Why they have made a rollback in WoW ?
I'm curious ... is it because hacks and dupes were out of control for a small portion of time ?|||Quote:
Never in my years of WoW & D2 experienced a rollback that made me anything more than slightly annoyed.
I doubt that this will be a problem.
Well that was my opinion also.
Until when I had a DBW roll back. And the rollback itself was about one(!) minute worth.
Those who played WoW during the WotLK days surely understand.|||Rollbacks are what helped me discover, in D2, that when an unidentified item drops, the game has already determined what that item is. Before that, I thought a random sequence was still initiated upon identification.
Quote:
Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
I expect that the best of the best items will last at least many hours, but typically days to weeks in an Auction House. Its possessor will want to carefully make sure he/she's getting the best deal.|||Quote:
Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
I doubt it. For ex. in wow if you post an item on the ah it automatuically gets 'permed'. Same goes if you equip it and it becomes soulbound. It works similarily to save&exiting the game in d2. It is just scripted to different events. I'm pretty sure such thing can't really happen. and if it did then nothing would be lost as money isn't transfered from accounts until the trade is completed.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
The inevitable "Rollback" - Page 2
Peace runeword exploit. Nuff said.|||I know it'll happen, but it'll be for under 6 hours, tops. And I know I'll rage like all the fires of Inferno, since they forced this whole online song and dance crap down my throat in the first place.|||Never in my years of WoW & D2 experienced a rollback that made me anything more than slightly annoyed.
I doubt that this will be a problem.|||Exactly what happened with all the other ones. Everyone will ragequit and the game will be deemed a total failure, never to be played again. Two weeks later, all the servers will be permanently taken down.|||I expect that all auction house transactions will have multiple redundancy with duplicate servers in separate locations, so I don't think that there will be any roll-backs on the auction house.
Rollbacks on characters shouldn't be longer than 1 to 5 minutes depending upon how long the game server buffers character updates before saving to the character/account storage system. There might be something longer if there is a data center fire or a massive tornado and blizzard hasn't gone the extra distance to do simultaneous remote duplication for the account storage system. A data center fire is pretty unlikely and I wouldn't build a flimsy data center in a region plagued by tornadoes so I am not worried about rollbacks.|||I doubt there'll be any serious rollbacks in Diablo III - they learned a lot from WoW.|||Coming from an IT background, Backup infrastructure has drastically improved over the last 10 years, I wouldn't expect a rollback to go back more than 1 hour. Also, since roll-backs in RPG type games consist of a Database rollback (usually because something happened with items), there are new methods that can be used to fix the issue without resorting to a rollback. For example, if there is a major dupe outbreak that is discovered and goes viral, Blizzard would use a complex query to locate those items and destroy them without having to roll the servers back.|||Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?|||Quote:
Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
|||Quote:
Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
Blizzard: Trollface.gif
I doubt that this will be a problem.|||Exactly what happened with all the other ones. Everyone will ragequit and the game will be deemed a total failure, never to be played again. Two weeks later, all the servers will be permanently taken down.|||I expect that all auction house transactions will have multiple redundancy with duplicate servers in separate locations, so I don't think that there will be any roll-backs on the auction house.
Rollbacks on characters shouldn't be longer than 1 to 5 minutes depending upon how long the game server buffers character updates before saving to the character/account storage system. There might be something longer if there is a data center fire or a massive tornado and blizzard hasn't gone the extra distance to do simultaneous remote duplication for the account storage system. A data center fire is pretty unlikely and I wouldn't build a flimsy data center in a region plagued by tornadoes so I am not worried about rollbacks.|||I doubt there'll be any serious rollbacks in Diablo III - they learned a lot from WoW.|||Coming from an IT background, Backup infrastructure has drastically improved over the last 10 years, I wouldn't expect a rollback to go back more than 1 hour. Also, since roll-backs in RPG type games consist of a Database rollback (usually because something happened with items), there are new methods that can be used to fix the issue without resorting to a rollback. For example, if there is a major dupe outbreak that is discovered and goes viral, Blizzard would use a complex query to locate those items and destroy them without having to roll the servers back.|||Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?|||Quote:
Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
|||Quote:Wow I didn't know these sort of things happened. What happens if you found some **** hot item worth a tonne, then went and sold it on RMAH and made a nice sale and then boom! It rolled back to the point where you no longer had the item to begin with? What of the item, the money, the trade? What happens to the receiver of said item?
Can this happen?
Blizzard: Trollface.gif
The inevitable "Rollback"
Time and time again, online RPG's have suffered one small annoyance, which while rare, happens.
A server Rollback. Server crashes, data is lost, the most recent backup puts the entire game back 12hr, 24hr, who knows.
-How will you react?
-How will Blizz react?
-How will Blizz refund lost time/money?
-Will Blizz's backups be within minutes of a server/data failure? Or perhaps redundant such that a full data loss + server rollback will "never" happen?
Thoughts?|||I suppose I'll feel a little annoyed and then quickly get over it.
Unless it happened right after my favorite hardcore character died, then I'll feel happy and a little guilty.|||I've never seen D2 rollback more than five minutes.
Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think its an issue.|||This is a great question. I don't remember many rollbacks in vanilla wow so I am not sure if it is still an issue but I would imagine the server that maintains the RMAH will be separate from the players servers and have a mirror that is updated instantly.|||I've experienced rollbacks, but almost all were not blizzard games. I would imagine, with all the tall orders they are promising (server side game, RMAH) that if anything goes down, it will immediately be back up.
This probably helps explain why things are taking forever, they have to make this thing (relatively) fail proof.|||I remember a major rollback around 2002 for diablo 2|||IIRC I experienced a few rollbacks with D2 and WoW, nothing more than a few minutes nor really memorable.|||I'll probably go play offline oh wait.....|||Quote:
I'll probably go play offline oh wait.....
|||If they're going to be using the same kinda of database processing that the WoW servers use, roll backs (if any, haven't seen one in years) will have minimal effect. You'll keep everything you had the minute the servers go down for the rollback.
A server Rollback. Server crashes, data is lost, the most recent backup puts the entire game back 12hr, 24hr, who knows.
-How will you react?
-How will Blizz react?
-How will Blizz refund lost time/money?
-Will Blizz's backups be within minutes of a server/data failure? Or perhaps redundant such that a full data loss + server rollback will "never" happen?
Thoughts?|||I suppose I'll feel a little annoyed and then quickly get over it.
Unless it happened right after my favorite hardcore character died, then I'll feel happy and a little guilty.|||I've never seen D2 rollback more than five minutes.
Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think its an issue.|||This is a great question. I don't remember many rollbacks in vanilla wow so I am not sure if it is still an issue but I would imagine the server that maintains the RMAH will be separate from the players servers and have a mirror that is updated instantly.|||I've experienced rollbacks, but almost all were not blizzard games. I would imagine, with all the tall orders they are promising (server side game, RMAH) that if anything goes down, it will immediately be back up.
This probably helps explain why things are taking forever, they have to make this thing (relatively) fail proof.|||I remember a major rollback around 2002 for diablo 2|||IIRC I experienced a few rollbacks with D2 and WoW, nothing more than a few minutes nor really memorable.|||I'll probably go play offline oh wait.....|||Quote:
I'll probably go play offline oh wait.....
|||If they're going to be using the same kinda of database processing that the WoW servers use, roll backs (if any, haven't seen one in years) will have minimal effect. You'll keep everything you had the minute the servers go down for the rollback.
Followers in D3
Blizzard has revealed in the past that followers were intended to be in single player only. Does anyone know if it's changed or not ?
If it's similar, I do believe Blizzard should change their mind because in D2 it was fun and added a new dimension of PvE at first but also for PvP with certain characters (pal,sorc .... Just to name a few)|||They said that followers may be usable in multiplayer but they will take player spot....so party could be 2 players with 2 followers ..or 3 players and one player using follower.
We didn't heard anything new since then.. Except one thing.. They said they want have followers usable only in normal difficulty at first. On 1.August, they said they may change that and followers could be viable for whole game...for cost of passive slot or something.|||i loved mercs in d2 !!! i always wished they made it more personable and something to invest in or something like a sidekick haha|||Well, I highly doubt there will be aura items such as Infinity or Insight, so mercs probably will be less viable in the late game than they were in D2. I'm okay with this, because they're not balancing D3 from any reference point in D2, they're doing it from scratch. Anyways, I feel like mercs made things too easy for ranged players in D2, who were originally supposed to use hit & run tactics.
However, I do hope that there will be more NPCs fighting alongside you, as there were Barbarians in the beginning of Act 5, just to contribute to the atmosphere of the game a little bit. The barbarians gave us the nice illusion that an entire faction was trying to push back a siege, and that it wasn't all being done by one person (even though that actually was the case). More locations that have a war like feeling would be nice.|||Quote:
They said that followers may be usable in multiplayer but they will take player spot....so party could be 2 players with 2 followers ..or 3 players and one player using follower.
I don't believe they ever said that. That was player speculation/suggestion.|||My recollection is that they said Followers would be too weak to be useful in multiplayer. not that they wouldn't be allowed.|||Actually, they never said that. Followers have only ever been available in single player.|||Followers leave if anyone joins your game, never once has it been said they are usable with other people ingame.|||Yes, thank you, I forgot to mention that detail.|||no this hasnt changed
http://www.diablowiki.net/Followers
If it's similar, I do believe Blizzard should change their mind because in D2 it was fun and added a new dimension of PvE at first but also for PvP with certain characters (pal,sorc .... Just to name a few)|||They said that followers may be usable in multiplayer but they will take player spot....so party could be 2 players with 2 followers ..or 3 players and one player using follower.
We didn't heard anything new since then.. Except one thing.. They said they want have followers usable only in normal difficulty at first. On 1.August, they said they may change that and followers could be viable for whole game...for cost of passive slot or something.|||i loved mercs in d2 !!! i always wished they made it more personable and something to invest in or something like a sidekick haha|||Well, I highly doubt there will be aura items such as Infinity or Insight, so mercs probably will be less viable in the late game than they were in D2. I'm okay with this, because they're not balancing D3 from any reference point in D2, they're doing it from scratch. Anyways, I feel like mercs made things too easy for ranged players in D2, who were originally supposed to use hit & run tactics.
However, I do hope that there will be more NPCs fighting alongside you, as there were Barbarians in the beginning of Act 5, just to contribute to the atmosphere of the game a little bit. The barbarians gave us the nice illusion that an entire faction was trying to push back a siege, and that it wasn't all being done by one person (even though that actually was the case). More locations that have a war like feeling would be nice.|||Quote:
They said that followers may be usable in multiplayer but they will take player spot....so party could be 2 players with 2 followers ..or 3 players and one player using follower.
I don't believe they ever said that. That was player speculation/suggestion.|||My recollection is that they said Followers would be too weak to be useful in multiplayer. not that they wouldn't be allowed.|||Actually, they never said that. Followers have only ever been available in single player.|||Followers leave if anyone joins your game, never once has it been said they are usable with other people ingame.|||Yes, thank you, I forgot to mention that detail.|||no this hasnt changed
http://www.diablowiki.net/Followers
Free online games; how will Diablo 3 earn its keep? - Page 12
Anet is also developing Guild Wars 2 now and released 3-4 expansions if I'm not mistaken. Then you factor in all the Steam sales they had for them to boost sales when they were flagging and I can see how they would remain operational on box sales.
It doesn't seem like a good strategy to do more than "stay afloat", so it will be very interesting to see the model Guild Wars 2 uses, as it's expected to be much more popular.
It doesn't seem like a good strategy to do more than "stay afloat", so it will be very interesting to see the model Guild Wars 2 uses, as it's expected to be much more popular.
Free online games; how will Diablo 3 earn its keep? - Page 5
Quote:
I think that you need to check the laws for your state. In DC, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, the four states I know about, it is illegal for underage persons to vend for real money except under certain circumstances - and an online auction house is not one of them. It doesn't matter what account they put the profits into, it is illegal. I doubt underage persons will be able to legally fund their account this way.
Moreover, there is a whole issue of self-employment for minors who make a bunch of money. And if a parent finds out that their child sells $1000 bucks of items on the RMAH and gets angry because their kid is online too much, you can bet they will sue Blizz for child labour infractions, and there are plenty of judges - I am not saying I agree with them - who would rule in favour of the parents. And this comes on top of using credit cards without permission. So, even if it is legal in your state, I doubt Blizzard will risk the lawsuits.
I could imagine a slippery scenario to get out of this dilemma where Blizzard says that your Blizz account represents "monopoly money" that adults can exchange out for real money if they want. But then if Blizz does that, there is very little difference between this and the system I suggested. Blizz already said they weren't doing that, though, and I doubt it would resolve any legal issues if they did.
I think it is a safe bet underage persons will not have access to the RMAH.
With the RMAH you have an option; attach an account with the 3rd party provider to your Bnet account (eg. Paypal), or have any money earned from the RMAH deposited into your e-account.
If the money goes into your e-account it cannot be cashed out later, so for all intents and purposes it is "monopoly money" and no different from gold or Microsoft points or TF2 hats.|||Quote:
With the RMAH you have an option; attach an account with the 3rd party provider to your Bnet account (eg. Paypal), or have any money earned from the RMAH deposited into your e-account.
If the money goes into your e-account it cannot be cashed out later, so for all intents and purposes it is "monopoly money" and no different from gold or Microsoft points or TF2 hats.
