Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Eapoe]

You are just being ridiculous and trying to argue for the sake of arguing. You don't get a legitimate argument that is not only a derail to this thread, but grossly farfetched towards what we are trying to do.

While we are at all, why don't we just start a kickstarter to go to a Pluto. I mean completely relevant. No way shape and form will be more expensive than Blizzard doing a classic server either.

Just starting to throw more people like this on ignore. It's become glaringly obvious these people are just trolls.

What you are trying to do is have a place to play your vanilla WoW with no threats of it getting shut down and play it to your hearts content. How is this a derailment? It's literally the perfect answer, unless you just want a crusade to go against Blizzard? I feel a need to reiterate: you say there are areas in the world where copyright doesn't exist, you say you want a vanilla server to play on. If everyone who wants this actually pulled together resources is it not possible for you to get the things you want without going directly thru Blizzard? This is not a derailment of the conversation as much as just stating think outside the box. You've literally stated exactly what you need to do this, yet no one wants to take the initiative to actually put it into action.

[gamingmuscle]

I'll believe it when I see it. I'll refrain from speculation and keep my opinion on the factual data that exists.

- - - Updated - - -



"No it doesn't. Game did exactly what I'm saying doesn't happen, but doesn't prove I'm lying".

Sigh. I said net adds or growth was trending down in vanilla and tbc....indicating the game was going to plateau soonish (IE wrath). WoD's sales do not disprove that....hell a single data point wouldn't disprove the trend. But it was a happy anomaly that didn't last. I totally didn't expect that large of a boost.

[Uurdz]

Who cares? The fact that 10 million people were actively subscribed around launch means not only did those players pay the retail price of WoD, they subscribed for at least one month of the game. There's no way you can prove that Blizzard's current business model isn't to facilitate exactly that kind of resurgence/drop-off in subs after the gradual decline and waning of MMO popularity which began to occur at the end of WotLK. I don't necessarily agree with it but the fact that even at 3-4 million active subs WoW is dwarfing its nearest competition has to mean something. And sure it'd be nice if WoD had more content to keep people around but it's stupid to continue hammering the faults of WoD as an expansion when there's a new expansion on the horizon which may fix many of the previous expansion's cardinal sins.

Moreover, there's a possibility Legacy realms may have a near-identical impact as WoD's release did: An initial surge in subscribers followed by a massive drop off after players either get bored or disillusioned by the content.

It doesn't, go read the December quarterly update. Man anti-legacy posters used to have good arguments

[Deficineiron]

Net adds mean growth, regression is the opposite of growth. You're wanting to argue that there wasn't consistent growth through vanilla and tbc? Or are you trying to argue that because growth in wrath was minor that it was obviously at peak population? You really think that's a good argument?

- - - Updated - - -



Lol gets countered hard and calls it a statistical outlier without any proof or evidence

issue is folks using worldwide sub number and comparing to box sales. half of worldwide subs dont pay for boxes at all.

[Baronthefirst]

Who cares? The fact that 10 million people were actively subscribed around launch means not only did those players pay the retail price of WoD, they subscribed for at least one month of the game. There's no way you can prove that Blizzard's current business model isn't to facilitate exactly that kind of resurgence/drop-off in subs after the gradual decline and waning of MMO popularity which began to occur at the end of WotLK. I don't necessarily agree with it but the fact that even at 3-4 million active subs WoW is dwarfing its nearest competition has to mean something. And sure it'd be nice if WoD had more content to keep people around but it's stupid to continue hammering the faults of WoD as an expansion when there's a new expansion on the horizon which may fix many of the previous expansion's cardinal sins.

Moreover, there's a possibility Legacy realms may have a near-identical impact as WoD's release did: An initial surge in subscribers followed by a massive drop off after players either get bored or disillusioned by the content.

You really like putting all your eggs in one basket don't you. Truth is even if Legion fixes issues. People might prefer to do it on a Pristine realm. You know a realm that operates like a Legacy realm. This subs are cyclonic needs to stop.

