What, you guys don't remember how games used to cost $1k for the box? I mean, they have to recoup that lost profit *somehow* if they're going F2P. It's not a charity! Cheap ass gamers.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
I would venture a guess most gamers will have moved on to their next game before ever really feeling the extreme edges of the paywall, but time will tell.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
You don't play ARPGs do you?
The Diablo games and other ARPGs sole reason for existing is to kill large numbers of things, collect the loot and use that to upgrade your gear.
Diablo 3 has been going strong for 10 years using that formula and their 3 or so seasons per year are all about starting from scratch and doing it all over again with some unique seasonal twist.
Anyone who plays it regularly will pursue and get some of the ancient legendaries, and Primal legendaries that are the BIS gear in the game. There's nothing that locks you out from pursuing that.
I don't even consider myself a top player like the ones who each season solo Greater Rifts in the 140-150 (150 is the absolute highest) range but when I play a season seriously I will solo GRs in the 110-125 range. I am not unique. That is how D3 is played.
So "extremities seldom reached" may apply to MMO Mythic Raids or other games where the majority never even complete the games but not so much to ARPGs. Attainable gear "extremities" is the draw.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
I would venture a guess most gamers will have moved on to their next game before ever really feeling the extreme edges of the paywall, but time will tell.
Perhaps. I think it may endure as Diablo is one of those franchises with unusually strong allure. I have no doubt some will reject it out of hand, being essentially a mobile game that will now also have a PC client, turning up their nose to it while waiting for DIV.
Some though will be open to giving Diablo Immortal a chance and that foothold may be all it needs if it can once again invoke that enduring allure without driving too many away with excessive monetization such that one can't even enjoy the game casually without paying an exorbitant cost.
After hearing the hullabaloo about the outrageous monetization, I'm glad I still have my Diablo disk, from before Blizzard 'discovered' greed. It was such a good game when B2P was the only thing. If I really get need a Diablo fix, I know where to go.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
You don't play ARPGs do you?
The Diablo games and other ARPGs sole reason for existing is to kill large numbers of things, collect the loot and use that to upgrade your gear.
Diablo 3 has been going strong for 10 years using that formula and their 3 or so seasons per year are all about starting from scratch and doing it all over again with some unique seasonal twist.
Anyone who plays it regularly will pursue and get some of the ancient legendaries, and Primal legendaries that are the BIS gear in the game. There's nothing that locks you out from pursuing that.
I don't even consider myself a top player like the ones who each season solo Greater Rifts in the 140-150 (150 is the absolute highest) range but when I play a season seriously I will solo GRs in the 110-125 range. I am not unique. That is how D3 is played.
So "extremities seldom reached" may apply to MMO Mythic Raids or other games where the majority never even complete the games but not so much to ARPGs. Attainable gear "extremities" is the draw.
I play ARPGs often and have many, D3 among them.
The discussion here is about extremity in potential monetary expenditure, something applicable to Diablo Immortal but in no way whatsoever to D3, D2, D and a great many other ARPGs that are for the most part b2p games.
After hearing the hullabaloo about the outrageous monetization, I'm glad I still have my Diablo disk, from before Blizzard 'discovered' greed. It was such a good game when B2P was the only thing. If I really get need a Diablo fix, I know where to go.
It's also available on GOG (with Hellfire) for those that lost their original disks or never had the opportunity to get them. It comes with a version adapted for more modern computers as well as the original for diehard purists.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
As a player even if I will not be able to climb the ladders I dream about getting the gear. It's what you aim for your goal, the thing that you chase after. Right off the bat when you find out you cannot get there without spending enormous sums of cash , you immediately lose some of your reasons to play. I mean you can still play but that dream to walk in some legendary stuff just dimmed and with it my enthusiasm. I don't understand how you can just settle and not want more. How can you accept that the only way to get it in a reasonable amount of time is to spend thousands?
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
Actually, if you compare D:I monetization to the most extreme box price/monetization featured in the franchise before that point... You will find the prior monetization schemes were, in fact, far less absurd even at their extremes. In fact, the most extreme example prior to D:I was quickly removed from D3.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
You don't play ARPGs do you?
