Please don't make it P2P. Please don't. Games with a finite story should not have a subscription.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
Did you look at the link in my first post? Jay says he has no intention of adding LAN.
I have :D.
But the link you post only shows a blue post. I want more confirmations, such as an official website and article. Lanning taken away is HUGE, so I have my doubts if there is yet to be a proper article regarding this situation, with blizzard employees discussing on these issues.
Can't really believe what i'm seeing in this threat.
I say this,
Hopefully Blizzard will use monthly fees to boost the maintenance, patching and especially monitoring (cheaters, dupers).
And let's be honest here. The only reason people want lan games to be around is because they wanna download it from piratebay. The depths of Blizzards coffers is a sign of a healthy and creative company; not of greed.
You bunch of cheapskates. They were doing this way before most of you were born so show some respect.
And please those who say you are not gonna buy the game - Dont. Might as well delete your account at Diablofans since you are not gonna play it. The gaming experience will be so much greater without you.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, there is really no need for this. If they say they are not going to play the games, they say it to express their feelings, which is understandable in my book.
Lan has been around for a long long time, although I honestly don't care if Blizzard removes it (I never lan, except in internet cafe), I don't see why they'll remove it.
However, I'm still skeptical since I have yet found a proper article with an interview regarding this topic, so I have no idea why we're getting worked up over this.
qft on that man, i wont even buy the fucking game if they pull out some gay shit like that
How did the pay-to-pay idea emerge? I thought it was only the possible absense of lan in D3. In no way does this mean its a Pay2Play. Not to mention, Hellgate: London had an optional pay2play and the game was a 3rd person hack n slash. That failed miserably. I highly doubt they'll implement pay2play, the system is just tooo... different compared to MMORPG.
PS: My previous post was deleted, I must have done something wrong:evil: (I guess quoting also equals to traces of someone's flame heheheh).
Mod Note: Yes. Quoting a flame post (and just responding to one, in general) is just as much against forum rules as flaming, itself. See theforum rules posted at the top of every forum section if you need a refresher. Thanks.
This sucks If they decide to take out the LAN capability of the game... I kinda feel the game that I've been playing since way back is not gonna be the same anymore... (OBVIOUSLY) know some of you will say yeah graphics blah blah blah... but I can remember when DII launced a bunch of my friends and I LANed weekend after weekend for most part of the year... It was the best way to spend time just hanging out with your friends killing monsters... And alot of my friends don't have high speed internet connections at home plus the cap options we get here are rediculous !!!
I want LAN. Please give me LAN. This stinks of anti-piracy ideas, which should not in my opinion be handled this way. They should break it by making B.net 2.0 great, not by forcing people to use it.
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.
We know that. Diablo 'fanbase' only exists because they didn't all switch to WoW because of the fees. It's so much easier to troll games, PK, try to scam, spam and be a retard in a game that doesn't cost you a thing. Otherwise people like that might actually focus to get the most of the game.
Diablo 3 will not and can not be P2P. It would be the only non-MMO game ever that has regular fees and that's simply not how things work. If D3 was P2P, then they would have put a meaningful level cap (instead something limited to a number of digits so that it better fits the box in the character sheet), and then raise it with major content updates.
Another thing. This whole thread is pointless. There are no signs, or omens - they are making a game that is designed to give you everything you need out of the box. They are aiming for a one-time payment type of a model, but the actual D3 team does not make decisions like this - it's up to the Blizzard management and always has been. Jay gave example that some areas might have to pay some sort of a fee, and that makes perfect sense. Specifically, he mentioned North America. They will have to hire french-speaking customer support, and pay for development of french content patches and updates. WoW has launched Russian servers only a couple of months ago for the first time! Do you know how much it costs to rent servers in Russia? A lot. They have to pay for at least a hundered of Russian-speaking GMs and they had to translate the entire game with all quests and texts which is a HUGE job. And now they took it upon themselves to develop content updates and patches on Russian language. So, they do not want to make D3 pay-to-play, but given some circumstances, they might have to enforce fees for certain areas.
That gives you something to think about.... Also. It's said that new Battle.Net will no longer have USEast and USWest, but rather have them as one realm, and North America will be a separate realm.... I wonder why, eh?
Blizzard is just leaving the dinosaur era. LAN fits in there. Nowadays most people have broadband internet and can play fine and properly over open or closed battlenet. As a major company you have to make choices which are best for marketing. Having people meet eachother on battlenet provokes getting to know new people and forming friendships. We all know friendship keeps people in a game. Besides the more people log into battlenet, the more battlenet will hold as value.
Good point. However, LAN does not exclude the inclusion of B.net, and I don't think including such a feature will impede people interaction. D2 did that very well despite LAN function, and if we are to judge by how 2.0 will look, more people than ever will want to use B.net of their own free will without being forced to it because of a lack of options.
Quote from "JayCrimson" »
Yes it's a shame for the few who can only play by LAN but a giantic coorperate business is not going to take a very small minority into account definately not if protests on different subjects by much larger minorities are declined also. No LAN = fee? NONSENSE!
See that's not the issue I have necessarily. First of all, my concern is mainly depending on the mod capabilities of D3. I know Blizzard isn't a mod-friendly company, and that modding in D2 was more a side-effect thatn anything else, but LAN capability was what made mods playable outside of singleplayer. That won't happen on B.net.
Secondly, it's always nice to be able to play multiplayer without having to worry about lag or random disconnects as happens on B.net right now.
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.
But the link you post only shows a blue post. I want more confirmations, such as an official website and article. Lanning taken away is HUGE, so I have my doubts if there is yet to be a proper article regarding this situation, with blizzard employees discussing on these issues.
Yeah, the link on page one did have a blue quote, and it gave the source.
Warning! Poor translation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
Sooo, whatcha think? I really can't see another reason why they'd cut off the other ways of playing coop unless they want to force you to play battle.net 2.0, therefore making you, *sigh,* pay2play. :mad:
I believe the new Bnet will have a few different options, a premium service which will have a subscription fee and a free service that will be closer to the current bnet, I'll gladly pay a bit monthly to get rid of some kids and hacks.
Hacks? Some people may use a maphack but that doesn't ruin your gameplay in anyway. As long as you're ok with people who bought all their gear from one of those websites. That's how it was in D2. You either purchased items online or you fall behind everyone else. It's not gonna be much different in D3 either, but then, a lot of children would cry if uniques were made soulbound.
I believe the new Bnet will have a few different options, a premium service which will have a subscription fee and a free service that will be closer to the current bnet, I'll gladly pay a bit monthly to get rid of some kids and hacks.
I dunno, I always find it more fun (if not just to laugh at them) to play with "kids." It's funny! Swearing about nothing, arguing about the same, always telling some weird explicate story, calling people 'n00bs,' calling you and your mother every name under the sun, then asking to be on your friend list. . . so you can hear them swear at their other 'friends' over /f m. . .
What I find completely depressing are the Hardcore, grown, 30 - 40 something gamers that swear at you using perfect grammar, use the words 'indeed,' 'therefore,' 'surely,' and 'scrub' in every sentence, bring up politics and religion . . and of course, can afford to pay their own subscription fee.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
Note: Removing LAN or even offline mode is COMPLETELY independent of any monthly fees.
When it comes to hacks (of the real cheating type, not just macros, or texture/sound editing), if you make single player online only (as well as remove LAN), you then can have the game completely hack free, with the impossibility of private servers as well, as long as the server does not get leaked.
That's a really drastic step though, and I doubt it would be done for this game.
You could still have the game pretty hack free with LAN and offline single player (or just without LAN) included (FYI obviously includes map hack and dupe hack, which were just caused by bad programming on blizzard's part). With single player though, and especially with LAN, it's much easier to play pirated multiplayer, which is not something blizzard would want.
The two main problems with not having LAN support I wouldn't say applies to most people, but should still be taken pretty seriously (obviously, since they are still valuable customers):
-People with bad Internet are not able to play effectively. They would resort to LAN parties and inviting friends over.
-(a branch off the first point:) People who bring friends over for a more social experience, sorta like playing something like mario party, guitar hero, Wii, or whatever.
-(this one doesn't really count IMO) Ability to play mods. This may be supported through battle.net if there's such a thing as an "open" server, but even if that's not the case, mods aren't supported for the game anyways, so it doesn't really count.
(those are the only ones I could think of, and is not necessarily exhaustive)
While those are both prominent reasons, the gains from users buying the game instead of pirating it, outweighs the losses from the small portion of people who won't buy it only because they can't play it with their friends, because they don't have multiple keys combined with good Internet.
If it's average gamers who all own a copy, they can still play on a open LAN, assuming the host's Internet is sufficient (which it would be for an average gamer, or especially one out of a group)
They would still not be able to play on a closed LAN, such as SOME LAN parties (more and more are being open, that is connected to the 'net), but that's not a reason why a person wouldn't buy the game, since I've never heard of anyone who buys a game SOLELY to play it at LAN parties/closed LANs.
Overall, it's the logical decision to make, lowering the number of potential pirates. It's possible some hackers will modify the game to allow LAN play, but that's not a guarantee, it takes time, and it's better than allowing it from the get-go. Considering how likely it is for the game to be hacked for LAN play, I don't see why so many people are disappointed at the fact LAN play will be gone (unless you believe it won't be hacked, which I suppose it a possibility if Blizzard programs well [and perhaps if people are too lazy to hack, because I don't think it's impossible to hack no matter how well it's programmed]).
They've said they'll develop the game first, then the selling mechanics.
If some of the community (not me included) want the art direction changed again, we'll all be paying a monthly fee pretty much, right? *snicker*
Seriously, I'll wait to see until B.net 2.0 releases. If they don't have a p2p fee for Starcraft 2 I doubt they will for D3. I'd be interested in getting one of those "D3 key changer" log in thingys though!
Where in the world did this pay-to-play garbage begin? (I refuse to replace words with numbers, by the way. The 90s called, they want their schtick back.)
I understand that all you 'hardcore' fans who like to micromanage stats and basically make the game less fun might be a little fussy about the lack of LAN support (which I admit doesn't seem too difficult to implement) but I'm pretty sure most of my time playing D2 was spent on BattleNET, instead of a room with six other PCs. If anything, the only people who should be even mildly upset are the owners of PC-Baangs in America, where the broadband isn't as amazing as it is in Seoul.
I think if anything Diablo III will just have micro transactions instead of being subscription based.
ok... now who would complain if they had to pay 99 cents to create a ladder character?
probably a lot of people, unless the ladder content was well worth it, and I'm sure that blizzard is more than capable of making it worth it.
now blizzard could do something like that. sell cards for $0.99(create one ladder char) $3.99 (4 ladder chards) $7.99 (8 ladder chars) and people would buy them, season after season.
and people who dont want to can always play non ladder.
that way Blizzard could cover whatever expenses they need to cover for this game without having many people bitch about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
One small step for Diablo 3, one giant leap for disaster.
To find the truth, you must risk everything.
I have :D.
But the link you post only shows a blue post. I want more confirmations, such as an official website and article. Lanning taken away is HUGE, so I have my doubts if there is yet to be a proper article regarding this situation, with blizzard employees discussing on these issues.
Blizzard
Valve
:thumbsup:
qft on that man, i wont even buy the fucking game if they pull out some gay shit like that
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, there is really no need for this. If they say they are not going to play the games, they say it to express their feelings, which is understandable in my book.
Lan has been around for a long long time, although I honestly don't care if Blizzard removes it (I never lan, except in internet cafe), I don't see why they'll remove it.
However, I'm still skeptical since I have yet found a proper article with an interview regarding this topic, so I have no idea why we're getting worked up over this.
Blizzard
Valve
:thumbsup:
How did the pay-to-pay idea emerge? I thought it was only the possible absense of lan in D3. In no way does this mean its a Pay2Play. Not to mention, Hellgate: London had an optional pay2play and the game was a 3rd person hack n slash. That failed miserably. I highly doubt they'll implement pay2play, the system is just tooo... different compared to MMORPG.
PS: My previous post was deleted, I must have done something wrong:evil: (I guess quoting also equals to traces of someone's flame heheheh).
Mod Note: Yes. Quoting a flame post (and just responding to one, in general) is just as much against forum rules as flaming, itself. See the forum rules posted at the top of every forum section if you need a refresher. Thanks.
Blizzard
Valve
:thumbsup:
Give me LAN please Blizzard!
Diablo 3 will not and can not be P2P. It would be the only non-MMO game ever that has regular fees and that's simply not how things work. If D3 was P2P, then they would have put a meaningful level cap (instead something limited to a number of digits so that it better fits the box in the character sheet), and then raise it with major content updates.
Another thing. This whole thread is pointless. There are no signs, or omens - they are making a game that is designed to give you everything you need out of the box. They are aiming for a one-time payment type of a model, but the actual D3 team does not make decisions like this - it's up to the Blizzard management and always has been. Jay gave example that some areas might have to pay some sort of a fee, and that makes perfect sense. Specifically, he mentioned North America. They will have to hire french-speaking customer support, and pay for development of french content patches and updates. WoW has launched Russian servers only a couple of months ago for the first time! Do you know how much it costs to rent servers in Russia? A lot. They have to pay for at least a hundered of Russian-speaking GMs and they had to translate the entire game with all quests and texts which is a HUGE job. And now they took it upon themselves to develop content updates and patches on Russian language. So, they do not want to make D3 pay-to-play, but given some circumstances, they might have to enforce fees for certain areas.
That gives you something to think about.... Also. It's said that new Battle.Net will no longer have USEast and USWest, but rather have them as one realm, and North America will be a separate realm.... I wonder why, eh?
See that's not the issue I have necessarily. First of all, my concern is mainly depending on the mod capabilities of D3. I know Blizzard isn't a mod-friendly company, and that modding in D2 was more a side-effect thatn anything else, but LAN capability was what made mods playable outside of singleplayer. That won't happen on B.net.
Secondly, it's always nice to be able to play multiplayer without having to worry about lag or random disconnects as happens on B.net right now.
Yeah, the link on page one did have a blue quote, and it gave the source.
Warning! Poor translation.
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
Ah well.
I dunno, I always find it more fun (if not just to laugh at them) to play with "kids." It's funny! Swearing about nothing, arguing about the same, always telling some weird explicate story, calling people 'n00bs,' calling you and your mother every name under the sun, then asking to be on your friend list. . . so you can hear them swear at their other 'friends' over /f m. . .
What I find completely depressing are the Hardcore, grown, 30 - 40 something gamers that swear at you using perfect grammar, use the words 'indeed,' 'therefore,' 'surely,' and 'scrub' in every sentence, bring up politics and religion . . and of course, can afford to pay their own subscription fee.
D3 Pros: Outdoors environment, night time environment, female Barbarian, rune spell system, the Wizard class
D3 Cons: Fantasy architecture, fantasy armor, fanstasy weapons, no shaders.
When it comes to hacks (of the real cheating type, not just macros, or texture/sound editing), if you make single player online only (as well as remove LAN), you then can have the game completely hack free, with the impossibility of private servers as well, as long as the server does not get leaked.
That's a really drastic step though, and I doubt it would be done for this game.
You could still have the game pretty hack free with LAN and offline single player (or just without LAN) included (FYI obviously includes map hack and dupe hack, which were just caused by bad programming on blizzard's part). With single player though, and especially with LAN, it's much easier to play pirated multiplayer, which is not something blizzard would want.
The two main problems with not having LAN support I wouldn't say applies to most people, but should still be taken pretty seriously (obviously, since they are still valuable customers):
-People with bad Internet are not able to play effectively. They would resort to LAN parties and inviting friends over.
-(a branch off the first point:) People who bring friends over for a more social experience, sorta like playing something like mario party, guitar hero, Wii, or whatever.
-(this one doesn't really count IMO) Ability to play mods. This may be supported through battle.net if there's such a thing as an "open" server, but even if that's not the case, mods aren't supported for the game anyways, so it doesn't really count.
(those are the only ones I could think of, and is not necessarily exhaustive)
While those are both prominent reasons, the gains from users buying the game instead of pirating it, outweighs the losses from the small portion of people who won't buy it only because they can't play it with their friends, because they don't have multiple keys combined with good Internet.
If it's average gamers who all own a copy, they can still play on a open LAN, assuming the host's Internet is sufficient (which it would be for an average gamer, or especially one out of a group)
They would still not be able to play on a closed LAN, such as SOME LAN parties (more and more are being open, that is connected to the 'net), but that's not a reason why a person wouldn't buy the game, since I've never heard of anyone who buys a game SOLELY to play it at LAN parties/closed LANs.
Overall, it's the logical decision to make, lowering the number of potential pirates. It's possible some hackers will modify the game to allow LAN play, but that's not a guarantee, it takes time, and it's better than allowing it from the get-go. Considering how likely it is for the game to be hacked for LAN play, I don't see why so many people are disappointed at the fact LAN play will be gone (unless you believe it won't be hacked, which I suppose it a possibility if Blizzard programs well [and perhaps if people are too lazy to hack, because I don't think it's impossible to hack no matter how well it's programmed]).
If some of the community (not me included) want the art direction changed again, we'll all be paying a monthly fee pretty much, right? *snicker*
Seriously, I'll wait to see until B.net 2.0 releases. If they don't have a p2p fee for Starcraft 2 I doubt they will for D3. I'd be interested in getting one of those "D3 key changer" log in thingys though!
Hungry? Why Wait? Grab a Barbarian!
Where in the world did this pay-to-play garbage begin? (I refuse to replace words with numbers, by the way. The 90s called, they want their schtick back.)
I understand that all you 'hardcore' fans who like to micromanage stats and basically make the game less fun might be a little fussy about the lack of LAN support (which I admit doesn't seem too difficult to implement) but I'm pretty sure most of my time playing D2 was spent on BattleNET, instead of a room with six other PCs. If anything, the only people who should be even mildly upset are the owners of PC-Baangs in America, where the broadband isn't as amazing as it is in Seoul.
Do you want to hate the game that badly?
ok... now who would complain if they had to pay 99 cents to create a ladder character?
probably a lot of people, unless the ladder content was well worth it, and I'm sure that blizzard is more than capable of making it worth it.
now blizzard could do something like that. sell cards for $0.99(create one ladder char) $3.99 (4 ladder chards) $7.99 (8 ladder chars) and people would buy them, season after season.
and people who dont want to can always play non ladder.
that way Blizzard could cover whatever expenses they need to cover for this game without having many people bitch about it.