[Uurdz]

Sigh. I said net adds or growth was trending down in vanilla and tbc....indicating the game was going to plateau soonish (IE wrath). WoD's sales do not disprove that....hell a single data point wouldn't disprove the trend. But it was a happy anomaly that didn't last. I totally didn't expect that large of a boost.

Keep telling yourself that the line you put on the graph is a natural product cycle line and not impacted my game features or general direction.

It's bad logic, but go nuts

[Eliseus]

Sigh. I said net adds or growth was trending down in vanilla and tbc....indicating the game was going to plateau soonish (IE wrath). WoD's sales do not disprove that....hell a single data point wouldn't disprove the trend. But it was a happy anomaly that didn't last. I totally didn't expect that large of a boost.

Prove everything you said as wrong. Adds growth was trending down? Trending down so hard that they saw exponential growth till WotLK? That makes no sense. A trend would indicate that the growth would have in fact gone down or had ANY indication at all of going down. There is NO indication of this at all in these eras. I don't know even know why this is being argued to begin with, let alone someone arguing that adds were trending down during these eras. Matter of fact, all there can be taken from this graph is that net adds were up. That is why there was never a down.

[Vineri]

I gave you the reasoning behind why I think market saturation better explains the plateau in wrath...and ultimately the slow decline after that. Where spikes either up or down could be the effects of design.

I don't think you even understand that "harddata"....and I'm certain you need to edit the first 2/3rds of the that sentence.

I didn't say sub losses, I said net adds.

Plot the change in subs (not the # of subs) from vanilla through TBC or later. It it quite obviously trending down from Vanilla.

Wow didn't lose subs in Wrath. Cataclysm did.

Cataclysm was a huge disaster To the community, to the game. A total mess. No doubt.

[Deleted]

No it doesn't. WoD sales do go against the trend, but does not disprove WoW hit market saturation in Wrath.

--SNIP--

Don't post spam

[Vineri]

Prove everything you said as wrong. Adds growth was trending down? Trending down so hard that they saw exponential growth till WotLK? That makes no sense. A trend would indicate that the growth would have in fact gone down or had ANY indication at all of going down. There is NO indication of this at all in these eras. I don't know even know why this is being argued to begin with, let alone someone arguing that adds were trending down during these eras. Matter of fact, all there can be taken from this graph is that net adds were up. That is why there was never a down.

I believe the poster was speaking of the churn rate (new people gained vs. people lost). Not overall Population.

New people were acquired fast during vanillia / TBC. New people were gained faster during WorLK, but not at the rate others were leaving. (i.e. gain 6 million players, lose 8 million). Most of the original players that made this game great left, in wake of "changes" had jumped ship. What was left was the Instant Reward crowd .. which scared away another Mil over the years. Instant Reward Crowd people .. want instant rewards .. don't wanna work on characters, want max equipment .. because they don't have time, ya know. Idea MMORPG'ers, right?

[Deficineiron]

Prove everything you said as wrong. Adds growth was trending down? Trending down so hard that they saw exponential growth till WotLK? That makes no sense. A trend would indicate that the growth would have in fact gone down or had ANY indication at all of going down. There is NO indication of this at all in these eras. I don't know even know why this is being argued to begin with, let alone someone arguing that adds were trending down during these eras. Matter of fact, all there can be taken from this graph is that net adds were up. That is why there was never a down.

gets worse if you break out some data points for china/not china in western wotlk period, + a comment by vivendi's ceo in early 2009.

late 2008/early 2009 was likely the western sub peak for wow. very good argument to make based on public statements by a/b and netease to support that contention.

also what is this 'wod sales' stuff, iirc wod sales were lower than panda sales, at least in comparable time frames?

