Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Vineri]

Most subs do come from china

This is very true. The "millions" come from China, they still do. the 100k's come from the US / EU.

The revenue Blizzard "REALLY" makes is from added-value, such as cash-shop, or transfer / customization stuff. It would be interesting for investor data to know details, but all anyone can know is while subs tank, overall revenue is OK to great, indicating strong support for non-tangible assets (while subs tank).

Sadly the revenue goes to other games within Blizzard's portfolio.

.. and then people hate Legacy because it takes away from "their" game .. if only they knew, and followed what is really happening.

[Gadzooks]

In a thread with lots of crazy claims, this has to be the most amusing. Even if you aren't aware of how things work online, just some basic awareness of current events might have prevented this.

And you followed it up with an even more hysterical claim, if you're talking about the sabre rattling going on between the US and Russia. If things are that bad, that Blizzard is blocked from doing business in their courts, then the Nost people, as citizens of countries part of NATO, will also be blocked.

But that doesn't matter, really, because the only thing Blizzard would have to do in Russia is serve the hosting company with a takedown notice to take the servers down. Any lawsuits would take place in the countries where the Nost people live. There is no mythical protection for the Nost people from where they decide to hide/host the game - Blizzard knows who they are, and will serve them in their home country quite easily, regardless of events in Russia - to claim otherwise is pure denial or delusional ignorance of how the law works, and how international law works, and how lawsuits work.(and it's fucking hysterical you would actually post hinting at it)

Furthermore, if they hired a Russian citizen to host the files for them, the Russian courts do, in fact, support WIPO and foreign IP law, and many Russian citizens have been sued and lost over copyright infringements and DMCA violations. Hacking is a crime in Russia that has weak punishments and is low priority, not copyright infringement. This isn't hacking.

This fantasy that Russia is some magical copyright haven of unicorn WoW servers is amusing, but completely meaningless. It's all part of the cute little echo chamber that exists in this thread, and among the legacy demanders.

[The Stormbringer]

Most subs do come from china

This. Not sure why someone is trying to act like China subs don't matter.

[Holtzmann]

Sadly the revenue goes to other games within Blizzard's portfolio.

.. and then people hate Legacy because it takes away from "their" game .. if only they knew, and followed what is really happening.

That's a fallacious argument. Money isn't generally the issue when it comes to implementation. Blizzard could spend any amount of money to build Vanilla back up from scratch if they wanted to. The problem is twofold:

1 - that they don't have the team for that, so they'd have to hire and train new people for it, which a company may or may not be inclined to do. Adding more people to a team does not necessarily make that team work any better, and Blizzard has historically taken a very long time to incorporate new developers to a project.

2 - Money is a concern when thinking about operational costs and long-term viability of a project. Basically, if they spend a hundred million dollars on a project, they want to make damn sure they have a good return on their investment in a timely fashion. That's ultimately the calculation that tells them whether or not they should proceed with a project. Something like Hearthstone, for example, had a tiny initial investment and an enormous return in a very short time. World of Warcraft has large investments but generally large returns as well - even with only 1 million active subscriptions they would be raking in a minimum of 10 million dollars a month, not counting character services or the in-game shop.

Legacy servers being released is predicated on Blizzard deciding that the project is worth relocating/hiring people to it, and that the return on their investment (programming, infrastructure, running costs) will be high enough. As I said multiple times, I'd like to see Legacy servers so I could try out the "real" Blizz-like experience for myself (I started playing in Burning Crusade), and so we could see the claims being made on this thread, from both sides, being tested. Hopefully we'll get an answer on the matter, one way or another, at Blizzcon.

And again, at this point I'm pretty sure Legacy servers are Blizzard's Half-Life 3. There is so much expectation over them that no matter what they do, they're going to get burned for it. So their strategy is simply not to do anything.

[-Joker-]

Is it possible they just don't feel like doing it? If nearly 300k signatures has not gotten them in gear, perhaps they just don't want to go backwards, or hurt the feelings of their long time players.

