Diablo 3: Auction house to accept real cash

[greenhawk]

Also aren't they eliminating single player mode entirely?

My knowledge on that might be old, but IIRC it was anounced that single player needs to be logged into the servers ala starcraft2.

and your single character can do do anything and still get xp from it, so single or multi, your character grows.

 

[greenhawk]

At first though I'm really not a fan of this. Here are a couple of thoughts:

1) proberly not, but then all high end gear will be cash simply as a unwanted drop could give you access to other blizzard goods from their "store".

2) proberly will, but via a "listing" fee.

3) ever seen a action do that? at best they place "buy it now" prices and that is seller's choice.

 

[StinkyPinky]

So even in the fantasy world the rich get to have the best shit and control everything. Yay.

 

[crownjules]

Cool, so Diablo 3 is going Pay To Win. Also aren't they eliminating single player mode entirely?

Well at least now I can save some money and buy Torchlight 2 instead, which probably won't cost $60.

Well the pay to win part is only if choose to do so. It's not like you HAVE to spend money on a piece of gear to enjoy the game.

The offline SP is more egregious in my mind. Combine both these things with the whole splitting up SC2 into three separate games and my faith in Blizzard has been shaken. Kotick's slowly sinking his fangs further and further into the delicious cash cow that is Blizzard's loyal consumer base. SC2 I've had no problem going without since I didn't enjoy the first one. But Diablo 3 is going to be a struggle because I do love the series.

I will have to get by with Torchlight 2 and Grim Dark until D3 drops in price or they get rid of the always on DRM.

 

[StinkyPinky]

http://www.pathofexile.com/

And it is free?

 

[darkxshade]

One thing I forgot to ask is now that Blizzard has legalized cash transactions... is it still OK to sell on ebay? Or is it only legal under their rules?

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

To the people who think it's a zero-sum game, it's not zero-sum although to people not paying attention it'll certainly seem that way (something they're no doubt counting on). Every time you go through a transaction you're going to lose 10% (or whatever %) + potential auctioning fee. I think the funniest thing about this is they're basically using a f2p model, but they're going to get millions of people to cough up the money just for the privilege of paying them further.

 

[Generator]

If this was Koticks idea, he deserves a raise. Diablo would have this pervasive black market whether the players knew it or not. This is just Blizzard attempt to get in on some of that action by being the house of sorts.

More and more the virtual economy melds with the real economy. Its one thing to make 10 million dollars off a flying horse, but to make a whole game for those sort of consumers? Brilliant and revolutionary!

I wouldn't complain to much, the real market AH is what is going to subsidize your free play on Battle Net for the remainder of this game.

 

[BD2003]

If this was Koticks idea, he deserves a raise. Diablo would have this pervasive black market whether the players knew it or not. This is just Blizzard attempt to get in on some of that action by being the house of sorts.

More and more the virtual economy melds with the real economy. Its one thing to make 10 million dollars off a flying horse, but to make a whole game for those sort of consumers? Brilliant and revolutionary!

I wouldn't complain to much, the real market AH is what is going to subsidize your free play on Battle Net for the remainder of this game.

I would rather pay a subscription fee.

I couldn't care less if this was some random game. But I've been anticipating D3 for years, and it sucks that they're whoring it out so badly. I guess it's a sign of the times.

Next thing you know they're going to have loot drops and microtransactions in call of duty.

 

[Chiropteran]

I think the funniest thing about this is they're basically using a f2p model, but they're going to get millions of people to cough up the money just for the privilege of paying them further.

Except they aren't. A free to play model involves paying cash directly to blizzard, not to other players. The % fee is unknown at the moment. 10% as you suggest would be pretty absurd, I am thinking more like 2% or at worst 5%, I hope you are not right 😛

 

[greenhawk]

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. If the value of gold or items drops by much, it'll be a net loss to run a gold farming company.

you appear to forget that a lot of gold farmers are thirdworld employees, so $2 per day is proberly a weeks wage to someone.

If Blizzard enforces regional servers then that should limited that part of it somewhat, but then Australia was to be left out of the US back before starcraft 2 was released. It took something like a 11th hour save to allow it onto the US servers. If Blizzard either limited to country (expencive) or did not allow character's gear moving from one to another then most of the gold farming businesses would be removed from the day to day transactions, leaving, as susjected, 14 year olds setting the market.

 

[Jschmuck2]

If this was Koticks idea, he deserves a raise. Diablo would have this pervasive black market whether the players knew it or not. This is just Blizzard attempt to get in on some of that action by being the house of sorts.

More and more the virtual economy melds with the real economy. Its one thing to make 10 million dollars off a flying horse, but to make a whole game for those sort of consumers? Brilliant and revolutionary!

I wouldn't complain to much, the real market AH is what is going to subsidize your free play on Battle Net for the remainder of this game.

Truth.

 

[greenhawk]

I'll just throw this in here since it's the most active and current D3 thread.

Diablo 3 to require "always on" internet connection

given that is the "advantages" of being online, I can do without them for an offline mode.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Except they aren't. A free to play model involves paying cash directly to blizzard, not to other players. The % fee is unknown at the moment. 10% as you suggest would be pretty absurd, I am thinking more like 2% or at worst 5%, I hope you are not right 😛

Expect the unexpected in the % they skim, and they are paying cash directly to Blizzard. From a company that charged 25$ on a flying horse, you think they're going to go conservative in their skimming off the top?

Just because only part of it goes directly to them doesn't make a difference.

 

[greenhawk]

... but caused by my own preferences.

Bad Company 2 for instance. There's an off-line story mode,

it's short, but it's scripted, there's a story, and yeah, it


it's not as bad or worse than having to connect to your EA/BioWare Network account via in-game log-ins to be granted access to your extra content owned in those accounts.

am still going through the "realize that pure off-line gaming is starting to die" phase.

1) that is your preferences, but for me it was 99% offline. The "online" was co-op over lan at uni, and that was limited as the character was not interchangeable with offline.

2) I hardly call most of those offline modes a "game". It is more of a training session. Works out great for the marketers as they get to advertise a "training" session and a "offline mode" when advertising it.

might as well call mine sweeper a multipler game as you can talk to someone else playing the game in single player at the same time.

3) better, no.
worse, no.
wanted. NO.

4) only happens if it is allowed to. Just need to support games that do not do it more to be able to send a message that the developers actually notice.

 

[Glitchny]

Except they aren't. A free to play model involves paying cash directly to blizzard, not to other players. The % fee is unknown at the moment. 10% as you suggest would be pretty absurd, I am thinking more like 2% or at worst 5%, I hope you are not right 😛

they have already stated it wont be a % it is a flat fee

 

[xXFaNtAsMaXx]

Why does there have to be a thread for every game that does this? Talk to the devs if you've got a problem with it. Otherwise, play the game and quit bitching.

Fucking people complain about anything just to feel like they're part of a group, even if it's a group of bitchers.

 

[greenhawk]

as long as their are "servers"/releams where cash AH is not allowed (like the proposed hard core), but I can still come back from dieing, then I can "overlook" this path I find is potentually effecting my gaming experence.

 

[crownjules]

Why does there have to be a thread for every game that does this? Talk to the devs if you've got a problem with it. Otherwise, play the game and quit bitching.

Fucking people complain about anything just to feel like they're part of a group, even if it's a group of bitchers.

Sort of like how you're complaining about complaining? Discussion boards are for discussion.

 

[BD2003]

Why does there have to be a thread for every game that does this? Talk to the devs if you've got a problem with it. Otherwise, play the game and quit bitching.

Fucking people complain about anything just to feel like they're part of a group, even if it's a group of bitchers.

The same reason every thread has to have some douchebag that rolls in on a high horse and makes this same comment.

 

[greenhawk]

A non-cash non-hardcore mode would be a huge joke.

I do not see it as a joke. I would welcome it. Not because it would mean the blackmarket is still in place, but then most of the people would be "against" the cash AH so less people looking to buy their way through the game, but any item purchased would be far more expencive. If someone is inclined to pay $5 for a sword, having them pay $50 for the same sword on a no-cash server puts in place a method that should reduce the number of "cashed "people on the server (so in effect pushing away gold sellers).

I see a win win for such a server. Sure some hard core gold sellers will stick around due to the higher selling price, but their would be, perporsionally, far less willing to buy. They could be trying to sell fridges to eskimos for all I care at that point.

 

[greenhawk]

Only problem is that you have to work to get to the fun part.

+1, but the same people can be slow to realise that getting something easily makes it worth less, so in effect, getting to the fun part faster means less fun from it generally.

 

[BoberFett]

I was semi-interested in D3. This shitcans it for me. There are other game companies which will deserve my money far more than Actiblizzard.

 

[OCNewbie]

Why does there have to be a thread for every game that does this? Talk to the devs if you've got a problem with it. Otherwise, play the game and quit bitching.

Fucking people complain about anything just to feel like they're part of a group, even if it's a group of bitchers.

I think you should stick to lurking

 

[OCNewbie]

Getting a rare object used to be it's intrinsic reward on it's own. Now it has a dollar value attached. Dollars are real. The game isn't just a fantasy virtual world anymore when the stuff in it has real world value. It's not a cool set of armor when it's potentially money in your pocket. It taints the fun of playing the game to it's core. It's crossing a line that I don't want crossed.

I basically said this exact same thing earlier in the thread. I agree 100%