It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I guess ultimatly boths haters and lovers of WoW can take something from the figures .
Remember they are an approximation still Blizzard states this themselves but lets for arguements sake assume they are correct .
For haters . Blizzard didnt't release day one figures for MoP and waited till they could put a possative spin on them . As industry analysts have pointed out this still points to a 30 percent decline overall since the release of cataclysm and WoW is expected to continue its slow downward trend in a few months time .
For Lovers . Its a vindication for Blizzard that MoP wasn't as badly recieved as some peolple had suspected . Its boosted subscriber numbers by a million and whos to say the downward trend will continue . Warcraft has bucked the tred many times before .
I still play WoW now and again but I wouldn't say I love it as much as I once did nor do I hate it .So i'll try and take the balanced view . I was there at the start of MoP for about a week untill my sub ran out . I havn't brough MoP ( i ll wait untill its on offer sometime in the future ) . What I saw was a boost in players but when I compare the number of high/full english speaking servers at release of MoP to Cata there were 15-18 compared to 35-40 . Which was quite a drop . There were a few locked servers and few more medium ones and a lot of low severs .
I have looked at the us realm status servers they appear to be doing a lot better than the EU ones so maybe being fair the bulk of the boost in subs come from them and not the EU ones .
My thoughts about the annoucement of the 2.7 is Blizzard choosing to use the word appoximately to describe the numbers when they were talking about Cataclysm were quite happy to use "over 3.3. million " and not approximately 3.3 million .
Maybe I'm getting cynical in my old age but when I hear a politician saying something is approximately this or that I tend to get the feeling hes putting a possative spin on something . You see approximations are evasive by thier nature they arn't exactly lies but theres a lot of room for maneuvre when you use the word .
Say a politican says theres approximately been a loss of 3 million dollar on something or another and it turns out to be 4 million . When hes questioned about this his answer will always be "it was only an approximation based on what sources gave us at the time " .
This makes me think Blizzard may have used analysts numbers from the likes of Brean, Murray, Carret and Co rather than data they have collected themselves .
Then again I could be wrong . Approximately is just a word after all . It could be a slip of the tounge . But then again the devil could be in the details .
Edit that title should read " prove something " .