4 raiding difficulties

[Mahourai]

It really is in Q3 2010 reported 12million subscribers and in Q4 2010 they also reported 12million subscribers. Do you see how this is different from what you claimed?

In the Q2 2011 earnings call, when Cataclysm's subscriber number dipped to 11.4 million after the post-release bounce, Mike Morhaime referred to that figure as a "return to the pre-Cataclysm subscriber numbers" - meaning that Wrath's end-period subs were also 11.4 million. Blizzard simply timed their releases to present a more rosy picture of events to shareholders so that the sub loss between September and December 2010 during the end of the year of Icecrown was made invisible by the bump from Cataclysm's December 7th release.

Do you get it now?

[Durantye]

Flex(normal) is everything LFR Should've been I honestly see no reason for LFR's existence anymore to be honest but even if it stays forever it is a Tourist mode, as per Blizzard's own words. So I'd say there is only 3 difficulties but only 2 that anyone even cares about to be honest, I feel like Flex(Normal) is a fun way to enjoy alts or play when you don't have time to join a raiding group and even normal(Heroic) is easily doable with pugs on most realms (assuming they disable current tier cross-realm again), Of course normal(Heroic) is for friends and family guilds mostly those that want to have fun more than progress, then there is Heroic (Mythic) when you have a bit of time to invest in raiding for addtional difficulty and challenge.

Basically I feel each one serves a purpose (except LFR I have firsthand experienced LFR's toxicity since I was an LFR raider when it first introduced and has only gotten worse, and since the introduction of Flex(normal) there is no reason for it since flex is generally faster and smoother than LFR) to allow everyone to have their content. So no it isn't too much.

[Golden]

No they want LFR players to get into organised raiding because raiders, as a group, tend to stick around longer. They will just as they did in Cata with heroic dungeons and dailies on MOP. There is no way they will ever implement a system where LFR have to wait a whole tier before having access to the latest raid.

Blizzard have told their share holders that casual engagement is an issue with sub retention I will take that over your unsubstantiated theory.

Blizzard has been trying to get people into organized raiding for almost 10 years now. How does having LFR available 6 weeks after the expansion starts (instead of 5 months) encourage players to do organized raiding?

Also, if organized raiders are the only ones who "stick around", why aren't there more sub losses right now? The game hasn't received new content for 11 months yet only 800K of almost 7M have unsubbed; obviously casual players have "stuck around" as well.

Furthermore, who is arguing that having casual player subs doesn't increase the number of subs the game has? What does that have to do with when LFR players see the content? Is content no longer engaging if you don't see it within weeks of when it's released?

I think it's your "theory" that the majority of casual players are going to unsub if they can't get in the latest raid tier 6 weeks after it's released. Personally, I think it's more likely that casual players will unsub if LFR rewards are crap.

[Seefer]

In addition to not lying, I also suggest you not put ridiculous nonsense in my mouth. Maybe you need to work on that whole personal integrity thing. You seem to have some issues with it.

Oh, and subs did NOT start dropping after LFR was added. Subs were nearly steady for two quarters, actually (Q4 2011 and Q1 2012). There you go lying again...

Listen I am going to be as polite as mother fucking possible with your ass and that isn't going to be much...............SUBS ARE DROPPING! My point is if you get your head out of Blizzards fucking ass for 20 seconds and COMPREHEND...........LFR did not save SHIT..........PERIOD! Those who stayed during Crapaclysm most likely would have stayed ANYWAY.

[Pann]

In the Q2 2011 earnings call, when Cataclysm's subscriber number dipped to 11.4 million after the post-release bounce, Mike Morhaime referred to that figure as a "return to the pre-Cataclysm subscriber numbers" - meaning that Wrath's end-period subs were also 11.4 million. Blizzard simply timed their releases to present a more rosy picture of events to shareholders so that the sub loss between September and December 2010 during the end of the year of Icecrown was made invisible by the bump from Cataclysm's December 7th release.

Do you get it now?

For starters in the Q2 2011 they announced 11.1 million subscribers down 300k on the previous quarter. In the Q3 2010 they told us New world - wide subscriber milestone announced for World of Warcraft at 12M in Q4 2010 they told us "New world - wide subscriber milestone announced for World of Warcraft at 12M in October" which would coincide with the Q3 earnings call. There is no need for the detective work they told us how many subs they had.

[gamingmuscle]

In the Q2 2011 earnings call, when Cataclysm's subscriber number dipped to 11.4 million after the post-release bounce, Mike Morhaime referred to that figure as a "return to the pre-Cataclysm subscriber numbers" - meaning that Wrath's end-period subs were also 11.4 million. Blizzard simply timed their releases to present a more rosy picture of events to shareholders so that the sub loss between September and December 2010 during the end of the year of Icecrown was made invisible by the bump from Cataclysm's December 7th release.

Do you get it now?

You just proved his point. Prior to the end of December 2010 11.4 mil could have been the #, but December 2010 number was 12mil.

[Mahourai]

For starters in the Q2 2011 they announced 11.1 million subscribers down 300k on the previous quarter. In the Q3 2010 they told us New world - wide subscriber milestone announced for World of Warcraft at 12M in Q4 2010 they told us "New world - wide subscriber milestone announced for World of Warcraft at 12M in October" which would coincide with the Q3 earnings call. There is no need for the detective work they told us how many subs they had.

Do you understand how what you're saying doesn't disprove me?

Between the Q3 and Q4 earnings calls, Blizzard lost 600k subs from the peak of 12 million during the wind-down of Icecrown and the lame pre-Cataclysm patch, launched Cataclysm on December 7th, and regained subs to go back to that peak - but you wouldn't know that just by looking at the raw data, you'd think nothing changed. But we do know otherwise, because Morhaime stated what the final Wrath figures were. Pay attention and don't just repeat your assertions again.

You just proved his point. Prior to the end of december 2010 11.4 mil was the #, but December 2011 number was 12mil.

You don't even vaguely know what we're talking about. December 2011 was during Dragon Soul...

[Pann]

Blizzard has been trying to get people into organized raiding for almost 10 years now. How does having LFR available 6 weeks after the expansion starts (instead of 5 months) encourage players to do organized raiding?

Also, if organized raiders are the only ones who "stick around", why aren't there more sub losses right now? The game hasn't received new content for 11 months yet only 800K of almost 7M have unsubbed; obviously casual players have "stuck around" as well.

Furthermore, who is arguing that having casual player subs doesn't increase the number of subs the game has? What does that have to do with when LFR players see the content? Is content no longer engaging if you don't see it within weeks of when it's released?

I think it's your "theory" that the majority of casual players are going to unsub if they can't get in the latest raid tier 6 weeks after it's released. Personally, I think it's more likely that casual players will unsub if LFR rewards are crap.

It clearly doesn't.

I did not say that at all. Maybe there are still people buying the game and replacing the casual audience?

I don't know it looks like something you've just made up.

Again I did not say that the majority of casual players would unsub this is another one of your creations. But what do you suggest players that usually run LFR do in this five month wait? Run the few dungeons we're getting over and over?

[Osmeric]

Listen I am going to be as polite as mother fucking possible with your ass and that isn't going to be much...............SUBS ARE DROPPING! My point is if you get your head out of Blizzards fucking ass for 20 seconds and COMPREHEND...........LFR did not save SHIT..........PERIOD! Those who stayed during Crapaclysm most likely would have stayed ANYWAY.

You have a trivial correct point there (subs are dropping), but you also have unsupported statements of opinion ("LFR did not save SHIT"). That you needed to lie to justify the latter makes your case rather weak, and should give you pause.

I suggest you step back and consider that your position on this issue is not well founded.

[Seefer]

You have a trivial correct point there (subs are dropping), but you also have unsupported statements of opinion ("LFR did not save SHIT"). That you needed to lie to justify the latter makes your case rather weak, and should give you pause.

I suggest you step back and consider that your position on this issue is not well founded.

Keep calling me a liar I don't give 2 sweet shits, I am not lying, it didn't save a damn thing end of story.....if it did subs would not be dropping like they have been.

[gamingmuscle]

You don't even vaguely know what we're talking about. December 2011 was during Dragon Soul...

It's called a typo, and based on the context of the conversation that should have been fairly obvious.

[Mahourai]

It's called a typo, and based on the context of the conversation that should have been fairly obvious.

