### Recent Blue Posts

3 hours ago

13 hours ago

14 hours ago

5 days ago

5 days ago

6 days ago

6 days ago

#### Hotfixes: March 31, 2020

Go to Blue Tracker »

### Recent Forum Posts

05:58 AM

05:58 AM

05:57 AM

05:57 AM

05:55 AM

05:35 AM

04:51 AM

#### Haunted Mansion - What A Waste

Go to Forums » Forum Filters

# Thread: Why are people genuinely mad that Classic is a success?

1. Originally Posted by Tweedzz
That's not really how statistics work. You could have a population in the trillions and only need a sample of 200 people for measuring a single yes/no variable (if you don't mind a 95% confidence interval). Frankly, population is not a huge factor in determining an appropriate sample size, other than the fact that you obviously can't have a sample larger than your population. Most national studies only involve samples from the range of hundreds to thousands of participants. The larger your sample, the more precise your answer, but we don't need massive samples to get a reasonable likelihood that our answer is right.

Numbers here are not the problem, potential sampling bias could be though.

EDIT: There are not many quickly accessible resources for this topic (stats books), but here is a decent article on the subject: https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...l-of-only-100/
You're right, the primary issue is that TV has A LOT of data points (Really, the population thing to me is more of an absurd feeling, when you consider how complex TV data is). That is primarily what impacts the sample size you look for. If you are researching something that is 2 data points (Yes/No), you don't need much because there's only so much variance that can come from that, so it's much easier to collect a small pool of samples. Yet, Nielsen has been constantly adding more to it's sample size in the last 5-6 years as it recognizes that as TV has exploded, it's numbers are lacking.

Also tack this into the fact that not only does Nielsen use their sample size to extrapolate total viewership, they also utilize weighted users to infer the viability of very specific points (the coveted Demos, Ethnic Viewership, etc). It just doesn't work well with TV, and history has often found that very popular shows come up with poor Nielsen ratings.

2. Originally Posted by themaster24
You're right, the primary issue is that TV has A LOT of data points (Really, the population thing to me is more of an absurd feeling, when you consider how complex TV data is). That is primarily what impacts the sample size you look for. If you are researching something that is 2 data points (Yes/No), you don't need much because there's only so much variance that can come from that, so it's much easier to collect a small pool of samples. Yet, Nielsen has been constantly adding more to it's sample size in the last 5-6 years as it recognizes that as TV has exploded, it's numbers are lacking.

Also tack this into the fact that not only does Nielsen use their sample size to extrapolate total viewership, they also utilize weighted users to infer the viability of very specific points (the coveted Demos, Ethnic Viewership, etc). It just doesn't work well with TV, and history has often found that very popular shows come up with poor Nielsen ratings.
Ah, that's fair. Frankly I don't know much about Neilsen, or TV data, my comments come from general statistical stuff, not the specific scenario.

3. Originally Posted by Gorgodeus
You do not understand statistics at all, obviously.
I understand perfectly. I also know limiting you data set won't get you accurate results as Rasmussen does when polling mostly people on land lines and Nielson does when getting data from mainly TV users, not people who watch online through non TV devices.

Again, they may be perfectly in accurate amonst TV users but people have been moving away from TVs for years, yet ratings are still based on who sits and watches programs on a TV. Which is missing an important, growing and soon to eclipse TV users.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jazzhands
You... You do know that fictional story telling is literally all just made up shit right? Every story in Warcraft is just made up shit. All the good story and all the bad story, just shit they made up at one point or another. They need to continue making shit up one way or another, because some shit will be shit still but some shit will still be decent. A lot of people still enjoy a lot of the shit they make up.
He just a shitposter. Would be best to put him on ignore.

But this does get me. People bitch about Bkizzard making shit up. As if it all wasn't just made up. Hell almost 75% of everything that launched in Vanilla was not in the RTS games, maps completely redone to mak a living world, races invented, cities created, factions, elemental planes and all that jazz. These same people would complain if the game only consisted of stuff from the RTS about how Blizzard is unimaginative.

4. Originally Posted by arkanon
Just had a quick look and i see they are like,.....\$2,000? am i missing something? Where did they (not you i realize) come up with "tens of thousands of dollars". That would mean \$20,000 - \$90,000 in my book, not \$2,000.

It amazes me how dishonest and disingenuous people can be on these forums just to desperately try and push their agenda.

- - - Updated - - -

If you read my posts as well in this thread its the same question - why are SOME of the classic fans so desperate to defend "their" game that they constantly lie and grossly exaggerate things to push their agenda. In this thread alone someone claimed certain data was reliable because it costs "tens of thousands of dollars". Turns out it costs \$2k, and thats just the general public full price, before taking into account any discounts, if they got charged at all.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree entirely with this comment.
Wow editing my comment to agree with it. So clever! Herp de derp. The fact is classic got a ton of people back that hadn’t touched retail in years. That’s a success. You can hate it all you want but they’ve had a success. A failure would have been three servers all dying fast. I mean shit of what we have now isn’t a success I don’t know what you expected. They rereleased a 15 year old game and it got them many people back that hadn’t touched the game in a decade. It isn’t like they had to put a ton of work into it either as they’ve said it took nothing away from retail to do it. But go head and seethe that some people happen to enjoy classic more than BFA.

I also like how you talk about people pushing agendas when all your posts are literally that. Why do you seethe so much that people prefer classic over live? It’s like imagine getting mad at someone who says Final Fantasy 7 is better than the newest one. Those damn fools don’t they realize the newest final fantasy improved on 7 in every way? How dare they!

5. Originally Posted by MoanaLisa
Game discussions have largely moved to other platforms. Retail WoW is somewhat alive on Reddit and the Blizz forums do a lot of business. There's a great interest in News about the retail game as seen on this site, WowHead and Icy Veins. My impression is that many people who want to seriously discuss the retail game are doing so on Discord and as much as people scoff about it, I'm aware of at least two Facebook groups with casual players that are well over 10,000 strong, very active and in tone about as much unlike MMO-C as it's possible to be. So much for the idea that there's no interest in Retail WoW, BfA as an expansion or Classic. There's a fuck of a lot more people with an interest in BFA/Shadowlands than in Classic even on this site. If you spend most of your time here and think that represents the greater universe of WoW players, you are most certainly wrong.

Anyone wanting to talk constructively about either game, who absolutely will be met with "X is trash," won't stay here long because there's very little discussion going on here. This site has been my home for WoW discussion for years but I'm not so blind that I can't see that the forums here have been marginalized into unimportant, unconstructive and often stupid immature fights with people who are much more interested in insulting one another and fighting over trivial things.

That's the problem with this thread specifically. There's a lot of blame to go around on both sides yet people think it's remarkably clever to talk up the one thing and completely ignore the other. This game vs. game shit is cancerous to both games. Most of what you see on forums these days--both pro and con nearly any topic including World of Warcraft--is less communication and more public performance.
I have never understanded how a moderator is allowed to post such false things. Classic wow have a lot more interest on almost ALL sites except mmo champion and wow forums (close though). Look at google trending search, twitch, discord chats, etc....

I have always not quite understand why mmo-champion only hire people who are pro-retail, as seen in all your posts.
Theres like 2x the playerbase in classic than retail and the moderator here still claims otherwise..

6. Originally Posted by retailpleb
I have never understanded how a moderator is allowed to post such false things. Classic wow have a lot more interest on almost ALL sites except mmo champion and wow forums (close though). Look at google trending search, twitch, discord chats, etc....

I have always not quite understand why mmo-champion only hire people who are pro-retail, as seen in all your posts.
Theres like 2x the playerbase in classic than retail and the moderator here still claims otherwise..
Any proof to back up your claim?

7. Originally Posted by retailpleb
I have never understanded how a moderator is allowed to post such false things. Classic wow have a lot more interest on almost ALL sites except mmo champion and wow forums (close though). Look at google trending search, twitch, discord chats, etc....

I have always not quite understand why mmo-champion only hire people who are pro-retail, as seen in all your posts.
Theres like 2x the playerbase in classic than retail and the moderator here still claims otherwise..
You call him out for saying false things, but then you turn right around and say things that cannot be proven. There is literally no data available that can prove things like "Classic has 2x the playerbase".

The issue with a lot of people is that you sequester yourself into echo chambers and conclude that's the norm. Just because everyone YOU know talks about classic/retail, that isn't indicative of the majority of WoW players (hence why evidence like this is called anecdotal). It's all the more likely that you have simply surrounded yourself with players who are like minded. Classic could have more players than retail, just like retail could have more players than classic. We will never truly know, though, as Blizzard keeps that information closely guarded.

