Blizzard to introduce auction houses in diablo 3

i dont understand u pc gamers sometimes . ,maybe its just me ,but if ubisoft or SOE implanted the same thing in their games u would be raging at them ,but no not when its blizzard u guys for some reason defend a corporation till the very end. blizzard dosent think the same about u . they treat u like criminals with using consistent internet connections to verfy ur game. im not saying blizzard is a bad developer i played warcraft 3 more tyhan all my other games combined. wat blizz iss doin with diablo 3 is a cash grab. when they seee the auction house working so good in it what do u think is goin to happen to wow and the rest of their gamesl. they are also gonna get auction houses. hell the fun of diablo bak in the day was killing stufff like in the cow lvl and finding items . why would u play diablo if ur buying itemes with real money that destroys the game

sinpkr

Ubisoft implemented the always online only as a form of DRM. There is virtually NOTHING in their game that *requires* an internet connection.

Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 are all about the multiplayer experience. Anyone who is into Blizzard games would never find himself playing Starcraft 2 offline unless he ran into connection troubles.

It's not a double standard.

They are trying to eradicate the black market by giving in-game currency a de facto value - the auction house will work with BOTH IN-GAME CURRENCY AND RL MONEY. The incentive to use €/$s to buy items will be completely nullified by the fact that you can simply work your way to the price with in-game currency.

What tells you you can't avoid this altogether? All of those items are DROPPED BY THE PLAYERS, and that includes YOU. What tells you there won't be an unwritten currency like the runes with Diablo 2?

All of this is assuming they actually put the system in place. Again, they had to do a similar thing with Starcraft 2 maps, and they didn't even do that with THEIR OWN maps.

Also, I don't get the "players willing to spend RL money will get ahead of you". Would anyone mind explaining the reasoning behind this? It makes no sense at all.

This is so incredibly stupid. Who would pay real money for items in a game you've already bought?

This is so incredibly stupid. Who would pay real money for items in a game you've already bought?

JW-toch

People who can't read the article ;)

Look, it's not a company's fault that they do the things they do.

Someone didn't just wake up one morning and say "Charge for DLC!" and now everything is like that. Someone had the idea to test the water with what would happen....some people took the bait and paid for DLC. It wasn't a huge success, but anything made from the test goes to show people (some sort of percentage) was willing to pay for this.

So things slowly started to build up. People would buy a game, play the game and some minor updates/downloads were created that added to the game. Then a bigger, more anticipated download was dangled out there and was offered for a small fee - some people outraged, others accepted it. So, now those willing to pay a small extra fee get more content with the game while those that won't pay, don't. It's pretty simple.

The game is already made. It doesn't take a large group of people to create DLC, the cost to do so is minimal and the companies are recouping their costs - otherwise you wouldn't see DLC being associated with fees.

Now a compnay has 2 ways to make revenue off their game. The initial sale of the game, then the DLC they charge you for.

The same thing happened with Collector Edition games. The company offers some kind of "incentive" to buy the CE and charge you more for something that doesn't really cost them anything more. Extra income on their games now. This also took off. It's a very big thing now, look at the new Star Wars MMO - $60 for the basic copy of the game....a copy of the CE rakes in over 2x the original copy. Cha-ching! They're in the money.... Just to show how popular the CE was, EA had to put out a notice of the limited availability and that you may not get one.

Consumers only have themselves to blame for this trend. We fueled it, now we're starting to regret it.

I personally don't buy any DLC or CEs. Only time I've bought a CE of a game was when I found it on sale for $5, months and months after the game was released. I was going to buy the game (Prey) anyways, the CE just happen to be priced to move.

If you don't like the idea of the "pay to use" extra features, then don't pay. That's what I do. Do I think they feel the hurt of 1 person not buying their DLC or CE? No. But that's the only way I know how to fight it.

"As of now Blizzard has no plans to separate players online between those using the in-game currency Auction House and those actively utilizing real-money transactions."

My concern with this is depending on how popular the real-life-currency AH becomes, this could cause a lot of items(especially rare) to completely bypass the ingame-currency AH. I mean honestly why would anyone want to sell their rare items in the in-game currency AH when they have a chance to make some real money?

"As of now Blizzard has no plans to separate players online between those using the in-game currency Auction House and those actively utilizing real-money transactions."

My concern with this is depending on how popular the real-life-currency AH becomes, this could cause a lot of items(especially rare) to completely bypass the ingame-currency AH. I mean honestly why would anyone want to sell their rare items in the in-game currency AH when they have a chance to make some real money?

THGarrett

Because they could get a lot of in-game money to massively improve a dozen characters and keep playing.

[QUOTE="sinpkr"]

i dont understand u pc gamers sometimes . ,maybe its just me ,but if ubisoft or SOE implanted the same thing in their games u would be raging at them ,but no not when its blizzard u guys for some reason defend a corporation till the very end. blizzard dosent think the same about u . they treat u like criminals with using consistent internet connections to verfy ur game. im not saying blizzard is a bad developer i played warcraft 3 more tyhan all my other games combined. wat blizz iss doin with diablo 3 is a cash grab. when they seee the auction house working so good in it what do u think is goin to happen to wow and the rest of their gamesl. they are also gonna get auction houses. hell the fun of diablo bak in the day was killing stufff like in the cow lvl and finding items . why would u play diablo if ur buying itemes with real money that destroys the game

Mazoch

I agree, there tend to be a massive double standard. Not jsut when it comes to Blizzard and Ubisoft. But it extents to most aspects of the industry. What would be a mortal sin if commited by BioWare would not be a big deal if it was done by CD Project. What would be a crime if done by EA / Activision would be just fine if it was done Valve.

........... Ok there is different.. Peopel piss and moan about online connections FOR SINGLEPLAYER GAMES.. Diablo 3 is going the Guild Wars route.. They are not the same. To me it seems like people are having false preconceptions of a game they knew little about.. And STEAM gets TONS of crap by people so I have no idea what your talking about.. My problem is when SINGLEPLAYER games force online connections.. Diablo 3 is completely a multiplayer experience.. For me to complaina bout that, I would have to complaina bout every MMO and games like Guild Wars out there for not cattering to me for singleplayer support with no onlien conneciton..

[QUOTE="Mazoch"]

[QUOTE="sinpkr"]

i dont understand u pc gamers sometimes . ,maybe its just me ,but if ubisoft or SOE implanted the same thing in their games u would be raging at them ,but no not when its blizzard u guys for some reason defend a corporation till the very end. blizzard dosent think the same about u . they treat u like criminals with using consistent internet connections to verfy ur game. im not saying blizzard is a bad developer i played warcraft 3 more tyhan all my other games combined. wat blizz iss doin with diablo 3 is a cash grab. when they seee the auction house working so good in it what do u think is goin to happen to wow and the rest of their gamesl. they are also gonna get auction houses. hell the fun of diablo bak in the day was killing stufff like in the cow lvl and finding items . why would u play diablo if ur buying itemes with real money that destroys the game

sSubZerOo

I agree, there tend to be a massive double standard. Not jsut when it comes to Blizzard and Ubisoft. But it extents to most aspects of the industry. What would be a mortal sin if commited by BioWare would not be a big deal if it was done by CD Project. What would be a crime if done by EA / Activision would be just fine if it was done Valve.

........... Ok there is different.. Peopel piss and moan about online connections FOR SINGLEPLAYER GAMES.. Diablo 3 is going the Guild Wars route.. They are not the same. To me it seems like people are having false preconceptions of a game they knew little about.. And STEAM gets TONS of crap by people so I have no idea what your talking about.. My problem is when SINGLEPLAYER games force online connections.. Diablo 3 is completely a multiplayer experience.. For me to complaina bout that, I would have to complaina bout every MMO and games like Guild Wars out there for not cattering to me for singleplayer support with no onlien conneciton..

Both SC2 and D3 have single player components. While I'm sure that the multiplayer component is the major draw for a lot of people that doesn't mean that there's not a lot of people who play them for their single player components.

No one should be surprised by this, blizzard is greedy, we've known this ever since they decided to chop starcraft 2 into three standalone games....I can't wait to see the 60$ pricetag on heart of the swarm...lol!

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

Good luck with that. You're confused about WoW and Diablo natures. You're thinking about Diablo as if the game must adapt to the WoW concepts, and that simply will not work. Diablo isn't a game about dps/tank/healer, and certainly isn't a game about gold farming and buying cellestial steeds.

Anyway, the game just will not afford the success of Diablo II, and of course the gold economy model is doomed from the very begining.

XaosII

I never said anything about WoW and Diablo's gameplay designs. Im speaking of their economies. They arent so different. Or rather, Blizzard is likely trying to make it much closer to WoW's economy with additional safeguards, because WoW's econmy works. Diablo 2's eceonmy is broken. Theres no reason for Blizzard to stick with Diablo 2's implementation.

Why would the gold economy "be doomed from the very beginning".... Its how any and every successful digital economy has worked.

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Ondoval

What? Where did you get this from?

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Ondoval

With that logic, no one would ever stay in an MMO for longer than a year.

Im pretty sure you're predictions are going to end up being dead wrong. If anything, a real money trading AH wil only prolong the game.

I think youre idolizing the game design and economic models of Diablo 2. The game has some serious design flaws and an absolutely broken economy. Just because its been around for a long time and its still has lots of players doesn't change anything of what i've said.

Can't wait to make some money to build a new pc lol

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Mazoch"]

I agree, there tend to be a massive double standard. Not jsut when it comes to Blizzard and Ubisoft. But it extents to most aspects of the industry. What would be a mortal sin if commited by BioWare would not be a big deal if it was done by CD Project. What would be a crime if done by EA / Activision would be just fine if it was done Valve.

Mazoch

........... Ok there is different.. Peopel piss and moan about online connections FOR SINGLEPLAYER GAMES.. Diablo 3 is going the Guild Wars route.. They are not the same. To me it seems like people are having false preconceptions of a game they knew little about.. And STEAM gets TONS of crap by people so I have no idea what your talking about.. My problem is when SINGLEPLAYER games force online connections.. Diablo 3 is completely a multiplayer experience.. For me to complaina bout that, I would have to complaina bout every MMO and games like Guild Wars out there for not cattering to me for singleplayer support with no onlien conneciton..

Both SC2 and D3 have single player components. While I'm sure that the multiplayer component is the major draw for a lot of people that doesn't mean that there's not a lot of people who play them for their single player components.

No it doesn't.. Diablo 3 is as multiplayer as WoW is.. WoW has plenty of solo content tha we can qualify as singleplayer.. Yet its wholly multiplayer..

[QUOTE="Mazoch"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

........... Ok there is different.. Peopel piss and moan about online connections FOR SINGLEPLAYER GAMES.. Diablo 3 is going the Guild Wars route.. They are not the same. To me it seems like people are having false preconceptions of a game they knew little about.. And STEAM gets TONS of crap by people so I have no idea what your talking about.. My problem is when SINGLEPLAYER games force online connections.. Diablo 3 is completely a multiplayer experience.. For me to complaina bout that, I would have to complaina bout every MMO and games like Guild Wars out there for not cattering to me for singleplayer support with no onlien conneciton..

sSubZerOo

Both SC2 and D3 have single player components. While I'm sure that the multiplayer component is the major draw for a lot of people that doesn't mean that there's not a lot of people who play them for their single player components.

No it doesn't.. Diablo 3 is as multiplayer as WoW is.. WoW has plenty of solo content tha we can qualify as singleplayer.. Yet its wholly multiplayer..

This is even more obvious for SC2, its single player campaign is just that, there's is no online component outside achievements, and yet it still requires an online connection. There is no significant difference between(for example) Silent Hunter had a multiplayer component; Splinter Cell Conviction had a strong online focus.

Blizzards 'always online' requirement for both SC2 and D3 is no more or less reasonable than Ubi's online always requirement for Splinter Cell Conviction or Silent Hunter 5.

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

XaosII

With that logic, no one would ever stay in an MMO for longer than a year.

Which is pretty much the truth for most of MMOs except EVE Online, and the reason behind a lot of them are turning from monthly fees to micropayments, a factual demosntartion of their inherent failure in the attempt to keep the interest of their purchasers.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Mazoch"]

Both SC2 and D3 have single player components. While I'm sure that the multiplayer component is the major draw for a lot of people that doesn't mean that there's not a lot of people who play them for their single player components.

Mazoch

No it doesn't.. Diablo 3 is as multiplayer as WoW is.. WoW has plenty of solo content tha we can qualify as singleplayer.. Yet its wholly multiplayer..

This is even more obvious for SC2, its single player campaign is just that, there's is no online component outside achievements, and yet it still requires an online connection. There is no significant difference between(for example) Silent Hunter had a multiplayer component; Splinter Cell Conviction had a strong online focus.

Blizzards 'always online' requirement for both SC2 and D3 is no more or less reasonable than Ubi's online always requirement for Splinter Cell Conviction or Silent Hunter 5.

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Mograine

What? Where did you get this from?

Why would you accept "virtual gold" for players in excahnge to the items you sell if can be sold for real money? And why you will focus your interest in playing if you can just buy top tier items with money? And why you will be interested into PvP modes if some people with better wallet bhas equiped themselvers which much better gear than the ones you've obtained in your poor grinding excursions?

MONEY! It will change everything (for worse).

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Mograine

What? Where did you get this from?

Why would you accept "virtual gold" for players in excahnge to the items you sell if can be sold for real money? And why you will focus your interest in playing if you can just buy top tier items with money? And why you will be interested into PvP modes if some people with better wallet bhas equiped themselvers which much better gear than the ones you've obtained in your poor grinding excursions?

MONEY! It will change everything (for worse).

Ondoval

You're kidding yourself if you believe any of this is true and you know it.

Just wait for the game to release and ask you friends who will buy the game how bad that will work.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Ondoval

What? Where did you get this from?

Why would you accept "virtual gold" for players in excahnge to the items you sell if can be sold for real money? And why you will focus your interest in playing if you can just buy top tier items with money? And why you will be interested into PvP modes if some people with better wallet bhas equiped themselvers which much better gear than the ones you've obtained in your poor grinding excursions?

MONEY! It will change everything (for worse).

because the virtual gold AH won't require 50000 different fees in order to get your money?

I don't mind it much. The way I see it, I might just occasionally sell an item here and there. Eventually, I might have built up enough money buy a really good item or I can just pocket the money in my bank account. Or maybe I buy one month of WoW to see how its going since I quit. Either way its mostly a benefit to my casual playing. As long as I'm smart about the items I sell, I should always make a tiny bit of money from each item. Because of the matchmaking system, I won't be pared with other players with amazing items. That means it won't just be me following the guy who bought all the best gear. The system will match me with other players around the same power level.

.. After reading the article this is a awesome idea.. Diablo 2 already had a sprawlign market of said thing.. This way I could make money from this while playing game by selling off items for real money.. Thats great.. Compared to what I dealt with in Diablo 2.. sSubZerOo

Yeah, to play for get fun is worse than to pay for win, seems now?

Honestly, I'm starting to think that some people would defend Blizzard even if they take the decision to charge a monthly fee for playin Diablo III or Starcraft II.

Hell, they disable the 8 players support in Diablo III (I was expecting an increase, not a chop), they turned the atribute point distribution into a auntomatic distribution (because adult people able to register to battlenet is unnable to take decisions, seems), the cut off runewords, cut off potions (almost entirely), they disabled LAN and off line single player play (despite this will not prevent people that pirated the sp experience to repeat it again) and now they throw this absurd real world monetization inte the titem trading system, a feature that no one outside WoW farmers could be interested in and people still defends any absurd chiice made by the company.

Well, everybody saluted Nintendo when they released 3DS at absurd price, but at the end they just get a spectacular flop... Blizzard is playing with fire here, and it will backfire soon.

Has there been any word on if there is going to be any actual currency sinks in D3 - outside of LOLrepair and gambling like D2 had? My initial reaction to hearing about the two auction house thing has me a bit wary, because gold in both D1 and D2 was so abundant that it didn't matter. I wouldn't even pick up gold in D2 most of the time because I had way more than I'd ever need. I fear if there is no legitimate gold sink in place that all the high end items will end up on the cash auction house, since the value of gold will be a joke after the game has been out for a few months.

I am interested to see how this turns out, but I hope that it is implemented properly.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="Ondoval"]

No, it will turn a 15 million units sold franchise into a 4-5 million units sold franchise that is leaved by the 80% of players just as 6 months after any big expansions due hardcore players already did everything and softcore players doesn't be longer interested in any about the game, which is what basically WoW is now.

