As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Diablo] 4: Rogue! D2R! Follower season is live!

17980818284

Posts

  • SpaffySpaffy Fuck the Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 18
    Most of the good necro sets/builds use minimal minions, though this seasons free set is a minion one

    Aw, that’s kind of a bummer. Is it good enough that I should still get it? Can I earn the packages on the Necro but open them on a... DH maybe to get a DH set instead? Is it based on level so I would still need to level up a DH in that scenario?

    *Rathma stuff*

    Oh, wow, even though I didn’t really want a pet build, it’s sad to hear a Necro’s pets aren’t really useful for harder stuff.

    I’m about level 51 with my Necro now. Just working through the story with my gf who never really did it. I’m feeling pretty weak compared to her Wizard, though I’m not sure if I just have a bad skill setup or worse luck with good items or if Wizards are just OP or what. Corpse Explosion seems like the best skill, and it is definitely good and satisfying, but getting a corpse in the first place can be the tough part. I know I’m still early in, so there’s probably that one Legendary that makes some skill way more useful.

    Overall it’s pretty fun though

    I've been leveling with Singularity Skeletal Mage to generate corpses, and then Corpse Lance for days. It's pretty fun and kills stuff fast enough. Corpse Explosion felt too localised compared to ripping bones out of a guy on one side of the screen and stabbing a guy on the other side with them.

    Spaffy on
    ALRIGHT FINE I GOT AN AVATAR
    Steam: adamjnet
  • NogginNoggin Registered User regular
    Corpse explosion-final embrace(or something like that) is fun for that! It animates and launches across the screen at monsters.

    Battletag: Noggin#1936
    Ringo
  • NobodyNobody Registered User regular
    While I like both Firebird builds, really they're just too frentic for me. I ended up rebuilding a Typhon set to farm back to LoD Hydras.

    Betsuni
  • SpaffySpaffy Fuck the Zero Registered User regular
    Just starting to dip into the Rathma set and man, this playstyle doesn't feel great. My big nuke, Army of the Dead, is barely visible on-screen and I often have to check my toolbar to check it even cast, and even then I'm not sure where it's targeted. And I have all these pets following me around and they do virtually nothing except lower my cooldowns.

    Also without the appropriate CD reduction I had to replace my mobility spell with Bone Lance just to have something to keep me killing between AotD.

    Ideally I just wanna throw bone spears for days but this set is all I got for now, and I can't help but feel it's been poorly thought out. All the elements feel so disjointed. Compare to UE DH, where you just feel like an apex predator at all time and a well-oiled machine in movement, and the difference is just night and day.

    ALRIGHT FINE I GOT AN AVATAR
    Steam: adamjnet
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    the good news is that the top necro build is currently bone spear with the simulacrum set, if you wanna stick with it long enough to get that. Inarius' is also pretty fun.

    I agree rathma seems poorly designed, though

    NREqxl5.jpg
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
    Ringo
  • SpaffySpaffy Fuck the Zero Registered User regular
    edited April 21
    Spaffy wrote: »
    Just starting to dip into the Rathma set and man, this playstyle doesn't feel great. My big nuke, Army of the Dead, is barely visible on-screen and I often have to check my toolbar to check it even cast, and even then I'm not sure where it's targeted. And I have all these pets following me around and they do virtually nothing except lower my cooldowns.

    Also without the appropriate CD reduction I had to replace my mobility spell with Bone Lance just to have something to keep me killing between AotD.

    Ideally I just wanna throw bone spears for days but this set is all I got for now, and I can't help but feel it's been poorly thought out. All the elements feel so disjointed. Compare to UE DH, where you just feel like an apex predator at all time and a well-oiled machine in movement, and the difference is just night and day.

    I ditched the Necro. Couldn't stand the playstyle, way too boring. Fired up a DH instead and even at it's very squishy early stages, it just feels so much better to play - just kinda annoyed that I used my Haedrig's on the necro so have a long grind ahead of me.

    Spaffy on
    ALRIGHT FINE I GOT AN AVATAR
    Steam: adamjnet
  • bwaniebwanie Posting into the void Registered User regular
    edited April 21
    FYI the technical alpha is playable for anyone. All classes, Still only act 1-2 unless you switch to legacy mode.

    edit: look for it on reddit if you're interested. I'm having a ton of fun with it.

    bwanie on
    Yh6tI4T.jpg
    BetsuniKoopahTroopah
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    I don't recall the original freaking Diablo 2 beta supporting offline mode. Blizzard sure were asking for this one.

