Applies just as well to the games industry. I'm frankly astonished that these fools have finally managed to discover (by accident, no doubt) that allowing people to play your game for free is potentially the most lucrative business model. Next they'll consider the idea of broadcasting television and radio for free. Ahaha.
I'm not a fan of this approach but I can't really bring myself to care too strongly about it. There will be other games. If the market doesn't want these things then there will be a large enough dip in sales to for Blizzard to change things.
Sure: That's not even there, you are a blatant liar.
Who expects it to be the most common usage, really?Quote:
These are correct, just a bit archaic, what are you even trying to say?
Now, are they also, quite accidentally, using the correct word without actually knowing it? Yes. So it's grammatically correct. But that's stripping the statement of any sort of intent which frankly isn't helpful. The current casual use of 'rape' does not stem from that original definition, and hasn't always existed. It's use colloquially over the past few years is something that has become more and more commonplace and is derived from the sexual meaning of the word, not the traditional one.
To go back to the OP, if we believe him he thought about it and decided that the traditional definition was the right word for the job and wanted to use it, in which case he should have been aware of the context of the discussion - a gaming forum - a venue known for its casual use of the term and thought twice about it.
About the shop.
its not a problem imo as like many already said. it takes over what already had happened with d2. ebaying the goods for real money. In that regards I believe it is a correct thing to do for blizzard to assume better control over the whole deal.
As i never played d2 MP i have a question. In multiplayer you could farm for the equipment in exactly the same way as if you were playing single player?
As for the game itself -- I do agree that the policies are silly, but am not sure if they are silly enough to keep me from buying it if I wanted it. But I don't want to play Diablo 3 anyhow, so I haven't had to wrestle with the question. o_O
The RMT is curious, though. This is, AFAIK, the first time anything like it has happened in a non-F2P game. Officially endorsed gold farming. I think it's going to be problematic, to say the least.
Don't know if it'll last. Just wait until the first sweatshop stories break; at least with WoW, they weren't taking a cut. It's going to look really, really bad, and they're going to have to answer some rather uncomfortable questions from journalists about a fucking videogame and the harm it's encouraging and profiting from.
The DRM is annoying and is being done for reasons of piracy, and I wish they'd just admit that as if they're truly running enough stuff server-side to make piracy very difficult (eg. if monster AI is done server-side) then it sort of makes sense. If they're just stopping the game launching when you're not online it's a lot more annoying. In other words, I can kind of put up with this sort of DRM if it's actually going to stop piracy (unlike with Ubi's system).
The mods thing, to me, points to a plan to get this on consoles and have the two versions work together. Otherwise it makes no sense at all.
I'd be interested to know how many people simply don't/won't keep up with game news before release and are then disappointed when they discover.... something (not being able to play offline, for example) but because they're not going on forums, etc. don't voice their opinion. And probably make the same mistake again in future.
My point is that if it was announced that Modern Warfare 3 was announced to be a very different kind of game it'd probably still sell shitloads purely because some people wouldn't have been paying any attention and are buying a name not a game. It happens everywhere, and in gaming it's no different. And it arguably has detrimental effects on what games get made. How many times do we see one series get continually worse purely because they know it'll sell? They've got mortgages to pay and food to buy, and if they're in it for the business reasons fair play to them. But it still bugs me that people keep throwing money at them and giving them no reason to care about making a better game. Not flecking-the-screen-with-spittle-while-I-rage, just annoyed.
I'm not concerned by the motivations of a developer (within reason).
The 'justification' for the always-on DRM is that Diablo 3 is a multiplayer game and Diablo 2 was plagued by hacks. The 'justification' for no mods is that Diablo 3 is a multiplayer game and Diablo 2 was plagued by hacks. Either way, guess who loses? The majority who play only single player, and the modding community - PC gamers, all.
Item shops are a P2W model. Screw that.