This just in...

[ninster]

Re: This just in...

Wow. Haven't been here in a long time but just had to read what folks had to say after the reveal for D3. Blizzard as an organization can do what it likes with the games it develops. I can also do what I like with respect to giving Blizzard money. I never played on b.net. Between the hacks, dupes, and wretched community (it's hard to pick the worst between b.net, wow, and xbox live) I never had the desire and really don't have it where real money could be involved.

I'm skipping D3. I also cancelled my wow sub (for plenty of other reasons but it does line up nicely). No, I won't buy it. I may get it as a holiday gift (people know I like the series) but I'm not just making noise. I'll grab Torchlight 2 and see how well GW2 and/or SWTOR do once released.

Why? I could write a nice wall of text and I'd love to do it on the official Blizzard forums if I thought it would matter but alas it does not matter. Nothing is going to change with respect to the RMAH, no SP, and dumbing down of the skill system. I'm just not Blizzard's target demographic anymore and that's ok. There are plenty of other game developers/publishers that do target my demographic.

 

[NatNit]

Re: This just in...

...I never played on b.net. Between the hacks, dupes, and wretched community...

There are good communities out there on bnet, you know. Granted, the majority of it is crap, but I played under the bastion of The Amazon Basin for a long time: they take a hard-line stance against hacks and dupes, and promote a safe, cooperative environment on bnet.

Further, there is nothing (short of the recurringly-mentioned connection issues) preventing the SPF from forming its own D3 online "guild" or "clan" - although I guess it would be pretty ironically named.

Essentially, I've never found any reason to play on bnet with cheaters, dupers, or spammers, but maybe I've been spoiled. I'm also a relatively social gamer, so perhaps having a trusted pool of coop buddies is not the norm.

(I still like single player for a ton of reasons, though, and will miss a lot of those features. It mostly revolves around having a pause button when RL gets in the way, and having complete ownership of my characters. /playersX doesn't hurt, either!)

 

[ninster]

Re: This just in...

There are good communities out there on bnet, you know. Granted, the majority of it is crap, but I played under the bastion of The Amazon Basin for a long time: they take a hard-line stance against hacks and dupes, and promote a safe, cooperative environment on bnet.

Good point and one I hoped someone would make as my experience on b.net was admittedly brief. I'm sure there are good places to find much like there are good guilds/servers in WoW. I guess I bristle at the notion that somehow Blizzard has good community and online gameplay figured out because of the success of WoW. Nearly every feature that people do love (and I do as well to be honest) also had a bad impact on the sense of community. LFD? 10/25 man sharing Raid locks? The only community most server's have going for them is trolls in Trade chat

Further, there is nothing (short of the recurringly-mentioned connection issues) preventing the SPF from forming its own D3 online "guild" or "clan" - although I guess it would be pretty ironically named.

Essentially, I've never found any reason to play on bnet with cheaters, dupers, or spammers, but maybe I've been spoiled. I'm also a relatively social gamer, so perhaps having a trusted pool of coop buddies is not the norm.

A trusted pool of coop buddies has not been my experience in D2. In WoW things are a bit better as I was brought into the game by IRL friends. I think I would reconsider my stance if I was able to find a group that would take a hard stance against hacks, exploits, crappy behavior, and the AH/RMAH. The only problem is I'd want to know of such a group before I spent money on the game.

Something I read summed it up as basically understanding the reasons why Blizzard chose to go online only and create an AH/RMAH. I do get that and it makes sense if you want to take the game in the direction as stated. I'm just not happy about it

 

[jimsfriend1]

Re: This just in...

I see sentiments similar to this brought up a lot:

Since virtual items in D3 have real money value, in a system supported by Blizzard, they will go out of their way to prevent and minimize duping. To Blizzard, someone spending 5 Ber on a duped charm is OK, but spending $5 on a duped charm is much more problematic.

The idea here is that blizzard will now be actively engaged in preventing duping/botting/etc, and I'm just not seeing it. Why should they care if I spend my $500 on a duped god hacked item of megacheats, which I will then dupe and sell again 500 times? And why should they care if I bot 24/7 on a hundred different computers and sell everything I find? The more stuff I sell on RMAH, the more money they rake. What financial incentive do they have to prevent me from giving them more frequent rakes? Sure, some people might quit, but probably not the people who are buying and selling the most, so big woopee. I don't recall any of my friends leaving b.net because of hacked items, but I do recall my friends acquiring hacked items. More bots/cheats = more rake. Keep in mind they take a flat fee and not a percentage of the sale.