But your figure for "prior to december 2010" isn't right either. You have the timeline all screwed up.

[Osmeric]

Keep calling me a liar I don't give 2 sweet shits, I am not lying, it didn't save a damn thing end of story.....if it did subs would not be dropping like they have been.

Of course you were lying. You made statements that were totally at variance with the truth. At best, you have become so deluded that you are arguing in reckless disregard of accuracy. In either case, no one else should put much credence in anything you say. You have impeached your own credibility.

And how do you know what subs would have done without LFR? For all you know, sub losses would have been LARGER without its addition. Given how many people use LFR and don't move to higher raid modes, this is actually quite a reasonable presumption. So no, you can't truthfully say LFR "didn't save a damn thing end of story".

[Seefer]

Of course you were lying. You made statements that were totally at variance with the truth. At best, you have become so deluded that you are arguing in reckless disregard of accuracy. In either case, no one else should put much credence in anything you say. You have impeached your own credibility.

Well, believe what you want to believe I got my own beliefs about you that I can't share on here, so all is good.

[Pann]

Do you understand how what you're saying doesn't disprove me?

Between the Q3 and Q4 earnings calls, Blizzard lost 600k subs from the peak of 12 million during the wind-down of Icecrown and the lame pre-Cataclysm patch, launched Cataclysm on December 7th, and regained subs to go back to that peak - but you wouldn't know that just by looking at the raw data, you'd think nothing changed. But we do know otherwise, because Morhaime stated what the final Wrath figures were. Pay attention and don't just repeat your assertions again.

Yeah, I mean it is more likely that Mike Morhaime was hinting that there was a loss of 600k in between the two quarters where they announced 12million subscribers and not at all referring to the quarters where they reported 11.5million subscribers. But perhaps most importantly they never said what you claim, what was reported was "As of March subscribership returned to pre-Cataclysm - launch levels in the West

[Golden]

It clearly doesn't.

I did not say that at all. Maybe there are still people buying the game and replacing the casual audience?

I don't know it looks like something you've just made up.

Again I did not say that the majority of casual players would unsub this is another one of your creations. But what do you suggest players that usually run LFR do in this five month wait? Run the few dungeons we're getting over and over?

Do you actually read the stuff you post? Why don't you read your post and tell my why I responded with this.

[gamingmuscle]

Keep calling me a liar I don't give 2 sweet shits, I am not lying, it didn't save a damn thing end of story.....if it did subs would not be dropping like they have been.

You can't actually claim that.

LFR may have slowed the bleed. LFR may have made it worse. Neither you or I can claim it did either. I personally doubt it caused more bleeding as it basically added a cheap form of raiding. Which would add value for those that are time/ability constrained.

- - - Updated - - -

But your figure for "prior to december 2010" isn't right either. You have the timeline all screwed up.

I pulled the time frame and numbers directly from your post.

In the Q2 2011 earnings call, when Cataclysm's subscriber number dipped to 11.4 million after the post-release bounce, Mike Morhaime referred to that figure as a "return to the pre-Cataclysm subscriber numbers" - meaning that Wrath's end-period subs were also 11.4 million. Blizzard simply timed their releases to present a more rosy picture of events to shareholders so that the sub loss between September and December 2010 during the end of the year of Icecrown was made invisible by the bump from Cataclysm's December 7th release.

Do you get it now?

So if I'm wrong, you were wrong...unless I am missing something.

--edit 2--

Oh shit am I confusing fiscal years and calendar years?

[Pann]

Do you actually read the stuff you post? Why don't you read your post and tell my why I responded with this.

Yes I do, clearly you didn't as you would not have written such nonsense.

[Seefer]

You can't actually claim that.

LFR may have slowed the bleed. LFR may have made it worse. Neither you or I can claim it did either. I personally doubt it caused more bleeding as it basically added a cheap form of raiding. Which would add value for those that are time/ability constrained.

- - - Updated - - -



I pull the time frame and numbers directly from your post.



So if I'm wrong, you were wrong...

Not saying it CAUSED bleeding, I am saying as opposed to what HE is saying LFR didn't save anything at all.

[Osmeric]

Oh shit am I confusing fiscal years and calendar years?

They are identical for Activision-Blizzard.