Pay to play or free to fail?

[gluecks]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Of course I'd prefer free2play because it actually sucks after BUYING a game to PAY just to PLAY it

However I'd probably still pay for it because what is 10$ in a month? It's 2 cocktails less in a party night...

 

[Brother Laz]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

If you can't afford to pay a measly $15 dollars a month to play a game then you shouldn't be playing games or on this forum in the first place. Priorities people. If you don't have time to dedicate enough time to make the $15 dollars worthwhile what makes you believe you have say in what the game should be, especially when there are those who can invest time into the game and contribute much more to the overall userbase.

It's not about me. It's about the thousands of kids with parents who don't want to pay them $15/mo to play a game (instead of studying), broke university students who'd just play another game with no fee, adults who can only play for a few days per month and don't want the hassle of paying for those...

After this exodus, there won't be a lot of people left, which makes multiplayer that much less fun. So yes, my game experience will be negatively impacted.

I heard more people than usual might not want to pay for games these days. It seems that recently a few jobs got lost here and there. Etc.

 

[raveharu]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

It's not about me. It's about the thousands of kids with parents who don't want to pay them $15/mo to play a game (instead of studying), broke university students who'd just play another game with no fee, adults who can only play for a few days per month and don't want the hassle of paying for those...

After this exodus, there won't be a lot of people left, which makes multiplayer that much less fun. So yes, my game experience will be negatively impacted.

I heard more people than usual might not want to pay for games these days. It seems that recently a few jobs got lost here and there. Etc.

Well for one, I don't wish for the "kids" to be playing :scratchchin:

And they can choose to play single player.

 

[Daedrith]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

If you can't afford to pay a measly $15 dollars a month to play a game then you shouldn't be playing games or on this forum in the first place. Priorities people. If you don't have time to dedicate enough time to make the $15 dollars worthwhile what makes you believe you have say in what the game should be, especially when there are those who can invest time into the game and contribute much more to the overall userbase.

That's incredibly selfish and ignorant; I take offense, despite that being a non-issue for me personally. You can't talk about priorities and paying a monthly fee for a video game. A lot of people can barely afford a f**king place to live with the economy and here you are all smug about a "measly $15". There is absolutely no reason as to why someone can't be a huge contribution to the game's user-base without paying a monthly fee.

Show some respect.

 

[apedog]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

That's incredibly selfish and ignorant; I take offense, despite that being a non-issue for me personally. You can't talk about priorities and paying a monthly fee for a video game. A lot of people can barely afford a f**king place to live with the economy and here you are all smug about a "measly $15". There is absolutely no reason as to why someone can't be a huge contribution to the game's user-base without paying a monthly fee.

Show some respect.

Respect for what? Failure? If you are in a position in life where you can't afford 15 dollars for a game, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING GAMES. I don't see how you can defend a person "wasting" time on a game when they can't even afford 15 dollars a month extra. I don't have time to play the worlds smallest violin for those who have wrong priorities. If a person doesn't have the drive to put themselves in a better situation that is their problem. Don't even bother trying to say there are those less fortunate, we are discussing video game politics, the poor do not even have a place in the computer gaming industry. They should be focusing on their financial/living situation only. If I want to socialize with others on a multiplayer game, i'd prefer to play with those who have stable careers instead of a child who has to beg for 15 a month.

 

[Doctor Salvador]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Respect for what? Failure? If you are in a position in life where you can't afford 15 dollars for a game, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING GAMES. I don't see how you can defend a person "wasting" time on a game when they can't even afford 15 dollars a month extra. I don't have time to play the worlds smallest violin for those who have wrong priorities. If a person doesn't have the drive to put themselves in a better situation that is their problem. Don't even bother trying to say there are those less fortunate, we are discussing video game politics, the poor do not even have a place in the computer gaming industry. They should be focusing on their financial/living situation only. If I want to socialize with others on a multiplayer game, i'd prefer to play with those who have stable careers instead of a child who has to beg for 15 a month.

I feel at this point in the argument, talking about people's priorities is irrelevant, it's already been established that many aren't willing to pay per month. Forcing players to P2P (fifteen dollars???) would restrict the gaming community. And no, that isn't a good thing, restricting it to people who are willing to pay that much won't leave you with some idealized perfect gaming community. You'll still get kids, it's just that you'll get snobby rich kids, and you'll still get hackers, and you'll still get the normal lowlife associated with video games.

Less players means less fans. For Blizzard's future, this means less moolah. You have to look at the big picture here.

