Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Blizzard Reveals Diablo 3 (Real Money) Auction House

CmdrTaco posted about 3 years ago | from the this-just-got-real dept.

The Almighty Buck 384

trawg writes "At a special event at Blizzard HQ in California, gaming press were treated to the first look at the Diablo 3 auction house — featuring real-world money transactions across different regions allowing you to buy and sell items with real money. There'll be a listing fee and a sales fee for auctions, and while they're not talking dollar numbers just yet, Blizzard assures gamers that they're not looking to pinch pennies." Update: 08/01 17:41 GMT by S :The other big piece of news about Diablo 3 is that it will require a persistent connection to Battle.net to play, even for single-player mode. Eurogamer has a detailed write-up about the current state of the beta.

cancel ×

384 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

no offline play = no sale (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36946960)

tsia

Re:no offline play = no sale (1)

jayme0227 (1558821) | about 3 years ago | (#36947378)

Who plays Diablo offline?

On a side note: I'm excitedly waiting for the shitstorm to flair up when the first guy manages to accidentally spend $1000 instead of $10.00 on some random piece of crap in game.

Re:no offline play = no sale (4, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 3 years ago | (#36947568)

I bought Diablo II and played it in single player and on a LAN exclusively. I'd probably buy Diablo 3 if I could do the same, but it seems that the game is aimed more at WoW players than people who enjoyed Diablo / Diablo II.

Re:no offline play = no sale (1)

drzhivago (310144) | about 3 years ago | (#36948078)

What? Though since you've never played online you probably don't know that RMT exists in Diablo 2 as well, and this is an effort to combat the most negative associations that go along with RMT (cheating/hacking/scamming).

Also, I think you are mistaken by assuming that the majority of D2 players didn't play online.

Re:no offline play = no sale (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947458)

I don't know why people insist on thinking that they are part of this huge group that is actually going to effect what game companies decide when they say "I'm not buying the game because there is no offline play."

I don't know if it's because they are tinfoil hatters, or if their internet service is being throttled by Comcast and others, or if they are just plain old retarded.

The internet is here.
The internet changed a lot of things since it came out.
The internet is only going o become more widespread in the future.
For the good, or the bad.
Get used to it.

Re:no offline play = no sale (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947562)

Sometimes the internet goes out, not being able to play single player games without the internet is just stupid.

Re:no offline play = no sale (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 3 years ago | (#36947790)

For the good, or the bad.

For Great Justice!*

* brought to you by the internet.

Re:no offline play = no sale (2)

Riceballsan (816702) | about 3 years ago | (#36948096)

why does it matter? Not everyone has 3G everywhere they go, not everyone has a 100% of the time always on connection that has no hiccups or lag ever. Not everyone is OK with the idea that in 5 years if they feel like replaying an old game that they paid $60 for, they may or may not depending on if blizzard felt the game was still profitable enough to keep supporting.

Re:no offline play = no sale (2)

milkmage (795746) | about 3 years ago | (#36947954)

how about RTFA (read THIS fucking article)
http://www.1up.com/news/diablo-3-requires-online-when-playing [1up.com]

you could argue that these features enhance gameplay/experience, and the online requirement isn't only for DRM/security (although simple auth like, SC2, should take care of those concerns)

really like the shared item stash (a la Torchlight)

A persistent friends list.
Cross-game chat via the RealID system.
Persistent characters that are stored server-side (no more having to play online once every 90 days, nor item duplication cheats).
Persistent party system.
Player-versus-player and public game matchmaking.
Dynamic drop-in/out for co-op
Larger item stash that gets shared among all of your characters (at the moment, up to 10)
The auction house, outlined here.
The Achievement system and detailed stat-tracking, both of which feed into the final point:
The Banner system, a visual way to display your prowess in the game. Banners start out like emblems, where you can choose from an array of symbols, patterns, and overall shape/design. Then, you can tweak its appearance through Achievements and other accomplishments. Examples Pardo cites include whether the character is in Hardcore mode, how many Achievements have been earned, how many PVP victories, and so forth. Additionally, the Banners also have gameplay features; in-game, rather than use Town Portal, you can click on a player's Banner to instantly teleport over to said player.

now, how about a release date?

goat turds (1)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 3 years ago | (#36946992)

You heard me.

