This is all in response to Luckmann's posts, I just didn't want to make this any longer by quoting everything already posted so I will paraphrase.
First - you stated in response to MadScientist's post on Majority.
"First of all, majority rule by the deluded masses of ignorants is what's wrong with society at large."
This might be true but either way, the majority still rule regardless of their intelligence, at least in some societies that is.
Second - You went on to comment on Dimebob's response about your opinion on the economic effects this would or wouldn't have.
"I don't like the idea of an artificially induced attempt to control a superflous (superfluous) or non-existant (existent) economical concept interfering with core mechanics and gameplay where it will simply impede reasonable usage. The reasoning as to why or examples beyond that point is irrelevant, since the imposed band-aid or "sink" is entirely unnecessary and arbitrary if you're not concerned with the supposed "economy". "
Well I don't see how this attempt at controlling a "non-existent" economical concept" is "artificially induced" for starters. But since there is a supply of items that existed and may well exist in D2 and D3 respectively, as well as a varied level of demand.......that sounds like an economy to me, albeit basic. The only possible way this could interfere with whatever you might define as the core mechanics of this particular game would be that when you get an item and say to yourself "Hey this is better than what I have, I'll use this." and then equip it, you won't be able to trade it to another person. So unless the economy, which you've already stated is non-existent in this game, is a core mechanic, then this won't affect anything other than people's ability to exploit the "farming" aspect of D2, which would probably fall under your idea of "Reasonable Usage."
Third - Then you commented on a mention of the greater good of the developersintentions which was brought up by emilemil1.
"The issue of course being what is percieved (perceived)as "the greater good". To me, it's a game that is good in it's own right, without compromising gameplay features arbitrarily.
And in the context of Diablo, that greater good doesn't include enforcing BoE's. If they want to "fix" "the economy", they should strive to do it in a manner that doesn't compromise gameplay. It [the "solution"] should be an issue for those that practice trading, those that enforce the supposed economy - it shouldn't be a ball and chain to us that doesn't."
I'm guessing that when you use the word "arbitrarily" here you mean it in the sense that what was done was done without reason. That can't be so because you were in fact given multiple reasons in the original post that started this discussion. In fact, the first words that preface these reasons are "the reasoning is..."
I WILL however say that i like your idea about fixing the problem from the perspective of those creating the problem so those who remain frequently uninvolved will not be majorly affected. However, as far as I can tell, this solution does just that. If you're a person who got by on trading Items in the last game, you're going to have a much harder time proceeding through the game if you're intent on not wearing items for fear of the binding principal, OR you're going to have far fewer items to trade because you're needing them to get through the game. Now if you're a person who doesn't trade very frequently, then this rule won't affect you hardly at all because you're going to equip items whether they bind to you or not because you're not otherwise going to trade them. It might seem more of a critical hindrance to the latter group of people only because the few times they want to trade an item, they might have already equipped what they wanted to trade and be SOL which might make it seem like a bigger problem.
Binding is a gear sink because it takes items off the market.
Unbinding a item might be one of those B.Net 2.0 priced services.
You take it off the market but you don't do anything to alter demand. Once I have my 1337 axe, I'm gonna bind it to my autostatted respeccable barb and never need another one. So if you happen to find 2 and want to trade one, guess what, its not gonna be nearly as tradable as an end game axe on D2.
When you die, you lose exp, its removed from your character, you have to replace it. That is a sink, it creates a near constant demand for exp.
When you die you lose gold, or you have to spend gold to repair items and buy potions and other random things, or you can gamble it away those are gold sinks. Gold is removed from the game, and at some point you will have to acquire more.
Now can you see the difference between a concept that can create more demand, and one that creates annoyances and discourages trading? Imagine how much it'd suck if when you bought a car, you couldnt ever trade it in or sell it and put that money towards a different car. Thats the restriction this bind on equip bullshit is going to place on the economy.
If you want an equipment sink, something has to actually remove equipment from play, and create more demand for it. Ladder resets did this well, unfortunately botters and dupers really cut down on the amount of time afterwards the economy felt fresh. Ways to actually have gear destroyed could also do this, such as a rare chance for things to break at random when you die, but that would be too unfair to morons I suppose.
As far as unbinding being a paid service, most awful thing I've ever heard. If I wanted to go play a pay per advantage game I'd go play one of the hundreds of free ones out there I don't have to pay 50 bucks to start on. Why would you even want bound items if you think this is a good idea, your just asking blizzard to take your money.
no it isn't it is meant for online play sp players give little to the community
Ah, freakin' go away you idiot if you can't read anything else that was posted before you. And your are completely ignorant if you think online is such a huge majority of the community.
Ah, freakin' go away you idiot if you can't read anything else that was posted before you. And your are completely ignorant if you think online is such a huge majority of the community.
except bnet 2.0 is built around community not playing catch with yourself
You seem to have missed the point. I don't have trading aspects in my Diablo.
Quote from "Luckmann" »
I encourage you to read my posts before commenting, in the future. I have no desire to sell or buy - as I said, I have no interest in trading whatsoever. I may, however, want to give my gear to a friend, when I find better gear or want to change into another setup, maybe try a new approach where whatever piece simply doesn't fit anymore.
Well if your only use of a trading function is to give gear to friend's when you no longer need it, then yes, this system will impede you. However Blizzard has obviously made the decision that that limitation is worth it for the rest of the playerbase who are in fact trading.
Quote from "Luckmann" »
I think the vast majority of customers as relatively casual, seldom or never venturing onto Battle.net and even then, comparatively rarely engage in trading. I think most casual games take place on TCP/IP LAN connections or simply by means of Battle.net for friends and acquaintances. Thus that majority doesn't care diddly squat for trading restrictions that impede other aspects of the game by it's very nature.