  • NogginNoggin Registered User regular
    Closed alpha news

    Battletag: Noggin#1936
  • BetsuniBetsuni UM-R60L Talisker IVRegistered User regular
    Noggin wrote: »
    Closed alpha news


    Yeah, think I'm going to pass on this game. Was hoping for a simpler just kill monsters get loot fun where I can dink around if I have spare time. This seems more typical mobile "you must be online at all times, or when we say so" type of game and even added in some PvP for those people who love that sort of Diablo game.

    oosik_betsuni.png
    Steam: betsuni7
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    edited April 21
    Hoo boy it's already unlisted.

    Edit: Oh hey look at all of these cool things Diablo 3 could have gotten but a mobile game gets instead

    Donnicton on
    see317
  • 3cl1ps33cl1ps3 I will build a labyrinth to house the cheese Registered User regular
    That game's going to make them a hojillion dollars in China which is all leadership cares about.

    DonnictonKoopahTroopah38thDoesee317Smrtnik
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    Donnicton wrote: »
    Hoo boy it's already unlisted.

    Edit: Oh hey look at all of these cool things Diablo 3 could have gotten but a mobile game gets instead

    Did you also want mobile style transactions to fund them?

    ...although that's probably where D4 is going.

  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    Donnicton wrote: »
    Hoo boy it's already unlisted.

    Edit: Oh hey look at all of these cool things Diablo 3 could have gotten but a mobile game gets instead

    Did you also want mobile style transactions to fund them?

    ...although that's probably where D4 is going.

    Honestly? Yes. D3 should have had monetization, maybe then they would have continued development on it the way PoE did.

  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    Donnicton wrote: »
    Hoo boy it's already unlisted.

    Edit: Oh hey look at all of these cool things Diablo 3 could have gotten but a mobile game gets instead

    Did you also want mobile style transactions to fund them?

    ...although that's probably where D4 is going.

    Why would/should mobile transactions be the only possible solution to fund them? Granted in Blizzard's mind that is the only option.

  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    Well let's use the term "ongoing monetization" anyway. Immortal is billing itself as an MMO, so they are far more interested in engagement than anything focused on one-time campaign sales ever would. They could have done that with late life D3 but it would have been a total paradigm shift.

    The other issue is that RoS seems to have underperformed the base game pretty badly, though not that surprising considering how well the base game sold. Still Blizzard would rather put their efforts into new games that haven't been written off by most of their audience. And I do think its a bit of an uphill climb now when some scrappy indie company has you beaten badly for ARPG engagement.

  • breton-brawlerbreton-brawler Registered User regular
    wait, what? what year is this? I feel like this outrage has happened before?

  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    Well let's use the term "ongoing monetization" anyway. Immortal is billing itself as an MMO, so they are far more interested in engagement than anything focused on one-time campaign sales ever would. They could have done that with late life D3 but it would have been a total paradigm shift.

    I'm already familiar with Kotick's sociopathic obsession with MAUs every time he opens his mouth in a financial call. But at the end of the day it's a self-feeding loop of their own design - they don't make content for it because they don't make money off of it, but they're not making money off of it because of their refusal to make content for it. How about they actually create the content, and money will come when we actually see it? This isn't "Kickstarter Bobby Kotick's next raise", they need to actually make something for us to (want to) buy first. How they prefer to deliver that content is not really my problem, it's their problem to figure out if it's going to get me to part with my money.
    The other issue is that RoS seems to have underperformed the base game pretty badly, though not that surprising considering how well the base game sold. Still Blizzard would rather put their efforts into new games that haven't been written off by most of their audience. And I do think its a bit of an uphill climb now when some scrappy indie company has you beaten badly for ARPG engagement.

    The only noteworthy replayability RoS had at launch was regular rifts and bounties, it took another five months for season journeys and greater rifts to come out and then outside of Necromancer and whatever zone scraps weren't tossed out with the abandonment of the second expansion's development, they dropped the game largely into autopilot and opted to do nothing while PoE overtook the ARPG market. Again it doesn't make money because they don't do anything to make money; it's a hole they dug themselves into, so as you can imagine I don't have too many tears to shed for the self-inflicted financial plight of the poor multi-billion dollar corporation.

