LFD tool was announced late in 2009 and sub numbers literally didn’t move from where they’d been since WOTLK announced. They peaked in March at Blizzcon when Cataclysm was announced as they often do around Blizzcon/when an expansion is released. And they started falling a month or so later.
So at best LFD tool had no impact on WOW sub numbers… And at worse it was one of the factors that led to a dramatic (and the first ever in WOW"s history) decrease in subs in the months following its release.
It’s common enough and old enough information that I wouldn’t think I would have to give a specific source as there are literally hundreds of them readily available. I’m sorry you’re still upset.
Yes… I agree that the release of ICC had little effect on sub numbers since it had been known it would be released since the expansion was announced. Glad we all agree.
PS: I dont think “reciting” is the word you were looking for. (Good, you edited it)
Nice strawman, dodge for citation of empirical data when it’s convenient to suit your claims. Although, this is also someone who in the same breath wants to joke about misogyny and not be labelled as one.
Yup, you have no argument. Agreed. Picking a random feature and saying this is the reason sub numbers dropped is not empirical data. It’s just a biased opinion. And hypocritical in that you could use such terribly flawed logic to point at any part of the expansion and say the same. As I did, and it flew over your head.
an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.
Telling people you have empirical data and then claim you don’t need to show is almost a perfect definition of what is being described as above… try again
When I point out the empirical data that subs peaked after lfd your instant response was to disregard it and then deflect and change the narrative to your opinion that lfd didn’t raise subs and in fact may have contributed to lowering them.
I know you can’t objectively look at your own posts, but if you could I think you’d be saying to yourself what you say to me.
But in the end this silly back and forth about sub numbers is completely irrelevant and has no bearing on WoW Classic.
Do you really think an authentic recreation of Wrath shouldn’t be the design goal? Nah, let’s set that aside and instead base decisions off what Bearhands thinks led ti the downfall of WoW. That’s a noble goal.
You’re assigning a causal relationship between two things when you don’t have anywhere near the evidence to support the claim. To say there WAS NO causal relationship (or at least one you can prove) requires a much lower burden, which I think is sufficiently met by the sub data we have combined with the dates the features were announced.
IE: The feature was announced. Sub numbers didn’t move. Therefore… the announcement of the feature did not have an impact on sub numbers.
Much easier to state/prove then “this one thing was the only/main reason for this effect” especially when the effect you’re claiming was offset from the cause by months, aligned with several other (arguably larger) events, and only temporary before a dramatic reversal.
What? so stating you know something as fact then deny proving it’s true is not easier than having a real debate based on fact? Yikes…
Sources matter. If you’re going to tell me something is true, you better believe I want you to prove it. The burden of proof lies on the individual saying something is fact.
You must be just as thick-headed as bear here. Probably cut from the same cloth no doubt.
The impact or lack of impact is meaningless. That is not a guideline for designing Wrath Classic. You really want to go through every feature in Wrath and based on biased opinions have that dictate whether it should or shouldn’t be in Wrath Classic.
