Blizzard: Diablo 3 PvP 'falling short of expectations'
Only two months before the release of Diablo 3 in May, Blizzard unceremoniously cut the planned PvP Arena system from the game, promising a patch at some later date. Nine months later, it appears the Team Deathmatch planned is no closer to release.
Only two months before the release of Diablo 3, Blizzard unceremoniously cut the planned PvP Arena system from the game, promising a patch at a later date. Nine months later, it appears Team Deathmatch is no closer to release.
Game director Jay Wilson said that dueling will come some time after the new year in patch 1.07, but the team is going back to the drawing board on Team Deathmatch. "In continuing to develop this mode, playtest it, and put it in front of other developers within the company, we've found that it falls short of our expectations for a high-quality Blizzard experience," he said, adding that depth and balance are key factors in the delay and need for a revamp.
Players have had a chance to play the mode at previous BlizzCons, and it was generally well received, but Wilson said internal testing revealed that the mode was probably not something people would continue to play in its current form, as they do in World of Warcraft's Battlegrounds. "For now, though, we're going to first be looking at new modes that play up to the strengths of the character classes, focus on objectives beyond just defeating other players, and possibly even integrate PvE elements and rewards," he said.
On the positive side, more news on the dueling patch should be forthcoming in the next few days.
-
John Keefer posted a new article, Blizzard: Diablo 3 PvP 'falling short of expectations'.
Only two months before the release of Diablo 3 in May, Blizzard unceremoniously cut the planned PvP Arena system from the game, promising a patch at some later date. Nine months later, it appears the Team Deathmatch planned is no closer to release.-
-
-
-
They are probably at a loss trying to figure out how to balance PVP in Diablo 3 in general, which isn't possible unless you want to make the game boring and also there is virtually no way to balance a pay to win system.
Overall Blizzard really screwed up Diablo 3. The last few patches were a step in the correct direction and I enjoy the game much more now because of them. However it's aggravating because they had a step by step guide how to make Diablo 3. It was called Diablo and Diablo 2.
It's downright amazing that they don't even have the hardcore ladders implemented yet.-
-
-
-
-
-
Pay-to-win refers to having to pay money to the developers for perks not otherwise found in the game that directly increase your effectiveness in the game. These are out of economy things injected by the developer for money.
Diablo 3's is completely player driven and only offers an in-game version to the sort of trading that always exists and has existed outside the game. The game is no more pay-to-win than Guild Wars 2, Diablo 2, World of Warcraft, or any other MMO.-
Yes, it is. I can, right now, on a character with no armour, spend my money to buy a full set of the very best armour and faceroll through inferno. That's absolutely not possible in Guild Wars 2 or World of Warcraft. At least, not with the ease I can in D3. WoW is pay to win in the same way Skyrim is pay to win, i.e. there's always someone willing to sell you their account or save game with the very best equipment, but you have to seek them out yourself. The paying to win is supported with the in game interface in D3. I pay for armour, I win game.
-
You can actually do that with WoW or Guild Wars 2. So.. your definition of pay to win is an in-game interface to buy the items? I'm sorry, but that's an irrelevant detail and defeats the original intent behind the phrase "pay to win."
Diablo 3's real money trading is entirely player driven. This is no different than what exists in the games I mentioned, as well as any other game with persistent stats. Claiming D3 is somehow different because there's an in-game interface to that segment of the player driven economy doesn't work because doesn't fundamentally change its existence in this or any other game.
Look, you either define "play to win" so broadly that every game is considered play to win or you define it so narrowly that the term loses all meaning. Or you conclude Diablo 3 is not play to win.
-
-
-
-
If no one else was playing Diablo 3, could you pay money to get a better character?
That's the key difference between what Diablo 3 (and every other game with real money trading) and "pay to win" is. Blizzard isn't creating shit to give to you in exchange for money -- it's all player driven. That item you paid $5 for was found by another player.
The only reason you want it to be "pay to win" is because you want to throw another negative phrase at it.-
It doesn't matter who is creating the items. The point is that someone can spend money to win. Isn't that the important thing? The problem with pay to win games isn't that the devs are creating items I can buy, it's the fact that I can buy power with money, and it's sanctioned by the devs. The origin of the items doesn't matter. Sure, you can buy accounts in WoW, but it's not an approved route of acquiring high level items. When I'm running around the World of Warcraft, I'm not thinking, that dude with the awesome armour probably bought all of it, whereas in D3, it may very well be.
And why would I care about throwing negative phrases?-
Now we're back to it ultimately being arbitrary.
You can always trade money for power. Buying accounts in WoW is one way -- there's also buying gold, paying for grinding services, and paying for raid spots. The lack of it being "sanctioned" means a higher chance of the customer getting screwed over, which results in more support tickets on Blizzard's end.
... and yes, it does matter who is creating the items because that's what the phrase is used to describe. The ability to spend money to win has been a consistent in gaming since persistence became a thing. Sanctioned or not, fighting against it is a losing battle, and the devs can either ignore it or try to secure it. The later has an added benefit if being another potential revenue stream, which can help sustain future development.-
So you mean it would be fine if WoW came with an interface for you to buy accounts, buy gold, pay for grinding, and pay for raid spots, just as long as the services came from players? Or to make the comparison clearer, it would be fine if it allowed you to pay money for bind on equip items as long as it came from a player? It would be fine if there was a Valve approved system for you to pay and a pro would play in place for you in DOTA2?
Why do you think WoW doesn't have an interface for players to sell items? The distinction of where the item comes from is meaningless. The fact that the game allows it, is the important thing. Players would be outraged if there were a real money WoW auction house, as many D3 players are about D3. There would be a great deal less buying of items with real money if the game didn't allow it. The small hurdle of finding the items you want to buy would deter a lot of people. The RMAH is the reason why D3 will never have a ladder system. It wouldn't be taken seriously. You'd pay, and you'd win the ladder.-
Sure, why not? You're already a simple internet search away from all of those features, so it's not like it requires some special or magical knowledge only a chosen few possess to get those services.
I think WoW doesn't have that built in for two reasons -- one is the game came out in 2004 before people realized just how wide-spread these player driven economies can be, and two it's still a subscription-based game and adding on more fees to the $15/month charge would cause more outrage than its worth. Fuck, you already get outrage for literally anything and everything.
The RMAH is the reason why D3 will never have a ladder system? I thought it was because at release D3 had a level cap that can be achieved after 20 hours of play with no other real way of measuring progress. Or that Blizzard realized players have changed significantly in the past 12 years and now grow way too attached to characters, so (semi-)annual resets would have more problematic than their worth.
Funny how the reason why changes depending on the point someone is trying to make.
I'll say it again, the phrase "pay to win" refers to Hellgate: London style models where players are given the option of paying for power-related items that are otherwise unobtainable in the regular game. Real-money player driven economies are just part of the deal now (and have been way before D3), and are not "pay to win."-
Many people won't go for that shady shit, I thought everyone knew that. The hassle of searching for items on third party sites is a deterrence enough for many people. And, excuse me, RMAH is one of the reasons why D3 will never have a ladder system.
I think the distinction between paying on shady sites and paying in game is clear, and for me, is what defines which game is pay to win. Anyway, I have to go out now. How about a compromise? D3 is definitely not Pay to Win in the walker270 definition, but if you have some loose change, you can boot up D3 tonight, log on to your level 60, and buy an Andariel's Visage.
-
-
-
-
After the rampant item selling and buying in D2 how could they not expect it? Unless they made everything soulbound which would have resulted in just as much gnashing of teeth by the community there's nothing they could do to curb it from happening. Fact is, D2 may not have been designed for RMT, but everyone knew it was there and that's how a lot of people played. Trying to say that D3 is P2W and D2 isn't is ridiculous.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
You could go through the whole game without ever paying a cent past the initial game cost, and as far as equipment goes, beat it on Inferno difficulty. Even Monster Power 10, without paying is doable, it will just take you forever.
As far as always online goes, well as long as you pay your net bill every month, I guess that could be considered pay to win. lol
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
wasn't there some leaked footage? wasn't it throw 'em in an arena and call it a day? why didn't they just launch that? it's never going to be good or fun or anything, it will be 99.9% unkillable barbs and monks shredding the FUCK out of everything! :D
I don't know what people are expecting from D3 PvP.
Unless they have plans to reboot alterac valley or something with PvE elements in it, pure PvP would royally suck balls. Unless you are a barb or monk. :D -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
As a software engineer for EA, I am curious, sometimes jealous, of what the apparently schedule-be-damned environment at Blizzard is like. From the outside Blizzard has been making/supporting their games at a loss, spending exorbitant amounts of time and money to make their games great. I appreciate that as a fan but I am interested to see how they evolve the business in a post-WoW era in which other products/franchises have to be profit centers and just loss leaders for the Blizzard brand.
-
Been a diablo fan since I was 12 years old when the first one came out. Honestly who the fuck cares Diablo was never a pvp game anyways.
Im reallly tired of all the hate diablo 3 gets too. Its a really good game and people just shit all over it because its alot harder to cheat and become real powerful over night. Then the haters who "remember" how diablo2(2008 battle chest edition) was and think there is some big problem with D3. Really it took years of updates and an expansion to get D2 ware it is now. Blizz has an awesome record for supporting their games long long after rls and have even already added a bunch of stuff to D3 to make it better in the paragon system, monster power and uber bosses.
-