Let’s give it a year and then will see. Also, even if the P2W model enjoys popularity, as long as there is a demand for full priced one-time-pay-only games, the market will provide them. Just like nature does not tolerate vacuum, the free market does not let unmet needs last for long.
Sadly, there is only one Diablo franchise, so we may have to look elsewhere.
Sadly, it’s probably due to how US perceives “drinking”.
When I worked at a grocery store, it was made clear that I would get the fine if I sold under age , not the store. I believe bartender training also goes through their legal responsibilities to not over-serve.
In that sense, a US company (eg Blizzard) should have no problems imposing limits on consumers purchases. At the same time, these limits should probably be set by the government.
So have I. (The limit is pretty high here.) Purchases for a weekend party may not hit that limit. (40L - but you can only transport 8L at a time without a transportation permit).
A perfect win woold be making fabulous amounts of money, great reviews, and being sold in all countries.
You defniition of major win is not what most companies would claim. Bad press and being banned in 2 EU countries is not a major win.
Next I am envisioning a claim that Enron, Theranos, and Perdue Pharma are “major wins”. They made money and we can ignore the bad press and legal actions.
There is plenty of demand. The question is what is ‘full priced’ because what people generally consider to be a full priced retail release is based on a price over 30 years old at this point. Not only is inflation a thing, but AAA caliber games have gotten way more expensive to make in that timespan.
So the game, from a publishing standpoint, is to figure out how to get more than that out of the average user while making it seem like they only paid what they considered ‘full priced’. There are loads of monetization schemes out there to accomplish this because no one really knows what the market will truly bear.
And a lot of those monetization schemes would initially seem pretty benign but have mechanics that definitely would fall under the standard definition of P2W.
As I have said many times, it is a major win if Blizzard made huge profits. Do you aware that most companies hardly put bad press and accessibility as their top priority.
Blizzard won’t cancel the game with the bad press or got banned in X countries as long as it made a billion for them. In fact, they might even nurture the “bad game” further.
That would depend on how much money they made that will offset the bad press and loss.
based on kilos logic i bet he thinks Bernie Madoff was the best financial advisor that ever lived
That fact that you think that one could debate whether Enron, Theranos, and Perdue Pharma are “major wins” demonstrates unequivocally to me that your definition of “major win” does not align with reality in my opinion.
Enron at its peak was trading at $90.76. Prior to them declaring bankrupcy, their shares were trading at $0.26. They were delisted from the NYSE, their accounting firm was convicted of obstructing justice. The founder and CEO was convicted of multiple crimes and initially received a 17.5 year prison sentence (later reduced to 14 years). The Enron CFO served multiple years in prison.
In consideration of the bad press and the legal system, how is it debatable that Enron was a major win?
D3 launches with Inferno difficulty. It’s a mistake. Monster Power system is implemented alongside Paragon. Drop rates are deemed unsatisfactory by the community the RMAH is still a blight. RoS draws near and is eventually released. Drop rates are improved, the RMAH is canned, Paragon goes accountwide, and we get the Torment difficulty system. A change in direction has also taken place. We eventually get seasons a lame attempt at content recycling, too. A little time passes and a few more names leave the team. Eventually even the new director leaves, with the only worthwhile updates of note being the cube and Necro DLC.
You’re free to think it’s because D3 didn’t make enough money for some hilariously backwater reason. I see office politics, leaders not being able to lead as they wish, budgets being withheld, and quite possibly the infection of that “frat boy culture” at times, too. Perhaps the core game was too busted for them to really do what they wanted, as well. The only reason D3 stopped “making money” is because Blizzard effectively stopped making things for D3. Funny how that works.
i cant believe people still have trouble accepting that D3 is a better selling game than DI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_III#Marketing_and_release
Before its release, Diablo III broke several presale records and became the most pre-ordered PC game to date on Amazon. Activision Blizzard reported that Diablo III had broken the one-day PC sales records, accumulating over 3.5 million sales in the first 24 hours after release and over 6.3 million sales in its first week, including the 1.2 million people who obtained Diablo III through the World of Warcraft annual pass.On its first day, the game amassed 4.7 million players worldwide, an estimate which includes those who obtained the game via the World of Warcraft annual pass.In its 2012 second quarter report, Diablo III was reported to have pushed Activision Blizzard’s expectations and as of July 2012, more than 10 million people had played the game.Diablo III remains the fastest selling PC game to date, and also [one of the best-selling PC video games. As of the end of 2012, it had sold more than 12 million copies,and as of March 2013, Blizzard stated that Diablo III had around 1 million daily players, with 3 million unique players each month.By May 2013, Diablo III had been played by 14.5 million unique players.and had sold over 30 million copies worldwide by August 2015.