The Diablo games and other ARPGs sole reason for existing is to kill large numbers of things, collect the loot and use that to upgrade your gear.
Diablo 3 has been going strong for 10 years using that formula and their 3 or so seasons per year are all about starting from scratch and doing it all over again with some unique seasonal twist.
Anyone who plays it regularly will pursue and get some of the ancient legendaries, and Primal legendaries that are the BIS gear in the game. There's nothing that locks you out from pursuing that.
I don't even consider myself a top player like the ones who each season solo Greater Rifts in the 140-150 (150 is the absolute highest) range but when I play a season seriously I will solo GRs in the 110-125 range. I am not unique. That is how D3 is played.
So "extremities seldom reached" may apply to MMO Mythic Raids or other games where the majority never even complete the games but not so much to ARPGs. Attainable gear "extremities" is the draw.
I play ARPGs often and have many, D3 among them.
The discussion here is about extremity in potential monetary expenditure, something applicable to Diablo Immortal but in no way whatsoever to D3, D2, D and a great many other ARPGs that are for the most part b2p games.
Think that's kinda the thing. And a bit of what Aori missed in claiming the "core game" isn't built around MTX.
Playing through the storyline that might take you a bit of time over a few days? That's only a snippet of the game. In most regards, a preview. When we can look at the progression, see how it's the focus of long-term play, and deduce that the core game actually is.
And that has a ton of monetization. On top of what's been already discussed we have the like of Prodigy's Path and the Helliquary that are heavily monetized as well. This on top of even selling gems outright (in stepped bundles so you can buy each bundle to upgrade the most expensive bundle).
Knowing that the bulk of the game and long-term play, is the gear progression, we can see exactly how the core of the game actually has a ton of MTX put into it, and has been tuned expressly with the bias that unless you invest, the same kind of progression and experience you might have had from one season in D3, you'll feel dragged out over years unless you invest.
Certainly you can invest on the low end to ease it, but the problem is that even if you pay 20k into the game, you're at best optimistically halving the slow progression to 4-5 years compared to a D3 season.
Important things to keep in mind when asking what is the average person supposed to consider a reasonable investment.
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
Actually, if you compare D:I monetization to the most extreme box price/monetization featured in the franchise before that point... You will find the prior monetization schemes were, in fact, far less absurd even at their extremes. In fact, the most extreme example prior to D:I was quickly removed from D3.
And guess what? Lost in all the coverage that the legendary crest/gem P2Win is getting is the fact that the RMAH is back lol. This time around it's limited to certain items (but legendary gems is the big ticket item) and the currency is double disguised in that it uses "platinum" that is a secondary cash shop currency that is bought with the primary cash shop currency, Eternal Orbs, at a rate of 10 platinum for 1 orb.
You do get some small platinum rewards as a F2P player. I have 900 hat I got somehow.
What can 900 platinum buy me in the RMAH? There are a few 1 star legendary gems for sale I could buy for about 800. Better legendary gems? I just looked and the best available are 3 star gems, no 4 or 5 star ones that I could see, and those 3 star sell for about 80K platinum each.
80K platinum is 8K Eternal Orbs and that is roughly $200 Canadian for one 3 star legendary gem. No idea what 5 star gems sell for but they are so rare that it would not surprise me to see them listed at 10 times that.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Just about anything will look absurd when judged solely from the position of it's greatest potential extremity. Such extremities are seldom reached, making them ill-suited as the basis for evaluating anything.
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
Actually, if you compare D:I monetization to the most extreme box price/monetization featured in the franchise before that point... You will find the prior monetization schemes were, in fact, far less absurd even at their extremes. In fact, the most extreme example prior to D:I was quickly removed from D3.
And guess what? Lost in all the coverage that the legendary crest/gem P2Win is getting is the fact that the RMAH is back lol. This time around it's limited to certain items (but legendary gems is the big ticket item) and the currency is double disguised in that it uses "platinum" that is a secondary cash shop currency that is bought with the primary cash shop currency, Eternal Orbs, at a rate of 10 platinum for 1 orb.
You do get some small platinum rewards as a F2P player. I have 900 hat I got somehow.