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.|||Quote:
What Torr is missing though is the most important part that differentiates World of WarCraft and Diablo3. While in WoW the story of the game constantly progresses trough content patches, which justifies a monthly subscription fee, when it comes to Diablo3 we get all the content with the box, the story does not progress trough content patches, but only trough expansions.That and the lack of features puts Diablo3 in a position in which requirement for a monthly fee would be simply unreasonable. And before people start arguing, the main argument would be that Blizzard themselves don't feel comfortable enough with a subscription fee model for Diablo3, since they are well aware that they cannot justify a monthly subscription fee for a game that doesn't have most of the features of games that do require a subscription fee, the most important of which is continuous development of the story and the content, and that is why they are not going with a subscription based model.
I'm not missing that point, because I agree with everything you said. I was heavily against monthly fees in another thread (Machinations), so I didn't want to come here and repeat myself. My whole point was what you said... D3 in it's current form doesn't give you enough to warrant monthly fees, and I also agree with you that Blizzard is not going to have a subscription fee for Diablo in the future.
To me the comparison of D3 to WoW proves the point that a monthly fee would be unreasonable at this time.|||Quote:
I also find extremely hilarious how some players think that if a game does not have a subscription free is free and you don't really have the right to demand a quality service for $50-60 game. The most hilarious statement of all was from the previous thread about how the cost for the game "goes for the development, but the support comes extra". Customers should expect support for the product they are purchasing, they shouldn't be explained by random people on the forums that things that don't have monthly fee are free.
Seriously. Some people seem to want to pay more. To them I say Blizz, I'm sure, will happily accept any checks you wish to send them.|||Quote:
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.
Yes, but the point is that there is no legal issue with allowing anyone to sell an item for virtual currency, regardless of their age.|||Quote:
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.
But you see it is not virtual currency, regardless of how it feels. Someone paid you real money and no matter what account it goes into (Blizzard or third-party), it is real money. Indeed, Blizzard plan to take a percentage of it (the transaction fee) and call it real revenue.
If Blizzard made this monopoly money, then they would say that choosing to put money in your Blizzard account means purchasing this "monopoly money", which is equivalent in value to real-world dollars, but not real-world dollars. In addition to that probably not holding up in court when legal issues, it would mean that Blizzard could not collect real revenue from sales where the money goes into your Blizzard account.
But, Blizzard has already stated that their plan is not to do this and that the Blizzard account will have real money, which means it is illegal in most states for underage players to take part in the RMAH.
My suggestion for an exclusively gold-for-item auction house and exclusively cash-for-gold auction house does nothing to prevent buying items for cash, which I believe should be in the game. It just puts an intermediary of gold in there, thereby allowing underage players to access items that would be off limits, ensuring a gold sink, possibly reducing lawsuits (because underage persons can wait until age 18 to sell their gold) and moving the brunt of the transaction fees to those who will not care as much about them - something that is good for revenue made off of transactions and, because more people are likely to stick around, expansions.|||^Not a percentage. Flat fee.|||Quote:
^Not a percentage. Flat fee.
Yep. Sorry.|||Quote:
There are people who are very quick to call out Blizzard for trying to make money on the RMAH, who DON'T appreciate the fact that this game is free.
I understand what you mean, but the game isn't free. It'll be $60 I'm assuming, and probably another $60 for the xpac, just like it's predecessors. Like someone else mentioned, that will probably do them just fine being that they're going to sell an insane amount of copies. Sure, they could make more in some way or form, but do they need/want to? That's the point worth arguing I suppose.|||Quote:
I understand what you mean, but the game isn't free. It'll be $60 I'm assuming, and probably another $60 for the xpac, just like it's predecessors. Like someone else mentioned, that will probably do them just fine being that they're going to sell an insane amount of copies. Sure, they could make more in some way or form, but do they need/want to? That's the point worth arguing I suppose.
Not only that but they made the decision to make the game online only. If they had included offline single player then it could be argued that online support isn't included in the initial price.
I think that you need to check the laws for your state. In DC, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, the four states I know about, it is illegal for underage persons to vend for real money except under certain circumstances - and an online auction house is not one of them. It doesn't matter what account they put the profits into, it is illegal. I doubt underage persons will be able to legally fund their account this way.
Moreover, there is a whole issue of self-employment for minors who make a bunch of money. And if a parent finds out that their child sells $1000 bucks of items on the RMAH and gets angry because their kid is online too much, you can bet they will sue Blizz for child labour infractions, and there are plenty of judges - I am not saying I agree with them - who would rule in favour of the parents. And this comes on top of using credit cards without permission. So, even if it is legal in your state, I doubt Blizzard will risk the lawsuits.
I could imagine a slippery scenario to get out of this dilemma where Blizzard says that your Blizz account represents "monopoly money" that adults can exchange out for real money if they want. But then if Blizz does that, there is very little difference between this and the system I suggested. Blizz already said they weren't doing that, though, and I doubt it would resolve any legal issues if they did.