I can’t believe people are trying to compare apples and toasters.
You can’t state the financial success/failure of a monthly purchase monetized game with only a 1/2 month of sales.
You need to get a good idea of how much staying power that the game has. First. (And if it has any). You can only do that after a few month-seasons.
thats true but thats why we have sites like this
https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-immortal
no matter how they slice it they still cant deny the fact it is NOT doing as good as Blizzard claims it is
it dropped to a 0.2 rating in only 10 days if people refuse to see that then theyre not just a skeptic theyre in denial
You can only assume financial success based on reviews of a game if the vast majority of reviewers are from the targeted market.
The PC centric player that binge plays in order to speed rush content sp the can get their epeen on in competition are NOT the targeted audience.
The people hitching a ride on the hate wagon aren’t anyone’s targeted audience (unless you’re a content producer).
Meyacritic reviewers for DI seem to mostly fit into one if these two categories. Therefore. Metacritic rating is a horrible method to judge a game for casual co-op mobile gamers.
DI isn’t for PC players.
yeah well the IOS version isnt faring much better
https://www.metacritic.com/game/ios/diablo-immortal
Sad,it’s basically d3 original but you get stuck in gating at some point–not worth playing.
The funny thing is I never said anything about major wins for them as I have no idea what are they and I care less to learn more about that., hence “depend” on my previous quote.
So what does it has to do with or related to current Blizzard and Diablo Immortal?
85k voters
https://i.imgur.com/g9cXvqe.png
vs
4925 voters
https://www.metacritic.com/game/ios/diablo-immortal
I am sure that Blizzard cares about 4925 IoS players’ feelings there when they got 85k IoS players to please.
And you are free to think that D3 made a lot of money that excited the company and investors but chose not to do anything because reasons.
Investors are dumb as rocks about making video games. I only care that their influence and greed is toxic to the industry. Diablo 3 is currently among one of the top 20 in game sales throughout video gaming’s history. That is not a financial failure. That’s better than tens of thousands, if not more, games that have come both before and after.
Running with this logic of yours, pretty much every other game in the history of ever has been a failure. “Boohoo, we can’t keep fleecing people!” deserves no sympathy or leeway. Another expansion would’ve sold. More characters would’ve sold. They chose to make $0 instead of some dollars. This is why I call them dumb if they were the sole reason.
What matters is the bottom line, not reviews.
In 2014, Swrve found that 50% of mobile game revenue came from 0.15% of users. And F2P aren’t designed for upfront purchases. Spending thousands of dollars does nothing for your first 20 or so hours. It is about the long term.
The other issue with reviews is that they get review bombed. And how often have we seen threats of video game boycotts, where the second the game is released, almost everyone in the boycott list can be seen playing in game?
For me personally, I put very little faith into what people say. I prefer to let the results speak.
Me:
Next I am envisioning a claim that Enron, Theranos, and Perdue Pharma are “major wins”. They made money and we can ignore the bad press and legal actions.
You:
That would depend on how much money they made that will offset the bad press and loss.
Me:
That fact that you think that one could debate whether Enron, Theranos, and Perdue Pharma are “major wins” demonstrates unequivally to me that your definition of “major win” does not align with reality in my opinion.
This is your response:
Since you claim to have no idea who these companies are, why would you say that they may be “major wins” dependent on their profit.
This is relevant because you also claim that D:I is a “major win” despite the bad press, being illegal in 2 EU countrues, and no verifiable source of Blizzard’s thinking or financial expectations for D:I.
It seems to me that your arguments are largely conjecture or topics that you respond to where there is missing knowledge (e.g. Enron, Theranos, and Perdue Pharma who all were subject of months of news coverage, litigation/fines/prison time).
Correction: they didn’t make money. They lost much more than they "made, " defrauding creditors, investors, and employees.
I thought I’d seen some ultra-sad corporate stans before. But this really takes the (even sadder) cake.