Blizzard: "I don't think it's a bad thing to want to make money" - Polidicks

[quote][url=http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-05-16-blizzard-i-dont-think-its-a-bad-thing-to-want-to-make-money][img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12875849/jotain/gamesindustry.png[/img][/url] [B]Diablo III's Jay Wilson on the auction house system and bringing the game to console [/B] Blizzard's Jay Wilson, the game director for the newly released Diablo III, has explained that the introduction of a real money auction houses into the RPG was a actually a design decision. And revealed that Diablo on console isn't a sure thing just yet. "It came from the design department," Wilson told Gamasutra of the new system that will see players able to sell and buy loot for real world currency. "So here's one of the things that I will say -- that no one in forums will believe me -- but we never make business decisions outside of the game development team. We always make them based on what we think is right for the game." He explained that Blizzard obviously intended to see a return on the service, and of course they wanted it to be successful. And that could only translate into a better experience for Blizzard fans down the road. "We want to make money because making money means we get to make more games, and we get to make bigger games," he continued. "I don't think it's a bad thing to want to make money. I think it's a bad thing to want to make money off things that are not a good service or product for your customer, and that's our inherent belief, is that it's okay to make money on a service we provide for our customers that we think is a good service worth paying for." Wilson also touched on the subject of Diablo III on console, which, despite the hype, isn't a sure bet just yet. "We tell people that basically we're experimenting, because it helps us hire people," he said. "The better people we hire, the better chance we have to actually make it. That's why we haven't kept it super secret, but we also haven't confirmed it, because we're not sure yet whether we think it will work, and whether we think we have the resources to do it." [/quote]

It isn't a bad thing to want to make money. It's an optional part of the game anyway and it's an attempt at cutting out gold/item farmers.

As long as it's not at the expense of the consumer, then go ahead, I'll be more then happy to see a deserving company enjoy its deserving money.

Funny how being it doesn't seem so bad when you're making a million dollars every time you blink.

I really like this honesty, or at least apparent honesty. everyone's cynical as fuck anyways, so you may as well just tell them the truth. it's probably better than what they're thinking.

[quote]"I don't think it's a bad thing to want to make money. I think it's a bad thing to want to make money off things that are not a good service or product for your customer, and that's our inherent belief, is that it's okay to make money on a service we provide for our customers that we think is a good service worth paying for." [/quote] Fair enough to be honest. Long as they stay original and keep it fun for their players, by all means let them do it. Though I really prefer Valve's emphasis on treating game development like an art more than a business, as long as the fans feel that their money is well spent I don't see a problem.

Yeah, but there's a difference between making money for games and making games for money. The article seems to imply the latter mindset tho, sincere or not.

[QUOTE=Conspiracy;35975930]Though I really prefer Valve's emphasis on treating game development like an art more than a business[/QUOTE] Yes, the art of selling digital TF2 items for as much as independent games...

[QUOTE=CaLeB-;35975976]Yes, the art of selling digital TF2 items for as much as independent games...[/QUOTE] The reasoning behind the hatstore is that they had released an insane amount of fresh content for the game completely free, and if they wanted to keep updating it and making it free to play, they needed some way to make money without screwing people over. Anywho that doesnt have much to do with their game development, which they do treat like a very free flowing art from rather than having project plans, deadlines, milestones etc. *EDIT* Not to whine about ratings or anything, but I find it funny that 5 people gave me boxes yet none of them actually replied to say why they think what I said was dumb. Valve themselves said that the reason behind the hat store was because they were spending so much time and manpower updating the game, and of course if they wanted to make it F2P they had to have some way to make money. Anyway I dont see why people are so butthurt about the hat store, if you play enough to care about the weapons and hats then it is no effort getting ahold of them.

[QUOTE=CaLeB-;35975976]Yes, the art of selling digital TF2 items for as much as independent games...[/QUOTE] That was a business experiment and it's doing its job well, seeing how many TF2 items get sold in a week... They ARE still a company depending on the money of their consumers. You shouldn't even start with that shit. TF2 is still entirely free to play, not some paytowin or pay2play disguised as free to play (hello spiral knights). You can get EVERY SINGLE ITEM in the game without having to pay, paying is just a way to get those faster if you really, really want it. Simski, that rating doesn't mean anything at this point. The ingame store has not changed anything about the game at all. They aren't 'monetizing'. They're giving the player the option to get the stuff they want faster. They aren't forcing the store down your throat at all.

It's not bad to want money, but it's bad to not want anything else. Not saying that's what Blizzard always wants, though.

My only problem with the RMAH is simply how tacky it is. Anyone buying items for co-op is just ruining it for themselves, and I believe PvP matches you based on gear anyway, so you'd just be put against more experienced players.

I've always liked Blizzard as a company, they're not perfect, but they're 20 times better than EA or Activision. They actually do give a shit about their customers.

[QUOTE=Eluveitie;35976677]I've always liked Blizzard as a company, they're not perfect, but they're 20 times better than EA or Activision. They actually do give a shit about their customers.[/QUOTE] Which, considering their fanbase, is worth some sort of medal.

[QUOTE=Eluveitie;35976677]I've always liked Blizzard as a company, they're not perfect, but they're 20 times better than EA or Activision. They actually do give a shit about their customers.[/QUOTE] I have a love-hate relationship with Blizzard. On one hand, I can definitely see the effects of their transformation into a large company with the blatant cash grabs and designing of the game for mainstream audiences. On the other, I feel like they still really enjoy making their games, and they still come up with some brilliant game design ideas.

What would be wrong with it? As long as they're not scamming people left and right and destroying the market with their greed, there's no problem. The whole [b]point[/b] of a business it to fucking make money.

It's only bad if it's dishonest and sleazy. Look at on disk and over priced DLC. Quality factors in quite a lot as well.

Make money? okay, I can deal with that. But when you are overcharging for stuff and forcing people to pay for day one DLC, I start to object.

Can things be traded for anything else other than real money? Like ingame gold or something?

[QUOTE=C47;35977548]Can things be traded for anything else other than real money? Like ingame gold or something?[/QUOTE] RMAH is an option, you can still buy things with gold.

[QUOTE=Recurracy;35976108]TF2 is still entirely free to play, not some paytowin or pay2play disguised as free to play (hello spiral knights).[/QUOTE] Valve made TF2 free to expose the Mann-Comony market to a LOT more players, since most buyers spend more money on multiple items than the game itself (which isn't hard to do, considering the outrageous prices). Making TF2 F2P was nothing more than a clever business strategy, which I do give them props for.