Why would they copy off of a failed design? This is blizzard we're talking about. Did they make it so that you have to pay extra to get extra gear in WoW or D2? Or to use the zerg or protoss in SC?
Q u o t e: Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
no.
- Bashiok
Acastermalbis
USEast
25. Re: we going to have to pay for diablo 3onli 06/30/2009 09:19:46 PM PDT
Q u o t e: What Bashiok said simply means that if you buy SC2, you will have all the features available to you over bnet. But If you don't own any new blizz games and you still want access to b.net 2.0 for whatever reason, you'll most likely have to pay a nominal fee.
In addition the wording allows for e-copies to qualify, should that option be available as well as limited use either as an unlimited online only or per battle basis using a web based app (meaning an entirely different coding of the game unusable for single player)
Skohsl
Europe
26. Re: we going to have to pay for diablo 3onli 06/30/2009 10:37:20 PM PDT
Wouldn't a structure like they have in WoW be more likely (not the monthly payment), the addition of optional extra realms as the tournament realm and the like.
Also they could charge money for non essentials, name change, server change, etc. How these will translate to a game such as Diablo III and Starcraft II is anyones guess...
But most likely nothing is finalised and blizzard employees cannot say anything until the actual game is out on the shelves...
Thurstie
USWest
28. Re: we going to have to pay for diablo 3onli 06/30/2009 10:49:58 PM PDT
Q u o t e: Mike mentioned it in an Activision Blizzard investor meeting [paraphrased] "A player that buys Starcraft 2 at retail will have the ability to play on Battle.net with no additional fee."
I'll point out that this is a very carefully worded statement.
The fact that he hinted that this statement is carefully worded MAY indicate that all information regarding Diablo III battle.net payment is void. We don't know anything about the new battle.net, and the fact that they are redoing it from the bottom up means we cannot assume anything from the original Battle.net will be like the new one. To summarize. . . This statement is directed towards Starcraft 2 and no information has been given on this topic about Diablo III.
Q u o t e: Mike mentioned it in an Activision Blizzard investor meeting [paraphrased] "A player that buys Starcraft 2 at retail will have the ability to play on Battle.net with no additional fee."
I'll point out that this is a very carefully worded statement.
Meaning if you torrent that #!#! you're not gonna play on B.net, similar to torrenting L4D.
Amirite?
Dbmeis88
USEast
34. Re: we going to have to pay for diablo 3onli 07/01/2009 05:17:40 PM PDT
in my eyes diablo 3 will not be a diablo game if u have to pay to play... the only thing u should ever have to pay for is the game, and any major expansions... if it did turn out to be pay to play they would lose many potential players, not to mention anyone who played wow would iether cancel there sumbscription to wow and go to d3 or try d3 and go back to wow. in todays economy no one can afford to p2p 2 diff games at once. specially since most people these days also have xbox live to keep goin also...
- he who is i am -
Yeahright749
USEast
36. Re: we going to have to pay for diablo 3onli 07/01/2009 11:27:08 PM PDT
Q u o t e: Originally posted by Bashiok [Blizzard Poster]
Mike mentioned it in an Activision Blizzard investor meeting [paraphrased] "A player that buys Starcraft 2 at retail will have the ability to play on Battle.net with no additional fee."
I'll point out that this is a very carefully worded statement.
On the "carefully worded" part:
When it says that Battle.Net will remain free to play, am i to assume this does or does not include Battle.Net 2.0?
Could this mean you are looking at allowing SC2/D3 to have access to the original Battle.Net for free, with the possibility of some kind of subscription or extra fee for access to Battle.Net 2.0 and its additional features?
Carefully worded indeed....