Why are people in denial about the state of the game?

[Queen of Hamsters]

The 3.1 score for BfA is probably because of the large echo-chamber that is the internet right now. BfA isn't great, but it's def not as bad as Cata or WoD was. Cata and WoD actually caused me to unsub around x.1 and go play other games. BfA has problems, but the PvP (excluding WM) is the best it's been for a while. BoD is one of the best raids since NH. M+ is pretty fun with the new Reaping affix.

AP and class pruning is the biggest issue that needs to be looked at.

Exactly.

WoD in particular, but the running online attitude is that WoD was somehow better, which sort of kills their credibility... That, or they have pretty big issues in the memory department.

WoW in a bad state (WoD) is still better than so much else on the market. WoW in an average state (BfA, Cata) even moreso. But as with everything else, there's always the option of simply not paying to play it. Not a very difficult concept to grasp, one would imagine.

"Thousands of people can't be wrong, right????" - says the desperate anti-Wower.

Welp, millions are even less wrong then? Nice logic, I'll take it!

[Razzako]

So basically, ITT the argument from people who still like the game is that the game is bad only for other people (basically, subjectively), not them - which means the game is not objectively bad... which is based on a subjective opinion. SMH.

[stigz]

If people like the game, then they like the game. You don't have to like it, but that's all there is to it. It's not being in denial, it's enjoying a high-quality product that isn't quite as good as previous years, but still plenty good.

but no.. it isn't "plenty good". it just really isn't. like almost objectively

[Fez]

Metacritic is not exactly the the best source to get reviews from. Besides that; Players will blindly follow and give blizzard money no matter the state of the game. For some people it's an addiction and for others it's just a cheap source of entertainment. I no longer play but still read the forums to see if stuff will ever change for the better (which it doesn't seem to be in my opinion). When I did play I could pay for my sub with 15 minutes of real work and play as much as I wanted for a month. It's a cheap form of entertainment.

Do you also mention your income in every other forum post you make to make your epeen bigger and to make yourself feel better?

[Weeps]

Is a shit product TO YOU

A RPG geek
A so called "true gamer"
A forum dweller

Whatever you describe yourself as. Is a shit product to you.

One of the first things i learned in 8 years on MMO Champion is that i am part of a minority group and that different people have different opinions and lives.
You shoudl learn that as fast as possible.
"We are all different."

Facts are on my side. More people hate BfA than like it. Shit product is shit product. You are the minority.

[Queen of Hamsters]

So basically, ITT the argument from people who still like the game is that the game is bad only for other people (basically, subjectively), not them - which means the game is not objectively bad... which is based on a subjective opinion. SMH.

Not sure what's so difficult to follow, really.

The game is subjectively good or alternatively, subjectively bad.

People saying it's objectively bad, have nothing but their own feels.
People saying it's objectively good, have nothing but their own feels.

Even when looking at it based on "X amount of people can't be wrong??", then you still can't get anything conclusive to one or the other. The OP links thousands having given their opinion on the expansion and the game, but on the other hand, how many thousands upon thousands still actively make the choice to pay for the title? Why are the ones giving their negative opinion somehow more valid as measurement, than the ones choosing to pay and play?

Exactly. Because X crowd agrees with the thousands giving the negative opinion and thus will toot it as the objective truth. Which it just isn't.

[Big Thanks]

Facts are on my side. More people hate BfA than like it. Shit product is shit product. You are the minority.

"You are the minority"

Blizzard makes more than 2 billion dollars in revenue

"BfA is shit product"

Blizzard makes more than 2 billion dollars in revenue

(i wish i could make billions of dollars with a shit product. My life would be golden. I already got the "shit part"...now i need a product to sell and make billions of dollars)

[Queen of Hamsters]

Facts are on my side. More people hate BfA than like it. Shit product is shit product. You are the minority.

Haven't seen that being said with tweaks to the specifics for over a decade or anything.

[Naiattavain]

Let's look at Metacritic scores:

TBC - 8.0 user score - generally favorable reviews - subs rise
WotLK - 7.7 user score - generally favorable reviews - subs rise
Cataclysm - 5.6 user score - mixed or average reviews - subs decline
MoP - 5.0 user score - mixed or average reviews - subs stagnate
WoD - 5.9 user score - mixed or average reviews - subs decline
Legion - 7.3 user score - mixed or average reviews - subs rise
BfA - 3.1 user score - generally unfavorable reviews - subs decline

You could make an argument that Legion does not fit the pattern since it had mixed or average reviews, but 7.3 is a lot closer to TBC's 8.0 and WotLK's 7.7 than any other expansion.

The fact is that these reviews are broadly representative of the state of the game. Thousands of people can't all be wrong about something. MoP had good gameplay but unappealing story / design direction so subs stagnated. Cataclysm, WoD and BfA were all badly received and coincided with a rapid drop in sub numbers. Legion was generally seen as a return to form for the game and although we didn't get exact sub numbers, it was pretty evident that they were on the rise just judging by increased activity across all endgame content.

