4 ms·

Diablo 4 has no legitimate reason to be a multiplayer game, its primary reason for being "always online" is to enable the microtransaction economy.

chongli 3y ago
Why is the microtransaction economy illegitimate? I’m not a fan of Blizzard and I have no interest in playing Diablo IV (or any of their other recent games) but I fail to see your point. Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. They hated the cheating in Diablo I & II. They want to know that items they purchase from other players are legitimate. They want to be able to participate in PvP without worrying about other players cheating to get the best items.
- squeaky-clean 3y ago
  You can implement those features and keep an offline-capable single player mode. Just allow characters to be offline-only at the time of character creation. I've never been interested in the online parts of Diablo, and I've skipped this game because of that.
  - chongli 3y ago
    I mean that’s fair. It’s one of the reasons I’m not interested in Blizzard games either. But I don’t think it’s illegitimate. I think it’s partly an anti-piracy measure and partly supportive of their microtransaction model for monetizing their games.
- rosmax_1337 3y ago
  Microtransactions are added to games to pad the pockets of their shareholders, not because they contribute to the experience of the game. This makes it an illegitimate reason to stay "always online". It's something that simply should not be a part the game. Monetization can be solved in many different ways, microtransactions are always just corporate greed. >Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. They hated the cheating in Diablo I & II. Some* Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. If you have some study to prove that it was a majority of players or even a significant number of them, that simply sounds unlikely to me. My anecdotal experience is that I know of noone that appreciates the addition of microtransactions to games, even games that by their nature must be online.
  - chongli 3y ago
    Diablo IV is the fastest selling game in Blizzard history. So if microtransactions are a deal-breaker for players, I don’t see the evidence of that. I don’t care for microtransactions and I don’t care to play the game, but they are a legitimate way to make money and lots of players are fine with them. I’m sure lots of people would be happy (and prefer) for the game to be free, but that doesn’t make charging a retail price illegitimate, despite the cost contributing nothing to the gameplay. I fail to see how this reasoning does not extend to microtransactions, which are merely smaller prices charged for content through an in-game (rather than retail) store.
    - rosmax_1337 3y ago
      I never stated that microtransactions are deal-breakers, I said they are an illegitimate reason for a game to be "always online". I've never said that charging retail prices for games is illegitimate, I infact said there are many ways to solve monetization, one of which certainly is retail pricetags. I could've made a rant about how microtransactions are bad for the industry, consumers and the developers in different ways, but since you mostly just misrepresented what I said, I don't feel like it.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      > Diablo IV is the fastest selling game in Blizzard history. That alone is not an argument. If you release a new game that's exactly just as fun as your previous game, you'll still hit "fastest selling game" and "most copies sold" records in your studio's history - this is a consequence of the economic and population growth in general, and in particular growth of the player population.
- LexiMax 3y ago
  Diablo II had two ways of playing online - Open BNet and Closed BNet. Open BNet allowed you to use your offline characters, but Closed BNet did not. The theory of the system was sound. The practical reason why Diablo II was a mess was because the game was buggy and trusted the client too much, making "Closed BNet" turn out to be not so closed after all. There is no technical reason why Diablo IV couldn't have been designed with the same two-tier system, they _chose_ not to do so.
t-writescode 3y ago
Do you not play with friends? Do you not engage in world events? Do you not engage in random skirmishes? Do you not find it fun when you're working on a question and it turns out there's someone else working on the same quest and so you roam and fight the mobs they're fighting, too? I've had many, many fun, multiplayer interactions in D4 that have absolutely enhanced my experience playing it. I have many negative things to say about Diablo 4; but, it being multiplayer - even it being massively-ish multiplayer - especially after playing it for a couple weeks, is not one of them.
- Kiro 3y ago
  Yeah, I was extremely skeptical of the "forced MMO" aspect and almost didn't get the game because of it, but now I think it's one of the best parts of the game. I love how it's not in the way and feels natural.
- notacoward 3y ago
  This isn't about online/multiplayer being an option. It's about that being mandatory. Today's DDoS brought the game down even for people who had absolutely no interest or intention to do any of the things you mention, at that time. 100% degradation instead of some lower percentage if online had been optional. Unless you want to argue that there are (or should be) no people who play games alone, your response is a bit of a red herring. Phrasing your statements as pseudo-rhetorical questions, as though the "right" answers should be obvious, is even a bit insulting.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Kiro 3y ago
    Would you say the same thing about WoW? Most people play solo but no-no would expect it to work offline. If Diablo 4 would be released as a new title with no expectations I don't think anyone would question the always online aspect. It's a new and integral part of the experience.
    - 3y ago

chongli 3y ago

Why is the microtransaction economy illegitimate? I’m not a fan of Blizzard and I have no interest in playing Diablo IV (or any of their other recent games) but I fail to see your point. Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. They hated the cheating in Diablo I & II. They want to know that items they purchase from other players are legitimate. They want to be able to participate in PvP without worrying about other players cheating to get the best items.

squeaky-clean 3y ago
You can implement those features and keep an offline-capable single player mode. Just allow characters to be offline-only at the time of character creation. I've never been interested in the online parts of Diablo, and I've skipped this game because of that.
- chongli 3y ago
  I mean that’s fair. It’s one of the reasons I’m not interested in Blizzard games either. But I don’t think it’s illegitimate. I think it’s partly an anti-piracy measure and partly supportive of their microtransaction model for monetizing their games.
rosmax_1337 3y ago
Microtransactions are added to games to pad the pockets of their shareholders, not because they contribute to the experience of the game. This makes it an illegitimate reason to stay "always online". It's something that simply should not be a part the game. Monetization can be solved in many different ways, microtransactions are always just corporate greed. >Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. They hated the cheating in Diablo I & II. Some* Diablo IV players want the microtransaction economy. If you have some study to prove that it was a majority of players or even a significant number of them, that simply sounds unlikely to me. My anecdotal experience is that I know of noone that appreciates the addition of microtransactions to games, even games that by their nature must be online.
- chongli 3y ago
  Diablo IV is the fastest selling game in Blizzard history. So if microtransactions are a deal-breaker for players, I don’t see the evidence of that. I don’t care for microtransactions and I don’t care to play the game, but they are a legitimate way to make money and lots of players are fine with them. I’m sure lots of people would be happy (and prefer) for the game to be free, but that doesn’t make charging a retail price illegitimate, despite the cost contributing nothing to the gameplay. I fail to see how this reasoning does not extend to microtransactions, which are merely smaller prices charged for content through an in-game (rather than retail) store.
  - rosmax_1337 3y ago
    I never stated that microtransactions are deal-breakers, I said they are an illegitimate reason for a game to be "always online". I've never said that charging retail prices for games is illegitimate, I infact said there are many ways to solve monetization, one of which certainly is retail pricetags. I could've made a rant about how microtransactions are bad for the industry, consumers and the developers in different ways, but since you mostly just misrepresented what I said, I don't feel like it.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    > Diablo IV is the fastest selling game in Blizzard history. That alone is not an argument. If you release a new game that's exactly just as fun as your previous game, you'll still hit "fastest selling game" and "most copies sold" records in your studio's history - this is a consequence of the economic and population growth in general, and in particular growth of the player population.
LexiMax 3y ago
Diablo II had two ways of playing online - Open BNet and Closed BNet. Open BNet allowed you to use your offline characters, but Closed BNet did not. The theory of the system was sound. The practical reason why Diablo II was a mess was because the game was buggy and trusted the client too much, making "Closed BNet" turn out to be not so closed after all. There is no technical reason why Diablo IV couldn't have been designed with the same two-tier system, they _chose_ not to do so.

t-writescode 3y ago

Do you not play with friends? Do you not engage in world events? Do you not engage in random skirmishes? Do you not find it fun when you're working on a question and it turns out there's someone else working on the same quest and so you roam and fight the mobs they're fighting, too? I've had many, many fun, multiplayer interactions in D4 that have absolutely enhanced my experience playing it. I have many negative things to say about Diablo 4; but, it being multiplayer - even it being massively-ish multiplayer - especially after playing it for a couple weeks, is not one of them.

Kiro 3y ago
Yeah, I was extremely skeptical of the "forced MMO" aspect and almost didn't get the game because of it, but now I think it's one of the best parts of the game. I love how it's not in the way and feels natural.
notacoward 3y ago
This isn't about online/multiplayer being an option. It's about that being mandatory. Today's DDoS brought the game down even for people who had absolutely no interest or intention to do any of the things you mention, at that time. 100% degradation instead of some lower percentage if online had been optional. Unless you want to argue that there are (or should be) no people who play games alone, your response is a bit of a red herring. Phrasing your statements as pseudo-rhetorical questions, as though the "right" answers should be obvious, is even a bit insulting.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- Kiro 3y ago
  Would you say the same thing about WoW? Most people play solo but no-no would expect it to work offline. If Diablo 4 would be released as a new title with no expectations I don't think anyone would question the always online aspect. It's a new and integral part of the experience.
  - 3y ago