I think it is a safe bet underage persons will not have access to the RMAH.
With the RMAH you have an option; attach an account with the 3rd party provider to your Bnet account (eg. Paypal), or have any money earned from the RMAH deposited into your e-account.
If the money goes into your e-account it cannot be cashed out later, so for all intents and purposes it is "monopoly money" and no different from gold or Microsoft points or TF2 hats.|||Quote:
With the RMAH you have an option; attach an account with the 3rd party provider to your Bnet account (eg. Paypal), or have any money earned from the RMAH deposited into your e-account.
If the money goes into your e-account it cannot be cashed out later, so for all intents and purposes it is "monopoly money" and no different from gold or Microsoft points or TF2 hats.
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.|||Quote:
What Torr is missing though is the most important part that differentiates World of WarCraft and Diablo3. While in WoW the story of the game constantly progresses trough content patches, which justifies a monthly subscription fee, when it comes to Diablo3 we get all the content with the box, the story does not progress trough content patches, but only trough expansions.That and the lack of features puts Diablo3 in a position in which requirement for a monthly fee would be simply unreasonable. And before people start arguing, the main argument would be that Blizzard themselves don't feel comfortable enough with a subscription fee model for Diablo3, since they are well aware that they cannot justify a monthly subscription fee for a game that doesn't have most of the features of games that do require a subscription fee, the most important of which is continuous development of the story and the content, and that is why they are not going with a subscription based model.
I'm not missing that point, because I agree with everything you said. I was heavily against monthly fees in another thread (Machinations), so I didn't want to come here and repeat myself. My whole point was what you said... D3 in it's current form doesn't give you enough to warrant monthly fees, and I also agree with you that Blizzard is not going to have a subscription fee for Diablo in the future.
To me the comparison of D3 to WoW proves the point that a monthly fee would be unreasonable at this time.|||Quote:
I also find extremely hilarious how some players think that if a game does not have a subscription free is free and you don't really have the right to demand a quality service for $50-60 game. The most hilarious statement of all was from the previous thread about how the cost for the game "goes for the development, but the support comes extra". Customers should expect support for the product they are purchasing, they shouldn't be explained by random people on the forums that things that don't have monthly fee are free.
Seriously. Some people seem to want to pay more. To them I say Blizz, I'm sure, will happily accept any checks you wish to send them.|||Quote:
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.
Yes, but the point is that there is no legal issue with allowing anyone to sell an item for virtual currency, regardless of their age.|||Quote:
You can attach a 3rd party to your bnet account, but each AH transaction is individual in terms of whether you want the cash out or not; also, there is a circular way to revolve the money from your bnet account out, by buying items with the b-net money, then selling the items, and then taking those proceeds out...that said, you may not get back what was in there, depending on what you sell.
But you see it is not virtual currency, regardless of how it feels. Someone paid you real money and no matter what account it goes into (Blizzard or third-party), it is real money. Indeed, Blizzard plan to take a percentage of it (the transaction fee) and call it real revenue.
If Blizzard made this monopoly money, then they would say that choosing to put money in your Blizzard account means purchasing this "monopoly money", which is equivalent in value to real-world dollars, but not real-world dollars. In addition to that probably not holding up in court when legal issues, it would mean that Blizzard could not collect real revenue from sales where the money goes into your Blizzard account.
But, Blizzard has already stated that their plan is not to do this and that the Blizzard account will have real money, which means it is illegal in most states for underage players to take part in the RMAH.
My suggestion for an exclusively gold-for-item auction house and exclusively cash-for-gold auction house does nothing to prevent buying items for cash, which I believe should be in the game. It just puts an intermediary of gold in there, thereby allowing underage players to access items that would be off limits, ensuring a gold sink, possibly reducing lawsuits (because underage persons can wait until age 18 to sell their gold) and moving the brunt of the transaction fees to those who will not care as much about them - something that is good for revenue made off of transactions and, because more people are likely to stick around, expansions.|||^Not a percentage. Flat fee.|||Quote:
^Not a percentage. Flat fee.
Yep. Sorry.|||Quote:
There are people who are very quick to call out Blizzard for trying to make money on the RMAH, who DON'T appreciate the fact that this game is free.
I understand what you mean, but the game isn't free. It'll be $60 I'm assuming, and probably another $60 for the xpac, just like it's predecessors. Like someone else mentioned, that will probably do them just fine being that they're going to sell an insane amount of copies. Sure, they could make more in some way or form, but do they need/want to? That's the point worth arguing I suppose.|||Quote:
I understand what you mean, but the game isn't free. It'll be $60 I'm assuming, and probably another $60 for the xpac, just like it's predecessors. Like someone else mentioned, that will probably do them just fine being that they're going to sell an insane amount of copies. Sure, they could make more in some way or form, but do they need/want to? That's the point worth arguing I suppose.
Not only that but they made the decision to make the game online only. If they had included offline single player then it could be argued that online support isn't included in the initial price.
Free online games; how will Diablo 3 earn its keep? - Page 4
The danger which subscription fees, and micro transactions present to the gaming industry, is that they present aleternate revenue streams that can sometimes be more lucrative than box sales. When game companies start focusing more on how they can nickle and dime than the core game itself, or worse, build the core of the game around subscription fees and microtransitions, then those games aren't going to be very good.
As consumers, we should always demand at minimum 99% of the content be included in the box sale. Developers should have to meet this demand however best they can. The exception being MMOs and 'persistent game worlds' that exist online only. And no, throwing a game online only (D3, etc) doesn't qualify it as an MMO, or 'persistent game world.' In which case, the box sale of the game should be little or nothing, and the only charge fees/subscriptions.|||Quote:
They aren't charging a monthly fee. Be thankful.
well said my friend.|||Quote:
But they're not limited. An underage or poor player can sell items or gold for money and then use that money to purchase items on the RMAH.
Have you ever tried to create an account on PayPal, eBay, etc? Pretty much all companies that work in these sorts of monetary transactions refuse to service underage clients. In the US, this is because it is illegal in most (all?) states. But even if it were not illegal, you can imagine the legal fees that add up when a kid uses his/her parents' credit card without permission and the parents decide to sue Blizzard, and that is one of the main reason these age limits are on the game - a user agreement preventing these sorts of lawsuits.
Add that to the odd lot that will sue for child labour, a case that wouldn't make it through the courts, but wouldn't need to either because it would be cheaper and more in the PR interests of Blizz to settle out of court.|||I get the feeling that the inevitable console version will be where the big bucks come from. Console gamers are a huge market, and Diablo is probably the most suitable Blizzard game for consoles.|||Quote:
Have you ever tried to create an account on PayPal, eBay, etc? Pretty much all companies that work in these sorts of monetary transactions refuse to service underage clients. In the US, this is because it is illegal in most (all?) states. But even if it were not illegal, you can imagine the legal fees that add up when a kid uses his/her parents credit card without permission and the parents decide to sue Blizzard, and that is one of the main reason these age limits are on the game - to be a user agreement preventing these sorts of lawsuits.
Add that to the odd lot that will sue for child labour, a case that wouldn't make it through the courts, but wouldn't need to either because it would be cheaper and more in the PR interests of Blizz to settle out of court.
The money can be deposited in your Blizzard "e-account" which can be used to pay for a WoW subscription, buy games/merchandise from the Blizzard store and buy items via the RMAH. No credit card is needed.
So an 8 year old could get an item or gold, sell the item/gold and buy an item via the RMAH.|||I feel like we were already discussing this topic in a separate thread, but maybe a fresh start will be good. Rather then rehash that thread, I'm going to take a different tact. First, let me say that I prefer microtransactions to monthly fees if they are optional to game enjoyment, like LOTRO or Guild Wars... in terms of D3 I am fine with RMAH fees, vanity items, perhaps even monthly fees for optional add-ons like major guild support. But if were going to talk about a straight monthly fee for D3, perhaps we need to discuss what you should get for a WoW-like fee.
So for that monthly WoW fee you get access and storage on their servers, an auction house, seperate warring realms to split players competetively in open-world pvp and major guild support to group players cooperatively in pvp or pvm, special events, better tech support, the ability to have many, many players raid together in both pvp and pvm, a persistent game world where you can explore freely rather than a more linear RPG, hundreds (thousands?) of quests, mounts, vanity items, etc., etc.
So rather than argue against monthly fees, I'm willing to discuss how much Blizzard needs to add to D3 so that it is worth a monthly fee. Right now it doesn't have enough of those features above to fairly warrant a subscription by Blizzard's own "definition" of what you get for that price.|||I will proceed on the assumption that they will not charge monthly prescription in the future, as that will be a huge PR disaster, we can throw that possibility out and not waste time talking about an unlikely scenario.
However, it is very likely (bordering on certainty) that they will implement vanity stores, which is perfectly good in my book, as long as goods sold give no gameplay advantage and stick to the cosmetic side of things, giving convenience advantage though like more shared stash space or slots for RM will start to be riding the line.
I imagine the finalized fee extraction model to end up similar to:
-RMAH transaction fee.
