Diablo Monthly Fee/2 Month Game Card

[wilbert]

Hi every1

I totally support Diablo 3 monthly fee if it means hacking/duping/map hack etc is a thing of the past for the Diablo franchise starting with Diablo 3.I'd like an option of game card like WOW. I played WOW in the open beta and i liked it, i played a bit after it was released but the currency sucked,i didn't like how rich people had better equipped characters because they buy stuff and don't earn it.Being a little new to wow after it was released I tried forming a guild...great guild name.. but I couldn't do anything or afford public storage like some other guilds. One other problem about WOW was the ability to get something accomplished at a single seating.

Using warden sound's like a great idea for preventing hacking
I think it's a great idea to have assigned attributes,some1 who just doesn't know much about the game could ruin there characters because they didn't look up stat point requirement for items.I'm sorry if I'm rambling or is against another preferences or beliefs |*Just wanted to get some stuff off my chest.*|I may have more posting's on my opinion on things,anyways,thanks

Sincerely Wilbert

[poonagi]

i too would be OK with a monthly fee... if the online experience is hack/bot/and dupe free (unlike D2 b.net). i know this may not be the popular opinion, but at this point in my life i can afford $15/month on a game i'll probably play nonstop for the next 3 years. :D

wilbert, about wow... i'm not sure what you're talking about regarding the currency. the gold system in wow is pretty balanced. each server has a fairly healthy economy... unlike D2 the gold actually means something! having said that... there were no great items that you could buy with gold. the people with the best gear definitely "earned" it by either pvp'ing, doing instances, or raiding dungeons. if somebody had all gold-bought gear in the end game, they were definitely weaker than most players.

[whiteboi]

I will agree with this route if Blizzard decides to take it. I feel this will produce a better game in the long run and I think most people wont have a problem with it by the time it comes out. They should however, announce it sooner rather than later to create a more solid player base earlier on.

[zionhuyga]

If blizzard is to make a game with a multiplayer aspect, it is their job and responsibility to do their best to prevent unfair play such as hacking/botting/duping no matter what. It would be absurd for them to charge extra money for these services that they should be providing anyway if they are to make a multiplayer game.

Look at all the multiplayer games on the market especially RTS and FPS ones. I certainly don't see any of them giving subscription fees for "extra features" like fair play and prevention of hacks.

[redground]

I would never pay a monthly fee to play any game at all. I certanly pay to have the original game, my original CD key.. but never to play it on internet... They have to look after sponsers...

I would not care about mephisto saying "Buy on Wal Mart, every day low price", but i would care about paying money for it (dont take it literally, the messagens would be displayed on chats, sites, but not ingame). If you think it is fair to pay for a game clean of hacks people think it is fair to pay for itens, it is just the oposite side.

[Apocalypse]

hahaha i can see it now, "the warmth of life has entered my tomb but if you go down to your local wal mart and get the newest brand of air conditioner it might not be so bad in here"

[stillman]

Blizzard should keep in mind that I'm paying almost 60 Canadian per month just to have high speed internet. Adding another 15 to that is going to be hard to manage. But something nicer like 5 per month is Ok.

I'm just saying, they need to think about the greater good of us being able to play their game for years, and the state of the ecconomy, rising costs of living, etc, etc.

[Keighvin]

Well, there is no fee for D3, or B-net 2. They've said that some actions that require a fair amount of effort will probably have a fee, like realm transfers in WoW.

[stillman]

Huh? Seriously? Did they really say there is no cost for bnet2?

[visom]

I don't mind if the monthly fee is $5 or less and 100% of it goes for paying their GMs or patching.

However the reason why I DON'T want a monthly fee is because you can't guarantee how much of the money actually goes towards what we want, for all we know a majority of that money probably goes towards Blizzard's pocket.

A few of my WoW friends say that the $15 monthly fee still can't rid of hackers or bots.

[Keighvin]

Yeah Pardo said that no P2P for Bnet2, just fees for certain actions.

[visom]

Isn't that just for SC2? For name/server change.

[Keighvin]

Don't know about that, just that there was a brouhaha(sp?) about P2P for awhile on the battle.net forums, until an interview with Rob Pardo who said that Bnet2 would be free but that certain actions pertaining to Bnet2 would probably have fees attached. Nothing game specific.

[MooCQ]

Ok, seriously, stop this nonsense. Do not let Blizzard fleece our *** any more than they already have. Especially next year, when our economy flatlines, and I have to downgrade my internet just to cut expenses. Again, please, stop the insanity; throwing money out the door, for no particular reason. Blizzard is perfectly capable of defending us, on sales. I fear for my pocket book! Wouldn't you rather donate to a worthy cause? like, maybe feed the hungry? Instead of feed the conglomerate? This is totally beyond unworthy, nowonder our world is screwed...

[Brother Laz]

I totally support Diablo 3 monthly fee if it means hacking/duping/map hack etc is a thing of the past for the Diablo franchise starting with Diablo 3.

Sheep!



In IT, the 'penetrate and patch' approach to security means you hire people to break into your own network (or wait until a black hat hacker does it for you, which is worse), then patch the vulnerability. And the next. And the next. At first you don't need to think much about security, but the running costs get higher and higher.

It is much better to prevent hack attempts than to patch them up. This costs more to get started because you need to design your systems from the ground up to be immune to common hacks, but your ongoing costs are far lower.

......

A D2 example: maphack. You could update Warden to detect maphacks and ban the users. Then the next maphack comes out. Update Warden. And the next... You can keep going like this forever and it'll cost you a fortune a month as a company.

It would be much easier if the game was designed so that the server only told the client about newly spawned monsters when the player enters their awareness radius and they are activated, and only communicated the next map block to the client instead of the entire map right away. Maphack would still be possible, but its value at revealing monsters would be zero because you could only see them when they already rush you, and it would be far less useful at revealing the map.

If you randomise the exit too (randomly replace a wall section with an exit, only inform the client at a distance of one screen), you won't be able to find it with maphack at all.

And it would be even better if the sum of all normal monsters in a level dropped more good items than the boss, so you have to clean out the normal monsters as well as the boss, not just rush endlessly to the boss. When you need to clear the level anyway, the location of the exit makes no difference.

That's defensive design and if Blizzard puts in the extra effort then the game will be hack-proof for a long time.

Similar measures can be taken with items, character saving etc. to prevent duping.

......

In short, if keeping realms hack-free costs a monthly fee, then it means Blizzard did not do a good job designing the game.

......

I adhere to the conspiracy theory that Blizzard currently allows the D2 realms to go to hell on purpose exactly to incite reactions like the original poster's. After all, D2 realms are hacked and laggy, WoW servers are hack-free and lag-free, so clearly asking a monthly fee/asking money for realm transfers/microtransactions/any paid content is what keeps hacks out and the realms running fast, right?

That's what they hope you'd believe in any case.

Remember, it's not like D3 would use much more bandwidth than D2, and we're 8 years later. Updating Warden is easy, too. And everything else they'd gain from those unnamed bnet2 features that cost money is pure profit.

[jingksed]

i wouldn't buy d3 if bliz implemented a monthly fee. bliz has done a piss-poor job of keeping d2 legit, why should i expect d3 to be any different? and why should i have to pay to keep d3 hacker free when its something i expect from the start?

[Gigashadow]

The only reason MMORPG's truly justify their monthly is because of the gigantic world, huge amounts of players, hence, huge servers. Patching, anti-hack, and other stuff was done perfectly fine without a monthly fee in SCI while it was supported.

A monthly fee charged for a non-MMO game signals to me that companies are getting too greedy. GW managed without a monthly fee, mind you... so did many other games... and if Diablo III has SP, which I am sure it does, why get MP that you have to P2P for when you can just get some Lan mod onto the SP part and play with your friends on Hamachi? The tradeoff is simply not worth it.

[Keighvin]

Seriously people, calm down, NO MONTHLY FEE!

[AcidReign]

A monthly fee doesn't bother me, but it would have to be worth it.

1. The hacking would need to stop, first and foremost.
2. There better be achievements and equipment worthy enough to play for hours on end to achieve.
3. There would need to be guilds/clans.
4. PvP better have some kind of impact online. There better be maps specially designed for PvP, that would allow more players. Oh, and did I mention PvP item bargaining and PvP rewards? Add them.
5. World Events. Diablo walks the earth. Again...

[Gamekk]

Isn't there any moderators around? Can we lock this, please?

They said there were no monthly fees at Blizzcon.

Over.

[Keighvin]

Thank you Gamekk. I've tried to explain this.

[raveharu]

Isn't there any moderators around? Can we lock this, please?

They said there were no monthly fees at Blizzcon.

Over.

There are always retards in forums posting what they want and insisting on it when it ain't gona happen :coffee:

[Catchafire]

You know, I don't think D3 warrants a monthly fee of $15. If they did, $5 maybe, but there should be no costs. D3 isn't an MMO, and as such, should be charged as one.

[classix]

diablo 3 is split into 2 game options:

- main retail softcore has no cost.
- hardcore mode is a p2p option, (as well as other options on offer like hellgate london)

bashiok hasnt cancelled it out or denied it

[MooCQ]

Suprisingly, pay 2 play, is the one end all, I will not buy D3 if it is implemented. I don't care if they charge 2 bits. It's an all or nothing mentality, the end.

[Catchafire]

It's a pity Mythos isn't being released because they would have flourished in this "dead time" before D3 was released. People need something to play!!!

[satheron]

Well if blizzard wanted to pull in extra revenue from this game..I doubt that they would want to push forward a business model that would pull customers between the subscriptions of two different games..

Because as far as d3, and WoW are concerned..unless the monthly fee is equal...then every account dropped from WoW to play d3... they will lose money per month.

Now granted there will be a large amount that would have both, but I think you would see a great number, if not greater that would choose one over the other.

I think blizzard's best bet is to adopt an in-game store where you can by different things for real cash. Its a proven model, and it wouldn't conflict with the WoW business model you see.


:)

[Brother Laz]

- main retail softcore has no cost.
- hardcore mode is a p2p option, (as well as other options on offer like hellgate london)

And why exactly should setting the 'can use hardcore' flag to 1 in the database cost money? That's one of the reasons people hated HGL: they just swindled the paying playerbase, but otoh you had to pay (and get swindled) otherwise you couldn't play in the endgame area.