Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Deleted]

i highly doubt there is 5 million active players playing right now, something more along the lines of 2 million, wod was a complete and utter disaster and has cost wow all of its player base just about. only the new players to the game and die hard casuals remain in what is a shadow of its former self game.

[ls-]

Most of that 5mln players are from asia region, aka an eu player doesnt really experience that playerbase. On the other hand, we did experience those 100k on nostalrius daily (mostly cause there were only 2 servers for whole world, but the feeling remains.)

Oh, it's 100k daily now. Wasn't it 13-18k? Damn, you guys are funny.

[Deleted]

Oh, it's 100k daily now. Wasn't it 13-18k? Damn, you guys are funny.

13-18k players at once on both pvp and pve realm. Do you think there were no people logging off and logging on during the very same 24 hours? how does it feel being served on your own failed argument? Who is funny now?

You can swap that 100k I typed to 70k. Or 50k. For all I care, it felt as more people, that was my point of the post.

[papaz]

There should be legacy servers of each xpac. And there should be a way to transfer from a vanilla to a TBC one etc. when you feel like you want to move on.

I'm all for this and want nothing more than a TBC server but even being a "private server TBC fanboy" I realize Blizzard can never pull a legacy server thing off in a good way.

There are like 1000 different problems that will show up for them that isn't a problem on a private server because you don't expect everything to be flawless.

But yeah, in a perfect world where the forums are all about praising each other and saying you love Blizzard and WoW and not whining, I would love a legacy deal where you get to choose your xpack.

In the real world, I agree with Blizzard not wasting resources on this subject.

[Coconut]

The pros and cons of a legacy realm is what it is about. Mark Kern have tweeted that server cost and the overall expenses are being hyperboled out of hand by anti-legacy crowd. It's nowhere near what they are trying to say it is. As he was a developer for Blizzard I rather take his word on it.

Server costs, or just direct costs combined (there's development also) are not the only issue.

The pro crowd, Mark Kern included, ignores opportunity costs entirely. Bleeding subs from standard to legacy is also a "cost", because it makes those legacy profits not really matter. Even worse, losing expansion sales now because people are content to play legacy, or later because people are allowed to stay disconnected from the direction the game is taking, and it's harder to promote your new product.

The pro crowd also sweeps long term profitability under the rug. A new expansion adds content that continues to stay relevant to a certain degree in the future. Today's end game raid will be a place where casuals farm transmog and mounts later. A legacy server offers very little after people go through its 2 years worth of content.

[Deleted]

Basic math btw..5 million worldwide (4 continents with dedicated servers, so count only them, right?) 1.2 million per continent (btw not players but account which is not even remotely the same, but hey, I`m in a good mood) Around 265 server in EU so 1.2 million/265=4568,3 in average...That`s how many player (account) per server in average....shocking isn`t?
Btw serverlist if you don`t believe me (select all realms on the top): http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/status

[Uurdz]

Here you go:
Might have missed some stuff, but it's a reasonable collection of arguments.

To keep things brief:
Link 1:

The only relevant scenario for profitability involves people who wouldn't otherwise play Legion subscribing for legacy servers. Otherwise it's a 0 gain. and so on

Not so. Players who are interested in Legion (like myself) will play it but could become bored quickly (like with WoD) instead of unsubbing they would maintain their sub to play legacy servers. This is presuming that legacy servers are offered as an add-on to existing subs. This is the only option that would avoid caniblisation.
The idea that people may choose not to try Legion as they would prefer Legacy is valid. You always need to have sufficient revenue to offset the Cap Ex. and ongoing Op Ex. so your statement is a bit reduant.
You infer 150k would be the full market. Legacy servers won't happen if that was true. I would estimate the actual population to be closer to Runescapes in the 1-2mill. That's just an opinion, but the point stands that its just conjecture on both your and my parts.

Fostering a disconnect with future expansions doesn't really add up. The player base would mainly come from those have stopped playing the current game in favour of illegal servers OR another game. The inference that the existing player base would leave Retail so they could play Legacy servers would infer a serious issue with the current state of the game. The disconnect already exists - this thread is good evidence of it. The point of legacy is to play OLD content. They can run 2 MMO's at once - it's not impossible as each revenue stream would support development.

Your rhetoric on the complexity of Vanilla servers (this includes your link 2 as well as a number of other comments) is wasteful. You're seeking to have a cohesive "We want vanilla icecream" statement from the entire population. That's never going to happen. Nost. didn't need to do it and they built a strong community. Is their growth opportunity? Sure. But start with what Nost did and go from there. You also go on to infer that Legacy players will be demanding and they probably will. However, the 150k were willing to play without all the QoL features you hold to be loved by the majority of the player base. You assume that Blizzard will be FORCED to invest in this integration. I disagree. Players will kick and scream, yes, but they always have. You can't create a game without your players demanding something. However, you're in no position to need to respond. A simple "We provide Legacy servers at an as-is state. The additional features sought from the current iteration of the game will not be transferred to Legacy servers. You can of course, enjoy them in the current iteration" will work.

Link 3:
Many good points here about how hard it would be. It's not a switch and Blizzard have said this. Doesn't mean it's not the right decision though. You don't make money by rubbing your hands together - you actually have to work for it. Nothing you listed sounds impossible. Difficult, yes, but if demand and monetization is strong enough then it will be a worthy investment. Remember they have a business mandate to develop on their existing franchises as these are the backbone of their success. As a shareholder if I heard "We're going to de-risk and increase our revenue stream by providing legacy capability of our popular World of Warcraft. As the content has been developed before and we can partially reuse it, the Capital expenditure will be much lower than previous iterations and the development of an entirely new game. Additionally we've had a proven track record of success with this product and a groundswell of support recently has indicated a strong community exists to support this investment" i'd be happy. You're reusing the old game and selling it back to them AGAIN? Shit - you already looked like a good investment, lets have some more.

Link 4: Yes they may well play Legion. I suppose that's a 'wait and see' approach. However, unless they're able to turn the ship back around (Spoiler: You can't) then the same thing will occur, except faster. The player base won't forgive forever and it's likely they won't come back for whatever next Expansion is released.

Your latter statements infer that these Legacy servers would actually care about new content. Unlikely.

Link 5: Again no, your rational is that legacy players will get bored and want to go back to whatever new expansions you've got. However, legacy servers aren't playing legacy because they're bored of your current content. They're playing it because they prefer what you previously had. This idea that people will constantly demand new content holds true for Retail players, but not for legacy.

When I play Diablo 2 again, I don't expect new content or patches. The old gameplay provides significant content for me to enjoy for another 6months before I put it down and play something else again. HOWEVER, I do come back to it every few years and Seasons are a big part of why I do that.

Also this is really good work. I respect the thought you've put into this however, I think you're focussing too much on why it couldn't work and not enough on how it could.

Sometimes the glass is half empty. It's also half full. It's up to you, how you want to talk about it.

[Kolvarg]

LOL hardly anyone playing it. But you feel that another 100k ish IS something LOL. How can you say 5 million is "Hardly anyone" and in the same breath say that 100k IS something?

Not saying he is right, but...

1) We don't know if it's till 5 million or not for sure, although realm activity seems to point to it not having lowered that much since the last report.

2) Those potential 5 million players are scattered around different locked-out zones. In your own zone you're likely to have somewhere in between 1 to 2 million subscribers (not active players).

3) Not everyone that is subscribed is play regularly.

4) Not everyone that is playing regularly does much multiplayer stuff - Logging in to check your garrison counts as being subscribed and an active player, but to other players it's as if you weren't even subbed.

5) We don't know if 100k is the number that would join legacy servers. Could be less, could be much more.

[Ausr]

Oh, it's 100k daily now. Wasn't it 13-18k? Damn, you guys are funny.

I enjoy their rambling about active WoW players and their ever changing active players on Nost. They're never consistent and scream desperate.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Both precendent made by Runescape and Everquest confirmed that canibalization is not a real phenomenon because the games are too different to be in competition with one-another. How is that still an argument?

Can't wait for Mark Kern video. Maybe we'll get Blizzard answer too.

[ls-]

Both precendent made by Runescape and Everquest confirmed that canibalization is not a real phenomenon because the games are too different to be in competition with one-another. How is that still an argument?

Can't wait for Mark Kern video. Maybe we'll get Blizzard answer too.

Thus they should have separate subscriptions.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Thus they should have separate subscriptions.

Or they share the same. Profits being made by greater player retention are more than enough to offset the cost. Not to mention the players who'd only subscribe for the legacy servers. Another solution, if you really want to "boost" profit, is that you need to pay a small initial fee to unlock the servers.

But I don't mind one way or the other.

[Camthur]

Playing on a private server isn't against ToS.

- - - Updated - - -



Nope

People absolutely could be banned on here for admitting to playing on a private server. They just happened to make an exception this one time. From the forum rules and guidelines:

The following topics are not to be discussed on MMO-Champion on penalty of ban.

Gold-selling/Account selling or trading websites
Buying or selling of items in-game or in real life
Keyloggers, hoaxes/phishing websites
Activities considered illegal by Blizzard Entertainment (botting, hacking, cheating, exploiting,...)
Religious opionions/debates
Hateful language about race, religion, country (Example: US vs. EU threads), political beliefs, etc.
Nudity/Sexually explicit content
Content that is considered illegal by law
Referral links for contests, promotions, or anything else
Medical advice

[Tekkommo]

Blizz should just hire the Nost team to run Legacy servers for them.

Make it F2P with a Store (no P2W).

[Zandalarian Paladin]

People absolutely could be banned on here for admitting to playing on a private server. They just happened to make an exception this one time. From the forum rules and guidelines:

Actually no. They've never banned anyone playing on private servers. It's a big part of the mmo-champ community anyway, which would be stupid; however, promiting or mentionning a private server is illegal and will result in a ban. There's a difference between saying you play on some random server and actually stating said server - or promoting playing on private servers.

[cFortyfive]

experience braindead spec 99% parse

Survival parses in heroic literally mean nothing. Nobody ever played the spec whether or not you consider it braindead or not and what's left is less credibility for your post.

[Pieterman]

I enjoy their rambling about active WoW players and their ever changing active players on Nost. They're never consistent and scream desperate.

150k active was based on the past month I believe, 13-18k was what you'd generally see as currently online. There's thousands of us, ofc there's gonna be inconsistent information.

[Marston]

Thus they should have separate subscriptions.

15$ each or 20$ for both. Since I am pretty sure the legacy thing would need to be it's own game entirely.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

150k active was based on the past month I believe, 13-18k was what you'd generally see as currently online. There's thousands of us, ofc there's gonna be inconsistent information.

This is right. 800k accounts, 150k active monthly players, 13-18k activity peak per day.

[Dormie]

Actually no. They've never banned anyone playing on private servers. It's a big part of the mmo-champ community anyway, which would be stupid; however, promiting or mentionning a private server is illegal and will result in a ban. There's a difference between saying you play on some random server and actually stating said server - or promoting playing on private servers.

lol they don't ban people here.