Information Blizzard To Drop Diablo III Auction House from March 2014

[Crooked Bee]

Tags: Blizzard; Diablo III; Diablo III: Reaper of Souls

This is kind of old news, but since Infinitron didn't post about it I'm gonna do it now anyway -- it was the past week's major news, after all, especially for those who are still under the Diablo spell for whatever reason. On September 17, Blizzard posted a surprise announcement on the Battle.Net blog, announcing the coming end of the infamous Auction House, decried as a "pay2win" system by many.

When we initially designed and implemented the auction houses, the driving goal was to provide a convenient and secure system for trades. But as we've mentioned on different occasions, it became increasingly clear that despite the benefits of the AH system and the fact that many players around the world use it, it ultimately undermines Diablo's core game play: kill monsters to get cool loot. With that in mind, we want to let everyone know that we've decided to remove the gold and real-money auction house system from Diablo III.

We feel that this move along with the Loot 2.0 system being developed concurrently with Reaper of Souls™ will result in a much more rewarding game experience for our players. [...] Please note that the shutdown will occur on March 18, 2014.​

There was also a video to accompany this decision:

​

So, Auction House is being replaced with "the Loot 2.0 system" to be introduced by the Reaper of Souls expansion. What the hell is that, anyway? Erik Kain offers a short round-up:

[L]eaked information about the Reaper of Souls release points to new game modes, loot runs, and a number of other welcome-looking additions to the game. The leak also points to hundreds of new side quests spanning all the game’s Acts, as well as a Clan/Guild system. If true, the Reaper of Souls release, coupled with both Loot 2.0 and the demise of the Auction House, could bring Diablo III to new heights, making it the game it really ought to have been at release.

Now Blizzard just needs to implement an offline mode, and we’ll be in business.​

Unfortunately, however, no plans for an offline mode have been announced. On the contrary, it has been confirmed that Diablo III will stay online.

 

[thesheeep]

Of course it will stay online!
I mean, you have to be online to be able to trade wi... I-I mean, you cannot play alone, no, wait. Actually, what I'm saying is and I'm sure that you will agree is that.. uhm.. thank you.

 

[PlanHex]

Why are they removing the gold auction house?
That was actually useful and wasn't pay2win.
Now trading becomes the giant hassle it was in d2.
Dafuq?



Whatever, I haven't played this game in 6+ months and wont be buying the expansion anyway.

 

[Infinitron]

Why are they removing the gold auction house?
That was actually useful and wasn't pay2win.
Now trading becomes the giant hassle it was in d2.
Dafuq?



Whatever, I haven't played this game in 6+ months and wont be buying the expansion anyway.

Because they realize the auction houses are a DEGENERATE feature that saps the fun out of the game and might be the reason people have stopped playing it.

This move isn't an ideological statement about pay2win.

 

[CSM]

Why are they removing the gold auction house?
That was actually useful and wasn't pay2win.
Now trading becomes the giant hassle it was in d2.
Dafuq?

Because it ruins gameplay.

 

[PlanHex]

Easy trading in a gold auction house doesn't ruin gameplay, the gameplay is already ruined by the fundamental design.
I suppose it doesn't matter anyway, since trading would mostly be useful for PvP gear anyway, and it seems like they've completely scrapped that.

 

[Don Peste]

Why is Leonard Boyarsky from House Troika wasting his time on this??

 

[Gurkog]

Because they pay him a shitton of jewgoldz.

 

[toro]

Core reward loop, Loot 2.0, Blizzard Team 3. Very informative

 

[Micmu]

"Bugs can be fixed, shit design is forever."
(ancient Codex wisdom)

 

[Cynic]

Francis knows all

 

[Mortmal]

Why are they removing the gold auction house?
That was actually useful and wasn't pay2win.
Now trading becomes the giant hassle it was in d2.
Dafuq?

Because it ruins gameplay.

You are right , but i dont think they really care of the gameplay. They will try to sell some expansion pack soon, and they want people to get interested into that again , an hard task .Only way is to remove one of the most hated feature, of course they cant remove the online drm, else people would not remove it from inventories and who knows maybe give some money to the redcross instead , activision and kotick definitvely dont want to see that happen .Although i am maybe wrong they gave 0.01% of call of duty profits to war veterans, they arent against charity.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Why is Leonard Boyarsky from House Troika wasting his time on this??

The older I get, the more I understand it.

When it comes to one's own life, there's more important things than making good games. It isn't even the money - things like not having to work crazy hours, having your weekends free to spend with your kids/wife, coworkers that you get on with (which is likely to turn on things that have nothing to do with shared gaming tastes), a good boss, job security of a kind that you can safely take a mortgage or an investment loan against...that stuff massively outweighs whether the game you're making is any good. It's not like it determines which games you PLAY. Not to mention, plenty of developers have tastes in games that seem bizarre compared to their own track record. Toddler* is a massive Ultima fan and repeatedly demonstrated a great knowledge and appreciation of old-school crpgs in his interviews (going well beyond the usual name-dropping), whereas the Troika leads have praised FO3 in earnest. Once you've worked in an entertainment industry for a while, your perspective gets warped and sometimes you can't see the forest from the trees. Developers marvel at shit games that happen to do things that their own, otherwise superior games, don't.

*(This is a deliberately backhanded compliment, but I started reversing my position on 'Bioware as dull but playable' v 'Bethesda as the absolute bottom of the barrel assholes who made Oblivion' the more that I developed the impression that the shit aspects of Bethesda's games (like Todd's 'rule of cool') are nonetheless authentic attempts by Toddler to make the games he wants to make. Of course, that makes his own talent as a developer even worse (and it's an even poorer reflection on his talent when you realise that the problem isn't one of taste - he's trying to emulate Ultima 7). But somehow I can respect - and find it easier to play - an authentic fuckup of a game, over Bioware's 'design by focus group' approach.

Not to mention that, at some level, Bethesda's greenlighting FO:NV indicates that they recognise that there's a market for a more intelligent approach to those games, and that they rate Obsidian highly enough to trust them with their baby. Sure, you might say the same for the early Bioware/Obsidian relationship. But KoTOR2 seemed a lot like a more personal payback for Interplay giving the Biodocs their start, and they gave NWN2 to Obsidian at a time when they had decided to abandon that type of game. Neither deal is really comparable to Bethesda giving their 2nd most important IP - their biggest outside of their personal flagship series, and their biggest IP at the time of FO:NV as unlike Bioware they weren't developing multiple IPs concurrently. They really gave Obsidian an amazing access to their baby in a way that could have hurt them badly if FO:NV had been shit. It demonstrates that they're better at recognising talent than fostering it themselves.)

 

[Metro]

Lol @ people asking why they removed the ability to buy gear (either via cash or gold) in a game where the sole purpose is to farm gear.

 

[Irxy]

Because it ruins gameplay.

Dunno, rmah/gold auc was the only thing I liked about d3 and the main motivation for playing beyond beating the main difficulties for me.

 

[Metro]

If making a few sheckles is your main motivation for playing a game then there's a bunch of shitty Facebook games you might be interested in~

 

[Mastermind]

Which FB games allow you to make real money?

 

[godsend1989]

I never looked at D3 as a business, it suppose to be a fun hunting game, turned out to be a farming gold auction house simulator, the online only is not a deal breaker for me and i wish they could implement a fucking lobby like in D2 where you could see, talk, trade with other people, D3 is social dead right now thanks to AH i didn`t play since they nerf the attack speed.

 

[Mantic]

Why is Leonard Boyarsky from House Troika wasting his time on this??

The older I get, the more I understand it.

When it comes to one's own life, there's more important things than making good games. It isn't even the money - things like not having to work crazy hours, having your weekends free to spend with your kids/wife, coworkers that you get on with (which is likely to turn on things that have nothing to do with shared gaming tastes), a good boss, job security of a kind that you can safely take a mortgage or an investment loan against...that stuff massively outweighs whether the game you're making is any good. It's not like it determines which games you PLAY. Not to mention, plenty of developers have tastes in games that seem bizarre compared to their own track record. Toddler* is a massive Ultima fan and repeatedly demonstrated a great knowledge and appreciation of old-school crpgs in his interviews (going well beyond the usual name-dropping), whereas the Troika leads have praised FO3 in earnest. Once you've worked in an entertainment industry for a while, your perspective gets warped and sometimes you can't see the forest from the trees. Developers marvel at shit games that happen to do things that their own, otherwise superior games, don't.

*(This is a deliberately backhanded compliment, but I started reversing my position on 'Bioware as dull but playable' v 'Bethesda as the absolute bottom of the barrel assholes who made Oblivion' the more that I developed the impression that the shit aspects of Bethesda's games (like Todd's 'rule of cool') are nonetheless authentic attempts by Toddler to make the games he wants to make. Of course, that makes his own talent as a developer even worse (and it's an even poorer reflection on his talent when you realise that the problem isn't one of taste - he's trying to emulate Ultima 7). But somehow I can respect - and find it easier to play - an authentic fuckup of a game, over Bioware's 'design by focus group' approach.

Not to mention that, at some level, Bethesda's greenlighting FO:NV indicates that they recognise that there's a market for a more intelligent approach to those games, and that they rate Obsidian highly enough to trust them with their baby. Sure, you might say the same for the early Bioware/Obsidian relationship. But KoTOR2 seemed a lot like a more personal payback for Interplay giving the Biodocs their start, and they gave NWN2 to Obsidian at a time when they had decided to abandon that type of game. Neither deal is really comparable to Bethesda giving their 2nd most important IP - their biggest outside of their personal flagship series, and their biggest IP at the time of FO:NV as unlike Bioware they weren't developing multiple IPs concurrently. They really gave Obsidian an amazing access to their baby in a way that could have hurt them badly if FO:NV had been shit. It demonstrates that they're better at recognising talent than fostering it themselves.)

What a load of hooey. Games like Skyrim aren't "screw ups", they are designed to be shallow and simplistic because that's what their fans/players want. TES has only gotten more popular while every iteration post-Morrowind has continually removed skills, spells and other character options, up to Skyrim which only has three real builds - warrior, rogue and mage. You don't get to that point by "screwing up", but by specific design goals.

 

[Lhynn]

I never looked at D3 as a business, it suppose to be a fun hunting game, turned out to be a farming gold auction house simulator, the online only is not a deal breaker for me and i wish they could implement a fucking lobby like in D2 where you could see, talk, trade with other people, D3 is social dead right now thanks to AH i didn`t play since they nerf the attack speed.

It wasnt simulating anything.
Problem with D3 is that it doesnt motivate you to do anything else but. Also the problem when you make it multiplayer, it all becomes a race, especially if you promise arena type features.

Shit, its amazing how many pros simply dont get how to make a game, nevermind a fun game.

 

[Kattze]

Just a small concession after thoroughly milking the tards.

 

[Scruffy]

what a shit, shit game.

 

[Sensuki]

I would have thought that they removed it because the cost of hosting the auction house was not being replenished by the transaction fees due to the loss of people from the game (or the decline of players projecting a loss on the feature in the future), so they cut the feature and put a spin on it to make them seem like good guy Blizzard.

 

[Infinitron]

What a load of hooey. Games like Skyrim aren't "screw ups", they are designed to be shallow and simplistic because that's what their fans/players want. TES has only gotten more popular while every iteration post-Morrowind has continually removed skills, spells and other character options, up to Skyrim which only has three real builds - warrior, rogue and mage. You don't get to that point by "screwing up", but by specific design goals.

Streamlining the game's systems isn't what Azrael was referring to. He was talking about stuff like Oblivion's broken levelling system, the retarded Bethesda dialogue, etc.

The streamlining is part of the "authentic attempts by Toddler to make the games he wants to make".

 

[Thane Solus]

so they still keep the online for single player. These guys will never learn, really, they live in their own imaginary world along with some people here on Codex