Is it a Smart Business move to make "Classic" for all previous Expacs?

[Darknessvamp]

For all previous expansions? No probably not. WotLK would be the expansion to stop at if that even becomes a consideration as it's the last expansion with the most positive nostalgia before it soured. Cataclysm had plenty of systems and dungeon/raid problems that people still complain about today, MoP had it's pvp, valor and daily/rep gearing issues as well as legendary quest whiners and it's pretty clear what people think of WoD and onwards.

[ro9ue]

It's almost certainly going to go like the image below. They even hired Holly Longdale, formerly of EverQuest, on the Classic team. EverQuest's model for their Time-Locked Progression servers basically keeps the game alive. As the new TLPs cycle through expansions lots of people come back for the "golden age" era. For WoW I think that's basically vanilla - cata.

[Netherling]

11 people who voted no!?!?!!?!?!? you literally must be living in never never land.

Until they see a significant lack of interest in a classic X it continues to be an insanely smart business move.
Blizzard saw all time highs in almost all metrics when classic released. If you think that isn't a smart business move, you're actually insane.

The question wasn't whether classic (vanilla) and classic (TBC) were a smart business move though. It was whether making a classic version of ALL previous expansions is a smart business move. By classic Battle For Azeroth, the playerbase would be spread incredibly thin; maintenance and other costs would be considerable by this point and, as others have mentioned, by a certain expansion (debatable), it's very similar to retail anyway. What you said is correct, but I'm not sure it tackles OP's question.

[Tyris Flare]

[Citation needed]

And i'm sure you're talking out of your ass because it suits your views. Even Blizzard probably doesn't know how many people subbed exclusively for classic.

Recreating BC once they've made classic is surely a very manageable risk with very little effort needed.

There are 160,000 logs just for DPS warriors just on Kel'thuzad: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

There are only 36,000 logs for balance druids on heroic Shriekwing and far fewer for everything else: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

I chose those two because they have the most logs. You can easily add up the totals.

I have absolutely no interest in classic or tbc, but the numbers are there. 16 year old raiding content is more popular than new content by a lot.

[Azerate]

Thankfully, they don't have to make them all at once, so I'm sure they will keep gauging the interest as well as the current revenue from Classic expansions and decide on the basis of that. It's not like they have to sit down and decide "okay, we'll be re-releasing every expansion again!". It doesn't work like that...

It's almost certainly going to go like the image below. They even hired Holly Longdale, formerly of EverQuest, on the Classic team. EverQuest's model for their Time-Locked Progression servers basically keeps the game alive. As the new TLPs cycle through expansions lots of people come back for the "golden age" era. For WoW I think that's basically vanilla - cata.

Is this a serious post or sarcasm?

This is a fake picture which has nothing to do with reality, created as a joke.

There are 160,000 logs just for DPS warriors just on Kel'thuzad: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

There are only 36,000 logs for balance druids on heroic Shriekwing and far fewer for everything else: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

I chose those two because they have the most logs. You can easily add up the totals.

I have absolutely no interest in classic or tbc, but the numbers are there. 16 year old raiding content is more popular than new content by a lot.

The number of logs has nothing to do with the total amount of players. Especially since a) SL has much more content to do outside of raids, while Classic has none, and b) heroic is considered to be a casual difficulty and thus most people don't log it, while in classic the only thing you can realistically do as "content' is speedrunning the raids over and over which means they will be logged more

[XDurionX]

There are 160,000 logs just for DPS warriors just on Kel'thuzad: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

There are only 36,000 logs for balance druids on heroic Shriekwing and far fewer for everything else: https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zon...006/#boss=1114

I chose those two because they have the most logs. You can easily add up the totals.

I have absolutely no interest in classic or tbc, but the numbers are there. 16 year old raiding content is more popular than new content by a lot.

Naxx is the only thing original for the vast majority of the playerbase and the main reason to play classic AT ALL. Apples and oranges. Plus raidlogs still don't give an impression about how many people paid their sub solely for classic.

[Tyris Flare]

The number of logs has nothing to do with the total amount of players. Especially since a) SL has much more content to do outside of raids, while Classic has none, and b) heroic is considered to be a casual difficulty and thus most people don't log it, while in classic the only thing you can realistically do as "content' is speedrunning the raids over and over which means they will be logged more

It's hardly a perfect metric but it also doesn't have "nothing to do" with the total amount of players. You could argue that classic actually has more to do outside of raids because leveling actually takes time.

Normal is the one most people don't log, heroic has very wide logging acceptance (especially since good logs are usually required for boosting).

Anyway I don't care about classic and I think it's garbage, but I also think people need to get their head out of the sand. I hate that it is as popular as it is, but it's the truth. This nostalgia mining is probably a very good business model because Retail really struggles to hold people more than a few months.

[Kralljin]

And i'm sure you're talking out of your ass because it suits your views. Even Blizzard probably doesn't know how many people subbed exclusively for classic.

Blizzard has gone on record to say that there is little overlap between Classic and Retail players, meaning only a few actually switch between the two games.

In other words, Blizzard sure as shit knows which accounts mostly play Classic and which mostly play Retail.

while in classic the only thing you can realistically do as "content' is speedrunning the raids over and over which means they will be logged more

This might come as a surprise to some people but: Not everybody in Classic cares about speedrunning.

I seriously dislike when people attempt to explain "Why people in Classic are more likely to log than retail" when you don't have any indicator of it being true.

[shadowroguetbc]

Honestly - I only played Classic to experience the content I never had a chance to do growing up. Namely the 40 man raids. I also plan to do TBC Classic as I never had a chance to experience TBC Raiding as well. After that I would probably stop playing Classic as I started in Wrath, and I cleared everything on Hard Mode / Heroic back then. Same with Cataclysm, Mists of Pandaria, and Warlords of Draenor.

Classic and TBC are really the only servers I can see Justifying their existence - Because they contain content you can no longer play on Retail servers. The list of content removed or altered in Retail is extensive.

01. Naxxramas 40 Man
02. Onyxia's Lair 40 Man
03. Deadmines
04. Shadowfang Keep
05. Stormwind Stockades
06. Temple of Atal'hakkar
07. Stratholme
08. Zul'Gurub 20 man
09. Zul'Aman 10 Man
10. Ragefire Chasm
11. Scarlet Monastery Graveyard
12. Scarlet Monastery Cathedral
13, Scarlet Monastery Library
14. Scarlet Monastery Armory
15. Scholomance
16. Blackfathom Deeps
17. Razorfen Kraul
18. Razorfen Downs
19. Upper Blackrock Spire

These instances were either removed or altered in such a way they are almost completely different instances. Classic servers not only allow you to experience the old world before Cataclysm but also experience these instances as well. Also the Story of World of Warcraft was altered on Azeroth after Deathwing arrived so newer players might be able to go to Classic and Experience the storylines from that game as well.

So while I think Classic PAST TBC is not really needed as content was not really altered or changed until Wrath of the Lich King, I would not call them a failure in the slightest.

I’m just going to go out on a limb here, even tho tbc is personally my favorite.... wotlk will be the biggest and longest lasting community a classic expansion will ever have. If anything, if they absolutely had to choose to keep up one and only one version of a classic expansion forever, it would be wotlk.

And again, this is from a tbc fan boy perspective.

[Nubpwn]

As the poll is stated I have to say no, not for ALL previous expansions.

I don't see any scenario where re-releasing WoD is a good decision in any sense of the word.

[Glorious Leader]

It wasn't even smart for classic. This will only speed up WoW's demise at some point in the future. Classic already proved how boring and repetitive WoW was and that people quily lost interest soon after a new phase was launched. This will be the case even quicker for most of the xpacs.

Its a dumb idea other than for the fact they can wring some money from existing assets by selling nostalgia to stupid people.

[Monkiy]

I see the Classic concept as only being worthwhile for Blizzard through Wrath. And that either with TBC or Wrath we may start seeing new waves of the previous expansions, through new fresh servers, or whichever.

While some expansions have still had great reception, and are held in high regard even today, I feel as though the nostalgia charm peaked in Wrath for a variety of reasons; the story culmination of WCIII, average age of players at the time, general level of information accessible, general skill level, etc. I could just be speaking for myself, but I do think these reasons apply rather broadly to the state of the game and players at the time, and that things started to tip after that in various ways.

[Prag]

I imagine that, if the actual cost is low and there’s a guaranteed ROI, having “era” servers and allowing players to choose the expansion is a really smart move. Especially if it attracts players not interested in retail.

I also assume that it adds a new revenue stream as they offer paid services to copy characters between them.

[shadowroguetbc]

I imagine that, if the actual cost is low and there’s a guaranteed ROI, having “era” servers and allowing players to choose the expansion is a really smart move. Especially if it attracts players not interested in retail.

I also assume that it adds a new revenue stream as they offer paid services to copy characters between them.

And I know people hate hearing this but once you start getting into an expansion like wotlk it opens up a TON of revenue for blizzard. Faction change, race change, it even opened up the dreaded mount store unfortunately. And whose to say they will only stick with the mounts that were offered in wotlk. Not to mention, I can see a metric shit ton of players coming in for wotlk specifically, and you know for damn sure there will be a boost again and everyone and their dog will be buying it just to have a DK day one.

[Zka]

I'm pretty sure there is not enough demand for anything beyond Cata. Maybe MoP/Legion were good enough but it would be funny to skip some expacs. Game really started going shit after LK. People usually don't like to replay shit games.
So I guess after LK they might go into a classic+ direction by adding further stuff to old expansions or something like that.

[McNeil]

It all depends on what the future holds for retail. If the game remains in a terrible state, than the more attractive the older games will look and it will probably draw a big enough audience to warrant most expansions for. I'd say they should at least go as far as WotLK and then just poll their players on what expansion they'd like to see next. I wouldn't be surprised if more people want MoP more than Cata and Legion more than WoD.

But if retail gets a lot better, then I expect that the interest in post-WotLK expansions will be a lot less. Considering that this is where WoW's design philosophy shifted as to where we are at now. Alternatively they could take a new direction with the game by just going full on ''Classic+'' and not follow up with the more modern expansions.

[Koward]

Even Blizzard probably doesn't know how many people subbed exclusively for classic.

Of course Blizzard knows. That's the most basic business data insight you can think of.
I remember around Naxx&Shadowlands release they mentioned there was little overlap between the two communities, which means most subscribers play exclusively Retail or exclusively Classic.
That's about all we actually know though, Blizzard never released full WoW demographics.

[TJ]

Its a dumb idea other than for the fact they can wring some money from existing assets by selling nostalgia to stupid people.

Or you know, some people actually prefer the old WoW and dislike the new systems and changes they have put in place. God forbid anyone has a different opinion to yourself.

[Relapses]

It's a no-brainer from a business perspective. This was known since before Classic was a thing. My biggest fear was division in the playerbase but nearly two years later it's kind of evolved from a division to a containment chamber. As long as it keeps people playing, they'll keep adding new expansions effectively creating two content consumption avenues for two entirely different types of players (or the occasional madlad who enjoys both).

[MoanaLisa]

I am almost certain classic pulls more subscribers than nopatchlands

Zero evidence to know either way. I'm quite sure that in some months where there's a major content release Classic might do this. In other months not. Most people I know play a bit of both.

On topic: Is it smart business to expand the number of subscribing customers for relatively low development costs? Please. That's a no-brainer.

At least up through Wrath it makes perfect sense. I don't know that there's any point to releasing a classic Cataclysm. They might well do that but I don't know that it makes any sense.