Hello IRS (2, Insightful)

DigiShaman (671371) | about 3 years ago | (#36946996)

Oh shit. You just KNOW the IRS will be getting involved here. Anytime you have money moving from person-to-person or business-to-person, the Feds will get their pound of flesh. This could get quite ugly for gamers.

Re:Hello IRS (5, Informative)

smelch (1988698) | about 3 years ago | (#36947042)

Uh, what?! You mean that an auction house using real money, just like any other auction house using real money on the internet, might actually require people to note the income on their taxes? Quick! Somebody tell everybody who ever used eBay the government is saddling up to ride in on them at dawn! It's about to get real ugly!

Re:Hello IRS (2)

Tukz (664339) | about 3 years ago | (#36947118)

This.

This is nothing new, a lot of games does something similar with real money, and the IRS hasn't freaked out more than usual (not in my country anyway).
Move along.

Re:Hello IRS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947480)

Is your country the USA?

but will they tax in game gold and the gold auctio (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 3 years ago | (#36947372)

but will they tax in game gold and the gold auction house?

Re:but will they tax in game gold and the gold auc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947460)

You can change your name as many times as you want, you're still fucking retarded.

Re:Hello IRS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947522)

how is it income? you typically pay more for something when you buy it than you get from it at an auction house.
Rate your time value at $300.00 an hour, and any items you sell for than the time*price you spent = loss - great new deductions for taxes...

let's see, I *lost* 3000.00 on that ring of might +3 auction.

Re:Hello IRS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947804)

Hey, I went to the Wesley Snipes School of Accounting too! What year did you graduate? Class of 2005/Alumni Association of Cellblock D for me.

Re:Hello IRS (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 3 years ago | (#36947984)

I don't think the IRS counts opportunity cost as a valid expense.

Re:Hello IRS (1)

Alarash (746254) | about 3 years ago | (#36947650)

Some countries created new business status just because of eBay to tax people making a living out of it. In France it was called "Modernization of the Economy Law." They even have a website for it [minefe.gouv.fr] .

Re:Hello IRS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947834)

Oh no! The tax system isn't static and based on centuries old principles and rules! What a frightful thing.

Better reform than having a revolution.

Re:Hello IRS (1)

ErikZ (55491) | about 3 years ago | (#36948060)

Everyone has a revolution eventually.

The IRS should get involved. (1)

Viewsonic (584922) | about 3 years ago | (#36947476)

Just about sums it up. This isn't much different than anything else online. I pay taxes on my XBox 360 purchases, this shouldn't be any different just because it is online.

Re:The IRS should get involved. (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | about 3 years ago | (#36947888)

This isn't much different than anything else online. I pay taxes on my XBox 360 purchases, this shouldn't be any different just because it is online.

We are talking about "in-game items" here, which are simple database entries. Now please explain why these shouldnt be any different than the purchase of a game.

So there's a new brother? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947704)

Diablo, Bhaal, Mephisto and IRS?

Re:Hello IRS (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | about 3 years ago | (#36948108)

This is why EVE does all trading with ingame money. Buy a character? Ingame money. Buy items? Ingame money. Buy clothes? Ingame money. Now, you can convert real money to ingame money through company sanctioned means(ETC/PLEX). To avoid tax implications, you can't (through sanctioned means, the Russians break these rules pretty much at will) convert ingame moeny to real money.

real money? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947020)

What is this 'real money' they're talking about? US dollars? hahahahahaha

Re:real money? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947058)

Awwww...someone still mad that the currency of their backwater shithole isn't the international standard in trade? Do we need to call the waaahmbulance?

Re:real money? (1)

repvik (96666) | about 3 years ago | (#36947506)

That's a very nice thing btw. Since the dollar value has sunken like a stone, everything I buy from abroad is really cheap. Keep up the "international standard" and worthless currency.

Re:real money? (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about 3 years ago | (#36947874)

Keep it up. Before the US dollar was the world's reserve, it was the British pound. Look how well that worked out for them. Currencies come, and currencies go. But actually paying for your imports for a change instead of just printing up money for them is going to be a real bitch for you. I can't wait to see how that works out.