  • The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Registered User regular
    edited April 22
    the good news is that the top necro build is currently bone spear with the simulacrum set, if you wanna stick with it long enough to get that. Inarius' is also pretty fun.

    I agree rathma seems poorly designed, though

    I've been doing LoD Corpse Explosion on Hardcore and am enjoying it more than the vast majority of Necro set builds. Bone Spear is powerful but super bland to play. Well, maybe not super bland, but virtually identical to Frozen Orb Wizard, which I had been playing.

    Honestly, it's kind of impressive how few options there are with Necro, as far as builds around sets go. I've said before, I like spidermancer, but it requires a crazy amount of CDR (and before you get there is incredibly clunky and frustrating to play), and doesn't get the benefit from minions like the new Rathma's does, but is dramatically more fun to play, once you get there. LoD CE is pretty close in the fun factor, to me, so I'm fine with it for now. I have the gear to switch over to spidermancer, but I'm in a groove, and since it's on Hardcore, I don't want to mess with that. :lol: EDIT: To be clear, you can make all the sets work to one degree or another. They're just largely not nearly as effective as LoD or Carnival, but to me, more importantly, none of the sets, in function, provide a very good argument to play Necro over another class. Pestilence is the only one with much flavor.

    Rathma, yeah, it just doesn't feel intuitive, is overly clunky, AoD is poorly designed both as a skill and visually. You already have so many minions, it's hard to tell, as someone mentioned, when you use AoD, and when you do figure out what to look for, as I've said before, the actual area of effect of the ability is smaller than the graphical representation, with Unconventional Warfare, which you'll be using in that build. So it looks like you're hitting a massive area, but you're really not. It's like base CE radius (15y I think), but the visual makes it look like 30y. Poor design. Plus, again I know I've said this in the past, but it will never not feel shitty to have a mess of minions and have them be completely functionless, aside from providing CDR to one skill. Cool, 7 skeles, 8 revives, maybe a golem...who combined can't kill a single trash mob on their own. Really, the only way to have minions do a damn thing other than provide CDR for AoD (or LotD, with Zodiac in other builds) is to play LoD/N. Even then, though, there aren't enough legendaries that provide damage to minions to compete with literally any other type of build.

    I'll never understand what Blizzard has against minions being functional outside of early game. D2 did the exact same thing, and it was no less frustrating there.

    EDIT: My first primal on HC this season was a god damned Blackthorn amulet.

    Second was a fucking Halcyon's Ascent.

    Someone is having a laugh at my expense. :lol:

    The Dude With Herpes on
    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

    Kayne Red Robe
  • Forever ZefiroForever Zefiro cloaked in the midnight glory of an event horizonRegistered User regular
    What is the best set offered as a gift this season?

    2fbg9lin3kdl.jpg
    XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
  • The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Registered User regular
    edited April 22
    Well let's use the term "ongoing monetization" anyway. Immortal is billing itself as an MMO, so they are far more interested in engagement than anything focused on one-time campaign sales ever would. They could have done that with late life D3 but it would have been a total paradigm shift.

    The other issue is that RoS seems to have underperformed the base game pretty badly, though not that surprising considering how well the base game sold. Still Blizzard would rather put their efforts into new games that haven't been written off by most of their audience. And I do think its a bit of an uphill climb now when some scrappy indie company has you beaten badly for ARPG engagement.

    RoS did 1/4-1/5 of the total sales of the base game in its first week. This isn't a simple number, though, because expansions traditionally don't sell nearly as well as the base game, unless it's an MMO, and there's a reason why the entirety of the industry has moved away from expansions as a model, generally, unless it's tied to a seasonal thing or an MMO. RoS also came on the back of Blizzard making some incredibly boneheaded decisions with D3, with the AH, drops, etc, that had already turned a lot of people off before RoS even came out.

    However, over the course of 2015, they added 10m in sales between the base game and expansion, to 30m total, and now we're 6 years on and several consoles later, and given that the game has functionally only sold as a package deal in the time since, specific RoS sales would be nearly impossible to suss out at this point, if it even mattered.

