Blizzard throw down real money auction house for Diablo 3

Arbalest

Arbalest

黒い剣士
Moderator
Now, Diablo 3 is probably one of the most anticipated games for many people, so you'd think the first thing Blizzard would do is make the game get released without any stupid things here or there. So, what do they do? They decide to throw down three things which haven't gone down well with....anyone so far.

1) The game requires a constant internet connection. It cannot be played offline.
2) Mods are “expressly prohibited.”
3) Items in the auction house are bought and sold for real-life money.
Click to expand...

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08 ... sh-trades/ - for more thoughts on it.

The article pretty much sums up everything i want to say on it, really. But i still feel that real-life money auction houses for in game items is the most stupid thing ever thought off, period.
 
Unless they rectify this immediately, I know who's NOT geting my money, **** this I'll just get Torchlight 2 instead

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/78O7ON7V1Ik?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/78O7ON7V1Ik?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="349" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
 
I have no problem with this. if your going buy items you might awell do it in-game and no mods is a no brainer if you look back too diablo 2.
 
thats true and not being able to play offline is naturaly going turn people away from buying the game. so people do have the right to be pissed off, i just dont think it will effect most of us.
 
Given how keen they always seem on eSports, mods are a bit of a contradiction. I personally prefer games without them.

It's a shame they couldn't beat RMT so, like several other game publishers, decided to legitimise it instead. It sort of ruins the sense of achievement for me (I could see myself selling things though, in a world where I had enough free time to actually realistically play Diablo 3).

R
 
A world where everyone is constantly under suspicion and surveillance to make sure they aren't cheating, stealing or otherwise doing anything which might deviate from the grand plan of their irreproachable overlords? A world run by people who are out to make themselves rich and deny everybody else their freedoms while they're at it?

Who needs Diablo 3? I live in that world already.
 
Rui said:
Given how keen they always seem on eSports, mods are a bit of a contradiction. I personally prefer games without them.

It's a shame they couldn't beat RMT so, like several other game publishers, decided to legitimise it instead. It sort of ruins the sense of achievement for me (I could see myself selling things though, in a world where I had enough free time to actually realistically play Diablo 3).

R
Click to expand...
I don't think eSports Tournies allow mods anyway, but that doesn't mean that average joes like us should have the option of having mods taken away from us
 
Is it "online multiplayer" or is it a permanent online presence, i.e. being logged into ArenaNet or whatever it is that Blizzard run? If its the latter, I really do not see what the problem is to be honest, most of us are online all of the time when sat our computers anyway.

The "real money auction house" is a little odd, but its really just a method to try and prevent the ebay culture that sprung up around WoW in my opinion.

However, the lack of mods for a PC game is a huge oversight, and I'm surprised at Blizzard in that respect, always got the impression they were very much like Valve and valued their fanbase, evidently that seems to have been the wrong impression since they merged with Activision though.
 
"Most of us" "most of the time" etc etc etc. The very fact that you can't say everyone and all of the time is enough to highlight the problem. In fact, when Ubisoft brought this in for AssAss on the PC, no less of a judge than Jeff Gerstmann suggested that maybe Ubi should just stop bothering with PC games altogether if this was the way that fear of piracy was affecting them!

The other two items on the list are far, far more disappointing, though.
 
ilmaestro said:
"Most of us" "most of the time" etc etc etc. The very fact that you can't say everyone and all of the time is enough to highlight the problem.
Click to expand...

I find games that try to please everyone end up pleasing no one.
 
Wakey said:
ilmaestro said:
"Most of us" "most of the time" etc etc etc. The very fact that you can't say everyone and all of the time is enough to highlight the problem.
Click to expand...
I find games that try to please everyone end up pleasing no one.
Click to expand...
How is any of what has been announced here attempting to please anyone!?
 
Wakey said:
ilmaestro said:
"Most of us" "most of the time" etc etc etc. The very fact that you can't say everyone and all of the time is enough to highlight the problem.
Click to expand...

I find games that try to please everyone end up pleasing no one.
Click to expand...
I find that you've missed the point.
 
Whilst I agree the option to play offline being omitted is a huge oversight on Blizzards, but its not a huge problem for the core demographic of PC gamers really is it?

Really, I imagine the vast majority of PC gamers are permanently connected to the internet the moment they switch the computer on, Blizzard aren't stupid, they don't appear to force strict anti-piracy measures upon their communities that ultimately detract from sales, in short, they aren't Ubisoft. Admittedly they are connected to Activision, but when the very people who complain about a lack of dedicated server support in Call of Duty then go and buy the game anyway, we're hardly discussing a consumer base (that being gamers) who vote with their wallets. Which is really the only real way to get your opinion heard, don't like design choices with a product and feel strongly enough about it for it to actually annoy you, don't buy the product.
 
RivaOni said:
in short, they aren't Ubisoft.
Click to expand...
Well, like I said, Ubi were pretty close to being the first people to bring this in, and got slaughtered for it.

I also imagine that most people have their PCs hooked up to the internet. But "best case scenarios" are not really how I evaluate corporate decisions that are actually centered around "must treat all customers like pirates".
 
Back
Top