He is saying that SCII isn't for him.

It's also not for me but not for reasons described so far in this thread.

I am however looking forward to D3.  I just hope my recently purchased computer will meet or exceed D3's recommended reqs.

-.-

Yeah, blah is putting it mildly.

Best regards,
Steven.

I know I'm bumping an old thread, but I didn't feel this deserved an entirely new thread to discuss.

As some people might know, Diablo III is now going to include an Auction House.  Two, actually.  One, allows people to put items on their for in-game gold.  The other?  Allows people to sell items for real money.  No, this isn't a joke.

Despite Blizzard's known stance against people selling items for money, particularly World of Warcraft's in-game currency, it seems Blizzard has agreed with the old "if you can't beat them, join them" attitude.  The benefit, of course, being that Blizzard now takes a cut of all items posted on the Auction House - both in-game gold and real money.

What are people's thoughts on this?

So far, the community reaction has been basically negative: some are optimistic that this will enable people to progress, however the major issue people have is that who in their right mind would use the Gold Auction house, when they can earn real money instead - which, essentially, kills trading for anyone unwilling to open their wallet.

I don't like trading since you didn't earn the item yourself but this is a good thing.

People want great gear. People are willing to buy gear from 3rd party sites so why not take advantage of that?   Now, with Blizzard as the middleman, 3rd partysites just recieved a suckerpunch

As for gold vs real money. Doesn't matter to me. I would never pay for anything in Diablo III and will only buy from the goldhouse. I'd try to sell on the real money AH though

One fansite had some really dumb people posting though. Complaining that "there's no need to play the game, just buy your gear" <--- I'm sorry, ooor actually I'm not but are you f'n retarded??      If you consider gear to be more important than the gameplay experience then....I don't know what to say!

GEARWHORES!

Entirely irrelevant to me, since I don't see me ever using it, but I've got nothing against it.

As others have noted, seems a blindingly obvious add for Blizzard to squeeze some extra money out of the game throughout it's lifespan.

So Kudos to them!  I guess I would only object if the players who didn't want to interact with the feature were somehow forced to interact with it, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

Personally, I'm pretty irate. Of all announcements on D3, this is the one that has seriously made me question how much I want to play it.

My complaint has two sides. One, I don't like always-on internet. But I can live with it. And I don't like real-money sticking its tentacles into the game world. But I can live with it.

It's the two, combined, that I have a problem with. My only desire, at its core, is to play D3 single player, never interacting with the community, the market or Blizzard/Activision's long-term business plans.

I no longer have that option. I don't have it because the game is now conceived of with a money-market in mind, from the ground up. There is no separation between the two. Whatever changes Blizzard makes to the game because of the market (be they totally justified ones or the Snidley Whiplash kind of manipulation everyone worries about), everyone gets saddled with, even people who expressly avoid the market by choice. There is now a good chance the game will get managed based not just on what's relevant to game play, but what's relevant to the market.

I don't like financial motivations with my gaming. I was talking with another friend and he was like "hell yeah, I made $400 selling items in D2, I can't wait." I could just hear the greed in his voice. That's not why I game, and I cringe when I think about the Chinese Forced Labor Farms (yes, they are real) and that Blizzard is essentially legitimizing all that, and adherence to supporting those markets may end up meaning more to them than the actual game.

So yeah, call it emo if you want. But Blizzard had plenty of opportunities to let us opt out. They chose not to because they want each and every one of us as potential customers (read as: repeat customers, because $60 just isn't enough these days.) I would care nothing if they'd allowed us to be unplugged from all the hype and extraneous BS. But because they refused, I'm now seriously considering not getting the game on principle. I love Diablo, since the first one. And I really wish Blizzard had waited for this shit until their new IP. But I know that's not being realistic. D3 is gold mine and they want to turn it into a diamond mine.

Or maybe just your's?

D2 is an old favorite. Spent many a happy hour.

D3 seems an entirely different game. The classes do not seem up to par. Never liked Barbarian anyways. Where is my Druid? Maybe there will be a Druid and they just haven't said. And what is this Witchdoctor? Not me, no thanks.