    I would be surprised if over the PS4/XB1/Switch, in additional to ongoing PC sales, if D3 weren't somewhere well above 50m units sold. It's made, at minimum, a couple billion dollars. And there's no way in hell or any other realm, that development costs, advertising, etc, is close to making the profits look like anything but an absurd success.

    The problem has never been profits or units sold, particularly with D3. It's about profits not being good enough anymore. Spend $200 million, make $3 billion? But where's the growth?!? :rotate: We will never know how much more money Diablo 3 could have made, had they not done stupid shit like the RMAH and soured so many people on the game, but even with that, it's made an obscene amount of money. It just doesn't count for anything, because it's not expanding the market share or implementing recurring customer attachment via monetization methods. Shareholders aren't satisfied with profits anymore, they're irrelevant. The name of the game is growth, and Diablo 3 has no room to really expand that in a way that would be acceptable to Activision and stock prices. I don't even care if Immortal has all the gameplay elements that I want, it's chock full of stupid shit that is designed around making you play all the time, whether you want to or not, and make your brain think that you need to pay more to get the things faster that you want. I honestly haven't watched the update video, but it'd have to have changed a dramatic amount about how the gameplay loop was designed from what was shown in the earlier alpha, and judging from reactions, they've done the opposite.

    There's a reason I'm on the fence about D2:R and I'm not even slightly hyped about D4. Blizzard hasn't shown interest in designing anything that is fun for the sake of fun, in a decade or so. It's all about content design that is intended to make your brain think it is being rewarded, and pull you into putting time to seek those rewards, fun or not, and increasingly putting that next "hit" behind a paywall. Immortal may be more egregious than whatever D4 ends up looking like, but there's no way D4 is going to be a "here's the whole game, we're not going to try to drain your wallet after you buy it". I will be floored if some fundamental system that we expect, or are used to, isn't behind microtransactions or loot boxes. Transmog/dyes seem likely. Or stupid shit like "boosters" that increase drops of crafting or enchanting materials.

    I still enjoy D3 because it's all right there, and it's fun to play, at least for the seasonal stuff, and isn't asking me for money all the time. But if they started charging to participate in seasons, like (edit: Destiny, not diablo, derp) or Fortnite or whatever? (yes, yes, they're "free", but they're totally not) Nah. And I fully expect D4 to have shit like that.

    I hate it, but fortunately there are still games being made that aren't going in that direction; it's just too bad that so many of the series and developers that I used to be a sure thing are going that way

    The Dude With Herpes on
    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

    RanlinRingo38thDoe
  • BetsuniBetsuni UM-R60L Talisker IVRegistered User regular
    What is the best set offered as a gift this season?

    DH for the UE. :)

    oosik_betsuni.png
    Steam: betsuni7
    Ranlin
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    diablo 3 came out in 2012. it's not worth supporting because it's old. and I doubt poe has some massive juggernaut playerbase to say otherwise

  • Forever ZefiroForever Zefiro cloaked in the midnight glory of an event horizonRegistered User regular
    Betsuni wrote: »
    What is the best set offered as a gift this season?

    DH for the UE. :)

    Well shoot, I already have that from a previous season, so I’ll pass, but it is pretty fun!

    After looking a bit, I’m thinking either Crusader or Witch Doctor

    2fbg9lin3kdl.jpg
    XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    I'm hard pressed to find games with significant ongoing updates that aren't being monitized in an ongoing way though. Even extremely fair F2P indie games or subscription MMOs. Its not even a question of how much money or profit, it's like, do we have *any* incentive to keep updating so people play for years, if we aren't getting ongoing revenue from at least some of those players.

    And its not like D3 hasn't had free updates, a ton more than D2 ever got, its just not enough to compete with true ongoing games.

    The success from the console releases could've been handled somewhat differently but, those aren't even always-online games. So its not surprising that its lacking Immortal style features.

    I guess this all spun out of an odd to me comment like "why aren't they just updating a really old game instead of making new one." I don't really want to defend billion dollar blizzard here but it comes across as a pretty strange expectation of any company.
    Jars wrote: »
    diablo 3 came out in 2012. it's not worth supporting because it's old. and I doubt poe has some massive juggernaut playerbase to say otherwise

    It's not "Blizzard's target audience" massive but it dwarfs D3 activity at this point. Not to say it makes any sense for them to pursue that path but there is some amount of money being left on the table.

