"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
Whether it's better or not is somewhat beside the point. There comes a time when you have to look at things outside the pure quality of the game (a subjective thing in itself) that affect how subscriptions go. Things like the age of the game; whether or not people have seen enough of the expansion; competition from other games, many of them F2P; whether or not MMO's generally are as popular as they used to be.
People are always going to be dropping out of the game. Some come back for a while, others don't. You can really only grow over the long run by attracting new players. For the most part, I don't believe that new players are very interested in paying what is quite a bit of money (barring sales) to get started in WoW when there are free alternatives out there. And MMO's aren't nearly as popular as they used to be. Competition within a gaming niche can drive consumer interest in that niche. At this point in time there's really very little in the way of competition for the pay-to-subscribe model so less interest. Other titles have tried it and either learned to survive at much lower numbers than WoW or have changed their revenue model entirely.
While I think it's true that the quality of game expansions can extend the life of a title to a great degree that's generally through slowing the rate at which people leave combined with word-of-mouth that there really is something good going on that might bring some players back as well as attract newer players. For the most part though it's difficult to think that any game that's been around for eight years is going to suddenly start growing again. I suppose it's possible but it seems rather unlikely looking forward five-to-ten years.
"...money's most powerful ability is to allow bad people to continue doing bad things at the expense of those who don't have it."
No it isn't. It's exactly the point. The game may chronologically be "old" (although even that is a relative term I mean people are still playing games that are much older say Diablo 2 for example) but it doesn't have to FEEL OLD. Mists hasn't stopped the sub loss BECAUSE IT FEELS INCREDIBLY DATED and the emphasis on grind is the problem. It's bad for 2013. This isn't 2006 and trying to appeal to that era is foolish in the extreme. Mists is bad because it's a dinosaur. Seriously? daily quests as something to do? Did they all just sit around an office one day thinking shit up only to have one guy just say "hey i know daily quests" and then everybody else nod and that was it? How little thought and innovation can you put into a product?
All this hedging by saying the game is old is comical and is just a way for you to dismiss any criticisms about the game. It's putting your fingers in your ears and screaming lalalalaala I can't hear you. Theirs is ZERO reason that the game has to continue to lose subs other than the developers don't have a clue what to do with it. Mists is a bad expansion and it's showing in the numbers. I mean if this were any other game by any other developer you'd all be screaming about how bad it was because it's loosing so many subs but since it's wow and it's blizzard you can't accept the idea that it's a poor quality product and you have to dream up this foolishness that because it's old it's can't be rejuvenated and it's just going to have to lose subscribers. Ironically you have lower expectations of the developers than I do. I expect they can make a product that will return subscribers and grow the game again. Most of you people defending them are resigned to loss.
I have no problem with the people posting on this site, I have a problem with their argument.
I stand by the argument that if this were any other game and any other developer nobody would think to develop the excuse that it's old and accept that as a fact, which is itself totally asanine. The unfortunate thing is that if tmmrw they announced that subs had grown everyone would take this as profound evidence of the quality of mists of pandaria but the corollary simple can't be true.
The problem with your argument is that you chose to use absolutes, like 'everyone'... unfortunately a single person can wreck your claim.. Assuming tomorrow that Blizzard announces a sub increase I would NOT be one to take it as 'profound evidence'... Thus... your assertion is wrecked.
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.
The argument would be made by enough people on this forum that mists was the correct path. Actually even if the argument wasn't made, enough of you, probably almost all of you really, would just naturally conclude that the hypothetical sub growth or return was because mists was a good expansion. You wouldn't come up with some fairy tale explanation about the game being old or anything like that. You would conclude (and quite naturally and reasonable I think) that mists was a good expansion that brought players back in. Why is the opposite (that mists is crappy and the sub loss can be attributed to that) not a reasonable conclusion?
You haven't "wrecked" anything. Being a stand out guy doesn't disprove a damn thing. It just proves you don't go along with the crowd. Congrats. Your still going along with the crowd of people who don't go along with the crowd. You can't escape the herd.
enough people isn't ALL, and despite your vast knowledge of the future and of the human psyche there are plenty that don't toe any line for or against. Personally, while being an investor I don't give a fk if subs go up or down... For me personally, I'm more interested in the health of the entire company, not just one title in their catalogue.
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.
It doesn't have to be all. That's a ludicrous standard on your part and frankly when I said everyone if you took it as literally meaning everyone then that's your problem. It was obviously not meant to be everyone except in so far as for all intents and purposes it is virtually everyone. Your inability to understand the subtleties of the english language is not my concern, nor is your investment record.
Some one has to tell me why I shouldn't take a sub loss as evidence that mists is a crappy product when the corollary would apply. You would do it for virtually any other service or product.
According to titan focus all expansions are slated to be announced at this years Blizzcon along with titan teaser. So no expansion details. That would be very much out of the norm anyways. They may mention they are working on it and plan to have it out by X but a name won't be revealed.
As for subs I am predicting -600 to -900k. I no longer play anymore but many friends who play on various servers who I keep in contact have all claimed their realms activity has declined recently. It's just a small sample size so as far as I know it could be +2 million.
I would say around 400,000 or LESS.
This release, and 4.3 right around the corner... Really smooth.
-> I really REALLY wonder how long 4.4 is though... I would guess about 6 months
It could be that fatigue with the franchise, or MMOs in general, would make growing the sub base difficult for anyone. Against that headwind, losing vs. gaining subs would not be symmetrical outcomes.
Rumors we've seen suggest that Blizzard expects a gradual decline. If that is true, the question is not whether subs go down, but how they go down relative to Blizzard's expectations.
I suspect MoP may actually have exceeded their expectations.
"There is a pervasive myth that making content hard will induce players to rise to the occasion. We find the opposite. " -- Ghostcrawler
"The bit about hardcore players not always caring about the long term interests of the game is spot on." -- Ghostcrawler
"Do you want a game with no casuals so about 500 players?"
Then the developers have a low standard set for themselves. I happen to think they can DEFY expectations and should attempt to. Not phone it in and just accept a loss even a reduced one. Growing the game again would be defying all expectations. I happen to think they can do this but not with mists.