[Holtzmann]

Is it possible they just don't feel like doing it? If nearly 300k signatures has not gotten them in gear, perhaps they just don't want to go backwards, or hurt the feelings of their long time players.

Tom Chilton claims that a lot of people in the WoW team were up for the idea of Legacy servers, so it's clear there's some interest within the company.

The question is: are the people who truly make the decisions (not the game/project managers and designers) up for it as well? Enough that they would take the plunge into a potential PR nightmare? Only they know so far, and they haven't told us anything yet.

[-Joker-]

Tom Chilton claims that a lot of people in the WoW team were up for the idea of Legacy servers, so it's clear there's some interest within the company.

The question is: are the people who truly make the decisions (not the game/project managers and designers) up for it as well? Enough that they would take the plunge into a potential PR nightmare? Only they know so far, and they haven't told us anything yet.

Given that Tom Chilton has walked away from WoW (not Blizz) and Watcher (Ian H.) is now running the show, I am guessing this will fall into a permanent purgatory. Seems like he is not keen on opening a door to the past.

[Vineri]

That's a fallacious argument. Money isn't generally the issue when it comes to implementation. Blizzard could spend any amount of money to build Vanilla back up from scratch if they wanted to. The problem is twofold:

1 - that they don't have the team for that, so they'd have to hire and train new people for it, which a company may or may not be inclined to do. Adding more people to a team does not necessarily make that team work any better, and Blizzard has historically taken a very long time to incorporate new developers to a project.

2 - Money is a concern when thinking about operational costs and long-term viability of a project. Basically, if they spend a hundred million dollars on a project, they want to make damn sure they have a good return on their investment in a timely fashion. That's ultimately the calculation that tells them whether or not they should proceed with a project. Something like Hearthstone, for example, had a tiny initial investment and an enormous return in a very short time. World of Warcraft has large investments but generally large returns as well - even with only 1 million active subscriptions they would be raking in a minimum of 10 million dollars a month, not counting character services or the in-game shop.

Legacy servers being released is predicated on Blizzard deciding that the project is worth relocating/hiring people to it, and that the return on their investment (programming, infrastructure, running costs) will be high enough. As I said multiple times, I'd like to see Legacy servers so I could try out the "real" Blizz-like experience for myself (I started playing in Burning Crusade), and so we could see the claims being made on this thread, from both sides, being tested. Hopefully we'll get an answer on the matter, one way or another, at Blizzcon.

And again, at this point I'm pretty sure Legacy servers are Blizzard's Half-Life 3. There is so much expectation over them that no matter what they do, they're going to get burned for it. So their strategy is simply not to do anything.

Legacy is Blizzard's game. If they want to keep their IP for posterity, they would promote it. I've seen lesser companies promote their "old" games, for no benefit other than to do so. If Blizzard wants to protect the IP, DO SOMETHING WITH IT - or let it go.

I won't forgive Valve for no Half Life 3. They were on the verge of a video game revolution with their quality, but they let it go ..for money, for Steam. Steam made huge money, but .. man what a waste of talent. What a waste.

[Gadzooks]

That's a fallacious argument. Money isn't generally the issue when it comes to implementation. Blizzard could spend any amount of money to build Vanilla back up from scratch if they wanted to. The problem is twofold:

1 - that they don't have the team for that, so they'd have to hire and train new people for it, which a company may or may not be inclined to do. Adding more people to a team does not necessarily make that team work any better, and Blizzard has historically taken a very long time to incorporate new developers to a project.

2 - Money is a concern when thinking about operational costs and long-term viability of a project. Basically, if they spend a hundred million dollars on a project, they want to make damn sure they have a good return on their investment in a timely fashion. That's ultimately the calculation that tells them whether or not they should proceed with a project. Something like Hearthstone, for example, had a tiny initial investment and an enormous return in a very short time. World of Warcraft has large investments but generally large returns as well - even with only 1 million active subscriptions they would be raking in a minimum of 10 million dollars a month, not counting character services or the in-game shop.