[gamingmuscle]

Net adds mean growth, regression is the opposite of growth. You're wanting to argue that there wasn't consistent growth through vanilla and tbc? Or are you trying to argue that because growth in wrath was minor that it was obviously at peak population? You really think that's a good argument?

And I said the growth was declining. Which it was. And it started in Vanilla, continued in TBC and plateaued in Wrath.

Lol gets countered hard and calls it a statistical outlier without any proof or evidence

No one has. We have the numbers. We can do the freaking math. My statement is factually correct about the trend. Maybe my conclusion of market saturation being the most likely explanation is wrong. But no one has countered that. All anyone has done is said no their opinion is better with out even backing up with a solid train of thought.

- - - Updated - - -

Image that only illustrates he doesn't understand the topic.

At least you're slightly amusing.

[Deleted]

Just look at the numbers retardmuscle, if you can't even get your data correct how dare you speak with some bs "mY StAtMeNt Is FaCtuAllY CoRreCt DeRp"
Your arguments are invalid at 99%

[Akani]

-snip-

Ironic that the pieces you quoted are proven in the areas you circled. WoD has a sharp increase where everything else after Wrath was a modest rise or massive drop. I lol'd.

[FlubberDuck]

At the very least Blizz has decided to set down and talk with the team. However I personally think legacy servers can be good and bad, as a matter of fact I posted a video to my youtube channel --SNIP--

[Eliseus]

Just look at the numbers retardmuscle, if you can't even get your data correct how dare you speak with some bs "mY StAtMeNt Is FaCtuAllY CoRreCt DeRp"
Your arguments are invalid at 99%

"This is what is actually correct" nothing provided vs "This is the opinion I'll have based off this data". Stuff provided. "I don't like your opinion that is understandable how you inferred that, since those numbers actually exist, but I don't like you and your cause so therefore you are wrong and I will say you didn't provide anything. Then I will continue to attack Mark and Nost which Blizzard won't give them the time of day. Even after confirmation of a meeting, it is a hoax." This is basically how the thread has gone since page 1.

I honestly don't know why I'm still in this thread arguing. Maybe it is for the random spectator? Who knows anymore. The same trolls just try their same argument every 40 or so pages, and hoping some poor sap doesn't just go "GOT ME!".

[SoBBeN1]

Ignoring the fact that vanilla/BC were by far my absolute favorite times in WoW by a longshot, I don't exactly want their return just yet. Would I play on those servers? If retail was still this bad, yes I would (and I did, on Nostalrius). Would I prefer retail go in a much different direction instead? Without a doubt.

When entertainment of any form tries to please everyone instead of those who made their entertainment a success in the first place, that entertainment usually doesn't end up entertaining that many people. WoW is an MMO-RPG. It's supposed to attract players who want to grind character progression and group with other people. Those types of players are the ones who made this game popular and they're going to decide when the game goes free-to-play. Little by little, that population is leaving. The most efficient way to get things done outside of mythic raiding is to press a couple buttons and voila! You're playing a single player RPG with what might as well be with NPCs. The gameplay is not nearly good enough to sustain that type of design.

I've given these "pristine servers" some thought and I think it's a decent enough beginning for an idea, but it would have to be substantially different from retail for me to want to play. No group finder, no flying, one difficulty for raids and raids with appropriate difficulty increase to compensate, removal of catch-up mechanics, removal of the majority of BoE's from the AH, re-institution of classic style legendaries, no name changes, no server transfers, no race changes, no level boosts, no cross-realm, very difficult world bosses on long random timers... I guess the list goes on and on, but I would be satisfied with at least half of it. It'll never live up to vanilla/BC for me, but it would at least bring back the elements from those times that I enjoyed. I'm obviously not alone when I say I'm thoroughly disappointed by how drastically this game has changed over the years.