Also, in regards to item ID. How would you detect the duping of gold? An in game item which will probably have a direct (maybe variable) conversion rate to dollars.

 

[skipjack]

Re: This just in...

Further contemplation of the newly introduced D3 game mechanics has yielded a few thoughts:

1) If you want to campaign for the inclusion of SP in D3, the ideal banner statement is probably "Blizzard Doesn't Support Our Troops."

2) While I would never pay actual cash for in-game items, I am not fundamentally opposed to the inclusion of the RMAH or the proposed basic principles on which it will function. The RMAH's existence does somewhat warp the D3 economy, but only to about the same extent as the existince of item sites warped the D2 economy. However, I am quite leary of Blizzard being the sole regulator of the RMAH. While I am fine with them verifying item legitimacy and I am tolerant of them earning profits as brokers, I do not exactly expect those to be the limits of their interventions; as a direct result of capitalist greed, I predict that Blizzard will eventually introduce exclusive items, either onymously or anonymously, into the economic framework. I hope this is not the case and that all items in circulation remain exclusively spawned by players, but I expect the allure of additional profits is just too high.

3) I was initially flabbergasted by the removal of non-item-based customization, but I now recognize that there is still some potential for such a system to work out. After all, equipment is generally the primary and preferred means of character optimization. I am still on the fence with this issue, but I will wait until after D3's full release before drawing any real conclusions.

4) I am completely fine with the ten character limit. Even now, I always delete characters such that I never exceed a total of eight .d2s files on my computer. Of course, this may not be the case if I had any need for HF rushing and I realize that some people like to keep old characters as trophies, so I can understand why some people would be upset by the limit. The inclusion of offline play would obviously nullify this issue.

5) I still have no intention of buying D3; the fact that I currently live in the residence of a post-secondary institution with closed gaming ports makes the decision of whether or not to buy the game rather easy.

 

[TopHatCat64]

Re: This just in...

Further, there is nothing (short of the recurringly-mentioned connection issues) preventing the SPF from forming its own D3 online "guild" or "clan" - although I guess it would be pretty ironically named.

This is about as good as we can do without actual singleplayer. The annoying this is that we wouldn't have a separate forum anymore, unless we just posted all the time in this one...

 

[NatNit]

Re: This just in...

This is about as good as we can do without actual singleplayer. The annoying this is that we wouldn't have a separate forum anymore, unless we just posted all the time in this one...

Sounds like fun! There are a few options:

1) Migrate D3 conversations elsewhere. There are other groups out there with similar hardline views.

2) Continue discussing it in the SPF. Seems a little unfair to clutter up all the fun D2 conversations.

3) Start a new (potentially free?) forum. d3spf.com! Sounds like a lot of work.

4) I have moderator status on some other forums, and could probably whip up an opt-in group and board for us. Shrugs.

 

[GoldenredDragon]

Re: This just in...

I'm all in for a SPF guild online community. I really liked the "ambiance" in the threads here, even-though I only spent a couple months here. I keep getting caught up in two of the best mods out there, "Back to Hellfire" and "Median XL", both of which I'm far from finishing...

To be honest, I started playing D2 in january 2010, after discovering they would be doing a D3. Still waiting... I am still shy of any first Matriarch, and never finished normal with any hardcore characters ! So I'll still have quite a ways to go before accomplishing most of what I'd like to achieve in D2. D3 can wait !

I'll probably wait for a time when I'm on vacation to start D3, and that won't be before next year. The faster their release comes, the longer I will have to see for myself what the game's value really is, from the comments of people on these boards and others.

I do have to say, the "no offline play" thing really bugs me, and the sad part, is that I totally understand the reasoning behind it (server/client architecture supposedly stopping hacks/cheats) and also support the idea in a way. I just know that I'll be constantly frustrated to not be able to play on the train while going to the university, nor be able to play on the evening when I'm somewhere internet costs waaaay too much (any hotel, cyber-cafe, whatever)

I guess I'll be playing D2 when I can't play D3 ! I'll still be buying it. I sure hope it won't disappoint me. Wait and see. (Just wait long enough for the price to go down a bit. And most bugfixes to be applied)

 

[DeathMaster]

Re: This just in...