  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    It's not a zero sum concept, they can update one game while also making a new one. Well.... a normal company could - given how much I've heard about Overwatch 2 being a shitshow it may in fact be beyond Blizzard's capacity.

    Also, for some perspective, Hearthstone came out before Reaper of Souls did. Why they don't continue to update Diablo 3 indeed.

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    tcgs are developed with.. turn over in cards? however you want to call it. I guess they could have built it in from the start, but there wasn't any groundwork for that ahead of time. the closest you had were people selling items on ebay and shit in diablo 2, which they did try to bring over and led to a ton of tinfoil hat nonsense and didn't make them any money anyway.

    then there's the whole issue of blizzard becoming less blizzard and more just activision with a different name, and if arpgs are much of a market anyway. the only prominent release I can think of between diablo 3's release and now is grim dawn, and that is behind diablo in some ways despite being 5 years newer.

    rahkeesh2000
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    edited April 22
    Also there's no Hearthstone 2 in development. There is still money to be made from ARPGs, Blizzard is just pushing their efforts mostly into new games rather than trying to get people to come back to D3. And yeah, probably ones with ongoing purchases built in from day one, where Hearthstone here is at the egregious end of "you need to open loot boxes just to play the game."

    rahkeesh2000 on
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    tcgs are developed with.. turn over in cards? however you want to call it. I guess they could have built it in from the start, but there wasn't any groundwork for that ahead of time. the closest you had were people selling items on ebay and shit in diablo 2, which they did try to bring over and led to a ton of tinfoil hat nonsense and didn't make them any money anyway.

    then there's the whole issue of blizzard becoming less blizzard and more just activision with a different name, and if arpgs are much of a market anyway. the only prominent release I can think of between diablo 3's release and now is grim dawn, and that is behind diablo in some ways despite being 5 years newer.

    Path of Exile came out a year and a half after Diablo 3 released, reportedly made a respectable $50m in profit in 2019 and 2020(after factoring in covid-related costs), and are actively developing it while also working on Path of Exile 2. Granted it's not Kotick money but whether or not you may think ActiBlizzard money is the only benchmark for whether there's a market there is absolutely a space for competently developed ARPGs.

    Activision taking over is where I would lay the blame for sure, it is if nothing else completely on brand for ActiBlizzard to abandon a flagging product and start over rather than expend any effort into turning it around.

  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    Activision acquired Blizzard 13 years ago. For better or worse they are one company now and they have been since Starcraft 2 came out. Everybody has a pet theory for the exact moment that Activision suits started ruining Blizzard, but the truth is probably messy and complicated, and there is no single good vs evil reason for anything that's happened. As far as I'm concerned, OW2, D2:R and D4 all look quite promising, so the company is not nearly dead yet.

  • BetsuniBetsuni UM-R60L Talisker IVRegistered User regular
    Betsuni wrote: »
    What is the best set offered as a gift this season?

    DH for the UE. :)

    Well shoot, I already have that from a previous season, so I’ll pass, but it is pretty fun!

    After looking a bit, I’m thinking either Crusader or Witch Doctor

    I'm biased and always go DH. Sorry that was part of my joke, but it is true since UE is super fast to get up to speed and GoD set is still good. I did try out the Firebird set on the Switch. While it was neat, just hard for me to get into with all the prep work before melting monsters (although GoD is just as bad if they put an elite mob at the doorway).

    oosik_betsuni.png
    Steam: betsuni7
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    overwatch 2 is literally on fire right now and might never see the light of day, and d4 reeks of 'games as a service' money extraction so I can't say I share your enthusiasm.

    d2r does look good, but it's just an old game with new paint

    3cl1ps3
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    overwatch 2 is literally on fire right now and might never see the light of day, and d4 reeks of 'games as a service' money extraction so I can't say I share your enthusiasm.

    d2r does look good, but it's just an old game with new paint

    Do you have a source for any of that? D4 might be a game as a service but that doesn't bother me at all, it means they have a financial incentive to continue its development indefinitely like PoE does. The reason D3 was abandoned is because it's too old fashioned and wasn't monetized enough.