Opinion. Arguably however, when LAN disappears and if trading becomes easier, through functions such as an auction house, more players will invariably be pulled into the tradeing aspects of the game. Which will make the economy an issue for them.
Quote from "Luckmann" »
Om man sager som sahar; BoE ar ett javla pahitt som kanns javligt meningslost om man inte bryr sig om ekonomin i spelet. Jag paverkas inte av ekonomin, men jag kommer att paverkas av "losningen" pa "ekonomiproblemet".
In the future, please avoid using any other language than english on the main boards. Keep other languages to PMs if you have to.
Quote from "nickm83" »
You take it off the market but you don't do anything to alter demand. Once I have my 1337 axe, I'm gonna bind it to my autostatted respeccable barb and never need another one. So if you happen to find 2 and want to trade one, guess what, its not gonna be nearly as tradable as an end game axe on D2.
A valid point, one that I had overlooked. However it supposes that the playerbase remains and that people never make new characters of the same class.
I also have to say that your previous argument utilizing a "low end enigma" as an example also had its point. It will hinder trade on certain items.
If the alternative isn't ladder however, the only other option would be to shift demand constantly for new items, like runewords after 1.10, Torch after 1.11 etc.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
A valid point, one that I had overlooked. However it supposes that the playerbase remains and that people never make new characters of the same class.
Theres going to be autostatting and skill respeccing in D3. This means, that you can never say oh crap, wish I put some points in dex for max block and remake, because the game choses your stats for you. You will never remake a character due to stats. Respeccing, don't think they really released any specifics on it, but if its any type of full/re-doable respecs you probably wont see any remakes to try new builds. Why would you remake a character with binded end game gear when you could just respec?
I don't get it. If you have 2 axes and only need one, then you trade one of them. I don't think I understand. It is bind on equip, not bind on pickup.
Who am I gonna trade it to when everyone has one and theres not even any market for ones with higher stats because nobody wants to bother when their current one has no resale value?
You can still sell it to a merchant for gold so it isn't like it loses all value once you equip it. It is a restriction, yes, but it is a good restriction. Do you have a better solution to the problem of deflation?
Yeah I hate this, gold based economies are boring. You can grind mid level zones for hours on end and buy all the end game gear you want. At least item based economies you need to be able to farm the harder areas to get the high end gear to trade. Look at torches for example, if you couldn't figure out how to beat the ubers then you'd have to put out some other items of value to trade for a torch.
I'm just holding on to a glimmer of hope blizzard doesn't turn diablo into a gold grinding game and keeps it about the gear, and trading with other players, but its not looking good at this point.
Ladder resets are the worst thing ever, they are deleting everything I have worked for because of a problem that can be solved. I would much rather have a tiny restriction and no ladder resets.
LIES! Blizzard never deleted your ladder gear. They moved it to non ladder. If you liked holding on to your riches and didnt want to go through the process of building up again, you could have just played non ladder.
If you liked searching for and trading new gear, then ladder resets were awesome. If ladder resets blow so much why was there a sudden spike in the number active players every ladder reset?
I also don't understand what you mean by this:
"If you want an equipment sink, something has to actually remove equipment from play"
Why does it have to be removed from play? It is enough to remove it from the market. This is not the only end-game equipment sink, I'm sure about that, because this would only affect the items we have worn and don't want anymore. It doesn't solve the large amount of items that people will get from farming bosses, but it is a start.
What I mean is very simple. Binding gear is not going to increase demand for that gear. Without demand for things there is not going to be much of an economy.
If you want to go on the assumption nobodies ever gonna need more then 1 of each bindable item per character, what does this achieve? The games still going to get overloaded, and the only difference is that this feature actually discourages players from trading and experimenting by stripping binded items of any retrade value.
P.S. Binding is not a gear sink. Your not removing anything from the game. Just because my 1337 armor binds when I wear it doesn't mean its going to make yours any more valuable if you want to trade it, and it will probably make it even mro annoying to trade.
I disagree, Binding causes the item to sort of "disappear" from the economy. Once you manually bind it to yourself, lets say for example an Enigma, that enigma is no longer part of the Diablo economy. The only person that enigma can help now is you (and hopefully your account ;)) only. This In turn WOULD make someone else's unbinded enigma more valuable to trade since their is one less enigma in the economy. As Demand goes UP so will the price. damn I talk too much.:cute:
Wow while I wrote this, a bunch of other comments where posted making mine sort of useless
And how did BoE make everyone have that specific item?
Theres 2 possible routes with this. Everythings going to be more common to compensate for the binding or have specific drop locations. Go do 100 runs on xxx boss and youll have all his drops, in which case nobody needs to trade because you just google where stuff drops and go do a few runs.
The other route is stuff is still ridiculously rare like in D2, in which case all binding does is make it harder to experiment with different builds and set ups. I'd be pissed if I mf'd or traded for a griffon's eye and tried it out on my sorc, then realized I couldn't ever try it out on a javazon or foh'er.
Given a lot of what blizzards released about this game and the latest D2 patch the first option seems far more likely.
1. How did BoE make people stop wanting better items?
2. Gold is the resale value.
Because now, in D2 with no binding, if I had a 414% ebotd, and some guy wanted a ton for a 415% ebotd, I might be willing to trade with him knowing I could turn around and trade off my 414% for things of value. If I couldn't do that I'd be far more likely to just say screw it, that extra 1% weapon damage isn't worth it. As far as gold being resale value, keep reading please.
Selling items from end-game bosses is still going to be the source of gold, the difference is that people will turn items into gold, preventing items from piling up and creating deflation.
But I do agree that trading with gold isn't as interesting as with items, but it is more user friendly.
Wrong. Look at the item values in D2. All the top end gear throughout every ladder season remained pretty stable. What a fort and enigma is worth in comparison to eachother has always been fairly stable. What a grief is worth in comparison to a beast has always been stable. The only place anything because less valuable is with low and mid grade eq, and its because nobody wanted the crap. This effect even helps noobs to an extent. I myself have filled up random games full of free mid grade gear for noobs many times, and have seen people dropping frees a lot.
Gold based economies are the pure opposite. All they are is inflation based. After the games out for 1month, someone with 1million gold might be rich, but what happens when after a year people have 50 million horded away? Sucks being that new guy that can't get anything good because everyones so damn rich.
Just seems to me, and you said it yourself, that gold economies are less interesting, so trying to use the argument you can still sell to vendors, is pretty much saying your okay with something you feel is going to make for a less interesting economy.
They deleted the gear from ladder. Why would I want to play on non-ladder when all of the good stuff is found on ladder.
1. Because they are usually combined with a patch.
2. Because the game recovers from beeing flooded with items. This wouldn't even happen if the deflation didn't exist.
They didn't delete anything. They simply transfered your characters, along with everyone elses to reset things. I always thought of the ladder only gear as a reward for those people willing to start from scratch to be able to get it, otherwise everyone probably would have just kept playing nonladder except for those few people who were actually interested in racing to 99.
You could have just kept some ladder characters for keeping all your godly stuff for dueling or just that euphoric feeling of pwning everything, and had a few ladder mf'ers for getting whatever new ladder only stuff you felt like getting to bring over to nonladder when it reset. Best of both worlds that way.
The game is not going to get overloaded with a proper item sink. It still keeps value in the form of gold.
And golds going to be stable right?
Deflation Is Bad!
Deflation doesn't matter at all if you have assets. Like I mentioned before, if you had a certain piece of high end gear, its value would always remain constant in comparison to other pieces of high end gear.
Infations only good if your in debt, and since nobody can really get in any hard coded debt in this game, guess that just makes inflation suck for everyone.
Ahh, so forcing me to have to get 3 of the item would bring balance to the game. I get it. Oh wait...no I don't. How would it do anything but make one of the most valuable and hard to get items in the game worth even more and even harder to acquire? Its already one of the most valuable, so if anything your just creating a bigger gap between mid grade and godly gear by doing this.
That is a positive change imo. You have to work hard for that last little improvement.
Your still working just as hard for the last bit of improvement, only every step of the way is worthless. I'm never gonna go from a 355 ebotd, to a 370, to a 388, to a 404, to a 415 if I can't trade each one off along the way. I'm gonna use the first one I acquire, and then hold out for a badass/perfect one, all your doing is cutting out the market of cheap ebotds.
Yes, the price difference between 2 end-game items didn't change, but they dropped in value compared to the items with a sink.
What exactly was the sink for low end items in this game? I must have been unaware of it my entire time playing the Diablo series.
This is because low-mid level characters didn't have a currency. All baalruns were done in Hell, rushs existed, and you could simply wait for a free game to get a full equip, so there was no mid-level economy. No economy = No item value. If you had spare gold and could walk to a AH and buy a better weapon (assuming free games doesn't exist, which I hope), wouldn't you do it? I know I would.
Actually there was some market for LLD and MLD items, but generally only very specific items for a niche player.
For the average player there was no low/mid level economy because you play the game thinking what you want your character to be at level 80+, not for what you are at level 30. Why bother dwelling on having uber mid level gear when in a few days or less you can be over level 80 anyhow, seems like a waste of time to bother.
Now you are beeing very unrealistic. D3 will have gold sinks to spend your money on. Sure, there will be a slight inflation, but it isn't going to be big. And that people have more money doesn't mean that items will cost more. If someone tries to increase the price, then someone with less money is going to offer the item for less. That is how it works in Africa
Ok so your admitting there will be inflation, the amount will be totally irrelevant, and neither of us have any clue as we don't have any specifics at this time. Just the mere presence of inflation though, will over time jack the economy up totally for new players to get into.
Oh cool, so in Africa you can buy something cheaper today then you could 50 years ago? Wish I could still buy a 3000 dollar, brand new Cadillac over here in the states.
Interesting doesn't equal better. I want both
What? Let's purposefully design a game thats not interesting? Uhh...
And what if I want the new ladder stuff when it resets, not just the old stuff? You should also know that not nearly all players have the time to do that. I have played D2 for over a year in total but I have never made a single MF character. I have also never been playing the game while the ladder resets, so I haven't been able to do that. And it seems like a VERY unpractical solution.
Wow. I've been playing the game since its release. I have participated in every new ladder season and loved it every time. I have friends both real life, and just bnet friends that ive made over the years that we all have a friggen blast every reset. We love it so much its become a ritual for us to join nonladder games after each reset and drop all our stuff in free games for people.
Seems pretty ironic someone who's relatively new to the game who hasn't participated in a new ladder season from the begining, and admittedly never even had an MF character is talking about how crappy one of the best features of D2 is.
Actually, thought I'd edit this in since it became obvious after I pasted you have no clue how ladder/nonladder works. Season one started with ladder, it reset, all ladder when to nonladder. Season 2 ladder, when it resets, all goes to nonladder, where all those season one characters are still in existence as nonladder. Ladder 3, resets, goes again, to the same nonladder. If you wanted ladder only items and all your original items, you had about a year to farm all the new ladder only items that might have come out with the newest patch, at which time it would reset again and you could use that stuff on all of your other nonladder characters.
Gold is a equal currency, items are not, so I'm going to say yes.
Is this a joke? My enigma might always be worth your ebotd. After inflation starts taking place, which it will. Suddenly that 1000gold for an enigma might turn into 2000g for an enigma over time.
But not in comparision to mid-level items and gold, which happens to be the main currency.
Mid level items and gold have never been a main currency in Diablo. As far as mid level items I've never even played any games in which they were the main currency...
D2 is D2 and D3 is D3, there won't be any massive inflation or deflation.
*palm to face* Every game with a gold currency that never has any periodic form of reset, over time, has faced in game inflation.
1. It should be a big (I'd say massive) gap between mid and high level items.
Then why were you complaining about your items being worthless?
2. I would have used my gold and other items to get a 415% EBOTD (or whatever) and then sell my 355%. You don't have to trade a EBOTD for a EBOTD, any item (or gold) works.
Good luck having enough gold for anything in a respectable amount of time if your not one of the original players that start near the games launch. Luckmann drew a perfect comparison to wow's economy. Whats the difference if your items get transferred to nonladder or made useless via patching? Quite honestly I'd rather have them go to nonladder where its at least still a level playing field if I don't feel like being in a farm race for the newest and best.
3. The low and mid level sink came with the progress design of the game.
This isnt a sink, this is a total lack of need for reasons I explained previously.
4. That is because the only currency you could use to trade items with was items, and the people who had the items you want are usually Hell characters. A Hell character wouldn't want the things a low or mid level character can find, so there was no point in trading.
Seriously? You can't make it to hell so the game is screwed up? Maybe next ladder I'll stay in normal and nightmare mode because I feel bad for people like you and want to give them in game pointers on how to be better players.
A gold economy would fix that. You would buy a good item to make you progress faster, and when you are done using it you sell it for the same price you bought it for. You might think that this would cause the same problems as it would for high level items, but that is wrong. When you are done using this item you might not even bother to trade it, you would sell it to a merchant instead. This would make the price go up. When the price is high, people will trade the item again, and the price will go down. That is a stable economy.
Your beating a dead horse. You already admitted gold will inflate over time. This design sucks, and your proving it even more. Why should you have access to good items if all your doing is farming easy areas for gold for hours on end? It'd be like tossing torches in a shop in D2 for 1 mil gold, stupid and boring.
5. You obviously failed to understand this. The amount of gold the high level players can collect is not going to affect the price of the items, only how much these high level players can buy.
Uh Diablo players have traditionally been a horde your stuff and wait for a good offer community. Rich players inflate the hell out of high end items, and give you better deals on low end crap. If you managed to get a high end item with perfect mods on D2 you'd understand this. This is essentially horrible for newbies, as after a while its near impossible to play catch up. It gets to a point where you can grind say 1000 gold on a good day. Some guys got 800,000k saved up, good luck catching him or ever getting anything good that you need unless you directly find it.
Haha, you totally got everything wrong.
I started playing D2 in 2003, I'm not new to the game. The thing is that I have never been around when the actual reset occured. I don't play the same game for month, I switch. I play the game when I feel like playing some D2. And there is no point in discussing ladder resets because Blizzard is cutting down on them for D3.
I know exactly how the the resets works... The rest of what you wrote there is only going to work if you play 24/365, which virtually nobody does. It is also idiotic to assume that everyone is going to plan their D2 plays to like a month before each reset.
No sorry. Popular to the belief of people who couldnt figure out the D2 economy, it doesn't take a tremendous amount of time to acquire gear good enough for owning hell or holding your own in pub duels. You already demonstrated complete lack of knowledge, stop trying to make up lies so you dont look foolish now.
Game inflation is not real life inflation. And if that would be the case, then it wouldn't matter because everyone (new people too) would have twice as much money.
Unless they constantly patch ways to make money faster into the game it'd be like trying to buy a house while earningwhat minimum wage was in 1963, good luck.
Are you sure that you read what I wrote?
Its kinda hard to understand when your making so little sense and contradicting yourself repeatedly.
I noticed something interesting with these people who just keep on complaining about nearly every new aspect of this game. They just keep on contradicting themselves.
Here are a few quotes from both Luckmann and nickm83 who are both against this new change.
First, there is the WoW blasting/comparison and then comes..:
Theres going to be autostatting and skill respeccing in D3. This means, that you can never say oh crap, wish I put some points in dex for max block and remake, because the game choses your stats for you. You will never remake a character due to stats. Respeccing, don't think they really released any specifics on it, but if its any type of full/re-doable respecs you probably wont see any remakes to try new builds. Why would you remake a character with binded end game gear when you could just respec?
Half of this quote is bringing down the respeccing/autostating system for removing a possible reason to replay the game due to mistakes. Probably in line with the "stop holding our hands" train of thoughts.
But then the other half says, since it's going to be too much work
to make another char with untradable items that he won't choose to make it. Instead he would prefer being able to trade all his old godly items to be able to remake a godly char in no time flat, minus the time it takes to trade a few items and get rushed.
Let me put it this way. Even if you did do like you said...And supposedly take the easy way and simply respecc you char. Do you actually think that all his gear would still be valid?
Tell me, if you had your Griffon (since u like to use this item to make examples) on your Light Sorc, but you decided to repec to Fire sorc...What the hell would you do with a Griffon but give it to a char that can use it in your account or trade it. But then again, you don't like trading....Then just sell it, not much difference than throwing it to your poor friends. By doing so they won't have access to such items and will have to play the game to get it....innovative. So NO, simple respeccing won't do it. You will still be forced to get new items therefor creating the demand.
Since respeccing will be available to everyone, than it means that more people will be doing it, and a bigged demand for new items will be created since not every build on a char can equip the same shit.
The other route is stuff is still ridiculously rare like in D2, in which case all binding does is make it harder to experiment with different builds and set ups. I'd be pissed if I mf'd or traded for a griffon's eye and tried it out on my sorc, then realized I couldn't ever try it out on a javazon or foh'er.
