I don’t necro or spam. But nice try. I provide my perspectives in as many places as I can. And you are wrath classic haters. Period. Completely anti wrath.
INSTANTLY followed by 
You just can’t help but to tell everyone how smooth your brain is, can you?
Schizo ramblings.
1 Like
Aovona is deathly allergic to quoting accurate information.
Source? He makes up head canon about me in every reply to me. Literally lies on every sentence. I’ve challenged him multiple times to quote me, and he has quoted me on any of his claims a total of 0 times.
He’ll say whatever he thinks he needs to say to fit his narrative. Literally a compulsive liar.
2 Likes
These opinions are fine and harmless, I should’ve been more specific in my post. I’ll elaborate for clarity:
Calling Cataclysm equal to Retail is just flat out wrong. The definitions you’ve given in posts above and other threads of what constitutes “Retail” cause confusion of terms. Doubly so when SoD is in question, which has no resemblance to anything, really. I think you’re using these terms to try to evoke an emotional response from people, rather than a rational one.
It’s commonly accepted that Classic through Wrath is the Classic era (despite Wrath having far more in common with Cataclysm than TBC), a clear evolution of a linear path. Cataclysm through WoD though, that’s a very experimental era. Everything from one expansion to the next was a major shakeup. Then the modern era, Legion to current (though hopefully DF becomes the first of a new era).
Don’t you worry my friend. I have screenshots of you doing exactly that. YOU don’t get to decide your guilt or innocence. BLIZZARD do.
I’m sorry but I have to point this out, you’re saying that you know nothing about this server that you do not play but you know that it’s both a really good server and that there’s lots of active palyers on it ever since Cataclysm was announced? Forgive me to think that you’re lying in some way with that statement.
Also if you think that there’s no RMT on those servers then you’d be mistakened. Those servers cost money to keep up and the best way to pay for them is to have the people who play the server pay hosts. So unless you’re saying that people are enjoying it so much that they’re giving them money for nothing in return then I’d have to say that there’s 100% a version of a WoW token on that server as well as other things that the server hosts have to incentivize them spending money whether that’s mounts or other things.
I forget who said it (might’ve been Willie) he said that…
Vanilla > WotLK is the classic era
Cata > MoP is the experimental era
Legion > SL is the borrowed power Era
I don’t know what kind of era DF is in but I can say for sure it’s gonna include the next 3 expansions with them being so closely linked or DF is just going to be a single expac era (doubt that though).
I kinda agree with this.
2 Likes
Check on all the multiple RDF threads made in the beginning of Wrath.
1 Like
Link once where you told me to quote you and I didnt.
1 Like
The burden of proof is on you not them.
I read them all. No one claimed that rdf was added at the beginning of wrath. If it was on all the multiple rdf threads you could easily find one. Just like you could easily find one game released about the same time as Cata that was more popular and profitable than Cata. You just lie and lie and lie. If you aren’t a liar you could just once prove one of the lies you pull from your behind but you never do.
That chick from Europe kept saying how Wrath was broken and said it back to back and how it was ruined because it launched without RDF. There were dozens of arguments about that.
Again you’re saying nothing, you’re being non-descript, post a link to the thread or at least say who you’re talking about other than a “chick from Europe”. This discussion is so pointless, why cling onto this so hard?
Many people said wrath was ruined because it launched without rdf. But no one said rdf was added at the beginning in original wrath. People asked for rdf to be added early in Classic because classic started at the patch it was added in original and because dual spec was added early.
If there were dozens it should be easy for you to link to just one.
I don’t get why she clings so hard, but I continue to push it because I’m sick and tired of her constant lies.
1 Like
No it didn’t. These patches are not the same as original Wrath.
Go find one if you want some. Look around these forums on Oct 23, Sep as well. You want it so bad, you find it.
Saying this
Is the EXACT same as saying that. And yes there were so many people saying we need RDF we need it now then so many said no RDF does not come out until later in Wrath original Wrath never came out with RDF. But so many here thought that it did. And they had to be told that there was no patch 3.4 in original Wrath. That is pure 100% a CLASSIC only feature.
1 Like
I’ve said this before but I’m going to say it again.
The reason it’s 3.4 and not 3.0 > 3.3 is because this isn’t retail, this is WotLK Classic and as such a distinction needs to be made. Not only that, this is a different client running a copy, a copy that has changes in it because of modern times. It’s not that hard to understand, it’s not a feature it’s just a patch number man, it’s not that deep.
1 Like
No one can prove a negative. No one can prove that Bigfoot doesn’t exist. Those that claim it exist must offer proof. I cannot prove that no one claimed rdf was added at the beginning of original wrath because I claimed it didn’t happen. If you claim those posts exist you have to offer proof. Honestly, almost every one who was posting then knows you’re lying. But I’m tired it so I will continue to point it out.
For example you claimed there were games released about the same time as Cata that were more popular and profitable. You gave 6 examples, with no links, that you claimed had more sales and more profits. Both Noxranna and I proved you wrong. I even included links. Cata was a huge success. No other game at the time was as popular and as profitable.
Look at IGN 2010 as they report top sellers for all games… Cata doesn’t even make the top 10 in that list. So you are lying there.
And also just Google most profitable game of 2010. Cata does not pop up.
Cata was NOT top seller for 2010. Call of Duty was as I said. 30.99 million sales for it.
1 Like
Call of Duty was a very popular game that had a couple dozen expansions each with different name. Call of Duty , Call of Duty 2, 3, 4, Call of Duty: World at War etc. Call of Duty had 4.5 million sales.
I have found no site that includes monthly subs as part of the profits. Cata had at least 10.2 million subs at $15 as sub for 22 months which would need to be added to the sale of the game. At $60 for the game every 4 months Cata made as much as it’s initial game sales. While some of the CoD expansions had more sales then Cata with the subs profit added Cata was still more profitable.
If “so many” thought rdf came out with wrath’s release you should have no problem finding just one.