Predictive Curve for the future of WoW Subscriptions

[Kolvarg]

Learn to comprehend a graphic imo.
The graphic says 0M as in under 1 million.Can very well be 999.999.

A graphic doesn't say anything "as in". If it's 0, it means 0. Values are only rounded on this graphic on an M scale, of course, you don't simply round from 1 to 0 when the maximum value is around 12.

This is where 1m (or 999.999) would be:


The most you can argue is it is a trend curve, not predicted values, but even so he wouldn't be "wrong" to disagree the tend curve is wrong.



On topic: As mentioned before, it won't simply drop from 7.5M to 0 the same way it got up from 0 to 7.5M.

The most likely scenario is it will keep losing subscriptions, slower as time goes by, with small increase bumps on expac/patch releases and/or popularity spikes. It will probably remain almost stable from anywhere between 1M to 4M for a few more years, at least until Blizz (or some new revelation) releases THE wow successor (and by this I mean something like WoW2, or Titan. Something that would make people swap from WoW, not necessarily even something subscription-based) or they are no longer able to pull expansions out of their arses in a convicing-enough fashion.

Like linked before, this:


NOT a symettrical arch, but something like this (not trying to predict specific numbers, just the trend of the curve):


It's just a matter of at how many subscriptions will the losses become less significant, and for how long will it remain so, and this depends on many many variables that we can't simple predict accurately, but it will almost surely survive above at least some 4M past 2015 depending on how well WoD does, and considering the next expansion will likely be Burning Legion themed, it's unlikely it will have huge drops on the number.

- - - Updated - - -

Right now WoW in its failing state is only a bit more popular than SWTOR. If SWTOR is widely regarded as a total failure of a MMO, what does that make WoW then? Dead.

1st table:
Source for those numbers? Those don't really seem to match most mainstream information
Even if they are truthful, and you care so much about sub/player numbers to define how well a game is doing, is Club Penguin really comparable to pretty much any game below Wizard101(which I never heard of before)?


2nd table:
That's free-to-play (micro-transactions) earnings alone. Here's another table:

According to those 2 tables (source chosen by you) WoW not only is #7 on micro-transactions despite being the most subscribed, and had above 1 billion of revenue in 2013 (subscription+micro-transaction). More than any other game in any of those tables.

And a graphic:


I'm sorry, but I find it idiotic to say SWTOR was a failure, for instance, much less than WoW is dead or "only a bit more popular than SWTOR". There are THOUSANDS of small and/or local brands who live along side mainstream global products. Are they a failure just because they aren't number 1? Is a local actor that manages to make a living in small movies a failure just because he isn't viewed by as many people as a holywood actor?

You're stating that the game that's likely the #1 or #2 making the most revenue in 2013 is dead. It is only (likely) bested in revenue by GTA:V, which released in 2013.

If 36% of the subscription-based market share plus being #7 on free-to-play earnings is being dead, every single bloody game in this world is dead. Add to the equation that WoW is based on a 10 year old engine (there's only so much they can improve with expansions) and already concluded the storyline that driven a lot of players to it (with WotLK) and it's pretty much a phenomenon that is still holding close to as many subscriptions as the maximum Vanilla ever had.

WoW number of subscriptions peak was a popularity spike (in the same way as the popularity spike of Flappy Bird), it was not because the game was inherintely better then, or better than the others in the genre, it just happened. It offered the right things at the right time with the right exposure.

Now it's been 10 years, many of the players (at least above a certain current age) that wanted to try WoW already have. Many players already played for a while and got tired of it, moving on. There now remain the players who never left, the ones who started more recently and are still enjoying it, the ones who keep coming back every now and then to check new content, and the ones who are still joining in for the first time. It's far from dead, and it WON'T be dead while it's profitable, which it will be for years to come even if it eventually becomes F2P.

[mrpoundsign]

I did some work on this myself. I seem to have come to a slightly different conclusion:

[spinner981]

Western MMO rankings:
Club Penguin, Wizard101 and Runescape all have way more active players than WoW (10x!)
Right now WoW in its failing state is only a bit more popular than SWTOR. If SWTOR is widely regarded as a total failure of a MMO, what does that make WoW then? Dead.

Wait, what the hell? Since when did WoW only have 3.5 million subs? Why is the yearly revenue stated as 630 million dollars (15.2 million * 12 months) and on the second graphed said to only be 213 million? Also, shouldn't the estimated sub price for WoW be lower because of people taking the 3 month and 6 month packages (like me)?

Not to mention, Runescape's sub price is about 8$ now, not 5.

That first graph is nothing but nonsense.

[ramjb]

Western MMO sub numbers (so not including China etc)

Table is from:
http://www.killerguides.net/blog/mmo...so-subscribers

[spinner981]

Western MMO sub numbers (so not including China etc)

Table is from:
http://www.killerguides.net/blog/mmo...so-subscribers

Where does this person get their information from? Also, what are you trying to prove with this graph? WoW still has the most paying subscribers, especially considering its higher monthly subscription cost. It's triple that of club penguin but according to this graph it has 500,000 more subscribers. WoW has the highest amount of revenue as well. Are you trying to pass off the 'estimated number of monthly players' as some sort of important factor?

Once again, where did this person get their information?

[BenBos]

The irrationality and magical thinking here is amusing. So is the immaturity. WoW will have 3-4m subs in 3 years. If you think it will level out where it is now, you're not dealing with reality. If you think subs will INCREASE you're delusional.

- - - Updated - - -



So over the next 6 years they're only going to lose the same amount of subs that they have lost EACH of the last 2 years?? Unlikely when the game is getting older.

As I said above, I think that by 2017-18 we're looking at 2-3m subs. That could be close to t he long term bottom. Of course, several things mitigate this - see my first post in this thread.

Again the loss of subscriptions was due to everyone else going free to play.

The last 2 sub based games launched had catastrophic results. So much so they hide the numbers.

Now that this transition of f2p is over, WoW will regain subs with WoD massively.

The reason is very logical:

1. WoW Subs hovered around 7.5 million before the last 3 months, which shows leveling was already on. The last quarter simply showed a lull between expansions and 2 duds launching which always impacted WoW for a few 100k subs.

2. There is no longer a competition in the MMO field at the moment WoD launches. Not even Destiny could convince with its half hearted MMO like play.

3. ANYONE wanting to play THE MMO will try out WoD and certainly the MOVIE in 2016 will even reset things.

So my prognosis for 2017 is around 7 million if things stay the same or 8-9 million if Blizzard smartly reset the leveling part by letting evveryone start at a fixed point to enter the yearly expansions.

That's far more realistic than your doom preaching JUST BEFORE A NEW EXPANSION LAUNCHES btw. 2 million is a JOKE in an industry where no one is even competing anymore in the subscription field.

They all left the field and these DUDS were responsible for the MMO decline btw: first by making terrible subpar quality AND by trying to give them for free even, which hampered NEW recruiting in a paid quality product.


And btw: a game is just as "old" as the latest on going expansion.
----> In 2014 Blizzard upgraded the backbone server infrastructure with REAL TIME cross server play AND they upgraded the avatar graphics.

2015 will be the year the content will be complete new with fresh level 90's for everyone.

So WoW is just as old as the latest expansion really.

By going to publish the expansions 1-1.5 yearly, they'll reset things with each expansion to attract new and returning players. like CoD.

tldr: the shake out in the subscription based industry left ONE game standing with multi million subs.

Also known as: the winner rakes it all.

----

To ramjb: WoW grossed more than 1 billion dollars worldwide for 2013. And this without even an expansion box in sight. Go figure and stop publishing falsified trolling charts.

It was over 914 million dollars for Blizzard and over 120 million dollars for Netease, the China operator of WoW.

A pity for you ramjb, Blizzard publishes its official MMO revenue per quarter - AUDITED by financial 3rd parties even - , so your "estimated charts" are not even close to reality...

The graph is simply a trolling attempt by a no lifer. If you can't live with the fact WoW beats anything in the on line market revenue wise by miles, go get a life.

And yes, WoW will out live the free to play trash for years because it simply is the better polished product.

Simple as that. 8 years of duds proved it. And in fact, with every new dud launched it actually reinforces the position of WoW in the long term even more.

The following years will prove that with ease. As I played Destiny and it doesn't even hold a candle to the open worlds of Azeroth.

[Deleted]

The graph is simply a trolling attempt by a no lifer.

And you are an insulting, no-brainer who feels it necessary to result to name calling, obviously finding it impossible to have a mature discussion without doing so. Way-to-go adding gravitas to your opinion with THAT line.

I just REposted a graph of OFFICIAL figures with a curve over it that followed and continued the obvious pattern displayed by the official line. Then I proposed a theory and invited mature discussion of that idea and/or any and all alternatives that ActiBlizz might come up with in reaction to the decline of subs. Thedownward trend of subs is just a matter of fact there was no "WoW-hating" involved, and yet so many people are determined to make it so.

[BenBos]

And you are an insulting, no-brainer who feels it necessary to result to name calling, obviously finding it impossible to have a mature discussion without doing so. Way-to-go adding gravitas to your opinion with THAT line.

I just REposted a graph of OFFICIAL figures with a curve over it that followed and continued the obvious pattern displayed by the official line. Then I proposed a theory and invited mature discussion of that idea and/or any and all alternatives that ActiBlizz might come up with in reaction to the decline of subs. Thedownward trend of subs is just a matter of fact there was no "WoW-hating" involved, and yet so many people are determined to make it so.

If I insult ANYONE by referring to the OFFICIAL and AUDITED figures of WOW revenue in 2013 , I think you need some pills and shill out.

So let's see what you did: you wanted to apply a NONSENSE business graph about subscriptions and make an invented line of "life cycle" of WOW.

----

Ok here we go then:

In 2014 ... WOW will make MORE revenue world wide than it made in 2008 with WOTLK launched.

read again: IF you talk about the life of a product: The 2014 REVENUE stream of WOD will hit MORE $$$ than the 2008 revenue of WOTLK.

Now : THAT is a business FACT, instead of talking about subscriptions in what has actually become a non subscription based industry.


So the graph is nonsense from a business point of view as subscriptions need to be viewed in the changing MMO market of f2p thingies.
It means you (on purpose) MIX subscriptions with what basicly has become a F2P industry...

And WOW making MORE money than when WOTLK launched ... Think about that.

Got that? Ok then next time talk business instead of meaningless subs as you are using an invented model in a non referenced (F2P) overall industry view.


That's the very crucial point when you talk about ONE game with NO reference to the industry. WOW makes MORE money than it did in 2008... So where does that put your "graph"?

Nowhere as we talk a business life cycle. Anyone still wanting to discuss subscriptions in what changed into a F2P MMO industry over the past 3 years is simply trolling.

[Deleted]

If I insult ANYONE by referring to the OFFICIAL and AUDITED figures of WOW revenue in 2013 , I think you need some pills and shill out.

NO, you insulted by calling people "Trolling no-lifer".

Got that? Ok then next time talk business instead of meaningless subs.

NO, I was having a mature discussion about the previously mmo-champion published graph about subs. If you want to start ranting incoherently about "business" start your own thread.

[BenBos]

NO, you insulted by calling people "Trolling no-lifer".

NO, I was having a mature discussion about the previously mmo-champion published graph about subs. If you want to start ranting incoherently about "business" start your own thread.

As stated above: when you IGNORE the fact that this MMO industry changed to a F2P model and STILL want to discuss WOW subscriptions WITHOUT reference to this FACT, you are not being very mature.

As WOD 2014 will make more money than 2008 WOTLK, it shows your invented graph into the future is not even based on a BUSINESS model.... as your point of WOW 2008 is on the same point of WOW 2014 ... business wise.

Since "subscriptions" are not even the measurement anymore of the present day MMO industry, which de facto turned ... free to play.

Very immature to discuss otherwise and even more childish to produce charts into the future within a NON referenced frame.

[Sathnick]

And you are an insulting, no-brainer who feels it necessary to result to name calling, obviously finding it impossible to have a mature discussion without doing so. Way-to-go adding gravitas to your opinion with THAT line.

I just REposted a graph of OFFICIAL figures with a curve over it that followed and continued the obvious pattern displayed by the official line. Then I proposed a theory and invited mature discussion of that idea and/or any and all alternatives that ActiBlizz might come up with in reaction to the decline of subs. Thedownward trend of subs is just a matter of fact there was no "WoW-hating" involved, and yet so many people are determined to make it so.

Thing is - if you have any Basic idea about statistics you will know yourself that you can not...never...extrapolate a result like you did with the graph. It's basically a joke and thus People will believe you are just trying to troll them.

[BenBos]

Thing is - if you have any Basic idea about statistics you will know yourself that you can not...never...extrapolate a result like you did with the graph. It's basically a joke and thus People will believe you are just trying to troll them.

It is even worse. He uses an NON meaningful economic stat (subscriptions) these days (as the industry reference is $$$$ - not the number of clients you have) and he ignores the economic revenue model of the product.

If you would take that, the line of the economical graph would be flat between 2008 (revenue) and 2014 (revenue), with a small bump into 2010...

Making an economic "product" chart about "life cycles" is always with a reference to the revenue, not to the "model" you sell and certainly not when the reference you use (subscriptions) is no longer the standard measurement within the industry (f2p).

Quite logical, but apparently he is surprised people call that obvious trolling.

If ANY new players will join in WOD (and they will), the revenue model will show an increase over 2009 too btw. But I let predictions out of this rather obvious thread.

[spinner981]

With how crap WoD is I wouldn't be surprised lols

Sorry, I just laughed at this post. I mean, how generic can you get? Another WoW hating bandwagon jumper who is either commenting on a game they don't play or is commenting on an xpac that they are going to purchase and play? Then you just gotta add the 'lols' to the end to make it that much better. Kudos to you for having the least interesting yet most trollingly generic post in the thread.

- - - Updated - - -

His curve is somewhat accurate. WoD is predicted to lose atleast 3 million subs if the trend from cataclysm and MOP holds true. That puts us at atleast 3.5 million subs, with it most likely going lower. There is only evidence that sub loss will accelerate after the first month of so of the new expansion.

Cata - 2 million subs lost
MOP - 3 million subs lost
Wod - 3-4 million subs?

There will most likely be a stabilizing curve towards the 2 million mark however, with the 5th expansion only losing maybe half of WOD will lose.

Why is it that people see lost subs as some sort of predictable equation? As if all WoW players play WoW for the same reason and would leave for all the same reasons, just with a higher required level of push before doing so for each individual?

[BenBos]

I repeat it a 100 times if necessary.

Calling out subscriptions these day is nonsense as the industry turned F2P as a standard paying model.

This transition from subscription based to pure free to play started off in 2010 and went through up until now with some major blockbusters turning free to play in the last 2 years.

If you would look at the actual revenue BEFORE 2010 and the present day revenue, you would see a complete different graph and economical life cycle as WOD 2014 will bring in more money than WOTLK back in 2008...

So until the trial posts of these obvious TxxxLs end: learn to accept the fact Blizzard is still making 1 billion dollars of WOW alone this year.... whatever the model...

And talking about subscriptions alone is useless as a comparing tool as everything AAA turned complete FREE. Even a 5 year old child would understand this, but apparently some people still try to ignore it as it suits their "game is dead" posts.

$$$ wise WOW is healthy as before 2010 (when the F2P mechanics were introduced and started with D&DOn line and LotrO).

So the only valid "graph" is the financial one and that graph tells a complete different story about WOW's life cycle and revenue/.

That revenue will be the ONLY reference for Blizzard too btw before they decide to change revenue models or mechanics.

[spinner981]

Hehe you're cute! I haven't bought WoD but am still playing until it hits even after playing beta. So gotcha there lols

Yes, well we will see how that turns out, the whole "I'm not gonna buy WoD!" thing that is. Of course, I don't know how anybody would justify playing until the release of WoD and then quitting. Are you so satisfied with monotonous SoO for so many months to keep playing yet so dissatisfied with WoD to quit? I don't understand how that would make any sense. Being satisfied to keep playing with more than half a year of nothing new, then quitting because new things are introduced that you claim to not like?

I can only assume it would be the class changes turning you off. I too was wary of the changes to my class (hunter) but I find the new marksmanship (on the PTR) both refreshing, interesting and new. The loss of abilities will be annoying for a bit, but eventually that will go away. Other than class changes though, I don't see why anybody would prefer months of SoO over an all new xpac.

[spinner981]

You act like you know me it's creepy lols

Well that's all I can speculate about when all you give me to work with is "I'm unsubbing bcuz lols"

[rda]

$$$ wise WOW is healthy as before 2010 ...

Is this really the case? WoW went from 12 mil "subs" to 7.5 mil "subs" (in quotes, because not all of these are real subs, these figures include Asia), that's a 37% loss. The highest estimates (which were under quite a bit of fire from the experts) I saw for microtransactions were about 30% of subs. Now, if you add that WoW had some of those services outside of subs back in 2010 as well, it doesn't seem like your statement that WoW is as healthy now as it was at its peak is correct. The loss is perhaps less than 37%, but it's still significant. Perhaps 20%. And that's before we factor in increased spending on development (these things never shrink).

Care to show your numbers?

[BenBos]

Is this really the case? WoW went from 12 mil "subs" to 7.5 mil "subs" (in quotes, because not all of these are real subs, these figures include Asia), that's a 37% loss. The highest estimates (which were under quite a bit of fire from the experts) I saw for microtransactions were about 30% of subs. Now, if you add that WoW had some of those services outside of subs back in 2010 as well, it doesn't seem like your statement that WoW is as healthy now as it was at its peak is correct. The loss is perhaps less than 37%, but it's still significant. Perhaps 20%. And that's before we factor in increased spending on development (these things never shrink).

Care to show your numbers?

You can research it RDA. Blizzard as a complete company only attained the 1 billion dollars status throughout 2007/2008. With ALL their games.

WOD alone will make that amount throughout 2014.

it shows one thing: comparing subscriptions - as such - in an industry that transitioned from pure susbcription based to micro transaction based is useless.

Because the other AAA MMO's no longer have published subscription numbers as they offer their games for FREE with micro transactions. (not talking about the few newly published ones who will go F2P within a year).

The OP needs to publish a graph with REVENUE, instead of subscriptions in an industry that went free to play and abandoned official seperate subscriptions.

That way, you get a complete different graph: that one of a commercial product with hard revenue attached.



------
BTW I am not saying that WOW is on par with 2010-2011 earnings, I am saying the graph is complete different as the revenue point of 2008 (WOTLK launch) is on par with the present year of 2014 (WOD launch).... and this DESPITE the fact of the industry going free to play as such.

EVEN A 5 YEAR OLD CHILD, would understand that free games make it much harder to recruit new blood in a SUBCRIPTION based game and as such talking about WOW subscriptions WITHOUT referring to the industry CHANGE is more than ridiculous.

If you want to talk about a "product" life, you need to look at its revenue, not "cars" or "watches" made and in the case of WOW, it is a virtual product that can be changed very easely.

-----

WOW will be a very valid marketing product for the next 20 years. It is up to Blizzard how they will manage that both in the virtual product production as in the way it will make money.

[Raelbo]

The expected curve for a product lifecycle looks something like this:




Funny thing. The curve you drew matches quite closely up to the peak, where the curve appears somewhat parabolic. The problem is after the peak the curve you should have drawn is a decaying exponential, not the rest of a parabola, which is why towards the current state of the game your predicted curve is going off so badly

[BenBos]

The expected curve for a product lifecycle looks something like this:




Funny thing. The curve you drew matches quite closely up to the peak, where the curve appears somewhat parabolic. The problem is after the peak the curve you should have drawn is a decaying exponential, not the rest of a parabola, which is why towards the current state of the game your predicted curve is going off so badly

While your remark is valid, the OP took a non meaningful economic factor 'subscriptions", while he SHOULD have taken the revenue from WOW throughout its life and that shows a complete other curve too.

You don't measure the commercial value of a product either by its numbers,... ONLY by its overall grossing value.

Simple example: producing 10.000.000 CHEAP cars is different from producing 7.000.000 expensive cars with double the revenue earned.