So, what's with this forum's hatred of Shadowlands?

[WowIsDead64]

And do you know what this means?

It means you have no proof.

That's my point.

If you don't have proof, don't go around yelling you do, and then complain how no one could ever prove this; well, if you're aware of that, why did you claim you had proof?

You don't have proof. You have a THEORY. You have some wild ideas you've conjectured based on personal, anecdotal experience. That's cool. You do NOT have proof. And so the responsible thing is to not make posts on public forums going GUYS I HAVE PROOF! and then two pages later admit "well this isn't provable duh".

If you can't prove it, don't make the claim. No one forced you to go and announce what you did. No one even asked you about it. You CHOSE to come out and claim it, and now you admit openly that you can't prove it. That's FINE - but then you don't get to claim you have proof. That's the deal.

So QED: you don't have proof, and you never did, and all this dancing was just you sweating under the realization that maybe just maybe you should not have said that you did.

But that's fine. There's no shame in admitting fuckups. You made a wild claim you couldn't back up, you got called out on the bullshit, it happens. You've admitted it, now we can just move on. And next time... do better, kay, hun?

Earth is round. How would I prove it? You need to do round-the-world trip yourself to verify it. Refusing to do it =/= I don't have proof. By refusing to verify truth yourself you simply reject it. That's, what you actually do.

[FelPlague]

Earth is round. How would I prove it? You need to do round-the-world trip yourself to verify it. Refusing to do it =/= I don't have proof. By refusing to verify truth yourself you simply reject it. That's, what you actually do.

No you do not, there is MANY ways to prove the earth is round from your very own home.
Measuring shadows, shining a light through holes from various distances, tracking stars.

Almost like if something is true, there is MANY ways to verify this.
so again, if you are going to make such MASSIVE claims, provide this proof you keep saying you have.

[Biomega]

Earth is round. How would I prove it?

By providing data and a methodology, just like Eratosthenes did in the 3rd century BCE when he calculated the Earth's circumference with remarkable accuracy without even coming CLOSE to doing that round-the-world trip you claim he'd need. You have no clue what you're talking about, do you? Because this is one of the most famous examples in the history of science for not needing to go out and doing the big journey, but using small, clever, local methodologies and data to prove larger things.

That's how it works: provide data and a methodology, and then we can verify your "proof".

You're not only not providing that, you're actually saying it wouldn't prove anything even if you did.

Which - surprise, surprise - means you have no proof.

That's really the end of the matter. "I have my proof, you go find your own!" doesn't fly; that's just more words that translate into "I don't have proof".

[WowIsDead64]

By providing data and a methodology, just like Eratosthenes did in the 3rd century BCE when he calculated the Earth's circumference with remarkable accuracy without even coming CLOSE to doing that round-the-world trip you claim he'd need. You have no clue what you're talking about, do you? Because this is one of the most famous examples in the history of science for not needing to go out and doing the big journey, but using small, clever, local methodologies and data to prove larger things.

That's how it works: provide data and a methodology, and then we can verify your "proof".

You're not only not providing that, you're actually saying it wouldn't prove anything even if you did.

Which - surprise, surprise - means you have no proof.

That's really the end of the matter. "I have my proof, you go find your own!" doesn't fly; that's just more words that translate into "I don't have proof".

Yeah. But you sould repeat his experiment to verify it. Because you don't belive to his words. Right? And you refuse to do it and therefore reject truth.

Have you noticed, that I actually provided data and methology? I said, that 6 characters missed one item for year. I said, that you need to level 6 characters and see, if they would miss any items to verify it. Right? But refuse to do it. What you do - is telling "I don't belive, that Earth is round, and I'm too lazy to verify it myself" to guy, who've just done round-the-world trip.

[FelPlague]

Have you noticed, that I actually provided data and methology? I said, that 6 characters missed one item for year. I said, that you need to level 6 characters and see, if they would miss any items to verify it. Right? But refuse to do it. What you do - is telling "I don't belive, that Earth is round, and I'm too lazy to verify it myself" to guy, who've just done round-the-world trip.

That is not data...
Provide your data if you wish to be taken seriously.
What world quests gave what items on what days on what charecters, and supply a sample size large enough to snuff out variables.

saying "i had 6 chars missing 1 item" is not data, that is your word, and your word is worthless, ESPECIALLY your word.
If you want to be taken seriously, provide data.
Big claims like a multi level manipulation of players and RNG behind the scene, requires big evidance, you saying "I am missing 1 item on 6 chars after awhile" is not data, its not provable, and its not even close to a sample size needed to confirm such.


