Diablo 3 Going Free to Play?



[caption id="attachment_379566" align="alignright" width="187"]
An old question, revisited.[/caption]A fan spotted an interesting sight on Blizzard's main Diablo 3 page... free to play up to level 70?

Is this a trial? Or permanent? Diablo3.com

Update: Looks like they changed it again. The store page now has 3 buttons again; $19.99, Gift, and Try for Free.

Kazua: Hey everyone - sorry for the confusion here. This was a temporary website issue that caused the wrong text to display. As others have noted, this has been corrected.[source]http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/20742675189?page=2#29[/source]

I moved into a house (after years in apartments) last fall, and the house came with a nice big yard. I've always been into gardening, even back when I just had some tomatoes in small pots on m back patio so now that I've got a yard I'm making all sorts of garden plans, and worrying about soil quality and fertilizer and such, and as a result... I know bullshit when I see it.

Sure, "now" their D3 website says $19.99 for the starter pack, and Blizzard claims that it was just a website glitch... of course it was! They just accidentally changed their D3 website to say "free to level 70?" out of the blue? I'm sure it was an "accident" that it was viewable by the public, but will anyone be surprised when/if D3 goes F2P up to level 70? That's the economic model they're following in new territories like China, after all.

This "accident" doesn't mean we'll finally see Diablo 3 China style "stash for cash" in all regions, but obviously Bliz is planning/considering setting D3 to F2P up to 70, which is why they're constructing sample/test versions of their website, which they clearly didn't mean to post for the public to see.

Does anyone disagree? Does anyone even mind if they do this? Bring in some fresh meat, get them hooked on the gameplay, and ease them into the full purchase. What's the problem?
Continue reading the Original Blog Post.


Diabloii.Net Member
Could be nice because leveling is a complete different game which is made boring because of the anticipated power creep. Yet, it is the only time where you have build diversity or you change a skill because of a legendary drop (a bit less now with Kanai cube). Finally Free Diablo could be more interesting than Pay Diablo (reminds me when people were trying to one shoot Leoric during the beta).


Diabloii.Net Member
yes, and that is why I don't ever see a D4 coming out -- only a small amount of players are interested in doing the actual story and leveling up by playing the actual game --- Blizzard is catering to a different group of players now -- if a D4 ever does get released it will have no story at all --- it will be like Overwatch or Heroes of the Storm --- just a quick jump in, join a group, smash something, jump out


Diabloii.Net Member
Well, I'd like to play more story mode. It's just, that it ain't catered for. Any and all new options are going into adventure mode. Drops via Rifts are hilariously better. As is Exp gain. And due to the design of adventure mode, the playing style providing me with the most fun :) Every nook and cranny. - Well, actually planning out my future characters and the route, how best to develope them to get to that point. But that's not even a part of D3 ...) is inefficient to a depressing degree in both.

To be honest: I'd like it better, if the randomness of Rift maps would be combined with telling the story, with fixed maps (more less, than often) thrown in, when necessary storywise or for certain challenges, like bosses. Just look upon a modern Nethack version, to get an idea of what I mean. (Back to the Rogue roots, so to speak. Deep side dungeons with their own mainstoryline, would be quite welcome ;))


Diabloii.Net Member
I used to think that free to play games were inherently awful.

PoE really changed my mind on that. As a game I found it much better than D3 (D3 on launch at least, now I'd say it's just sort of "different" rather than strictly "better"). Anyways, I think that there's definitely room for free to play games that avoid strict pay-to-win mechanics in their cashshops.

I tried some other free games recently (or low buy in, followed by optional microtransactions), and think that while they might have been mechanically sound (good, even), they fell flat on their face with a lack of either funding, time, and/or attention to plot development and voice acting. In some games like D3 that's not a huge issue... but in others it really breaks the whole game for me. Free to play games simply don't get the funding for enonugh development to be truly epic in scope. So while it may work for an ARPG, IPhone app, or the latest pvp hack and slash, it's always going to be severely limited when it comes to new tripple a titles seeking to put out something "epic," "immersive," or just truly novel and ground breaking.

D3 never had the deepest story though. Neither did its earlier incarnations. It's certainly not the type of game that requires a subscription to maintain content and development for, and if they feel they can make it free to play at this point and get more money than they would by just selling boxed media, then more power to them.

For games that do fit a pay to play model, I think it can work very well. People are happy to support PoE and more willingly - it's not just people buying tabs and stuff because they're needed. My sense is that a lot of gamers have chipped in 20+ because they feel the game has been worth that to them. True, some people cheap out and get a free ride. But for everyone who does that there's someone crazy who puts in way too much money for some stupid forum title or whatever. The end result is a pretty involved game that caters to it's playerbase, pleases its player base, and is - more or less - self sustaining.

If you can raise enough money for your game's needs with that alone, I'd call it a win for everyone involved.