6.5-7m subscribers over the course of two expansions would just suggest that its stable.
6.5-7m subscribers over the course of two expansions would just suggest that its stable.
Wait, so now it's an important indicator of the health of the company?
You just got done acting like Blizzard did it to disguise the fact that their revenues are down?
So, which is it? Important indicator of company health, or sneaky trick to make people think they're healthy when they're not?
You can't have it both ways, bub.
And yes, this was exactly my claim. What are you talking about? I said they reported revenues as up because they are up and non-GAAP is a perfectly valid way to report revenues. Those were my claims and I've established them all as fact while you seem to be changing your stance entirely from one post to the next.
Of course WoW is dying, but that doesn't mean it's gonna shut down next month or something. WoW will still be up and running a decade from now most likely.
People think "dying" is an alarmist term, and I guess it sounds like it, but it's technically accurate.
Yes, it is.
They put a positive spin on not so positive figures there is nothing particularly wrong with doing it but it is not the full picture.
Health does not always have to be good.
No your claim was "This is how all earnings are reported and it's what investors pay attention to." which not true. I have not changed my stance at all the figures reported to the SEC were down.
I have to say for someone that apparently does not care about to learn more about the subject you are going to quite some effort to keep talking about it.
It is incorrect.
Because WOW will grow in the near future again.
As early as the WoD launch even.
As WoW is not a biogical life either it is independant of "dying".
It is enough that Bizzard announces WoW for free , and the number of players would skyrocket.
WoW will be around for ages.
- - - Updated - - -
It is incorrect.
Because WOW will grow in the near future again.
As early as the WoD launch even.
As WoW is not a biogical life either it is independant of "dying".
It is enough that Bizzard announces WoW for free , and the number of players would skyrocket.
WoW will be around for ages.
More than 1 bilion dollars in the last year. Not one movie came even close dudes .
Will WoW grow to it's previous record of 12 million subs? If not then one must say that it is is declining in subs.
You expect it to get those subs from one expansion?
No one ever said it was. However have you never had electronics that stopped functioning? Did you not say that they had died?
If Blizzard were to announce that it is free would that not hurt their bottom line? IF so one could assume that then they (Blizzard) would feel that it is dying since it isn't bringing in the money it once did.
Years but not ages.
Stop being so close minded and learn that death is not something that only pertains to a biological organism. Though WoW is not dead it is waning in power and therefor it is dying.
By the way I now see why you post the way you do. You can take what little knowledge you have and by spreading it out over several lines it suddenly makes it seem like you have more of a point than you truly do.
Last edited by Xeraxis; 2014-08-11 at 05:59 PM.
no wow is not dying but to say it is not in decline would be wrong. 6.8 million subs at the moment, lowest number since TBC. The game once had 12 million players.
however dont worry subs dont matter anymore, it may hurt the health of the game having a smaller pool of people but wow wont die as long as it is profitable and blizzard still gains hundreds of millions in revenue from microtransactions related to wow plus wow is not their only franchise.
Until WOTLK content was challenging in WoW. While WOTLK had the highest number of subs, it only really increased by 500k from TBC. Past WOTLK the sub numbers dropped and that's when game content got easy. Raid content was still hard thanks to Heroic modes, but the rest of the game was just a grind. But that even raids became more accessible thanks to LFR but the subs don't stick around.
Point is when game content is no longer challenging, but instead tedious and boring then you lose interest. Look at Heroic dungeons, people just want to blaze through them. It's not a matter of working with people and honing your skills, but just getting through it so you can be at work in time. It would also be awesome if dungeons supplied dungeon set gear like Wildheart, Valor, and Lightforge.
Around the time Wrath launched Blizzard commented that between two and three times the current player population had played WOW which suggests that the majority of players did not play for long and the amount of players joining the game masked the amount leaving. They also said that only between 1-2% of players had stepped in/completed Naxx/SWP which suggests that the majority of players were not playing the most difficult content. It is ridiculous to suggest that players joined and stayed the game because less than 5% of them was engaged with difficult content.
The game grew because it hit an untapped market.
So are all of us.
So is our sun - in just a few billion years it will be nothing but a smouldering brown rock
Seriously, though, that 6.2 million subscribers is still WAY healthier than any other MMOs out there. Yeah they've dropped more customers in the last 5 years than any other MMO has ever had. If the trend continues maybe they'll have to consider going F2P in another 5, and shutting down a few years later. WOW is probably past its prime, but it's outlived every game that I've ever seen talked about in these forums as a "WOW-killer" and it's still got a couple of expansions worth of life left in it.
This is a dumb thread.
You guys keep talking about numbers but forget most of the losses in subs is from China and other Asian countries. Since they mostly pay hourly why bother paying for a game with such long content droughts ?
Yes, I can say it is. I can also say it hasn't hit a point where it reaches a precipitous drop into obscurity, so saying it's dead wouldn't be accurate.
I also think it can recover from it's four or five year slump if it repairs it's reward mechanisms.
Why would anyone give a shit about the microtransactions? You can easily just, you know, not fucking buy them.
On topic: WoW will be "dying" when it starts generating deficit, not profit. Subscriber numbers are nice, and are obviously a factor in profits, but as of right now we see quickly declining subscriber numbers yet stable/increasing profits (seems like there is a lot of truth to their "mostly in the East" claims regarding subscriber losses). Call me when WoW actually starts losing money, then I will worry about WoW dying.
Last edited by Bepples; 2014-08-11 at 11:52 PM.
More digital store content can offset lost subscribers. Especially when the content is more expensive than one month of gameplay.
No surprise they're still posting profits. However, the servers are still steadily emptying out, and merges are still rolling. Hallmark of a game in decline.
Most players who don't do Heroic content, aren't going to stick around for long. People wait for an expansion, play for a few months and then quit their subscription. Why? Cause they don't do hard content. This will never change, as the introduction to LFR has shown that players are still leaving. Most of WoW's content except for raiding and PvP can be completed within a few weeks. Hardcore raiders and PvPers can also complete the game in a relatively short time, if they're truly good. They quit cause they don't want to pay that subscription fee. The ones who stick around are either having a hard time in raids or have nothing better to do.
To me it seems that subscription cost is still the #1 reason people quit WoW. The lack of a challenging game content is why some of them never come back.
You have no way of knowing this. Again this is more supposition that is not backed up with actual data. Over 90% of the population never engage in the most challenging content. Players were leaving before LFR. Wouldn't most of WOW's content being able to be completed in a matter of weeks point to a lack of content? Again more assumption.