Diablo II is still currently popular despite tha game is over 10 years old and despite it has no major changes since the 1.12 patch and no new content was added at all. None of those achievements will reached by Diablo III, due the gameplay design encourages people to trade in items for money instead of encouraging the people to play to raise their chances of obtain exotic items, whereas in 12 months you can do everything that is possible to do in WoW.

Ondoval

What? Where did you get this from?

Why would you accept "virtual gold" for players in excahnge to the items you sell if can be sold for real money? And why you will focus your interest in playing if you can just buy top tier items with money? And why you will be interested into PvP modes if some people with better wallet bhas equiped themselvers which much better gear than the ones you've obtained in your poor grinding excursions?

MONEY! It will change everything (for worse).

I will accept virtual gold to improve my other characters. It's a good deal to get rid of one uber item and get a number of very good for different characters.

I'll do this because I have will, something haters apparently lack.

I also won't give a **** about how someone else got their gear. I really don't care if my opponent is rockin' a good sword obtained after 15 hours of grind or if he spent two dollars on it. It's his enjoyment, not mine. I'm sad that you'll be constantly wondering if that guy bought or earned his items. I'm fully expecting obnoxious **** to call everybody a cheater ater losing a fight. You can't abuse the system due to transaction and level caps anyway.

This situation is the perfect example of why it's not good to announce games four years before launching them. If they said from the start they're turning it into Guild Wars, there would be no ****storm.

Meh, i don't see a problem. If some guy want to spend his money buying virtual items, i'd be happy to sell em to him.

DoomZaW

This is an absolutely terrible idea. For all sorts of reasons.

1] Imagine the conundrum of getting a really rare drop. Do you use it for yourself? Do you give it to your buddy who really wants it? Or do you sell it for $50? I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to have to make that decision every time I get a unique or a purple. I just want to play the game, not feel like I'm working a second job. Of course it's my choice, but I don't want to have to feel like a retard for not making the monetarily wise decision.

2] When Blizzard made its earliest games, they made money based on the quality of their games. That was it. Quality. That's not entirely true anymore. I've played Free-To-Play MMOs and let me tell you something: it rarely works. What happens is that the company purposefully creates false "needs" and then sells a product to fulfill that need. It's garbage and this creation of false "needs" invariably lowers the quality of gameplay experience.

Blizzard now has a capacity to create said "needs." They could make a quest that -requires- a certain rare item and then make bank off its sales. They could make a certain PvP item be very powerful and very rare and again make bank off its sales. Hell, why would Blizzard not just magically create rare items and sell them on the auction house?

As some of you are so fond of saying, they are a business whose goal is profit. You better believe that they will do all of these things and more, as much as they can get away with.

3] From an economic standpoint, this is quite interesting actually. Blizzard will be creating an artificial rarity, much as the De Beers diamond cartel does. Blizzard will control the supply, the way in which that product is spent/used, and the market for trading that product. I don't know it's going to play out, but... I just can't imagine that it will turn out well.

4] I foresee balance problems with this. How can they really feel free to make changes when they've been profiting from the sale of certain items? To some degree this is connected with #2. This move creates a massive internal conflict of interest between a long-term fair balance and short-term flavor of the week skewed balances (which will encourage greater trading and therefore greater fees for Blizzard).

--

I find it a little amusing that people say, "Well there was already item/gold selling going on, in the black market! Now it's just legitimate, and they get a fair slice." Well, yeah there was a market but IT WAS A HASSLE. I never sold items because it wasn't worth it, and so I just didn't worry about it. Yeah, the occasional player would become uber by buying items, but he was rare. Now it's legitimate. Everything will be so much more accelerated. And now the market and the supplier are one and the same. Such a bad idea.

I fully concede I may be unnecessarily doom and gloom. But I doubt it. Unless this game gets phenomenal reviews, they will have lost my $50 (or $60, heh) and likely some additional box-sales from my community of friends, who were intending to all play together but will probably not.

I like this idea.

