-
- Dolaiim
- Registered User
-
Member for 13 years, 10 months, and 14 days
Last active Wed, Feb, 8 2012 14:31:09
- 8 Followers
- 932 Total Posts
- 101 Thanks
-
May 19, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on Sixteenth Batch of Screenshots and ArtOnce they announce beta likes will shoot through the flipping roof. As for this piece of turd, thanks for nothing Bliz. I'm 100% sure this was drawn on "bring your kids to Blizzard day" by one of the artist's medium-talented 10th grade children.Posted in: News -
May 17, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on The Follower BluesPosted in: NewsQuote from Jackzor
Well the thing is those 'nubbins' are the majority of the people who have ever played D2 (or, more recently, SC2). So catering to them, at least in some ways, is almost forced upon the D3 team. And considering the aim of this system is to encourage them to become more hardcore and involved with the online community, as opposed to just trying to appeal to them, which I would say is much more indicative of their design mindset. They want a game that has a large community and a wide range of players.
Very well said, I agree. I definitely want a lot of people, of all skill ranges, to play and love D3. And I want the features to work for everyone. That was my point, though. It's definitely not a big gripe.. But I think the reason we're all a bit miffed about followers is that it's a cool feature, but it hasn't been implemented for everyone.. it's only useful for people who will play the game through normal, single-player.
Just seems like a waste of a great feature. The main reason followers aren't viable at endgame, that I could extrapolate, is they help too much with MF and Gold grinding.
BUT... maybe, just maybe.. they're not needed at end game, because end game play is way more involved and amazing than we can imagine.
Edit: And as for the "screen chaos" argument.. try playing WoW with 25 ppl in a raid fighting bad guys that don't even fit in the screen. It's AMAZINGLY fun to be in the middle of pure chaos.. I was main tank in a very active guild, and I had to find a way to keep everything that was happening under control during extremely complex mechanics. You find a way, and it's exhilarating. I agree with those here, that we should have the option. -
May 16, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on The Follower BluesA lot of good points on both sides. At first glance, I don't care either way. As I said before, I never liked the idea of having mercs in the first place. And I never played summoning classes. Not my style.Posted in: News
There is one thing that does have me annoyed though.. it's this: Bashoik openly admits that followers are implemented specifically for people who will likely only play through normal then ditch the game. It's a feature that is only functionally useful to novices.
Now look, I think it's a great idea to have features that are attractive to new players, and/or ones who aren't hardcore freak addicts like us. And it should be said.. if the followers have a significant impact on the storyline, then that's something. But frankly, if you need followers to reveal the story through exposition, well, that's awful storytelling. Diablo's not about talking, it's about showing. Or, at least it used to be.
So anyway, if the D3 dev team has spent this much time creating a feature that's only useful to nubbins, that tells me something about the design mindset over at Blizzard. -
May 16, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on The Follower BluesPosted in: NewsQuote from St_Spaceship
Do people ever just get excited about things? I guess I am a casual gamer because I totally do not look at features in an analytical way. I look at something and think about how it will add to the immersion, story or my gameplay experience. How frustrating life must be when things that are inherently fun and for leisure become points of contention and unrest in the eyes of those that play the games. What is the point? A lot of it also seems to be contrary for the sake of trying to play devil's advocate every single time something is shown.
Thanks so much for trying to sell me your personal world-view. The text in bold is especially condescending and judgmental, but I understand that from the outside, it's difficult to understand why certain among us behave this way.
The fact is, some of us thoroughly enjoy analyzing information in order to gain knowledge. If remaining ignorant is fun for you, cool, high five. Some of us are compelled to dissect life in an attempt to understand its governing dynamics.
Also, many of us just love to debate. We find it fun, and we understand that investigating other people's opinions can lead us to an enlightened viewpoint.
In short, you don't need me to be excited with you. And I don't need you lecturing me about how to approach my life. Also, be aware of the irony of complaining and bitching about all the people who complain and bitch.
Now, finally, on-topic.
<-ON TOPIC->
I always hated mercs. I'm not sure why, but they just annoyed the crap outta me. If followers were a big part of the game, I would want Dragon Age -esque control of the tactical choices of the followers, in depth. Otherwise they're just annoying.
But I agree with several people here.. why have followers at all if they're only used solo, AND they aren't viable past normal? That seems to me an incredible waste of engineering resources. If they did all that just to "encourage" people to play b-net co-op.. that seems a giant steaming waste.
If they don't get the game out by 12/31/2011, I'm blaming the followers that I'll never use. -
May 12, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on Trait UpdateIt's possible we have an "off-by-one" error here. If you get a trait after every three level-ups, then you'd have 19, because you start at level 1.Posted in: News
Ding level 1 -> 2 = 1
Ding level 2 -> 3 = 2
Ding level 3 -> 4 = 3 << First trait point
Just a possibility, not sure.
Anyway, I love the idea of having traits yield big changes in core function. The nickel-and-dime nature of most RPG's drives me insane.. This is a pretty visionary move by Bliz, imo.
I don't see any way they won't let us re-spec, but I don't think trait respec is confirmed, only skill re-spec for now. So we have to wait for more info. -
May 10, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: News
Given their track record of delaying software, I don't see any reason I should believe what they say. Now, I'm not saying they're wrong for delaying software - it's part of why they are so great! Blizzard scoffs at deadlines because they are so quality-focused, and we should all be thankful for that.
If you want to believe the game is coming out in 2011, by all means, do it. It seems optimistic to me, but there's a real chance they could make it. But don't come here and criticize people for taking a different opinion.
Like Kiserai said earlier, this isn't fanboys vs. haters. We all love Bliz, and we all want this game to come out yesterday. But we're all unique individuals who see the world our own way. Blizzard intentionally speaks in obtuse generalities because they refuse to make any real time commitments until very close to release. Absence of evidence leaves us with guesses and opinions. And as we know, opinions are not fact. Neither is belief for that matter.
The only time I've taken issue in these forums is when people start extrapolating wild fantasies from statements that are intended to avoid external commitments. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Kiserai
There's a difference between framing your opinion as 'I think that...' and 'You're all wrong and I'm right because of x y and z knowledge that I have.'
It's a good point. And it says to me that I haven't been expressing my points very clearly.
All I've really been saying is that we don't know anything extra, because Blizzard didn't tell us anything substantial. I've been revealing flaws in people's assumptions, not stating anything as fact over other people.
I've also just been trying to caution people about automatically building new timetables on heresay. That has been spun as my being overly negative, which I'm not. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallNobody is saying they have magical knowledge. But honestly dude, saying that all opinions are equal when I just had to explain the difference between Alpha and Beta test to several people...Posted in: News
I totally respect most of your opinions, having read them.. but diminishing the importance of expertise is a common method used by those who lack it.
In any case, we're really digging into some rhetorical skullduggery here. The bottom line is, I expected more information at this conf call than was given. Shame on me.
Edit: yes, we're all friends, and we're ultimately all on the same side. we want D3. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: News
Are you kidding me? Do you have ANY IDEA how much revenue the D3 release will generate? Remember how they were bragging about SC2, and how it sold over a million copies its first day? Saying D3 is "hardly a huge money maker for them compared to other games" is just absurd.Quote from ScyberDragon
If you are an investor, then you should know why D3 got so little attention. For Activision/Blizzard, D3 is hardly a huge money maker for them compared to other games. It has nothing to do with its development.
Hm, I dunno. Maybe it's that I develop computer software for a living, and I have worked under numerous different development archetypes since starting my career in 2004, including the ones they use at Blizzard. That expertise allows me to share my insights into their process, for better or worse. I, for one, don't have a vested interest in spinning everything positive, my ad revenue doesn't depend on it.Quote from ScyberDragon
I don't know what you being a software engineer has to do with anything though.
Quote from ScyberDragon
This is a beta announcement. Yes it can still be changed but so can any date for any product. The fact is that we are getting close to those dates regardless so if that is what they are shooting for and it is only months away then there is a good chance it will happen.
They announced that there would be a (ed:limited) public beta more than a year ago. Let's not get pedantic, I meant a Beta START announcement. No one knows when this Beta is going to start, and they had no interest in committing to any dates, even though it's an extremely important part of quality customer experience for most software companies.
Furthermore, when following a scrum development model (which they do), the closer you get to your target, the more accurate your predictions become. The fact that we're this close to the target dates, and the predictions have such an enormous variance, is actually a sign that their process might be broken.
Look, nobody is stopping you from getting excited. I'm not trying to make anyone sad, but I'm not trying to make anyone happy. I'm just calling it like I see it. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from snared04drummer
I fully believe there will be external testing starting sometime in July, and that we will, in all probability, see this game around Christmas time.
Here we go again, not hours from this latest bit of "news." Assuming Beta will start in July, assuming seeing the game around Christmas time "in all probability."
What probability is it you're basing this on? Even while the conf call was still going on, Bashiok was quick to point out that this was a rough estimate, depending on how development goes.
Quote from ScyberDragon
Mike Morhaime:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We are still pushing for a 2011 release
nuff said
Nuff said? Really? Wait so during a conference call they didn't drop a bomb by saying that 2011 is now unlikely, even though everyone knows that? You can take that as confirmation of a 2011 release, but we all know they purposefully said nothing. D3 got 3 bullets and 0 questions, a total of not more than 1 minute in the call.
Let me say this as clearly as I can: That was not a Beta announcement. That was an announcement that Alpha has started, and the game is "looking good." They gave a 3 month margin of error for Beta start, and even THAT is subject to the bombshell caveat "unless things change." It was barely even a timetable.
I'm not saying this as a QQ gamer with no life. I'm saying this as an investor and a professional software engineer. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Jackzor
I think we're all more than aware of Blizzard's inability to do anything early, but I still don't see them missing a three month window, especially after internal testing has already started.
I agree with you. What surprises me is that they give a 3 month margin of error for something that could purportedly start in less than 2 months. When it comes to project management in software engineering, that's the same as saying "we don't really know." If I were a VP and my PM said that to me I'd fire him on the spot. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Jackzor
Wait what? A WoW xpac (and keep in mind that WoW players make up most of Blizzard's fans) would be lackluster but putting a date on a beta thats already essentially announced would make people excited? I don't think so. Not to mention that BlizzCon is in October, which isn't during Q3, so their entire three month window would have to be off.
Bashiok:
"The 3rd quarter reference in the earning's call today was a calendar quarter, meaning that we're aiming to launch the Diablo III beta between July 1st and September 30th. Keep in mind that it's our current goal, and of course that can change as development continues."
Of course, that COULD mean the Beta could start earlier than Q3. But it won't. It's Blizzard. They haven't been on time since '97, and they've NEVER been early.
No it hasn't. They're targeting Q3. Key word targeting. An announcement is the release of an actual start date. Not a start 1/4 of an entire year. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: News
I don't think anyone's particularly disappointed. But I think most of us are pretty fed up with Blizzard's hazy rhetoric and "soon" politicking.
Now I see why you find it great news. While I honestly love your optimism, I don't understand it. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Winged
Although looking at the even bigger scheme of things, I think Blizzard is in a little bit of a rut. WoW is old, say what good things you will about it but in 3 years it will be ancient in terms of video games. Blizzard knows this I'm sure. So on top of anything else, I'd bet they are planning a grand release for their new MMO that will kick start a new generation of Blizzard games, which can be funded from the pay to play plan that will undoubtedly be part of it.
That's exactly what I got out of Machinima's "Blizzard Entertainment Part 5." Frank Pearce said "I would say that even though we have these really popular franchises, Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo.. If you look at our track record over the last 10 years or so, really you could make the argument that we've just been the Warcraft company." Morhaime added some color to what Pearce said by staring all sadface at his shoes.
It's hard for me to accept the timetable for D3 because Blizzard constantly and openly admits short-changing their other franchises for the sake of WoW maintenance. Yes, they're working their tails off, but they need more engineering resources to actually get the thing done in a timely way.
I thought it was interesting that Morhaime hinted at changes to their development structure to facilitate faster release time frames. I don't have the quote but I remember that distinctly. -
May 9, 2011
Dolaiim posted a message on May 9th Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Winged
Good point you bring up on how they keep their share holders in the dark. I guess their track record of success is what allows them to do that without people pulling shares out. Though I'd think most of them are more interested in how WoW is going to do in the future, since lets face it without WoW Blizzard isn't Blizzard in the minds of the share holders.
There was some interesting talk along these lines. Morhaime is terrible at answering shareholder questions. He openly admitted when asked about wow subscription "churn" that more people are leaving WoW than joining. If I'm an investor, here's how I see it:
1. BlackOps is doing great, but they spent a little too much time talking about the nickels and dimes of DLC 2.
2. WoW is dying.
3. Starcraft II does not bring in subscription revenue, so it's already priced in.
4. Diablo 3? What the hell is.. Oh yeah, that franchise. No subscription revenue, no real timeframe, no care.
5. They've announced a new MMO that they haven't announced yet, so the universe might run out of electrons before THAT thing comes out.
Conclusion: sell. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
Agree 100%. It's amazing how quickly, efficiently, and effectively humans can complete tasks when under pressure. But when given no deadline, it's amazing how there's never enough time to do anything. It's a strange phenomenon, but it's once I've experienced over and over again in both personal and professional life.
Edit: typo
0
That's the stuff that bothers me. When they throw out a word like "redesigning" and the only elaboration they give is (paraphrasing) "Some changes are in the works that will shake up characters," is it any surprise people will AT LEAST entertain the idea that the D3 release date is moving to the right?
It's Blizzard's right to delay their own release. And it's my right to be dissatisfied with their release timetables.
0
I love you.
0
Well most everyone already knows we're working on runestones still, and we have some other changes that are going to shake up characters a little bit. We'll be letting you know as soon as we're sure they'll work out at all, and then we're going to be asking everyone for feedback.
Edit: First of all, let me point out, I really do appreciate Bashiok taking the time to write up this post. I'm sure he gave as much information as PR allowed him to.
That said, this is vapor-speak disguised as details. The following example is what happened in my head, and why, in my opinion, saying something as vague as "We have some other changes that are going to shake up characters a little bit" is a terrible idea..
My brain: "Oh wow, they're still working on runestones, thought they would have made a decision by now. And oh.. wait what? There's more changes they haven't announced yet? They're going to effect characters? What does that mean? They are putting in changes, plural, so that means more than one. It's going to "shake up" characters. Hm. New skill systems? New leveling/stat mechanics? Are they going back on the whole weapon damage determines spell damage idea? What could it BE!? THEY'RE NOT EVEN SURE IT WILL WORK AT ALL!!??!? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?!?!? WHY AM I HERE??? IS THERE A PURPOSE TO LIFE AND THE UNIVERSE??!?!?!?! IS THERE A GOD??????? AAAAAARRRRRRR <head explodes>"
Ok, I took a little poetic license there, but basically, here's my point: I appreciate that Bashiok is communicating with us, in principle. But what he has said is too vague. It leaves the door open for a lot of fear and rage and worst-case scenario-ism.
We'll be continuing to add players to beta as we need. We recognize that there are many people that want to be a part of helping out and we appreciate that. We just aren't able to provide any particular schedule for additions.
The ongoing, concerns on timing of the release are understandable, but in some cases are a bit overblown or overly pessimistic. We recognize that it's mostly due to anxiousness and the desire to get in and stomp demons, but as Bashiok said in his post, we'll release it when we're ready. We believe it will be worth it.
We appreciate all of the constant support and enthusiasm for Diablo III and it is something that continues to inspire us to make sure we release a game we can all be happy with and have many great adventures in.
Beyond vapor-speak.
Once again, congratulations Blizzard. Never has so many words been used to say so little.
7
Keep believing that Blizzard is so great for "graciously" providing us such a priceless wealth of "information." For a large group of customers, their "information" is anything but informative; it's frustrating, misleading, and un-necessary. In my experience, this kind of continual, intentionally vague, vapor-speak is intended to keep an immature, un-empowered customer base ignorant but engaged. I've worked in software a long time, as a technical marketing engineer, test engineer, development engineer, and in sales. There isn't any paranoia at work. They are literally not allowed to say anything of substance without going through a serious approval chain (just read a day in the life of Bashiok).
I find it particularly cynical your opinion that corporations are impervious from any criticism or accountability to their paying customers. If Blizzard is going to engage their customers by announcing a game 4 years in advance, they have a responsibility to effectively inform their customers, or else their customers are going to get pissed off... which is exactly what happened. Why is this such a travesty to you?
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Where there's a ton of pissed off customers, there is a company that needs to improve their marketing and PR. In my opinion, most people don't think that highly of Blizzard as a company, they only think highly of Blizzard games. That's a fairly fragile brand loyalty.
Now you might argue that in order for them to keep making great games, they will always have to alienate their "impatient" customer base. That could not be farther from the truth. Again, how cynical do you have to be to believe that Blizzard can't have both great PR AND great games?
It's a good point to bring up, that people holding Blizzard accountable to their release dates is what caused Blizzard to STOP giving release dates. But don't be naiive. The PROBLEM was Blizzard missing release dates because
they suck at project managementthey don't value discrete project management deadlines like most other companies do.. The problem was NEVER the customer, because all we ever did was hold Blizzard accountable to their own word. Guess that's a giant inconvenience to them.The conversation goes roughly like this:
Us: "Hey Blizzard, you said the game was gonna be released <date1>. Now you're just gonna push release to <date2>? How can I trust you now?"
(2 weeks later)
Blizzard: "Trust us. Oh, btw, we're gonna miss <date2>, it's <date3> now. Aren't you glad I communicate with you so much? You should be thankful!"
Us: "Why? Some companies announce a game is in development, give concrete dates, meet those dates."
Blizzard: "Because we give you waaaay more information than those companies, and we make better games than them."
Us: "Well, you do make better games. But maybe I don't need information if it's not accurate, reliable, or even really saying anything we didn't already know..."
Blizzard: "But we really want to engage our fans, we love you guys!"
Us: "Cool. Well in that case, I have a few questions. How far along are you guys in development? What's going well? What's not? How's testing going?"
(2 weeks later)
Blizzard: "We're making design decisions and polishing the game, it's looking great. We're in the home stretch."
Us: "um.. you MUST be aware that you didn't answer the question at all."
(2 weeks later)
Blizzard: "Well runestones are pretty weird, it's possible we've made a decision about runestones now. We're in the home stretch of runestone decision making."
Us: "You guys are re-writing runestones? Ok. Well, what's the verdict?"
Blizzard: "We have several solutions and we're polishing things up, it's looking great and we're really close. Home stretch."
Us: "So, hey how about a release date? I mean, we know you are very protective of quality, but you MUST have internal deadlines, right? C'mon, gimme a little something.. you love me, remember?"
(2 weeks later)
Blizzard: "Early 2012."
Us: "What does that mean? Q1? First two months? First half? Jan 17th? wtf?"
Blizzard: "It means we pushed release back to 2012"
Us: "Ok that's actually MORE vague than 'early 2012', which is an amazing achievement in vagueness."
Blizzard fanboy: "Wow dude, stop being such an entitled, whiny little bitch. You should be kissing Blizzard's hairy beanbag just for talking to you at all."
I could keep going.
I tried to understand your point of view, I just can't extract your opinion out of his words.
0
3
Excuse me but that's not what he's saying. At all. Assuming he's too stupid to understand things can change during development is condescending and rude. Maybe you need to re-read his post.
Most of us are upset not because the game is changing and/or being delayed, but because Blizzard is continually pretending to keep us in the loop with misleading, open-ended language. They do not want an informed customer base, yet they keep feeding us information. This requires misdirection on Blizzard's part, and causes a psychological dissonance in certain among us.. we feel engaged and informed, because we get a lot of information, but the information itself is absolutely worthless, ethereal mist that evaporates at the whims of Blizzard PR. In a word, we feel manipulated, because what Blizzard says doesn't match what Blizzard does.
My point is this: Some people get seriously offended by the way Blizzard handles PR. Some of those people are vocal about it, and seek redress of grievances here, on Blizz official forums, and other ways. Other people don't mind and support Blizz. One view point is NO BETTER than the other. If you think your tolerance of Blizzard is in ANY WAY more valid than other people's intolerance of Blizzard, you need to step back and try to see the world through someone else's eyes, cause yours need a rest.
Now, I will say, the OP did have some good points, and he was striking out mainly at people who extrapolate strange paranoid conspiracies from Blizzard vapor-speak. Fair enough. Myself, and many others in this forum, are the type of people who speak out, sometimes passionately, when something is bothering us. I respect people who don't prefer that type of discourse. What I don't respect is when those people try to say it's not a valid conversation, it's pointless to engage in, and those that do are idiots.
Maybe we should have an official sticky "venting" thread or something.
1
As opposed to complaining about complainers. Way more constructive.
Frankly, the OP pissing and moaning about people pissing and moaning is about as useful as a Blizzard tweet. Next thread.
2
I'm not sure why you're posting this here though... Your opinions seem resigned that nothing will change in the design and gameplay, so you're just venting. Good for blogs, not so good for forums.
If you want to have a conversation voicing your concerns for a game you believe in, constructively criticizing the parts you dislike, with potential solutions, by all means. But as it stands, you seem perfectly stoked with D2, and perfectly happy to fart in D3's general direction. Basically your post is a troll, so do us a favor and keep it to yourself, eh champ?
As for this thread de-volving into another D3 is going to be better than D2 clusterfuck troll bait topic, www.nope.com
0
I will try not to fap up the pages.
0
First, as a technical matter, it's obviously difficult to do.
Second, I think that's a philosophical question. It comes down to choice, and how much of it Blizzard is willing to allow. I personally believe that more choice is better, to a point. Obviously we can't allow people to PK/grief others. In my view, MF stacking and low DPS doesn't qualify as griefing, but general annoyance. People should be allowed to play the game in a non-optimal way.
Plus, in the case I listed (where friends would actually want to stack MF on one character provided there's an agreement between friends to that end), preventing this practice would restrict friends playing the game benevolently.
0
Very astute point.
One thing to consider: Game theory does not accurately predict the outcome of these situations. Most humans tend to be far less shrewd, and more empathetic than our mathematical models predict. If someone's being a douche and stacking MF, don't party with that person in the future.
Hopefully people will create an ever-growing list of in-game trusted friends that they want to party/play with. People who act like dicks won't make those lists, will get passively blacklisted, and won't enjoy D3 very much.
However, I can see a party of 4 friends intentionally having one buddy stack MF while doing runs. Why? Because that buddy will drop the gear he/she doesn't need, to the benefit of the group.
1
This isn't the end of the world. But here's what I don't like: This decision is clearly not motivated by customer demand. We've never had any trouble paying for Blizzard services. We don't need a Blizzard balance that's transferable only between RMAH and Blizz "bucks." It seems to me that most people would prefer the option to cash out your earnings whenever you like.
But if you can cash out whenever you like, then you won't be enslaved by their banking system. They have no interest in your convenience. What they want is dependence and addiction, since "I have to keep playing, I still have a balance..."
Anyone who sits and thinks about it will come up with this model, provided their motivation is convenience for the user and not simply profit: Use paypal for everything. If you buy something from Blizzard, or from the RMAH, that amount is withdrawn from paypal. If you sell something on the RMAH, that account is credited. This technique is used constantly with online vendors of every make and model. But Blizzard doesn't want the money sitting in Paypal's bank accounts. They want it sitting in their OWN bank accounts. That's why they have to use a bunch of convoluted legal trickery to escape being labeled a bank.
Bottom line, it's motivated by profiteering reminiscent of large financial institutions... the same ones who literally invented collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps out of thin air, lobbied that they not be regulated, and subsequently used them to ruin our economy for the foreseeable future, and created new financial instruments during the crisis to profit from the very ruin they created!
Unrelated rant? Nope. I see the same instruments at work here, and would be fascinated by what the SEC has to say about all this, and how the legality was handled. I wonder if Blizzard account balances can be bundled and securitized, and traded on wall street? Hey, if you were a new hotshot MBA working for Blizzard, who's been educated by the very same people who systematically de-regulated and de-frauded American economics for ruin and profit, wouldn't this sound like a great model to increase gross margins with little-no downside risk?
Sorry guys, but I have no remaining trust in American Capitalism as it is practiced today. We've been burned black and bled dry. I, for one, am sick of it.
1
Same. Here's what bugs me:
"Once funds or Diablo III auction house earnings have been added to your Battle.net Balance, you are not able to convert that Balance into cash? Battle.net Balance can only be used to buy designated Blizzard Entertainment products or to acquire items from Diablo III's currency-based auction house."
They are very obviously making it purposefully inconvenient to convert RMAH money into real money. They have made it IMPOSSIBLE to redeem blizzard "bucks" or lol "value" back into cash. So, if you "load up" your "balance," it's the exact same as spending the money in the first place.
I find their language disconcerting: "Battle.net Balance is a new Battle.net feature that will allow players to store value in their Battle.net account"
They are trying to make you forget your "value" is actually real money. Why? So it can sit in THEIR bank account un-used. Every real-money dollar that sits in their (ahem, sorry, your) account is literally profit they have created out of thin air.
Blizzard is trying to manipulate online gaming currency so they can become a pseudo-financial institution. Their (ahem, your) unspent "bucks" are surely accruing interest, and more probably are re-deployed through accounting tricks into higher yield investment bundles. Meanwhile, it is literally impossible for you to get your money back out.. How is that acceptable?
Imagine a bank that only allows you to deposit, and never withdraw. That's what this is. Imagine that bank justifying what is essentially share-cropping practices by "selling" you 5 or 6 items of your "choosing". Such as: WoW time, um.. starcraft 2 maybe? Um, t-shirts, don't forget oh and hoodies. Did I say WoW time? Maybe this Titan IP when it comes out in 2018?
Look, it's their right to do whatever the hell they want, within the boundaries of law. I'm willing to bet they've been hard at work lobbying congress to allow some of this stuff to be legal in the first place. But as Gheed said, I'd much rather see them use this intellectual energy on new game products, rather than new financial instruments.
Gold AH for Life.
1