Legacy servers being released is predicated on Blizzard deciding that the project is worth relocating/hiring people to it, and that the return on their investment (programming, infrastructure, running costs) will be high enough. As I said multiple times, I'd like to see Legacy servers so I could try out the "real" Blizz-like experience for myself (I started playing in Burning Crusade), and so we could see the claims being made on this thread, from both sides, being tested. Hopefully we'll get an answer on the matter, one way or another, at Blizzcon.

And again, at this point I'm pretty sure Legacy servers are Blizzard's Half-Life 3. There is so much expectation over them that no matter what they do, they're going to get burned for it. So their strategy is simply not to do anything.

Well said, and good points all - but these points have been made the entire length of this thread, and they have been passed off and rejected by people who simply don't want to hear the truth, so they make up their own, like "They're lying that they don't have all the data!" This entire thread is of specious claims being made, shot down, and ressurected over and over and over - if they'd simply accept the truth and reality that it's A. going to be expensive, and take a lot of work, and Blizzard is unsure they'll get repaid for that, and B. there's no clear business plan based on real world numbers for the health and growth of a project like this. Just accept that. But no, "I want!' overrides it all, to comical effect.

IF they announced they were doing it, I'd be surprised, and interested how they overcame the hurdles, but not shocked, upset, or anything, really. I get why people want it. It's beyond established that there's interest from the players - and from the devs. Very, very few people have taken the attitude that they shouldn't happen, they just try to pound into certain people's head why it's most likely not going to happen, and correct their distortions, lies, flights of pure fantasy, and more comical claims about copyright and your "rights" as a customer. I honestly don't care if you want legacy servers. I have no interest in playing it again - but if you want to, more power to you. And I honestly don't care if you play on illegal servers, either, just don't come running here and start bawwing about "rights" and "it's not illegal" and how "ripped off" you are that Blizzard won't jump to attention when you snap your fingers.

I don't know if at this point legacy servers are in Half Life 3/Duke Nukem Forever status, but from the comments of the devs that matter, they're not coming any time soon, if at all. I think Chilton's "we'd like to do that, some day" is the defining statement - and Ion's comments, especially with the Pristine server comments, is that he'd rather fix the game to make it what the legacy players want - which is a reasonable response, from the guy who's now running the game. (and who knows - maybe Chilton left the WoW team to work on legacy, he was one of the supporters...but I still doubt it.)

[Vineri]

...the truth and reality that it's A. going to be expensive, and take a lot of work, and Blizzard is unsure they'll get repaid for that, and B. there's no clear business plan based on real world numbers for the health and growth of a project like this.

or C. Blizzard may want to save face and implement Legacy to maintain their reputation .. or D. they may wish to do Legacy to spite all the private servers .. or E. They will spin Legacy in a way nobody has imagined yet.

The demand is there. It's up to Blizzard to ultimately say they will or will not. It's not your's or mine, or anyone elses call. It's theirs.

I think Legacy will happen. You don't.

Speculation is good. While we differ in opinion, hopefully we agree on this - speculation is good.

[Deficineiron]

This. Not sure why someone is trying to act like China subs don't matter.

my take is two-fold.

for players on this forum, i have seen 1 or 2 people over the years that played on netease servers. For all practical purposes wow in china is completely irrelevant except to use in worldwide sub number arguments to compare to western-only mmo's and otherwise bludgeon other posters' opinions.. the only thing that matters is western wow - and it is western wow' that drives blizzard game design decisions. At the time a/b went black on info, wow was still doing easily well over half the revenue run rate of wow at its peak.

the other thing is that for blizzard, from what I could tell, a netease sub was worth 1/6 or 1/7 the revenue of a blizzard western sub some years ago. don't know how that ratio has tracked now. Obviously their relationship with netease is important, but I don't think overall it matters that much to blizzard in terms of game decisions they make at, if at all. as far as I can tell, all they do is provide the software with the special adaptations for that market (language and visual), and collect royalties.

so while china subs do matter on the 10k/10q's, I don't think they matter one single bit in terms of blizzard game design decisions nor for this forum.

