Poll: Diablo 3: Will you buy it?

[Continuity]

So we've heard about the interesting decisions Blizzard have made for Diablo 3, specifically A real money auction house, an always on internet requirement: so no offline play, and no modding.

has this given you pause for thought about buying the game?

 

[Blindrooster]

No. At least not at first. The second one was fun, but my laptop isnt that great and the only game thats gona go on it in the near future is The old Republic. Maybe somewhere down the road.....

 

[AlternatePFG]

Not really boycotting it, because actively boycotting is ineffectual to say the least, as many of the gamers who would claim to be doing so will end up buying it anyway. Not buying it though. Haven't played the previous Diablo games, though I have played a few Diablo clones and I like them quite a bit. Had a passing interest in Diablo 3 until these recent bits of news. I'm not going to support a move like that, but I'm not going to raise a big stink about it.

 

[Robert Ewing]

I'm pissed at the decisions big time. I don't think it's a step in the right direction. But Blizzard are an exceptional games company, not a single on of their product has been bad. With the Warcraft franchise still being the most popular MMORPG scene in the world. Starcraft taking everything by storm... again. And Diablo coming from behind to probably end up as a seriously solid, and good quality game.

Diablo is the underdog below Warcraft and Starcraft. But I expect Diablo to be brilliant, even a bit better than Starcraft maybe? I expect nothing less than brilliance from Blizzard, they've always delivered that before.

 

[Vulg]

Where is the "Yes" option?

Honestly, I have never understood the complaint about always on internet requirements, it's more likely than not at this stage, no? sure it sucks that you can't really take it on a business trip or whatever but aren't there better, single player games for that?

About the auction house...well, sure it's not needed, I won't be using it as getting your own loot is more satisfying, but if there are people who care enough to spend real money on it, then i'd rather the money go to Blizzard and the players than people using the suspicious sites for it where they could have details stolen etc as they have done with D2.

 

[manythings]

Where is the "Yes" option?

Honestly, I have never understood the complaint about always on internet requirements, it's more likely than not at this stage, no? sure it sucks that you can't really take it on a business trip or whatever but aren't there better, single player games for that?

Well my issue is, I want to play game X but the devs/publisher have actually made it a challenge to play my own legally purchased product. At what point is making your own customer find reason to consider your product a problematic purchase a sensible idea?

I once lost almost five hours of play in Ass Creed 2 just because my service providers shit went out. Boom, gone. Now I don't buy Ubisoft. Admittedly I didn't need any more reasons to not buy Blizzard products but there you go.

 

[Aeshi]

Yes, Blizzard has yet to fail me on a game and I don't think this is going to be an exception.

Plus the people who are refusing to buy the game seem to be the stuck-up snobs that the game will probably be better off without anyway.

 

[Rawne1980]

Haven't really liked any of the Diablo games and Starcraft managed an "okay" from me.

So no, it's a game I won't be buying.

I have so many games coming out between now and mid 2012 that I wouldn't play it if I did buy it.

 

[GrimSheeper]

Easy decision, I have no access to my gaming pc in college so why should I buy it. It's not like boycotting, but I'm not happy with the way they're handling the game anyways. If I had the chance to play it...I don't know, Blizzard after all hasn't made a bad game in a decade or more and it would possibly be very enjoyable if I stay away from the, to me, horribly annoying idea of selling player-made content through an online store like some bad free-to-play-but-really-not-if-you-want-to-be-any-good MMORPG that sells the only items worth a damn for actual currency in a store.

 

[atol]

I think it'll still be fun. Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 could have well been the strongest titles of the decade, but as it is they're just good. It's sad, but it definitely isn't grounds for me to boycott.

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

Despite the fact I've put countless hours into WoW and currently am trying to scale the insurmountable wall of a learning curve in SC2, I dislike Blizzard's marketing ploys. I haven't read enough about this real world money thing, but I'd hope they at least keep it away from the 'Pay for Epic Weapons' type of deal.
Either way, it'll be a long while before I pick it up unless it gets stellar reviews across the board.

 

[Lunar Templar]

i was gonna consider it till i heard there's no offline play, >.> yeah um, no, i'm a forget it exists now

 

[krazykidd]

I was going to buy it , but not anymore , i really hate what they did to the game , yes different ia good, and im sure and i hope blizzard sells alot of copies , but all the changes that were made compared to D2 i don't like . But that is the risk you take when you change shit up, and although i will not buy the game im glad at least blizzard is willing to change things instead of making the same old thing even if i no longer want to buy it.

 

[Hiphophippo]

I'll be buying it on day 1 yes. It shocks me that people give a shit about this stuff, really. I spent probably 95% of the hundreds of Diablo 2 hours I've logged playing online so the always online thing is a nonissue to me. The AH thing? There are two auction houses. I don't care what some person who I am in no competittion with does to gain an advantage over the game. He's not gaining an advantage over me. I'm interested in playing diablo 3 for the story with a friend or two then doing whatever the Diablo 3 version of Baal runs are and pimping out my character. The fact there's even an in game currency AH is such a moot point to me. I'll probably use neither.

People will complain about anything. I really don't see the problem.

 

[Loop Stricken]

I'm not massively bothered about these technically-negative changes barring the irritating precedent they set.

Always online? Well I am anyway! This changes nothing. When my internet connection does I don't shrug my shoulders and play something else; I panic.

Auction house for real money? Well I don't really intend on playing multiplayer so what other people do won't affect me much. I sure as Hell aren't going to buy my way to the end of the game but if I find some awesome item I don't want, I could sell it. Capitalism ho!

No modding.
Well. Depends what's classed as a mod so until we know, I can't comment with any accuracy.

 

[Frostbite3789]

I'm going with the boycott. Which will stay that way until Blizzard gets it's sorry ship to shore and ditches Activision.

 

[Jimbo1212]

Woah woah woah.

How is selling items for real cash a bad idea when PLAYERS are the ones who sell it?
If you are good, then you could farm items and make real cash from it.
If you are bad, then 'pay to win' by lining a smart players pocket.

I think this has to be one of the best ideas ever for gaming.

 

[camazotz]

If they come out with an offline single player version, yes.

I'm not even that miffed that they are requiring the online connectivity...I am generally connected 24/7 anyway....but I am sure the reason has more to do with the stupid cash item auction house than any of the other ridiculous reasons they have cited.

Also, on occasion we do get internet outages around here, usually when it rains or from a lightning strike, and the last time that happened I grew to really dislike those games which didn't let me play offline (but were single player experiences). I decided to avoid buying games that didn't cater to the offline option from then on.