Bro When you refuse to play the current expansion, stick yourself in old expansions and make up these constant theories, no one will take you seriously, if you want anyone to listen to you and these massive claims, provide actual evidence, and not just "I said so"


And again, you don't need to go around the world to verify the earth is round, there is multiple ways to test if it is round from your own home.

[Biomega]

Yeah. But you sould repeat his experiment to verify it. Because you don't belive to his words. Right? And you refuse to do it and therefore reject truth.

I don't. I just need to look at it and check if it works out - if the methodology is sound, and the data is plausible. I then can go and replicate the experiment if I want to (and someone very well may), but the first step is checking the data and the methodology. Always. Because 99% of the time that's where everything fails (or succeeds) already, and you don't even need to do the experiment. This is especially important in modern-day physics, where experiments can cost millions of dollars. People only do that once everything else checks out, because if there's a faulty methodology or bad data, you'd have wasted millions of dollars with your experiment.

Have you noticed, that I actually provided data and methology?

No I have not. You have not provided data. I'm not sure you know what "data" means. You've barely provided a methodology; but without data, I couldn't even evaluate that because I'd have to see what data you have to tell if the methodology is useful in any way. And you haven't provided data.

I said, that 6 characters missed one item for year.

And you think that's "data", do you?

I said, that you need to level 6 characters and see, if they would miss any items to verify it. Right?

No.

You would need to do this. Because otherwise you don't have proof. What you have right now is a theory that you think explains that data. However you are also saying that based on that data, you could not prove it to me; you could only prove it to yourself. Do you know what that means? It means you don't have proof, because proof isn't subjective or personal. If it is, then it isn't proof.

Don't commit a category error here by confusing data and mechanism of action - what's in dispute isn't necessarily your data (though without seeing it, I can't even say that for sure of course) but your conclusion.

In other words, you're saying "Roses are red because magical pixies paint them red. Don't believe me? Well I guess you'll have to go outside and find a rose yourself, and when you see it's red you'll know I'm right!" - you're confusing fundamental elements of your claim.

If you're saying "of course one person's data couldn't prove this", then you don't have proof by definition. So you telling me "go and do it yourself!" would mean nothing other than you admitting you have no proof.

[WowIsDead64]

I don't. I just need to look at it and check if it works out - if the methodology is sound, and the data is plausible. I then can go and replicate the experiment if I want to (and someone very well may), but the first step is checking the data and the methodology. Always. Because 99% of the time that's where everything fails (or succeeds) already, and you don't even need to do the experiment. This is especially important in modern-day physics, where experiments can cost millions of dollars. People only do that once everything else checks out, because if there's a faulty methodology or bad data, you'd have wasted millions of dollars with your experiment.

This isn't how science works, because it makes your opinion subjective. Something becomes truth only because it satisfies your philosophy. "I'm told it at school" isn't valid proof, you know. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe to others? Verify everything! Something becomes truth, when majority of people agree with it. And in order for it to happen - many people should verify it via repeating experiments. Why don't you want to be one of first ones, who'd do it?

I'm just guy, who've just done round-a-world trip, so I'm absolutely sure, that Earth is round. You just need to repeat it. Methodology is simple. Try to get full 352 cypher gear on 30+ characters via doing WQs and dailies only. And you'd notice, that something is wrong with RNG in this game.

[FelPlague]

This isn't how science works, because it makes your opinion subjective. Something becomes truth only because it satisfies your philosophy. "I'm told it at school" isn't valid proof, you know. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe to others? Verify everything! Something becomes truth, when majority of people agree with it. And in order for it to happen - many people should verify it via repeating experiments. Why don't you want to be one of first ones, who'd do it?

I'm just guy, who've just done round-a-world trip, so I'm absolutely sure, that Earth is round. You just need to repeat it. Methodology is simple. Try to get full 352 cypher gear on 30+ characters via doing WQs and dailies only. And you'd notice, that something is wrong with RNG in this game.

You did not do a round-a-world trip.
you went 30 feet, then made a claim and refuse to provide evidence, and instead you say "go do it yourself" when asked for said evidence.
Also in this metaphor making yourself the "world is round" guy is hilarious speaking its quite the opposite. You are the guy who is claiming the world is flat, refuse to provide any evidence yourself, have done no actual tests, and when asked to provide proof simply say "its out there, find it yourself!"

[Biomega]

This isn't how science works, because it makes your opinion subjective.

