What if WoW keeps up this longer release cycle?

[anon5123]

Ever since I "quit" back during WoD, I never stay subbed to retail for more than a couple months. I do the latest raid on normal/heroic and maybe farm some gear a bit and then quit when I'm bored.

No point in staying subbed forever when every single new raid is a gear reset.

[Lighthope]

while they don't give a actual number other then highest in recent memory With shadowlands being at the highest number in a Decade that would safely make that recent memory include cata's 12m.

Cata didn't have 12 million, as we already saw in the article I linked above. Blizz said the reporter misquoted.

And Blizz was vague enough so that their "recent memory" can mean anything.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...me-of-All-Time

I can't get that businesswire link to open. But Shadowlands being the "fastest selling" doesn't mean "highest subscriber". If it sold 500,000 copies in 30 minutes, it would be the fastest selling, but if that was all they sold it was also be the lowest selling.

Notice they always say "fastest selling," never "highest selling."

In the months leading up to the expansion’s release and the time since launch, the game reached and has sustained its highest number of players on monthly or longer-term subscriptions compared to the same period ahead of and following any WoW expansion in the past decade, in both the West and the East.

Since I can't open the link, I can't the context. But if I were to read that quote as it was, I am going to call Blizz a bald-faced liar. There is no way Shadowlands had a higher active subscription than Wrath or Cata.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Cata didn't have 12 million, as we already saw in the article I linked above. Blizz said the reporter misquoted.

cata absolutely had 12m it’s in there quarterly report first quarter following wrath was 12 second was 11.5 or something.

And Blizz was vague enough so that their "recent memory" can mean anything.



I can't get that businesswire link to open. But Shadowlands being the "fastest selling" doesn't mean "highest subscriber". If it sold 500,000 copies in 30 minutes, it would be the fastest selling, but if that was all they sold it was also be the lowest selling.

Notice they always say "fastest selling," never "highest selling.

that’s not how these things work. Fastest selling means it sold the highest amount of copy’s on launch day comparing life time sales obviously isn’t possible until said product has some to the end of its life.

Since I can't open the link, I can't the context. But if I were to read that quote as it was, I am going to call Blizz a bald-faced liar. There is no way Shadowlands had a higher active subscription than Wrath or Cata.

here’s another link and a quote from the investor call transcript, if we want to say this is a lie then we might as well say every reported sub number was also a lie as the investor reports are or less legally binding now then when we were getting sub numbers.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nme....-2834793%3famp

The metrics that we conditionally track for an expansions release have been quite successful. Life to date on Shadowlands is actually the highest on any expansion in the last 10 years. We also see significantly more player engagement than we typically see at this stage. And that momentum has continued through January with the player base so significantly larger than it was a year ago, while Classic, the community continues to be highly engaged and it's a global community. Since the launch, Classic has really given players who love the game a way to experience [indiscernible] (1:01:21) in the community the way they experienced it for the very first time. And as a result, the overall World of Warcraft has a significantly larger player base, which provides us with a lot of opportunities.

https://investor.activision.com/stat...c-2b6182e48c7f

[tacoloco]

There's no incentive for Blizzard to shorten patch cycles or create smaller in between patches because they know most people will put up with long droughts and continue to subscribe.

[Falkeshall]

I can't get that businesswire link to open.

3.7m in first 24 hours.

[Revamp Man]

If WoW kept up the current cycle I’d be ok with it
It gives breathing room to tiers for players that start late or progress slow

The problem is 9.0 wasn’t designed for that so it’s like 6.2 all over again but we know the end is coming soon

[Soon-TM]

3.7m in first 24 hours.

Considering that it includes months and months worth of preorders, it isn't really that impressive.

[Sluvs]

Considering that it includes months and months worth of preorders, it isn't really that impressive.

Considering it broke a record, it is.

[regardoz]

I will never subscribe if the game delay patches when there are thousands flaws in the game play like playing pvp now you literally have to worship the game, if you dont play atleast 3 hours aday continuously without going to the bathroom you might be able to play after f**cking your own anus within 1 months and thats just to get started.

This is the most grindful expansion for pvper since 8.3 corruption shit.

[Soon-TM]

Considering it broke a record, it is.

Sure it did, but it isn't really impressive. The "24 hours sales" metric is a relic of times when you bought your games at a brick and mortar store. Now that presales begin 9, 10 or even more months before the actual release (not talking just Blizzard here), it really diminishes its worth.

Yes, the game sold pretty well given its age, but that's it.

[Sluvs]

Sure it did, but it isn't really impressive. The "24 hours sales" metric is a relic of times when you bought your games at a brick and mortar store. Now that presales begin 9, 10 or even more months before the actual release (not talking just Blizzard here), it really diminishes its worth.

Yes, the game sold pretty well given its age, but that's it.

It might be a relic and it is true that it diminishes the value, but the game did not sold well for it's age. It sold well. Period.

It might not be OMG INCREDIBLE, but it still is impressive. Even more impressive if you consider that a lot of others pc games did not manage to break such record.

But yeah, I can get behind what you are saying.

[sunxsera]

For the environment i play in it is kinda bad ( world ~1000 ) guild. We allready had 4-5 people quitting wow. And we had a stable roster since the start of bfa.
I also really didn`t play the last 5-6 weeks - i just login for raids. And i really never had that behaviour ... maybe in wod.
I even stopped doing weekly stuff. Maw + torghast is just boring - visions had at least a bit of a challange in the first weeks - torghast is just time consuming for no rewards at all. farming anima will be obsolete in 9.2 anyway, because you will get showered in it - so why should i do it now.

Of course i`m just one of a million players - but i don`t think these super long cycles are good for the game.
Maybe they would, if the game offered enough content - which 9.0 does not.

[OokOok]

We are cyclical

The sooner you stop playing WoW, the sooner you will feel like playing it again.

6 years ago I would of agreed with you, but I haven't touched wow since covid started. So about 18ish months and I haven't though about playing or wanting to play it once. It's kind of nice actually, it's opened my eyes to more views and opinions about how bad both blizzard and wow is.
Prior, if I read an anti wow post i'd roll my eyes and defend ithe game. But now i'm able to actually see things from both perspectives and it's pretty nice i'm able to actually accept just how shitty of a company Blizzard really is and enjoy actual good games made by companies who actually care and try.

[sam86]

Siege of Orgrimmar, for example, lasted quite a while and arguably did well with it. Did Ruby Sanctum do well for the time it was supposed to cover? Hell no. Did this work at the end of WoD either? Fuck no.

I don't remember a stretched patch no matter how beloved it was accepted, including SoO
At least the 'hated' Ruby Sanctum patch (which even blizz said it is mini patch and ICC is still the major one) didn't drop sub numbers like 'beloved' SoO did
to be fair, the reason Wrath didn't drop subs during the long 3.3 patch is because china released wrath way late (like only 2 month pre-cata late) and the flood of chineese players balanced if not even outnumbered all losing subs from other regions, after all china - alone - was half of wow 'subs' during TBC (also china/korea sub system is way different than eu/usa if u don't know, they don't pay for exp, just playtime)

[Lighthope]

here’s another link and a quote from the investor call transcript, if we want to say this is a lie then we might as well say every reported sub number was also a lie as the investor reports are or less legally binding now then when we were getting sub numbers.

I am not saying that sub numbers given in the past were lies. Looking over my previous quote, I think I meant to say Shadowlands didn't have 12 million. Now I can't remember where the peak sub number was. Was it Cata or Wrath?

But there is no way in any scenario that Shadowlands matched that number. Any quote from any article that someone tries to prove otherwise is vague and meaningless. Blizz never, ever said Shadowlands had 12 mil subscribers.

Really, if WoW had 12 million subscribers, Blizz would have trotted that number out with fireworks.

But we're kind of swinging off topic.

Back on the rail, the question is: What would you do if Blizz extended the patch time cycle?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I am not saying that sub numbers given in the past were lies. Looking over my previous quote, I think I meant to say Shadowlands didn't have 12 million. Now I can't remember where the peak sub number was. Was it Cata or Wrath?

But there is no way in any scenario that Shadowlands matched that number. Any quote from any article that someone tries to prove otherwise is vague and meaningless. Blizz never, ever said Shadowlands had 12 mil subscribers.

Really, if WoW had 12 million subscribers, Blizz would have trotted that number out with fireworks.

But we're kind of swinging off topic.

Back on the rail, the question is: What would you do if Blizz extended the patch time cycle?

how is this statement vague?

In the months leading up to the expansion’s release and the time since launch, the game reached and has sustained its highest number of players on monthly or longer-term subscriptions compared to the same period ahead of and following any WoW expansion in the past decade, in both the West and the East.

Either there lying in which case no number release they have ever put out is credible or there not lying and they mean what they say making subs the highest in the last 10 years which would include the 12m for cata's launch.

[Unholyground]

The pandemic did this to everybody it's just that the toxicity at blizzard is peering through and we all see it now.

[Big Thanks]

I am not saying that sub numbers given in the past were lies. Looking over my previous quote, I think I meant to say Shadowlands didn't have 12 million. Now I can't remember where the peak sub number was. Was it Cata or Wrath?

But there is no way in any scenario that Shadowlands matched that number. Any quote from any article that someone tries to prove otherwise is vague and meaningless. Blizz never, ever said Shadowlands had 12 mil subscribers.

Really, if WoW had 12 million subscribers, Blizz would have trotted that number out with fireworks.

But we're kind of swinging off topic.

Back on the rail, the question is: What would you do if Blizz extended the patch time cycle?

It actually did reach an insane number More than 10 million for sure

This is the document by Blizzard:
https://investor.activision.com/node/33796/pdf

In the months leading up to the expansion’s release and the time since launch, the game reached and has sustained its
highest number of players on monthly or longer-term subscriptions compared to the same period ahead of and
following any WoW expansion in the past decade, in both the West and the East