Diablo 3 will involve real world money

[Slothy]

Also as someone pointed out on our blog, the no mods thing is a direct consequence of the RMT AH. They have to try and keep everything 'legit' and if that means less fun for the players, then smurf the players.

I'm not totally buying that. They could have easily had an offline only single player mode which could be freely modded while not allowing any mods in online play, requiring separate characters for each mode, to maintain drop rate integrity. I'm not saying that would be the ideal solution, but it would be a hell of a lot better than the big old middle finger that mod and single player fans got.

I'll also add that even though I had no plans on buying this game (never played Diablo 2, and don't usually care for this style of game anyway), it pisses me off that it requires a constant online connection. I hate developers who do this. It's stupid, and ignores the large chunk of the world that doesn't have decent internet available or consistent access to a decent connection. I don't even have this problem and it pisses me off, and I wouldn't buy any game that requires it. Ever.

With regards to your mentioning that this isn't the same Blizzard we used to know Milf, I think it's safe to say that the merger with Activision is when they started acting stupid. I probably should have guessed that Activision stink would eventually rub off on them.

I also want to post this little editorial because I found it interesting, and agree with just about everything in it: Gamasutra - News - Opinion: Diablo 3 And Keeping Players At Bay

Blizzard used to at least seem to care about their fans and the communities that built up around their games. Now they seem to want to control every aspect of everything their fans do with an iron fist.

[KentaRawr!]

What's Diablo?

[VeloZer0]

For a while I was shocked at how many SCII players I'd talk to on Twitter or whatnot had never played the original...

To be fair a large chunk of current gamers probably weren't even of age when the original Starcraft came out. Ditto for D2.

[DMKA]

[Iceglow]

I don't agree with micro-transactions like the proposed ones for D3, sorry not my bag. Used to love D2 and yet D3 is going on the "not even going to..." list which is a real shame.

I've got no real beef with the whole play online, play offline deal though frankly it's annoying yes but if a games company wants me to truly play their product and buy the ridiculously over-priced expansions or dlc packs for it then they need to give me the option of playing them offline too. Dawn of War 2 and Starcraft 2 both piss me off with this.

[Pike]

For a while I was shocked at how many SCII players I'd talk to on Twitter or whatnot had never played the original...

To be fair a large chunk of current gamers probably weren't even of age when the original Starcraft came out. Ditto for D2.

It's a side effect of getting old, I guess. I forget that people who are that young exist. :x

[Pheesh]

I absolutely loved Diablo 2, it was definitely one of the games I spent the majority of my childhood playing, and more so than all the changes they're making to it I think the biggest problem is that they just took too long to make it. When the first trailer came out for it I was amped (and also like 16 or 17 :/ ) and then by the time I remember hearing anything else on it I think I'd forgotten it was still in development. Now I'm finding it hard to get myself excited about it to the extent that I was. I'll probably still buy it, more so if some of the old friends I used to play with buy it as well, but it's all a little disheartening.

[Peegee]

Will the cost per item be controlled by the market or artificially set by blizzard?

In either case, it could be conceivably possible to play the game 'for free' by selling enough junk to maintain subscription fees. I'd never be able to make enough money to quit my job (I wouldn't want to), but if I could play D3 for free, WHY NOT?

[Slothy]

Will the cost per item be controlled by the market or artificially set by blizzard?

In either case, it could be conceivably possible to play the game 'for free' by selling enough junk to maintain subscription fees. I'd never be able to make enough money to quit my job (I wouldn't want to), but if I could play D3 for free, WHY NOT?

It's an auction system, so that means prices set by the market by default, though that will mean based on rarity/how powerful an item is, so ultimately I guess Blizzard does have control.

There aren't any subscription fees either, though I believe you could take any money you made and use it towards a WoW subscription. Why anyone would want to grind away in one game to pay for their grinding in another is beyond me though.

[theundeadhero]

All the different things about Diablo 3 I've learned in this thread has convinced me to stay away from it. It's sad too because I grew up in the Warcraft 2, Diablo, Starcraft era.

[Slothy]

Gamasutra - News - Blizzard VP 'Surprised' Over Response To Diablo III Online Requirement

Just a little bump to point out that Blizzard is surprised at the backlash they've taken from this stuff. I can only, conclude based on their decision making of late and inability to predict the obvious consequences of their actions, that the guys in charge are either stupid or five years old. I'm not sure which would be worse.

[Skyblade]

Gamasutra - News - Blizzard VP 'Surprised' Over Response To Diablo III Online Requirement

Just a little bump to point out that Blizzard is surprised at the backlash they've taken from this stuff. I can only, conclude based on their decision making of late and inability to predict the obvious consequences of their actions, that the guys in charge are either stupid or five years old. I'm not sure which would be worse.

Yeah, I'm forced to agree with this. Lately, Blizzard's decisions seem to be getting more and more off kilter. They've been upsetting their playerbase left and right. SCII was the first point I noticed it, as a lot of players and fans had huge problems with some of the decisions Blizz made with the game (granted, it still has a huge following, but there was still a statistically significant amount of players who hate the game because of some really stupid design decisions). Then Cataclysm came out, and Blizz suffered the first net loss in subscriptions since they released the original WoW. And now we roll around to all the new info on Diablo III, which has had at least three huge design decisions which has their fans upset. They are really losing touch with their playerbase, and I am wondering if it is starting to catch up with them.

As far as I can tell from this point, I'm never going to buy another Blizzard game. I wasn't impressed enough with SCII to keep investing with it, Cataclysm basically killed everything I loved about WoW, and between D3's lack of an offline mode and the new auction system, my interest in that game has suddenly slammed into nonexistence.

And, sure the auction system may be trying to cash in on something that is already taking place, but that "something" is largely hated by fans, and by legitimizing it, Blizz is simply annoying all those people who have been asking (for years) for them to try harder to fight them.

[felfenix]

I don't know what the big deal is. Just don't buy items from the cash AH then. When have you ever "needed" items from other players in Diablo anyway? There will still be a non-cash AH for like-minded players too. If some sucker wants to pay cash for my scrap drops that I get just for playing the game, then so be it. I won't be paying any real money for anything, but to each their own. I fail to see how this makes the game "more grindy" than it would be without the cash AH. If you choose to turn the game into a job, that's your own fault.