Re:real money? (1)

Tukz (664339) | about 3 years ago | (#36947136)

Whichever currency is active in your region.
The Auction House is going to be divided into currency regions.

As opposed to in game currency.

Re:real money? (1)

Radres (776901) | about 3 years ago | (#36947570)

***Whoosh*** that joke just flew over your head.

Re:real money? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947762)

What is this 'real money' they're talking about? US dollars? hahahahahaha

Must be time for another bitcoin article ;)

Cue... (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 3 years ago | (#36947026)

Cue the spam of...looking 4 2 soc 2 skill 20 fcr barb circlet

Re:Cue... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947198)

Actually, it will eliminate a lot of that spam, since if you're looking for something, you have a singular, searchable place to go find it. Unfortunately, it will be replaced by "Yo yo, check out my auction for 4 2 soc 2 skill 20 fcr barb circlet". On the plus side, thousands of Chinese teenagers are about to get new jobs.

Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947052)

Fuck everything about this...

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (4, Interesting)

klocwerk (48514) | about 3 years ago | (#36947122)

Fuck everything about this...

I kind of have to agree...
I was a hardcore D2 gamer, almost failed out of college because of that game, and I've been looking forward to D3 Very Much.
But real money? No. I play games as an escape from thinking about things like my bank account.

Bliz, please rethink this.
Let a real money secondary economy evolve, but for the love of Pete don't enshrine it in the game.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (2)

Desler (1608317) | about 3 years ago | (#36947144)

Let a real money secondary economy evolve, but for the love of Pete don't enshrine it in the game.

Why? This means that you are less likely to get ripped off since Blizzard will be running it versus the third party sites where you are most likely getting scammed from. Why would you think the second choice is better?

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (2)

klocwerk (48514) | about 3 years ago | (#36947554)

Why? This means that you are less likely to get ripped off since Blizzard will be running it versus the third party sites where you are most likely getting scammed from. Why would you think the second choice is better?

Frankly because I don't care if people doing an explicitly forbidden activity get ripped off.
Wrapping it into the game likely means that all the best items will get put in the cash auction house, and the in-game-gold AH will only have lesser items.

I'd love a separate server (cluster) for those who wanted to play in the real money economy.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

morari (1080535) | about 3 years ago | (#36947254)

Blizzard seems absolutely intent on fucking Diablo 3 up in any way they can. The lack of LAN play and persistent Battle.net DRM wasn't already enough?

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (4, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | about 3 years ago | (#36947516)

Realistically lack of LAN play in today's market will only upset geeks, and only a very small subset of them. Battle.NET DRM is indeed annoying in it's own way, but it's also kind of cool - namely in that Blizzard will let you redownload all your games at will. I managed to find my Warcraft III jewel case in a drawer - no clue where the CD is, but it had the CD-key on the case. I logged into my Battle.NET account, registered that game, and poof. Instantly download ability. That's a benefit that I can live with a few negatives to get.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947826)

Can't you do that with Steam anyway, without the always-on bullshit?

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

Tukz (664339) | about 3 years ago | (#36947342)

Why?
It's an option you don't have to use, you know.

You don't HAVE to sell or buy items, you're free to trade like always.
I can't see how it disrupts your game, you can just simply choose not to participate in the auction house.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

afidel (530433) | about 3 years ago | (#36947534)

My thoughts exactly, in D2 I played hardcore exclusively after the first year and only played with a fairly large group of friends who were into legit gaming, the SOJ and ZOD hacking never affected me because I simply never traded with anyone outside my group, I'm sure I'll do the same with D3 and so the real money auction house will never affect me.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (2)

klocwerk (48514) | about 3 years ago | (#36947582)

Because the guy who finds the BFG9000 he doesn't need/want is ALWAYS going to put it on the cash market, not the in-game one.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 3 years ago | (#36947864)

If there's a BFG9000 in Diablo 3 then Blizzard really did screw up the game.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

ifrag (984323) | about 3 years ago | (#36947384)

Let a real money secondary economy evolve, but for the love of Pete don't enshrine it in the game.

