WoD: Potential to Surpass WotLK?

[Vargur]

Potential rating: -1/10

[Duridi]

I really really really hope WoD surpass WotLK.... If WoD cannot surpass the most horrible expansion to date, the game is truely in a bad shape..

I guess I should sign this .

Honestly, WotLK was a terrible expansion. It's the expansion which has certainly offered me the least amount of fun. My opinion ofc.

[lunchbox2042]

Cataclysm had all of those and it was complete crap from 4.1 on.

[Duridi]

Rose-tinted glasses? You're actually comparing me to those freaks who think Classic or TBC was better because they were the "glory days"? Don't deny the fact Wrath has been the most critically acclaimed expansion, and most enjoyable at that by a LOT of people.

What makes your opinion less "nostalgic" than those who prefer whatever came before?

If you don't view your own opinion as nostalgia, you have no right to claim anyone else suffering from it. Let's face it, it's been many years since even WotLK was released. In fact, this year it has been 6 years.

[Jawless Jones]

OK, maybe not huge, but WotLK did start the decline..
http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...rs-by-quarter/
Q3-10 to Q4-10 was the first time it was stagnant.
Q4-10 to Q1-11 was the first decrease. Even with the increase in subs when a new expansion hits, it stil, resulted in a decrease.

Many people, who endured most/all of WotLK, simply refused to sub during Cata, because they became fed up with WotLK.

this is by far the most retarded logic i have ever seen... "i hated the previous thing, so I'm going to leave when it gets replaced, simply because I thought the previous thing was so bad"

if people were going to unsub, they would have unsubbed in wrath... but they didn't, they left in cata (because it was a PoS expac)

OK, maybe not huge, but WotLK did start the decline..

grasping at straws if i ever saw it.

[Duridi]

OK, maybe not huge, but WotLK did start the decline..
http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...rs-by-quarter/
Q3-10 to Q4-10 was the first time it was stagnant.
Q4-10 to Q1-11 was the first decrease. Even with the increase in subs when a new expansion hits, it stil, resulted in a decrease.

Many people, who endured most/all of WotLK, simply refused to sub during Cata, because they became fed up with WotLK.

Let's not forget that TBC ended with about 11 million subscribers aswell, so it had a pretty high startingpoint already.

[nekobaka]

Cataclysm had all of those and it was complete crap from 4.1 on.

So much potential and just went to shit with what I felt was lets see how we can do by just scraping by then go shit this isnt working lets throw 40% more developers at this despite claims saying it wouldnt help much and now we got WoD having an additional 40% working on the developer team due to the Titian reset. That is a 96% larger team that is working on WoD than the one that worked on Cata. Though the developers did admit to spending too much resources on the 1-60 revamp, but even then =/ Cata was a good example of making good ideas and then sabotaging themselves with a bad idea in part of which was due to trying to appeal to everyone at once while trying to shove them into the same thing and that just doesnt work.

Lets not forget that WotLK also had a lack of dailies at launch, but players forgot that when Cata launched and acted like it was something new. A good example of super short rose tinted glasses of players who could only remember the last months of the game where content was over geared and nerfed.

[Gsara]

Just because something is popular doesnt really mean it was liked the most.

You do know that is the definition of popular right?

[Einsz]

Mixed feelings tbh, WOTLK was really awesome lorewise , continuation of arthas story from W3 which made most of the players play warcraft. Orcs/ogres are my favourite races though its a big plus I will "hang out" with them, however I am not entirely sure if I like the lore.
WOTLK had very enjoyable raids, Ulduar is still my favourite up to date, ICC was amazing aswell however raiding it for a year kinda ruined its vision. Not sure regardless if WoD will success that much.

P.S I find TOGC to be awesome

[Pua]

What makes your opinion less "nostalgic" than those who prefer whatever came before?

If I'm honest, I hate the "lol nostalja" argument.

It's patronising and asinine, all at the same time. WotLK was arguably the first major shift in endgame philosophy, it shifted dramatically again in Cataclysm and Mists, with another big shift now going into Warlords. There are more than enough objective reasons for players to have preferred every expansion up until now, so the whole "rose-tinted glasses" argument needs to die in a fire.

It's used by people incapable of accepting another person's preferences, and who have no way to resolve the personal anxiety that fact causes.

[Jawless Jones]

Let's not forget that TBC ended with about 11 million subscribers aswell, so it had a pretty high startingpoint already.

if Wrath was a bad expac, sub numbers would have gone down not up

the fact it managed to sustain (and raise) such high sub numbers for 2 years is a testament to its overall quality

[Pua]

You do know that is the definition of popular right?

I think he meant "because something is popular doesn't make it the best".

Justin Bieber is more popular than, say, George Michael - we all know who the more talented singer is.

if Wrath was a bad expac, sub numbers would have gone down not up

the fact it managed to sustain (and raise) such high sub numbers for 2 years is a testament to its overall quality

Let's not get carried away.

Things don't always sell because they're good, they sell because they're well aimed at a specific market. My Justin Bieber comment above applies again; a lot of popular music isn't designed to be good, it's designed to be profitable by making use of things like fashion, sex, current trends, cultural influences or any number of other things. To me, WotLK was the most profitable expansion because it was the only one to date that really engaged the casual playerbase.

I agree with you, I think, in my belief that WotLK was the pinnacle of World of Warcraft. You just need to be careful how you quantify that.

[Duridi]

If I'm honest, I hate the "lol nostalja" argument.

It's patronising and asinine, all at the same time. WotLK was arguably the first major shift in endgame philosophy, it shifted dramatically again in Cataclysm and Mists, with another big shift now going into Warlords. There are more than enough objective reasons for players to have preferred every expansion up until now, so the whole "rose-tinted glasses" argument needs to die in a fire.

It's used by people incapable of accepting another person's preferences, and who have no way to resolve the personal anxiety that fact causes.

Thank you Zellviren, that is exactly my thoughts.

You even bring the very reason I decided to take a break from the game, into play. The major shift you are referring to, is exactly what took away the reason I enjoyed this game so much.

[Pua]

Thank you Zellviren, that is exactly my thoughts.

You even bring the very reason I decided to take a break from the game, into play. The major shift you are referring to, is exactly what took away the reason I enjoyed this game so much.

The most important thing for me in WotLK is that I was both encouraged, and rewarded, for playing with my friends. Small group content was meaningful and fun, with 10-man raiding being forgiving enough for us to play together regardless of individual skill. That was the key behind WotLK's success; the game thrives on small group content, and WotLK delivered it in the most engaging way.

I will never forget those years in Northrend, and will never stop thanking that team for them; they were the best gaming years of my life and many of those guys I played with became my friends in real life, too.

[Duridi]

if Wrath was a bad expac, sub numbers would have gone down not up

Why are you bringing the good/bad argument to me? I didn't say a word about it.

I just mentioned that TBC actually ended with about 11 million subscribers, which certain people frequently try to ignore, or hide. Or they just don't know, and purely remember the "12 million"-headlines. By the definition of the argument often used in such cases, they should be talkinga bout TBC, as TBC had a major increase in subscriptions(I think vanilla ended with 8 million, but can't remember), and they stayed all the way into WotLK!

Ending that, I don't think a subscription comparsion is that fair. We have no idea what the status of any account was during any period. For all we know, there was a huge income of new players, but also a huge amount leaving(but still creating even numbers), during WotLK. Or maybe very few old players left, and not many joined. We don't know.

[PrairieChicken]

Contrary to what people think, Wrath never gained subs. It remained stagnant / decreased throughout its lifespan (only masked because blizzard didn't post sub numbers every Q during Wrath). It had (or, started with) largest number of subscription because BC ended up with 11 mil + new expansion effect.

The surge by the end of the expansion was due to delayed release in China and therefore shouldn't count (If it wasn't delayed then Wrath probably would have started with 13-14 mil though)

TLDR : All the claim that wrath was pinnacle of wow is false, because Wrath never gained meaningful subs

[Deleted]

You have Lfr~
Everything is for the tourist model~

Mythic~ gear gonna become lfr version once new patch is coming so ~??

MAgic is gonne ~aswell gear up is becoming ok ....only for the top 100~

[Wildcherry]

WoW had 6M subs at the end of Vanilla.
WoW had 11M subs at the end of TBC.
WoW had 12M in the middle of WotLK.
WoW had 11,9M at the end of WotLK.

As I wrote, WotLK rode of Vanilla/TBC's success wave, but couldn't attact very many new players, and before the expansion was over, people even started to unsub....

How can you call WotLK successful?

WotLK did ride off of Vanilla/TBC success, purely because of how well the game was being marketed to the world. When a game first comes out, a lot of people won't have heard of it (including me, I had never even heard of the game until my ex-housemate showed it to me at the end of vanilla, if it wasn't for him, I probably wouldn't have heard about it for a while). The rise up until the end of WotLK was purely down to more people learning about the games existence. Also the genre was fairly new to a lot of people, the idea of subscription based gaming had only really taken off on people (previously a lot of scepticism with the idea of a game taking £8.99 a month from your bank account).

Blizzard had a massive marketing campaign during WotLK (remember the ads with Mr T, Ozzy Ozbourne, Chuck Norris etc..??), and to be honest, you can't claim the game to be at it's most epic purely due to numbers being at it's highest.

From a personal point of view, TBC > WotLK > Vanilla > MoP > Cata. If WoD comes somewhere in the middle of that, I will be happy.

[xindralol]

arena wise
wotlk > tbc = cata > > > > > mop

[Mosotti]

It will flop, unfotunately