Digital piracy (long)

[Jaden]

GOG is the best website ever.

And Andara, it's not even really an argument. Either you're ok with the way they're doing it or you aren't. I'm not. I think the way they designed it is stupid, especially having them all linked to battle.net so if one game has problems, they all do, so I don't want to play it. And it's a shame, because I probably would enjoy the actual game. But Blizzard has been pissing me off pretty much since WoW and the Activision merger. I think the way they've set up Diablo 3 (and Starcraft 2, for the matter) is immensely stupid. If you don't, fine.

[Andara Bledin]

I'd like to hear how they could have designed a system where the game would be as secure as it is to protect the real money trading they have set up that would also allow for a completely offline single player option? Once you get real money involved, it becomes an online only game. It's the state of technology today. You don't have to like it, but the constant complaints with no realistic alternatives are wearying.

^-.-^

[Nekojin]

I'd like to point out that the RMT aspect has existed since at least Diablo 2, and possibly as far back as late-stage Diablo 1. The difference is that until now, it's been shady websites with suspicious practices offering to sell you gold, and Blizzard never saw a dime of that secondary market that was profiting off their game. Would you not agree that if anyone is entitled to profit from it, Blizzard is?

So, they acknowledged that they're leaving money on the table, as they say, and worked out a method to both make the gold-selling (and other item selling) safe and secure, while taking a cut off the top. That seems a reasonably balanced approach - much better than straight-up selling you a Sword of Ultimate Uber for $4.99, as a few netgames have done.

I agree wholeheartedly that in an ideal world, we should have an offline mode that isn't affected by the quality of my internet connection or the stability of Blizzard's servers, but we're not in that ideal world. At least Blizzard is giving us something in exchange for the DRM, unlike Ubi.

[Jaden]

Well, I don't like micro-transactions either, so that may have something to do with it My alternative would be not to have micro-transactions. You may be right that it's the best way to support their real money trading system, I just don't like that either. So basically, it's a system that I think is stupid and inconvenient to the purchaser to support an infrastructure that I also think is stupid and greedy of the publisher.

Modern PC gaming just isn't for me, I guess Or not the Blizzard/EA/Ubisoft variety, at least.

Edit: Nekojin's post wasn't there when I posted this. Illicit RMT is terrible and I hate it. I've played a lot of MMO's, and gold sellers are the worst people, especially in FFXI. Like I said, I don't really like micro-transactions to begin with - I prefer the practice of using in-game money, thank you very much

[Nekojin]

Edit: Nekojin's post wasn't there when I posted this. Illicit RMT is terrible and I hate it. I've played a lot of MMO's, and gold sellers are the worst people, especially in FFXI. Like I said, I don't really like micro-transactions to begin with - I prefer the practice of using in-game money, thank you very much

Again, given a perfect world, I'd be happy to do away with RMT entirely. But... how do you do that? Blizzard's approach seems to be the lesser evil, all things considered.

[Jaden]

You can't stop people from breaking the rules, you can just change the rules and wait for people to figure out how to break those instead. You can, and should, put things in place to stop people from exploiting the game, so long as it's not inconvenient to the purchaser, but if I've already paid Blizzard $60 for a game, I don't really want to be bugged to give them more of my actual money.

[Andara Bledin]

Like I said, I don't really like micro-transactions to begin with - I prefer the practice of using in-game money, thank you very much

That's all well and good, but there are a lot of people out there who would like the opportunity to see the top level content but don't have the time to do the farming necessary to get the upper tier items in order to be able to do so. Is it really so terrible to give them the option to part with some of their cash in order to essentially pay others to do the farming for them?

Plus, if you don't like it, there's no reason to use it. After all, there is an in-game money auction house already up and running quite well.

^-.-^

[Jaden]

That's all well and good, but there are a lot of people out there who would like the opportunity to see the top level content but don't have the time to do the farming necessary to get the upper tier items in order to be able to do so. Is it really so terrible to give them the option to part with some of their cash in order to essentially pay others to do the farming for them?

^-.-^

Because it's a video game. Why would you wanna skip the entire game? Yeah, actually, I do think it's kinda dumb to give people the option to pay to not have to play the game. It also gives people the option to be on the same level as those who do do all the "work" of playing the game. In a multiplayer setting, I think that's quite harmful. And where's the sense in that? Why would you buy a game and then pay more money so that you don't have to play it? I don't get that at all.

Edit: And you're right, if I don't like it, I don't have to use it, but as I already mentioned, the entire justification for the way the game is set up (single player on a remote server, etc.) is to support that system that I already think is lame.

[Nekojin]

You can't stop people from breaking the rules, you can just change the rules and wait for people to figure out how to break those instead. You can, and should, put things in place to stop people from exploiting the game, so long as it's not inconvenient to the purchaser...

Well, you're running into a pragmatic problem here. If you put in rules that say, "No RMT, at all, absolutely!" then you have a dilemma. If you don't actually enforce the rule at all, then it's toothless, and people soon realize that, and you're worse off than if you never made the rule in the first place (note that this is how Diablo 2 operated). If you decide to take action on it, that costs time and effort, which costs money - and you'll be throwing money at something that will never generate any money to pay for the cost of itself.

If there's any system to trade items, you will not be able to stop RMT, period. And if you accept that as axiomatic, then you move on to the next step - if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, and make some sort of profit on it. At least this way, Blizzard will have a revenue stream with which to keep doing updates, bug fixes, and exploit fixes for years to come. This time, when/if a duping exploit shows up, they may be able to actually stop it this time.

but if I've already paid Blizzard $60 for a game, I don't really want to be bugged to give them more of my actual money.