What can 900 platinum buy me in the RMAH? There are a few 1 star legendary gems for sale I could buy for about 800. Better legendary gems? I just looked and the best available are 3 star gems, no 4 or 5 star ones that I could see, and those 3 star sell for about 80K platinum each.
80K platinum is 8K Eternal Orbs and that is roughly $200 Canadian for one 3 star legendary gem. No idea what 5 star gems sell for but they are so rare that it would not surprise me to see them listed at 10 times that.
All I can really say, if they are really trying to bring this kind of monetization to PC, is... Smh.
There's really nothing else to be said. I've already seen articles of a streamer running rifts until he gets a 5 star drop at $25 per rift run... he was at nearly $4k with zero 5 stars as of the time the article was written.
There's really nothing else to be said. I've already seen articles of a streamer running rifts until he gets a 5 star drop at $25 per rift run... he was at nearly $4k with zero 5 stars as of the time the article was written.
There's really nothing else to be said. I've already seen articles of a streamer running rifts until he gets a 5 star drop at $25 per rift run... he was at nearly $4k with zero 5 stars as of the time the article was written.
It is not P2Win anymore, it is PAY TO LOSE!
It also kind of flies in the face of the folks who keep trying to argue the monetization only matters for PvP and leaderboards...
Unless they think one 5 star gem is all that's needed to top the leaderboard or dominate PvP.
forget about the cash shop stuff, im confused as to why people are trying to say this game is a good game. its not, like, the complaints aren't only about the cash shop, even with the cash shop removed, its crap. there's no complaint when addressed will suddenly make this okay.
People are desperate....They will play anything and they'll pay for anything.....
This sort of monetization is already on PC, it's just been flying under the radar. Players can spend $400/day on Lost Ark. That $400/day limit is one Amazon specifically requested Steam implement. The normal steam limit is apparently in the thousands ($1k+) by default. So there are games already on Steam that allow players to spend obscene amounts of money per day.
We're seeing the dawn of games built for the rich that are also made so the poor (that's anyone who can't spend hundreds per week) can access.
That's very true. I think the key difference is this was an established AAA franchise with a core western fan base, as opposed to an Eastern port or obscure title built with obscene monetization. It's also another negative PR stop in a train line of them for Blizzard.
Like you said, it's showing that these tactics are becoming a common practice throughout the industry. I think it hit home hard with Diablo for many gamers.
If you think the monetization is so awful, then don't play the game. I'm not playing it. It's really not that hard to find some other game to play. There are literally many thousands of other games out there.
If you think the monetization is so awful, then don't play the game. I'm not playing it. It's really not that hard to find some other game to play. There are literally many thousands of other games out there.
It's kinda like listening to addicted gamblers complain how bad their luck is lately
That kinda misses part of the point of discussing the problems and how it impacts not just the game in question, but whole genres of games and gaming as a whole.
"Don't play it." solves for a minor part of the equation in the short term. Given that mindset, it implies that one is not part of the audience the game is made for. IE, the ones they can monetize.
What does that mean for the game? Well, that it's no real loss on the game's part. What does it mean for the franchise? Well, that we may end doing the same "then don't play the game" bit when D4 rolls around.
Will that stop Blizzard? Again, probably not. Because if Immortal's overly aggressive monetization works for Blizz, then the next step for them is to ask what more they can do.
If you think the monetization is so awful, then don't play the game. I'm not playing it. It's really not that hard to find some other game to play. There are literally many thousands of other games out there.
It's kinda like listening to addicted gamblers complain how bad their luck is lately
Even if that were true, listening to addicted gamblers complain would still be much more interesting and on point than listening to supercilious comments about the gambler's complaints,
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Comments
/s
A more reasonable basis for consideration is to what degree average persons will typically feel they need be spend to derive adequate enjoyment from the game and to what degree it can be enjoyed by those determined to spend nothing.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I have 4 Heroic pieces and just playing the game, not paying anything. I am level 41 right now.
The Diablo games and other ARPGs sole reason for existing is to kill large numbers of things, collect the loot and use that to upgrade your gear.
Diablo 3 has been going strong for 10 years using that formula and their 3 or so seasons per year are all about starting from scratch and doing it all over again with some unique seasonal twist.
Anyone who plays it regularly will pursue and get some of the ancient legendaries, and Primal legendaries that are the BIS gear in the game. There's nothing that locks you out from pursuing that.
I don't even consider myself a top player like the ones who each season solo Greater Rifts in the 140-150 (150 is the absolute highest) range but when I play a season seriously I will solo GRs in the 110-125 range. I am not unique. That is how D3 is played.
So "extremities seldom reached" may apply to MMO Mythic Raids or other games where the majority never even complete the games but not so much to ARPGs. Attainable gear "extremities" is the draw.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Perhaps. I think it may endure as Diablo is one of those franchises with unusually strong allure. I have no doubt some will reject it out of hand, being essentially a mobile game that will now also have a PC client, turning up their nose to it while waiting for DIV.
Some though will be open to giving Diablo Immortal a chance and that foothold may be all it needs if it can once again invoke that enduring allure without driving too many away with excessive monetization such that one can't even enjoy the game casually without paying an exorbitant cost.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I play ARPGs often and have many, D3 among them.
The discussion here is about extremity in potential monetary expenditure, something applicable to Diablo Immortal but in no way whatsoever to D3, D2, D and a great many other ARPGs that are for the most part b2p games.
It's also available on GOG (with Hellfire) for those that lost their original disks or never had the opportunity to get them. It comes with a version adapted for more modern computers as well as the original for diehard purists.
Playing through the storyline that might take you a bit of time over a few days? That's only a snippet of the game. In most regards, a preview. When we can look at the progression, see how it's the focus of long-term play, and deduce that the core game actually is.
And that has a ton of monetization. On top of what's been already discussed we have the like of Prodigy's Path and the Helliquary that are heavily monetized as well. This on top of even selling gems outright (in stepped bundles so you can buy each bundle to upgrade the most expensive bundle).
Knowing that the bulk of the game and long-term play, is the gear progression, we can see exactly how the core of the game actually has a ton of MTX put into it, and has been tuned expressly with the bias that unless you invest, the same kind of progression and experience you might have had from one season in D3, you'll feel dragged out over years unless you invest.
Certainly you can invest on the low end to ease it, but the problem is that even if you pay 20k into the game, you're at best optimistically halving the slow progression to 4-5 years compared to a D3 season.
Important things to keep in mind when asking what is the average person supposed to consider a reasonable investment.
You do get some small platinum rewards as a F2P player. I have 900 hat I got somehow.
What can 900 platinum buy me in the RMAH? There are a few 1 star legendary gems for sale I could buy for about 800. Better legendary gems? I just looked and the best available are 3 star gems, no 4 or 5 star ones that I could see, and those 3 star sell for about 80K platinum each.
80K platinum is 8K Eternal Orbs and that is roughly $200 Canadian for one 3 star legendary gem. No idea what 5 star gems sell for but they are so rare that it would not surprise me to see them listed at 10 times that.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
There's really nothing else to be said. I've already seen articles of a streamer running rifts until he gets a 5 star drop at $25 per rift run... he was at nearly $4k with zero 5 stars as of the time the article was written.
It is not P2Win anymore, it is PAY TO LOSE!
Unless they think one 5 star gem is all that's needed to top the leaderboard or dominate PvP.
People are desperate....They will play anything and they'll pay for anything.....
Like you said, it's showing that these tactics are becoming a common practice throughout the industry. I think it hit home hard with Diablo for many gamers.
It's kinda like listening to addicted gamblers complain how bad their luck is lately
"Don't play it." solves for a minor part of the equation in the short term. Given that mindset, it implies that one is not part of the audience the game is made for. IE, the ones they can monetize.
What does that mean for the game? Well, that it's no real loss on the game's part. What does it mean for the franchise? Well, that we may end doing the same "then don't play the game" bit when D4 rolls around.
Will that stop Blizzard? Again, probably not. Because if Immortal's overly aggressive monetization works for Blizz, then the next step for them is to ask what more they can do.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Or 5 minutes to midnight, depending on how one looks at it.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon