Diablo Immortal streamer spends $10000.

[Cayde69]

Maybe the reason people think your points don't make much sense is that 80% of your posts read like this.

No one's impressed by the forum tough guy act, by the way. So if you have something material to say that will make your points appear more cohesive to readers, be our guest.

I’m not being a tough guy, the only people who didn’t understand what I was saying was you and another guy. I found two people with comprehension problems on a video game forum, wow tickle me surprised.

I already gave you plenty of material to read over and think about, but you seem to be having issues with the later.

[Ghost of Cow]

I’m not being a tough guy, the only people who didn’t understand what I was saying was you and another guy. I found two people with comprehension problems on a video game forum, wow tickle me surprised.

I already gave you plenty of material to read over and think about, but you seem to be having issues with the later.

No, you haven't. You've spent so much time trying to insult people that you still haven't demonstrated why we should not judge Cruz on his own words and behaviors on this topic.

Lets try this from the other angle: What SHOULD we judge someone on in this context if NOT their past comments and behaviors - comments and behaviors that they retain into the present?

[Cayde69]

No, you haven't. You've spent so much time trying to insult people that you still haven't demonstrated why we should not judge Cruz on his own words and behaviors on this topic.

Lets try this from the other angle: What SHOULD we judge someone on in this context if NOT their past comments and behaviors - comments and behaviors that they retain into the present?

This is why I keep just pointing out your lack of comprehension skills.

I already answered and have discussed all of this. Even in posts you quite literally quoted yourself. This is just getting embarrassing for you at this point.

I specifically said you should just look at the policy presented to you at the time. You should not care who suggests it. You should not care if that person is someone you disagree with on literally every other topic imaginable, even if they hold a more extreme position on the very same topic.

I pointed out how people on the right do this very same thing with democrats who hold extreme gun control ideas today. I pointed out that you, as a freely thinking adult, can agree with a certain policy/idea regardless of who or what side said it. If you ARENT capable of doing this, then you aren’t a critical thinker. You are just a walking talking bias or the side of the fence you align yourself with.

Lets try this from the other angle: What SHOULD we judge someone on in this context if NOT their past comments and behaviors - comments and behaviors that they retain into the present?

I’ll make this real simple for you, because it’s clear here that if anyone needs something simplified, it’s def you. You should judge the idea being presented. Not the person.

I already said all of this. I already answered all of this. If you come at me with another strawman or another question I already answered and presented to you, then I’m just going to link you to a website to study for a GED

[Ghost of Cow]

I specifically said you should just look at the policy presented to you at the time. You should not care who suggests it. You should not care if that person is someone you disagree with on literally every other topic imaginable, even if they hold a more extreme position on the very same topic.

Again, this isn't about the party of the person, or what they said about other topics in the past.

This is about THEIR stance on THIS issue in the PRESENT.

If we can't look at an individuals stance on an issue in the present and judge whether or not we want them in charge of that issue, what do you want us to look at?

To borrow your strategy on analogies for a second, saying that you want people like Ted Cruz to start regulating video games because they said one thing you like about microtransactions would be like saying you want the ex-CEO of "We Dump Chemicals in Your Water, Inc" to be in charge of the EPA just because they said they like clean water at a press conference.

In short, you're kinda missing the forest for the trees on this.

[Cayde69]

Again, this isn't about the party of the person, or what they said about other topics in the past.

This is about THEIR stance on THIS issue in the PRESENT.

If we can't look at an individuals stance on an issue in the present and judge whether or not we want them in charge of that issue, what do you want us to look at?

https://ged.com/study/ged_classes/

[Ghost of Cow]

https://ged.com/study/ged_classes/

So you still have nothing of substance to say, you just want to keep throwing insults from your alt account there.

Setting the bar real low for yourself, I guess.

[Cayde69]

So you still have nothing of substance to say, you just want to keep throwing insults from your alt account there.

Setting the bar real low for yourself, I guess.

I told you very specifically if you strawman or bring something up I already addressed I’m forwarding you to get your ged. I’m not parroting myself over and over again for a child.

Get to studying.

[pinkz]

alot of the streamers are less than honest

using i'm spending money so you dont have too. look at asmon spent $2000 plus on DI in days, yet rages about WOW store mount cash grabs that are $25 and on sale as low as $12.50. if he bought every mount at full price including those removed he would have spent around $700 over last 12 years. imagine asmon doing a stream buying all the store mounts so you dont have to

today i watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SymO1Svvsk, he says he is F2P with over $400 into DI, which exceeds SL expac cost and SL subs since launch. says he is still playing, quitting, maybe going to quit and may continue if changes are made. total contradiction thru out.

sad thing, there are others like it, some even more severe in spending. some say they will no longer stream it, yet still play. blizz is loving it

[blackbird1205]

Been tempted to do a legit, actual f2p run of the game, and see how stifled progress is. F2P games with this level of insidious dogshit monetization should AT LEAST give you excellent free levels of bound progress, or ability to hard farm for hours. Looking at D:I it's just the worst of all worlds.

And this is what most mobile/gacha games are doing to an extend which makes sense. You can get everything what someone gets who spends money on the game, but it just takes a little longer or you have to farm more. Only thing you probably will miss out are copies/dupes of units if you want to max characters in said games. In the end they might have 10-30% higher power level, which is agreeable I guess if people think they have to spend thousands of $$$, but everything else is farmable as f2p. That also goes for bigger games like genshin.

I honestly played through half the gacha market there is, an none was so badly monetized like diablo immortal. And blizzard isnt your everyday chinese company (no offense there) you would think. It left me a little shocked even though (maybe especially) I know the mobile market quite a bit.

