The one thing that baffles me about the boost

[anon24854118]

Sub stagnation and decline. The near death of the game lol

[Zazda-wyrmrest-accord]

@anon24854118

How about the stagnation of subs starting in wotlk when convenient features were first introduced, those being: lfg and heirlooms

Wrath was also the absolute highest point of WoW (supposedly), and again, correlation without causation.

@anon24854118

lfg and heirlooms, and then the further decline as more and more installments of microtransactions were introduced?

Again, you have nothing to show that these caused the decline, by this reasoning it was Worgen.

@anon24854118

There’s an opinion for ya

It is indeed your opinion, stop trying to pass it off as fact.

[Zazda-wyrmrest-accord]

@anon24854118

The near death of the game

… when? WoD and BfA both still drew in millions, lotta people leaving didn’t mean they game died.

[Esperia-whitemane]

@anon24854118

Sub stagnation and decline. The near death of the game lol

Everyone seems to have an opinion as to why the subs declined in retail and think it’s correct.

[anon24854118]

You can thank original classic and TBC for that growth. Wotlk stagnated. You can look to the many complaints and figure out for yourself why people quit playing because the subs who quit will tell you their reasoning. There’s a lot, but of those reasons, micro-transactions are a big one.

[Norsë-kromcrush]

@Mankrik-atiesh

The one thing that baffles me about the boost, and the one thing that I haven’t heard enough from people who are against boost is:
If the goal of the Classic servers is to recreate the experience in as accurate a way possible of the expansion that the Classic server is for, why would they add boosts, which in no way what-so-ever help to retain or recreate the experience of TBC?

Shouldn’t that be enough to kill the argument altogether? If it doesn’t help to retain or recreate the experience of TBC then it doesn’t belong. 'Nuff said.

Well we’re starting on Patch 2.4.3, so if they wanted to create the true TBC experience we wouldn’t be starting at the final expansion patch. So that whole argument goes out the window. If we are starting with vastly more developed/powerful talents, and bug fixes, etc. We aren’t getting a game that aims to be true to form TBC launch, therefor a boost isn’t really violating any purity test you are trying to pass. The game is already fundamentally truly not a TBC launch.

Even if it was, we’d have RAF boosting, 300% increased XP in old world content with drastically reduced XP requirements. Boosting isn’t economical for bots, they are just going to level as is, if they had RAF bots would be out of control. This alone is a reason boosts are superior to TBC Launch as is with RAF leveling.

[Esperia-whitemane]

@anon24854118

You can thank original classic and TBC for that growth. Wotlk stagnated. You can look to the many complaints and figure out for yourself why people quit playing because the subs who quit will tell you their reasoning. There’s a lot, but of those reasons, micro-transactions are a big one.

Citation needed.

[Zazda-wyrmrest-accord]

@anon24854118

You can thank original classic and TBC for that growth. Wotlk stagnated.

You mean Vanilla? That is definitely your opinion.

I saw more complaints about TBC then I did Wrath, TBC derailed characters, Wrath didn’t.

@anon24854118

You can look to the many complaints and figure out for yourself why people quit playing because the subs who quit will tell you their reasoning. There’s a lot, but of those reasons, micro-transactions are a big one.

We don’t have access to those exit questionnaires.

And no, people making a forum post saying their quitting isn’t valid, it’s usually just for drama.

A vocal handful/hundred (remember, WoW playerbase measures in the millions) whining on the forums is not “proof” that microtransactions are the downfall of WoW.

P.S. those started at the end of Vanilla/beginning of TBC btw

[Slicy-anathema]

@anon24854118

Sub stagnation and decline.

Happened in cata, well before the boost was a thing.

Next?

[Iron-pagle]

top kek at the “bots will buy boosts” argument

because they wont. its not economically viable for them. its gamble.

[Blackheart-myzrael]

@anon24854118

Sub stagnation and decline. The near death of the game lol

World of Warcraft became the most successful MMO based on subscriptions immediately after launch and has never been anything other than the most successful subscription MMO maintaining more paying subs than any other MMO.

World of Warcraft ‘sub stagnation and decline’ is true but only in relation to WoW at other given times. Subs consistently decline substantially well into an expansion and then boom with expansion releases. But always staying ahead of other subscription MMOs.

So WoW appears to have never been near death and you have to wonder if it ever will be. Too many people just can’t resist coming back.

[Gardoomforge-mankrik]

@anon24854118

You can thank original classic and TBC for that growth. Wotlk stagnated. You can look to the many complaints and figure out for yourself why people quit playing because the subs who quit will tell you their reasoning. There’s a lot, but of those reasons, micro-transactions are a big one.

I’d like to see you prove and cite this.

Oh wait. Impossible to prove something that is completely false.

110% made up. Not even speculative. Just completely fabricated to suit your argument.

Take a hike, like you said you were a week ago.

[anon24854118]

Convenience features were already in place and then continued upon with lfr in cata followed by pandas and then finally boosts in WOD which was the equivalent of a wow heart attack. Ty, next

[anon24854118]

Its no where near its peak. It was dying, but classic came to save the day for a moment. Too bad its goin down the same path. Future deaths x2

[anon24854118]

Im sorry you cant read a graph and comprehend information. Id tell you to take a hike, but you probably need adult supervision, and I dont want you to be at risk.

[Xane-faerlina]

@anon24854118

Convenience features were already in place and then continued upon with lfr in cata followed by pandas and then finally boosts in WOD which was the equivalent of a wow heart attack. Ty, next

Correlation does not mean causation.

Vanilla and TBC had growth because more new people were joining than old people quitting.
WotLK plateud because either A) the rate of new people joining and old people leaving were roughly equal, or B) No new people were joining and the old players were happy with the state of the game
Cataclysm declined because more old people were quitting than new people joining

Did some quit because of the cash shop? I wouldn’t doubt it, but you can’t say definitively “muh cash shop killed the game”. Their reasons for doing so are pure speculation.

I personally got burn out mid Wrath and quit, came back to try Cataclysm and didn’t really have something to keep me playing so quit again. Didn’t feel the need to try MoP or WoD so didn’t try WoW again until Legion. The cash shop had nothing to do with my decisions then.

[anon24854118]

The actual data would disagree with you. You can have your opinion, but its wrong. The objective fact of the sub graph speaks for itself along with the corresponding features during those time periods. The beginning of convenience features, LFG and heirlooms, resulted in stagnation. The continued addition of such features, LFR, resulted in a decline. Ridiculous pandas and a form of a boost, further decline. Then the actual boosts come out in wod along with an isolated garrison, and what do you get? Destruction of sub numbers. Sorry but you’re wrong. The facts speak for themselves.

[anon24854118]

You’re right about correlation not equaling causation, but when players tell you they quit because of such correlations, then you now know the causations.

[Blackheart-myzrael]

Only for those players.

[anon24854118]

True, but that’s a lot of players