...what? Data and methodologies are "subjective"? You don't know what you're talking about. 99% of experiments never go into replication because something is found wrong with them. Have you ever done data analysis? Do you know how this works? With bad data, it's often trivially easy to demonstrate that something doesn't add up. They don't need to go get their own data, because they can prove (through various means) that something is wrong with the original data.

For example, if you give me fractional %s of 100 and I add them up and get 105, something is wrong with the data. I don't need to go and do the experiment to see if I also get 105% - I know something is wrong, because the numbers don't add up. That's a simplistic example (there's way more sophisticated mathematical techniques) but that's the kind of error that scuttles a huge number of experimental results based on the data alone.

Something becomes truth only because it satisfies your philosophy.

No. Something becomes truth if it's widely accepted as true based on consensus around objective data. There is no absolute truth. Anywhere. Ever. That doesn't mean truth doesn't exist, it simply means you have to adjust your criteria.

"I'm told it at school" isn't valid proof, you know. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe to others? Verify everything!

That's the idea. Which is why I'm asking you for data. And I could, if I wanted, go and get data on any number of other arbitrary "school facts", too. Which is in fact very often what you do in school - you retrace the steps so you understand the conclusion. Have you not had an education where this was demonstrated to you?

The key here is that you're effectively sabotaging yourself with what you think is some clever jab at epistemology. But I agree: don't just accept things, and ask for data so you can verify it.

THAT IS WHY I AM ASKING YOU FOR DATA.

And do you know who is the one here who goes "why don't you just trust me"? - YOU.

Something becomes truth, when majority of people agree with it. And in order for it to happen - many people should verify it via repeating experiments. Why don't you want to be one of first ones, who'd do it?

Because we're not there yet. Replicating the experiment isn't the first step.

It's one of the last steps. After you've checked everything else first, to see if it's even worth replicating.

But so far you haven't even provided anything for me to check experimentally. We're still waiting on your data. And "uh six characters over a year, I guess?" isn't data. If that's all you have, we don't need to do any experiments, because there's nothing to verify - you got jack shit, and the discussion ends there because you have nothing worth talking about.

That's why the first thing I asked from you in my very first post was actual data - ideally a spreadsheet or some comparable format that gives me actual numbers to work with, not a vague assurance. How many quests did you do, exactly? Where/how did you record the results? What were they? Over what time frame? What cadence? And so on.

If you don't have anything like that, you have nothing. You're just some rando going "huh it kinda took a long time to get this item, that's weird" which doesn't tell anyone jack shit and which certainly isn't anything even REMOTELY resembling "proof".

I'm just guy, who've just done round-a-world trip, so I'm absolutely sure, that Earth is round.

Except that's not what's happening, because you don't know that what you've found is an abstract, observable fact.

THAT'S THE POINT. That's WHY you don't have proof. Because if you KNEW this, that WOULD be proof. But you can't know that from your single data set. You just ASSUME it, and you are now saying we should assume it, too, and see if we get the same data. But that is not proof. If we all went and did this, and then found that indeed we are all getting the same result, that MIGHT be proof. Do you have such data? Because if you don't... then you don't have proof.

What you're doing here is effectively saying "well if you all went and did the work, we'd have proof!" - and I agree. We could, potentially. But do you see what that means? It means that YOU, RIGHT NOW do not have proof. And that's been what I was saying all along.

You. Do. Not. Have. Proof.

So don't go around claiming you do, and when people ask you for it go tell them "well you go find it, once you do we'll have it!".

The fact that you don't seem to understand this makes me very worried, because you seem to fundamentally lack some kind of critical capacity of comprehension here.

[WowIsDead64]

You did not do a round-a-world trip.
you went 30 feet, then made a claim and refuse to provide evidence, and instead you say "go do it yourself" when asked for said evidence.
Also in this metaphor making yourself the "world is round" guy is hilarious speaking its quite the opposite. You are the guy who is claiming the world is flat, refuse to provide any evidence yourself, have done no actual tests, and when asked to provide proof simply say "its out there, find it yourself!"

What else do you need? Imagine, that there are no satellites, it's 3 BCE and you're Eratosthenes's friend. He tells you, that he has calculated the Earth's circumference. What other proofs Eratosthenes should provide?

I tell you simple thing. I've played content for 3 years. Repeated it on 30+ characters. And I've found out, that WQ/daily rewards aren't random. They have monthly pattern. And even worse. Some items are picked so rarely, that they can be unavailable for YEARS.

Methodology:
1) Level character to 60
2) Go to ZM and grind 6/6 cyphers then avoid killing rares and grinding treasures
3) Try to complete full 352 cypher set
4) Do it on many characters
5) Verify following facts:
*Too many duplicates, like same item dropping every day for 5 days in a row and overall dropping too many times/month
*Same loot pattern repeating next month with other item
*Some items being unavailable for months/years

Is it simple? Yeah!

[FelPlague]

What else do you need? Imagine, that there are no satellites, it's 3 BCE and you're Eratosthenes's friend. He tells you, that he has calculated the Earth's circumference. What other proofs Eratosthenes should provide?

I tell you simple thing. I've played content for 3 years. Repeated it on 30+ characters. And I've found out, that WQ/daily rewards aren't random. They have monthly pattern. And even worse. Some items are picked so rarely, that they can be unavailable for YEARS.

Methodology:
1) Level character to 60
2) Go to ZM and grind 6/6 cyphers then avoid killing rares and grinding cyphers
3) Try to complete full 352 cypher set
4) Do it on many characters
5) Verify following facts:
*Too many duplicates, like same item dropping every day for 5 days in a row and overall dropping too many times/month
*Same loot pattern repeating next month with other item
*Some items being unavailable for months/years

Is it simple? Yeah!

What else do I need?
ANY DATA
LITERALLY ANY ACTUAL DATA


I am not going to get your proof for you, you said you got it, so post it.
your methodology is awful, and proves nothing, you are literally just experiencing bad rng and going "ITS RIGGED!" because humans are pattern seeking, and you want to see patterns where there arnt any. Especially since I literally geared multiple alts entirely through ZM back in the day, and had no issue getting gear in every slot.
You have made a MASSIVE claim, and say you have the data to prove it, but refuse to provide it and demand we go get your data for you.

[WowIsDead64]

What else do I need?
ANY DATA
LITERALLY ANY ACTUAL DATA


I am not going to get your proof for you, you said you got it, so post it.
your methodology is awful, and proves nothing, you are literally just experiencing bad rng and going "ITS RIGGED!" because humans are pattern seeking, and you want to see patterns where there arnt any. Especially since I literally geared multiple alts entirely through ZM back in the day, and had no issue getting gear in every slot.

We are circling. The best answer in this case: everything has already been said - you just need to read my posts more carefully. If you need ANY data - then it has already been provided. I've already said, that Plate and Mail boots, cloak for Leather wearing classes and Cloth gloves had been missing in all ZM loot tables prior to Remix patch. All these items drop from exactly the same WQ. So, not WQ itself, but this loot combination had been missing for about year. I don't remember exact timings, but other info has also been provided in various threads on this forum, including info about belts constantly dropping every day, then next month weapons constantly dropping every day and then I stopped tracking monthly loot cycle. Overall I prefer to mark it's start by several days without gear loot at all.

But all this info is pointless now. Because it's historical data and nobody can verify it now. Loot tables has changed after Remix patch and everything should be started from scratch.

[FelPlague]

We are circling. The best answer in this case: everything has already been said - you just need to read my posts more carefully. If you need ANY data - then it has already been provided. I've already said, that Plate and Mail boots, cloak for Leather wearing classes and Cloth gloves had been missing in all ZM loot tables prior to Remix patch. All these items drop from exactly the same WQ. So, not WQ itself, but this loot combination had been missing for about year. I don't remember exact timings, but other info has also been provided in various threads on this forums, including info about belts constantly dropping every day, then next month weapons constantly dropping every day and then I stopped tracking monthly loot cycle. Overall I prefer to mark it's start by several days without gear loot at all.

But all this info is pointless now. Because it's historical data and nobody can verify it now. Loot tables has changed after Remix patch and everything should be started from scratch.

You did not provide data, you provided your anecdotal recount of events.
provide actual data.
Days you played
Items you got
Classes you played

Provide your proof, stop just going "well I did it on 6 chars and was missing pieces!" that is not data, that is not proof.
without actual data, your massive conspiracy falls apart with just a couple words

I did Zm this week and got an entire set of gear
Your word against mine, and so, you have been proven wrong.
If you wanna prove me wrong, then guess you gotta go find the proof yourself.


"Loot tables has changed after remix patch" where is your proof on this?
you seriously are sitting here saying blizzard has been manipulating RNG in ZM and caught wind you were catching onto them, and so they changed it with pandaria remix's release..?

