A little bit late i would say.

Hmm, seems like they're cutting a lot and acting different than the Blizzard that always waited until the product was 100% (or pretty darn close). I guess I shouldn't complain because my whole intention is to duo the co-op content with my s.o., but it still seems odd of them.

Originally posted by Vindicta

Hmm, seems like they're cutting a lot and acting different than the Blizzard that always waited until the product was 100% (or pretty darn close). I guess I shouldn't complain because my whole intention is to duo the co-op content with my s.o., but it still seems odd of them.

 

Patching in PvP at a later date rather than adding 2-3 months more to the release date is far more appealing to me and the majority of others, and blizzard know that.

Blizzard are not known for rushing their games but even by Blizz standards D3 has dragged on.  So they delay some content meh, people would be far more upset if they dealyed the game just for some arena based PvP.

Bizzard could relaese this game with 10% of the content it has now and still millions of people will buy it just cause.

But PVP to me means very little, but ill still be passing on this game, have to say I am disspointed in blizzrds vision in the last couple years, seems to me this company went downhill after the saw so much success at making games easy with very little challenge and instant reward.

Ouch, more bad news from Blizzard's end. Definitely not a good year for threequels. While I understand that PvP may not be a big deal for some, it should still raise concerns. Why? Because you are still paying the same price for less content (and possibly less quality) in a game you want to play. By giving in to this, you can expect to see this more in the future (and it will probably be worse each time) as you are basically reconfirming w/ the company that they can basically screw over the consumer however they please to get those quarterlies looking nice for their next board meeting.

Cutting PvP doesn't just mean there won't be PvP at launch, but it also means that they've had (all this time) resources devoted to a system they aren't using. It's a waste of resources they could've been using to make the parts you do care about better. Also, as some have already joked about a 'PvP patch at a later date' doesn't guaruntee that it will be free. And further more, name one game that has had a PvP patch, where the PvP was actually decent? This approach has always failed in the passed. A tacked on system is a tacked on system, and I have yet to see any company (even Blizzard) tack on a system and have it not feel like it was just thrown in there w/ no real thought.

Not to mention, that them cutting game features, yet keeping a cash shop, should make it pretty blatant what their business strategy is for this game. The economy may not be in a bubble atm, but it's also not declining anymore (at least not for america), that's not much of an excuse atm. Personally, I'm sick of the monetization angel that some of the larger game studios are pushing. It's basically an attempt to make consumers take their financial hits for them, paying more for less.

Originally posted by aesperus

Ouch, more bad news from Blizzard's end. Definitely not a good year for threequels. While I understand that PvP may not be a big deal for some, it should still raise concerns. Why? Because you are still paying the same price for less content (and possibly less quality) in a game you want to play. By giving in to this, you can expect to see this more in the future (and it will probably be worse each time) as you are basically reconfirming w/ the company that they can basically screw over the consumer however they please to get those quarterlies looking nice for their next board meeting.

Cutting PvP doesn't just mean there won't be PvP at launch, but it also means that they've had (all this time) resources devoted to a system they aren't using. It's a waste of resources they could've been using to make the parts you do care about better. Also, as some have already joked about a 'PvP patch at a later date' doesn't guaruntee that it will be free. And further more, name one game that has had a PvP patch, where the PvP was actually decent? This approach has always failed in the passed. A tacked on system is a tacked on system, and I have yet to see any company (even Blizzard) tack on a system and have it not feel like it was just thrown in there w/ no real thought.

Not to mention, that them cutting game features, yet keeping a cash shop, should make it pretty blatant what their business strategy is for this game. The economy may not be in a bubble atm, but it's also not declining anymore (at least not for america), that's not much of an excuse atm. Personally, I'm sick of the monetization angel that some of the larger game studios are pushing. It's basically an attempt to make consumers take their financial hits for them, paying more for less.

 

They're not cutting PvP, just delaying it and plan to patch it in in the first major patch update.  The PvP is not tacked it, it was playable at events over a year ago.

This will mkae them lose a couple ofhoundreds of  thousands subs. Not sure they will regain those later with a patch, you get one shot to get people aboard...

Interesting news. This certainly can only look bad for Blizzard, we'll have to see how this works out I guess.

I do not think people rush out and buy games like we used to. I have bought games long after launch and others do too. Games can patch stuff in and it is done all the time. The bad press this creates wll be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of people that will still buy this game. Don't kid yourself into thinking this will affect sales. The game will sell millions.

Originally posted by kitarad

I do not think people rush out and buy games like we used to. I have bought games long after launch and others do too. Games can patch stuff in and it is done all the time. The bad press this creates wll be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of people that will still buy this game. Don't kid yourself into thinking this will affect sales. The game will sell millions.

 

If just one person doesnt buy the game due to no PvP, then it has affected sales...please dont kid yourself here.  Unfortunately for blizz, I think its safe to say, that at a MINIMUM, thousands of sales will be lost due to this...and please, dont think for a second Blizz (or any game company) doesnt want you to buy the game NOW -- when they can still sell it for $70 -- if someone waits 2 years and buys it for $19.99 (or less) instead, that does affect the bottom line.  your comments are laughable.

too bad Blizz didnt spend a little less time on that cash shop for the game and a little more time actually making the game full featured and playable at launch.  So much for the "when its done," BS, eh Blizz ?

Originally posted by kitarad

I do not think people rush out and buy games like we used to. I have bought games long after launch and others do too. Games can patch stuff in and it is done all the time. The bad press this creates wll be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of people that will still buy this game. Don't kid yourself into thinking this will affect sales. The game will sell millions.

I think the good games we still rush out and buy.  I've gotten games at midnight on multiple occassions the last couple years LOL.  Now I still buy games way after launch as well, but those are pretty much games I'm only marginally interested in, or which came out right after another game purchase.

If I'm excited about a game I buy it as soon as I can get my paws on it.

Sounds like someone is eager to meddle with the continously dropping "online revenue" segment with D3s Pay2Win AH, which will be very likely thrown into the same category which until recently only one single game had occupied and thus was accurately showing that one games steady decline in the West despite their PR gags with "subscriber records": World of Warcraft.

Recorded Q4 2011 revenues of WoW where hardly "good", the worst ever since the Activision merger to be precise.

For Q1 2012 they have drawn their SoR card in the last moment and still lean back on anual pass subscriber. However it wont last forever till everyone earned their prices either.

Q2 needs to be inflated by some other source to cover up greater losses. Releasing Panda expansion or D3? They need Panda to face GW2. But that one just doesnt want to release either. Better rush and throw out incomplete D3 on  the market and please the shareholder. After all the debacles and weak reception, no one expects anything more of it anyways, other than riding on the success of D2 to inflate initial boxsales before word of mouth kills of the sales like it happened with SC3.

Originally posted by aesperus

Ouch, more bad news from Blizzard's end. Definitely not a good year for threequels. While I understand that PvP may not be a big deal for some, it should still raise concerns. Why? Because you are still paying the same price for less content (and possibly less quality) in a game you want to play. By giving in to this, you can expect to see this more in the future (and it will probably be worse each time) as you are basically reconfirming w/ the company that they can basically screw over the consumer however they please to get those quarterlies looking nice for their next board meeting.

Cutting PvP doesn't just mean there won't be PvP at launch, but it also means that they've had (all this time) resources devoted to a system they aren't using. It's a waste of resources they could've been using to make the parts you do care about better. Also, as some have already joked about a 'PvP patch at a later date' doesn't guaruntee that it will be free. And further more, name one game that has had a PvP patch, where the PvP was actually decent? This approach has always failed in the passed. A tacked on system is a tacked on system, and I have yet to see any company (even Blizzard) tack on a system and have it not feel like it was just thrown in there w/ no real thought.

Not to mention, that them cutting game features, yet keeping a cash shop, should make it pretty blatant what their business strategy is for this game. The economy may not be in a bubble atm, but it's also not declining anymore (at least not for america), that's not much of an excuse atm. Personally, I'm sick of the monetization angel that some of the larger game studios are pushing. It's basically an attempt to make consumers take their financial hits for them, paying more for less.

ok, though I am not concerned about PvP You have raised some good points.  Question,  you mentioned cash shop - what Dragon Age origin's style or something different. This is a single player/co-op game like Diablo II correct? Not a buy to play like GW?  A little concerne don how that operates. I was looking at D3 as a possible  for single player.. now am a bit concerned because I am not looking for a diablo mmo.

My guess is this won't hurt Blizzard's bottom-line.  People who want to PvP will still buy the game so they can level up their characters.  The other 95% of us will be happy for an earlier release date.

Originally posted by syntax42

My guess is this won't hurt Blizzard's bottom-line.  People who want to PvP will still buy the game so they can level up their characters.  The other 95% of us will be happy for an earlier release date.

I dunno, releasing a Diablo game unfinnished doesn't seems wise to me.

Blizzard policy have always been to release a game when it is ready, not to patch in important stuff later.

I smell Activision forcing them to release it too early. Another worrying thought if this will just be the PvP or if it is more stuff they plan to patch in.

personally been playing beta, love the changes made so far. Glad to see blizzard isnt just putting out diablo II with new skins.  Pvp not a biggy i can wait for that. I think it was a smart decision to release before pvp is properly fine tuned. People will bitch b/c its not there at launch, and people would bitch if it wasnt done properly if they did release pvp at launch. Ppl just plain old bitch everything by the sounds of it. Keep up the good work blizzard. Looking forward to this release

Originally posted by voltt

personally been playing beta, love the changes made so far. Glad to see blizzard isnt just putting out diablo II with new skins.  Pvp not a biggy i can wait for that. I think it was a smart decision to release before pvp is properly fine tuned. People will bitch b/c its not there at launch, and people would bitch if it wasnt done properly if they did release pvp at launch. Ppl just plain old bitch everything by the sounds of it. Keep up the good work blizzard. Looking forward to this release

Yeah, people whine whine if it isn't in from launch or done poorly...

Still, the third alternative is to release the game complete from launch. Heck, people have been waiting for this game since they announced Blizzard North were working on it 2004, a month or 2 more to get it right wouldn't really be a biggie.

Blizzard have always said that they release a game when it is done, it is actually what made them the company they are today.

I love how people are complaining about NO pvp at launch = doom. Remind me again how much PVP was in d1 or d2? Yeah, thats what I thought.The diablo series has always been and will always be at heart a single player/co-op dungeon crawler. This game doesn't need PVP at all. ANd honestly, I wish more MMORPG's would simply remove it. You cannot do open world PVP in a game because you have to many scenario's that make it almost pointless and chaotic which in the end is not fun. That is exactly why you get force into an instance like WoW and RIFT. Because there you can control it to a point. I mean even when WoW had Open world PVP, what happened? A clusterf$%# in Tarren Mill everyday to the point it impaired peoples questing and leveling. The only game that did PVP correctly was DaoC and even that was bad. The only reason it semi worked was because, wait for it.................. A THIRD FACTION. So who cares if Diablo 3 has no PVP at launch, it will still be a diablo game just like it always has been.

Originally posted by mackdawg19

I love how people are complaining about NO pvp at launch = doom. Remind me again how much PVP was in d1 or d2? Yeah, thats what I thought.The diablo series has always been and will always be at heart a single player/co-op dungeon crawler. This game doesn't need PVP at all. ANd honestly, I wish more MMORPG's would simply remove it. You cannot do open world PVP in a game because you have to many scenario's that make it almost pointless and chaotic which in the end is not fun. That is exactly why you get force into an instance like WoW and RIFT. Because there you can control it to a point. I mean even when WoW had Open world PVP, what happened? A clusterf$%# in Tarren Mill everyday to the point it impaired peoples questing and leveling. The only game that did PVP correctly was DaoC and even that was bad. The only reason it semi worked was because, wait for it.................. A THIRD FACTION. So who cares if Diablo 3 has no PVP at launch, it will still be a diablo game just like it always has been.

As this is by far one of my favorite ip'sof all time, I agree about the pvp whine and could care less. I am bored of the betaat this point and would like to actually play past the Skeleton King. However, DAOC had the best PvP and world RvR ever done to date pre-frontiers. However Jacobs had to screw that up too and lose the team behind it. As a 6+ year veteran in DAOC and tester, WAR was nothing like DAOC RvR. 

The only way MMO's are ever going to get back to solid PvP is to go back to the early DAOC model with 3 faction RvR. However, that is another discussion all together. Just release D3 Blizz. because the limited PvP in D2 even did nothing for me.