[yetgdhfgh]

Funny that blizz has seemed to have weathered this storm after all that oh we will listen and still we are no where near to getting out vanilla servers.

[Marakesh]

And you followed it up with an even more hysterical claim, if you're talking about the sabre rattling going on between the US and Russia. If things are that bad, that Blizzard is blocked from doing business in their courts, then the Nost people, as citizens of countries part of NATO, will also be blocked.

But that doesn't matter, really, because the only thing Blizzard would have to do in Russia is serve the hosting company with a takedown notice to take the servers down. Any lawsuits would take place in the countries where the Nost people live. There is no mythical protection for the Nost people from where they decide to hide/host the game - Blizzard knows who they are, and will serve them in their home country quite easily, regardless of events in Russia - to claim otherwise is pure denial or delusional ignorance of how the law works, and how international law works, and how lawsuits work.(and it's fucking hysterical you would actually post hinting at it)

Furthermore, if they hired a Russian citizen to host the files for them, the Russian courts do, in fact, support WIPO and foreign IP law, and many Russian citizens have been sued and lost over copyright infringements and DMCA violations. Hacking is a crime in Russia that has weak punishments and is low priority, not copyright infringement. This isn't hacking.

This fantasy that Russia is some magical copyright haven of unicorn WoW servers is amusing, but completely meaningless. It's all part of the cute little echo chamber that exists in this thread, and among the legacy demanders.

Magical copyright haven? Nothing is ever guaranteed but there's a huge difference between how readily some countries will enforce IP. Last I heard they were still among the worst at copyright infringement and what laws they do have get used to censor opposition, not protect artists. Pretty sure it was their facebook equivalent I read about a year or 2 ago that was getting off near scot free? Can't remember off hand, however, since you're a random person on the internet blowing hard about knowing it all, I must take your word its all on lockdown over there now. Also, I'm sure at a time when Russian corporations are getting their funds seized they'll be right on your request for "assault weapons" to take down the evil Nostralius for the benefit of a beloved American corporation.

But you keep raging and hoping against all hope! Vanilla WoW will fade after Nost and never be heard from again. Except, why do you keep coming into this thread if you're so sure?


edit - and it took 2 minutes to google it and find out Russia is still on the US priority watch list for copyright infringement as of this year.

[Vineri]

my take is two-fold.

for players on this forum, i have seen 1 or 2 people over the years that played on netease servers. For all practical purposes wow in china is completely irrelevant except to use in worldwide sub number arguments. the only thing that matters is western wow - and it is western wow' that drives blizzard game design decisions.

the other thing is that for blizzard, from what I could tell, a netease sub was worth 1/6 or 1/7 the revenue of a blizzard western sub some years ago. don't know how that ratio has tracked now.

I think they were worth less, at one point several years ago they were worth a nickle on the dollar, yet counted as subs to inflate popularity. Multi-Million subs is apparently an inside joke, one Blizzard no longer advertises.

[Tackhisis]

Legacy is Blizzard's game. If they want to keep their IP for posterity, they would promote it.

There is no "legacy". World of Warcraft, be it 1.12 or 7.1 is the same game with only superficial differences. No jurisdiction will ever consider them DIFFERENT products.

[Vineri]

There is no "legacy". World of Warcraft, be it 1.12 or 7.1 is the same game with only superficial differences. No jurisdiction will ever consider them DIFFERENT products.

No, just no.

If you have no idea what is currently happening, I would recommend you educate yourself.

If you think there is no difference between 1,12 and 7.1, I'd also recommend you educate yourself.

What you said is making you look silly.

