Mysteries of the Mighty Barbarians.

[Tajin]

Again with the servers without RMAH, it would be extremely stupid (read: losing business opportunities) to do that, when everyone is acknowledging that outside RMT will happen with or without blizzbux. Fuck catering to 'purists'

[GRT]

What are you, some kind of Bobby Krotick minion?

[geno]

I was an economics major in college, online economic systems ramming head-first into real world currencies is pretty damn interesting to me. I'm saying I find it interesting just from an academic standpoint.

[GRT]

Not you, the other guy saying we shouldn't have non-RMT servers.

I really hope they make a compromise for us "purists" like they did with RealID

[miokomioko]

Again with the servers without RMAH, it would be extremely stupid (read: losing business opportunities) to do that, when everyone is acknowledging that outside RMT will happen with or without blizzbux. Fuck catering to 'purists'

Do you seriously think that RMT will go on at the same frequency/intensity with or without an RMAH?

Do you really think that the average online Diablo player has no problem giving their credit card info to some sketchy China-based RMT operation or some random kid on an obscure forum offering a character for sale?

[Tajin]

Eh I had a wall-o-text, but I'm tired of beating the poor horse. I'll play the game, enjoy the killing; in the unlikely chance I get something worth selling ($150+) and that I can actually sell it what with living in Mexico, I'll do it and think nothing of it except 'what I'm going to spend it on?'.

Want to flaunt your epeen? Take a screenshot and use the internet.

[Lucavi]

Do you seriously think that RMT will go on at the same frequency/intensity with or without an RMAH?

Do you really think that the average online Diablo player has no problem giving their credit card info to some sketchy China-based RMT operation or some random kid on an obscure forum offering a character for sale?

If they can get the same items cheaper, then yes. You overestimate the average intelligence of the "average online" person, period. People are still falling for those "I need money because I'm stuck overseas" email scams.

[geno]

Nah I'm pretty sure mioko's got the right of this. I think it's pretty clear the sheer percentage of players willing to RMT for items is going to be considerably higher in a legal in-game supported and Blizzard-backed system than it is in a sketchy against-ToS online scam filled RMT operation.

[Kaylia]

So, in your first post you chastise Mioko for attempting to form an argument based on a what-if scenario and in your second you put forth one of your own, stating that in your own experience most people on the internet are retarded. That's all fine and dandy, but you really shouldn't go around telling someone they have an invalid argument because they can only postulate what people "might" do when the basis of one of your own arguments is in the same vein.

They are two completely different arguments.

In one case, Mioko is telling us that he cares about the well being of other players when the argument right before was that his own gameplay experience is going to be harmed by this. There is no correlation between what he is trying to prove, and the argument he used. In the second post, I'm disagreeing with GRT because he is using the conclusion of an uncited internet argument to justify his stupid stance.

Well, it's a casino because of the randomized item systems that are drops and crafts. It always was a virtual slot machine, but now the risk is not just some pixels but real money.

Why do you not understand that you don't invest any money here. You can basically enter with 0$ and walk out with something (unless you want to count the few pennies of the first listing)? If a casino would do that, it would go bankrupt in no time because that's not a profitable model.

Like I said before, it's an auction of virtual goods, not a casino. Renaming it to something less accurate is retarded when it's properly named already.

Oh, and I assume you skipped past a few pages of discussion, so the short version is that there's no way to avoid the real money "auction service" because of the highly liquid currency exchange system, where the dominant currency (i.e. real money) will set prices and eventually drive out the lesser one.

This is not an argument when gold has the potential to be a valuable ressource. Money will drive out gold if it's anything like it was in Diablo 2, but Blizzard already stated it wouldnt be the case, and there is no reason to believe that it won't.

Secondly, I'm not sure what kind of econo-magic you're using to say that money will drive out gold out of the game, when gold has a value and and an use. Two currencies can coexist as long they can be exchanged and have a value, and that's exactly what we have. It wont be D2 all over again where gold literally had no use.

And finally, the limit of 1 item on both AH is going to artificially even out both AH even further.