Well, if Blizz is set on doing this they should just fracture the community in half from the start. Establish 2 separate servers to play on, one supporting this RMT feature, and the other featuring an in-game economy only. Although the problem with the original D2 economy was that gold was worthless and you always had to barter item-for-item to get anything. So if there is going to be an "in-game" economy at all, they really need a medium of exchange that isn't worthless.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

crow_t_robot (528562) | about 3 years ago | (#36947548)

I was a hardcore D2 gamer, almost failed out of college because of that game, and I've been looking forward to D3 Very Much.

Maybe you are the one who needs to do the rethinking. D2 almost destroyed a very expensive education/life for you and you are looking forward to letting it try again with D3??

You think that's bad? (1)

chalkyj (927554) | about 3 years ago | (#36947618)

Oh, don't get distracted by just this one piece of news when there's been so much more revealed!

Max 4 person multiplayer! Region locking for co-op games! No offline single player! No mod support what so ever!

Sure, this RMT auction house is the shitty icing on the shit cake, but lets not lose sight of the complete mess this game is going to be even without this feature.

Source: http://www.destructoid.com/preview-diablo-iii-beta-207543.phtml [destructoid.com]

Re:You think that's bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36948116)

Max 4 person multiplayer!

Well that completely kills any interest I had in the game.

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

madhatter256 (443326) | about 3 years ago | (#36947688)

I was a hardcore D2 gamer, almost failed out of college because of that game, and I've been looking forward to D3 Very Much.
But real money? No. I play games as an escape from thinking about things like my bank account.

I think it is because of D2 that you have to play games to not think about your bank account... maybe if you controlled your addiction you wouldn't be in that situation ;-) /sarcasm

I will admit that when I buy a game, I don't want to be repaying it over and over.
I understand paying for WoW, but with TF2 becoming a micro-transaction game where now servers can kick you if you don't own any hats to trade, then the game stops being fun.... I hope D3 doesn't become like this... requiring you to be part of something that has nothing to do with the gameplay...

Re:Nope, not going to play Diablo 3. (1)

alphatel (1450715) | about 3 years ago | (#36947734)

There's not even a release date [diablo3release.com] yet and they're squabbling over how much to charge players for trading goods? Holy **** !!!

Oh, look (3, Insightful)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 3 years ago | (#36947054)

Blizzard jumped a shark.

Re:Oh, look (2)

Desler (1608317) | about 3 years ago | (#36947092)

Why? At least with Blizzard on board finally you don't have to go to some shady 3rd party chinese site to buy items like vast amounts of people did in D2. Or would you rather them go back to their policy of shutting down people for copyright infringement for selling in game items or Wow gold [securitycurve.com] ?

Re:Oh, look (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947544)

It's actually a great way to combat gold selling. You now get that "0.1% baron's mount" to drop for you and you can sell it for $20* or 20,000 gold*, or something like that. If there's some uber mount collector willing to pay $20 for it, then so be it. Blizzard will take their 10%* cut ($2) and you'll get a little something out of it.

In WoW, at least, you'd have to find "20k gold" (or whatever large number) or buy it from a gold seller. This looks like it's an attempt to satisfy a market and keep it above board in terms of being able to regulate it, while finding more ways to make money. And Blizzard doesn't have to do jack except come up with uber rare/uber desirable items that fans of their game will be willing to pay for to save themselves wasted hours (or days) or farming time.

I know some people will reject this idea on principle that they should never have to pay real money for in-game virtual items, but that ignores the fact that there's others doing this very thing in a black market type of fashion. This would rather be a way to try and moderate it to a degree. It's got potential for people to make some nice beer money.

(numbers are made up)

Beware the rake. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947068)

Blizzard is going to be taking a sizeable percentage off of every transaction.

Re:Beware the rake. (1)

Tukz (664339) | about 3 years ago | (#36947164)

According to the TFA, the fee is "nominal".
There is a list fee and a completing fee (when item is sold).

You get a few free listings per week.

Hooray! (1)

mikkelm (1000451) | about 3 years ago | (#36947074)

Awesome new way to launder all of my illicit income.

Sword of Visa! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947102)

Blizzard assure gamers that they're not looking to pinch pennies.

That is, gamers should not be looking to pinch pennies. Get ready to break out the Sword of Visa and PowerSwipe(tm) the Master Card, and "here comes a new challenger," the PayPalHelm

Gold Farmers of the world, Rejoice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947108)

Yay!