Well, the Demon Hunter might be exciting. But dual wielding cross bows? Lame! C'mon!

Monk is a hopeful sign. How can you screw up a monk? Wizard also looks pretty good. But what the game needs is an Engineer!

Just IMHO, Torchlight 2 will probably be a better game overall.

Or, just load up D2: LoD and install Brother Laz's free mod, Median XL Omega.

On a positive note, well there will be a decent crafting system. Crafting systems are good!

The DRM alone made it go from sale to no sale.

Not surprised by anything else.

I was on the fence about the game but now I won't be buying it.

Region locking, online play only, no single player campaign, auction houses that legitimize Chinese goldfarmers, pay to win structure, no mods, etc.

DiabWow/Blizzard has jumped the shark.

People can laugh at me all they want but I'm sticking with Torchlight II.

No region locking, offline play is fine as well as Lan play and online play, single player is fine, no auction houses/pay to win, very mod friendly, etc. Also less than half the price of DiabWow.

Made by the guys who made Diablo I and II, these guys still "get it."

This was a game I was near assured to get.  But Diablo III's online restriction is even worse than Civ5 and steam.  It's all going to shit!  After passing on Civ5 I thought E:WOM would fill the bill.  But that's not working out.  Then I thought... finally Diablo III's coming out.  Based on the first 2 I figured the new one would be a good bet.  But they went and monetized it to death.  For me anyway.  Must be online to play the AI!?!  No thanks!

I never used to give much credence to the gaming analysts who'd say that PC Gaming was in decline.  But its hit rock bottom for me.  I've officially lost all interest in new games.  Lucky for me I missed out on all the wonders during the golden years.  Just today I bought Heroes of Might and Magic 1-4 + Chronicles.  And the Might and Magic RPGs 1-8.   13 quality games + 7 expansions for a price which is about $10 less than 1 new game.  And no DRM (from GOG.com)!  I've still yet to play much Alpha Centauri, Free Space 2, Port Royale 2,  Conquest of the New World, The Witcher EE, Temple of Elemental Evil, Fallout 2 & 3,  Patrician 3, and Master of Magic.  Then there are the Age of Wonders mods.   And aaaaalll the greats I've yet to get. The list is looooong.  Then there are the emerging indies!  Screw the publishers.  GOG set me free of those bastards!!!   

I never said Civ5 didn't work offline.  Though everytime I check the steam forums, I find threads where new people bring up the now old "I set offline mode but it doesn't stick" problem.

Forget steam dude.  Think E:WOM.  Think Civ4 at release.  Think Civ3 when Atari sold to 2k.  Think Dragon Age.  Think a whole lot of games turned to cash cow crap.  Or studios that just fumble like Stardock did.  Or fucked up publishers like 2k and ea.  And on and on. The decline of PC gaming in my mind, and on the minds of others I see, goes well beyond the control freaking of steam.  And of the publishers who crave the user data that steam mines.  

It's all over the industry.  steam might help push them in a direction since steam has such a chunk of the sellers market.  Their horseshit focus groups and the fracking attitude of "go big or go home".  There's much more to the decline than a dwindling steam.  And wtf?  I thought you Tridus were smarter than to pull the "evil steam" horseshitted strawman.  You've got a mind.  You gotta know that crying "evil steam" in a discussion has no worth!?

Ya, pc gaming iv thriving. Maybe it's not the development you wanted, but the market did, and the developers did.

Frankly, old games are overrated. I go back and play some classic like Half-life or FF7. And you know what? They're not that good! I probably wouldn't even play them if they were released today. I think some people tend to idolize retro games and disregard advances made in new games. A lot of people are getting older and just not getting the rush they do any more from gaming. All they remember is that rush when they played that old game. But at the end of the day, you've changed as much as games have. Truth be told, if I played a game like Bulletstorm or Civ5 15 years ago, my mind would literally be blown. And yet, these games which are soooo much better than retro titles such as Civ or Quake  somehow end up on my shitlist? I don't think so.

Complain all you want about where pc gaming is heading. I couldn't be happier.

Oh... Settlers and Dungeon Keeper. Those were pretty much the highlight of my rts life. And when I played them just recently, it was just painful.