[WowIsDead64]

You did not provide data, you provided your anecdotal recount of events.
provide actual data.
Days you played
Items you got
Classes you played

Provide your proof, stop just going "well I did it on 6 chars and was missing pieces!" that is not data, that is not proof.
without actual data, your massive conspiracy falls apart with just a couple words

I did Zm this week and got an entire set of gear
Your word against mine, and so, you have been proven wrong.
If you wanna prove me wrong, then guess you gotta go find the proof yourself.


"Loot tables has changed after remix patch" where is your proof on this?
you seriously are sitting here saying blizzard has been manipulating RNG in ZM and caught wind you were catching onto them, and so they changed it with pandaria remix's release..?

Why this info is important for you? You're not Wow dev to gather debug info to nail down nasty bug, that makes ZM loot broken. So, specific dates, classes, etc. aren't important. Because all we need to determine - is it random or not. Not where. Not when. Not how. Yes or no. Random or not. You ask this info just because you know, that I don't have it now. Simply because I realized, what actually happened, only after it had happened. What I say - is consolidated data. It's perfectly enough to understand, what actually happens.

No. "Loot tables have changed" means, that I no longer know, what loot is missing now, because missing items have changed to other ones. I need time to determine it. I suspect pants, but I'm not sure.

[FelPlague]

Why this info is important for you? You're not Wow dev to gather debug info to nail down nasty bug, that makes ZM loot broken. So, specific dates, classes, etc. aren't important. Because all we need to determine - is it random or not. Not where. Not when. Not how. Yes or no. Random or not. You ask this info just because you know, that I don't have it now. Simply because I realized, what actually happened, only after it had happened. What I say - is consolidated data. It's perfectly enough to understand, what actually happens.

No. "Loot tables have changed" means, that I no longer know, what loot is missing now, because missing items have changed to other ones. I need time to determine it. I suspect pants, but I'm not sure.

Why is this data important to me?
Cause you made a claim and want to convince us you are right
so we want to see the data so we know you are right and can agree with you

if you dont want people asking for your proof, dont make a giant post about how the game is manipulating you, and you have the proof.


you have no data, and you admit it multiple times, but then keep calling it data, when its not data.
it is your flawed memeory.

[Necrolord]

Shadowlands pretty much destroyed Warcraft lore.

[Kyphael]

I just find it boring. Story not engaging, questing is dull, new race/class not that interesting to me.

Last expansion I liked was BFA...Legion was good...Wrath/Cata/MoP was when I was most active with this game and I think there needs to be more innovative game design.

This in a nutshell. Even before the story went to hell, the gameplay had already become pretty repetitive and boring.

[Biomega]

This in a nutshell. Even before the story went to hell, the gameplay had already become pretty repetitive and boring.

Is that specifically the fault of SL, though? Or is that just WoW in general. The game has been around for 20+ years. It's a minor miracle it's been going this long. It's a bit unrealistic to expect them to be able to have a single game that both preserves its own identity and also constantly innovates so nobody gets bored at the same time. SOME people no doubt haven't gotten bored, but a lot of people have. They liked the gameplay loop, maybe even liked it for many years - but even a good thing can turn stale eventually. And that's FINE. WoW doesn't need to be your forever game - you can stop liking something you've liked for 10+ years or whatever, and it may well not be the game's fault directly - it's just that after so long a time, even really good things simply get old.

That being said I do agree in general that WoW gameplay - especially combat and class mechanics - has been spinning its wheels a bit and overall has some issues with bloat and overdesign. I suspect that at least part of the allure of Classic is that people need a breather from the onslaught and appreciate a break with barebones rotations and simplistic designs. I'm not advocating for a reactionary return to that kind of design, of course, but it is an indicator that maybe they're going a bit too hard on things. The repeated complaints from new players about WoW having become this really opaque, difficult to grok mess is another indicator.

To me, that was about 1/3rd of what made me quit in SL. Another 1/3rd was what I call the philosophy of anti-fun design that constantly throws stones at you and pokes sharp sticks in your eye and calls it "challenge" or "content" without ever stopping to think whether more and more complicated actually means better; and 1/3rd was a general vibe check of listless flavor, terrible writing, and overall lack of passion in the product.

DF disappointed on the same counts and so I didn't even bother playing it. I'll keep an eye on TWW to see where it's going, but from what the Alpha/Beta has shown so far... not looking like I'll be back.

And that's FINE.

I had almost 20 years of fun. It's okay if they're going in a different direction now and I no longer like that. I'd prefer it if they didn't, but I have more things to do than I have time for anyway. It's not a huge loss.