The new truism (4, Insightful)

sapphire wyvern (1153271) | about 3 years ago | (#36947124)

If you can't beat 'em, monetise 'em.

I guess in principle it's probably not _all_ that evil.

Still, it makes me think the gameplay experience will be like a Free To Play game... but with a $60 USD (or $90 AUD, grrrr) barrier to entry.

Re:The new truism (1)

need4mospd (1146215) | about 3 years ago | (#36947434)

You're trying to equip a Demonhorn Sword!

Would you like to purchase the license to use this item for $2?

Re:The new truism (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | about 3 years ago | (#36947780)

All they're doing is hosting a player auction house, where items can be bought from players by players for cash. They're not selling items themselves.

Re:The new truism (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 3 years ago | (#36947900)

Yeah, right. guess who gets charged transaction fees for that? Not who pays it, but who will the fingers be pointed at?

Blizzard.

Hypocritical decisions (2)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about 3 years ago | (#36947140)

So, Blizzard doesn't allow Real Money Trading in WoW, but is going to set up a system in Diablo 3 for that?

Re:Hypocritical decisions (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 3 years ago | (#36947186)

Yes, let's blast Blizzard for making a sensible decision about selling in game items for once and reversing one of their stupidest policies of the past many years. Clearly they should continue to get people shut down for copyright infringement [securitycurve.com] over the sale of in game items and gold.

Re:Hypocritical decisions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947294)

Twice that securitycurve link comment in only 23 posts? Are you pissed or something?

Re:Hypocritical decisions (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 3 years ago | (#36947350)

Over what? That Blizzard will not be trying to use copyright laws in ways it wasn't imagined to stop people from selling in game D3 items? That they are finally reversing a poor decision thus people no longer have to go to shady 3rd party sites to buy in game items and instead have a regulated and safer way since people are going to do it anyway? Yeah, I'm totally pissed!

Re:Hypocritical decisions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947938)

2x you've posted the same link. You work for Blizzard or something? Shill much?

Re:Hypocritical decisions (1)

bareman (60518) | about 3 years ago | (#36947220)

That's not hypocrisy, it's R&D. If they can make more money doing this they will most certainly bring it to WoW. Patience friend.

Re:Hypocritical decisions (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | about 3 years ago | (#36947298)

No I find it unlikely this will ever move "backwards" (sideways?) into WoW. WoW has too larger of a fanbase, too many players to try something like this so late in the game. On the other hand I do find this a feasible large-scale test of using Gold + Currency trading in a Blizzard game. Yes other people have done it first, but this is Blizzard trying it for themselves. The minor testing was of course, mini-pets in wow and mounts, which confer no in game advantage. I honestly believe they'll stick to that mantra with WoW. This is the next step mind you and I think it is something that may be on the books for Blizzard's next MMO (project Titan). They could feasibly add Currency + Gold auctions to the new MMO without the outrage that they would earn adding it to WoW.

Re:Hypocritical decisions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947444)

This would make WoW a laughingstock. It will never go to WoW until it has jumped the shark so much they are pumping it before burial.

This could actually be terrible for D3 as well- having to played D3, and not knowing what items are for sale, it is hard to call.

WoW does have purely cosmetic items (a few) available from their store, or from the trading card game. No one has any issues with that, or at least, very very few.

Re:Hypocritical decisions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947292)

I would expect that if it is a success in D3, we'll see it in WoW and/or Titan.

Re:Hypocritical decisions (1)

OnionFighter (1569855) | about 3 years ago | (#36947918)

It's two different game models for two different games, why would that be hypocritical?

DRM (5, Insightful)

c1t1z3nk41n3 (1112059) | about 3 years ago | (#36947244)

More news to come out is their decision to mirror Ubisoft with an always online requirement. Players will require a Battle.net connection even to play single player. I certainly won't be purchasing it, and it seems that most of my friends won't either. Too much DRM and no LAN play make it a poor investment.

Re:DRM (1)

LazyBoot (756150) | about 3 years ago | (#36947402)

Players will require a Battle.net connection even to play single player.

Can you provide a link to somewhere where it says that they'll do it any differently than in Starcraft 2? (Where you can play the singleplayer without internet)

Re:DRM (4, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 3 years ago | (#36947652)

Not sure if he can, but I can: here [wired.co.uk] . Took about 5 secs of Google. From the article:

To play Diablo 3, you'll need a constant internet connection -- it cannot be played offline.

Amusing part: they're trying to spin this as "good" for players: "no longer will you have to worry about leveling up to 30-40, then having to restart from scratch on Battle.net! Everyone who wants to level to 30-40 and never play on battle.net: you can just go fuck yourself." Thats a paraphrase, but you get the idea. BTW, that would be people like me. No interest in online play, would love LAN/ singleplayer. It's OK: I most likely won't have to worry about either the DRM or playing online. Either through not buying the game or... well, use your imagination.

Oh yeah, and rich players can buy more power through this auction house. Next step: items that Blizzard is selling that can only be bought on the auction house. They might not do that: depends if Activision (aka Bobby Kotick) is really letting Blizzard be free to do their thing or not. Blizzard would realize that would ruin the game. Activision just sees the $$$$$$$ they could make, and screw the gamers (more).

Oh yeah, and no modding either, according to that same article.

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947828)

They already do some of that stuff for wow, look at the store-only mounts/pet, or the recruit a friend mounts.

Re:DRM (1)

tepples (727027) | about 3 years ago | (#36948008)

Thus I have decided that I will not be paying Verizon or AT&T $600 per year to authenticate to Diablo 3 from a laptop computer. I will not be buying Diablo 3. I will not be playing Diablo 3.

Re:DRM (2)

c1t1z3nk41n3 (1112059) | about 3 years ago | (#36947666)

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/08/01/diablo-3-will-have-always-online-drm-microt/1 [bit-tech.net]

This site references an interview Blizzard gave PC Gamer. Starcraft 2 has a timeout for single player without internet. I didn't know that until I was on a ship for a month and it stopped letting me play.

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947960)

boo hoo, we here at Blizzard frankly don't care

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36948028)

I completely expect to see a lan mod, or a custom lan server within a few months of the game coming out, and thats the way it should be

To be honest... Blizzard could sell the "Portable Battle.net Server" for a hundred dollars and still make a good profit on it

I say good for them (1)

grimmjeeper (2301232) | about 3 years ago | (#36947330)

So, there's a good chance I'll never play the game. And if I did, I wouldn't spend real money to buy stuff for one of my game characters. However, a lot of people do this. It's amazing how much real world money changes hands over intangible things like this. I say good for Blizzard for taking advantage of it. It doesn't sound like they're going to charge a huge percentage (else players will continue to buy and sell elsewhere like they always have). It just lets Blizzard get that percentage rather than an outside company. And why shouldn't they? These people are going to do it one way or another. Why not integrate it into the game? It may even make the trading a little more secure. If the game system runs the transaction, there's less chance for fraud. The game can ensure that both sides of the transaction take place at the same time. The game can make sure items aren't misrepresented. At least in theory. If they do it right, this could be a significant improvement to the game.

Conflict of interest (3, Insightful)

traindirector (1001483) | about 3 years ago | (#36947540)

It just lets Blizzard get that percentage rather than an outside company. And why shouldn't they? These people are going to do it one way or another. Why not integrate it into the game?

The general argument is that then Blizzard has a conflict of interest: will future additions and changes to the game focus on increasing fun, or will they focus on increasing transaction profit?

It's easy for any person or organization to say "this is just something on the side and we will always focus on our core intent rather than generating extra profit". This is much harder to do in reality.

It's much easier to restrain oneself from entering a situation with a conflict of interest than getting involved and making questionable choices, perhaps without knowing you are making a tradeoff.

Re:Conflict of interest (1)

grimmjeeper (2301232) | about 3 years ago | (#36947982)

The whole point of being in business selling games is to make a profit. If they make a system so horribly onerous people will do their trading elsewhere like they already do. Blizzard will see either a revenue drop or just that the trading is an under performing revenue segment and they will focus on what they need to do to bring it back up (If they don't kill the franchise through stupidity à la Ubisoft).

Given that most games now are riddled with DRM and many require subscription to an online service to play, I say that the profit motive has already destroyed gaming. But the gaming companies have pretty well figured out the threshold that most gamers will accept for restrictions/fees. Sure, they've lost some players but only a very small percentage of the market. Most successful gaming companies have figured out where the fine line is between profitability and giving the people enough of what they want.

If this new trading system isn't executed well, people won't use it. There's nothing stopping people from dropping items while standing next to someone else. You can't take that away without breaking the game. And so long as that's part of the game, people will figure out a way to trade items for real cash. If Blizzard gets it right, they'll just do it in-game instead of elsewhere.

derp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947348)

D2JSP has been doing this for years, and thriving.

This way, the transfers are secure, and with a flat rate, can go towards maintaining servers.

If some pathetic loser wants to spend real money on pixels because hes too useless to get the items legitimately thats his choice. Even if blizzard didn't input this, he'd go to d2jsp and do it anyway. If you're bad enough that you can't get the items legit, it won't matter how many you buy, I'm still going to roll your face with skill.

It's also made in a way that you don't have to use it if you don't want to, and if you do want to use it, you don't need to spend real money on it. Put your own items up, since there are so many free listings per week.

The only thing now is the gold auction house is going to suffer greatly, but the salvage system is built to drain items and gold out of the economy anyway so it doesn't even matter.

Pinch pennies (1)

synapse7 (1075571) | about 3 years ago | (#36947426)

Is it just me or does it sound like that is exactly what they will be doing. So much of WoW has been homogenized moving toward a seemingly arcade style game, the auction house does not play as big a role for obtaining materials or items as it did years ago.

Dupes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947496)

Does this mean that selling duped items could be prosecuted as fraud?

Pay To Work!! (1)

crow_t_robot (528562) | about 3 years ago | (#36947610)

If you buy this game you are essentially going to work for Blizzard except you will be paying for the privilege. Blizzard is taking a cut of each auction when it is posted and again when it is sold (real money). So, you pay Blizzard to play the game (where you search for treasures) then you pay Blizzard (in real money) to trade/buy/sell these things you paid them for the opportunity to find. This is a digital diamond mine and you are a fucking slave.

Re:Pay To Work!! (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | about 3 years ago | (#36947742)

Your point would be more valid if there weren't dozens of services that do the exact same thing already. I see this as Blizzard making a virtue of necessity: if people are going to sell their rare items, then why not facilitate that?

Nobody is making you play.

So that third-party go-between is going to be... (1)

taliesinangelus (655700) | about 3 years ago | (#36947616)

Bitcoin?

Re:So that third-party go-between is going to be.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947664)

I support your comment. There is way too little talk about Bitcoin on Slashdot.

Re:So that third-party go-between is going to be.. (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 3 years ago | (#36947968)

No this isn't a black or gray market it is completely above the board so people could use real dollars.

So let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947702)

People are going to bidding in real world auctions with real money for items in a computer game? LOL

Re:So let me get this straight... (1)

grimmjeeper (2301232) | about 3 years ago | (#36948072)

Do you live under a rock? People have been doing this for years. Probably since the MUD days of yore.

Can of worms. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947760)

Just wait till large (subjective) sums of money get transfered to hot spots around the world, North Korea, China, etc then things might get interesting.

V

Liability? (1)

Spykk (823586) | about 3 years ago | (#36947846)

I seem to recall one of the arguments against allowing RMT at all in the past was that if Blizzard acknowledged that in-game items had value then they could be held liable if there was a server issue that caused someone to lose their account. Was that just an excuse, or is Blizzard so confident in their servers that they don't think that will happen?

There must be some kind of mistake (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 3 years ago | (#36947904)

It's August 1st, not April 1st today. I know they both start with "A", but you really shouldn't post things that are so obviously untrue until April Fool's Day rolls around again, since it's just not funny. I mean, this is a joke, right?

Blizzard assure gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36947970)

"Blizzard assure gamers that they're not looking to pinch pennies"

But Activision probably are.

An Economy - Blizzard Style (1)

Edgewood_Dirk (858367) | about 3 years ago | (#36948088)

This is fantastic. I personally LOVE how every WoW server's economy was total garbage, with huge variances in supply and demand, where low-level items are priceless and the highend stuff is vendor trash. I can't wait to see what happens when Blizzard applies real currency to their systems.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>