15% fee is outrageous, need 3rd party websites suggestions ! der=0

[jamesL]

you have to look at it from a buyer's point of view

if you're selling something for more than $20 and you're using a 3rd party site, I'm going to wonder if you're trustworthy or if I'm getting scammed

a buyer will tell you, "sure, I'll give you $20, just put it on the RMAH so I know its legitimate"
you'll say, "no, I don't want to pay the 15% fee"
and a wise, cautious buyer will reply, "lol, forget you, I'll get it from someone else who's legit"

[psyadam]

As a student of DigiPen, we had EULA agreements in our student software, because we were told to have them. That does not mean that we had authority either. Game companies make EULAs mostly as a means of deterrant--there is really no binding effect of any EULA imo.

Logically, yes, I can imagine at some point Blizzard will say they ban trading outside of RMAH, and I can imagine that will be part of their EULA, but I have major doubts that that is legally enforceable.

15% seems reasonable, but who is to say that Blizzard won't up the amount at some point?

I don't see how Blizzard could even have authority to ban trading in D3, but that probably won't stop them pretending to have authority.

[Zokar]

I get the feeling that the current fee isn't the final fee structure. If they just simply made it 15% for items under $10 and $1.50 for anything over $10, they get the best of both worlds. People can sell cheap things with a very small fee structure and people who find amazing things can pay a flat fee. Blizzard wins in the PR sense because they don't have incentive to adjust high end drop rates to try and profit off high value items and they open the market for people who never find the big ticket items by letting them make reasonable profits on low value items. Win-Win.

Give it time, I'm pretty sure they'll figure it out

[Brak]

the flat fee was stupid
this makes far more sense for all parties

[Raesene]

So there no proof that 3rd party real-money trading will be banned, just speculation.

[kestegs]

I don't understand why people would rather give their money to a 3rd party site over blizzard. At least with blizzard you know it will at least partially benefit the game in the long run.

I'm all for the 15% right now, looks much better than the flat fee.

[Brak]

I don't understand why people would rather give their money to a 3rd party site over blizzard. At least with blizzard you know it will at least partially benefit the game in the long run.

I'm all for the 15% right now, looks much better than the flat fee.

because LEAVE THEIR MONEY ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!111!!1!!eleven!!!

[FluffyTheFluffer]

At least with blizzard you know it will at least partially benefit the game in the long run.

If by "the game" you mean the game, sure.

[ShadoutMapes]

I don't see how Blizzard could even have authority to ban trading in D3, but that probably won't stop them pretending to have authority.

Blizzard can ban people because they are bored one day. They don't really need a reason.
As such, they can also ban people for trading outside of the game if they want to.
Obviously we have no idea if they want to ban people for 3rd party trading.

They do however have a good financial reason to do so now, so it would be surprising if they did not try it at some point.
It should be noted however that it is probably the sellers they will go after, not the buyers. That has been the case in WoW. Going after the buyers is too much of a resource hog with no real gains, compared to being able to take down the big sellers (=companies).

EULA's are theoretically legally binding, BUT taking individual players to court over an EULA-break would be some rather serious waste of money and time for Blizzard, so they wouldn't do it.
As above, that could only happen against companies breaking the EULA, and even then it would probably not be worth it for Blizzard (Note: They have done it in WoW, against the creator of botting software - and they won the case)

What however can be worth it, is suing companies when Blizzard can show that those companies are breaking Blizzards EULA AND causing Blizzard to lose money by breaking the EULA. Since a court will care a whole lot more about the latter part than they will care about the first.
Of course bringing a chinese company to court in a civil case in America is not exactly easy I would assume.

[Apocalypse]

like reasene has already said, Buyers will dictate where you sell what items. Buyers will always prefer the official AH over a 3^rd party one so to use a 3^rd party program you will have to charge at least 15% less just to get them to consider it. then at only 15% the buyer will just get from the RMAH since its its equally priced. I would be willing to bet that you will need to under cut items on the RMAH by atleast 20% on the highest dollar items, 25% or more of the mid to low level items, just to get anyone to even consider buying through a 3^rd party.


Do people really think they can charge the same thing through a 3^rd party and get people to all go there to shop?

Think about it this way, its an advertising fee. No matter how good a product is it will not sell if people don’t see it that’s why stores like wal-mart became so popular.