Blizzard: No TBC era servers. Everyone will be forced to WoTLK.

[Drusin]

Shitty change, I quit playing BCC and went back to Classic because I'm not playing Wrath with no LFD, fuck outta here.

- - - Updated - - -

where do people like you come up with this stuff?

"the most popular"

you might want to check the start of cata.. it had same # of subs as wrath... so what does that tell you?

It tells me that Wrath was the most popular expansion and since Wrath brought in all those players they were already around for when Cata came and people just decided to hang about and checkout the new xpac.

[Ringthane]

where do people like you come up with this stuff?

"the most popular"

you might want to check the start of cata.. it had same # of subs as wrath... so what does that tell you?

And what was the sub count at the end of Cataclysm? Far less than at the beginning.

A simple Google search would show you that he's right - the game was at its most popular during Wrath. Cataclysm was the beginning of the downward spiral.

[meathead]

Nope.

You just failed to make the point you thought you were making, you were wrong, and you can't handle it. Dunning-Kruger in all its glory.

That said, did you even look at the very question you asked that I answered? Walk away for an hour then come back and read it again. Then read it one more time. Because you clearly have no idea what you asked.

say what you want its your opinion

but i started facts unlike you you that backs up my point 100%

but you are right the scrapping of 2v2 DURING wrath means it was good.. and the removal of wow at the end of wrath from mlg also means good game play? why was 2v2 not scrapped during TBC? = because it was actually pretty good in TBC!

and yeah raid were easier compared to TBC but like i said TOC and RS were epic...

everything i said is true from game play to class abilities to broken op'ed dks and pallys
you on the other hand just stated your personal feelings... enjoy

- - - Updated - - -

Shitty change, I quit playing BCC and went back to Classic because I'm not playing Wrath with no LFD, fuck outta here.

- - - Updated - - -



It tells me that Wrath was the most popular expansion and since Wrath brought in all those players they were already around for when Cata came and people just decided to hang about and checkout the new xpac.

what are you trying to say?
wrath did not bring in 11+ million players it brought in 1 to 1.5 mill
10+ million already played classic and TBC

- - - Updated - - -

And what was the sub count at the end of Cataclysm? Far less than at the beginning.

A simple Google search would show you that he's right - the game was at its most popular during Wrath. Cataclysm was the beginning of the downward spiral.

just like the sub count went down in wrath?peak wrath had more subs then the end of wrath...

stop talking about subs #'s as i said cata had the same as wrath...
wrath brought in 1.5 million new players classic and TBC brought in 10 million new players = the game and its player bases was already made before wrath.

no comment on game play or classes right?just subs #'s? lol.

[Somic]

say what you want its your opinion

but i started facts unlike you you that backs up my point 100%

but you are right the scrapping of 2v2 DURING wrath means it was good.. and the removal of wow at the end of wrath from mlg also means good game play? why was 2v2 not scrapped during TBC? = because it was actually pretty good in TBC!

and yeah raid were easier compared to TBC but like i said TOC and RS were epic...

everything i said is true from game play to class abilities to broken op'ed dks and pallys
you on the other hand just stated your personal feelings... enjoy

- - - Updated - - -




what are you trying to say?
wrath did not bring in 11+ million players it brought in 1 to 1.5 mill
10+ million already played classic and TBC

- - - Updated - - -



just like the sub count went down in wrath?peak wrath had more subs then the end of wrath...

stop talking about subs #'s as i said cata had the same as wrath...
wrath brought in 1.5 million new players classic and TBC brought in 10 million new players = the game and its player bases was already made before wrath.

no comment on game play or classes right?just subs #'s? lol.

Buddy… I’m not in this conversation but you are completely wrong on the sub counts. Wrath never saw a drop in sub counts, it saw a stagnation in the middle of it, but ‘peak’ sub counts for wrath was actually at the end of wrath so idk wtf you’re talking about. So yeah the very first quarter of cata had wrath sub numbers (because who tf would leave in droves at the very beginning of an expac) but IMMEDIATELY following the release of cata it saw a massive massive drop in players. It started with 12 million and ended closer to the 8 million range then went back to 10 at the start of mop (new expansion) then mop dropped to like 6.

Also tbc started with with like 8 million subs and ended with like 11ish. Idk wtf you’re on about it didn’t bring in 11 million

Wotlk was and still is the most popular version of the game hands down. It’s not even a question or debated. Nor should it be.

[Relapses]

nah, seems to be a bit "we'll see what folks want" about it

They said this about WotLK before TBC launched. I personally believe anybody who thinks they won't eventually come out with Cata Classic is fooling themselves; but I'm sure somebody will quote this and say that Cata private servers failing is proof that "nobody" wants it.

- - - Updated - - -

And what was the sub count at the end of Cataclysm? Far less than at the beginning.

A simple Google search would show you that he's right - the game was at its most popular during Wrath. Cataclysm was the beginning of the downward spiral.

"Downward spiral" is such a loaded phrase because it operates on this impossibly stupid notion that nobody ever unsubscribes from WoW nor do new players start playing WoW. It also completely discounts the concept of market saturation. These claims are just looking at a floating data point without any of the incredibly important churn data which Blizzard has never released and attempting to make an objective statement based solely on one's subjective opinion.

[Drusin]

what are you trying to say?
wrath did not bring in 11+ million players it brought in 1 to 1.5 mill
10+ million already played classic and TBC

The information I found says otherwise

[Rocksteady 87]

say what you want its your opinion

What's that common phrase, something about fecal matter and Sherlock Holmes...

but you are right the scrapping of 2v2 DURING wrath means it was good.. and the removal of wow at the end of wrath from mlg also means good game play? why was 2v2 not scrapped during TBC? = because it was actually pretty good in TBC!

Oh hey, apparently I don't have to say anything at all, because you just make stuff up for them.

By all means, continue telling me what I didn't say.

- - - Updated - - -

Wotlk was and still is the most popular version of the game hands down. It’s not even a question or debated. Nor should it be.

Apparently it is, by a certain demographic anyway.

[Somic]

Apparently it is, by a certain demographic anyway.

I mean sure I guess but that’s like saying someone is debating 2+2 isn’t 4, debate away but you aren’t going to win lol.

[schwank05]

SOM TBC seems like a possibility, but SOM classic has been how long now like a year? TBCC is just over a year long so how fast will SOM be 4-6 months?

[mercutiouk]

They said this about WotLK before TBC launched. I personally believe anybody who thinks they won't eventually come out with Cata Classic is fooling themselves; but I'm sure somebody will quote this and say that Cata private servers failing is proof that "nobody" wants it.

Nah, I'm pretty sure that... short of some extreme weirdness occurring from the MS buy and their input/direction being added to classic we're likely to see the expansions keep rolling, pretty much in order. Folks will come/go with the favourites/hated expansions but it's essentially "free" subs from a Blizz point of view. I'd be utterly shocked if they didn't take the tried/tested content they have and roll it again (maybe with a few tweaks).
(basically /agree)

[meathead]

Buddy… I’m not in this conversation but you are completely wrong on the sub counts. Wrath never saw a drop in sub counts, it saw a stagnation in the middle of it, but ‘peak’ sub counts for wrath was actually at the end of wrath so idk wtf you’re talking about. So yeah the very first quarter of cata had wrath sub numbers (because who tf would leave in droves at the very beginning of an expac) but IMMEDIATELY following the release of cata it saw a massive massive drop in players. It started with 12 million and ended closer to the 8 million range then went back to 10 at the start of mop (new expansion) then mop dropped to like 6.

Also tbc started with with like 8 million subs and ended with like 11ish. Idk wtf you’re on about it didn’t bring in 11 million

Wotlk was and still is the most popular version of the game hands down. It’s not even a question or debated. Nor should it be.

you know what? i dont give a rats ass what you try to spin and make up...

