Deepwind Gorge
• Monks
• The changes to the warrior class from Cataclysm
• Obscene daily grinds
• About 80% of the armor sets
• All of the raids except ToT

Did they add stuff I thought was cool? Yes: Timeless Isle, Challenge Modes, Mantid, Lore Scrolls, Rare Mobs, ToT. I was just making the point to the other poster who thinks more = better.

- - - Updated - - -

exactly: more!= better.

Just because cata had more sub, doenst mean it was a better expansion.

Well played.

[Itisamuh]

That's not how it works. It isn't necessarily a direct correlation.

True, but I would still agree with the thread title.