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited April 22
    the overwatch stuff has been a constant drip feed of things that I have read, but I don't save links or anything for it. most recently kaplan just left blizzard and he was lead dev of overwatch. the situation of that game is pretty dire at this point

    diablo 4 though, that's just my impression of how things are nowadays combined with the always online factor. there's a good chance d2r is the last blizzard game I play. and it's technically not a new game, just a game I liked a lot back in the day that I would like to play again in a resolution that isn't 800x600. I don't care about perpetual game development, I don't need to play a game for 10 years.

    Jars on
  • KwoaruKwoaru Registered User regular
    If D4 is monetized in the same way as PoE and also promises to be actively supported in the same way as PoE then I'm okay with it being a game as service situation (though hopefully with more player qol benefits than PoE offers up front)

    If D4 is monetized like overwatch then I'd be pretty leery

    I'd be pretty surprised if D4 launches without some kind of revenue stream beyond the initial purchase though

    2x39jD4.jpg
  • The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Registered User regular
    Maybe it's because I've been playing a lot of No Man's Sky lately, but I just can't bring myself to have any.soet of empathy for Blizzard with their modem attitude towards development and monetization.

    NMS was, by most standards, a dumpster fire on release (I enjoyed it, but it absolutely did not live up to the expectations that they had only themselves to blame for setting), yet here we are nearly 6 years later, and it's gotten endless free massive updates, and not a single thing in the game is monetized. Maybe Hello Games had more on the line to not having a stable of fans who were loyal, and no cash cow mmo at its height, like Blizz was with D3. But they stuck with it, took their hits, admitted their mistakes, and dig in and got back to work to make it right. I have to assume that at some point they saw that their efforts were being rewarded with sales, or they couldn't keep doing it, but there is still no end in sight for the game. Contrast that with D3, that launched with a RMAH that players were vocal about how bad of an idea it was, then, and then players quickly discovered how a demonstrably anti-player fun loot system was paired with the AH to make gearing without it so miserable that you were driven to use it. Then a period of Blizzard resisting the consensus that it all sucked, arguing it provided choice and nonsense like that (they were pioneers in what the modern bullshit corporate speak is to justify monetization), before finally relenting when they had an expansion pack to sell to a fairly hostile player base. I suspect it didn't even matter much to them that RoS was widely praises as fixing the majority of problems in the base game, with great additions on top of that. They lost what was likely a cash cow with the RMAH and unit sales of the expansion probably paled in comparison to the potential the RMAH had for ongoing profits, even with a reduced player base and the damage to fan loyalty. I think it's common for players to make the mistake that any company we like, cares any more about us, than their bottom line. Sure, developers care, but the folks making the choices at the top sure as shit don't. And it's not just Blizzard or game companies; corporations of all types have largely left the era of customer relationships in the past. You, a lifelong customer, just aren't as important as the potential growth they can achieve by enacting policies that fuck you over, but trap a thousand others. Your loyalty is an acceptable loss to the potential growth that can come if they don't "waste" resources on keeping their customers happy, and instead find innovations to monetization of their products.

    As far as D4 goes, I'm not sure what anyone is expecting. WoW is locked in it's sub/xpack model, but everything Blizzard has developed or released in since D3 has been about loot boxes, rng, monetizing every little thing including even playing at all, or how much you play. As I said before, D4 might not be as egregious as Immortal, but you're living on the moon if someone thinks it isn't going to have some insidious monetization in there.

    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    the RMAH did not make them money. seriously. you can keep repeating it but it is not true that the RMAH made blizzard a dime. all that money went to paypal.

    it was a service that they thought players wanted based on player behavior in diablo 2 and nothing more.

    3cl1ps3RanlinKoopahTroopahrahkeesh2000Smrtnik
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    I genuinely don't think a single Blizzard game has "insidious" monetization. I do think Hearthstone is skeezy, but that's typical of the genre.

  • 3cl1ps33cl1ps3 I will build a labyrinth to house the cheese Registered User regular
    I think Overwatch's implementation of microtransactions is pretty bad. Specifically, how much useless chaff is in lootboxes compared to how long they take to earn in-game and how often they make limited time ones with many extremely rare drops.

    38thDoeKayne Red Robe
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    I haven't played a lot of overwatch, but when I did they had a seasonal event with limited skins locked behind loot boxes and it was... not great

    38thDoe
Sign In or Register to comment.