Some of us are not pirates

General Discussion
Prev 1 5 6 7 Next
30/04/2012 10:59Posted by Rebound
Anyone on this planet, even the wealthiest person would prefer playing a game like Guild wars 2 (which is free and u just pay for cosmetics) compared to p2p games that are mediocre by far in design.


Now THAT's a load of bullcrap.
30/04/2012 21:23Posted by DarkCowboy
Now THAT's a load of bullcrap.


+1
@DarkCowboy and @The sheep that posted after him

Ok, i can accept that, if u actually have reasons behind your statement. So far i've seen none. Can u prove somehow i am wrong? Or u just drop a bomb then quickly run for your life?

Are u someone who prefers paying for a game monthly+the costs of the game itself initially, instead of 1 time pay with the possibility of online shop? U do know statistics for free games with cash shops are everywhere on the internet..and u could clearly see and read even mmo websites why ppl prefer them. I base my answer on those and my personal opinion. More and more mmo's go free to play sooner or later.

Sales for free games + cash shops are "10 times higher" then a normal payed game for the simple fact ppl spend MORE money on a cash-shop free mmo then they do for a payed MMO. For p2w items..for different cosmetics..for expansions etc. BUT at the same time u could always play it for free.

Masses speak :) and masses DO prefer free over payed (not necessarily games). Maybe u forgot what times we are living in and the problems of day to day life. That restricts payment for potential games a lot. Even WoW subs have drastically suffered.
All i can say is:
This !@#$ happened and happends "off the grid" anyway, i rather see blizz getting something good out of it rather than some "billy "buys a better sword at som random site,probebly gets scammed, either way it doesnt support blizzard...
30/04/2012 10:59Posted by Rebound
Anyone on this planet, even the wealthiest person would prefer playing a game like Guild wars 2 (which is free and u just pay for cosmetics) compared to p2p games that are mediocre by far in design


No I actually think this is quite an extreme and silly stamement, sorry. You are both including everyone IN THE WORLDs opinion + comparing to Gw2, which a totally different game and concept. Its like comparing apples and bananas.

I also dont like to pay after I buy a game but that does not define Everyone else and what the think.
I think its normal when a company try to make money, its still a business, and the long they make money they make great games for us.
Anyone on this planet, even the wealthiest person would prefer playing a game like Guild wars 2 (which is free and u just pay for cosmetics) compared to p2p games that are mediocre by far in design


No I actually think this is quite an extreme and silly stamement, sorry. You are both including everyone IN THE WORLDs opinion + comparing to Gw2, which a totally different game and concept. Its like comparing apples and bananas.

I also dont like to pay after I buy a game but that does not define Everyone else and what the think.


GW2 was just a fast example that poped into my mind while writing this. I thought i made it clear it's one of many possible examples. And by "world" i ment the biggest majority. And however much u try to convince me, that doesn't change the fact ppl in general prefer free over payed.
30/04/2012 21:32Posted by Rebound
Ok, i can accept that, if u actually have reasons behind your statement. So far i've seen none. Can u prove somehow i am wrong? Or u just drop a bomb then quickly run for your life?


I think it's pretty obvious, than when someone else makes statements on behalf of the entire population on the planet, at any given time, it's bull.

No further explanation should be necessary.
So if i make a statement that all ppl in the world think the Planet is round, that's bull or is it just a common sense fact?

U actually think ppl prefer paying for something, over getting the same exact quality product for free. U must live in a very strange world. Worst case scenario it's not "ALL" it's a very very very big majority... is it better assuming common sense facts like that now?...it's clearly not "ALL"...there must be a hands down a nutcase on this planet that has such big issues as to believing otherwise to what common sense and actual proof show him.

They go by the name of social freaks.

EDIT: This brings us to the main issue. Why would Blizzard ever address a handfull of freaks...and not the "very very very big majority" (as previously scientifically stated)?
So if i make a statement that all ppl in the world think the Planet is round, that's bull or is it just a common sense fact?

U actually think ppl prefer paying for something, over getting the same exact quality product for free.


First, you're opposing something based on pure speculation towards something that is a well known fact.

Second, you will NEVER EVER get the exact same quality product for free, as long as the world is based on economics. Some might get it for free - but somebody will be paying for it.
Isn't it a fact that the big majority of ppl prefer free over payed? Also we are talking about 1 time pay AND cash shop vs monthly fee. Not completely free + we are talking about Blizzard here and their products. They tend to respect their free customers the same as their paying customers.

We are also talking about 2 different business models. The 1 time pay one also has a cash shop..like all free mmos. That cash shop has been proven (and u can google it, it's a fact) to turn out better income then a monthly fee. So by that logic, the 1 time pay + cash shop buyers should get more out of their game compared to monthly fee...if the developer supports the ppl who bring them more money.

BUT the major difference is that buyers actually decide on their own..when what and if they buy stuff, compared to being a subscription-slave. That should be something positive for anyone...to have the freedom of choice.

Diablo 3 goes a bit further. They even give u the possibility of fully finishing the game without EVER using RMAH. Indeed if u don't have any luck in finding items + the time to farm them, buying them from RMAH is a good thing because u can enjoy the game without stressing yourself out. You can even sell your own items to actually MAKE money. Not to get ritch..but atleast u can make enough money to invest into other items and so on.
29/04/2012 04:54Posted by feynman
Time is money. Many people want to be good in a game but dont have the time to be. The RMAH is a way to remedy that. You don't have to play, just buy your "playtime".

Obviously, there are people willing to sell their "playtime" and people willing to buy "playtime". Blizzard is just providing easy and secure marketplace for that. That marketplace would exist anyway ...

29/04/2012 04:54Posted by feynman
Children WILL play your game, despite of it's rating

Rating is not a law, it's just a recommendation for parents.
01/05/2012 00:16Posted by tero
Rating is not a law, it's just a recommendation for parents.

Depends on the country. I understand it's mandatory in the US.

Rating is not a law, it's just a recommendation for parents.


Well it depends - if You allowed Your underage child to play this game (like it is 5 years old so it is obvious the game isn`t suitable for it) I can inform the judge that You are not fulfilling Your parental responsibilities and then You could face some legal consequences. For example, it is not against the law that Your child is always dirty and in the same dirty clothes without any hygenic habits, but that could mean You are breaking the law which constitues Your parental responsibilities.

This is what happens when You study for magister exam without even seeing the sunlight. :(( lol
Rating is not a law, it's just a recommendation for parents.

Depends on the country. I understand it's mandatory in the US.


It depends who rates the game. Like some company responsible for ratings can`t give You any obligations or injunction, You need state institution either to do it itself or to approve what has this company said (about ratings). Well at least I understand it this way. :P

EDIT: Although You agree on the terms when You buy the game... so in fact, they could!

Ok, back to study!!!! :))
I think many counter arguments have been already showed to the OP and he is free to accept them or not.

I premise that I have become convinced that using money as an incentive to do anything is fundamentally wrong and the corporate system may have started with good intention but it is looking more and more a form of autocracy that stifle competition and the free market and aggregate power in the hands of the few... buuut this is a discussion for another forum.

In the case of Diablo 3, I do not see the problem of value here. The OP could have picked tons of other game that offer waaaaaay less value and hours of gameplay than Diablo 3 will. On-disk DLC, 1-st day DLC and online passes are everywhere nowadays, but none of that is in Diablo 3... let's count our blessings, shall we?

People already explained why the AH ADDS value to the game and it is entirely optional.

What about the "Always-online" option? What value that offer to the game? Well, I was skeptical of that too, of course, after Ubi Soft and their Assassin Creed 2 debacle, BUT Blizzard's approach is completely different and much smarter.

You see? the game IS build like a MMO with a client-server architecture. The server tells the client certain vital information like how to build random dungeons, the behaviour of monsters, what loot will drop etc etc. THIS makes it royally harder to hack and make cheats for.

Furthermore, even once the pirates manage to create an emulated server, it will never be like Blizzard's. So it will be more like an MMO situation where you have private servers you can join illegally for free running in parallel with Blizzard's offer. You won't be able to hack a diablo III copy and join the non-hacked public because the server will instantly know when you try to deceive it and will ban you, like it happens in WoW.

Furthermore, even if the pirates would crack Battle.net (not impossible of course) and somehow create a version of the game that would work with battle.net like the original copies, well then Blizzard can just modify the code a bit and break all these illegal copies and the pirates' only recourse would be to hack battle.net AGAIN! Only each time this happen, it will be harder and harder as each exploits can usually be used once before getting blocked.

So an online-only game means an hack-free/pirate-free environment for all. That means a lot let griefing and frustration for us, so I count a good addition to the game even if I will probably never play online myself.
Great post, an actual believable one.

Blizzard is a company, companies make money, making money is important to companies so they will look for how to gain the ``maximum amount of milk with the least amount of moo``

And to exclude changes in patchnotes like the one mentioned before ``increase in difficulty so that sales on Rmah will increase```aint that far away in those terms of money making.

conspiracy or not, companies wants to make more money and thats how simple it is.
You don't OWN the game. You have entered into a license agreement to play it at a price. If you don't like the agreement, don't enter into it, ie don't buy D3.

Blizzard have a right to protect their investment. If you 'buy' the game you're one of the good guys.



I`ll give you a history lesson here. You need one!
The word "license" is from latin, "licentia", and means quite literally "oppression". It was a common practise then in order to keep the various parts of the empire subjugated and controlled. Without a license from Rome you couldn`t conduct trade, build houses etc.
This is the tradition that was reborn in Feudalism, where the serfs, depending on the country they lived in, could not move, could not hunt, could not defend themselves, get married or carry arms, or do anything whatsoever without the "lords`s" permission. To control everything guilds were established for almost everything, and without being accepted into one you could do nothing. Or you could get hung if you tried anyway.
Wars have been fought to end the oppression of "licenses". Yet here we are, a generation of ignoramuses, who don`t even understand the meaning of simple words.
In modern terms it means that whenever you subject yourself to licensing, whatever it is you have a license for can be denied to you at any time by those who issued the license. Therefore you don`t own what you buy, popularly known as your property, but lease it, as you point out.
When this spreads for long enough we will be serfs again. Virtual serfs maybe, but serfs all the same. If you don`t see anything creepy about the transition from consumer rights to company rights and licensing it is only because of ignorance.'
Perhaps, one day, we will see the oppressed serfs, pitchforks in hand, storming the castle of their virtual vampire masters. Whether Blizzard will fall into this category remains to be seen:)

My suggestion: when D3 launches, go buy some books instead, and wait with Diablo until you have figured this stuff out.


I think this has to be the post of this month :)
Dude shut the !@#$ up and delete this post, for real!

RMAH is made for 2 obvious reasons imo:

1: So that there won't be any scamsites that try to trick u into buying the items online, as there have been with diablo 2! The RMAH is there to use for thoose who wanna use it, who says that buying your child a new weapon in diablo 3 won't make him happier than buying him a new toy?

2: The money that blizzard makes from this is also gonna be used to keep the game up to date dude. Like with wow, imagine wow without a monthly supscription? u think they would have a gigantic staff sitting there improving and building extra %^-* on all the time, keeping servers up etc. without having the monthly fee? It's needed with some kind of income besides the "starter pack" to ensure that they will have staff working on it for 10years + or how long this game is gonna get played.
Oh man...

Activision Blizzard's CEO & President is Robert Kotick.

Just to illustrate, this is one of his quotes:

"The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games."

I think you may get the idea now. Blizzard has a President, Mike Morhaime, who likes gaming. He is quite possibly the responsible out of working diplomatically with Kotick into making sure Blizzard keeps having a certain degree of freedom in making games, but do not be fooled into thinking that ultimately, Morhaime has to also give in to a lot of things in order to make cash. At least, while bringing money in, he's allowed to make fun games.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum