Quote:
Originally Posted by RecondoJoe
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It was and still is considered very accurate.
|
You're posting data that mirrors what used to be posted on mmogchart. Whatever site you pulled that graph off simply copied the old one. It was mostly compiled from companies' own public statements. That's why the EQ graph has that solitary (and ridiculous) spike in 2004--that was when Sony most radically re-defined what it counted as a subscriber. The "growth phase" and "stagnation era" numbers for EQ from 1999 into 2003 are usually regarded as more or less accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobart
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You get to have an opinion. You just don't get to decide for everyone else nor do you get to characterize what everyone else has decided. Actually you get to try, but you'll just be wrong.
|
In this case it benefits us as a community to accept a definition of "classic EQ" because it serves the benefit of communication. I'd rather talk about classic--which insofar as P1999 is concerned very much includes content through but not beyond Velious--than argue over definitions. Words need accepted meanings.
Danth