Thread: Possible leak?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    You really need to grab your monocle to engage on a conversation with me...you are failing at it on all levels (>_<)

    Im saying is flawed for the party developing the MMO.
    The company

    We? The consumers? We just "NOM NOM NOM NOM" eat up the millions of dollars Blizzard wastes on development in a month and ask for more
    As usual you fail to address the issue raised - my comment had nothing at all to do with the players, and was 100% regarding the party developing the game - Blizzard. You comment suggests that wow is a themepark mmo, and that themepark mmos are not popular. I pointed to wows 15+ years on top of the mountain, and you, as usual, completely deflected.

    If consumers are paying to "NOM NOM NOM NOM" (cringe) and eat up the content, how is that not a positive for the company? As usual from you, just nonsensical drivel.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    If that was true, nobody would be doing it.
    Eh? But thats exactly the situation we have in our world?
    Almost "Nobody" is doing MMORPG's

    Only big BIG companies can do it because of the flaw i mentioned and everyone knows about.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Eh? But thats exactly the situation we have in our world?
    Almost "Nobody" is doing MMORPG's

    Only big BIG companies can do it because of the flaw i mentioned and everyone knows about.
    If big companies are doing it, it isn't nobody. You're contradicting yourself there. Big companies are also less likely to take unprofitable ventures, so that flaw can't be as big as the flaws of sandbox MMOs.

  4. #44
    Is there a source that I somehow missed? Can someone post it?

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    If big companies are doing it, it isn't nobody. You're contradicting yourself there. Big companies are also less likely to take unprofitable ventures, so that flaw can't be as big as the flaws of sandbox MMOs.
    There are plenty of small studios doing mmos - the entire argument is baseless and flawed. Just google "new mmos" or "2021 mmos" or similar and you will find multiple mmos being developed by small studios.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    There are plenty of small studios doing mmos - the entire argument is baseless and flawed. Just google "new mmos" or "2021 mmos" or similar and you will find multiple mmos being developed by small studios.
    Yeah, themepark mmos without updates and microtransactions and macrotransactions and...transactions :3

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Yeah, themepark mmos without updates and microtransactions and macrotransactions and...transactions :3
    So just like those sandbox mmos you love so much then.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Calfredd View Post
    So just like those sandbox mmos you love so much then.
    I know! Is all messed up for MMORPG fans right now dude...is all messed up.
    At least im having fun in Shadowlands but...
    I just need a quick fix of a good Sandbox content man...

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    Yeah, themepark mmos without updates and microtransactions and macrotransactions and...transactions :3
    So which is it? You said no one was developing them, now you are saying they are? For a self promoted "connoisseur" of mmos, your knowledge seems extremely limited. I would argue that sandbox mmos are notorious for extremely aggressive and questionable MTX and monetization practices, especially compared to large themepark mmos.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadoowpunk View Post
    I just need a quick fix of a good Sandbox content man...
    Dont you mean Sandpark?

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Smash Adams View Post
    Really not sure what the fascination is with sub counts. Who gives a shit what the Classic numbers are? Who gains anything by Blizzard publicizing high or low numbers?
    To win arguments on the forums one way or another.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Are you trying to say Sandbox? If so........what are you trying to say? The leak supposedly says that CLASSIC lost a surprisingly high number of players...
    surprisingly? are you wearing sunglasses inside? there is no surprise that classic dropped off hard after 2 month and everyone knew it would happen!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pohut View Post
    If the leak is true, what do you expect it to reveal?
    I expect that leak to be bullshit as you pay ONE sub for classic and RETAIL

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post
    surprisingly? are you wearing sunglasses inside? there is no surprise that classic dropped off hard after 2 month and everyone knew it would happen!
    Yes, but if you read what was said, it was surprisingly high - meaning even larger than was expected.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post

    I expect that leak to be bullshit as you pay ONE sub for classic and RETAIL
    Yes, but Blizzard can EASILY break down who plays what - as OP said - what subs only play classic, only play retail, or play both.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    Yes, but if you read what was said, it was surprisingly high - meaning even larger than was expected.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Yes, but Blizzard can EASILY break down who plays what - as OP said - what subs only play classic, only play retail, or play both.
    I just hope there were enough that played Classic to warrant TBCB to be made. From the sound of it The Burning Crusade Classic looks like it will be scrapped.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nizah View Post
    why so mad bro

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Pohut View Post
    I was on one of “those” websites, and a reputable WoW leaker had a since removed post up regarding a potential leak from Blizzard.
    The story goes their Sub count has been leaked by accident (not a disgruntled employee or anything dramatic like that), including a very in-depth breakdown of the splits between accounts that only play Classic, only play Retail, and those that play both. Her source informed her, without mentioning specific numbers, that it painted quite a grim picture for Classic outside the initial 6-8 weeks.
    From what she said, Blizzard are aware of the leak, and are seriously considering releasing the information themselves rather than it coming from an unknown source.
    If the leak is true, what do you expect it to reveal?
    If the information is true, which it isn't, ATVI would face a potential class action lawsuit for misleading investors as they specifically highlighted the strength of the Classic product providing sustained returns during qtrly updates.

    It's simply nonsensical for them to update the market with a lie.

  15. #55
    Does it really matter one way or another? Of course classic was never going to be a long-lasting thing, it didn't take a prophet to see that coming.

    The part about Blizzard coming out with the info themselves is probably nonsense though, they have no reason to. In fact it's better if they don't, and just ignore the supposed leak, because it can't be confirmed one way or another.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Uurdz View Post
    If the information is true, which it isn't, ATVI would face a potential class action lawsuit for misleading investors as they specifically highlighted the strength of the Classic product providing sustained returns during qtrly updates.

    It's simply nonsensical for them to update the market with a lie.
    They didnt lie once in their reports - however the classic fans horribly misunderstand what is actually being said. This is an ongoing trend since day 1, with some ppl making ridiculous claims such as classic having at least DOUBLE the playerbase of retail.

  17. #57
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Epic Premium
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    45,766
    "Game vs. Game" type threads don't tend to produce much in the way of constructive discussion or debate. Closing this.
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •