Mordrak
1641
The context of what he was talking about was nerfing over powered items, not the additional items being added to the game. At least I thought he was, but if he wasn’t my mistake.
If anything, I can see the exact opposite of what Kristopher is expecting, not boring safe items, but tons of OP items that are worth a bunch of money.
In the context of nerfing, it may change their willingness to nerf an item, which may have drastic effects in things like PVP. Generally, they aimed for balance in the PVE game as well, but that may go out the window.
Anyway, I took his concern more as the effects on design decisions than having a specific problem with a nerfed item or overpowered items, etc. I think the mostly likely scenario is that Blizzard will make good items overall more rare, to promote their value in the AH so they are more desirable rather than make a bunch of overpowered items (which would still rely on rarity to maintain their value).
With Blizzard taking three cuts, wanting players to cash out each transaction separately if they want to at all, and wanting high volume of transactions, they are going to have to jigger the game design so items will be worth at least a few dollars each to make it economically desirable for players to sell items.
maxle
1642
I’m actually a bit surprised to hear there’ll be PvP matchmaking with, y’know, rankings, given that in earlier previews they were talking about not caring one whit about PvP balance.
Well ok, I agree, I guess, but you do realize that the non-MMO NWN is applicable to the situation? Why bring up that particular MMO? If you wanted to mention the beginning of subscription multiplayer games, then why not Quantum Link?
Wait, are you saying you don’t want WoW style flat % upgrades every few levels?
There aren’t player-viewable PVP rankings; they’re still going for a very casual PVP environment:
Q: I know you mentioned that in the PvP arena there will be a matchmaking system that will pit you against players of your equal skill or gear level and that there will not be a number one team. Does that mean there is no ranking what so ever, there are no points attached to you PvP teams? And with the said, if there are points attached to PvP teams, can we have multiple teams so I can play with my friends who are terrible but I can have my hardcore team, I can do both?
A: There is no ranking. There is an invisible ranking that we use for matchmaking but it’s a per player basis. When you are on a team, we kind combine the rank together in a super smart way. The guy who does that is wicked smart. He works all of that out. But we don’t have a “I’m a 2200 rated player and therefore I am better than you as a 2100 rated player”. What we are focusing on is a more of a progression based system which is “I am a level 20 PvPer” which means I have played a lot of PvP.
Q: Can we expect a win/loss ratio?
A: Currently, we don’t even do a win/loss ratio. We might do a number of wins but not a number of losses. Even in SC, we found that the number of wins actually feels a lot better than showing a win/loss ratio. That’s why people recycle accounts because people don’t want those losses shown. So, the solution was to not show them. We want to keep it more casual. With the leveling system, you’re always winning slightly faster than losing. Even if you go on and lose it up for a hundred hours, you will be able to get just as far as someone who always wins.
Nesrie
1646
It’s the earliest graphical MMO I remember playing, and by the nature of the game, it was tied to servers that, when yanked, ended the game is the reason I chose that one.
While, at the moment, I can’t put into word elegantly what the difference is… there are MMOs I’ve been playing off and on since then that I paid a subscription fee for and, by the nature of the genre, had to be online AND connected to a server to play. I am okay with that. I am not okay with either one of those happening with non-MMO games.
Non-MMO NWN didn’t require an online activation or a constant online connection to play. At least not the vanilla. I was on dial-up when that came out, and certainly not connected when it installed, and I played.
The multiplayer obviously required a connection, but it performed an authentication the moment you selected multiplayer options. The authentication was required even for local lan multiplayer. Later when the Premium Modules were released, the same authentication was required despite all but one of the premium modules being single player only. It’s the first occurrence of online verification for a singleplayer game that I’m aware of, although it was a one time on start verification and not an always on DRM.
fenrir
1648
Hard to say what the real impact the RMT AH will have but I think a lot of people are overreacting. Eve was not destroyed or even negatively affected by people buying isk with real money. If anything, it made for a more interesting experience with more options available. Personally I’m intrigued to see what will happen and actually look forward to being able to buy/sell things legally.
Yes it can be argued they’re just extracting revenue from the players, and I’m sure that’s part of it. But they are also confronting a big problem with the old game in an honest fashion and being pragmatic about the solution. I heard a lot of complaints but I’m not sure I’ve heard another viable solution to the problem.
If anything I’m more worried that all the endless treadmills and progress quests I’ve played over the years made me immune to Diablo 3. I played a lot of D2 but once you’re done with one treadmill you’re kind of done with all of them. It’s kind of like the first MMORPG you play is great and all the ones after that are just more of the same. I’m not sure how they can make it a fresh experience.
Well, Diablo II will always be there…
because it has offline singleplayer AND multiplayer!
This whole deal with real money in an ingame auction house doesn’t seem that ridiculous anymore, if you had told me 10 years ago about something like that I would have laughed in your face.
Oh how times have changed!
I wonder if some of the gambling laws in some countries will apply for this game now?
The fees are flat, not percentage based, for precisely the reasons people are mentioning here. It’s in the interview with Jay Wilson.
Well, all these things are mentioned in the interview, which while it may be a bunch of lies/subject to change, still serves as a starting point for what they’re planning.
What happens if there is a patch and the item I purchased is altered?
It’s important for us to ensure that Diablo III remains balanced and fun for years after launch. To that end, it may be necessary to change stats or alter abilities of items from time to time. It’s very important to note that Blizzard will not be providing refunds or making other accommodations if a purchased item is later altered in a patch. Given this, it’s up to players to determine whether they’re comfortable purchasing items in the currency-based auction house.
http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/2397-Diablo-3-Auction-House-Announced-Spend-and-Earn-Real-Life-Money
Q: If a lot of players want to turn it into a big, competitive e-sport kind of thing…you wouldn’t stop them, would you?
A: No. But when people say “BARB IS TOTALLY OP!!!” we’re going to be like “yeah…he probably is.” (Talk about SC2 balance…) We’re not going to be looking at a lot of percentages or really even tracking it. If players want to turn it into an e-sport, more power to them, but we want to set their expectations about what level we’re going to support that. We never want PvP to drive PvE game balance, and that is the reason why in WoW (to a lesser degree than SC2) they both let the PvP game drive the PvE game and whenever we have a conflict…(moderator dude interrupts)
Q: Any thoughts about a wagering system for PvP?
Micah: (Side stage)Yes
A: Apparently Micah is all for it. If there was ever a way we could make it into an e-sport, which is exactly what we don’t want to do, no not really. And that is the reason why. We know people are going to want to turn it into an e-sport but it won’t be from any encouragement from us. The big reason being is that we are never going to allow, or at least over my dead body, the PvP game to wag the tail on game balance. We want the PvE game to rule it. Even the amount that PvP can alter the PvE game in WoW is unacceptable to us. Whenever we run into a case where “this would be really awesome for PvE” and the PvP guys says “ that kind of screw PvP” the answer is always “shut up PvP guy, it’s awesome in PvE”.
http://www.diablofans.com/topic/26249-diablo-3-press-event-visit/
Tony_M
1652
Who told you that? The Blizzard marketing guy? Yeah we can trust him to be completely honest. If their true motivation for always online was “because we want Ubisoft style DRM”, then I’m sure the marketing guy would have been honest and upfront about it.
This is the same marketing guy who said of the Real Money Auction House: "We think it’s really going to add a lot of depth to the game."
This isn’t Ubisoft DRM; its more of a boxed mini-MMO (like Guild Wars) than anything else.
Ubisoft DRM implies that all they’re running is authentication checks on a single player game like Settlers. This is like closed Bnet, which is server side characters and data, and a server wide economy, plus matchmaking and drop-in co-op. It obviously makes sense to avoid this if you were planning on playing offline, though.
Tony_M
1654
I agree it is like a boxed mini-MMO. Which is a shame because MMOs aren’t allowed Mods, or anything else that might intrude on the walled garden. I completely understand why Auction Houses, Leaderboards, and achievements require a sealed system, I’m just really disappointed that they’re not offering Battlenet play and non-battlenet (with mods) play like they did with Diablo 2.
Probably playing a $10 indy game, which does something new and interesting in it’s gameplay, why?
The fees are flat, not percentage based, for precisely the reasons people are mentioning here. It’s in the interview with Jay Wilson.
Listing Fee = flat - some free listings per week
Selling Fee = flat
Blizzard Cash-out Fee = undefined at this stage
3rd Party Provider Cash-out Fee = percentage, as that is generally how they operate
If the 3rd party provider is taking a percentage for cash-out, I suspect Blizzard will for that portion as well, but we’ll have to wait and see.
What will Blizzard’s cut of the cash-out fee be? I’d imagine probably a % of the % then?
Heh, that interview transcript upthread, apropos of nothing Dialbo related, confirms why I eventually gave up on WoW, or at least one reason. The utter contempt that Blizzard has for PvP in MMOs and games in general is pretty clearly demonstrated…
Though in Diablo 2, I never did an PvP stuff. I might look into it in D3.
Once Blizzard announce how much some of the flat fees are going to be, we might be able to speculate how much low level items might minimally list for, that should be very interesting as it will essentially set the baseline value for any listed item and suggest how Blizzard view the potential of the economy.
For example, if the listing fee is $0.10 and selling fee is $0.20, then no-one will want to sell even a low level item for less than say $0.50.
It the cheapest item is $0.50, is it conceivable that elite gear could list for 100x that ($50) and probably get buyers? If items are then regularly selling in the $25-$50 range, will Blizzard be content taking only $0.30 on the transaction??
Is $0.10 unreasonable as a listing fee? Can anyone really see them charging less than that?
