What was the point in “removing” TBC when Wotlk launched? Why not leave TBC era running alongside Classic era and Wotlk era? It sucks having to choose between Classic or Wotlk when TBC was right there.
Please consider adding TBC era option in the launcher for people who love this part of WoW.
I think they may of done it due to the worry of wotlk, TBC, classic, retail ending up with less population, or servers due to players being spread everywhere. They fear it makes the game look less popular maybe. They’re well aware of gamer’s suspicion being aroused and calling a game to be “dieing” and this spreading etc.
They have the accurate player statistics, we don’t. So this could be what they see and fear.
I wouldn’t know. I mean, one of the reasons I restarted some time ago on Classic ERA, only to drop after lvl 15 or so, is because I started remembering what raiding in Classic was like - as in, it utterly sucked. Which is a shame because the leveling experience was way better than in WotLK IMO - crafting professions actually matter, the world is actually dangerous, etc. These kinda things may be unenjoyable in a progressing environment where you mostly just want to put leveling behind so you can move on to the seasonal endgame. But in an Era setting where you can enjoy things at your pace, it makes for a much better experience to me.
I found TBC like the happiest medium, in a way. The leveling experience still feels very Classic-like, with few to no real changes to it up until the very late levels. But the raiding experience feels a lot less painful than in Classic - smaller raids, more reasonable lootdrops, cheaper consumables, no world buffs, more viable specs, and overall better raids (I’d say, even to this day, that SWP was the best raid I’ve played in Classic so far - and I doubt ICC/RS are going to change my mind).
In short, I didn’t particularly like TBC as a progressive experience (in fact, I found the experience to be pretty poor at least until T6 released), but as an Era experience I find it’d work pretty well PvE-wise.
It’s not about ‘better’, which is subjective anyway.
I much prefer Outland over Northrend, I much prefer the gearing in TBC over Wrath, which jumbled all casters together. I much prefer the raid and dungeons from TBC over those in Wrath.
Only thing Wrath did better is the overarcing story and it’s culmination. From the moment we stepped off the boat we all knew wrath would end at the top of ICC. In contrast stepping through the Dark Portal, while extremely epic, felt like stepping into the unknown.
Tbh at least for me…TBC is the closest thing to vanilla and id love to play TBC Era. As for “Blizzard are afraid to spread the players” concerns… at this point if a player does not like retail and does not like wotlk like myself ,but already playing ERA for many years … what would be better, to release TBC Era or to lose subs ? Id take 5 mil players spread over 3 - 4 expansions than 4 mil players and 2 expansions. It does not matter how spread players are as long as subscription count cover the expenses on each separate project . If TBC ERA can have as much players to cover the costs of running it and making them money on top , its a good business! If every expansion maintained by Blizzard can self sustain and make them money is always the better thing to do than to refuse and lose on sub counts . Until they release such TBC Era they would never know if it will be successful or not. So they can just go with 1 TBC cycle and if it is still alive at the end they can choose to support it as ERA. Now this model will only work if every expansion have its own subscription , yes it wont be good from players POV ,but it will gouge the self sustain and will give best picture of what the players like the most without the fear of poaching players from different expansions due to combined subscription model. If i want to play TBC the most i will just play and pay exactly that. If i so much want to play 2 different expansions i will pay for 2 . No other way boys from business point of view , u cant ask them to maintain 300 expansions when the payout is a single subscription for all of them ,but the cost of maintaining and servers increases a lot.
Most definitely i will pay for vanilla refresh cycle per 3-4 years subscription and another for TBC ERA 3-4 years cycle. If the cycle is just 1-2 years … i will just play 1 at a time and will probably cycle them.
Just for example , if i dont get TBC fresh , i dont know how much more i will play cuz vanilla after 5 years can be really boring and i will not touch retail or wotlk for sure and most definitely wont even think about DUMB CATA. So in my case , its either lose sub or release fresh. If they dont want to run as many expansions they can rotate the fresh cycle. 1 vanilla cycle , 1 TBC cycle, 1 vanilla cycle , 1 TBC cycle so players wont burn from doing the same thing over and over like zombies.
Hmm I get what you’re saying but it would be much more ‘clean’ to just reset classic2019 every 6 years, at least in my opinion. That way the people running naxx in classic have a use for the gear when TBC opens up, for example.
Exactly. I would even be fine with just Vanilla ERA existing if they promise to reset classic all the way through to wrath every 5-6 years. While I miss TBC I’m 100% in agreement with those that say TBC era servers don’t have the same allure as the vanilla classic servers we already have.
A promise that we’ll go through all classic expansions again would bring far more players, though a reset now would be too soon imo.