I really like this post on Terrariaonline forum by Vaxter

As people have realized time and again, myself included, 'Video Games'(, at least the so called 'AAA Titles' by 'multi (b)million dollar companies') no longer need to stand their own. What do I mean by that? Simple:

- Copies. Most of the 'AAA Titles' are cover based war shooters. There's thousands of them, just look at the best selling one, copy it, upgrade the graphics and add a few guns and maps.
- Publicity. If your company has enough money to feed an entire city for weeks, chances are a little advertising won't hurt, because no matter how bad your game is, it's gonna make people buy it. That, and the fact that a lot of new releases are simply sequels, most of them poorly executed and simply, well, look above.
- Hype. If you're popular, or at least known for doing things that are publicly considered "awesome", chances are that people will get excited when you announce you're going to do it again, or more often. In this scenario it's making games. No matter the quality of your content, there's always going to be some amount of people who fall for it. As a very disappointing example, take a look at Duke Nukem Forever.
- Ignorance. Most 'multi million dollar companies' either completely ignore the community, or don't pay enough attention to it, because they don't have to. All the above points are still going to earn your company more money than the development costs, assuming you don't screw up big time. Which pretty much leads us to the last point:
- Money. It's become so easy to make money off of video games, that you don't even have to try anymore. If you make a sequel to a popular game and overmarket it like crazy, it will cause hype and you don't have to worry about what your community wants. It pretty much doesn't matter what you do anymore, you still get the green.

If you want an example for any and all of the above, simply head over to Activision and look at anything that isn't Blizzard related.

This is pretty much why indie games are often times much better and much cheaper than 'AAA Titles'. If you copy something, you'll be called a rip-off. All the publicity you get is word of mouth or bigger companies supporting you. Hype is not going to build unless it's, for example a really well made and deserving sequel or remake (The Sonic remake for example). If you ignore your community, people aren't going to care much, and chances are you'll be missing a lot of good ideas, making the game worse, and lastly; your budget is finite, nonexistent or irrelevant: You have to make do with as little money as you have, or you don't even care about sales in the first place and only want to create a fun game.

[QUOTE="sinpkr"]

[QUOTE="Raxzor"]

This is why Blizzard have gone from my fav dev to my most hated and why I have quit WoW and will never buy another Blizzard game. They are greedy, plain and simple!

yellonet

this

Agreed. Things like this does not belong in games at all.

I really like this post on Terrariaonline forum by Vaxter

Seto_Akari

How does that belong here?

I love this.

People bought stuff in Diablo II (from 3rd party sites) as well as almost every other online and MMO RPG that has come out in the last 10 years. This just made it something official that actually will generate some money for Blizzard. If you don't want to buy an item with cash then don't and it costs you nothing. If you want to use gold then do that... or don't... again, you are not forced to do so. I am sure most the the money Blizzard makes on this will go to the servers of the AH, the rest will go towards the games expansions.

Guys, seriously, think about things before going mad on forums.

I love this.

People bought stuff in Diablo II (from 3rd party sites) as well as almost every other online and MMO RPG that has come out in the last 10 years. This just made it something official that actually will generate some money for Blizzard. If you don't want to buy an item with cash then don't and it costs you nothing. If you want to use gold then do that... or don't... again, you are not forced to do so. I am sure most the the money Blizzard makes on this will go to the servers of the AH, the rest will go towards the games expansions.

Guys, seriously, think about things before going mad on forums.

arto1223

My only concern is about leaking credit details and hacked accounts. Incorporating real money with AH is just bad. How do you think people are going to buy stuff online? Cash? Top secret research facility computers, defense computers are hacked, don't tell me Blizzard has capacity to combat hackers from all over the world. Not to mention gold farmers like there are in WoW. I'll still buy the game, though I won't be using AH. harshv82

Features of Diablo 3....

This is basically paying to be better. Sure you could use 3rd party sites for Diablo 2, but Blizzard wasn't sponsoring it. Now Blizzard is making sure that if people want to pay to be better, that they are getting some money off of it. It is a lame more on Blizzard's part. I consider buying better items with real money to be cheating.SF_KiLLaMaN

This is *not* basically paying to be better.

You CAN get those items yourself just like the seller got them.