So don't give them any more of your actual money. There's a gold-based auction house as well as the RMT auction house, and I can tell you for sure that the gold AH is going to be a lot more robust than the RMT AH. Ignore that the RMT AH even exists. That's my plan.

[Andara Bledin]

How does allowing a person to have a piece of gear that would be a huge time-sink to acquire pay to acquire it equate to "skipping the entire game?"

They would still have to play to get their character to a high enough level to use the item, which requires actually playing through the game through at least once (the rewards on normal difficulty would get too low to be worth it fairly quickly).

Honestly, you're not thinking this through completely. The only thing that the rmt economy does is allow people to bypass the time-sink part of the game. They still have to play to level and to progress to even use the uber-loot gear; they just don't have to farm to acquire it.

^-.-^

[Jaden]

So don't give them any more of your actual money. There's a gold-based auction house as well as the RMT auction house, and I can tell you for sure that the gold AH is going to be a lot more robust than the RMT AH. Ignore that the RMT AH even exists.

Already addressed this part, but you probably didn't see it yet since you were probably typing this at the time.

As the rest of your post, therein lies a large part of the difference between Diablo and an MMO. First of all, since as you said, Diablo 3 has an in-game auction house that uses in-game currency, there's still going to be RMT. So there's that. But also, you're right, if they make the rules and don't enforce them, then it's toothless. That's why MMO's have GMs to ban gilsellers. If Blizzard wants to have it essentially set up like an MMO, then operate it as one.

Just to relate a person story for why micro-transactions bother me - I really love Guild Wars. It's easily my favorite MMO ever, and of course, it's great for a broke dude like me since it has no monthly fee. I've pretty much played it since it came out, and I only play it very sporadically these days, but its a lot of fun. So, in case you don't know, in Guild Wars, you can get things called Elite skills - basically, really good, really useful skills that you have to acquire from certain monsters which have them. Some elite skills take a lot of work. My friends and I were spend hours and hours, days and day, getting these elite skills. It was fun, but it was very difficult at times as well.

Then, a couple of years into the game's lifespan, they introduced a real money market in which you could buy a pack of elite skills for like $10. Needless to say, we were a bit miffed.

Edit: Andara, then why even have the "time-sink" part of the game if you can just pay a bit of money to skip it? It's part of the game. And it's not nearly as satisfying as earning it yourself. And furthermore, the main justification for having the annoying way Diablo 3 is set up is both something I think is stupid and something I'll never use, so I'm not sure why you don't understand my problem with the way Diablo 3 is set up as far as things like remote server storage of the single-player part of the game, having everything linked to battle.net, etc.

[Andara Bledin]

Then, a couple of years into the game's lifespan, they introduced a real money market in which you could buy a pack of elite skills for like $10. Needless to say, we were a bit miffed.

And we get to the heart of the problem.

It's like old people who get cranky about how "easy" young people have it, with their fancy cell phones and computers... It's not really a valid complaint for the disallowing of the option, merely a preference.

^-.-^

[Jaden]

Fine, it's a preference. I don't see how that means it's an invalid complaint, though. It's just as valid a complaint as any other preference. It's just a matter of perspective. Like I said, I don't like the way a lot of MMO's and EA/Blizzard/Ubisoft do their thing. I don't like their variety of PC gaming, and I've explained why, and I hope I've made myself clear as to why that is. We're probably just going to have to agree to disagree, since we both understand how it works and what's behind it. You're just ok with it and I'm not. Simple as that.

I'm a cranky old man in a lot of ways. I also think music was way better in the 60's, and cartoons were way better in the 90's. Welcome to my world

[Andara Bledin]

And furthermore, the main justification for having the annoying way Diablo 3 is set up is both something I think is stupid and something I'll never use, so I'm not sure why you don't understand my problem with the way Diablo 3 is set up as far as things like remote server storage of the single-player part of the game, having everything linked to battle.net, etc.

Your big issue is that other people will get things easier; which is just silly, since it won't change your own sense of accomplishment for doing it the hard way one bit. In fact, the only difference is that your perceived e-peen will have less shine because other people might have gotten to the same level without as much work.

Plus, having the data stored in the cloud stops the duping exploits that were used in D2 that did the exact same thing you're complaining about, only without any controls whatsoever. At least this way, somebody has to find the Uber Item of Awesomeness for every person who gets to wield one. In D2, they only had to find one, then they could dupe it until there were millions out there; talk about cheapening the accomplishment.

So, yes, I don't understand your complaint since the thing that you complain about RMT is the thing that is most prevalent without the cloud storage component.

^-.-^

[Jaden]

Forget about the micro-transactions for the moment. I don't like micro-transactions in general., but I can deal with their existence. But the fact of the matter is that the entire reason why Diablo 3 is set up in such an annoying way is to support a system that I will never use and that I already think is stupid. The set up of Diablo 3 - the remote server for single player, everything linked to Battle.net, that stuff. That is my main complaint, and if the only justification is something else that I already think is silly and greedy on the publisher's end, then why would I want to play a game that I have to log in and experience server maintenance when I just want to play it on my own, and the only reason for the existence of that is micro-transactions, something else I think is silly? That is my problem.

There's no need to start throwing out accusations of my e-penis being threatened or whatever. I'm a pretty easy-going guy, really, and I don't think I'm taking this as seriously as you think I am. I don't scream at the computer screen or send complaints to the game maker. I just sigh and roll my eyes.

Anyways, I think I've said all I have to say, and this is probably a pointless argument where nobody is going to be convinced one way or the other, and is starting to get a bit too testy for my taste, so I'm gonna go ahead and bow out. I have no beef with either of you, for the record