8. Originally Posted by RumbleShakes
Besides the open world pvp, simpler classes, more customizable talents, less forgiving mechanics, pre-diminishing returns, stronger sense of community, and more feeling of achievement... sure--Classic is hot garbage.
retail has open world pvp, simple classes is bad game design, you are forced into cookie cutter specs, almost no mechanics whatsoever and none of them are harsh, being perma cced is bad gameplay, community is just as shit as it is on retail, and there are no achievements in classic. your argument is invalid.

9. Originally Posted by retailpleb
I have never understanded how a moderator is allowed to post such false things. Classic wow have a lot more interest on almost ALL sites except mmo champion and wow forums (close though). Look at google trending search, twitch, discord chats, etc....

I have always not quite understand why mmo-champion only hire people who are pro-retail, as seen in all your posts.
Theres like 2x the playerbase in classic than retail and the moderator here still claims otherwise..
Other than the fact that you cant read, you cant tell the truth, and you appear incapable of presenting any facts, I think you'll fit right in

10. Originally Posted by Seranthor
Other than the fact that you cant read, you cant tell the truth, and you appear incapable of presenting any facts, I think you'll fit right in
I'm not a mod either for what it's worth. And I'm plenty critical when I think the topic deserves it.

11. Originally Posted by otaXephon
What? Even if that person logs off after doing an emissary, logs into Classic to do a dungeon then logs back into retail to complete another emissary?

I'm usually considered very pro-retail but I'm not sure how you're getting zero sum unless you assume somebody who stops playing retail to play Classic will forever play Classic or somebody who stops playing Classic to play retail is now only ever going to play retail. The fact that you can play both games is the opposite of a zero sum game. Am I missing something?
We only have so many hours in a day. If one spends an hour on Classic, that's one less hour they could be spending on retail. Most people aren't like that, but I know plenty that quit retail for Classic. You can play both, but you are dividing your time away from retail. You don't get free hours in your day to play the other. That's what zero sum means. If you add time to something, you must take it away from something else.

12. Originally Posted by Tweedzz
Frankly, population is not a huge factor in determining an appropriate sample size, other than the fact that you obviously can't have a sample larger than your population.
Population size isn't a factor. Making sure your sample is a representative sample of that population is.

13. Originally Posted by Shibito
Only reason i enjoy classic is i know TBC will come the greatest wow of all times.
I wonder if they will bother with TBC. If they do, wrath is a given then. Wrath is the most popular WoW Xpack.

14. Originally Posted by Jonnusthegreat
We only have so many hours in a day. If one spends an hour on Classic, that's one less hour they could be spending on retail. Most people aren't like that, but I know plenty that quit retail for Classic. You can play both, but you are dividing your time away from retail. You don't get free hours in your day to play the other. That's what zero sum means. If you add time to something, you must take it away from something else.
But WoW retail and WoW classic aren't the only things they can do with their time. It could be they'd have been playing baseball instead.

I regularly play two+ different games now. There's no reason WoW and other WoW can't be two games I play and compete for my time against both each other and other games/hobbies.

Your original claim of "if someone is in classic they're not in retail" doesn't hold up, because those aren't the only options. If classic didn't exist, I'd spend that time playing another game instead of Retail. Retail doesn't get that time either way.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Shibito
Only reason i enjoy classic is i know TBC will come the greatest wow of all times.
I just want to do BC PVP as a faceroll braindead warrior instead of lowest-representation-in-high-rating-by-far hunter.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Beefhammer
But this does get me. People bitch about Bkizzard making shit up. As if it all wasn't just made up. Hell almost 75% of everything that launched in Vanilla was not in the RTS games, maps completely redone to mak a living world, races invented, cities created, factions, elemental planes and all that jazz. These same people would complain if the game only consisted of stuff from the RTS about how Blizzard is unimaginative.
It seems like a lot of people view the RTS and maybe books as the "real" lore, and basically treat wow as though it was fanfic that had no real association with the official lore.

15. Originally Posted by Jonnusthegreat
We only have so many hours in a day. If one spends an hour on Classic, that's one less hour they could be spending on retail. Most people aren't like that, but I know plenty that quit retail for Classic. You can play both, but you are dividing your time away from retail. You don't get free hours in your day to play the other. That's what zero sum means. If you add time to something, you must take it away from something else.
It's not a Zero-Sum because that would imply any time spent on Retail/Classic is inherently time that would have to of been spent on the other. That is no necessarily the case though, and opportunity cost does not make for Zero-Sum.

16. Originally Posted by Beet
Wow editing my comment to agree with it. So clever! Herp de derp. The fact is classic got a ton of people back that hadn’t touched retail in years. That’s a success. You can hate it all you want but they’ve had a success. A failure would have been three servers all dying fast. I mean shit of what we have now isn’t a success I don’t know what you expected. They rereleased a 15 year old game and it got them many people back that hadn’t touched the game in a decade. It isn’t like they had to put a ton of work into it either as they’ve said it took nothing away from retail to do it. But go head and seethe that some people happen to enjoy classic more than BFA.

I also like how you talk about people pushing agendas when all your posts are literally that. Why do you seethe so much that people prefer classic over live? It’s like imagine getting mad at someone who says Final Fantasy 7 is better than the newest one. Those damn fools don’t they realize the newest final fantasy improved on 7 in every way? How dare they!
Funny how you claim to know what every single post of mine is about, and that I have an agenda against classic. Funny because I have said multiple times I am enjoying classic for what it is - a nostalgic but fundamentally flawed and horribly outdated version of the game.

I am playing classic more than retail right now, and am happy that classic is enjoying some popularity, even though it is quite clearly very short lived.

You seem to be projecting a lot of anger and frustration into other people who are not exhibiting those emotions at all.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jonnusthegreat
We only have so many hours in a day. If one spends an hour on Classic, that's one less hour they could be spending on retail. Most people aren't like that, but I know plenty that quit retail for Classic. You can play both, but you are dividing your time away from retail. You don't get free hours in your day to play the other. That's what zero sum means. If you add time to something, you must take it away from something else.
And I know plenty who came back for classic, and quit within a month and moved over to retail.

17. I think one of the funniest thing about this whole Classic vs retail feud is that they are basically pinning 2 games against each other that are vastly inferior to other versions we have had. If we go by polls then TBC, WotLK, MoP and to some extend Legion score the highest as best expansions. Classic and BFA actually score really low. People also bring up raiding a lot while comparing games, yet if we look at this thread made some time ago, both Classic and BFA score the lowest out of all.

18. Originally Posted by McNeil
I think one of the funniest thing about this whole Classic vs retail feud is that they are basically pinning 2 games against each other that are vastly inferior to other versions we have had. If we go by polls then TBC, WotLK, MoP and to some extend Legion score the highest as best expansions. Classic and BFA actually score really low. People also bring up raiding a lot while comparing games, yet if we look at this thread made some time ago, both Classic and BFA score the lowest out of all.
The poll talking specifically about raids?

19. Originally Posted by RWQ
But WoW retail and WoW classic aren't the only things they can do with their time. It could be they'd have been playing baseball instead.

I regularly play two+ different games now. There's no reason WoW and other WoW can't be two games I play and compete for my time against both each other and other games/hobbies.
I don't care about baseball or other games. If someone is playing Classic instead of retail, it negatively affects their retail experience if they care about populated realms on retail. You are literally describing a situation that supports my argument. You playing a game that's not retail means you aren't playing retail. You are taking possible time away from retail.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by themaster24
It's not a Zero-Sum because that would imply any time spent on Retail/Classic is inherently time that would have to of been spent on the other. That is no necessarily the case though, and opportunity cost does not make for Zero-Sum.
No, you are assuming that everyone is like that. If ONE person does it, it is net negative. Since you say it's not NECESSARILY the case, are you saying that sometimes it is? That supports my claim.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by arkanon
And I know plenty who came back for classic, and quit within a month and moved over to retail.
Cool information, but that's not the discussion that is happening right now.

20. Originally Posted by Jonnusthegreat
I don't care about baseball or other games. If someone is playing Classic instead of retail, it negatively affects their retail experience if they care about populated realms on retail. You are literally describing a situation that supports my argument. You playing a game that's not retail means you aren't playing retail. You are taking possible time away from retail.
It doesn't support your point. Your previous claim was that classic has to take from retail because it's zero sum. This is objectively, provably false. Observe.

I play retail 1 hour a day. I play baseball one our a day.
Then classic comes out.
I play retail 1 hour a day. I play classic one hour a day.

See how it's zero sum for time, retail lost no players, and classic still has one? I don't understand why I'm having to give a proof by example for this. This isn't a hard to understand concept. Things other than retail and classic exist and take time. Playing one DOES NOT automatically mean taking from the other. This is not debatable. It's not an opinion. It's an objective fact.

Of course, I suspect what you're really doing is backing down from your "it's zero sum!" argument to a more defensible "SOME PEOPLE might quit retail for wow" because you know your "its zero sum" is flawed.

#### Posting Permissions

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