| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (130)

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:06AM Saladfork said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Hmm. Interesting idea.

I certainly won't be using the real money option, but I'm interested to see just how well it's received and used.

Don't suppose there's been any announcement of a release date, eh?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:31AM Amaxe said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Saladfork

I found myself wondering if this is going to be a test run for whether it would fly in World of Warcraft
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:43AM trinica said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Saladfork
Same, I'd love to see how this works out....I honestly can't decide if it's an incredibly good thing or an incredibly bad thing.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2011 2:33AM Eamil said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Amaxe Officially their line right now is that they know it wouldn't fly in WoW. From an interview on diablofans.com:

"Take a game like WoW: if we started selling items there, it would pretty much destroy the game. The core of the game is guild/raid progression; that is your top tier and that’s where everyone is focusing on. If you now give me the ability to circumvent that using money, you’ve kind of destroyed the need for having guilds in the first place."
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:08AM Mutagenaric said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
So... how long until someone tries to use this as a money laundering operation? Is that even possible, let alone viable?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:25AM sohcahtoa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mutagenaric

When people launder money it would be in the thousands... I doubt the items in WoW sell for more than a few dollars, max i give it is what... $100? It would require A LOT of transcation to launder money that way, and i bet they would have something in place to monitor that.

They dont want to go the way of online gambling
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:07AM PR0F3TA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mutagenaric

possible but not practical.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 7:32PM damnreds said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Mutagenaric
forget laundering, what about theft?

you think blizz has issues NOW with wow/battle.net accounts getting hijacked? what happens when every item in your inventory has a real dollar value already attached to it?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:12AM Dalrint said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
But what's the Stone of Jordan to Dollar conversion ratio?
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2011 8:24AM Draco765 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dalrint

per websites that do this now for D2, $.98per SoJ
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:16AM Oldtaku said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Diablo $$$ you say?

Oh what the hell I'm in anyhow.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:16AM freaparn said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Heh, so there's a "nominal fee" for posting a sale, another one for making a sale, and a "percentage-based fee" for cashing out of the BlizzBank. That's the financial equivalent of a gangbang.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 8:53AM TheRedComet said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@freaparn

Remember when Bobby Kotick said he wouldn't interfere with Blizzard? Riiiiiiiiiight.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 9:11AM Scuffles said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@TheRedComet

..... I wonder how much lube is going to go for in the D3 cash auction house?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 9:43AM ironneko said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Scuffles

Lube? You'll have to make do on blood... and tears.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:20AM sohcahtoa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freaparn

Well the article mention that the Percentage CashOut actually goes to the third-party company that handles the real cash (i have a feeling paypal :P )

it isnt surprising to see an auction to have a posting fee, and a buyer's fee... as long as it is flat and nominal, to the consumer it wont be much, but to blizz it would be big money.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:26AM BananaBoat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freaparn - That's what I came here to say. I can cash out, but there are three layers of fees for me to do so?

Meh. It's like you are paying Blizzard to play their game, and the more you play, the more you pay them if you ever want to sell your crap and leave.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:43AM chrisredfield31 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freaparn eBay works off of the same system, as does Amazon.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 12:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@freaparn
I don't know if you know this, but the average percentage an auction firms like Christie's and Sotheby's take is on the order of 20-30% based on the item being sold. There's no way in hell Blizz would take that much. What we're talking about is probably 10 to 15 cents for every dollar spent max. So blizz would get a dime and paypal would get a nickel. That's not much.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:22AM blueskyv201 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Diablo 3 will require an active Internet connection to Battle.net to play"
What the fack are you doing Blizzard? I have a shitty internet connection that drops every 15 minutes, does this mean I won't be able to play Diablo 3?

This is facking ridiculous!
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:45AM Third said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@blueskyv201
"like StarCraft 2"
This probably refers to the lack of LAN-based multiplayer, like in SC2.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 9:09AM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Third

SC2 has a single player campaign (well 1/3 of one anyway), Diablo III does not.

They've completely scrapped the single player offline mode and are forcing everyone to use the Diablo 2 style online.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 9:51AM Pugnaciousturtle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@blueskyv201 Yeah, I have no idea why I would buy DIablo 3 now. I think I'll just wait for Torchlight 2.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:48AM Third said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is
Didn't know that... Dang, that's harsh.

I guess the online multiplayer always was far more popular than single player in Diablo II, and the patches released by Blizzard for the game were clearly aimed at the multiplayer. But I kinda liked the single player, especially since it's still a somewhat story-driven RPG. I certainly didn't expect it to be scrapped completely.

Still, Torchlight will keep me occupied. (Best €5 I ever spent)
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:50AM Wulf said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@This Little Man Says His Name Is

You're obviously a trool , but I'll feed you nonetheless.

There is an expansive single-player storyline, as there has always been in the Diablo series.

Your idiocy in clinging to that 'SC2 is 1/3rd of a game' completely discredits anything else you might have to say. SC2's Terran campaign had one less mission than the entirety of StarCraft.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:12AM Third said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wulf
I guess what he meant was there still is a campaign, but thanks to the always-login-to-Battle.net thing it's essentially a multiplayer campaign you play on your own, rather than a pure (offline) singleplayer. At least, that's what I understood.
As for SC2, they did split the massive 3-part campaign into three releases, essentially making it episodic. Haven't played SC2 yet, so I have no idea how the size of it compares to the original StarCraft, but the basic point of the storyline being split still stands. That of course didn't prevent it or Half-Life 2: Episodes or any of the other episodic releases from being awesome and totally worth the money.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 7:52PM damnreds said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@blueskyv201
you can thank this real money auction house for that. blizz cant very well allow offline single player, or mods, or really let you to own your character's saves (theyre in "the cloud" now, yay) if the potential payoffs for cheating are so tangible. at least they are being honest about this, instead of giving the same old "piracy" line as ubisoft for their always-on drm. not that i agree with blizz's decision.

each new announcement about diablo 3 increasingly draws comparisons in my mind to all those grind-y korean mmos (albeit, incredibly well polished). many people will buy and enjoy it, and blizz will make money hand over fist.

sad to say, it seems im just not diablo's target audience anymore.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 7:58PM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wulf

Have you ever played Diablo 2s online?

It's the single player campaign with the option to have other people join you. I never said they removed the campaign. All I said was their forcing you to play the game online.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:26AM Faceless Troll said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I give it a week til the first lawsuit.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:49AM DevilSei said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Faceless Troll

Hope so at least. Of all the ways they could of killed off my interest in Diablo 3, they chose the worst!
You know what kind of behavior this is going to breed into people? NO ONE is going to use the "in-game currency" auction house because they know they can make real money selling the same exact thing over the "real $ shop". Its going to be twisted heavily towards that side. And Blizzard won't give a rats arse because as long as they use the real-$ house, they get to make more money off it.

And this whole Battle.net 2.0 bullcrap can kiss my arse. Old Battle.Net works just fine, and still does.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 4:35AM FakeJamaican said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Faceless Troll

the terms of agreement are going to be like 150 pages.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 7:16AM Colorfuljosh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@DevilSei
you are ofcourse 100% right i dont know why people downvoted you? people only wanna see and hear what they want i guess which is "OMG BLIZZARD YEAHMAN CANT DO ANY WRONG. PLEASE TAKE MY MONEY!!! hoho yeah diablo !" they will take your money trust me
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 9:36AM HooDiergod said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@DevilSei This reminds me of when APB first came out, you could sell stuff for in-game money or for real world money. Some people never had to pay for the game... it could work.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:41AM sohcahtoa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@DevilSei

It might be true that there wont be anymore ingame auction being used, but after a few transaction selling items, there would be enough cash flowing around in your account, you might never have to use REAL cash out of wallet to fund cash items
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 1:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@sohcahtoa
One can sell a item on the ingame market, someone buys it, they put that item on the real world currency market.
And vice versa. You can buy a item with real money and sell it on the ingame currency market.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:39AM Beatz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Stop playing those video games and go get a job!"

"This is my job! Capitalism, ho!"
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 3:47AM Third said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Considering international commercial and tax laws, this is a brave move by Blizzard, to say the least. Better get ready for a wave of EU questioning...
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 4:03AM Mr Tastix said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I actually enjoy the Diablo series and want to get Diablo 3 on release but that's simply not going to happen if I have to be online to play the game.

What, so people who have dial-up don't play Blizzard's games? Hell, what about people with no internet access at all?

The entire situation of Blizzard removing LAN play from StarCraft 2 was bullshit enough as it is. I know it's no real difference to Steam (and anything else like it, such as internet activation) but those are pretty bullshit, too.

Clearly games today are no longer meant to be accessible.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 4:26AM Jeremy2112 said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Mr Tastix I know, right? I mean jeez, we even have to buy a whole computer in order to play these games. It's ridiculous and alienating to those who don't have a computer.

CLEARLY the games are no longer accessible.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:01AM Vladeon said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Jeremy2112

Maybe you aren't aware of this for one reason or another but even in the U.S. there is still 40% of us that don't have access to broadband internet and 30% of us don't have access to the internet at all, and that's only talking about those of us who live in the United States. American servicemen use a T1 type connection and are only allotted a small amount of internet access every month, so basically they won't be able to play this game at all if they want to email their family or skype. so maybe do a little research before you expose us to your ignorant snarkiness.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:09AM alinos said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Vladeon

Yeah not to mention that in most cases if you want to play said game portably on say a laptop your plain out of luck

D3 was gonna be a compute game for me.

Allows me to sink in a good 2 hours or more a day. While still maintaining my regular games that actually require an online connection at home.

Oh well went from being a day 1 to a meh
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 11:01AM Courtney said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Jeremy2112

I live in a rural area and run off 3G wireless internet, as it's really my only option (thankfully right on the edge of having good signal for that). One person can sometimes game on it, but it's impossible for two people to run on it at the same time. So my wife and I, who have played through D1 and D2 together, will not be playing D3.

I'm sure they will make plenty of money, but I'll just choose to spend my cash on games that are friendlier to people who want to play offline or locally.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 5:45PM ThePenIsMightier said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Mr Tastix

Inaccessible to YOU doesn't mean inaccessible.

You're posting online. Why are you whining about needing internet access?
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2011 3:20AM Mr Tastix said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@ThePenIsMightier
Charities exist because people want to support others in need, not because they themselves are in need.

Or in other words, just because I may have some semblance of online accessibility does not mean I don't have to support those who don't.

Just because you and I have internet access doesn't make it justified to deny somebody a service just because they don't have the same access.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2011 7:34PM ThePenIsMightier said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Mr Tastix

Wahhh wahhh. Why aren't you whining about it shipping on DVDs? People with older budget systems might not have a DVD drive! How cruelly inaccessible to publish software in a format that is in line with the common majority's setup!
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 4:22AM Schlecht said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It sounds somewhat illegal. I'm not sure exactly how, but it does.
And you gotta expect scams to get a whole new twist on them through this.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 4:27AM Jeremy2112 said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Schlecht It's not illegal in any way. Blizzard owns the content, and they can do with it as they see fit. End of story.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 6:13AM Xero Theory said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Jeremy2112 Not end of story Mr. Internet Lawyer. There are definitely still questions of legality. There are still questions of how much will Blizzard be held accountable for the various scams that are bound to pop up. There is still a question of if this is legal in all states and all the other countries that will receive access to this service. I very highly doubt you passed the bar and speak to a definitive legality to all these questions. Stop trolling, we get it you're all over Blizzards nuts but people have a right to question this whole idea.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 7:54AM Kougeru said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Xero Theory Okay Mr.Internet lawyer 2. You don't think Blizzard looked into the legalities of this all? I'm sure they've been looking into the entire situation for a long time and weighted all the pros, cons, and legal issues. It will work fine, it will be fine. If they announce pvp gear the only legit complaint (balance) will be gone as well. Right now it's too early for people to make judgement and whine about it, but in the end most of them won't play pvp anyway. Hell, this might even not come to pass....They were gonna pay players for top SC2 maps and then charge players for the top SC2 maps..that system never took effect, this might not...but it seems they spent A LOT more time in this one so I think it will, and I think it will work great.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2011 10:37AM BananaBoat said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Xero Theory - The only issue of legality I can think of is in relation to tax law.

What law is there against Blizzard operating this type of infrastructure? How does one scam a system wherein Blizzard takes the item and the money in escrow, and then passes them along to the buyer and seller respectively? This certainly shouldn't fall under any sort of anti-gambling law, so I'm not sure what the issue is there.

I loathe the entire idea of RMT on a moral basis (it really does ruin the game. I've seen the economy of an MMO completely tank based on out of control RMT) but on a legal one, I'm not sure what the issue is (in the US specifically) beyond tax law.

(Warning: I am not a lawyer)
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW