Do you want yearly expansions?

[Okorsis]

Longer expansions with more content is the better solution for me, just because +10 levels with new gear devaluate everything you could do before that.
If you have 6-8 months to do a content and to raid/farm a raid tier, then everything you do these months gives you better start in the next content on the same level, while is completely useless for next content on higher level.

[Florida Man]

I want expansions released every two years on the dot, with four months of content for each content update.

7.0 > 4 Months
7.1> 4 Months
7.2> 4 Months
7.3> 4 Months
7.4> 4 Months

That 20 months. Three more for beta hype, and one month for preexpansion content.

Truth is, I like a little lull at the end of an expansion. Not a year long, but 7 months id be totally happy with.

[Deleted]

Absolutely not. The game shouldnt be -constant- progress, then everyone would get burned out from constantly having something to do. Farm is great, gives time to do other things.

This, I enjoy the time off after we get things on farm only raiding once or twice per week, if there was constant progress i would get burned out eventually and quit the game.

[Rale89]

Well at least some good news on the horizon... Up till now it was not commercially reasonable or necessary for them to "care" about live game once they anounce the next expansion (begining of the drought), because most (or at least enough) players would keep subing no matter what for there business model to stay viable. After all, subs are much more profitable in terms of gain on investement then selling a new expansion.

BUT, as we have all seen that trend has changed so dramaticly this time around that its no longer the case. In a matter of months the subs plummeted so drasticly that they even stop reportiong them on the investeros call. My opinion is they will just be forced to change their business model, to adjust to the changing market demands.

Edit: That being said, i think yearly expansion is still loooooong way from being reality, if we are ever going to see them at all. Blizzard is a business first and foremost, and they will never do something unless market forces them to.

[Dhrizzle]

I always enjoy playing through the new continent more than repeating raids and dailies, so for me quicker expansions with less patches would be the best system.

[epLe]

I'd rather see no more expansions - only content patches.

Such a subscription based game where we pay to play continuesly, shouldnt really warrant an extra fee to play new content.

[TheDestinatus]

The length of an expansion isn't a determining factor for the amount of content, WoW is a perfect example of that as they prove time and time again that they can't consistently deliver content over a 2 year period. More frequent expansions isn't even in our benefit, what exactly do you think they are going to do, an entire new world every year? Give me a break. Its more likely a yearly expansion would end up being an expansion per raid tier and we end up getting even less.

[Rale89]

The length of an expansion isn't a determining factor for the amount of content, WoW is a perfect example of that as they prove time and time again that they can't consistently deliver content over a 2 year period. More frequent expansions isn't even in our benefit, what exactly do you think they are going to do, an entire new world every year? Give me a break. Its more likely a yearly expansion would end up being an expansion per raid tier and we end up getting even less.

Couldnt agree more!

[Magruun]

Blizz said they wanted yearly expansions since Burning Crusade and I've never liked that idea.
one and a half feels much better and is actually closer to what they manage to deliver.

I don't understand that after 5 expansions, none of which they managed to release on that yearly schedule, they still not only keep aiming for yearly expansions, which few people actually want, but also fail to spread out content enough to avoid 1 year long content draughts every single time.
In addition to that the endgame is now so full of catch up mechanics the only relevant content is the latest released content of HFC and Tanaan.
The way Blizzard treats the game makes it have less content instead of more and causes us to consume that little bit of latest patch content way faster than if we would just progress through all the tiers as we used to in Classic and BC.

[Ciddy]

I don't care as long as we actually get proper expansions. But I don't want to get half-baked, shitty, unpolished "expansions" that cost $50+ rushed out once a year. I'd rather sit through a 1-year lack of content and get a proper expansion.

[TheFreeman]

If getting annual expansions means getting more expansions like WoD than my answer has to be no. I hope we never have another WoD ever again.

[Darkeon]

With the way Activision-Blizzard releases content, we'd have the Expansion and then the year of content drought right away - that does not amuse me!

[Pua]

People will now say "Yay" and then realise they have to spend 50 dollars a year and then make "QQ" threads

Did you bother looking at the votes or comments before typing that?

[Taurous]

No, I already pay around $17 a month to play, no way I'm also paying $60 a year.

[Kithelle]

I don't...already pay $15 a month for the game and the price of expansions is rising...don't want to and don't need to fork out for a new one every year.

[Vestig3]

Do i want it? Yes, Is it possible? No.

[Deleted]

I'm actually not sure too be honest.

What I don't want is a years long content drought with no patch. That for sure.
But on the other hand, if you have a really cool expension, that is fun to play and where alot of stuff is being added via patches. A year long addon could be too short and maybe I would miss it.

BC for exemple was such a good addon for me, it would have been a shame if it would have been shorter. Wotlk was a great addon but after ICC there should have been another content patch.

Legion however was an addon that I wish would be allready over.


So it depends. Yearly addons are, in my opinion, only needed if there is a huge content drought between the last patch and the comming addon. Or when the addon is really really bad design wise like WoD.

[Pua]

Wotlk was a great addon but after ICC there should have been another content patch.

There was another content patch post Icecrown.

[Yamuri]

They need more major patches in current content to make this system work of longer than a year. The answer is still no, 1 year isn't long enough for an expansion to be built and have it stand out.

[Lightwysh]

I think the "drought" at the end of expansions is planned and necessary for more people to complete the content. Just because 10% of the people finish it in 3 months doesn't the majority of folks have finished it.