Oh Blizzard, how you have fallen (Diablo Immortal).

[Elim Garak]

I wouldn't say the highest, but it would score higher, yes. But hey, they can serve you a delicious beef wellington, but you'd still give the overall dish a low rating if it came coated in liquid diarrhea, wouldn't you?

Except the analogy is bad since the game is not coated in monetization. It's a side dish that you can just not order.

[Lolites]

You can link all you want, that "science" will never convince me, and if you ever known anyone dying of actual diseases like cancer, you wouldn't be so disrespectful to even compare it to real diseases.

my great aunt died of cancer few years back, and my father died of cancer 3 weeks ago
addiction absolutely IS DISEASE, its not deadly, very few mental diseases are, but it is very serious disease

and sure it "just needs discipline" (that is serious understatement but lets go with it), same way type2 diabetes just needs discipline - diet and exercise are nothing but discipline - yet somehow nobody in their right mind would say diabetes is not a disease...

wait a minute.. arent you the guy with thread how its the games fault you save useless trash instead of selling it and then not have space? i got it now, you cant admit addiction is disease, bcs you would have to admiot you have mental issues, and its easier to lie to yourself

[Jerot]

Except the analogy is bad since the game is not coated in monetization. It's a side dish that you can just not order.

If the side dish was steak, and it was a steakhouse.

The game is called Diablo: Immortal, the majority of new content revolves around becoming or fighting against Immortals, all of that gameplay is tainted by monetization. Everything else is a side dish to getting into that content. People don't play modern ARPGs/Diablo games to run through the story 500 times on alts. Gear progression is the only uncapped form of progression and its eventually paywalled.

[Aucald]

You are confusing talent/skill with the art. So no wonder you think this is about popularity. Though I never posited that the number of fans matters. Even if an artist has one fan - they are talented and good. Their art is just very very niche.

Talent is also judged externally and subjectively and is therefore not objective - most especially artistic talent. One person's songbird is another's headache-invoking nuisance. Thinking yourself skilled doesn't make you objectively skilled, and having a single fan doesn't make you objectively talented, either; especially if the said fan is also biased. In that single, sad context you might be said to be skilled, but as soon as you leave it you'd be a pariah. That's how subjectivity functions.

[Aucald]

Using his train of logic Tommy Wiseau is a talented and good director and actor.

Axiomatically and universally approved, yes. Blizzard (and every other game developer) would probably love it if reality actually worked that way - Diablo: Immortal would be a modern masterpiece because a handful of whale players love it, and that would be objective reality. Meanwhile Big Rigs and the one guy who really, really liked it (who just so happens to have been its key programmer) also enjoy the laurels of it being the greatest game of all time as an objective and inarguable fact.

[Ielenia]

Except the analogy is bad since the game is not coated in monetization. It's a side dish that you can just not order.

Sure. But the overall point doesn't change, now does it? I mean, you still have that "side of shit" stinking up the table, even if you avoid it, right?

[Ghost of Cow]

Axiomatically and universally approved, yes. Blizzard (and every other game developer) would probably love it if reality actually worked that way - Diablo: Immortal would be a modern masterpiece because a handful of whale players love it, and that would be objective reality. Meanwhile Big Rigs and the one guy who really, really liked it (who just so happens to have been its key programmer) also enjoy the laurels of it being the greatest game of all time as an objective and inarguable fact.

Like I said, that's the problem with people trying to judge art in this way.

When can we say it's "good" without someone else saying it's not? A majority vote? Some objective cosmic measurement? Of course not.

[Aucald]

Like I said, that's the problem with people trying to judge art in this way.

When can we say it's "good" without someone else saying it's not? A majority vote? Some objective cosmic measurement? Of course not.

Pretty easily in point of fact: "I think it's good," or "I think it's bad" would work and can't really be gainsaid. You could also even claim "a majority think it's good/bad," and that is at least somewhat provable via a poll or ranking website. The point is that art is not objective, and as art, neither are video games. Someone else is always allowed to disagree, and that's there own subjective opinion on the matter, which doesn't invalidate yours if they disagree.

[Aliven]

probably not. its a competent game, but its not without its issues. a lot of the quests are repetitive. zones are really small forcing group content at hell levels is questionable IMO. crafting, which was one of my favorite parts of D3 is all but gone. I'm not 100% sure if severely limited time windows to do specific content is because of monetanization or its own thing, but IMO its a terrible bit of design. PC UI needs work.

that said it would get much better reviews/reception without the degree of monetization it got. blizzard pushed way WAY too far there.

Forced grouping is for social triggers to buy stuff so you "done let down the group" and timers are to train pigeons to create habit and becasue FOMO is hell of a drug. Every decision makes sense when looked from the perspective - how can we psychologically manipulate people to spend more money?

[Ghost of Cow]

Forced grouping is for social triggers to buy stuff so you "done let down the group" and timers are to train pigeons to create habit and becasue FOMO is hell of a drug. Every decision makes sense when looked from the perspective - how can we psychologically manipulate people to spend more money?

I keep hearing people use "FOMO" to describe like...literally everything anymore.

It makes me wonder if there's really anything wrong with concepts like daily quests, or if people are just increasingly spoiled brats who just want everything and can't handle the idea of not getting something no matter how tiny.

[Elim Garak]

Talent is also judged externally and subjectively and is therefore not objective - most especially artistic talent.

You too are confusing talent/skill with art. You seem to be judging talent by the art. That's where YOUR subjectivity gets in the way of your thinking. Talent is objective. You see it, even in the art you don't like (if you are able of seeing it that is).

You can see a great artist - paint a piece of shit (but with a great skill) in your humble opinion. You can hear a pianist plying something horrible to your ears (but so complex you wonder how his hands work).

Talent and skill are objectively recognizable.

Back to Diablo Immortal though, it's not just about whales. It's also about all those non-paying players having a blast without paying. Diablo Immortal is objectively good game. It's popular in it's niche and it earns a pretty dollar. No amount of minority screams can change that.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure. But the overall point doesn't change, now does it? I mean, you still have that "side of shit" stinking up the table, even if you avoid it, right?

Only if you order it.

[Ielenia]

Only if you order it.

Yeah, well, in this analogy you can't "not order" it, since it comes with the beef. Even if you don't touch it, it's still there, right next to your beef wellington.

Either way, the point is that even if you consciously avoid engaging in microtransactions, you still see them there, taunting and teasing you to get you to spend money on them.

[Ghost of Cow]

Either way, the point is that even if you consciously avoid engaging in microtransactions, you still see them there, taunting and teasing you to get you to spend money on them.

What is this "taunting and teasing", jeez.

No different than the million other things competing for your money every day. Just...don't buy them.

[Elim Garak]

Yeah, well, in this analogy you can't "not order" it, since it comes with the beef. Even if you don't touch it, it's still there, right next to your beef wellington.

Either way, the point is that even if you consciously avoid engaging in microtransactions, you still see them there, taunting and teasing you to get you to spend money on them.

You absolutely can not order it, but you will see it in the menu.
If seeing it in the menu - is bad for you - leave the establishment at once.

[Ielenia]

You absolutely can not order it, but you will see it in the menu.
If seeing it in the menu - is bad for you - leave the establishment at once.

The "menu", eh? Can you show me where in the B.net store where I can find a version of the Diablo: Immortal game without microtransactions?

- - - Updated - - -

What is this "taunting and teasing", jeez.

No different than the million other things competing for your money every day. Just...don't buy them.

You never played a single mobile game in the recent... five or so years, have you?

[Ghost of Cow]

You never played a single mobile game in the recent... five or so years, have you?

Yes, I have, and I just...don't buy the stuff.

Just do the extremely bare minimum responsible adult thing and don't spend beyond your means. Who cares if the game is "teasing and taunting" you, do you really somehow feel incomplete if you don't buy everything that's shown to you?

[Delekii]

You too are confusing talent/skill with art. You seem to be judging talent by the art. That's where YOUR subjectivity gets in the way of your thinking. Talent is objective. You see it, even in the art you don't like (if you are able of seeing it that is).

You can see a great artist - paint a piece of shit (but with a great skill) in your humble opinion. You can hear a pianist plying something horrible to your ears (but so complex you wonder how his hands work).

Talent and skill are objectively recognizable.

Talent and skill require a subjective value gradation of the object of that skill. You can hear a pianist playing something you don't like but can subjectively judge to be complex and necessitating talent. You can also hear a monkey sitting at a keyboard and mashing buttons in a complex but ultimately random way. It requires a subjective value judgment to determine the difference.

Back to Diablo Immortal though, it's not just about whales. It's also about all those non-paying players having a blast without paying. Diablo Immortal is objectively good game. It's popular in it's niche and it earns a pretty dollar. No amount of minority screams can change that.

You have done precisely nothing to change the reality that calling a piece of art good requires your subjective opinion, nor that quality is described through popularism or monetary success.

Only if you order it.

You can't not order it, it comes with the dish whether you order it or not. You can not eat it, but it's still there on the plate in perpetuity.

We will never see the version of Diablo Immortal that was not designed with unbridled greed as its core motivating design strategy; that game simply does not exist. Every facet of the game experienced by every player, free to play and whale alike, is sat on a bed of design choices informed by monetization. It is an objective fact that the game was not designed as its best possible version in and of itself; only secondary to that goal of making money.

[Ghost of Cow]

Every facet of the game experienced by every player, free to play and whale alike, is sat on a bed of design choices informed by monetization. It is an objective fact that the game was not designed as its best possible version in and of itself; only secondary to that goal of making money.

To some extent that's true, but it's far from unique to D:I, or even mobile games in general.

It has been an issue ever since the concept of always-on, game-as-a-service products started to become popular and accepted. In the same way that arcade cabinets were designed to be horribly unfair games that ate your quarters, these games-as-a-service were designed to drip-feed you content and get you invested in your character/gear/etc to keep you subscribed forever.

This shit has been around forever, there just wasn't a big manufactured controversy around it all back then.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this to excuse any practice by D:I or any other game. Simply that shit to milk money out of you is everywhere, and it's on us to ignore it and just play what we want on our terms. To not act like spoiled brats who NEED everything they see and are thus compelled to spend for the sake of it.

[Elim Garak]

The "menu", eh? Can you show me where in the B.net store where I can find a version of the Diablo: Immortal game without microtransactions?

It's the same game in b.net store. Diablo Immortal has no microtransactions if you are not using them.

[Witchblade77]

Forced grouping is for social triggers to buy stuff so you "done let down the group" and timers are to train pigeons to create habit and becasue FOMO is hell of a drug. Every decision makes sense when looked from the perspective - how can we psychologically manipulate people to spend more money?

oh I am aware. but those also exist to some degree in games that are NOT trying to lead you into a cash shop every step of the way. and in case of timers specifically, its not like I can buy my way into a boss spawn on a more comfortable schedule. they could have made the window longer to give more people opportunity to participate while still keeping it relatively limited to encourage that FOMO. But just like monetization, they pushed it too far IMO.