[Kyphael]

Is that specifically the fault of SL, though? Or is that just WoW in general. The game has been around for 20+ years. It's a minor miracle it's been going this long. It's a bit unrealistic to expect them to be able to have a single game that both preserves its own identity and also constantly innovates so nobody gets bored at the same time. SOME people no doubt haven't gotten bored, but a lot of people have. They liked the gameplay loop, maybe even liked it for many years - but even a good thing can turn stale eventually. And that's FINE. WoW doesn't need to be your forever game - you can stop liking something you've liked for 10+ years or whatever, and it may well not be the game's fault directly - it's just that after so long a time, even really good things simply get old.

That being said I do agree in general that WoW gameplay - especially combat and class mechanics - has been spinning its wheels a bit and overall has some issues with bloat and overdesign. I suspect that at least part of the allure of Classic is that people need a breather from the onslaught and appreciate a break with barebones rotations and simplistic designs. I'm not advocating for a reactionary return to that kind of design, of course, but it is an indicator that maybe they're going a bit too hard on things. The repeated complaints from new players about WoW having become this really opaque, difficult to grok mess is another indicator.

To me, that was about 1/3rd of what made me quit in SL. Another 1/3rd was what I call the philosophy of anti-fun design that constantly throws stones at you and pokes sharp sticks in your eye and calls it "challenge" or "content" without ever stopping to think whether more and more complicated actually means better; and 1/3rd was a general vibe check of listless flavor, terrible writing, and overall lack of passion in the product.

DF disappointed on the same counts and so I didn't even bother playing it. I'll keep an eye on TWW to see where it's going, but from what the Alpha/Beta has shown so far... not looking like I'll be back.

And that's FINE.

I had almost 20 years of fun. It's okay if they're going in a different direction now and I no longer like that. I'd prefer it if they didn't, but I have more things to do than I have time for anyway. It's not a huge loss.

It's WoW in general, but it doesn't help the lore in SL was shit and let a lot of people down on its potential alone. I was already getting burned out in Mists, even though the lore there in hindsight was great. Legion was what brought me back because of lore (I missed BC and love the Legion story, not xpac, the story itself of Sargeras, Kil'Jaeden, etc.) Plus, Class Halls were innovative, and the legendary weapons were a great hook. Suramar also looked awesome to explore and quest through, and it was.

WoW is a minor miracle, it's an anomaly, it's its own beast. In many cases, it doesn't need to innovate and evolve anymore because then it wouldn't be WoW in many ways. While it bores me now, I still wouldn't want a "WoW 2" that updates the graphics and gameplay to something so modern, it loses its identity. I'd rather wait for an expansion they might one day do that somehow intrigues me (or that may never happen, and that's ok too.)

I view WoW as like The Simpsons, it was once amazing, and the best in its genre (gaming, animation.) In its time, it innovated, and inspired, and made the genre better. Then it jumped the shark, became a parody of itself, but was so good, people still consume it on the basis of its name alone. I still watch new Simpsons episodes on Sunday even though I know most of the time it won't be funny. People still play WoW because it's still in a way, a fun, affordable, endearing, and nostalgic form of entertainment still better than many console games out there with little to no replay value beyond a weekend.

It's no huge loss for me either, as much as it is a gain for many other young gamers who can enjoy it for decades to come.

I just gripe about what could have been with Shadowlands. For me, it held promise of the last great WoW expansion I could have played after Legion, and that Arthas redemption story we never got so we could focus on... Zovaal, Sylvanas, and Anduin... blergh.

[Biomega]

I still watch new Simpsons episodes on Sunday even though I know most of the time it won't be funny. People still play WoW because it's still in a way, a fun, affordable, endearing, and nostalgic form of entertainment still better than many console games out there with little to no replay value beyond a weekend.

That's part of the problem. People have been acculturated to brand loyalty. That's a toxic consumer feedback loop, because it skips the quality checks that should make for discerning consumers, and would be responsible purchasing behavior. As a result, many brands have realized that it's not about the product but about the branding and the marketing, meaning they now pump all their money into better selling mediocre products than into making better products. That was the core promise of a market economy, and it's being undermined by people too complacent to demand quality.

Ultimately, WoW is the way it is because we allow it. And the argument of "well it sucks but there's nothing better around I guess" really doesn't fly anymore in a world of overabundance like today; at least for most people. All that's needed is a shift in consumer behavior, i.e. overcoming the laziness of complacency and seeing what else is out there. We only have so much time, but there's never been more ways to fill it; and we really don't need to let companies get away with mediocrity.