@Bluechip
Read what Mydienon said. The matter is not whether you care about anyone else, but you accuse anyone who doesn't agree with you cheater/poor/second class human/etc. We've been very nice to you in fact. Everywhere else, the language will be a lot harsher. But do that here, we would get banned.

@NatNit
Yes, there are other issues other than internet connection. eg:
1. people like me who play only HC. Even you have a fast/reliable connection, the lag (which was explained, has nothing to do with downlad/upload speed) could kill your char.
2. people like me, I don't trust ANYONE else with my HC char, there is no way I will risk for HC death because someone else's mistake.
3. people like me who like to play at my own speed.

There is a reason why a lot of people play SP, not just because we have crap internet (My country has crap internet connection, that's not a matter my money could fix), or lack of money (I'd pay if I could get reasonable internet connection).

 

[purplelocust]

Re: This just in...

You mean they are aiming the game at those too dumb to work out how builds work, or use strategy. Their new target audience is a bunch of 13 year olds who can point and click sort of like a hack and slash circa 1985.

Annoying those players who can think, analyze and come up with off beat builds/play styles (and are likely to buy multiple copies) doesn't bother them.

Yes, it does seem like they are aiming at a broader audience. We have to admit that people here are a pretty small but devoted set of gameplayers and our views do not represent the general market. In other words, they are not making their game for us. My guess is that their accountants see us, the 1% of D2 users who are still playing and optimizing D2 gameplay, as an endearing but negligible part of their market. Their experience with WoW has been a huge financial success so I expect they are using a lot of that expertise in guiding where D3 goes.

There will be analysis and build development by communities similar to ours, although the knowledge used to improve guides and gameplay will have to more indirect and come from online play, rather than from SP play and code analysis. So I don't expect a sophisticated level of understanding like that which has evolved for D2 in our community here to develop.

As far as the "buying multiple copies" argument goes, my guess is that for D2 there are many many more people who bought multiple copies because they got banned for some reason than people who bought multiple copies for genuine curiosity and gameplay advantages. I bought a total 3 copies total for b.net play, the most recent was more than 8 years ago (player + BO barb + enchantress, for example, as well as for muling of course) for online play, and I expect for each one of me there are dozens of people who got into the game and then got tempted by various cheats and ended up having to buy the game again, perhaps multiple times.

Another aspect from their perspective is that if the mechanics are all hosted on their servers, the notion of discrete patches is simply gone. They are free to fix bugs and exploits continuously, as well as rebalance the game at will. In theory, they would do this in a responsible way to foster a diverse community of players, but of course that would take some looking after and good management decisions on their part.

 

[DarkChaos1]

Re: This just in...

After finally getting around to reading this thread (well, most of it), I can give my 2 cents as well. First off, my overall sentiments are much like everyone else's here, and I'm obviously disappointed in the lack of Single Player. However, I think I'm less hotheaded than some of you when it comes to anger at D3...

First off, since I've seen mention that "online D2 had hacks, so online D3 will have hacks". This is not really the case. As much as people here hate WoW, the truth of the matter is that hacks are almost nonexistent in WoW. And when they do exist, they typically get patched very quickly. I am almost certain that hacking in D3 will be unnoticeable if at all present.

Now about that RMAH... I think some people here do not know the reality of how battle.net D2 really is... one only needs to look at places like d2jsp or one of the many, many item-selling sites to realize that cash transactions for virtual items happen all the time in a sizeable underground market. I'd rather have this in game, where it's more official and secure and people won't get scammed by those 3rd party sites. I personally won't use the RMAH, but I agree that having it is a good thing. Of course, you can argue that eventually Blizz might create their own items to sell in the RMAH and that full control is always a bad thing, and that even *more* people will use the RMAH than they use 3rd-party sites now since it's encouraged, but overall I can't see why people are so upset about the RMAH.

As for the crux of the matter - the online-only mode - well, it's a good decision by Blizzard to keep mechanics all online, as many have stated. It protects the game from cheats/exploits by inferring game mechanics, and it probably really will help with piracy overall. It's unlikely that we'll be seeing any good cracked versions, although of course I don't agree with it - I think more often than not, someone who pirates the product wouldn't have bought it in the first place, but if they put in a good word about D3, other people will buy it and the company will be better off.

