Nothing will change. This topic is boring and utterly dead.
1 Like
Which work just fine offline.
Not that games necessarily need DLC to make money either. That initial sale can be enough. DLC takes money to make, and usually has diminishing return, so it isn’t necessarily the best choice for a company, albeit very often a good choice.
Or if you are Bethesda you just keep selling the same re-released game again and again.
That too.
Yeah, because companies in general tend to go “Oh, we made enough, lets not try to make more”?
Not what I said. It costs money/resources to make DLC, it doesn’t magically appear. You might make more money just selling the game and stop there, and move onto a new project, than pushing out DLC for your old game.
Its most likely due to NOT wanting to expose the game code. For offline modes to happen, you have to get all the code onto your computer. Exposing the code is just asking for hacking to run rampant. I mean just look at D3 for the console games like switch, people have hacked items and max paragon.
Online only is pretty much how a LOT of games are going now.
That is due to the immensely bad decision of storing the “online” saves locally, not due to offline mode.
Wont happen. They have no reason to. I would even say its less likely with MS being involved as they can provide better servers and would love a cash shop.
That’s not his point. Obviously Blizzard expected more revenue from the RMAH and pulled the plug early. True that most companies want to monetize everything to have a constant stream of revenue. But Shadout is correct, especially with a game like Diablo, the box sales alone were more than enough to continue development without a secondary revenue source.
There will be no offline support for Diablo 4, it’s an online game only.
1 Like
go play diablo on console hax as much as u like
2 Likes
I’m willing to bet these days, selling expansions and DLC is important to funding the next game while keeping the old game on the minds of the majority of players given new iterations easily take 5 years these days. Not talking a new sports game with minimal changes and new rosters or the copy/paste CoD/AC minimal change games.
They pulled the plug because they had no choice.
1 Like
They had a choice. They could have easily added a cosmetics shop and made a fortune or waited a few months to see how successful and positively received RoS was.
1 Like
Those are very good examples however.
Selling expansions is only worth it if people are there to buy the expansion. The main benefit of DLC/expansion is that it is (relatively) cheap to make. If you can sell 10+ times as many copies, at a higher price, by making a new game instead, that might be the more profitable choice.
Neither of those have anything to do with the RMAH though.
Yeah they do. The RMAH was the monetizing vehicle. They pulled it and decided, whelp, there is nothing else we can do, and pulled the plug a few months before RoS launched since they felt they had no way to monetize. I just gave 2 examples of what they could have done
1 Like
I think it is technically impossible (or at the very least - too hard and expensive to do) as the game is built on D3 improved engine with client-server mechanism in its very core.
Clearly D3s engine is not incapable of having offlline support. Since it does.
I have feeling they want to try and make it a crossplay experience. You can’t do that whit offline mode. D2R stepped into that direction whit crossprogression. If the deal whit MS goes thrue, they have a better chanse in makeing D4 a crossplay game. But it needs to be online only, for that to happen.
I want to correct you, it was a select few and during meetings it was considered unfavorably. The select few who wanted it, no longer work for Microsoft. But I see your point.