[Roadblock]

my take is two-fold.
<snip>
the other thing is that for blizzard, from what I could tell, a netease sub was worth 1/6 or 1/7 the revenue of a blizzard western sub some years ago. don't know how that ratio has tracked now. Obviously their relationship with netease is important, but I don't think overall it matters that much to blizzard in terms of game decisions they make at, if at all. as far as I can tell, all they do is provide the software with the special adaptations for that market (language and visual), and collect royalties.

so while china subs do matter on the 10k/10q's, I don't think they matter one single bit in terms of blizzard game design decisions nor for this forum.

You have something there but not in the way that you think I believe.

Q: Something you said about resource allocation in this. So, the issue is the constraint, then — you talked about resource allocation being more important. The constraint would be basically development talent. Not life of ideas.
A: <snip> as we start to get leverage in the international markets, where there’s no incremental significant cost of development
<snip>So, penetration in China. Penetration in Korea. More opportunities in Europe and emerging markets
<snip>Getting the institutional leverage that Blizzard has online, and applying that to franchises that we control.

Translating:
- Your constraint in proper resource allocation would be development talent (the most costly resource)
- Not when expanding to untapped markets with an existing product (China, Korea etc) because the development has already happened and been paid for, they're not developing for China they're just marketing to a new audience.

Now interestingly that's the one thing expanding to new markets geographically and providing versions of your game that are no longer available have in common.

They are both in essence re-selling an already developed product (the bulk of it anyway) to a new customer.
In the first case the Asian audience in second case the Legacy WoW lovers that have fallen off the retail bus for one reason or another (some percentage of 100mil people)

Now.. do I think that this reason alone is sufficient for Blizzard to re-release Legacy "as it was then"?
No.
Because that's not the only consideration.

Blizzard in the Activision era has purposely moved away from Classic monetization and is all about ARPU and milking as much as possible from its audience with value added services, microtransactions etc even at the cost of shrinking that base.
This is part of the reason a lot of people fell off the bus in the first place.
Their game design has also changed drastically to conform to that business plan.

The course correction and the implied admittance that this might not be in the best interest to gamers, would just be too severe.


The best case scenario would be for them to give a limited license to their IP to a 3rd party (like EQ and Project 1999 or the9 / netease themselves) so they can "wash their hands" and keep going their way.
The same way "whatever China rakes in" was a bonus since it was a time delayed release of content already developed, Legacy proceeds would similarly be a bonus for content that has already been developed and paid for itself ten times over.

[FelPlague]

Tom Chilton claims that a lot of people in the WoW team were up for the idea of Legacy servers, so it's clear there's some interest within the company.

The question is: are the people who truly make the decisions (not the game/project managers and designers) up for it as well? Enough that they would take the plunge into a potential PR nightmare? Only they know so far, and they haven't told us anything yet.

also the question of

only 300k people signed it saying " i would like it"
they dident have to pay anything
how many people could they get ,that would be willing to pay monthly for it...

300k FREE signatures, that could easily be botted
how many people will PAY to play on a private server... alot of people wont as they would rather play for free on other private servers, so idk, we will see

[Duronos]

also the question of

only 300k people signed it saying " i would like it"
they dident have to pay anything
how many people could they get ,that would be willing to pay monthly for it...

300k FREE signatures, that could easily be botted
how many people will PAY to play on a private server... alot of people wont as they would rather play for free on other private servers, so idk, we will see

Change.org has a very good anti-bot system to prevent stuff like that from happening. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[AeneasBK]

The thing is they didn't do it 10 years ago that much. Raiding was very uncommon. Most likely they did it when they were a much higher level than it.

Thats true but I would imagine that there is a stronger overlap of people who raided in Vanilla out of the people playing Nost proportionally. I could be well off.

Not to mention people who never played vanilla will have (at least some) up until WotLK been able to solo farm the old encounters in pretty much the same form they were at the end of vanilla. Certainly I feel I could face Vanilla Nefarian and, for example, know where to stand to avoid shadowflame.