Perfect time to introduce Pandyr

[rrayy]

Right, I totally believe that too, wink wink.

Well, it isn't an adequate inicator of game health anymore as they understand players aren't all constantly subbed. They take breaks They also buy from the cash shop which helps game health. Subs are no longer the sole way the game makes money anymore.

[Martymark]

This is some pretty wild cultural appropriation!

[Dhrizzle]

Real life called, it wanted to check on you:

Oh look, WoW lost subs at an average of 100k a month with just little bumps and a couple of huge, expansion-starting peaks. In other words Cata, MoP and WoD all shared the same steady rate of attrition from WotLK until they stopped publishing the figures.

- - - Updated - - -

Follow your logic WOD was the worst expansion if you go by subs, what's your point?

It's also the best if you look at subs gained.

[Aggressive]

Jesus Christ OP has it all:

- Random Pandaria bashing;
- Mistaking his weird opinions as facts;
- Posting the meme graphic;
- Randomly going against Pebrocks of all people (it's pointlesssss)

Pandyr are metal as fuck but this post is a mess

This post is just not a mess. It is a pointless bickering Bowl of HOT MESS. Why the mods on this site let childish arguing going on when the thread literally goes no where is beyond me...Straight RIDICULOUS.

[kaelix1]

It's also the best if you look at subs gained.

I would be impressed if WOD could have kept the subs for more than 1 patch, nothing more than hype, still, what's the point of the chart?

[Dhrizzle]

I would be impressed if WOD could have kept the subs for more than 1 patch, nothing more than hype, still, what's the point of the chart?

It shows that WoW has a steady decline from the end of WotLK to the last announcement with expansions causing large peaks that disappear within a few months and very slight wiggles to do with patches. The most you can say about MoP is Isle of Giants managed to get a slight increase in subs, something no post-Wrath mid-expansion patch has managed.

[Speedlance]

I'll take an infracture just say you're a fucking dumbass for saying mop was a bad expansion.

[kaelix1]

It shows that WoW has a steady decline from the end of WotLK to the last announcement with expansions causing large peaks that disappear within a few months and very slight wiggles to do with patches. The most you can say about MoP is Isle of Giants managed to get a slight increase in subs, something no post-Wrath mid-expansion patch has managed.

I fully understand whats that chart shows, my question is what is the point of the chart regard OP statement that MoP is the worst expansion while using the chard as evidence?

So, what exactly are you trying to point out here that I don't get?

[Lodreh]

Real life called, it wanted to check on you:

I am reminded of an old adage... There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics. The Pandyr, while visually striking art, appears to be nothing more than customization options for Pandarean. I do like the facial markings and beards in the concept art... I suppose they look a little leaner than the current Pandarean but given the bulky armor that could be an illusion.

[Bumkin]

they look awesome, should be introduced as allied race

[Dhrizzle]

I fully understand whats that chart shows, my question is what is the point of the chart regard OP statement that MoP is the worst expansion while using the chard as evidence?

So, what exactly are you trying to point out here that I don't get?

That the OP linking that chart has done absolutely nothing to support his own argument

[bledgor]

Pandaria was one of the best expansions to date, and using subs as your measure of success is a completely idiotic, and useless way to measure performance. Also anytime anyone says Pandaria was bad because of "whimsical" Pandas or something like that, I can no longer take anything they say seriously.

[ReleaseDay]

You spelled "vulpera" wrong.

I dont like those either