No, you're just being lazy and expect people to give you everything on a platter, not to mention willfully ignorant to the problem that Activision Blizzard is about as trustworthy in their promises as a politician during an election season.
Not really, you're just failing to apply any kind of nuance to the topic. "GaaS = bad" isn't the general complaint. "Bad GaaS = bad" is the complaint. It just so happens most GaaS titles are pretty bad, because publishers use GaaS as a way to launch early access titles that, if they don't immediately explode into popularity, they wholesale abandon. So, gamers have come to equate "GaaS = broken, unfinished, poorly made game". With Diablo IV, we've had multiple extensive betas, the most transparent development process for any Blizzard title, and more than enough time to evaluate. That Blizzard intends to support it with major content via GaaS is neither here nor there: based on the multiple betas, Diablo IV is a very high-quality game worth paying for. If it turns out to be a terrible GaaS? That won't subtract from the core campaign and leveling experience that we already know is pretty good. Hence the excitement: we've played it, and Blizzard didn't fuck it up. That you're the highest poster in this thread, trying to convince everyone who's already played the game and already know it's worth paying for should be ringing alarm bells for you.
Sure, if that's your beef. The question is: why this game in particular? What is it about Diablo IV that specifically warrants its own thread and you specifically calling this one game out right here and now?
If the recent playstation showcase is anything to go by, the majority of posters around here share a clear dislike towards these types of games at best, and absolutely shit on them at worst. I'm just speaking about what I saw happening in various threads that touched upon GaaS games.
That kinda sucked though, because cdpr was a ambitious xev that wasnt doing any DRM, GAAS, monetization schemes. And they try to push things forward with tech and prsentation and write all their quests and so on instead of procedural generation.
This is such bullshit
Almost like it cost much more nowadays, almost..
There's a difference between "support" and "adding new content".
No extra cost? Diablo 3 launched with the real money auction house. There are also cosmetics that you can purchase with the deluxe edition of Reaper of Souls.
The poor devs need our support! Blizzard is too indie a company to support their game long term without hassling the users for more money. Dont you get it?
Drizzlehell
's right, people. You can't be surprised when companies see games like Diablo 4 and worse when it comes to monetization and game design twisted around it, when you give massive time, attention and money to the Diablo 4's of the world.
How so? From what I see, it appears that the monetization was proportional to how much effort they put into the game post release.
I'm comparing what happened with D3 to what Blizzard has plans for D4. They've already said that D4's seasons are going to be bigger than D3's.
My analysis is purely based on the available information. I'm not claiming that I know the future and that Blizzard will or won't stick to their promises.
Indeed. This is what I was talking about when I talked about proportionality a few comments back.
Blizzard has millions to spare.
www.gamespot.com
Completely optional cosmetics that have nothing to do with gameplay are not predatory.I wonder what gives players the impression of abuse and predatory practices.
Thanks to the images of Diablo IV's in-game store posted to Reddit, fans now have a better idea of what to expect from the game's optional cosmetics. One image shows a set of armor for the Necromancer selling for around 2,800 platinum, Diablo IV's premium currency. Blizzard has previously stated that the game's premium battle pass would sell for around 1,000 platinum, which is the equivalent of roughly $10. That means the cosmetic armor set in the image costs around $28. Another image shows the price of an in-game mount and armor set at 1,600 platinum, or $16.
Fans point out that it's rare that players can buy the exact amount of a premium currency they want, meaning players in Diablo IV will likely need to buy $30 or $20 worth of platinum in order to buy the $28 or $16 cosmetics respectively.
Diablo 4's Microtransaction Prices Revealed, And They Aren't Cheap
A full set of cosmetic armor for one class looks like it will cost around $28.
Even if you want to defend the absurd pricing, you can't defend having to spend money to buy currency that let's you buy those cosmetics and is designed so that your balance is never zero.
Then tell me what your definition of predatory is, and what your threshold is that crosses the line between normal and predatory?
You're moving the goalposts. Please acknowledge/respond to my previous points before moving on to something else. As for the currency demarcations, that already exists in many other online stores. Does that make it less scummy? No. Players should be able to buy as much or as little currency as they want/need. Battle.net does this already, but the same probably can't be said for the D4 shop. Is it dumb? Yes. Predatory? No.