Wotlk was and still is the most popular version of the game hands down. It’s not even a question or debated. Nor should it be

look TBC HAD 11 million players wrath had 11.5 million so i was WRONG i said wrath brought in over a 1million guess i was wrong....!
wrath ONLY brought in half a million subs LMFAO! where the game growth? the only game play in wrath people like you like is op'ed dks and pallys.

cata had 12 millions subs correct? so according to people like you cata was better and more popular then wrath,right? cata had more subs so it must be the best/ most popular!

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

Also tbc started with with like 8 million subs and ended with like 11ish. Idk wtf you’re on about it didn’t bring in 11 million

i said classic and tbc brought in the players and created the player base and thats 100% correct as you just proved to me and anyone else so ty!
11 million to 11.5 million thats all wrath brought in... TBC landed 3-4 million new players!

the more you talk the more you prove me to be correct lol!

- - - Updated - - -

The information I found says otherwise

your info is wrong like your post!

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

- - - Updated - - -

What's that common phrase, something about fecal matter and Sherlock Holmes...


Oh hey, apparently I don't have to say anything at all, because you just make stuff up for them.

By all means, continue telling me what I didn't say.

- - - Updated - - -


Apparently it is, by a certain demographic anyway.

make up what stuff?i gave #'s and facts you just state your opinion cause you dont know anything about game play.

simple question how is wrath "better" then TBC?SCRAPPING of 2v2 in wrath and im sure you have no clue what that means or how wow was removed from mlg..
the easy raids in wrath that were made to be more player friendly so more could see end game raids.. is that what you liked about wrath?the free welfare epics and a late added group finder.. just give some example of how the game was better in wrath?

having more sub say 500k more then TBC does not make wrath better it just means it has more subs, just like cata had = to or better #'s.
i said this a while back all people like you cna say is sub #'s because thats THE only thing you can even argue about game play.
did you play wrath live?2nd time i asked you that so im guessing no.

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

OMG live wow has how many subs?5-6 million? so that must mean live in better then classic wow right?see how dumb that sounds?

[Konteil]

guess you skipped everything i wrote correct?

blizz said 2v2 was done in wrath mlg said wow was done at the end of wrath... and you think thats the best of all time?
welfare epics and face roll raids is wrath pve.. with cookie cutter specs..

did you play wrath live?i did!and i remember how broken it was say other wise and you are lying or trolling.

classic and TBC brought in 10 million players!
wrath brought in 1 to 1.5 mill players max! game growth and player bases was made in classic and TBC

most wrath players did not play it live and have no clue how it was
you can go to warmanes private wrath server and see the qq about 2v2... the same 2v2 that blizz scrapped when wrath was live... its like driving a tank every day yet complain about gas prices lol.
= much worse then TBC but then again TBC was wows peak game play.

rock that dk or pally call it skill and tell everyone how good wrath is...! sure TOC and RS raids are what people point to as "epic" raids...
no more "slow" TBC pvp and hello wrath one shots! such a great time right?

think druids were op'ed in TBC?dks and pallys are a million times worse in wrath then tbc druids.

- - - Updated - - -



hey ty for the reply and yeah im glad we agree with most stuff.
i dont "hate" wrath it was my 2nd fav behind TBC, but i do dislike wrath for what it did to the game, the game TBC pretty much got as close to right/balanced as we will see in wow.

i played wrath live and i remember how broken it was all of wrath but s5 was all time bad!the way they let dks and pallys run around for so long was just dumb. even after they nerf'ed them they still were op'ed. my class i play war and we were total crap pvp pve dps and tanking the huge changes to wars came middle of wrath = not good.

i liked cata to mainly for the rated bgs!but yeah cata fixed alot of wraths issues pvp and pve wise. i always said if TBC had rated bgs it would be near perfect!
this time around wrath will be a little better cause it will be based on the last patch from wrath, so thats a good thing but still broken.

op'ed classes dks/pallys two button classes broken pvp and face roll pve in wrath are my main issues to go with the one shotting pvp/faster crap also like we both said welfare epics of wrath is not good.

things like macros/cds/ cc dr in classic was kind of bad but TBC fixed it and i dont see many players understanding that. most just say look wrath had more players so its better... got to tell people classic and TBC = 10 million new subs! wrath brought in 1 - 1.5 million and cata = peak wraths subs.. tell them that and they usually cant say anything back. or since cata had more subs then classic and TBC that means its better....we know it was not but the sub game #'s is easy to lol about within reason.

like i said hopefully if blizz was smart they give us classic 60 tbc 70 and wrath 80, 1 pvp sever each so we can keep our toons there forever. i could see cata happen as it was solid but outside of the big 3 classic tbc and wrath not sure how far blizz will go.

i to this day will not play a dk or pally because of how broken they were in wrath.

maybe we just like wrath cause it was fun to play? i dont play uno cause i need a challenge. i play uno cause i like to play fun games with friends. wrath is the same thing. im not there for the challenge. im there cause it was actually fun to play. that simple. cant wait to see hw much hate that statement brings.

[kranur]

you might want to check the start of cata.. it had same # of subs as wrath... so what does that tell you?

This actually tells many things if you look at the full picture and are capable of understanding a simple graph. The same number of subs at the start only means 1 thing, it had the momentum from Wrath, which Wrath in its turn had it from TBC, the difference being that Wrath was able to increase the number of subs while Cata was not.



Ever since launch WoW has continuously increased in popularity, maintained in through Wrath and even increased slightly towards the end. This momentum was maintained through the launch of Cata and shortly after for the first time ever, it dropped and continued to dropped massively through the expansion while being unable to attract more players than it was losing at any point.

[Somic]

you know what? i dont give a rats ass what you try to spin and make up...

Wotlk was and still is the most popular version of the game hands down. It’s not even a question or debated. Nor should it be

look TBC HAD 11 million players wrath had 11.5 million so i was WRONG i said wrath brought in over a 1million guess i was wrong....!
wrath ONLY brought in half a million subs LMFAO! where the game growth? the only game play in wrath people like you like is op'ed dks and pallys.

cata had 12 millions subs correct? so according to people like you cata was better and more popular then wrath,right? cata had more subs so it must be the best/ most popular!

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

Also tbc started with with like 8 million subs and ended with like 11ish. Idk wtf you’re on about it didn’t bring in 11 million

i said classic and tbc brought in the players and created the player base and thats 100% correct as you just proved to me and anyone else so ty!
11 million to 11.5 million thats all wrath brought in... TBC landed 3-4 million new players!

the more you talk the more you prove me to be correct lol!

- - - Updated - - -



your info is wrong like your post!

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

- - - Updated - - -



make up what stuff?i gave #'s and facts you just state your opinion cause you dont know anything about game play.

simple question how is wrath "better" then TBC?SCRAPPING of 2v2 in wrath and im sure you have no clue what that means or how wow was removed from mlg..
the easy raids in wrath that were made to be more player friendly so more could see end game raids.. is that what you liked about wrath?the free welfare epics and a late added group finder.. just give some example of how the game was better in wrath?

having more sub say 500k more then TBC does not make wrath better it just means it has more subs, just like cata had = to or better #'s.
i said this a while back all people like you cna say is sub #'s because thats THE only thing you can even argue about game play.
did you play wrath live?2nd time i asked you that so im guessing no.

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

OMG live wow has how many subs?5-6 million? so that must mean live in better then classic wow right?see how dumb that sounds?

I’m not spinning a single fuckin thing homie, I’m telling you the straight facts.

I don’t give a single shit whether or not that guy was right or wrong about how many people wrath ‘brought in’ because that’s irrelevant. If we are going by how many people each game brought in then we could argue wod was a great expansion because of how many people bought it, but that doesn’t matter.

The thing about wotlk is that it HELD the highest amount of subs the game has ever had and it kept it that high and even rose during its time in retail. There wasn’t a single point where wotlk was ever losing more players than it would gain and it held onto those record breaking numbers every single quarter.

Now cata had a shit load of subs at the beginning. You can say what you want about that and why that was, my personal experience was cata looked fucking amazing from the start, wotlk was a massive hit so it had a ton of people, and cata was a miss or at least not near as close as wotlk.

There’s no reason cata couldn’t have held onto wotlk-esq sub numbers, but it didn’t. It eventually dropped the sub count to early tbc numbers down from the historical highs wotlk had.

If your only defense is that cata had 12 million subs at the start, then you don’t have an argument to stand on at all. Look at wod, they had a metric fuck ton of subs spike up at launch but once players ACTUALLY played the expansion they found out it was dog shit.

Idc if you like cata, idc if cata is your favorite expansion, shit idc if wod is your favorite expansion. That’s not the topic. The topic is which is more popular, and it has been, it is, and it will always be wotlk unless retail WoW somehow gets massively better.

Facts don’t care about your opinions

[Rocksteady 87]

make up what stuff?

Literally everything you said in that wrote after "say what you want its your opinion."

I gave #'s and facts you just state your opinion cause you dont know anything about game play.

No, you twisted facts using effed up logic, sprinkled in with a healthy dose of complete and utter bullshit. Then flailed your little arms around when actual facts were presented to you.

simple question how is wrath "better" then TBC?

It's already been explained, in detail. You refusing to acknowledge it doesn't change a thing. You're just wrong. Objectively wrong. It's not even an opinion, you're just wrong.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

So I know the going future into Cata thing seems doubtful for some people. They point to graphs of when the game started to go down hill and all that. But don't you remember! They fixed what killed the game. They removed RDF from the game. So now its totally to the moon if that is what really caused the game to die. As they, Blizzard, put it. So why not just re-release everything. The golden fix is in!!! /s

[Drusin]

your info is wrong like your post!

http://powerwordgold.blogspot.com/20...2005-2013.html

Hmm info doesn't look wrong, looks like Wow got its 10/11m playerbase in 2008, by the time Wrath was announced maybe?





- - - Updated - - -

It's already been explained, in detail. You refusing to acknowledge it doesn't change a thing. You're just wrong. Objectively wrong. It's not even an opinion, you're just wrong.

No expansion is objectively better than another expansion, it's 100% opinion when you say it that way. I can say SL is better than Wrath all day long and not be wrong because it's my opinion. If however we start talking about specifics like sub count or number of people doing some content then you can be objectively wrong but just "SL better than Wrath" cannot be objectively wrong.

[Rocksteady 87]

No expansion is objectively better than another expansion, it's 100% opinion when you say it that way. I can say SL is better than Wrath all day long and not be wrong because it's my opinion.

No, what it actually is is a collective opinion by the majority. Which effectively makes it objective when discussing the entire audience, at least as objective as any poll can be.

If however we start talking about specifics like sub count or number of people doing some content then you can be objectively wrong but just "SL better than Wrath" cannot be objectively wrong.

It can in the context of the conversation. No one's asking about your personal opinion. You're not the center of the universe, no matter how much your mother told you that.

[Drusin]

No, what it actually is is a collective opinion by the majority. Which effectively makes it objective when discussing the entire audience, at least as objective as any poll can be.


It can in the context of the conversation. No one's asking about your personal opinion. You're not the center of the universe, no matter how much your mother told you that.

If that's what you choose to believe then so be it but you're still wrong as it is still an opinion no matter how much your mother told you that.

[Rocksteady 87]

If that's what you choose to believe then so be it but you're still wrong as it is still an opinion no matter how much your mother told you that.

Spoken like someone who doesn't know what, well, any words mean. Apparently.

Let me guess, Republican?