Even though I personally have a relatively good and stable connection, I don't like being forced to stay online, and even worse that players from the US and EU regions almost surely won't be able to play together. I'll still probably end up getting it, but I'll have to wait and see if the reviews are favourable before getting it because of this.

The gameplay/customization stuff - meh, it may make me a bit nervous but since I haven't yet played the game, I can't say yet that it will suck and not be replayable or any of that stuff. I'll have to wait and see, and although it might end up being bad, I think people here panic about this stuff too quickly - we haven't seen the game yet as a whole, so it may not be as bad as some people think.

 

[ninster]

Re: This just in...

I may have been swayed a bit on the RMAH.

A good article on AH design

Then check his most recent blog that discusses the Diablo model. I think the biggest concern I have is the exchange rate and the amount of gold sinks that might be necessary to regulate that rate. There's also a very good link in the first entry on the mechanics of developing a RHAH.

So what do people think? Would it make more sense if there was a separate currency (credits in the examples above) that could be purchased directly from Blizzard?

Still not happy with the online requirement. At least the default (according to one of the interviews) is a single player environment...Then again I am pretty much online all the time unless the upstream ISP eats itself. I guess I don't understand the whole "But if you want to play with your friends you have to start a new character from scratch, which makes you feel that you wasted time" argument. I wouldn't feel that way about it because it is two completely separate parts of the game.

 

[Jason Maher]

Re: This just in...

I think I fired from the hip a bit on the auction house. On reflection, it makes perfect sense for Blizzard to recognise the strong demand that is out there for people to obtain powerful gear in this way, and to want to take it in house and put the dodgy third parties out of a job. I guess I reacted because the concept of paying real money for a virtual object doesn't make a great deal of sense to me, and I've always shaken my head at people who actually do so (much like I shake my head at people who actually buy crap advertised in an informercial). I must confess, however, that other people paying me real money for a virtual object makes an awful lot of sense. Perhaps I shall become a dedicated D3 farmer.

 

[Mydienon]

Re: This just in...

I may have been swayed a bit on the RMAH.

A good article on AH design

Then check his most recent blog that discusses the Diablo model. I think the biggest concern I have is the exchange rate and the amount of gold sinks that might be necessary to regulate that rate. There's also a very good link in the first entry on the mechanics of developing a RHAH.

So what do people think? Would it make more sense if there was a separate currency (credits in the examples above) that could be purchased directly from Blizzard?

<snip>

Interesting article. Although this thread is focused on the lack of offline play, I wanted to respond to your post...

Blizzard has sort of made the separation of credits and gold (mentioned in the article) by separating money "credit" from money in a bank account. People who don't want any part of real money transactions can still sell items in the RMAH, earn money that sits in their battle.net account, and use that money to purchase items in the RMAH. The money credit on the battle.net account can't be directly transferred to a bank account (though it could, later, be laundered through the RMAH and routed back into a bank account tied to the player).

I think the article missed another consideration--whether or not there is an infinite supply of money in the game. D1 and D2 generated treasure (items and gold) each time a creature was killed or a chest was opened. There was no depletion of resources; the only limiting factors on how much gold and items existed was the amount picked up, and the amount of gold spent on repairs/resurrections/gambling/etc (gold sinks).

In a game like this, the more players there are, the more treasure will exist. Think about how much a real-world currency would have if people could print it themselves, and the only limiting factor were the amount of time spent doing (and the resources available--printer, ink, etc.). In D1 and D2, rich characters are those who spend the most time obtaining treasure. Luck and skill have something to do with it, but mostly, it's just time.

There are a couple of options not discussed in the article to deal with infinite supply (only gold sinks are mentioned). What if the game has a closed economy--for example, there is an exact number of each item and an exact number of each gold coin? A unique could be well and truly unique--only one exists, and it's either in a monster's possession or a character's (or sold to a merchant or sitting on the AH waiting for someone to purchase it). Keeping track of this might be challenging from a technical standpoint, but it would keep deflation from occurring. As the number of players increase, the number of items could also increase. The game design might also have to include a time-out process (so retired characters don't prevent items from permanently disappearing), or a way to increase the number of items/gold if they become scarce.

Another option is bind-on-pickup (for those unfamiliar, whoever picks up an item gets that item, and no one else can ever use it). If all items could only be used by the character who found it, the items possessed by a character would be a lot more about luck. Essentially, everyone would be playing untwinked every time, because no other option would exist. Trading would be non-existent if all items bind on pickup. Buying/selling accounts and characters might exist, though.

Bind-on-equip (whoever equips an item gets that item, and no one else can ever use it...but keeping it in inventory doesn't cause it to bind to the character) is something else that has been discussed. This would allow trades, but items would be removed from the market after they are equipped. Trading wouldn't be stopped by this, but it would create a potent "item sink" to help keep deflation from occurring as quickly...

------

Blizzard's auction house idea is controversial, but the article ninster cited does a good job of explaining why there is no perfect solution for every player.

As for me...I'll bring this back to the OP's topic. I play offline singleplayer, and I don't trade. If I were capable of playing D3, the auction house wouldn't bother me or excite me, but if I had my choice it wouldn't be in the game. I believe the D3 game design could have made gold farming and botting unprofitable, rather than choosing to facilitate it in softcore and prohibit it in hardcore. But then, my ideas on game design would make a lot of people unhappy (probably moreso than the RMAH) which is probably why I'm not a game designer...

 

[Rhone]

Re: This just in...

So, after not playing D2 since March last year, I found myself craving it recently and decided to check on how D3 is coming along. It's very, very, very rare that I will buy a game while it's still expensively new, but I've been planning on D3 being one of those rare exceptions.

And the first thing I saw about D3 is that Blizzard is crapping all over those of us who prefer single-player and telling us it's for our own good. WTF?

Even if I had the most reliable internet connection in the world, I still want the peace of mind of having the game entirely on my computer and not depending on Blizzard's servers to be able to play a game that I have absolutely no interest in ever playing any way other than SP. It's Blizzard's right to make the game however they want, but if they are going to make Diablo more and more like WoW and leave out those of us who choose Diablo over WoW in part because we want an entirely solo experience, then they've lost me as a (previously) loyal customer.

The most insulting part is that Blizzard is being sneaky and deceptive about it by telling us they're doing it for us. Gee, Blizzard, were you receiving mass E-mails from people begging you to scrap the option to play singleplayer? Blizzard is no better than Ubisoft, but I guess they're smarter, because they know there is less of an outrage if they just turn it into a multiplayer game and outright lie about the real reason for requiring a constant connection to their servers.

I won't be buying D3, but I'm realistic, too--Nightfish is right, we here in the SPF are a minority that Blizzard can easily ignore, and D3 will likely sell well. What's worse is that more and more game companies will see turning SP games into MP games as an ideal countermeasure for piracy.

On the bright side, I guess I can go back to MFing in D2 without worrying about the game being replaced by a worthy successor anytime soon.

 

[Takth]

Re: This just in...

What's the big deal? You can still play single player. You don't have to play online if you don't want to, or trade online (even though most of us do on here anyway). Fair enough you have to be logged in but you all have the internet.

Am I missing something? I for one will not play single player D3, I only play SP now because of all the hacking and duping in D2, if that is irradiated in d3 then brilliant, if not, play single player 'online' nothing to stop you?

I am a bit late to this party but have only recently discovered this news.

As a primarily offline/single player type of person it is crummy news. Not show stopper in my case but has really put a damper on something that I have been looking forward to for many, many years.

Realize one can still play single player if one chooses, but in addition to all of the things already pointed out one thing that stands out to me is I really, really don't like the idea of having no choice but to always be on the latest patch, even if there are game breaking bugs, or be at the mercy of an unpreditcable internet as well as the infrastructure that all this runs on. Sure bnet has been fairly reliable for me personally, but just the thought of "Oh noes, I can't connect today!" causes undue anxiety.

Ok, maybe anxiety is too strong of a word, we are talking about a game after all. But I think I made the point.

I will reserve judgment until I actually try but my gut reaction is "Uh, what? Why?"

 

[Chunes]

Re: This just in...

