Diablo Immortal streamer spends $10000.

[Elim Garak]

All of it is true. The game is free to play, the game has gambling mechanics and its pay to win.

If you invent your own definitions - everything is true. The hard part is getting everyone to reasonably agree with your definitions. Yes, a simple majority won't do.

[Delekii]

If you invent your own definitions - everything is true. The hard part is getting everyone to reasonably agree with your definitions. Yes, a simple majority won't do.

Irony, thy name is you.

[GreenJesus]

In most places gambling is defined by giving out cash or prizes that can very easily converted to cash.

So what you are saying is that lootboxes are worse. At least with casinos you have a chance at getting your money back. In DI you are just handing your money to blizzard for dopamine hits. Blizzard never has a chance to lose if you keep pressing the button. Casinos have the downside risk of paying out for jackpots and bank on just having a 1% higher win rate in blackjack/poker than losses while dealing with volume. DI you can just keep going on and on and never hit pity. Lost ark has a maximum limit on how much you can spend per day. Genshin has maximum pity timers to guarantee characters. DI has none of these. Thank God Diablo doesn't have booba to roll for or else even more people would have lost their money.

- - - Updated - - -

Guys I understand that your knowledge about the market is below zero, but immortal is a mobile game. Every mobile game works like that , no one is forcing you to spend 10k and it is not even worth since the power gain is nothing game changing that you cannot have playing F2P. Can you grow a bit and move on?

But WHY are mobile games like that? Why does it have to be like that? The logic is circular. "The game is pay to win because its pay to win." The switch is a mobile console. I could play diablo 3 on it just fine while sitting at the airport. Just because the shitty clash of clans and candy crushes and angry birds of the past were pay to win doesn't mean the hardware requires pay to win in all of its games.

[Gaidax]

Future of gaming right here... I'll give it a decade max before every game, mobile or not, is like this and I'm being optimistic here.

Only regulation can change this inevitability and chances for such regulation going though in countries that matter is pretty low.

- - - Updated - - -

And yes games like Lost Ark and Genshin Impact are few of the many to come that will try to move this shit to PC, even without being mobile games.

[Caprias]

]
But WHY are mobile games like that? Why does it have to be like that? The logic is circular. "The game is pay to win because its pay to win." The switch is a mobile console. I could play diablo 3 on it just fine while sitting at the airport. Just because the shitty clash of clans and candy crushes and angry birds of the past were pay to win doesn't mean the hardware requires pay to win in all of its games.

Because your average soccer mom/dad is naive in these regards and has a mobile phone, destroying the market with second order effects.

Candy crush makes how much money? For pretty much objectively not being that good of a game, not even being the best puzzle game of that kind? The RoI is ridiculous.

A fool and his money are soon parted etc.

[Dhrizzle]

So what you are saying is that lootboxes are worse. At least with casinos you have a chance at getting your money back. In DI you are just handing your money to blizzard for dopamine hits. Blizzard never has a chance to lose if you keep pressing the button.

No that makes gambling much worse. Gambling offers a chance to make a tangible improvement to your real life. On top of that gambling offers a solution to the problems it causes. Just lost all your rent in a betting shop? Maybe you can win it back with your bill money! Nobody who overspends on Crests in D:I will think their financial problems will be solved if drop cash finding a 5/5 gem.

[MoanaLisa]

But WHY are mobile games like that? Why does it have to be like that? The logic is circular. "The game is pay to win because its pay to win." The switch is a mobile console. I could play diablo 3 on it just fine while sitting at the airport. Just because the shitty clash of clans and candy crushes and angry birds of the past were pay to win doesn't mean the hardware requires pay to win in all of its games.

My theory (which I think is more common sense) is that when mobile started out there was an effort to expand the gaming market by adding casual players for very casual games. Those new players would react with more interest to a title with no entry cost. The usually small amounts that MTX starts at—sometimes $.49 to $.99 cents—were easy to purchase and it became clear that something like this was the best way to expand. I'm not enough of a game historian to know if F2P on PC led the way or the other way around or whether they more or less came in together. I suppose Facebook games played a part in informing game studios of what might work too.

Whatever. It doesn't seem likely that that players new to gaming on whatever platform they were looking at were going to drop $29.99 to $59.99 for a title. The stuff has to be funded some way and this was what worked best. You might as well ask why a river runs in a channel. In this case, game studios made the channel and people dived right in.

[Kittahsmash]

It's not my problem people have reading comprehension. And if I point it out you would delve into semantic warfare.

The keywords are "hope of gain". It is obvious to anyone who knows what gambling actually is that that "gain" refers to the "bet" or "stake". You bet something of value in the hope of gaining more, knowing full well the risk of losing it all.

Diablo Immortal has NO gambling.

Let the Semantic Wars begin.

You "bet" the money in hopes of getting an item you can use. You most often don't, so you lost that money.

It's gambling. Get over yourself.

I might as well call it a completely free game in which you can max out your character without paying a cent.

CAN you, though? Can you prove it? Do you have the formulae to prove that it's statistically possible to max out your character without paying a cent? Because nobody has that info besides Blizzard themselves, so I'd love to see you back this claim up with some hard evidence other than "it must be possible, even it it would take you 25000 years straight due to the randomness involved, it still must be possible!" cause...that sort of anecdotal evidence wouldn't last a second in any place it matters.

[Elim Garak]

You "bet" the money in hopes of getting an item you can use. You most often don't, so you lost that money.

The item is worthless.

[bbr]

25K so far, and he finally got his level 5 gem.
Then deleted the character.


Things aside why he even has that much money to spend on games,
could have bought with the money,
or how much of it was sponsored by his viewers.

seems a bit of an attention freak.
But yeah, disgusting amounts of money wasted on something like this.

[Nachtigal]

Honestly if Blizzard's gonna make some of their games P2W, I'd prefer this method. If max gear costs 100k, very few ppl will actually drop the cash. Also who the heck plays diablo for pvp

[Clozer]

And yes games like Lost Ark and Genshin Impact are few of the many to come that will try to move this shit to PC, even without being mobile games.

WoW sold in-game currency in the shop before those games even existed.

[Gaidax]

WoW sold in-game currency in the shop before those games even existed.

What WoW did and does is nothing in comparison to likes of Lost Ark or Genshin Impact.

Seen that shitty red dot pointing your attention in Lost Ark? Or how about getting your stuff via store links? All there - seeping right into PC.

I played Lost Ark for quite a bit and it's a future of PC gaming right there and it's a bleak future. It's no longer just some token where you know what you get exactly - now it's various bullshit materials that may or may not give you what you want - practically a new version of lootboxes with that middle in-game step to cover their nature as lootboxes.

- - - Updated - - -

And you can bet Bobby and the likes focus on D:I experience with all their might, aside from Blizzard's first experience with mobile and monetization - I bet they are VERY interested how it will turn out for PC. It might even be the real reason they added PC client as a test to see how full of shit PC gamers are. Scream and pout, but spend wads of greens all the same.

[loras]

saw numerous headlines on $10000 here is one link

https://gamerant.com/diablo-immortal...ive-star-gems/

imagine raging how stupid blizzard is concerning DI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5J_KQZrqUo

listen carefully at beginning about how he spent money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7mY3LdDNP0

claims for content, used same tactic in Lost Ark, recently admitted he cheated also offline with DI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTmdHu6cSnk

acting or not, then at times grandstanding on loot boxes. still a good example why these systems work as a 27yo man gets emotional
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEbsaxvWbTo

I hope my country's ban on these sorts of games gets replicated across the EU.
Nothing against gambling per se, but you've gotta be honest about it and act accordingly; we don't tolerate unmentioned alcohol in soft drinks either after all.

[Gaidax]

I hope my country's ban on these sorts of games gets replicated across the EU.

One can only hope.

Belgium and NL are insignificant enough for these corps to just filter them out and chug along. Now if Germany, UK and France would adopt - you'd see Bobby twist his face in pain. And if US would do - oboi, time to innovate lootbox there.

But US will never do it, because corps are running the show there effectively. They will just eventually buy out the legislature like in Idiocracy.

[loras]

One can only hope.

Belgium and NL are insignificant enough for these corps to just filter them out and chug along. Now if Germany, UK and France would adopt - you'd see Bobby twist his face in pain. And if US would do - oboi, time to innovate lootbox there.

But US will never do it, because corps are running the show there effectively. They will just eventually buy out the legislature like in Idiocracy.

True enough, still that's a market of ~30 million people lost. Also one not without clout in the greater EU, hence the hope.

[Gaidax]

True enough, still that's a market of ~30 million people lost. Also one not without clout in the greater EU, hence the hope.

Out of almost 500 million in EU alone. It's just a drop in the ocean really, that's why corps just not release it in NL/Belgium and chug along.

Until you get into hundreds of millions in the west - EA/Actiblizz/Ubisoft/Gameforge/Whatever - they won't give a fuck. It's a simple numbers game.

There is this bit just recently, which is actually pretty awesome - it shows that at the very least in US congress there are some people who are at least aware of this shit. So who knows, maybe there will be some regulation there eventually, but I don't hold my breath.



As a side note the interviewer guy is so fucking cringe, either he trolls or lived in a cave last 2 decades.

[Twdft]

As a side note the interviewer guy is so fucking cringe, either he trolls or lived in a cave last 2 decades.

I thought Cruz would be the reason to not watch the video but 2mins in I can't listen to anymore of that reporter...

[Gaidax]

I thought Cruz would be the reason to not watch the video but 2mins in I can't listen to anymore of that reporter...

Cruz impressed there actually - he clearly knows the issue, which gives hope there are more people in congress who are not some total boomers and are aware of this stuff.

[Dhrizzle]

Cruz impressed there actually - he clearly knows the issue, which gives hope there are more people in congress who are not some total boomers and are aware of this stuff.

Are people really cheering on right wing politicians regulating video games because they can affect real life behaviour?