WoW this, WoW that: Why are FFXIV forum users so obsessed with WoW refugees?

[Vahlnir]

No, WoW's number were cooked, just like FF14's.

Years ago WoW's 12 million sub number was actually legit during Wrath of the Lich King. It started going down with the next expansion, Cataclysm. In Mists of Pandaria it was back and forth for the most part but there was still a slight decline overall. They reported sub numbers up until mid Warlords of Draenor (the expansion after Mists of Pandaria) which actually started with 10 million subs...but then it got so bad (losing half the player base in 6 months bad) that they chose not to report them ever again.

[Kaedan]

Years ago WoW's 12 million sub number was actually legit during Wrath of the Lich King. It started going down with the next expansion, Cataclysm. In Mists of Pandaria it was back and forth for the most part but there was still a slight decline overall. They reported sub numbers up until mid Warlords of Draenor (the expansion after Mists of Pandaria) which actually started with 10 million subs...but then it got so bad (losing half the player base in 6 months bad) that they chose not to report them ever again.

No, it was not legit. The number they gave was NOT active subs, even though they wanted you to believe it was.

Also, Blizzard was including China, which heavily skewed the numbers.

[Makeda]

No, it was not legit. The number they gave was NOT active subs, even though they wanted you to believe it was.

Also, Blizzard was including China, which heavily skewed the numbers.

This is true. If we include WoW-China, then we need to compare it against other Chinese MMOs, some of which had populations ov 20-30 million up until a maybe 2017 when... they got even bigger by switching to mobile...

If you do NOT include WoW-China... then it's maybe about the same size as Guild Wars 2... Almost surely smaller than even FFXIV NA/EU, and notably smaller than ESO.

That said, if you include FFXIV-JP, then I am not sure if you compare that against WoW-China or WoW-US/EU... because I'm not sure what servers WoW-JP players are grouped onto, if any. And not sure if players in China can access any form of FFXIV.

But WoW-US/EU is only a small fraction of WoW's numbers.
- So while WoW players leaving WoW for here would give this place a big boost, it's probably not as much of a boost as my post right above this one hinted at.

[Doljax]

No, it was not legit. The number they gave was NOT active subs, even though they wanted you to believe it was.

The press release disagrees with you.

From https://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...1007005648/en:

IRVINE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. announced today that the subscriber base for World of Warcraft®, its award-winning massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG), now exceeds 12 million players worldwide.

Fairly hard to argue that the 'subscriber base' isn't active users, especially since they specifically exclude people who wouldn't, by any reasonable definition, be active subscribers. From the same link, emphasis mine:

World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards. Subscribers in licensees’ territories are defined along the same rules.

Also, Blizzard was including China, which heavily skewed the numbers.

Irrelevant. Merely having a different sub model doesn't mean they didn't have a uniquely identifiable account, which was individually paid for. Hence, they were still subscribers.

[Kaedan]

The press release disagrees with you.

O_O Seriously. If you think that's evidence, I have a bridge to sell you. A company can claim whatever they want, but it has never been corroborated.

And umm... did you look at what you bolded? Like really read it? Cause if you did, you would know that their definition of "subscribers" includes non-active subs...







Irrelevant. Merely having a different sub model doesn't mean they didn't have a uniquely identifiable account, which was individually paid for. Hence, they were still subscribers.[/QUOTE]

[Doljax]

O_O Seriously. If you think that's evidence, I have a bridge to sell you. A company can claim whatever they want, but it has never been corroborated.

They can. The difference is, they have more evidence they had 12m than you have that they did not. In fact, I even went to their Q4 2010 earnings report, where they reiterate that claim. Since an earnings call has actual legal requirements regarding veracity, I think it's safe to say they had 12 million subscribers.

And umm... did you look at what you bolded? Like really read it? Cause if you did, you would know that their definition of "subscribers" includes non-active subs...

I did. I paid particular attention to the keyword "exclude", and the phrase "expired or cancelled subscriptions". Which is clearly, unequivocally saying that non-active subs are not included in the sub count.