Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
... LastLast
  1. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by vincink View Post
    This may come as a shock but... the price of things goes up over time. Hell, I remember when gasoline was under USD $1.

    Inflation sucks.
    diablo as a brand new game, back then, would have been ~$40 way back then. the fact it isn't new and they flopped the last remaster makes it questionable choice to get, especially when diablo 2 is still available. its also ridiculous that they are advertising it as "two games in one" because it will include the expansion.

    i really hope that the official trailer isn't what they are calling the remastered version, because it looks the same as the original.

  2. #322
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludvig View Post
    Some of the employees at Blizzard are known to barely be able to pay rent and some even skip the cafeteria lunches because they can't afford it. Even veterans have claimed to receive raises which equate to about 50 more cents per hour. Oh, and on a record quarter they decided to fire 800 employees. Great business dude.
    If you feel this way and still buy their products.... jokes on you and you're weak, weak ethics. But I get it. The flesh is weak.

  3. #323
    I mean, i was excited for all of 5 minutes, and then I saw the price and decided that i'll just watch remastered cutscenes on youtube. I already have the original AND the expac. i can play that if the mood strikes and don't need to pay extra for it.

  4. #324
    You need to realise, part of the package that comes for the 40 $/€ is a fresh start away from bots (hopefully at least for a while), auto account lockout after switching chars too fast, limited games per hour, duped/glitched gear, old 08 uniques and classic rares, hybrid runewords domination in pvp... and a lot of other stuff that was making the old b.net experience terrible.
    Is the price right? It's for you to decide. I think it's a bit high, but someone that's really invested in D2's glory days/legacy will pay. That's what they're counting on.
    Quote Originally Posted by FelPlague View Post
    I can't believe you idiots banned my main forum account because I was only showing you proof of your trolling. I will keep posting here and I will not stop this war. Just stop disrupting roleplay. You have done enough damage already.

  5. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by Gasparde View Post
    Seeing how great WC3:Refunded turned out... it's bold to ask for more than 10 bucks.

    But then again, they could price it at like $100 bucks and would still make a fortune. Blizzard loyalist zealots are some of the most insanely blind and I just pay whatever because it's company X customers I've ever seen. Seriously, we're rivaling Apple here. They can just do whatever the fuck they want and ask for any random amount of money... and old Bobby 'Devil Horns' Kotick is still gonna make another couple millions... and no matter how good their sales are they'll probably still lay off another 500ish people and rehire them at a lower rate because why the fuck not but please don't unionize because the gaming industry couldn't possibly work if everyone just stopped willingly eating shit while fucking paying for it.

    So buckle up, Lord of destruction is probably gonna come in a couple years and they'll just ask your for another 30 or 40 bucks. Bu maybe you'll get a cool WoW pet or an Overwatch lootbox FOR FREE alongside your purchase to make you feel better.
    This post sounds a little greedy to me. You dont like the price ? Dont buy it - simple as that. I will buy it, i dont care those 40 bucks. Maybe i am a fanboy zealot, but this is not your bussiness at all. Maybe, if blizzard disappoints me again with a remaster title like with wc3, i will change my approach to the next title, but right now i will buy new blizz stuff.

  6. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by Uurdz View Post
    Price is fine. If it was too expensive they wont sell copys and at some stage it'll be on discount for people who don't want to play on Day 1.

    I don't buy people saying shit like "this is an old game should be cheaper" or "i've already bought this once" because its actually a brand new game. It's just that its a carbon copy of an older game. Given how shite some of the new games are that come out im happy to spend money on a game I know will be good. As for "buying it twice" I was under absolutely NO expectations that when i bought D2 i'd be able to play it online for 20+ years, which has been whats happened, further i'll be able to KEEP playing it based on their announcement and if I want i can UPGRADE my version with modern graphics.

    Costs $55USD for NZers ($75NZD) idgaf - worth it.
    That's the thing. From what I heard, it is not a brand new game. They are supposed to be using the old game engine, "just" with updated graphics. There's nothing wrong with that, especially since the game is still just fine, but the pricetag for it is quite steep.

    I think what happened to AoE2 should be considered golden standard for remasters. It costs 20 bucks, revived the community around the franchise and is still being actively developed and balanced a year after its release, even getting new civs (sure, for a pricetag, but I don't think anyone would have issues paying for new d2 content as well).

    If the game gets continued support beyond bugfixes for that pricetag (say, seasons ala d3, new class, ...) the price might be justified. Otherwise it's ripoff banking on Blizz name stamped on it to sell. Especially since everyone is locked up in their home.
    Just out of curiosity, is w3 getting any kind of support?