I don't think Blizzard will ever revert back to their old designs, but I do think the pristine servers could breathe life back into the IP for many, many disenfranchised players.

this would bring me back

[gamingmuscle]

Prove everything you said as wrong. Adds growth was trending down? Trending down so hard that they saw exponential growth till WotLK? That makes no sense. A trend would indicate that the growth would have in fact gone down or had ANY indication at all of going down. There is NO indication of this at all in these eras. I don't know even know why this is being argued to begin with, let alone someone arguing that adds were trending down during these eras. Matter of fact, all there can be taken from this graph is that net adds were up. That is why there was never a down.

LOL you don't understand at all. WoW.

This is exponential growth.



Growth had gone down. The 2nd column in the below table is the growth.
1-8 is Vanilla
9-15 is TBC
16-23 is Wrath
24+ cata...maybe mop only did 30 quarters worth.

Quater	Change in subs (Growth)	Total Subs
1	1.5	1.5
2	2	3.5
3	0.5	4
4	1.5	5.5
5	0.5	6
6	0.5	6.5
7	0.5	7
8	1	8
9	0.5	8.5
10	0.5	9
11	0.3	9.3
12	0.7	10
13	0.7	10.7
14	0.2	10.9
15	0.1	11
16	0.5	11.5
17	0	11.5
18	0	11.5
19	0	11.5
20	0	11.5
21	0	11.5
22	0	11.5
23	0.5	12
24	0	12
25	-0.6	11.4
26	-0.3	11.1
27	-0.8	10.3
28	-0.1	10.2
29	0	10.2
30	-1.1	9.1

[Relapses]

"This is what is actually correct" nothing provided vs "This is the opinion I'll have based off this data". Stuff provided. "I don't like your opinion that is understandable how you inferred that, since those numbers actually exist, but I don't like you and your cause so therefore you are wrong and I will say you didn't provide anything. Then I will continue to attack Mark and Nost which Blizzard won't give them the time of day. Even after confirmation of a meeting, it is a hoax." This is basically how the thread has gone since page 1.

I honestly don't know why I'm still in this thread arguing. Maybe it is for the random spectator? Who knows anymore. The same trolls just try their same argument every 40 or so pages, and hoping some poor sap doesn't just go "GOT ME!".

You're purposefully glossing over the arguments provided by people against Legacy realms. I can't speak for other posters but I personally try not to add to the discussion unless I see something so patently false it needs to be questioned. It's pretty frustrating when the pro-Legacy circlejerk has dudes like the guy above posting giant fucking mean-spirited memes simply because they don't agree with the way the poster is framing their argument.

[Deficineiron]

"This is what is actually correct" nothing provided vs "This is the opinion I'll have based off this data". Stuff provided. "I don't like your opinion that is understandable how you inferred that, since those numbers actually exist, but I don't like you and your cause so therefore you are wrong and I will say you didn't provide anything. Then I will continue to attack Mark and Nost which Blizzard won't give them the time of day. Even after confirmation of a meeting, it is a hoax." This is basically how the thread has gone since page 1.

I honestly don't know why I'm still in this thread arguing. Maybe it is for the random spectator? Who knows anymore. The same trolls just try their same argument every 40 or so pages, and hoping some poor sap doesn't just go "GOT ME!".

Once again, Forum Logic provides answers that have eluded you. This is from early in my system of forum rationalization development and bold.blue had not been added yet. Let me quote for your education.

'Forum Logic' dictates the only reason wow went from 0$ to over a billion annual (and over 5m western subs) revenues so quickly is 1) it was new (no other video game was ever new) and 2) the game was bad (the evidence for how bad classic and tbc were is how quickly the game grew).

Once the bad game was made good (post-merger of course) Forum Logic then dictates that the good game slowly bled subs and revenue for ~5+ years running because of market saturation (the bad game had saturated the available market, which I guess is normal for bad games).

More seriously, while one assumes market saturation was coming into play by late 2008, the game took a hard easy turn across the board in 3.0.2 and wihtout blizzard's internal data, we have no idea how it impacted churn patterns. it seems certain that it would have impacted them but we can only speculate.