-Vanity store
Supplemented by expansion sales, which is another word for a big DLC really. Whether they will mix smaller DLC alongside the expansions is another possibility, though I'd hope not, D3 seems more suited to bigger DLC (expansions) then numerous optional DLC, a poorly implemented rapid DLC model can fragment the game community too.|||Quote:
The money can be deposited in your Blizzard "e-account" which can be used to pay for a WoW subscription, buy games/merchandise from the Blizzard store and buy items via the RMAH. No credit card is needed.
So an 8 year old could get an item or gold, sell the item/gold and buy an item via the RMAH.
I think that you need to check the laws for your state. In DC, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, the four states I know about, it is illegal for underage persons to vend for real money except under certain circumstances - and an online auction house is not one of them. It doesn't matter what account they put the profits into, it is illegal. I doubt underage persons will be able to legally fund their account this way.
Moreover, there is a whole issue of self-employment for minors who make a bunch of money. And if a parent finds out that their child sells $1000 bucks of items on the RMAH and gets angry because their kid is online too much, you can bet they will sue Blizz for child labour infractions, and there are plenty of judges - I am not saying I agree with them - who would rule in favour of the parents. And this comes on top of using credit cards without permission. So, even if it is legal in your state, I doubt Blizzard will risk the lawsuits.
I could imagine a slippery scenario to get out of this dilemma where Blizzard says that your Blizz account represents "monopoly money" that adults can exchange out for real money if they want. But then if Blizz does that, there is very little difference between this and the system I suggested. Blizz already said they weren't doing that, though, and I doubt it would resolve any legal issues if they did.
I think it is a safe bet underage persons will not have access to the RMAH.|||Quote:
I will proceed on the assumption that they will not charge monthly prescription in the future, as that will be a huge PR disaster, we can throw that possibility out and not waste time talking about an unlikely scenario.
However, it is very likely (bordering on certainty) that they will implement vanity stores, which is perfectly good in my book, as long as goods sold give no gameplay advantage and stick to the cosmetic side of things, giving convenience advantage though like more shared stash space or slots for RM will start to be riding the line.
I imagine the finalized fee extraction model to end up similar to:
-RMAH transaction fee.
-Vanity store
Supplemented by expansion sales, which is another word for a big DLC really. Whether they will mix smaller DLC alongside the expansions is another possibility, though I'd hope not, D3 seems more suited to bigger DLC (expansions) then numerous optional DLC, a poorly implemented rapid DLC model can fragment the game community too.
I agree with every word of that post except that I'm very skeptical that the RMAH will ultimately prove profitable.|||OP, you realize D3 will likely make $500 million-$1billion in revenue over its lifespan? SC2 has made hundreds of millions already and without an expansion or DLC, which is coming very soon.
As consumers, we should always demand at minimum 99% of the content be included in the box sale. Developers should have to meet this demand however best they can. The exception being MMOs and 'persistent game worlds' that exist online only. And no, throwing a game online only (D3, etc) doesn't qualify it as an MMO, or 'persistent game world.' In which case, the box sale of the game should be little or nothing, and the only charge fees/subscriptions.|||Quote:
They aren't charging a monthly fee. Be thankful.
well said my friend.|||Quote:
But they're not limited. An underage or poor player can sell items or gold for money and then use that money to purchase items on the RMAH.
Have you ever tried to create an account on PayPal, eBay, etc? Pretty much all companies that work in these sorts of monetary transactions refuse to service underage clients. In the US, this is because it is illegal in most (all?) states. But even if it were not illegal, you can imagine the legal fees that add up when a kid uses his/her parents' credit card without permission and the parents decide to sue Blizzard, and that is one of the main reason these age limits are on the game - a user agreement preventing these sorts of lawsuits.
Add that to the odd lot that will sue for child labour, a case that wouldn't make it through the courts, but wouldn't need to either because it would be cheaper and more in the PR interests of Blizz to settle out of court.|||I get the feeling that the inevitable console version will be where the big bucks come from. Console gamers are a huge market, and Diablo is probably the most suitable Blizzard game for consoles.|||Quote:
Have you ever tried to create an account on PayPal, eBay, etc? Pretty much all companies that work in these sorts of monetary transactions refuse to service underage clients. In the US, this is because it is illegal in most (all?) states. But even if it were not illegal, you can imagine the legal fees that add up when a kid uses his/her parents credit card without permission and the parents decide to sue Blizzard, and that is one of the main reason these age limits are on the game - to be a user agreement preventing these sorts of lawsuits.
Add that to the odd lot that will sue for child labour, a case that wouldn't make it through the courts, but wouldn't need to either because it would be cheaper and more in the PR interests of Blizz to settle out of court.
The money can be deposited in your Blizzard "e-account" which can be used to pay for a WoW subscription, buy games/merchandise from the Blizzard store and buy items via the RMAH. No credit card is needed.
So an 8 year old could get an item or gold, sell the item/gold and buy an item via the RMAH.|||I feel like we were already discussing this topic in a separate thread, but maybe a fresh start will be good. Rather then rehash that thread, I'm going to take a different tact. First, let me say that I prefer microtransactions to monthly fees if they are optional to game enjoyment, like LOTRO or Guild Wars... in terms of D3 I am fine with RMAH fees, vanity items, perhaps even monthly fees for optional add-ons like major guild support. But if were going to talk about a straight monthly fee for D3, perhaps we need to discuss what you should get for a WoW-like fee.
So for that monthly WoW fee you get access and storage on their servers, an auction house, seperate warring realms to split players competetively in open-world pvp and major guild support to group players cooperatively in pvp or pvm, special events, better tech support, the ability to have many, many players raid together in both pvp and pvm, a persistent game world where you can explore freely rather than a more linear RPG, hundreds (thousands?) of quests, mounts, vanity items, etc., etc.
So rather than argue against monthly fees, I'm willing to discuss how much Blizzard needs to add to D3 so that it is worth a monthly fee. Right now it doesn't have enough of those features above to fairly warrant a subscription by Blizzard's own "definition" of what you get for that price.|||I will proceed on the assumption that they will not charge monthly prescription in the future, as that will be a huge PR disaster, we can throw that possibility out and not waste time talking about an unlikely scenario.
However, it is very likely (bordering on certainty) that they will implement vanity stores, which is perfectly good in my book, as long as goods sold give no gameplay advantage and stick to the cosmetic side of things, giving convenience advantage though like more shared stash space or slots for RM will start to be riding the line.
I imagine the finalized fee extraction model to end up similar to:
-RMAH transaction fee.
-Vanity store
Supplemented by expansion sales, which is another word for a big DLC really. Whether they will mix smaller DLC alongside the expansions is another possibility, though I'd hope not, D3 seems more suited to bigger DLC (expansions) then numerous optional DLC, a poorly implemented rapid DLC model can fragment the game community too.|||Quote:
The money can be deposited in your Blizzard "e-account" which can be used to pay for a WoW subscription, buy games/merchandise from the Blizzard store and buy items via the RMAH. No credit card is needed.
So an 8 year old could get an item or gold, sell the item/gold and buy an item via the RMAH.
I think that you need to check the laws for your state. In DC, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, the four states I know about, it is illegal for underage persons to vend for real money except under certain circumstances - and an online auction house is not one of them. It doesn't matter what account they put the profits into, it is illegal. I doubt underage persons will be able to legally fund their account this way.
Moreover, there is a whole issue of self-employment for minors who make a bunch of money. And if a parent finds out that their child sells $1000 bucks of items on the RMAH and gets angry because their kid is online too much, you can bet they will sue Blizz for child labour infractions, and there are plenty of judges - I am not saying I agree with them - who would rule in favour of the parents. And this comes on top of using credit cards without permission. So, even if it is legal in your state, I doubt Blizzard will risk the lawsuits.
I could imagine a slippery scenario to get out of this dilemma where Blizzard says that your Blizz account represents "monopoly money" that adults can exchange out for real money if they want. But then if Blizz does that, there is very little difference between this and the system I suggested. Blizz already said they weren't doing that, though, and I doubt it would resolve any legal issues if they did.
I think it is a safe bet underage persons will not have access to the RMAH.|||Quote:
I will proceed on the assumption that they will not charge monthly prescription in the future, as that will be a huge PR disaster, we can throw that possibility out and not waste time talking about an unlikely scenario.
However, it is very likely (bordering on certainty) that they will implement vanity stores, which is perfectly good in my book, as long as goods sold give no gameplay advantage and stick to the cosmetic side of things, giving convenience advantage though like more shared stash space or slots for RM will start to be riding the line.
I imagine the finalized fee extraction model to end up similar to:
-RMAH transaction fee.
-Vanity store
Supplemented by expansion sales, which is another word for a big DLC really. Whether they will mix smaller DLC alongside the expansions is another possibility, though I'd hope not, D3 seems more suited to bigger DLC (expansions) then numerous optional DLC, a poorly implemented rapid DLC model can fragment the game community too.
I agree with every word of that post except that I'm very skeptical that the RMAH will ultimately prove profitable.|||OP, you realize D3 will likely make $500 million-$1billion in revenue over its lifespan? SC2 has made hundreds of millions already and without an expansion or DLC, which is coming very soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)