All of these people can't be wrong.

the state of the player spell books is far more important. spell books were fine during wod and then when legion went live it screwed the game balance in the name of the artifact. that really made me mad. especially since it fucked over rogue game play. and its left in ruins for bfa. legions content was what people really liked about legion i think that why legion had a 7.3 was mainly because of the content. the abilities is left in shambles to and that why we subscribe to the game for the rpg aspect of wow. in terms of balance, when legion went live it messed with the continuity of the abilities the players could do that was very bad report

[Razzako]

Not sure what's so difficult to follow, really.

The game is subjectively good or alternatively, subjectively bad.

People saying it's objectively bad, have nothing but their own feels.
People saying it's objectively good, have nothing but their own feels.

Even when looking at it based on "X amount of people can't be wrong??", then you still can't get anything conclusive to one or the other. The OP links thousands having given their opinion on the expansion and the game, but on the other hand, how many thousands upon thousands still actively make the choice to pay for the title? Why are the ones giving their negative opinion somehow more valid as measurement, than the ones choosing to pay and play?

Exactly. Because X crowd agrees with the thousands giving the negative opinion and thus will toot it as the objective truth. Which it just isn't.

Are you actually saying we can't objectively judge if the game is good or bad?

[Queen of Hamsters]

"You are the minority"

Blizzard makes more than 2 billion dollars in revenue

"BfA is shit product"

Blizzard makes more than 2 billion dollars in revenue

(i wish i could make billions of dollars with a shit product. My life would be golden. I already got the "shit part"...now i need a product to sell and make billions of dollars)

That's what their minds can't grasp.

If thousands of people giving their opinion on that specific website aren't wrong, then neither are the hundreds of thousands (underestimating here) keeping the game absolutely insanely profitable.

[Sanguinerd]

Facts are on my side. More people hate BfA than like it. Shit product is shit product. You are the minority.

You can keep repeating that horseshit all you like, it isn't going to make it true.

Your facts are fiction.

[Big Thanks]

but no.. it isn't "plenty good". it just really isn't. like almost objectively

How?
How is it objective to say BfA isnt good?

[Queen of Hamsters]

Are you actually saying we can't objectively judge if the game is good or bad?

Yep.

But I'm sure you're about to provide a iron clad measurement no doubt clashing with your own opinion and thus making you free from any bias.

All you people screaming that the game is objectively bad, are simply being emotional creatures. Same as the rest of us.
And meanwhile the game continues being profitable, keeps having content developed, keeps on trucking.

Hell, not even Wildstar was objectively bad as a game, and it's literally dead.

[Razzako]

Yep.

But I'm sure you're about to provide a iron clad measurement no doubt clashing with your own opinion and thus making you free from any bias.

Let me go on a bit of a tangent first. How about for other games? Are you saying any game can't objectively be reviewed?

[Big Thanks]

Let me go on a bit of a tangent first. How about for other games? Are you saying any game can't objectively be reviewed?

At a technical level, yes it can.

Bugs
exploits
broken mechanincs
flawed game design
responsive on controls
PC performance

But when it comes to "i dont like pandas, this game is bad" thats not objective
Thats subjective.

[Razzako]

At a technical level, yes it can.

Bugs
exploits
broken mechanincs
flawed game design
responsive on controls
PC performance

But when it comes to "i dont like pandas, this game is bad" thats not objective
Thats subjective.

I agree with you. But two points:

There is a different between: "I don't like Pandas, this game is bad" and "The pandaren thematic of the expansion negatively impacted the expansion".

Second point, that's why we often fallback for metrics, e.g. overall ratings, among others.

[Queen of Hamsters]

Let me go on a bit of a tangent first. How about for other games? Are you saying any game can't objectively be reviewed?

We're discussing WoW here, not other games from all sorts of genres and all sorts of developers.

The one time WoW was being slammed for objective flaws, was during WoD when it simply didn't receive the development players had come to expect (and deserved), and the expansion was literally scrapped as a result. Add to that objective technical criticisms.

As much as players may dislike design decisions or class design or the story in BfA, it's still being enjoyed by others as well as still seeing development. Aka, the same subjective shit that's always been the case for the game.
If the game was objectively as bad as the online community would have you believe, then everyone would agree and the game would be in a worse state than WoD, which still made 800k USD on a bad year in profits.

[Razzako]

I asked you:

Are you actually saying we can't objectively judge if the game is good or bad?

You replied saying:

Yep.

But I'm sure you're about to provide a iron clad measurement no doubt clashing with your own opinion and thus making you free from any bias.

Then you say:

All you people screaming that the game is objectively bad, are simply being emotional creatures. Same as the rest of us.
And meanwhile the game continues being profitable, keeps having content developed, keeps on trucking.

Hell, not even Wildstar was objectively bad as a game, and it's literally dead.

Specifically:

Hell, not even Wildstar was objectively bad as a game, and it's literally dead.

Can you clarify?

[Queen of Hamsters]

I agree with you. But two points:

There is a different between: "I don't like Pandas, this game is bad" and "The pandaren thematic of the expansion negatively impacted the expansion".

Second point, that's why we often fallback for metrics, e.g. overall ratings, among others.

"The Pandaren thematic of the expansion negatively impacted the expansion" is wholly subjective and only applies to the people agreeing with it.

MoP held 5+ million players during a 14-month long drought. Just saying.