  7. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by Bee76 View Post
    This post sounds a little greedy to me. You dont like the price ? Dont buy it - simple as that. I will buy it, i dont care those 40 bucks. Maybe i am a fanboy zealot, but this is not your bussiness at all. Maybe, if blizzard disappoints me again with a remaster title like with wc3, i will change my approach to the next title, but right now i will buy new blizz stuff.
    it isn't new though, based on the preview it looks the same, for double the price.

  8. #328
    Titan HighlordJohnstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I live at a location, somewhere, ya know? :D
    Posts
    11,617
    ew

    Should've been like $10 or $20 at MOST. Definitely not paying $44 for a remake of an old game. The Crash N Sane Trilogy doesn't even cost this much ($4 dollars LESS, actually), and that shit had 3 fucking games remade. Not 1.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bee76 View Post
    This post sounds a little greedy to me. You dont like the price ? Dont buy it - simple as that. I will buy it, i dont care those 40 bucks. Maybe i am a fanboy zealot, but this is not your bussiness at all. Maybe, if blizzard disappoints me again with a remaster title like with wc3, i will change my approach to the next title, but right now i will buy new blizz stuff.
    This is a horrible excuse. "DOESN'T MATTER IF THIS "REMAKE" LOOKS BLAND, IS OVERPRICED, ETC! IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T BUY IT" is not an excuse for Blizzard's poor handling of a product. Doesn't help that this isn't even a true "remake". It's more or less just the old game with some slight HD updates to it, as well as some "quality of life" changes. Definitely not worth spending 40 fucking dollars on.

    - - - Updated - - -

    It's greedy, and uninspired. And, like I already mentioned before, I could get much better "remakes" of multiple products (For example: The N Sane Trilogy, WHICH LEGIT REMADE THE FIRST 3 CRASH GAMES! THAT LITERALLY SLAPS ANYTHING D2 or WC3 RELATED) for a lesser price!

  9. #329
    Warchief bloodwulf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    End of the Universe
    Posts
    2,165
    Maybe im a shill but that does not seem bad at all to me, especially because it is being done by Vicarious Visions who did great on two previous remakes (THPS1+2 and Crash). That and its arguable my 2nd favorite game of all time. Id be more concerned about the game if Blizzard had announced they were doing it entirely on their own, but the group that is doing it knows how to remaster and stay true. We are talking $44, if that was money i was honestly concerned about I might go out to eat with my wife one less time in a week....
    We live in an era of "me versus them", an era where something is done that you don't like means you are personally attacked. People whine too much.
    Let us play video games and be happy.

  10. #330
    I don't mind the price, but I'm going to wait with a purchase until I see some honest reviews. I haven't forgotten warcraft 3 reforged.

  11. #331
    Titan HighlordJohnstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I live at a location, somewhere, ya know? :D
    Posts
    11,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Elkas View Post
    I don't mind the price, but I'm going to wait with a purchase until I see some honest reviews. I haven't forgotten warcraft 3 reforged.
    I am definitely going to be pessimistic of this shit as well. I don't like the Price, but I will wait for its release just in case.

  12. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    Name a single company that has released a "passion project" that they didn't expect to make a profit on.
    no man's sky is probably is probably the best known example in recent history. guess you can argue if that's a remake or just fixing their broken product, but they definitely did it for free instead of making the new content DLC.

    It remains to be seen if other publishers will follow 2K's lead and make $70 a new de facto standard for big-budget console game pricing. But while $70 would match the high-water mark for nominal game pricing, it wouldn't be a historically high asking price in terms of actual value. Thanks to inflation and changes in game distribution, in fact, the current ceiling for game prices has never been lower.
    yeah except 10 years ago, before the rise of DLC and microtransactions, before the death of deep discount sales, that was actually believable. nowadays a $70 "big budget console game" that doesn't have a season pass and has a life expectancy of more than 1-2 years is the exception not the rule.

    inflation is a nice argument to use, but one easily countered by the rather explosive growth of the market in the same time period.

  13. #333
    Quote Originally Posted by Hellobolis View Post
    yeah except 10 years ago, before the rise of DLC and microtransactions, before the death of deep discount sales, that was actually believable. nowadays a $70 "big budget console game" that doesn't have a season pass and has a life expectancy of more than 1-2 years is the exception not the rule.
    Hasn't Nintendo gone with a pricier model than most for much of a decade or more now?
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  14. #334
    Herald of the Titans Daffan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Computer Chair
    Posts
    2,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    $40 is pretty reasonable.
    Will you buy me a copy
    Content drought is a combination of catchup mechanics and no new content.
    Classic+ Retune/New Boss Abilities >>> #nochanges crowd

  15. #335
    Quote Originally Posted by Hellobolis View Post
    no man's sky is probably is probably the best known example in recent history. guess you can argue if that's a remake or just fixing their broken product, but they definitely did it for free instead of making the new content DLC.
    .
    That's not comparable at all. The DLC For No Man's Sky wasn't a remake or adding "new content". It was adding the content that should have been there at launch. It was even worse than WC3:RF.
    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2021-02-26 at 02:41 AM.

  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by h4rr0d View Post
    That's the thing. From what I heard, it is not a brand new game. They are supposed to be using the old game engine, "just" with updated graphics. There's nothing wrong with that, especially since the game is still just fine, but the pricetag for it is quite steep.

    I think what happened to AoE2 should be considered golden standard for remasters. It costs 20 bucks, revived the community around the franchise and is still being actively developed and balanced a year after its release, even getting new civs (sure, for a pricetag, but I don't think anyone would have issues paying for new d2 content as well).

    If the game gets continued support beyond bugfixes for that pricetag (say, seasons ala d3, new class, ...) the price might be justified. Otherwise it's ripoff banking on Blizz name stamped on it to sell. Especially since everyone is locked up in their home.
    Just out of curiosity, is w3 getting any kind of support?
    Look im not going to say it's cheap, it is certainly expensive. However, i'm more than willing to pay for it for the reasons stated. AOE2 for $20 is cheap although for me personally, I can only play AOE2 for a few hours before I get bored - D2 I could play for multiple days straight.

    They're reasonably comparative on a performance basis

    On its debut day, Diablo II sold 184,000 units.[42] The game's global sales reached 1 million copies after two weeks,[43] and 2 million after one and a half months.
    v.
    In January 2000, three months after its release, Microsoft had shipped two million copies of The Age of Kings.


    By seasons I assume you mean Ladder resets but with new content?

    From what I can see w3 is getting support but it is in such a poor state that support is pretty pathetic. It's more expensive and certainly not worth it's price tag in it's current state.

  17. #337
    Quote Originally Posted by HighlordJohnstone View Post
    Doesn't help that this isn't even a true "remake". It's more or less just the old game with some slight HD updates to it, as well as some "quality of life" changes. Definitely not worth spending 40 fucking dollars on.
    if u dont think its worth spending 40 dollars on it, just dont do it ? if enough ppl dont buy it for that proce, blizzard will lower the price. until that, if you want it, you will need to pay that price
    Quote Originally Posted by HighlordJohnstone View Post
    It's greedy, and uninspired. And, like I already mentioned before, I could get much better "remakes" of multiple products (For example: The N Sane Trilogy, WHICH LEGIT REMADE THE FIRST 3 CRASH GAMES! THAT LITERALLY SLAPS ANYTHING D2 or WC3 RELATED) for a lesser price!
    So you should betther buy this ?


    From my point of view, D2R will Cost about 40 Bucks. Even if i spend only 10 hours in it, thats 4 Bucks/hour. Cheap entertainment! Watching a soccer game, cinema, etc is way more expensive/hour. Even driving around for fun.

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by agm114r View Post
    If you don't like the price, don't pay it. The game company sets the price they want you to pay, and you can say yes, or no. You don't get to run the company and set the prices.

    That's how the real world works.

    Besides, surely some of you have gotten jobs since D2, haven't you? 40 bucks is pocket change if you like the game. If 40 bucks is too much, maybe you need to not be spending on games anyway?

    Again, it's luxury pixels. Don't like the price, don't pay it.

    Don't you love how we true D2 fans FINALLY get the remaster we've been begging for, and the hordes of people come crawling from under rocks to bitch and moan about every little detail?

    I'd gladly pay full price for D2 Remaster, i've been wanting this shit for so long and am so hyped it's beyond reason.
    It is my #1 favorite game of all time thus far, and I don't foresee that changing anytime soon now that the remaster has been revealed and coming out in December (hopefully) sooner.
    I will happily sink another 10-15 years of my life back into this game

  19. #339
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    ... That's exactly my point? Do you even read and try to understand what you're replying to?
    only art assets are being changed, and only slightly improved. For instance, simply replacing a 3D model with a more detailed model.
    Thats not what you wrote. You wrote IF this is what you are doing, then its more then just a graphics polish. I'm saying, you cant do this. You use sprites for 2d but for 3d you need actual models and rigs.

    Its getting kinda redundant at this point. I think you have mostly come 180 since the start anyway, now we are just arguing semantics.

    Personally i am developer who has spendt a lot of free time in unity and recently in blender. I know a fair amount about this stuff.

    If you dont, perhaps dont insert yourself into these discussions

  20. #340
    How can someone expect to be taken seriously when they write shit like "it's simply turning a 2D graphic in 3D". You have no clue about video game development and design if you write things like that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •