View Poll Results: Will Pandaren or Pandaria ever get any new lore or attention after MoP?

Voters
1130. You may not vote on this poll
  • Pandaren and Pandaria will remain the central focus of ALL WoW expansions to come.

    57 5.04%
  • Pandaren will get more lore development than other races.

    48 4.25%
  • Pandaren will get very little lore development in the future.

    587 51.95%
  • Pandaren and Pandaria will be ignored in the future lore after MoP.

    438 38.76%
Page 25 of 27 FirstFirst ...
15
23
24
25
26
27
LastLast
  1. #481
    Quote Originally Posted by Zellviren View Post
    They could literally make things up and only have to have the stories last for for one expansion if it went badly (which, statistically, we know it did).

    Anyway, I'm pretty sure that Pandaria will be utterly ignored after this expansion closes and the developers will simply chalk it up as a costly experiment that, with hindsight, wasn't worth the risk. They'll likely avoid any and all future references to the place, to the extent where they're giving people a free level 90 so that they can skip it entirely.
    Oy, you really need to stop using "raw statistical data" as an argument because it doesn't prove anything.

    Anyone who has taken a course in Stats knows that raw statistical data is utterly useless without proper statistical analysis. For example, your only metrics for proving that Mists of Pandaria was a costly mistake, primarily due to the theme and story, were 1) that it had a subscriber decline of 2.6 million and 2) that it has the lowest total number of subscribers to any expansion to date.

    The problem with these metrics is that you are missing a metric ton of variables. One of the most important variables missing is why people quit in the first place (Was it the theme? The Pandaren? The new Talent revamp?). This one is especially interesting because it actually has a negative correlation with the theme (Pandaria and the Pandaren) being the cause of the expansion performing poorly. MoP sold 2.3 million boxes, not counting digital downloads, in the first week, and over the first quarter actually gained 900,000 subscribers (Up from Cata's low of 9.1 to MoP's peek at 10 million). Second, by saying that MoP was a failure due to it's expansion low of 7.4 million, you ignore that Cataclysm was responsible for the loss of 2 million subscribers that never resubbed for MoP at all (The difference between WotLK's high of 12 million and MoP's high of 10 million). Without any kind of data knowing why these people didn't resub, we have to simply blame that loss on Cataclysm.

    Moving on, even if we say that MoP performed poorly strictly by losing subscribers, we have to assume that this was due to the longevity of the expansion rather than the initial theme. We know nearly 1 million people returned at the outset of MoP, so the theme must have been enough to entice people to at least try it out. Why didn't they stay? There are a long list of variables that could be the cause, none of which are shown in the data we have. Those variables include, but aren't limited to, not liking the other theme of the expansion - the Faction War, the endless amount of dailies, the switch from dungeoneering for casual players to LFR for casual players, general burnout that occurs every expansion, and game fatigue - the permanent burnout that happens in a 9 year old MMO.

    Finally, even after showcasing all of this, we know that, thus far, MoP has had more staying power than Cataclysm due to the amount of subscribers each expansion lost. MoP sits at 2.6 million subscribers lost while Cataclysm lost 2.9 million. Granted, this could change with the Q1 2014 report, but there seems to be evidence that the subscriber loss has begun to plateau; the last quarterly report only indicated a loss of 100,000, which is rather low considering it was riding on the weakest content patch of the expansion, 5.3.

    Ultimately, saying MoP 'flopped' when it sold millions of copies and still managed to retain a number of subscribers that eclipses all other MMOs in history based on a simple downward slope on a graph is completely misrepresenting the issue. Warlords of Draenor will attract people again, and then lose those same people and more. This isn't because people don't like Draenor, the crazy time-travel plot, Orcs or Draenei, but rather, because the game is aging and had a very clear peak in Wrath of the Lich King. It's all downhill from here, even if they announce a fan-favorite theme for an expansion, such as the Burning Legion.

    Mists of Pandaria was a controversial expansion, to be sure (I mean, damn, just look at this thread), but there is no available data to accurately explain the losses without taking a sample survey of the people who quit. The only obvious one is that the game is old and past its prime, and that everyone should expect the losses to either plateau or continue to decline based on that one fact, especially after the initial jump in subs after each expansion's release.
    Last edited by AbalDarkwind; 2013-11-30 at 11:02 PM.
    Professor of History at Silvermoon University

  2. #482
    When the forums explode in protest and the expansion is being trashed nonstop for more than a year and none of this happened to this extent with previous expansions, I think we all know MOP was a very unpopular expansion.

  3. #483
    Yeah what the Panda lovers seem unable to grasp is that it's not just a few loudmouths who hate Pandas, there is a huge portion of the player base who dislike to downright hate them and don't want them in the game and wisht hey'd never been added.

    MoP did more damage than good, it just pissed off a large portion of the player base for no gain.

    I strongly believe if Blizzard had to do it over again they'd do something different. They took a gamble that it would shore up subs in Asia and that didn't pay off.
    Last edited by Zaqwert; 2013-12-01 at 01:23 AM.

  4. #484
    Epic! Phookah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Zebes, SR-21
    Posts
    1,745
    Every race that I don't personally play/like is a joke race, wahh wahh

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaqwert View Post
    Yeah what the Panda lovers seem unable to grasp is that it's not just a few loudmouths who hate Pandas, there is a huge portion of the player base who dislike to downright hate them and don't want them in the game and wisht hey'd never been added.

    MoP did more damage than good, it just pissed off a large portion of the player base for no gain.

    I strongly believe if Blizzard had to do it over again they'd do something different. They took a gamble that it would shore up subs in Asian and that didn't pay off.
    Nah, its pretty much a few loudmouths. 90% of the players in this game don't even know what a forum is/exists

    Also they clearly made the whole expansion pandas to "shore up subs in asian", you know it!
    Maybe in WoD we'll get the hamburgler race for us Americans!
    You know, to help "shore up the subs"
    Last edited by Phookah; 2013-12-01 at 01:10 AM.

  5. #485
    Are Death Knights a joke? they are kind of in the same boat as Pandarens

  6. #486
    Scarab Lord Frozen Death Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Forsaken Lands of Sweden
    Posts
    4,941
    Quote Originally Posted by AbalDarkwind View Post
    -snip-
    I like seeing when people who know what they are talking about post about this stuff. Have been saying this crap for ages now.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaqwert View Post
    Yeah what the Panda lovers seem unable to grasp is that it's not just a few loudmouths who hate Pandas, there is a huge portion of the player base who dislike to downright hate them and don't want them in the game and wisht hey'd never been added.

    MoP did more damage than good, it just pissed off a large portion of the player base for no gain.

    I strongly believe if Blizzard had to do it over again they'd do something different. They took a gamble that it would shore up subs in Asia and that didn't pay off.
    What you just said here is just complete and utter asinine. Heads would rolling at Blizzard right now if their main demographic was Asian players for the current expansion, especially considering the fact that the majority of sub losses happened in Asia of all places. Do you honestly believe that they spent an entire expansion catering to a single continent of players just so that they would lose revenue by losing that same target audience? You have to be on another plane of existence to make this argument, since it is that insane.

  7. #487
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaronese View Post
    Are Death Knights a joke? they are kind of in the same boat as Pandarens
    Not at all. Deathknights are badass, pandas are for 5-year olds.

  8. #488
    Quote Originally Posted by Dagoroth23 View Post
    Your just a butthurt panda lover, Tauren were in warcraft 3 and they are important part of the Horde lore. Panda were an april fool's race and that's what they are , kung fu panda joke race with made up shitty Chinese lore
    they were part of warcraft story since w3, before kung fu panda, before that april fools joke. chinese lore fits in w3 just as much as Norse mythology, or lol space ships
    Stormspellz -mugthol
    Battletag - Stormz#1438

  9. #489
    High Overlord Felocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    chrislol#1816 ama
    Posts
    135
    Dont hate
    panda best

    Number 1 Enchantment shaman world 8) soon to be deathknight

  10. #490
    Panda mmo went belly up, so blizzard switched to thrall story. It won't save mop from being the worst expansion but at least may lead into a better storyline in WoD.

  11. #491
    Pandarens won't get more\less attention then goblins\worgens\DKs

  12. #492
    Quote Originally Posted by 3stats View Post
    Panda mmo went belly up, so blizzard switched to thrall story. It won't save mop from being the worst expansion but at least may lead into a better storyline in WoD.
    Thrall's Story? Don't think you payed attention to the expansion at all.

    Anyway opinions ≠ fact. In my opinion MoP was the best expansion other than Wrath, both story wise and game-play wise.

    Don't mean it's fact, but it does mean people don't all share the same opinion as you.

  13. #493
    To be honest, I think every new race and class they've added since original has been unnecessary, just to varying degrees.

    They will continue to add junk too, becasue that's how they sell xpacs, adding stuff.

  14. #494
    Quote Originally Posted by Lastgope View Post
    Thrall's Story? Don't think you payed attention to the expansion at all.
    Indeed, its Garrosh's story if anything. Was from the get-go.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by 3stats View Post
    Not at all. Deathknights are badass, pandas are for 5-year olds.
    That's the level of wit that comes from a 6 year old. Because usually when ages are mentioned in a negative manner the people is often barely older then that but sees themself as being superior.

    If you can't see past the Pandaren's friendly cute outer appearence then that's on you. People with more maturity can see their depth and the darkness of their history, and the grim realisation that they are holding back the inevitable with the evil that sleeps beneith them.

  15. #495
    The Draenei were created out of retconned lore and died off in the story. The Pandaren, which existed before but have a somewhat retconned storyline as to their current existence, will too, along with their homeland which was only good for one expansion (same with Northrend, Outland, and the soon-to-be Draenor). When can we have a new continent that is worth going to many times over like our main two continents?
    Last edited by cmats4020; 2013-12-01 at 08:12 AM.

  16. #496
    I am Murloc! Volitar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Victory Road.
    Posts
    5,238
    I think Panda's are a joke race, just the way that they are portrayed. Fat, silly, and a big jiggly belly. =/

  17. #497
    I completely agree that pandas are a joke race, however; this poll should be pretty much identical no matter what new race is introduced. Excluding ogres and highelves which tend to already be hanging around.
    blah, new sig... something something

  18. #498
    3K+ posts and making such stupid threads... Pandaren will just have as much love as the other races.. (except orcs).

  19. #499
    The Lightbringer Amulree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland.
    Posts
    3,427
    Quote Originally Posted by AbalDarkwind View Post
    Oy, you really need to stop using "raw statistical data" as an argument because it doesn't prove anything.

    Anyone who has taken a course in Stats knows that raw statistical data is utterly useless without proper statistical analysis. For example, your only metrics for proving that Mists of Pandaria was a costly mistake, primarily due to the theme and story, were 1) that it had a subscriber decline of 2.6 million and 2) that it has the lowest total number of subscribers to any expansion to date.
    "Oy", I've never once argued that it was a costly mistake "primarily due to the theme and story". Not once.

    And the statistical analyses have been done, many times, with the only argumentation really coming from the throng of Blizzard fandom that won't accept that there are legitimate design concerns that have caused the game to slide far faster than would have otherwise been anticipated. If you follow the link in my signature, you'll see some of the statistical analysis you're looking for (it's not explicit, obviously) and you can find more of it around the Internet by professional and well paid statisticians.

    MoP had some significant design issues, with its fall compounded by more mundane problems such as age and competition. Obviously that's not the whole story, but MoP threw almost everything at the player base in order to stem the outflow of players... And all to no avail.

    Fortunately, it would appear that Greg Street paid for these errors with his job. Maybe now some of them will start to be fixed.

  20. #500
    Quote Originally Posted by Zellviren View Post
    "Oy", I've never once argued that it was a costly mistake "primarily due to the theme and story". Not once.
    This is your first post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Zellviren View Post
    I think Blizzard are most likely to move on from Pandaria with the lessons learned and never look back.

    Mists of Pandaria was a disaster.

    I just don't see them revisiting it, or any facet of its story, ever again.
    Case in point: You've implied it through the entire thread. I even quoted your last post in my original post saying they won't make a reference to Pandaria because this expansion was a "costly mistake"; that's implying that the theme was the costly mistake. You're deliberately misusing a graph to make a skewed point.

    And the statistical analyses have been done, many times
    I've read the entire thread. You didn't use statistical analysis once.

    , with the only argumentation really coming from the throng of Blizzard fandom that won't accept that there are legitimate design concerns that have caused the game to slide far faster than would have otherwise been anticipated. If you follow the link in my signature, you'll see some of the statistical analysis you're looking for (it's not explicit, obviously) and you can find more of it around the Internet by professional and well paid statisticians.
    Most of the statistical analysis around the web , including Forbes, have been saying the same thing I concluded with: the game is old, and that's the primary reason it's losing subscriptions.

    As for your link, if you think I'm going to spend time reading pages of your blog on the subject, for some abstract, psuedo, read-between-the-lines analysis, you're mistaken. But, to humor you, I began to read a bit, and your bias towards the theme of becomes remarkably clear in your latest post with these lines:

    "But can Warlords of Draenor meaningfully arrest the slide that began during Cataclysm?

    The smart money will likely conclude with a “probably”."

    You then go on to basically gush about the theme of WoD. Finally, you end with:

    "In any event, Warlords of Draenor is undoubtedly being better received than Mists of Pandaria was and that’s very much to its credit."

    This continues to betray your bias about the theme because, frankly, there is just as much whining about WoD as there was about MoP. People are confused at the direction the story is taking, angry that the lore explanation is thin, and are upset that the story seems to be moving backwards rather than forwards, and that's just discussing the theme and story of the expansion! Features-wise, there have been whole threads dedicated to bashing WoD for being, essentially, a large patch.

    To conclude this portion, smart money would be to expect a jump in sub numbers at release, and then continue to expect a slide into a plateau, and that's based on almost four years of subs doing just that.

    MoP had some significant design issues, with its fall compounded by more mundane problems such as age and competition. Obviously that's not the whole story, but MoP threw almost everything at the player base in order to stem the outflow of players... And all to no avail.
    This thread isn't about MoP. It's about the Pandaren. You're now trying to change the issue from the Pandaren and Pandaria being problems to the entire expansion having issues, which I've addressed with several points in my original post. Plus, it's not even a terribly convincing argument; every expansion to date has had no more issues than MoP has had, with the possible exception of Cataclysm.

    Fortunately, it would appear that Greg Street paid for these errors with his job. Maybe now some of them will start to be fixed.
    It would "appear" that way only if you're wearing a tinfoil hat and are a generally distrusting person to begin with.
    Last edited by AbalDarkwind; 2013-12-01 at 05:07 PM.
    Professor of History at Silvermoon University

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •