Blizzard Entertainment launched Diablo Immortal, a free-to-play "prequel" of its award-winning Diablo series, for iOS and Android devices, yesterday. It also launched an Open Beta for its PC version (though the game is built primarily with touch controls in mind for tablets and mobile devices). Despite its many predictable micro-transactions, it is getting rave reviews on the App Stores.

How many of you plan on playing Diablo Immortal?
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Diablo Immortal
By: Kaelon to All on Thu Jun 02 2022 12:11 pm

Blizzard Entertainment launched Diablo Immortal, a free-to-play "prequel" of its award-winning Diablo series, for iOS and Android devices, yesterday. It also launched an Open Beta for its PC version (though the game is built primarily with touch controls in mind for tablets and mobile devices). Desp its many predictable micro-transactions, it is getting rave reviews on the A Stores.

How many of you plan on playing Diablo Immortal?
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

Not me. I have pretty much given up with modern gaming. I am a bit tired of where this industry is going and I can play old games I already own to my heart'scontent anyway.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Diablo Immortal
By: Arelor to Kaelon on Thu Jun 02 2022 07:02 pm

Not me. I have pretty much given up with modern gaming. I am a bit tired of where this industry is going and I can play old games I already own to my heart'scontent anyway.

That's actually not a bad attitude, in my opinion. So much is wrong with modern gaming, and the "games-as-a-service" slippery slope to micro-transaction hell is certainly paved with good intentions, but unavoidable. And that's kind of what Diablo Immortal is - a wonderful Diablo game, cloaked behind some of the most predatory and obscene micro-transaction blasphemy that I have ever seen.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Diablo Immortal
By: Kaelon to Arelor on Fri Jun 03 2022 09:28 am

That's actually not a bad attitude, in my opinion. So much is wrong with modern gaming, and the "games-as-a-service" slippery slope to

Regarding games as a service, I remember hearing about Sega's Genesis game service in the early 90s where you could subscribe to get Sega Genesis games delivered over a cable channel. I thought that was an interesting idea, as an alternative to game rental (sometimes you might not want to buy a game but still want to try playing it).

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Diablo Immortal
By: Nightfox to Kaelon on Fri Jun 03 2022 10:34 am

Regarding games as a service, I remember hearing about Sega's Genesis game service in the early 90s where you could subscribe to get Sega Genesis games delivered over a cable channel. I thought that was an interesting idea, as an alternative to game rental (sometimes you might not want to buy a game but still want to try playing it).

Sega was definitely ahead of their time! They also tried to do something similar with the Sega Dreamcast, which along with the PlayStation 2 before it and the XBOX after it, was one of the few Internet-connected console devices of the late 1990s and early 2000s.

I definitely think that services like Xbox Live - where you have access to the entire library of games that Microsoft provides for a single monthly subscription - is totally destabilizing (and excitingly disruptive!) to the gaming marketplace. I love services like this that deliver real value to gamers and drive meaningful choices.

But "games-as-a-service" also includes the current dominant model (which I am not really a fan of), where a game - usually still in development - is released early, and a series of recurring fees (subscriptions) and one-time purchases (micro-transactions) are used to fund the profitability of the game. I much prefer paying full price for a fully developed game, and then being able to play it on my own terms, but this model has definitely mostly gone by the wayside. Now it's all about playing games that are "always connected," and "constantly improving," and that requires additional monetization. That's the wrong incentive, in my view.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 02 Jun 2022, Kaelon said the following...

How many of you plan on playing Diablo Immortal?
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

I might check it out but not dropping money on it. I prefer to own my games. Not pay for them over time. What game provider should do is Well you the game and then have a small charge onces there isn't enough traffic to keep the server going. This way of people want it to stay online they can vote with their dollar.

Better than micro transactions. Everything I read says its basically pay to win.

DrClaw
Noverdu BBS sysop
Noverdu.com SSH/Telnet/Web at Port 808

Re: Re: Diablo Immortal
By: claw to Kaelon on Sat Jun 04 2022 02:30 pm

Better than micro transactions. Everything I read says its basically pay to win.

You are correct. It is essentially pay-to-win, if you want to reach the highest stages of the game and be competitive. If you just want to play the storyline and get moderately geared, you don't need to drop a single cent on the game. But, yeah, the micro-transactions are obscene and this represents a new brazen and offensive standard. It is a Netease game, though, and they are really good at the micro-transaction game.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Kaelon wrote to claw <=-

You are correct. It is essentially pay-to-win, if you want to reach
the highest stages of the game and be competitive.

I play WarThunder, and think of the in-game transaction costs as
entertainment costs, and I'm OK with that. Like the game you describe, you could be a successful mid-tier player without spending a cent, it's once you get into more expensive vehicles, or get impatient grinding up to get new vehicles that spending money in-game makes sense.

Then again, if I were better, I'd make more in winnings and could maybe subsidize the game without paying.

It's all about entertainment, and I enjoy it.


... Slow preparation, fast execution
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Re: Diablo Immortal
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Kaelon on Mon Jun 06 2022 08:14 am

Kaelon wrote to claw <=-

You are correct. It is essentially pay-to-win, if you want to reach the highest stages of the game and be competitive.

I play WarThunder, and think of the in-game transaction costs as entertainment costs, and I'm OK with that. Like the game you describe, you could be a successful mid-tier player without spending a cent, it's once you get into more expensive vehicles, or get impatient grinding up to get new vehicles that spending money in-game makes sense.

Then again, if I were better, I'd make more in winnings and could maybe subsidize the game without paying.

It's all about entertainment, and I enjoy it.

... Slow preparation, fast execution

I think the problem does not come from the fact you have to invest money to play a certain way, but rather from the fact payments interfere with the gaming experience.

See those village building games in which you may be having trouble, but then you swipe your card loaded with inǵ-game-currency to get critical infrastructure built in a second. This sort of thing removes the escapist aspect of games because it keepds reminding you ever and ever again that the game has IRL implications which happen to be finantial.

When I play old games, only the game exists in my mind while I am playing. WHen there are IRL economics going it feels like such fact is competing with the actual game experience for my attention.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
ï¿­ Synchronet ï¿­ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: Diablo Immortal
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Kaelon on Mon Jun 06 2022 08:14 am

It's all about entertainment, and I enjoy it.

I generally agree, and have historically looked at monthly recurring subscriptions to video games as a very cheap and effective form of entertainment. When you think about what we have been paying for decades to go to the movies, for example, you'd be out of pocket ~$40 for a ticket, some concessions, and gas money to basically see a 2 hour film at the theaters. So $15/mo. is a bargain.

That said, Diablo Immortal is redefining the floor for how much a gaming company can nickle-and-dime you to consume the content. Want to complete the dungeon more quickly? That's $2 for a 4 minute run. Want to get extra gear just from logging in? That's $9/mo. Want even more? That'll be another $20/mo. What about in-game gold or other currencies? You can buy them, anywhere from $10 for about 20-30 minutes worth of farming, to $10,000 to skip ahead and get perfect gear.

It is pretty brazen, and my preference is just to ignore the most extreme parts of it. That said, it's already banned in certain countries, and it is likely going to spark the debate in the United States and Canada. Regrettably, it does confirm that Blizzard's good name has truly seen the end-times, as having sold the Diablo franchise to NetEase, a notorious Asian mobile games developer with a penchant for these micro-transactions, puts the nail in the coffin of what little goodwill remains for this brand.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net