[Nymrohd]

Been tempted to do a legit, actual f2p run of the game, and see how stifled progress is. F2P games with this level of insidious dogshit monetization should AT LEAST give you excellent free levels of bound progress, or ability to hard farm for hours. Looking at D:I it's just the worst of all worlds.

Why should a F2P game offer you unlimited gameplay??? Who exactly is paying for those maintenance costs for you to be online 24/7?

[Nymrohd]

Because it has uncapped earning potential from whales, and spenders. Why does it not cost everyone 60 bucks if f2p are outright handicapped? Basically making the case for going back to baseline game cost as a system, which I wholly agree with.

There is absolutely no case for a baseline cost for games that are a service. You cannot have a product that requires cash outflows for an extended period of time with variable costs and not have a way to generate matching inflows. That's inane. Why would anyone invest resources in such a product?

And you can play a solid 3 hours per day before you meet any caps in the game. 3 hours per day every day for a free game.

[Nymrohd]

Games don't have to be a "service", neither expansion packs, or subscriptions, or dlc, or lootboxes, or. . . Jeez, it seems like we gave these pricks an inch and they are taking the whole mile, huh?

I am sorry but some games do need to be live services to function, e.g. multiplayer games. I am old enough to have enjoyed LAN parties but that's just not an adequate replacement for online play. And that brings long terms costs that hold significant ambiguity and thus cannot be accounted for in a box price.

[Nymrohd]

I disagree, this is why we had subscriptions, they originally filled this bill. To say we need uncapped purchasing to this degree is solely to feed their shareholders and ridiculous revenue.

Oh we absolutely don't need uncapped MTX and certainly not to this degree. I'll say this, I play and enjoy DI and I do not feel there is much reason to invest heavily on MTX because it is clear it wouldn't really get me anywhere unless I spend insane amounts. I guess you can drop a couple hundred not to do something idiotic like chasing 5/5 5Star gems but more to get enough gem power to awaken a legendary or get your 1 and 2 star gems to rank 5. But there is absolutely no reason to be looking for BiS unless your disposable income is into the six figures.

But we do need something. And I am not sure people would consider subs for a mobile game. Cosmetic only MTX on diablo has questionable appeal to me; there is just not enough real estate in a mobile screen to gawk at people or even at yourself.

That said, Diablo Immortal could have gotten away with a box price and subs simply on brand recognition and the fact that it actually is a very fun game. Which is sad. I like to fantasize how it'd be if this was the second xpac to D3 instead of a new game

[Fencers]

I just ran across this article and thought it was interesting.

https://mobilegamer.biz/blizzard-ear...loads-to-date/

[Delekii]

I just ran across this article and thought it was interesting.

https://mobilegamer.biz/blizzard-ear...loads-to-date/

What is interesting about it?

Of all the articles I could read on D:I, that would seem to be the least interesting one possible to post here...

Legitimate question; I looked through a second time to see if I missed something beyond "DI made shitloads of profit".

[Nymrohd]

What is interesting about it?

Of all the articles I could read on D:I, that would seem to be the least interesting one possible to post here...

Legitimate question; I looked through a second time to see if I missed something beyond "DI made shitloads of profit".

It also doesn't matter much without comparing it to a similar budget mobile game. How many other mobile games have a similar budget and how much do they make? That would actually be interesting to see because you'd know if the profit they are making is worth the brand damage.

[Fencers]

What is interesting about it?

Of all the articles I could read on D:I, that would seem to be the least interesting one possible to post here...

Legitimate question; I looked through a second time to see if I missed something beyond "DI made shitloads of profit".

It's an article about the revenue and downloads of the game. That is interesting to me. In particular how it quickly outdid Apex Legends on mobile, which was a huge game in the space.

This is a thread on spending in the game, and I think an article about the revenue generation of DI is interesting in that context.

[Delekii]

It also doesn't matter much without comparing it to a similar budget mobile game. How many other mobile games have a similar budget and how much do they make? That would actually be interesting to see because you'd know if the profit they are making is worth the brand damage.

I don't think an argument can be made that brand damage even enters the discussion at Blizzard once DI released as it did. When functionally 100% of your money comes from 3% of your players, the only people whose opinions matter to your bottom line are those 3%, and for everyone else it just has to be ok enough to be playable. In a mobile market where it is better than 95% of alternative arpgs mechanically, its brand doesn't even matter. It's a means to an end; an acceleration of the initial uptake and nothing more.

DI is already an overwhelming success in the eyes of every person with any decision making power whatsoever at Blizzard. It would be hilarious to be a fly on the wall if it ends up actually being banned in China, because there will be some fucking angry people in that room, but ultimately its only whether the profit is is fucking stupid or absolutely fucking stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

It's an article about the revenue and downloads of the game. That is interesting to me. In particular how it quickly outdid Apex Legends on mobile, which was a huge game in the space.

This is a thread on spending in the game, and I think an article about the revenue generation of DI is interesting in that context.

To each their own It's like linking the times tables as an interesting addendum to a maths article :P Like I said, I only asked because I thought I missed something!

[Ghost of Cow]

I don't think an argument can be made that brand damage even enters the discussion at Blizzard once DI released as it did. When functionally 100% of your money comes from 3% of your players, the only people whose opinions matter to your bottom line are those 3%, and for everyone else it just has to be ok enough to be playable. In a mobile market where it is better than 95% of alternative arpgs mechanically, its brand doesn't even matter. It's a means to an end; an acceleration of the initial uptake and nothing more.

While we'll never have exact figures, people generally overestimate the share of profits that whales are funding. A lot of estimates seem to be around 50%, but who knows.

Logically, a million people buying a 99 cent package or two will at least keep pace with a handful of people spending tens of thousands. We just don't know for certain what the ratio is.