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"]This is basically paying to be better. Sure you could use 3rd party sites for Diablo 2, but Blizzard wasn't sponsoring it. Now Blizzard is making sure that if people want to pay to be better, that they are getting some money off of it. It is a lame more on Blizzard's part. I consider buying better items with real money to be cheating.Mograine

This is *not* basically paying to be better.

You CAN get those items yourself just like the seller got them.

If it's not pay 2 win, then what is it? People who don't take out their wallets will have a much harder time competing to be on equal standing with those who do.

That's the very definition of a 'pay 2 win' model.

If it's not pay 2 win, then what is it? People who don't take out their wallets will have a much harder time competing to be on equal standing with those who do.

That's the very definition of a 'pay 2 win' model.

SkyWard20

Again, you can get those items yourself. Somebody buying them off the AH means somebody else is *NOT* getting to use them.

Pay to win implies you get an unfair advantage over those who *don't* pay. What if they implement a match-making system based on gear and make difficulty scaling based on gear too rather than just player count? How is that pay to win?

Also, what's up with people completely forgetting that there's a in-game currency AH too?

[QUOTE="SkyWard20"]

If it's not pay 2 win, then what is it? People who don't take out their wallets will have a much harder time competing to be on equal standing with those who do.

That's the very definition of a 'pay 2 win' model.

Mograine

Again, you can get those items yourself. Somebody buying them off the AH means somebody else is *NOT* getting to use them.

Pay to win implies you get an unfair advantage over those who *don't* pay. What if they implement a match-making system based on gear and make difficulty scaling based on gear too rather than just player count? How is that pay to win?

Also, what's up with people completely forgetting that there's a in-game currency AH too?

The inherent competitive divisiveness of using a real world currency shop for in-game items is clear: you get first and foremost access to items that would normally be very difficult to obtain otherwise, possibly requiring days/weeks of playing for normal users, while improving additional characters through the same system becomes a breeze for people willing to go the extra step; generally, as a paying customer, you'll always be one step ahead and ten times as faster and more likely to get the best equipment than the majority of the dedicated 'free 2 play' crowd ( if you're at least moderately dedicated yourself ) -- again, it's the very definition of a pay 2 win model; even if a few from the hardcore crowd will manage to keep up, you're still going to have to work harder to compete than those with real word money; it doesn't have to mean that you're not going to be able to keep up at all.

Bringing up the ( vanilla ) video game currency-based trading system is a non-argument. You're never going to find the same selection of items being sold in gold when there's a market for them in real-world currency. Basic vidya game economy 101.

Oh, God. I just known that Diablo III has no longer skill points: every skill has only 1 level and they are unlocked when your character reaches the proper level. Then you can select 6 active skills and 6 passive skills to be running in the 9 slots. You can change those abilities, and that's all.

So, Blizzard Ripped off the 8 player support, the LAN and off line support, the runes (as they were in the past), the runewords, the free distribution of atribute points and now even the skill points! Is just insane! Is just like a kindergarten version of Diablo! Blizzard went crazy...

...you get first and foremost access to items that would normally be very difficult to obtain otherwise, possibly requiring days/weeks of playing for normal users...

SkyWard20

I'd say that it's even more drastic than that. Diablo's randomised stat system could mean that players might never see those particular items anywhere else.

The inherent competitive divisiveness of using a real world currency shop for in-game items is clear: you get first and foremost access to items that would normally be very difficult to obtain otherwise, possibly requiring days/weeks of playing for normal users, while improving additional characters through the same system becomes a breeze for people willing to go the extra step; generally, as a paying customer, you'll always be one step ahead and ten times as faster and more likely to get the best equipment than the majority of the dedicated 'free 2 play' crowd ( if you're at least moderately dedicated yourself ) -- again, it's the very definition of a pay 2 win model; even if a few from the hardcore crowd will manage to keep up, you're still going to have to work harder to compete than those with real word money; it doesn't have to mean that you're not going to be able to keep up at all.

Bringing up the ( vanilla ) video game currency-based trading system is a non-argument. You're never going to find the same selection of items being sold in gold when there's a market for them in real-world currency. Basic vidya game economy 101.

SkyWard20

All I read here is that you completely lack a gaming ethic and just assume everyone is willing to shell out cash as if it grows on trees. "Assume" being the keyword.