Which expansion was the absolute worst?

[HordeFanboy]

Probably Cata.

Wod still had decent raids. Same goes for wotlk, most of it was good except the shitshow with trial of the grand crusader and ruby sanctum.

So many ppl whos "obviously wod" "obviously bfa" "every expansion after mop was the worst"
Why are yall here? The game is good and yall like it, we all do.

The game is utter garbage and only 1mln of blizzdrones are still playing.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't believe people actually enjoyed hehexd rngland grindfest that was legion

Ppl on mmochampion are delusional and 95% of posters are mount collectors/pet battles enthusiasts/casual lfr H E R O E S

Legion was the worst expansion because it introducted LAYERS of RNG and butchered all classes and specs

[Crushima]

Legion worst by far. Turned wow into Diablo3, with the ability to endless farm BIS gear from dungeons with no lockout.

[Soeroah]

It's hard to believe people are seriously saying anything other than WoD, honestly.

[XxTizzyWhacksxX]

With the end of an expansion comes my biannual worst expansion poll.

Which expansion/era is the absolute worst, and why?

Mists and Pandaria and Legion were a tie for me. Both godawful.

[Osmeric]

The only thing disastrous about Cata was the complete destruction of 25M Heroic raiding. They single handedly destroyed an entire raiding community with gear parity between 10 and 25M and set themselves up for two entire expansions worth of encounter design hamstrung by having to create two versions of every boss.

That said, I don't think it was purely the ostracization of casual players in Cata which led to subscriber losses. I think, in large part, WotLK's culmination simply represented a stopping point for many continuously subscribed players who had played since Vanilla. This was the end of WoW's reign at the top of the video game food chain and even though it's seen bumps in popularity since the game in general seems far less dependent on large numbers of continuously subscribed players than it was towards the beginning of its life cycle. (See also: Shitty arguments that "prove" Cata killed WoW because its release coincided with sub losses.)

25M heroic raiding affected only a small fraction of the player population. It can't be an explanation for the overall failure of the expansion.

What we do know is that heroic dungeons were seeing disastrous internal stats, so bad that GC was forced to eat crow just a few weeks after his "git gud" editorial.

The killer fact you should look at is how many players found even WotlK normal mode raids too difficult. Wrath, for all the pearl clutching by the hardcore, was actually too difficult for many players. Going from that to Cataclysm was an incomprehensible blunder. No competent game designer, looking at the actual evidence of what their customers were doing, should have made that decision.

Perhaps MMOs' time was up, but their decision to go hardcore sure didn't help.

[justandulas]

Bfa for me but I can understand how wod would be a close second. Both were awful for different reasons.

Too early to say about shadowlands so it shouldn’t even be listed but if they don’t change the covenant system, shadowlands could be the worst

[Osmeric]

But I do think that Cataclysm had a hard time because of the reasons you say about WotLK and players, not because the raids were hard. People could still do normals, so the argument the poster you quoted doesn't feel like a good reason to me. Raiding in Cata was easily accessible.

No, that's just wrong. Raids (before 4.3) in Cataclysm, even normal mode, were just out of reach for a substantial fraction of the players. And those players realized that early and many left the game.

[Doffen]

No, that's just wrong. Raids (before 4.3) in Cataclysm, even normal mode, were just out of reach for a substantial fraction of the players. And those players realized that early and many left the game.

Not in my experience, but if you know that for a fact among the player base, I believe you. But for tier 11 it was easier than both ulduar and ICC. Normal that is. Heroic ICC and Hardmode Ulduar was obviously harder than heroic t11 too, goes without saying.

[OFiveNine]

I only put WoD over BFA because of the challenge mode weapons

[Demsi]

BFA for sure, WoD had a great levelling and raiding experience, BFA were nothing but frustration and getting fucked over from start to finish

[Alja]

WoD - I've played every expansion and that was the only one that I quit during, I just didn't enjoy it at all.

[spalernTJ]

Having plaid from the beginning of Vanilla Beta, all the way up to current day, there's only been one expansion that killed my enthusiasm of the game, and that was BFA. Guilds / friends were enough to keep me going during the worse expansions; Cataclysm / Wod, and raids were generally fun (For the most part, looking at you Dragon soul.)

BFA however... There are only two types of content I thoroughly enjoy about WoW and that's Dungeons and Raids, I also enjoy transmog hunting and smaller misc stuff, but I play for the group content. Up till legion, I've always felt it was more about how well I played and utilized my class knowledge to gain success, whether I'm DPSing or Healing, I got by just by playing. Come Legion, and worse yet BFA, there's new metrics that are mandatory if you want to compete and those are the infinity grinds, the external power sources and the content that cators DPS more than anyone else.