Like most here, I understand why Blizzard is doing this. I think it's a terrible decision, of course—the most insulting aspect of it is that Diablo III isn't particularly suited to online play (in the way that World of Warcraft is, for example). I do think it's crummy in general that more and more aspects of computing are giving way to the cloud-computing paradigm; I like having control over my own files. I also like having the feeling that once I purchase software, it's more or less mine to do with as I please.

I'm not sure if I'll buy Diablo III. On one hand, I'm tempted because it's hard to pass up on the new-release fun and comraderie. I also suspect that the online play will be far more polished than Diablo II's ever was, with fewer dupes and whatnot. On the other hand, I usually just played by myself when I played on Battle.net anyway.

I do hope they make certain information publicly available about our characters, though; call me vain, but I want to know whether someone bought their sword of asskicking or they actually earned it. I'd prefer that any character tainted by real-world currency be flagged and easily identified by players.

 

[Trim]

Re: This just in...

On the other hand, I usually just played by myself when I played on Battle.net anyway....I want to know whether someone bought their sword of asskicking or they actually earned it. I'd prefer that any character tainted by real-world currency be flagged and easily identified by players.

Respectfully, I don't understand your issue. If you play alone, what does it matter if someone purchased an item? And when you think about it, what's the difference between gold and RL currency? They're completely interconnected. Trading is trading in D3.

Okay, so someone buys their Massive Apocalypse Sword of Doomy Doomy Doom from the RMAH. They then use it to do thousands of MF runs. He/she then dumps all the good items into the gold auction house. People who hate the RMAH will go to the standard AH thinking that they're segregated from the RMAH taint... but they're buying items that came about only after that glorious sword was purchased and used from the RMAH.

All of those items from RMAH user placed on the gold AH are tainted, everyone who purchases them are tainted, everyone who ever joins their party is tainted... it will trickle down so quickly that the only people who will be unaffected are those who play entirely alone and never ever trade.

Simply assume that, if you trade at all, taint will happen. Now you don't have to stress about it anymore because it's inevitable! The two auction houses are symbiotic; if you hate one, you have to hate the other one, too. If you support one, you have to support the other. Maybe not embrace it, but you can't escape the fact that trading in any form is, in essence, you opening yourself up to taint.

But... eh, this isn't so much concerning the DRM like the thread's supposed to be about. I believe I made my opinions known a while back. ...And since the SPF is my home, I'm pretty sure it's obvious which way I'm leaning on the subject...

 

[Takth]

Re: This just in...

Respectfully, I don't understand your issue. If you play alone, what does it matter if someone purchased an item? And when you think about it, what's the difference between gold and RL currency? They're completely interconnected. Trading is trading in D3.
:

It doesn't matter in that it has any effect on game play, but it does cheapen the feeling of accomplishment for those of us that like to collect things. I went through a similar thing with LotrO. They have (had? No idea since I don't play anymore) events where you had the chance to find certain rare items. Finding them was a real treat and could take a lot of effort and time.

That is, until the event was over and they just slapped the same items in their store so anybody could go buy them.

Not everybody plays just to be the biggest and best, and this trend of just throwing money around to have whatever you want takes a lot away from the scavenger hunt feel.

 

[diiavidgamer]

Re: This just in...

TBH , I don't really understand how the auction house is supposed to prevent the 3rd party websites like those that sold d2 items for real money. I mean, if motivated enough, the people at that kind of websites could just lowball price everything and beat the average at the auction house.

I'm with Takth on the accomplishment part of item finding.

Example from D2: I farm all 5 bosses + throne and sanctuary clears for items and Hr's. I do this for a couple of weeks. Maybe I find some good uniques, and if lucky 1-2 Hr's. I feel happy about it and I enjoyed doing it. Then I go post a trade in the Ladder Trade Channel and get a nice little comment : "You're lowballing the item you want to buy. It's not worth 2 Hr's. You don't know the prices of things man blah blah " .

Why do I get this type of answer? Because the guy that's selling the item either botted for it, or did money trade for Hr's and has way more to throw around in a trade. So because, he just bought 40 hr for X amount of dollars, it means that my effort for weeks was pointless. Which degrades my experience of the game on the realms.

Auction house is just gonna cater to those with money to spend IMO, and just end up being the biggest " middle finger " to those that put effort in item finding.

PS: sorry if I got carried away, but I got a huge beef with people that bot/pay money for d2 items