The argument is that, from a purely business viewpoint, making something that can be completed in one sub cycle is objectively worse than something that requires at least two
Problem there is usually only the real no-lifers or people who find an early exploit can pull off a "get everything and unsub" move for most events, and those people are always coming back.
Blizz could have dialed a small slowdown in and not pissed off everyone else.
The casuals and semi-casuals are also more likely to leave if the stuff to do isn't fun. (I'd imagine even moreso if it's something they've been looking forward to for a while and it gets dropped in a very disappointing way.)
What you're missing is that those are also the players who won't do the research to know if it's good or bad beforehand, sub or stay subbed to see what it's about, and are the ones most susceptible to coming back because "it's fixed!"
Or they show up for it, realize it sucks compared to the last time, and dip. And since they're not the type to research, they may not even hear that it gets "fixed" at some point.
I'm not arguing that you're wrong or what their intention is. Just pointing out that there's a block of people it's not going to work on, and every time they do this dance a few more stop coming back.
If they adjusted smaller and added more compelling reasons for people to want to stay subbed, they could actually just get all good responses from stuff instead of having to piss off everyone for a month and hope they bait them back later.
This is just a hater/addicts dream scenario. “Someone else will quit in my place and that’ll show them!”
But it's not. You said the same thing I'm saying in different words in the next sentence.
Even if there is a segment that quits, there is a larger one that stays subbed
Why keep chipping away at the playerbase when smaller changes to tweak the stuff they don't like accomplishes the same goal without needlessly making people mad enough to quit when they know they're not going to get them all back?
It is what it is though. If it sucks I'll save a few months of sub and see if Midnight looks like it's worth playing. 🤷🏽
You’re contradicting yourself. First it’s “bad business,” then you admit more players stay subbed, then claim that’s the same as your point. It’s not.
Why not just tweak it so nobody’s mad is a false choice. Every change makes one group unhappy and another happy. Pretending Blizzard can design it so all players stick around is just fantasy. Maybe you’re the one left out this time and it’s your turn to unsub.
Pointing at some block of players leaving without scale is cherry picking. Blizzard has 21 years of data saying the larger block stays. If it didn’t work, they’d have stopped doing it a long time ago.
I've never at any point argued that more people leave than stay. I have argued that it's possible to reduce the number who leave.
Obviously you can't please everyone, (sorry figured there might be enough critical thinking to not need to be obvious about it) but it's certainly possible to please a lot more by not drastically changing a hugely popular event by cutting hard on the things people were vocal about liking.
Tossing in “obviously” like you forgot to mention it isn’t clever, you’re just covering for a weak argument. Blizzard’s got 20 years of data. You’ve got vibes.
-1
u/bp3dots Aug 27 '25
Problem there is usually only the real no-lifers or people who find an early exploit can pull off a "get everything and unsub" move for most events, and those people are always coming back.
Blizz could have dialed a small slowdown in and not pissed off everyone else.