Suddenly, I have to farm my neck, I have to farm my azerite pieces, I have to farm Essences, I have to farm coalescence and I have to farm Visions (Which is borderline the worst content I have ever experienced as a priest main.) I never quit any other expansion out of boredome or irritation. BFA made me quit 3 times.

[Osmeric]

Not in my experience, but if you know that for a fact among the player base, I believe you. But for tier 11 it was easier than both ulduar and ICC. Normal that is. Heroic ICC and Hardmode Ulduar was obviously harder than heroic t11 too, goes without saying.

Both Ulduar and ICC (even with 30% buff) were too difficult for a substantial number of players who attempted them. GC commented that Ulduar was the most poorly received raid in Wrath.

In Cataclysm, many players didn't even get to the raids before bailing, given their experience in heroic dungeons. Overall completion numbers, even of the N mode raids, were bad.

Ruby Sanctum should have been a warning to the devs that their direction for Cataclysm was going to crash and burn.

[Doffen]

Both Ulduar and ICC (even with 30% buff) were too difficult for a substantial number of players who attempted them. GC commented that Ulduar was the most poorly received raid in Wrath.

In Cataclysm, many players didn't even get to the raids before bailing, given their experience in heroic dungeons. Overall completion numbers, even of the N mode raids, were bad.

Ruby Sanctum should have been a warning to the devs that their direction for Cataclysm was going to crash and burn.

Greg Street (Ghostcrawler):

https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...25539268677632

"Ulduar was popular for the tiny percent of players who saw it. Flex mode normal would have helped it a ton." Though that link doesn't exist anymore. But you linked it, so I guess you can approve.

From something you linked in a thread a while ago. I googled it, and what GC is saying is that Ulduar was too hard for people, not that it was poorly received. From those who did it, it was well received. Difference in saying that it had low participation because it was too hard, compared to poorly received.

But that's just goes along with my point, Ulduar and ICC was way harder than t11, and I know for a fact that casual guilds cleared Ulduar, even some HM. I would know, I was in one.

If Ulduar had so low participation because it was too hard, why didn't WotLK have less people if that's your reason for Cata dropping subs? Ulduar was the second tier even. Not Lich King Heroic.

[Osmeric]

Something screwed up that link (look at it). Try this one.

hat GC is saying is that Ulduar was too hard for people, not that it was poorly received. From those who did it, it was well received.

People not even doing the content = bad reception. You don't just count the minority that did it when you assess how the player population as a whole reacted.

[ShaanuJaanu]

BFA is the worst by far.

[Relapses]

25M heroic raiding affected only a small fraction of the player population. It can't be an explanation for the overall failure of the expansion.

What we do know is that heroic dungeons were seeing disastrous internal stats, so bad that GC was forced to eat crow just a few weeks after his "git gud" editorial.

Blizzard very, very rarely shares internal stats so I'd be interested in seeing where Blizzard outright admitted they made the game too difficult which directly resulted in large amounts of attrition.

Also, for the sake of argument -- I generally agree with you: Making the game too difficult or inaccessible to casual players is a huge blunder. I simply believe natural attrition and people "moving on with their lives," after WotLK had far more to do with the decline in subscribers post-Cata.

[Osmeric]

Blizzard very, very rarely shares internal stats so I'd be interested in seeing where Blizzard outright admitted they made the game too difficult which directly resulted in large amounts of attrition.

It's an inference from their actions. They pivoted so abruptly that the numbers must have been very alarming.

[Doffen]

Something screwed up that link (look at it). Try this one.



People not even doing the content = bad reception. You don't just count the minority that did it when you assess how the player population as a whole reacted.

So Vanilla Naxx, Ahn-Qiray 40, Sunwell, Heroic ICC and to some extent Black Temple also got bad reception then? That's sort of what you are saying here. So raids back in the day got bad reception? I am not saying you are wrong about anything, I do to agree with you on a lot about accessibility(oh well the old WoW me would not, age does something!) But you should also count the raids how it was received by those who did them. If not whole of vanilla and TBC was bad according to same logic. But you might think that, so that's a fair critique if so.

Anyway, not gonna derail the thread more than this. Yeah, did check, was nothing there like I wrote Thanks for the other link though.

[Relapses]

It's an inference from their actions. They pivoted so abruptly that the numbers must have been very alarming.

Come on, man. I don't need to tell you that correlation is not always causation. Blizzard pivots on a lot of things and players love to pin it on "massive player outcry" when the more likely scenario is that the developers simply changed their minds. Without concrete evidence otherwise, I think any argument which relies on unknowable information to be inherently weak.