Given a lot of what blizzards released about this game and the latest D2 patch the first option seems far more likely.
Yeah, it will be harder, so what? Didn't you guys say you didn't like Blizzard dumbing down games and making everything easy to access? Why should Blizzard offer you respeccing and give you a way to insta replace all your gear to fit the new build. What they are giving you is a chance to respecc and telling you that if you do, you will have to consider hunting for new gear therefor creating replayability and a demand for new gear.
Which sortof brings us to a seemingly unrelated topic that will have an impact on a supposed economy - What incentive are there to start over? If you can simply respec and characters are autostat:ed, there is very little reason to replay the game once you've played through it once.
All characters of all levels will desire roughly the same gear. If not for their current allocation of skills, then for one they may (or may not) try out in the future, after a respec. Sorry if that got a little off-topic, I just found it interesting, because I've never seen the problems of autostats & respecing from this perspective before (always good to have new ammunition for the old machinegun).
I just stated the incentive in my last paragraph. Plus, Starting over doesn't only mean from level 1. Could be that you get to keep the char you worked hard for but start over in his skill tree, or with his gear hunting. Which is obviously much harder and interesting then leveling him up with monster grinding. (not like leveling from 1 to 60 was any fun anyways.) few hours of rushes did it.
That is also called replayability. Why would you want to flood your accounts with 10 versions of the same char when you can respec and still have to start over searching for new gear to fit the new build all while keeping the character you worked so long with.
The only difference between respeccing and remaking a new char is that the new char has to be rushed. That's it. Otherwise it's still the same. New gear, new builds. So to the economy this means that most people will be wanting new items to go on their new respec. again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
No sir, I am making perfect sense. Are you aware of the time it took in Diablo 2 to make a godly dueler, charms and all. What was nice about it, is once you got one godly character, you could trade that characters gear for gear for other godly characters. It encouraged playing multiple classes and tweaking various builds when your gear was always worth what it was when you got it. So, here comes another wow bashing comparison. I've had numerous characters and bulids for each class in D2 over the years as a casual player, how many of you have max level end game gear alts of every class on wow and still have a social life? I want a game where I can interact with other players and experiment, not one that makes me think man, I want a sorc, but do I really wanna devote another 3 months to leveling and gear farming just to find out if I even like the classes end game potential?
It is hard to understand someone that assumes D3 will be D2 and that the current D2 economy is good.
Sorry I'm ignoring any more economic lectures from you since you've already admitted there would be inflation.
The D2 economy is good, its not perfect. Its major flaw is dupers and botters running rampant. If this was fixed it'd be the best in game economy around.
I'm not assuming D3 will be D2. I don't expect the games to be identicle. I am however becoming increasingly disappointed as its becoming more and more apparent blizzard is drifting further and further away from the core concepts that made the first two games so great. I guess the Diablo series is gonna be like the Terminator movies. The first one was great, the second one freaking amazing, and the third one sucked.
Inflation is inflation, wheter or not it's real-life or not doesn't matter. But the idea that everyone will have twice the gold at the rate of prices double just isn't true. That necessitates that you live constantly alongside the inflation.
If you don't play constantly or haven't been playing from the beginning, inflation is going to kick you in the nuts. The rate of accumulated wealth is an average constant in a game (as opposed to real-life).
Yes Luckmann, you said it perfectly, but according to emilemil1 thats not how things work in Africa! Guess he's not from Zimbabwe or he wouldn't be so clueless about inflation.
Welcome to OEM-BEARING.com E SHOP. We are professional China bearing wholesaler.we sell bearing type: Deep groove ball bearings,Angular contact ball bearings,Self-aligning ball bearings,Cylindrical roller bearings,Spherical roller bearings,Cylindrical roller thrust bearings.1. To ensure that imported a large number of the spot, the origin of bearing;2. Cheap, timely delivery ,in stockBearing Product packaging appearance may change due to changes in the factory in order to prevail in kind packaging; The actual operation of the purchase price due to the specific circumstances of the time and vary in order to mutually agreed price. The original brand name products to ensure product quality commitment; More information on these products, as well as sourcing, delivery and other business information, please use the following exchange:TEL: +86-22-27596611 +86-22-27565577 Auto Fax : +86-22-87720337 Email: yangbearing@yahoo.com.cn Msn : yangwangli@hotmail.com Website: www.oem-bearing.com If you have the demand for bearings, please send an email to me. I will reply to you promptly. The best price, the transittime of goods, transport costs, weight, volume and other parameters in detail.Mode of transport:By AIR , By SHIPING , By UPS , By DHL , By FEDEX
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First - you stated in response to MadScientist's post on Majority.
"First of all, majority rule by the deluded masses of ignorants is what's wrong with society at large."
This might be true but either way, the majority still rule regardless of their intelligence, at least in some societies that is.
Second - You went on to comment on Dimebob's response about your opinion on the economic effects this would or wouldn't have.
"I don't like the idea of an artificially induced attempt to control a superflous (superfluous) or non-existant (existent) economical concept interfering with core mechanics and gameplay where it will simply impede reasonable usage. The reasoning as to why or examples beyond that point is irrelevant, since the imposed band-aid or "sink" is entirely unnecessary and arbitrary if you're not concerned with the supposed "economy". "
Well I don't see how this attempt at controlling a "non-existent" economical concept" is "artificially induced" for starters. But since there is a supply of items that existed and may well exist in D2 and D3 respectively, as well as a varied level of demand.......that sounds like an economy to me, albeit basic. The only possible way this could interfere with whatever you might define as the core mechanics of this particular game would be that when you get an item and say to yourself "Hey this is better than what I have, I'll use this." and then equip it, you won't be able to trade it to another person. So unless the economy, which you've already stated is non-existent in this game, is a core mechanic, then this won't affect anything other than people's ability to exploit the "farming" aspect of D2, which would probably fall under your idea of "Reasonable Usage."
Third - Then you commented on a mention of the greater good of the developersintentions which was brought up by emilemil1.
"The issue of course being what is percieved (perceived) as "the greater good". To me, it's a game that is good in it's own right, without compromising gameplay features arbitrarily.
And in the context of Diablo, that greater good doesn't include enforcing BoE's. If they want to "fix" "the economy", they should strive to do it in a manner that doesn't compromise gameplay. It [the "solution"] should be an issue for those that practice trading, those that enforce the supposed economy - it shouldn't be a ball and chain to us that doesn't."
I'm guessing that when you use the word "arbitrarily" here you mean it in the sense that what was done was done without reason. That can't be so because you were in fact given multiple reasons in the original post that started this discussion. In fact, the first words that preface these reasons are "the reasoning is..."
I WILL however say that i like your idea about fixing the problem from the perspective of those creating the problem so those who remain frequently uninvolved will not be majorly affected. However, as far as I can tell, this solution does just that. If you're a person who got by on trading Items in the last game, you're going to have a much harder time proceeding through the game if you're intent on not wearing items for fear of the binding principal, OR you're going to have far fewer items to trade because you're needing them to get through the game. Now if you're a person who doesn't trade very frequently, then this rule won't affect you hardly at all because you're going to equip items whether they bind to you or not because you're not otherwise going to trade them. It might seem more of a critical hindrance to the latter group of people only because the few times they want to trade an item, they might have already equipped what they wanted to trade and be SOL which might make it seem like a bigger problem.
You take it off the market but you don't do anything to alter demand. Once I have my 1337 axe, I'm gonna bind it to my autostatted respeccable barb and never need another one. So if you happen to find 2 and want to trade one, guess what, its not gonna be nearly as tradable as an end game axe on D2.
When you die, you lose exp, its removed from your character, you have to replace it. That is a sink, it creates a near constant demand for exp.
When you die you lose gold, or you have to spend gold to repair items and buy potions and other random things, or you can gamble it away those are gold sinks. Gold is removed from the game, and at some point you will have to acquire more.
Now can you see the difference between a concept that can create more demand, and one that creates annoyances and discourages trading? Imagine how much it'd suck if when you bought a car, you couldnt ever trade it in or sell it and put that money towards a different car. Thats the restriction this bind on equip bullshit is going to place on the economy.
If you want an equipment sink, something has to actually remove equipment from play, and create more demand for it. Ladder resets did this well, unfortunately botters and dupers really cut down on the amount of time afterwards the economy felt fresh. Ways to actually have gear destroyed could also do this, such as a rare chance for things to break at random when you die, but that would be too unfair to morons I suppose.
As far as unbinding being a paid service, most awful thing I've ever heard. If I wanted to go play a pay per advantage game I'd go play one of the hundreds of free ones out there I don't have to pay 50 bucks to start on. Why would you even want bound items if you think this is a good idea, your just asking blizzard to take your money.
Ah, freakin' go away you idiot if you can't read anything else that was posted before you. And your are completely ignorant if you think online is such a huge majority of the community.
except bnet 2.0 is built around community not playing catch with yourself
diablo 3 is meant for online play, it will follow sc2's footsteps (like being online even when you are doing the single player campaign)
you will create games, if you want to be by yourself, you make a game with max players 1, but you are still online
I know you and the other spers are scared of feeling inferior to people who aren't bad at games, but itsok
I'll try to not lol at you guys too much in d3 chat
get a newer quote when they said they will implement bnet like sc2 is
sc2 is doing it by making an offline guest mode where you can't get achievements and etc
the person in charge of the new bnet is from xbox live, not from carebear island
also game isn't out yet, so how can you say it is false?
Opinion. Arguably however, when LAN disappears and if trading becomes easier, through functions such as an auction house, more players will invariably be pulled into the tradeing aspects of the game. Which will make the economy an issue for them.
In the future, please avoid using any other language than english on the main boards. Keep other languages to PMs if you have to.
A valid point, one that I had overlooked. However it supposes that the playerbase remains and that people never make new characters of the same class.
I also have to say that your previous argument utilizing a "low end enigma" as an example also had its point. It will hinder trade on certain items.
If the alternative isn't ladder however, the only other option would be to shift demand constantly for new items, like runewords after 1.10, Torch after 1.11 etc.
This is about binding items.
Theres going to be autostatting and skill respeccing in D3. This means, that you can never say oh crap, wish I put some points in dex for max block and remake, because the game choses your stats for you. You will never remake a character due to stats. Respeccing, don't think they really released any specifics on it, but if its any type of full/re-doable respecs you probably wont see any remakes to try new builds. Why would you remake a character with binded end game gear when you could just respec?
Who am I gonna trade it to when everyone has one and theres not even any market for ones with higher stats because nobody wants to bother when their current one has no resale value?
Yeah I hate this, gold based economies are boring. You can grind mid level zones for hours on end and buy all the end game gear you want. At least item based economies you need to be able to farm the harder areas to get the high end gear to trade. Look at torches for example, if you couldn't figure out how to beat the ubers then you'd have to put out some other items of value to trade for a torch.
I'm just holding on to a glimmer of hope blizzard doesn't turn diablo into a gold grinding game and keeps it about the gear, and trading with other players, but its not looking good at this point.
LIES! Blizzard never deleted your ladder gear. They moved it to non ladder. If you liked holding on to your riches and didnt want to go through the process of building up again, you could have just played non ladder.
If you liked searching for and trading new gear, then ladder resets were awesome. If ladder resets blow so much why was there a sudden spike in the number active players every ladder reset?
What I mean is very simple. Binding gear is not going to increase demand for that gear. Without demand for things there is not going to be much of an economy.
If you want to go on the assumption nobodies ever gonna need more then 1 of each bindable item per character, what does this achieve? The games still going to get overloaded, and the only difference is that this feature actually discourages players from trading and experimenting by stripping binded items of any retrade value.
I disagree, Binding causes the item to sort of "disappear" from the economy. Once you manually bind it to yourself, lets say for example an Enigma, that enigma is no longer part of the Diablo economy. The only person that enigma can help now is you (and hopefully your account ;)) only. This In turn WOULD make someone else's unbinded enigma more valuable to trade since their is one less enigma in the economy. As Demand goes UP so will the price. damn I talk too much.:cute:
Wow while I wrote this, a bunch of other comments where posted making mine sort of useless
Theres 2 possible routes with this. Everythings going to be more common to compensate for the binding or have specific drop locations. Go do 100 runs on xxx boss and youll have all his drops, in which case nobody needs to trade because you just google where stuff drops and go do a few runs.
The other route is stuff is still ridiculously rare like in D2, in which case all binding does is make it harder to experiment with different builds and set ups. I'd be pissed if I mf'd or traded for a griffon's eye and tried it out on my sorc, then realized I couldn't ever try it out on a javazon or foh'er.
Given a lot of what blizzards released about this game and the latest D2 patch the first option seems far more likely.
Because now, in D2 with no binding, if I had a 414% ebotd, and some guy wanted a ton for a 415% ebotd, I might be willing to trade with him knowing I could turn around and trade off my 414% for things of value. If I couldn't do that I'd be far more likely to just say screw it, that extra 1% weapon damage isn't worth it. As far as gold being resale value, keep reading please.
Wrong. Look at the item values in D2. All the top end gear throughout every ladder season remained pretty stable. What a fort and enigma is worth in comparison to eachother has always been fairly stable. What a grief is worth in comparison to a beast has always been stable. The only place anything because less valuable is with low and mid grade eq, and its because nobody wanted the crap. This effect even helps noobs to an extent. I myself have filled up random games full of free mid grade gear for noobs many times, and have seen people dropping frees a lot.
Gold based economies are the pure opposite. All they are is inflation based. After the games out for 1month, someone with 1million gold might be rich, but what happens when after a year people have 50 million horded away? Sucks being that new guy that can't get anything good because everyones so damn rich.
Just seems to me, and you said it yourself, that gold economies are less interesting, so trying to use the argument you can still sell to vendors, is pretty much saying your okay with something you feel is going to make for a less interesting economy.
They didn't delete anything. They simply transfered your characters, along with everyone elses to reset things. I always thought of the ladder only gear as a reward for those people willing to start from scratch to be able to get it, otherwise everyone probably would have just kept playing nonladder except for those few people who were actually interested in racing to 99.
You could have just kept some ladder characters for keeping all your godly stuff for dueling or just that euphoric feeling of pwning everything, and had a few ladder mf'ers for getting whatever new ladder only stuff you felt like getting to bring over to nonladder when it reset. Best of both worlds that way.
And golds going to be stable right?
Deflation doesn't matter at all if you have assets. Like I mentioned before, if you had a certain piece of high end gear, its value would always remain constant in comparison to other pieces of high end gear.
Infations only good if your in debt, and since nobody can really get in any hard coded debt in this game, guess that just makes inflation suck for everyone.
Your still working just as hard for the last bit of improvement, only every step of the way is worthless. I'm never gonna go from a 355 ebotd, to a 370, to a 388, to a 404, to a 415 if I can't trade each one off along the way. I'm gonna use the first one I acquire, and then hold out for a badass/perfect one, all your doing is cutting out the market of cheap ebotds.
What exactly was the sink for low end items in this game? I must have been unaware of it my entire time playing the Diablo series.
Actually there was some market for LLD and MLD items, but generally only very specific items for a niche player.
For the average player there was no low/mid level economy because you play the game thinking what you want your character to be at level 80+, not for what you are at level 30. Why bother dwelling on having uber mid level gear when in a few days or less you can be over level 80 anyhow, seems like a waste of time to bother.
Ok so your admitting there will be inflation, the amount will be totally irrelevant, and neither of us have any clue as we don't have any specifics at this time. Just the mere presence of inflation though, will over time jack the economy up totally for new players to get into.
Oh cool, so in Africa you can buy something cheaper today then you could 50 years ago? Wish I could still buy a 3000 dollar, brand new Cadillac over here in the states.
What? Let's purposefully design a game thats not interesting? Uhh...
Wow. I've been playing the game since its release. I have participated in every new ladder season and loved it every time. I have friends both real life, and just bnet friends that ive made over the years that we all have a friggen blast every reset. We love it so much its become a ritual for us to join nonladder games after each reset and drop all our stuff in free games for people.
Seems pretty ironic someone who's relatively new to the game who hasn't participated in a new ladder season from the begining, and admittedly never even had an MF character is talking about how crappy one of the best features of D2 is.
Actually, thought I'd edit this in since it became obvious after I pasted you have no clue how ladder/nonladder works. Season one started with ladder, it reset, all ladder when to nonladder. Season 2 ladder, when it resets, all goes to nonladder, where all those season one characters are still in existence as nonladder. Ladder 3, resets, goes again, to the same nonladder. If you wanted ladder only items and all your original items, you had about a year to farm all the new ladder only items that might have come out with the newest patch, at which time it would reset again and you could use that stuff on all of your other nonladder characters.
Is this a joke? My enigma might always be worth your ebotd. After inflation starts taking place, which it will. Suddenly that 1000gold for an enigma might turn into 2000g for an enigma over time.
Mid level items and gold have never been a main currency in Diablo. As far as mid level items I've never even played any games in which they were the main currency...
*palm to face* Every game with a gold currency that never has any periodic form of reset, over time, has faced in game inflation.
Then why were you complaining about your items being worthless?
Good luck having enough gold for anything in a respectable amount of time if your not one of the original players that start near the games launch. Luckmann drew a perfect comparison to wow's economy. Whats the difference if your items get transferred to nonladder or made useless via patching? Quite honestly I'd rather have them go to nonladder where its at least still a level playing field if I don't feel like being in a farm race for the newest and best.
This isnt a sink, this is a total lack of need for reasons I explained previously.
Seriously? You can't make it to hell so the game is screwed up? Maybe next ladder I'll stay in normal and nightmare mode because I feel bad for people like you and want to give them in game pointers on how to be better players.
Your beating a dead horse. You already admitted gold will inflate over time. This design sucks, and your proving it even more. Why should you have access to good items if all your doing is farming easy areas for gold for hours on end? It'd be like tossing torches in a shop in D2 for 1 mil gold, stupid and boring.
Uh Diablo players have traditionally been a horde your stuff and wait for a good offer community. Rich players inflate the hell out of high end items, and give you better deals on low end crap. If you managed to get a high end item with perfect mods on D2 you'd understand this. This is essentially horrible for newbies, as after a while its near impossible to play catch up. It gets to a point where you can grind say 1000 gold on a good day. Some guys got 800,000k saved up, good luck catching him or ever getting anything good that you need unless you directly find it.
No sorry. Popular to the belief of people who couldnt figure out the D2 economy, it doesn't take a tremendous amount of time to acquire gear good enough for owning hell or holding your own in pub duels. You already demonstrated complete lack of knowledge, stop trying to make up lies so you dont look foolish now.
Unless they constantly patch ways to make money faster into the game it'd be like trying to buy a house while earningwhat minimum wage was in 1963, good luck.
Its kinda hard to understand when your making so little sense and contradicting yourself repeatedly.
Here are a few quotes from both Luckmann and nickm83 who are both against this new change.
First, there is the WoW blasting/comparison and then comes..:
Half of this quote is bringing down the respeccing/autostating system for removing a possible reason to replay the game due to mistakes. Probably in line with the "stop holding our hands" train of thoughts.
But then the other half says, since it's going to be too much work
to make another char with untradable items that he won't choose to make it. Instead he would prefer being able to trade all his old godly items to be able to remake a godly char in no time flat, minus the time it takes to trade a few items and get rushed.
Let me put it this way. Even if you did do like you said...And supposedly take the easy way and simply respecc you char. Do you actually think that all his gear would still be valid?
Tell me, if you had your Griffon (since u like to use this item to make examples) on your Light Sorc, but you decided to repec to Fire sorc...What the hell would you do with a Griffon but give it to a char that can use it in your account or trade it. But then again, you don't like trading....Then just sell it, not much difference than throwing it to your poor friends. By doing so they won't have access to such items and will have to play the game to get it....innovative. So NO, simple respeccing won't do it. You will still be forced to get new items therefor creating the demand.
Since respeccing will be available to everyone, than it means that more people will be doing it, and a bigged demand for new items will be created since not every build on a char can equip the same shit.
Yeah, it will be harder, so what? Didn't you guys say you didn't like Blizzard dumbing down games and making everything easy to access? Why should Blizzard offer you respeccing and give you a way to insta replace all your gear to fit the new build. What they are giving you is a chance to respecc and telling you that if you do, you will have to consider hunting for new gear therefor creating replayability and a demand for new gear.
I just stated the incentive in my last paragraph. Plus, Starting over doesn't only mean from level 1. Could be that you get to keep the char you worked hard for but start over in his skill tree, or with his gear hunting. Which is obviously much harder and interesting then leveling him up with monster grinding. (not like leveling from 1 to 60 was any fun anyways.) few hours of rushes did it.
That is also called replayability. Why would you want to flood your accounts with 10 versions of the same char when you can respec and still have to start over searching for new gear to fit the new build all while keeping the character you worked so long with.
The only difference between respeccing and remaking a new char is that the new char has to be rushed. That's it. Otherwise it's still the same. New gear, new builds. So to the economy this means that most people will be wanting new items to go on their new respec. again.
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
No sir, I am making perfect sense. Are you aware of the time it took in Diablo 2 to make a godly dueler, charms and all. What was nice about it, is once you got one godly character, you could trade that characters gear for gear for other godly characters. It encouraged playing multiple classes and tweaking various builds when your gear was always worth what it was when you got it. So, here comes another wow bashing comparison. I've had numerous characters and bulids for each class in D2 over the years as a casual player, how many of you have max level end game gear alts of every class on wow and still have a social life? I want a game where I can interact with other players and experiment, not one that makes me think man, I want a sorc, but do I really wanna devote another 3 months to leveling and gear farming just to find out if I even like the classes end game potential?
Sorry I'm ignoring any more economic lectures from you since you've already admitted there would be inflation.
The D2 economy is good, its not perfect. Its major flaw is dupers and botters running rampant. If this was fixed it'd be the best in game economy around.
I'm not assuming D3 will be D2. I don't expect the games to be identicle. I am however becoming increasingly disappointed as its becoming more and more apparent blizzard is drifting further and further away from the core concepts that made the first two games so great. I guess the Diablo series is gonna be like the Terminator movies. The first one was great, the second one freaking amazing, and the third one sucked.
Yes Luckmann, you said it perfectly, but according to emilemil1 thats not how things work in Africa! Guess he's not from Zimbabwe or he wouldn't be so clueless about inflation.