The only thing the money AH got over the gold AH is that gold price is going to fluctuate for a while, which make it a risky device until it stabilize. Once it does, both will be fair ground, and it will become a mini stock market combined with an auction.

Maybe go back and read some of that before coming up with a comparison with eBay?

Ebay is an auction that make money off people transaction. This is exactly what is going on here. The only difference is that instead of selling real or virtual good, you're limited to selling a specific type of virtual good.

[Kaylia]

oh my god are you people still going on about this, holy fuck. and nobody's made fun of them changing from 7 slots to 6 to "maximize the number of combinations" despite the 12 they used being mostly arbitrary and the fact that 8-10 out of those 900+ will actually be good regardless.

It's true that 12 is arbitrary, but that was not his point. What he was trying to say is that balance felt better with 6 than 7 for now because they have designed around 12 unique abilities for every class.

It's actually hard to come up with distinct abilities that have meaningful use. If the developper felt like 6 slot was the best, they probably meant it. They might be saving some room for future expansion, but it's not really a bad thing either. I mean, as long the gameplay is fun, and don't feel too restricted, 6 could be more than enough for now.

[plue]

RMT AH aside, the graphics look like shit... =(

[Shenrien]

Beta phase bro, it'll get better at launch. n_n

[geno]

RMT AH aside, the graphics look like shit... =(

This I'll openly disagree with. Definitely like the graphics I've seen of D3 a lot more than Torchlight 2.

[Gokulo]

Ehh, it does look crappy, but I guess its the usual "we want people with weaker computer to be able to play"... Still, even the general aesthetic feel isn't too great atm, areas look really empty etv. I hope they can improve all that.

[GRT]

@Kaylia

When a poker pro gets staked into a tournament, that's gambling even though he's not doing it with a dime out of pocket. Half the time I've gone to Vegas, I got cash credit for gambling from either my company or the hotel I stayed at at, and I was gambling even when I never used my own money. Like I already said, whether or not you make or lose money doesn't make an institution a casino, that it facilitates the act of gambling does. And if you still want to argue about whether D3 has gambling mechanics that runs on real money, feel free to do it with the game's lead designer Jay Wilson. I assume you trust his opinion much more than mine.

By the way, plenty of underground casinos host card games only between players, and the house takes a cut of money changed hands... sounds familiar? (Those are actually legal and/or openly common place in many other countries. If you ever go to China, you'll see mahjong houses all over the alleyways, and this is how they operate... without going bankrupt.)

As for the "econo-magic" (love the term btw, bravo), I find it both exasperating and cute that you are putting so much faith in what Blizzard is telling you. Although I suppose it's quite normal to trust opinions of the authorities about issues you don't quite understand. Most of America trusted Wall Street when it told us that interest rate was on par with GDP earnings growth, and they were trading loan packages of real value. I mention this not to dig on your beliefs, but to remind you that truth constitutes authority, not the other way around.

I already explained why I don't agree with Blizzard's assessment in multiple posts, so I feel like I fulfilled my responsibility of sorts to voice an opposing view with what I know. You can take it or leave it, but I hope you can at least look at my reasoning without prejudice or pride. It really is nothing to me if you think I am the next Ben Bernanke or some crazy soothsayer.

[geno]

#1. A better comparison would be an arcade. For arcade games, you put in your upfront cost (25cents vs 60dollars), play the game for awhile (i don't even need parenthesis because this line works for both! but I already did anyways so ), and with some luck and skill you may or may not get something of value (gold/cash vs tickets/prizes). Actually, arcade games will generally end and you have to put in coins again, diablo 3 won't.

But beyond that, this entire thing is the stupidest fucking argument I may have ever seen. Gambling, auctioning, gaming, who gives a shit what you call it? Arguments should be made on the effects and outcomes of a system, not on its fucking name. Wasting words on semantics is fun, but take a look at the results. Does diablo ALLOW a player to gamble if they want? Let's say yes. Buy gold, waste gold on randomization element hoping for winning item. What does this even matter? Sure you can waste your money if you want chasing some odds we don't know in a system we haven't heard about if you want, but why is this an important argument? I mean, you could have been laying bets with your friends on what you got gambling in diablo 2, that didn't make the game a fucking casino and it certainly didn't ruin anyone's play experience that wasn't doing it.

#2 He has faith in Blizzard because they have control over the gold supply. Wall street has no control over the GDP growth rate or even interest rates for that matter, only predictions and models. Blizzard isn't selling us truth, they are selling us their power.

[GRT]

#1. It's true, you can call it whatever you want. But since I'm upset with Blizzard right now, Imma call it a giant fucking casino. If you want me to stop, convince me why it isn't.

#2. Except they aren't selling us their power. In fact, Jay Wilson said explicitly that Blizzard will have nothing to do in terms of influencing the gold value.

It's up to the players to really decide the real-world value of gold. Items that get posted in in-game gold won't show up in the real-money auction house, because we don't want to do the translation. One of our goals with the system is to ensure that Blizzard is not influencing it in any way, it's a player trading system, it's not something that we want to be seen as having incentives to, or requirements to manipulate in any way, which we'd have to do if we were transferring the balance of gold to real money.

That's why I'm saying they are either being disingenuous and sinister as fuck or being profoundly stupid.

[Gokulo]

Ugh, and here I thought we will finally get off that topic before the whole thread drowns.

[Kaylia]

When a poker pro gets staked into a tournament, that's gambling even though he's not doing it with a dime out of pocket. Half the time I've gone to Vegas, I got cash credit for gambling from either my company or the hotel I stayed at at, and I was gambling even when I never used my own money. Like I already said, whether or not you make or lose money doesn't make an institution a casino, that it facilitates the act of gambling does. And if you still want to argue about whether D3 has gambling mechanics that runs on real money, feel free to do it with the game's lead designer Jay Wilson. I assume you trust his opinion much more than mine.

First of all, poker pro get in for free because it is a good publicity for the casino. Their presence alone is worth something, and that's why they receive money to gamble with. It's by no mean a viable method that could be used on your average joe because his only value is what he has in his pocket.

Secondly, if it's your boss that is buying gambling credit, it was not fucking free. The casino didn't spend any money, your boss did, and he could add that money on your paycheck instead.

As for the "econo-magic" (love the term btw, bravo), I find it both exasperating and cute that you are putting so much faith in what Blizzard is telling you. Although I suppose it's quite normal to trust opinions of the authorities about issues you don't quite understand. Most of America trusted Wall Street when it told us that interest rate was on par with GDP earnings growth, and they were trading loan packages of real value. I mention this not to dig on your beliefs, but to remind you that truth constitutes authority, not the other way around.

Why are you talking about "faith" here? My reasoning aren't based on what blizzard told us, but what would be the most profitable for them, and my own observation of online economy.

Of course, if I was going to invest any money in the game, I would have to trust them. They could very well outdate the awesome pieces of gear I just bought for 10$, they could create a massive inflation and devaluate my gold, but in the end, they have very little to gain from this.

If the market is all over the place, people are going to be scared of it, and it means there will be much less transaction (and most likely smaller one). That's why I'm certain that Blizzard will do everything they can to keep the economy stable. If people know that down the road, they are going to be able to sell theirs gears for as much as they bought it, they will be more inclined to pay a large sum.

[geno]

edit: Probably already clear, but this is @grt

They are doing none of the above, they are simply stating they won't be setting any particular value for gold. What I'm saying is that they will make sure that the gold has value in the first place so players want to trade for it (and hence set its trade-value), because it will be needed for repairs / buying safe pages / crafting / or whatever other gold sinks they have in the game. They will also control the supply of gold so that it doesn't enter the system at an exponential rate making it silly for players to trade for gold.

As for the first point, fair enough, you're mad at Blizzard and will call them whatever you want. I'm not saying you're right, I'm just saying you cannot be swayed so there is no point in me arguing with you. I'm beginning to think this is the case with your other point as well, anything I say to the contrary is only going to reinforce any beliefs you had originally no matter how (in)correct they are.