Classic World of Warcraft Discussion [Megathread]

[Deleted]

It's a job. Sometimes you have to do things you don't really want to to earn money. Thats life, people have bills to pay.

Unless you live in a magical land where Blizzard will take a third party application, open up their service containing a metric fucktom of private data to run it, install it on a live server and start selling it tomorrow, it's fairly obviously the initial cost just to get it installed are getting fairly sizable already. For something that actually has very little market appeal. A very small but vocal minority will play a 12 year old game that is painfully unpolished by 2016 standards for more than a month or two.

Though if you do live in that land, I have a field of unicorns I'd love to show you.

- - - Updated - - -



It wouldn't be part of the cost of subbing to retail though. Legacy would have to be capable of standing on its own feet.

I belive it could stand on its own.
But if there was a legacy sub that is lower than retails sub. I would pick the legacy one over the retail and that would result in less money from me.
Biggest reason why i think it should be a different sub is to keep retail and vanilla players from just trolling and bashing each others choice of game.

- - - Updated - - -

You know what I would love though, is a real EQ-style progression server. Time-locked releases of all the raids and expansions with QoL improvements to keep leveling speed in line with 2016 standards... that's some good stuff.

Somewhere in space there is a universe where that is true. And god would i want a spaceship to get there!

[Deleted]

That's another thing, seems like there is like a...let's say "competition" (for not saying war) between legacy and retail communities, and that's another question, can Blizzard "support" a war between both communities inside is business?

That's another great question. I'm making cofee.

It's a job. Sometimes you have to do things you don't really want to to earn money. Thats life, people have bills to pay.

Unless you live in a magical land where Blizzard will take a third party application, open up their service containing a metric fucktom of private data to run it, install it on a live server and start selling it tomorrow, it's fairly obviously the initial cost just to get it installed are getting fairly sizable already. For something that actually has very little market appeal. A very small but vocal minority will play a 12 year old game that is painfully unpolished by 2016 standards for more than a month or two.

Though if you do live in that land, I have a field of unicorns I'd love to show you.

Yes, i know is job, but people can be cool working on something cause they like it, but also can work on something that they don't like it and at the end people see it in the end result. That's my point.

And the black part...¿how do you know? Nobody knows if is a minority or majority or nothing, unless Blizzard make a oficial pol or question or whatever.

[Vash The Stampede]

Agreed. I think you'd have a whole lot of people in for a rude awakening when they try to play a decade-old MMO and that would translate into sub losses after the initial burst. Especially since it's pretty clear you'd need more than just private server legacy people (who presumably know how it feels to play 1.12 in 2016) in order to make this financially viable.

Financially viability shouldn't really be a concern. If you combine the known amount of private servers with their players it will surpass Legions current EU US population, given that if WoW Census is true that Legion is currently at 2.1 million active players. Of course it's an up hill battle cause private realms are free and Battle.net is not, or whatever Blizzard calls it now. But consider that there's a demand for this and Legion isn't doing so hot then maybe there's something here to consider. At this point I don't expect Blizzard to suddenly create Legacy Realms, but I do hope they can learn from this. Their design choices for Legion should be reconsidered, and how they abandon older content should also be rethought.

Also it's 2016 and 99% of multiplayer games on the market don't charge a monthly fee. I do believe Blizzard had 10 million subs mid September for Legion, that's including China, but that dropped way way down to something like 4-5m with China. The EU/US have 2.1m subs. I can see it easily reaching the mid million range by January, at which point Blizzard has to rethink their business model with WoW. Keep this train wreck going, or do something like include Legacy realms as part of the subscription. Shouldn't even need to purchase the game for new players.

[Ielenia]

But consider that there's a demand for this and Legion isn't doing so hot then maybe there's something here to consider.

I don't trust WoWCensus for populations. Especially since you apparently need a specific addon to count for the census, according to this. It's below the bottom of the graph.

Plus, I'm seeing much more activity, at all hours of the day, than I used to see during WoD (which had 5 millions subs at its last count, I believe), and my Real ID list, and my guildies' Real ID lists nowadays are filled with much more active players than in the previous expansions. Claiming Legion "isn't doing so hot" is a bit disingenuous, to be honest. The most honest statement one can make is that they don't know how the expansion is really doing, sub-wise, but, in my opinion, there is much more activity and players around nowadays than before.

[Relapses]

I don't trust WoWCensus for populations. Especially since you apparently need a specific addon to count for the census, according to this. It's below the bottom of the graph.

Why base an argument in reality when you can just invent facts and figures to support your position?

[Vash The Stampede]

I don't trust WoWCensus for populations. Especially since you apparently need a specific addon to count for the census, according to this. It's below the bottom of the graph.

I get it, but what else do we have to go on with? If anything WoW Census gives a ruff estimate. This is the price Blizzard pays for suddenly keeping subscription #'s quiet.

Plus, I'm seeing much more activity, at all hours of the day, than I used to see during WoD (which had 5 millions subs at its last count, I believe), and my Real ID list, and my guildies' Real ID lists nowadays are filled with much more active players than in the previous expansions. Claiming Legion "isn't doing so hot" is a bit disingenuous, to be honest. The most honest statement one can make is that they don't know how the expansion is really doing, sub-wise, but, in my opinion, there is much more activity and players around nowadays than before.

I get that it feels more active, but that's far less reliable than WoW Census. Might as well shack the magic 8 ball at this point. But anyway, many games operates at a much lower financial level than WoW and offers more. And there are many more financial avenues that Blizzard can exploit with Legacy servers. Blizzard is no stranger to this, as HearthStone is free... mostly.

For example, they could use Legacy servers to leverage players to go play Legion. Other players could influence Legacy players to get on their Legion character and play. Also, Legacy Realms could bring back a lot of players to the game. Why you think so many players came back for WoD, and overloaded the servers? They thought it was going to be like TBC2.0, at least that's my hypothesis anyway.

Lets also not forget that other games have done this as well. Everquest which is a popular game to reference, has Progression Servers. In fact, Everquest is Free To play, at least for Vanilla. This also includes Everquest II. They found a way to make it financially feasible, so why can't Blizzard?

[Relapses]

I get it, but what else do we have to go on with? If anything WoW Census gives a ruff estimate. This is the price Blizzard pays for suddenly keeping subscription #'s quiet.

It doesn't do anything. The information isn't even remotely accurate so it's literally 100% useless. If anything, it gives you a reason to quote it as a factual source of incorrect information. But hey, it makes your shitty argument an air of validity so I guess it serves its purpose, eh?

[Deleted]

Financially viability shouldn't really be a concern. If you combine the known amount of private servers with their players it will surpass Legions current EU US population, given that if WoW Census is true that Legion is currently at 2.1 million active players. Of course it's an up hill battle cause private realms are free and Battle.net is not, or whatever Blizzard calls it now. But consider that there's a demand for this and Legion isn't doing so hot then maybe there's something here to consider. At this point I don't expect Blizzard to suddenly create Legacy Realms, but I do hope they can learn from this. Their design choices for Legion should be reconsidered, and how they abandon older content should also be rethought.

Also it's 2016 and 99% of multiplayer games on the market don't charge a monthly fee. I do believe Blizzard had 10 million subs mid September for Legion, that's including China, but that dropped way way down to something like 4-5m with China. The EU/US have 2.1m subs. I can see it easily reaching the mid million range by January, at which point Blizzard has to rethink their business model with WoW. Keep this train wreck going, or do something like include Legacy realms as part of the subscription. Shouldn't even need to purchase the game for new players.

Do you have any way to know the number of private server players?
Because i had a huge debate of saying i thought there was at least a million people playing on private servers but i was quickly shot down execution style by the "source patrol".

I think there is at least 1-2 million people playing on private servers around all the world but you are called crazy over here for having rational thinking and no proof ^_^

[Vash The Stampede]

It doesn't do anything. The information isn't even remotely accurate so it's literally 100% useless. If anything, it gives you a reason to quote it as a factual source of incorrect information. But hey, it makes your shitty argument an air of validity so I guess it serves its purpose, eh?

If anything, WoW census can be used to track trends. If it shows less players, then there's a good chance there's less players. How many less players is still debatable. Also, I don't see you attacking Ielenia with how he "feels" the population is. Cause you know, that's more accurate, AMRIGHT? We know WoW Census isn't accurate, but you make it sound like it's so inaccurate that it might as well be monkeys throwing feces at a button that determines the number of active players.

Do you have any way to know the number of private server players?
Because i had a huge debate of saying i thought there was at least a million people playing on private servers but i was quickly shot down execution style by the "source patrol".

I think there is at least 1-2 million people playing on private servers around all the world but you are called crazy over here for having rational thinking and no proof ^_^

I was looking for a Vanilla private server and found very surprising population numbers on some of these realms. The servers could be lying, but I was seeing some crazy numbers like 200,000 for a few of them. BTW heard about Elysium?

BTW this is just one method to track activity.

[Relapses]

If anything, WoW census can be used to track trends. If it shows less players, then there's a good chance there's less players. How many less players is still debatable.

Debatable? How do you debate imaginary numbers? I'll agree you can track trending but since we don't know the exact numbers it can be anywhere from 3 to 10 million subscribers off. And when you're dealing with a data spread that wide, the information gleamed from it is completely inconclusive and useless to support the argument you're trying to make.

Also, I don't see you attacking Ielenia with how he "feels" the population is. Cause you know, that's more accurate, AMRIGHT?

It's anecdotal evidence, yes, but I didn't quote that portion of his post since it wasn't relevant to my observation.

We know WoW Census isn't accurate, but you make it sound like it's so inaccurate that it might as well be monkeys throwing feces at a button that determines the number of active players.

...I wouldn't want to insult monkeys flinging shit at a keyboard. If we hired enough of them they'd be able to create an argument in favor of Legacy which is better than anything we've seen in this thread so far.

[Mahourai]

The servers could be lying, but I was seeing some crazy numbers like 200,000 for a few of them.

As in, what? Total registered accounts? Active accounts? Where did you find this? No English-language private server has ever published data like this besides Nostalrius's postmortem.

[Deleted]

As in, what? Total registered accounts? Active accounts? Where did you find this? No English-language private server has ever published data like this besides Nostalrius's postmortem.

If i understand correctly the site alexa.com shows the trafic of how many people visit the web page.
I don't think it shows the numbers of the servers but it shows how much trafic the site has along the year.

It's not an exact science but it shows how many people visit the site on a daily basis with a graph and everything.

Not sure if i am right.

[Manhands]

The more important point is: how does Blizzard determine whether enough people would pay for this? They're not running a charity here; Blizzard needs to be confident that legacy servers would be a net gain for them in some way. I don't know how they're supposed to arrive at that conclusion, and if they can't -- you won't be seeing official legacy any time soon.

Let me jump in and say that Blizzard operating legacy servers at a loss might still be worth it. It will (1) earn a huge amount of goodwill toward the community as a whole and (2) bring back players to commingle with those who play the full spectrum of blizz games. Those returning players will likely talk to current Legion players and have the discussion, "How good is it?" And once they get on the WoW-crack raiding progression train, where are they likely to go? At least some percent will go to live servers, especially considering the hook of buying subs with gold.

And I think the qualitative benefits of (1) are a big deal. Look at this thread.

[Deleted]

It doesn't do anything. The information isn't even remotely accurate so it's literally 100% useless. If anything, it gives you a reason to quote it as a factual source of incorrect information. But hey, it makes your shitty argument an air of validity so I guess it serves its purpose, eh?

The only people with 100% accurate information are blizzard. They chose to not disclose this information anymore due to obvious reasons.

Don't ask for/expect absolute accuracy then, when the company you are brown nosing is too fearful to deliver said information to the public. There is a reason people are having to use third party sites, if you don't like it, request blizzard show their numbers again. Until then, pull you head out of your arse and accept the fact no one here is going to have totally accurate information.

[Mahourai]

If i understand correctly the site alexa.com shows the trafic of how many people visit the web page.
I don't think it shows the numbers of the servers but it shows how much trafic the site has along the year.

It's not an exact science but it shows how many people visit the site on a daily basis with a graph and everything.

Not sure if i am right.

The question I am asking and the post I am responding to has nothing to do with Alexa numbers. He stated he "found population numbers" from "the servers".

[Relapses]

The only people with 100% accurate information are blizzard. They chose to not disclose this information anymore due to obvious reasons.

Don't ask for/expect absolute accuracy then, when the company you are brown nosing is too fearful to deliver said information to the public. There is a reason people are having to use third party sites, if you don't like it, request blizzard show their numbers again. Until then, pull you head out of your arse and accept the fact no one here is going to have totally accurate information.

I'm not asking implicitly for accuracy, I'm asking for you guys to support your argument with real information instead of baseless presumptions you gleam for unsubstantial sources.

Further than that, I had no idea that Blizzard had some kind of moral obligation to release its subscriber numbers for the purpose of your argument. I think if you were to write an angry, strongly worded letter to Mike Morhaime, they might reconsider their decision based solely off the inconvenience it has caused you.

[clevin]

If anything, WoW census can be used to track trends. If it shows less players, then there's a good chance there's less players. How many less players is still debatable. Also, I don't see you attacking Ielenia with how he "feels" the population is. Cause you know, that's more accurate, AMRIGHT? We know WoW Census isn't accurate, but you make it sound like it's so inaccurate that it might as well be monkeys throwing feces at a button that determines the number of active players.


I was looking for a Vanilla private server and found very surprising population numbers on some of these realms. The servers could be lying, but I was seeing some crazy numbers like 200,000 for a few of them. BTW heard about Elysium?

BTW this is just one method to track activity.

That chart shows ranking of the site in question against all sites theyt know about. It's got nothing to do with how many people are on that site.

[Deleted]

Let me jump in and say that Blizzard operating legacy servers at a loss might still be worth it. It will (1) earn a huge amount of goodwill toward the community as a whole and (2) bring back players to commingle with those who play the full spectrum of blizz games. Those returning players will likely talk to current Legion players and have the discussion, "How good is it?" And once they get on the WoW-crack raiding progression train, where are they likely to go? At least some percent will go to live servers, especially considering the hook of buying subs with gold.

And I think the qualitative benefits of (1) are a big deal. Look at this thread.

I find it hard to believe that Blizzard would not make a huge profit out of this.

1)Not everyone played Vanilla so it's basically a new expansion for them
2)New Blizzard game = millions of people trying it out
3)A lot of people enjoy more oldschool wow than retail

I see it profiting in any way or form they decide for payment. It needs to be a huge fukup for this thing to not profit. Huge.

[clevin]

If i understand correctly the site alexa.com shows the trafic of how many people visit the web page.
I don't think it shows the numbers of the servers but it shows how much trafic the site has along the year.

It's not an exact science but it shows how many people visit the site on a daily basis with a graph and everything.

Not sure if i am right.

You're not at least not if you're looking at the chart a few posts up.

[Ielenia]

I get it, but what else do we have to go on with? If anything WoW Census gives a ruff estimate.

What? No! We don't know how accurate is that "rough estimate". It's all wild guesswork. For all we know, WoW could be surpassing WotLK's numbers, or dwindling down to just a million. Thing is, we have no idea how accurate those numbers are, so we can't use them even as "rough estimates".

This is the price Blizzard pays for suddenly keeping subscription #'s quiet.

... What? "This is the price they pay"? What kind of self-entitled nonsense is that? You can't say they're 'being punished' for neglecting their obligations, because Blizzard is not obligated to release subscription numbers to you.

I get that it feels more active, but that's far less reliable than WoW Census.

I never claimed it is, I was just speaking of my experience.]

But anyway, many games operates at a much lower financial level than WoW and offers more.

Offers... more? Could I have some examples so I could check them out, please?

And there are many more financial avenues that Blizzard can exploit with Legacy servers.

Sure there are. Of that, there is no question. The true issue is: are those other financial avenues more lucrative than what they're doing right now?

Lets also not forget that other games have done this as well. Everquest which is a popular game to reference, has Progression Servers. In fact, Everquest is Free To play, at least for Vanilla. This also includes Everquest II. They found a way to make it financially feasible, so why can't Blizzard?

Because Blizzard is not DayBreakGames? Besides, this is something I cannot really comment since I never played EQ or EQII, so I cannot make any comparisons, however, maybe DBG is doing some compromise to make 'free to play' work, that Blizzard isn't willing to do. Like I said, just a theory.