 

[Krugar]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Respect for what? Failure? If you are in a position in life where you can't afford 15 dollars for a game, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING GAMES. I don't see how you can defend a person "wasting" time on a game when they can't even afford 15 dollars a month extra. I don't have time to play the worlds smallest violin for those who have wrong priorities. If a person doesn't have the drive to put themselves in a better situation that is their problem. Don't even bother trying to say there are those less fortunate, we are discussing video game politics, the poor do not even have a place in the computer gaming industry. They should be focusing on their financial/living situation only. If I want to socialize with others on a multiplayer game, i'd prefer to play with those who have stable careers instead of a child who has to beg for 15 a month.

Right. Thoughtful, understanding, realistic and with a firm grasp of reality. Your wisdom and maturity shine. I place your age around... hmmm... 5.

And since Diablo 3 will be free anyway, I'm pretty sure I won't have to suffer you on battle.net. There's a word for people like you. It starts with *** and ends with hole.

 

[Daedrith]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Respect for what? Failure? If you are in a position in life where you can't afford 15 dollars for a game, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING GAMES. I don't see how you can defend a person "wasting" time on a game when they can't even afford 15 dollars a month extra. I don't have time to play the worlds smallest violin for those who have wrong priorities. If a person doesn't have the drive to put themselves in a better situation that is their problem. Don't even bother trying to say there are those less fortunate, we are discussing video game politics, the poor do not even have a place in the computer gaming industry. They should be focusing on their financial/living situation only. If I want to socialize with others on a multiplayer game, i'd prefer to play with those who have stable careers instead of a child who has to beg for 15 a month.

It's not a matter of being able to literally pay $15 a month - people dish out way more than they probably should on digital TV and other entertainment as it is. It's the fact that we don't all WANT to have to pay a fee that high for a video game! I used to play WoW (still have an account up, actually) and payed for it entirely on my own money. I work a part-time job because I'm a student, along with the statistical majority of gamers. I regret it, it was a waste of my life and money, and there are better things to spend on. Sure, if you literally can't afford $15, you shouldn't be playing games in the first place, and I don't think anyone is arguing that here other than yourself. Most people don't want to waste a lot of money on something like this because it adds up. They could pay for it if they really wanted to, but there comes a point where someone moderately frugal should say "Is it worth spending that much $$ on this?"

The one thing in your post that I can somewhat understand is your last statement; logically, a monthly fee should help prevent annoying immature kids from playing. Then again, you certainly seem to be well-off enough and I'd much rather play with the whining 12 year-old kids than someone so arrogant as yourself. And furthermore, who says the game should be so restricted anyways? As Doctor Salvador posted above, that would probably hurt the community in reality. Find some friends to play with if it's that big of a deal with you. It's a game, marketed to the public as entertainment for anyone to enjoy.

 

[apedog]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Mmm, a few children who believe that I am 5 years old and can't even afford to pay $15 dollars is making me guilty for wanting a better player base :jig: Seriously, you have no grounds for your arguement. Get a job or do something with your life that has more monetary value. WoW is successful because it can afford to be, distributing a game without monetary support will just let it drown no matter how popular it is. Btw kiddies, nice guys finish last so I have no problem being an A-hole with money Keep living life thinking the free option is the best option, see where it gets you.

 

[Daedrith]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

You say we have no grounds for our arguments. I believe all of us just stated very real grounds for our arguments. You have yet to provide a single counter. Instead you fire petty insults to cover for your own insecurities, that's real mature. Looking back, every post you have made on this board has been filled with insults to another member.

You say to get a job. I just stated in my above post that I do have a job AND I am a student. I was just accepted into Johns Hopkins University. I'm furthering my education so I can get a decent job doing something I love.

You state that distributing a game without monetary support will just let it drown no matter how popular it is. Are you familiar with a company by the name of Valve? They charge a single fee for their games, at purchase, as with most games. They continually provide tremendous support; As an example, for Team Fortress 2, they provide new maps, new gameplay modes, improved balancing, graphical enhancements, new class weapons and achievements, etc. regularly. Free of charge.

I never suggested living life free is even a remotely good option. It isn't. I just don't throw my paycheck in the trash and announce it to everyone.

See where that attitude gets you. Have a nice day.

 

[Krugar]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

So, now that our resident tycoon has been dealt with, on to more pressing business...

Diablo 2 will most definitely not be pay-to-play. Many arguments as to why have already been discussed by many of you folks. In my opinion, the most important one being that the game simply doesn't fit into the MMORPG gameplay that justifies that business logic.

But even more important. There was an interview sometime last year in which I seem to remember Jay Wilson specifically stated there aren't any plans to do such a thing with the Diablo franchise. Definitely not with Diablo 3. There's only one thing that can force this and it's not called Blizzard, but Activision. However, it was certainly not without a grin on his face that Jay also said if Activision wants to push that business logic, Activision will lose business.

I can't seem to find this interview. You folks do search for it. It's too late and I'm off to bed soon. It was sometime last year shortly after the announcement. July or August, I reckon. On any case, anyone wanting to pay to play Diablo (be my guest) you are barking at the wrong tree if you go to Blizzard. They won't, they don't want, they aren't. Knock on Activision's door instead and if they lose their marbles and decide to hear from you before they hear from Blizzard, you may get what you want.

... oh... and good luck. Not!

 

[Daedrith]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

That's good to hear! I must have missed the interviews when they said that. I was somewhat concerned since they are being all hush-hush about all the new battle.net features they are implementing for D3 and SC2 - though it will be cool to see what they'll have though

 

[apedog]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

You say we have no grounds for our arguments. I believe all of us just stated very real grounds for our arguments. You have yet to provide a single counter. Instead you fire petty insults to cover for your own insecurities, that's real mature. Looking back, every post you have made on this board has been filled with insults to another member.

You say to get a job. I just stated in my above post that I do have a job AND I am a student. I was just accepted into Johns Hopkins University. I'm furthering my education so I can get a decent job doing something I love.

You state that distributing a game without monetary support will just let it drown no matter how popular it is. Are you familiar with a company by the name of Valve? They charge a single fee for their games, at purchase, as with most games. They continually provide tremendous support; As an example, for Team Fortress 2, they provide new maps, new gameplay modes, improved balancing, graphical enhancements, new class weapons and achievements, etc. regularly. Free of charge.

I never suggested living life free is even a remotely good option. It isn't. I just don't throw my paycheck in the trash and announce it to everyone.

See where that attitude gets you. Have a nice day.

Your arguements were based on saying that people can afford to pay but do not want too. My arguement earlier stated that if you don't feel like paying a small fee, you really have grounds for opinions on what the game should be because you do not contribute as much as someone who pays would. Telling me that you're a student and that you have a part time job means you need to stop worrying about whether diablo 3 will be free/p2p because you have other priorities. This is the misonception that little children like you have, you believe that being in school automatically gives you success later in life. Like I keep saying, get your priorities straight before you even attempt to argue what the game should be. It's obvious you're undergraduate studies should be top priority, since your parents are spending their hard-earned money on you anyways. Btw bringing in Valve is like comparing apples to oranges. Valve does not run the servers, they give out map packs to their highest played games because they do not have to spend money hosting servers. However, other games like Far Cry 2 on steam give out map packs but at an added price. Name one DECENT rpg that does not have some sort of p2p system and constantly updates.
Foot note:
My attitude has given me a stable career where I don't have to listen to whiners who complain about their paycheck. Im guessing you know what thats like making what? 7.15 an hour? I just love how kiddies who just got into school refer to themselves as students and use it as justification to have an opinion on every matter :jig:

 

[NASE]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Respect for what? Failure? If you are in a position in life where you can't afford 15 dollars for a game, YOU SHOULDN'T BE PLAYING GAMES.

So you means that the student, the engineer to be and the shaper of your future world that doesn't have a stable financial situation because his studies prevent him from having a stable job and because his housing is way to expansive, that only wants to play for a few hours on a Friday night to forget the troubles of the week, that he shouldn't be playing.

Well, that's just not fair. And you later ever have a pump broken, you'll have to fix it your self, cause I'm ain't gonna.

I just love how kiddies who just got into school refer to themselves as students and use it as justification to have an opinion on every matter :jig:

Some of those kiddies are students. And some of them are much smarter then you. Better be careful who you piss off.

Name one DECENT rpg that does not have some sort of p2p system and constantly updates.

And who evens says we need constant updates? If they fix serious hacks once a mounts, and give us content patches once a year, that's more the enough.
That's they whole point, they should be working on this as if it isn't a p2p game. They should design the game so that it has minimal server load. so that it has minimal post-development cost, forinstance, by ignoring season updates like wow has or by hardcoding the needed mechanisms them.

 

[Shadon HKW]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

I must admit, moving from D-2 to WOW gave me quite a surprise, the gold spammers are dealt with in a timely fashion, if you make a mistake on loot distribution, open a ticket and the problem is usually solved in an hour or less, if a boss or event is bugged, page a GM (one actually joined us in a 10 man raid), we chatted and had a blast with him. There is 24/7 in game support offered in WOW, if this is the kind of excellence we can expect to get in D-3 and the new B-Net, then I will be happy to pay a monthly fee.

 

[NASE]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

I must admit, moving from D-2 to WOW gave me quite a surprise, the gold spammers are dealt with in a timely fashion, if you make a mistake on loot distribution, open a ticket and the problem is usually solved in an hour or less, if a boss or event is bugged, page a GM (one actually joined us in a 10 man raid), we chatted and had a blast with him. There is 24/7 in game support offered in WOW, if this is the kind of excellence we can expect to get in D-3 and the new B-Net, then I will be happy to pay a monthly fee.

That question is not like that. We shouldn't ask ourselves if it's nice to have such a support. We should ask if we need it.

 

[Sid]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

>Name one DECENT rpg that does not have some sort of p2p system and constantly updates.

Um, Diablo 2? Neverwinter Nights? Pretty much every single RPG ever made that wasn't an MMO?

>My attitude has given me a stable career where I don't have to listen to whiners who complain about their paycheck. Im guessing you know what thats like making what? 7.15 an hour? I just love how kiddies who just got into school refer to themselves as students and use it as justification to have an opinion on every matter.

0/10.

Nobody sounds more like a kiddie on this thread than you. You're intimations are immature, way out of line, and offensive. Reported.

 

[Daedrith]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

Your arguements were based on saying that people can afford to pay but do not want too. My arguement earlier stated that if you don't feel like paying a small fee, you really have grounds for opinions on what the game should be because you do not contribute as much as someone who pays would. Telling me that you're a student and that you have a part time job means you need to stop worrying about whether diablo 3 will be free/p2p because you have other priorities. This is the misonception that little children like you have, you believe that being in school automatically gives you success later in life. Like I keep saying, get your priorities straight before you even attempt to argue what the game should be. It's obvious you're undergraduate studies should be top priority, since your parents are spending their hard-earned money on you anyways. Btw bringing in Valve is like comparing apples to oranges. Valve does not run the servers, they give out map packs to their highest played games because they do not have to spend money hosting servers. However, other games like Far Cry 2 on steam give out map packs but at an added price. Name one DECENT rpg that does not have some sort of p2p system and constantly updates.
Foot note:
My attitude has given me a stable career where I don't have to listen to whiners who complain about their paycheck. Im guessing you know what thats like making what? 7.15 an hour? I just love how kiddies who just got into school refer to themselves as students and use it as justification to have an opinion on every matter :jig:

I'm sorry, but there is no justification for the idea that you having more money should grant you more influence over a video game developed by an entirely unaffiliated company, who sees you as one customer out of millions. Do you really believe that you, personally, as a player, should and will receive more attention from the developers at Blizzard because you have some extra cash to wave in their faces? Is that really what "contributing" is all about? Sure they are a business - but that is not what makes a good game. It's just as important to provide feedback and help build a strong community around the game; that is what will keep the game alive. And it certainly did for Diablo II.

Look, if there would be a monthly fee, then so be it; if the game is really deserving of the extra cash then I would gladly dish out some money to play for a while so that I could have the opportunity to participate. But you know what? Right now, IT DOESN'T. And because it doesn't, you have absolutely no more right than anyone else on this forum to be here making suggestions about the game, period.

Moving back to the "priorities" insults you keep throwing at me. All of your reasoning can be turned around and thrown right back at you. I should be focusing on my education? No doubt! By that logic, just as much as I should be focusing on my life, you should be focusing on yours. Your life. Your job. And perhaps even more importantly, your social life because you are probably the most disgustingly rude person I have ever encountered. But that's not fair is it? The truth is, you have no more of a right to say what I should be focusing on than I do to say the same about yourself. It's none of your business, and it isn't Blizzard either.

Actually, Valve does run their own servers. Steam doesn't run itself. It's a content distribution platform that supports thousands of games for millions of users. Any game you purchase via a Steam account can be accessed from any computer you log in to. Games these days take up gigs. It also provides patches and updates, support, their anti-hacking system, etc. That content is hosted and provided by them, and needless to say it takes up a lot of bandwidth. Not so say that Blizzard should not charge for WoW or anything, I see that as reasonably justified given the sheer amount of content, the scale, and the level of support they provide. Diablo II isn't an MMORPG, it doesn't NEED that. Blizzard did a fine job with Diablo II and they could certainly release more expansion packs after Diablo III comes out to add content, and if the users want them, they will buy them. Myself included.

A decent non-MMO RPG doesn't charge the equivalent $15 a month worth for their DLC, most don't even release enough content to be compared to WoW or any other pay-to-play MMO game. Paying for DLC didn't really take off until the last for years. Again, Diablo is not an MMO. In response to your question, I'd rhetorically ask you to name a decent RPG that is non-MMO and has a $15 a month fee.

I refer to myself as a student because at this point in my life, that is my job. I don't use it as "justification to have an opinion on every matter" as you suggest. In fact, I never even used it as justification once in any of my posts - I purely defended myself from your childish "get a job" remarks. I'm giving an example of a large percentage of the gaming population, a percentage that have no less potential to contribute to the game as you do.

Please stop using irrelevant childish attacks on others. The more you do, the deeper you dig yourself into a hole. But you know, I've wasted way too much time on trying to give you a different perspective, a hint of reality, and an idea of respect. So I'm done with this rant. Also reported, this site is a great community and the forum doesn't need to be plagued by trolls.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I apologize to everybody else on the forum for having actually argued back, I realize this took up a lot of space and caused a bit of commotion. Lets get this post back on topic, no? :thumbup:

NASE brings up a good point. While the quality of support of WoW is hardly refutable, do we really need such extensive support in Diablo? I think it really depends on just what all of these new features to Battle.net are. They have been very hush-hush about the whole thing, so there might be some pretty cool stuff. The concept of having GMs is somewhat impractical since in WoW they have several for every server. The only implementation I can think of would be having them join a game when a bug is encountered and they can do whatever they need to from there to fix the scenario.

But I don't think that would be necessary in a game like Diablo since it isn't so expansive and complicated as an MMO like WoW. The level of bugs that were present in WoW at launch would be relatively unacceptable in a game like Diablo (in my opinion). And I also wouldn't expect the same amount of new content for Diablo as I would from WoW. Blizzard has the history of releasing expansions, and I'm sure Diablo III will be no exception. We'll just have to wait and see...

 

[Astroquicky]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

I didn't read every single post in this thread (I read the first 4 and the last page), but somewhere in one of the first few pages someone mentioned that D3 going P2P would probably leave quite a bit of players just downloading a pirated copy to play single player and leave the multiplayer aspect for what it is.

I'm afraid to say that I'm quite sure I would be one of those people. First of all, I don't have the time, or the desire to play any game on a regular and constant basis. Sometimes I play several times a week for 2 or 3 months. Sometimes I play quite intensively for a week, sometimes I don't play at all for months at a time. This means that if I'm forced to pay to play, I'm going to be annoyed that a) I have to spend a hell of a lot of money to play per year ($60, $120, $180... whichever it'd be, it'd be more than I'd want to pay), and b) I'll be paying even when I'm not actually playing, and c) I'll be torn between wanting to spend less time playing so I'm more productive and spending more time playing so that I get as much bang for the buck.

If it ends up being $5 per month I might consider going along, but at $10 I doubt I'd do it, and at $15 it's definitely out of the question, and I'll simply be downloading a pirated copy to play the single player and forget about it afterwards, unless I'm really impressed and want to honour the developers by paying for it anyway. As many have said here, Diablo is not an MMO game, nor do I want it to be. I want to play when I feel like playing and not pay even when I don't feel like playing.

EDIT: Oh, and before you start calling me a leecher, I bought Diablo 2 and the expansion last month, after having played a pirated copy for a few weeks. I had been looking for another isometric RPG game (for some reason I don't like the 3rd or 1st person ones like WoW), after having played Divine Divinity -- which I also bought btw -- extensively, when I came across Diablo 3 and was thoroughly impressed, prompting me to download Diablo 2 and try it out.

 

[NASE]

Re: Pay to play or free to fail?

NASE brings up a good point. While the quality of support of WoW is hardly refutable, do we really need such extensive support in Diablo?

You could even go further and claim and bugs are simply part of diablo II. I know we don't like dupers, hackers etc. Yet there are smaller bugs that have become part of diablo II.
Would the game still be the same without those fire-explosion one hit skills back in 1.08? Would the game still be the same without ebugged armours? Or without glitch rushes? Fine, the fend bug is annoying, yet people learn to life with it. And eventhough we want it fixed, we aren't complaining (to much) that it still isn't fixed. Or those strange ith weapons, they were kind of fun - and overpowered. Or those super crafted rings with +20 life leech.


If they patch these things, that's fine. If they don't, that's fine for me too.