This is pretty much the same chart I shared. So it seems you just lack reading comprehension skills because it clearly shows that vast majority of sub growth was in vanilla and TBC. The growth bumps in wrath were very tiny compared to the peak growth of vanilla/TBC. Wrath mostly plateaued and stagnated. Cata was the start of the decline.
Glad you didn’t read my post and invented something entirely different.
Subs grew in Wrath, therefore sub growth. the subs grew higher in wrath then either Vanilla or TBC, which shows sub growth.
Wrath was growth, stable population plateau, then more growth. Even into Cata.
Go home.
1 Like
Oh I thought I was going to have to do a subtle troll of liking Raid Finder and only playing Cata if Raid Finder was put in but you already did it for me. No RF is bad and the more bad systems removed to ensure retail tourists don’t populate the game and confirm all the criticisms over the years about why Retail is different from the Classic Trilogy the better.
I read your post, you are strawmanning and misconstruing what I said to desperately try to support your argument. I didn’t say wrath had zero growth, I said vanilla-tbc had peak growth. Vanilla-tbc saw the game grow 10.5 million players, wrath grew a small bump and stagnated.
Just looking at TBC, that expansion grew the game by an extra 5 million players, and grew 5 million players, vanilla grew 7.5 million players. Both vanilla and TBC had growth going on the entire duration of those expansions. In wrath, the growth was 1 million, and stagnated for most of the expansion.
It’s crystal clear from the chart, vanilla-tbc had most of WoWs sub growth. Those were the most popular versions of WoW as they attracted the most new players. Most of wraths subs were hold overs from vanilla-TBC and not new players coming in.
Wrath was the most popular version of WoW. The sub numbers don’t lie.
Subs show vanilla and tbc had the most growth, and wrath stagnated. Most of wraths pop came from vanilla and TBC. That shows vanilla + TBC was more popular, as it attracted more new players to the game.
Funny when people try to give wrath credit for subs that were earned from previous versions of the game lmfao.
That’s a lie. You said
That’s not a response to a person but an attempt to insult all people who wanted rdf.
Nothing you posted was objective or factual. Prove that it was a vocal minority that wanted rdf. Prove that those who wanted it were “retailers.” I didn’t claim that it was a vocal minority that didn’t want rdf because there is no data to support that claim and I make objective factual arguments. You just go with your fee fees. And since I have not played retail for years and I started about a month from vanilla’s release date I am not a retailer. You’re just not sufficiently educated to know what an objective factual argument is.
If you could understand what you read you’d know I never claimed that players were asking for an automated group finder. I clearly stated
Players wanted something and blizzard tried with a group finder in BC. But it wasn’t working and almost no one used it. The complaints continued until rdf was added. It was a great success though it did have some problems that were corrected in later expansions. The problem was real and players in vanilla were asking for a solution before retail even existed.
This is just you claiming that everyone agrees with your fee fees. Prove that a majority of those who wanted to replay vanilla didn’t want rdf. I came back to wow after quitting for years and I wanted rdf and dual spec added from day one of classic. I wouldn’t care about you expressing your subjective personal feelings about the game but you keep trying to claim your fee fees are shared by everyone who wasn’t a “retailer” and are objective facts. That’s a level of stupid I won’t just ignore.
I challenge you to take a look at the forums, classicwow, and nostalrious subreddit, any classic enthusiast anywhere online, see what the sentiment was about RDF. Any outlier you can find supporting RDF got absolutely buried in downvotes. The community is absolutely dead set against it.
The vanilla enthusiast audience that got us classic in the first place was certainly heavily against RDF. These are facts, that do not align with your fee fee’s.
Which based on the graph I provided, you are still wrong. You are trying to take a new game on release and compare it to the second expansion released. That’s not how you compare growth in this case.
Comparing to TBC, wrath had increased growth.
Learn to read a graph.
Again. Go home.
Anyone who thinks the forums or any other on line chat group gives us any information about what the vastly larger number of people think about anything needs to take a course on Statistical Analysis or read a book on the subject. But you’re not the type of person who would read a book or study anything when you have such strong feelings. The simple fact is that everyone arguing about anything on both sides is a vocal minority. You’re using objectively flawed data that every scientist would reject to claim your feelings are facts.
Those who argued here both for and against rdf are just a tiny little fringe group. It’s a fact that the majority of players posting on the forums when we were told rdf wasn’t coming were asking for it. But I never claimed that majority on the forum meant that the majority of classic players wanted rdf. Because a majority on the forum tells us nothing about what the majority of players want. You’re just too stupid to realize that.
Citation needed.
Gonna be waiting a looooooooong time. Especially when he can’t read a basic graph.
Go home.
TBC was not a new game on release.
This is wrong, grew by over 5 million subs, wrath grew by 1 million and stagnated.
The irony is this is advice you should apply to yourself. You are desperately trying to interpret it to align with your fee fee’s, or are simply visually illiterate.
Is that why blizzard caved to these people and finally made classic servers?
I suspect there were some legal reasons that with the existence of classic servers it was easier to protect their intellectual property. I suspect that’s why they promised there would always be a classic vanilla server but didn’t have a BC era or wrath era server. I suspect that with the decline in engagement in retail and the marginal success of other early game re-releases by other companies they decided to try an experiment with classic. The difference between you and me is I think about these issues rationally, make logical guesses, and don’t claim they’re objective facts.
Right. It sure wasn’t the major success of nostalrious, verified by them traveling to meet blizzard and share their internal data, proving there was an audience for this, further proven by classic’s success that was much bigger than blizzard expected. None of that, it was to “protect their IP” which they’ve done just fine over the years.
Damn I wish it was in actual WoW Classic too, LFR Molten Core would be badass.
I would actually play Classic Era if they added RDF and LFR for a month or two then get bored and quit.
You’re such an ignorant fool. What people will do for free doesn’t give us any information about what they will pay a monthly fee for. That information is all over the internet. Those in the news business learned that fact over and over again as massively trafficed sites used daily by millions for free could not get enough subs to pay their bills when the advertisers went to FB and google. It’s something Musk learned when he tried to get subs for twitter when it lost much of it’s advertising revenue. There was no proof Classic would be successful. It was a gamble.
Is your problem that you’re too lazy to read or to stupid to understand what you read? I gave several reasons including
Also isn’t leveling it seems. Rdf for even dps has been decent wait times. 20’s, 30’s.
Lfg is still there for those who want the old ways. Issue most will rdf it lol.
For a reason. I can and have quested by stone talon on a leveler. And I get a pop. Where shall I go now. Blackfathom.
Cool…it be the dungeon I’d never see. It be the dungeon I never saw in vanila/ tbcc leveling. It never came up in lfg. Beyond me asking for more once in a while.
Hell even before tbcc nerfed boosting, boosters didn’t go there. 4 days of questing in the area I saw a mage booster once.
Who charged way too much. They packed up in an hour. Probably went to monastery.
This is 2018 all over again lmfao. So you are going to repeat this argument made back then, when classic 2019 already disproved it? I’ve already stated it for you, classic 2019 was a success. The audience was proven. End of story. Cope and seethe all you want but this is where the facts lie. All the people claiming “nost only popular because free” proclaimed classic would be a fad that dies in 1 month… and not only did that not happen, classic was a much bigger success than blizzard anticipated.
If you are going to still cling onto these arguments from 2018 that were already disproven, you are living in a fantasy that aligns with your personal feelings.
When you gamble sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. In a zero sum game that’s no more proof then guessing heads will be the next coin flip and getting it right. Those who wanted classic guessed it would succeed. Those who didn’t guessed it would fail. There was no intellect behind those guesses and getting it right was no more proof then getting the coin flip right. Those, like me, who rely on data and science didn’t guess because there was insufficient data.
Correlation doesn’t mean causation nor does it constitute evidence. Those who claimed, “nost only popular because free” were as wrong as those who claimed nost popularity means classic will be a success. Some re-released have succeeded even though they had nothing like nost as reasoning for their success so there must be other reasoning for the success than a popular private server.
When news organizations moved to a subscription model almost every one thought it would succeed because of the massive traffic on the free sites and the importance of news in a free society. When the New York Times and some others succeeded it didn’t prove the subscription model was successful. More failed then succeeded. The NYT success didn’t predict that Musk would be successful when he tried a subscription model for twitter. It was a complete failure.
I’m giving you a little lesson on how science works knowing from the start that it would be too complex for your tiny intellect to understand. I’m doing it because I like science. I like logic, math, rationality, and the hard sciences. My degree is in a hard science. While I read some fiction most of the books I read are non fiction. While I might binge watch some drama tv mostly I watch documentaries. And I disdain ignorance and stupidity, which you are the prime proponent of here.