Blizzard didn't reveal just how much of the sales came from the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, but we know that it had moved 12 million as of the start of this year. That means the console versions sold somewhere under two million during the two months it was available in this quarter, minus whatever the PC and Mac versions sold since the start of 2013. Still, the console ports were specifically mentioned as a boon to overall sales this year, so it must have been a significant chunk.
I don't know why people are talking about diablo 4.
We can already see the truth on the expansion sale in a couple of month.
Blizzard had all aces in hand with D3.
D3 as a concept was perfect in a time where short playing sessions, solo challenge and an armory to brag and view each others avatars is mandatory for success. It even introduced an AH in Diablo.
Blizzard fucked up BIG time though.
NOT only because of bad drops , NOT because of AH's and trading but because of bad mechanics.
If they had introduced a ONE TIME sell system in the AH's (gear bought on the AH couldn't be traded a second time by making it BoA after being bought), the game would have been an incredible endless experience.
Everyone and his dog would grind to find better gear to sell and do everything to reach that goal. Since the great gear would DISSAPEAR from the trading game, it would invite everyone to keep on playing.
With such a mechanic the trading would adapt to the number of players and a perfect balance would result in endless play.
---> Ros fucked it all up now. No end game as everything that drops after you kill the final boss is meaningless. Worthless even.
D3 RoS will be dead 2 months after its launch as trading is near impossible. D3 will now be remembered as a joke of a game.
Even some Blizzard hypers like Athene said it recently: there is no end game in the upcoming RoS: it is boring as hell....
D4 as a full fledged MMO - but action packed - with a full fledged Gold AH can't come soon enough, but helas it won't be in this decade anymore.
Btw: 15 million copies was due to Blizzard hype. Hearthstone will double that player figure within 10 months. Every Blizzard game gets to 10 million copies, good or bad. And HS is not better than D3 RoS.
Perhaps Blizzard did it on purpose. Everyone back to WoW is their motto lately.
How is this the mess up Blizzard made? How would making items easier to sell in the auction house make playing the game over and over and over again more fun? The fun comes from inside the game. It doesn't come from selling things in the auction house. I'm glad they are getting rid of it. D1 and D2 didn't have an auction house and they kept peoples attention a lot longer then D3.
Originally posted by nariusseldon http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-02-07-diablo-3-sales-hit-15m-as-wow-subs-riseWe already see GW2 (which itself sold pretty well when released) to have more actiony combat, and so does NWN.Is the trend of MMOs going in the direction of ARPGs?Now, before anyone says Halo also sold a lot, there are devs moving in that direction too ... Defiance, and Destiny (which is close enough to a MMO, but not quite). So may be FPS is another direction MMO, or MMO-like games will go? May be now MMO is going to splinter .. ARPG-MMO, MOBA-MMO, FPS-MMOs .....
WoW already was heavily inspired by Diablo 2 in many respects. Diablo 3 took after WoW on it's turn.
Originally posted by Magnetia Diablo 4 couldn't ever beat D3 because we all got burned by how greedy they are and how artistically bankrupt they've become.
Which is a complete load of nonsense. Artistically bankrupt? I'll agree that the writing was sub-par, and the dialogue was George Lucas level terrible, but other than a couple spots (Rita Repulsa / Maghda) the game design & visuals especially are top notch. They managed to update the look of the game while keeping in spirit with previous entries in the series; plus it did away with the moronic light radius mechanic so the artwork could actually be seen. I love the atmosphere in D3, with the opening of Act 3 one of my favorite areas in any game, ever.
But you are after all entitled to your opinion, no matter how silly and tainted by nostalgia it is.
He is just spamming copy/pasting from the internet. Most of these guys never played the game seriously. Like the one above, he made it to Act 2 as a lvl 14.
You can't evaluate games when not playing them, but on the web it looks cool to hate.Hence fake accounts everywhere.
D3 had it all, but there was and is clearly a lack of coordination at Blizzard. And it has NOTHING to do with different skill levels or the AH or the loot as such.
It is the overview that is the problem and frankly I hate noobs comments who never even touched the game seriously.
Whacky internet.
The game has nice art, but it definitely has a different art style and feel.
Obviously the first two games were a lot darker. They had a lot more blood. The butcher was a lot scarier. It was like playing through a survival horror game that happened to be an actionrpg. The world had a realistic, gritty, dark, depressing feel to it. The CGI scenes lent to this. There were no goofy classes like Monk and Witch Doctor that look like Cartoon Characters. I was never a big fan of the Barbarian even in the second game. The fighter fit a lot better.
D3 is a very nice looking, but cartoony game that was clearly toned down for this age where everything is blown out of proportion and mass market appeal is attempted to be reached. The characters in the game never really scare you in any way. The main bad guy in the game uses a pretty young girl as his host. Diablo is a big cartoony monster with big breasts and hips sticking out. It's hard to be afraid of it. As mentioned the Monk and Witch Doctor are throw offs from games like World of Warcraft which were never intended to be scary. Overall it's a pretty game to look at but doesn't really have much life to it. Everything is to politically correct for a world that is supposed to be filled with evil to defeat. Then again that is the case with many games these days.
I believe Diablo and many other early RPGs came from the medieval setting which was definitely more gritty and had more gritty traditional classes like Mage, Fighter, Theif, Cleric. Dark worlds that represented the times they took place in. Even when games take place in a medieval setting these days they don't really represent those times accurately in any way because it wouldn't be politically correct and it wouldn't have mass appeal to different demographics.
Minecraft sold 35M and I'm way more interested in Everquest Next Landmark and more sandbox games. You already have tons of MMO's leaning toward ARPG games like Priston Tale and Marvel Heroes but they really don't do anything more for me than Diablo 3 or Path of Exile.
You have games like Runescape and Ultima Online with the isometric view and personally I would rather play a full 3D MMORPG.
As far as more actiony combat that does not relate to ARPGs but more to fighting games like Soul Caliber with dodging and positional moves etc so I would say MMOs are drawing more from 3D fighting games with the action combat than ARPGs.
Diablo sold however many copies it sold at over three times the price of Minecraft. When the D3 expansion comes out, it will be selling at $60 a pop too, and people are going to buy the heck out of that. D3 has a smaller audience willing to spend more money than Minecraft. Maybe more than EQNL. Definitely more than the other games mentioned.
Different games, different markets, different marketing strategies. In the end, the money made will determine a lot of what happens next. But that doesn't mean MMORPGs will be more like ARPGs though. Developers can sell what the market supports and selling more ARPGs for more money per sale doesn't mean the MMO or MMORPG market is going to spend more money per sale for ARPG like MMOs or MMORPGs.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I don't mind there being action games in the MMO genre, but I'm getting sick and tired of almost every stinking recent and upcoming game jumping on the action bandwagon. When will this genre learn to do things in moderation? It's like lemmings to the cliff, they all have to jump off, there is no room for divergent paths.
Originally posted by Vorthanion I don't mind there being action games in the MMO genre, but I'm getting sick and tired of almost every stinking recent and upcoming game jumping on the action bandwagon. When will this genre learn to do things in moderation? It's like lemmings to the cliff, they all have to jump off, there is no room for divergent paths.
The main problem is that games are still real time turn based, but pretend to be FPS. In pretending to be FPS they lose a lot of their strategic elements. Even World of Warcraft had a large variety of abilities for different situations. Now you have only a few abilities, but it's still real time turn based so you don't have the complexity of twitch based combat. What you end up with is a really simple an boring real time turn based combat.
D3 is a great game for all of 2 weeks. They are a great B2P game, very much a casino mentality on this one as well. It would be a shame to see more games follow this model, it's not healthy.
Heck forget the ARPG thing I'm more worried about these games copy/pasting MOBA combat and having 3-4 abilities and an ultimate. ESO, GW2, EQN all lean very heavy toward this and I really dont want MMORPG combat to be more like playing SMITE.
Then again theres a fine line between EQ2 ability bloat and redundant abilities vs feeling like your playing a MOBA with 4-5 abilities. There a Goldilocks area in the middle that is just right.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Heck forget the ARPG thing I'm more worried about these games copy/pasting MOBA combat and having 3-4 abilities and an ultimate. ESO, GW2, EQN all lean very heavy toward this and I really dont want MMORPG combat to be more like playing SMITE.
Why not? MOBA combat seems to be more fun to me than traditional MMO combat .. and if it is more fun to many, it is a good thing.
Heck forget the ARPG thing I'm more worried about these games copy/pasting MOBA combat and having 3-4 abilities and an ultimate. ESO, GW2, EQN all lean very heavy toward this and I really dont want MMORPG combat to be more like playing SMITE.
Why not? MOBA combat seems to be more fun to me than traditional MMO combat .. and if it is more fun to many, it is a good thing.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
So trying new style of combat will not suit you who just want the same old combat system again, and again? Got it.
Personally i am ready to go with more actiony combat, FPS combat, and other ideas. And who says everyone will be doing the same thing? There will be ARPGs with D3 type combat, 3D action combat like GW2, and i am more than happy to see more MOBA combat too.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
So trying new style of combat will not suit you who just want the same old combat system again, and again? Got it.
Personally i am ready to go with more actiony combat, FPS combat, and other ideas. And who says everyone will be doing the same thing? There will be ARPGs with D3 type combat, 3D action combat like GW2, and i am more than happy to see more MOBA combat too.
Which means they will be MMOARPGs, or MOBAs, but what they won't be is MMORPGs, which have a pretty clear and specific definition and feature sets.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
15 million is pretty impressive. I'm not a fan of those type of games, but it seems like a LOT of people are.
15 million spread over PC and 2 consoles. That is pretty much Blizzard standard sales records over 2 years.
It has nothing to do with old D2 players etc... It is just standard sales figures.
Hearthstone with its free to play mechanics will probably double that number spread over PC, tablets and mobiles.
It doesn't mean squat for MMO's that a card game suddenly has 30 million players.
The name Blizzard sells millions. That's all to it.
In this respect, I wonder if Blizzard can topple LoL with Heroes. My guess ? Yes, because LoL doesn't have the Heroes of Blizzard and quite frankly LoL isn't that good. There is still a wide margin of growth in that genre.
I believe more in a surplus of choices : AND an MMO about WoW AND a card game AND a dota Game all within the same Lore system.
----
To talk about Diablo though: I think the hack@slash needs an overhaul in mechanics. Not 3D, but the mechanics in trading and a more open world. Seriously doing 4 times the same content is bad. But the market needs this kind of non pvp games where you combat against the system in solo or co op mode.
PvP is nice, but people want to win against systems too and there is still a huge market asking for hack&slash, but it needs to be in an open world and non repetitive WITH trading and AH's - at least for basic mats and crafting purposes.
All of which Diablo 3 in RoS is lacking in a Big way unfortunately. The AH for basic mats trading like Gems etc should have stayed in, the world should be freely travelled, the dungeons should be truely random and the professions overhauled.
Take that and add the existent hardcore perma death mode and I would play D3 endlessly like so many others.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
So trying new style of combat will not suit you who just want the same old combat system again, and again? Got it.
Personally i am ready to go with more actiony combat, FPS combat, and other ideas. And who says everyone will be doing the same thing? There will be ARPGs with D3 type combat, 3D action combat like GW2, and i am more than happy to see more MOBA combat too.
Which means they will be MMOARPGs, or MOBAs, but what they won't be is MMORPGs, which have a pretty clear and specific definition and feature sets.
All just semantics .. i personally don't care what the games are called, but if they are fun ... so what if the feature sets are changed for the better ... i am all for it.
All of which Diablo 3 in RoS is lacking in a Big way unfortunately. The AH for basic mats trading like Gems etc should have stayed in, the world should be freely travelled, the dungeons should be truely random and the professions overhauled.
I don't think an open world would do anything for a ARPG ... since combat are tuned for small groups anyway.
Random dungeons .. you didn't read .. it is in RoS.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
So trying new style of combat will not suit you who just want the same old combat system again, and again? Got it.
Personally i am ready to go with more actiony combat, FPS combat, and other ideas. And who says everyone will be doing the same thing? There will be ARPGs with D3 type combat, 3D action combat like GW2, and i am more than happy to see more MOBA combat too.
Which means they will be MMOARPGs, or MOBAs, but what they won't be is MMORPGs, which have a pretty clear and specific definition and feature sets.
All just semantics .. i personally don't care what the games are called, but if they are fun ... so what if the feature sets are changed for the better ... i am all for it.
In other words, you don't care if anyone else is catered to, as long as they cater to you. One day, you may find yourself on the receiving end and you won't like it much when other posters use the same attitude you do for their arguments . People have different tastes, not one of them is better than the other and they all deserve the respect and consideration of the game developers.
Comments
Diablo 3 sold 10 million on the PC during its first 3 months month ending July 2012
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-03-activision-diablo-3-has-over-10-million-players
18 months later, D3 has sold 5 million more but that includes console sales on PS3 and XBOX360
Nov 07, 2013
http://www.shacknews.com/article/81933/diablo-3-hits-14-million-sales
Blizzard didn't reveal just how much of the sales came from the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions, but we know that it had moved 12 million as of the start of this year. That means the console versions sold somewhere under two million during the two months it was available in this quarter, minus whatever the PC and Mac versions sold since the start of 2013. Still, the console ports were specifically mentioned as a boon to overall sales this year, so it must have been a significant chunk.
EQ2 fan sites
How is this the mess up Blizzard made? How would making items easier to sell in the auction house make playing the game over and over and over again more fun? The fun comes from inside the game. It doesn't come from selling things in the auction house. I'm glad they are getting rid of it. D1 and D2 didn't have an auction house and they kept peoples attention a lot longer then D3.
WoW already was heavily inspired by Diablo 2 in many respects. Diablo 3 took after WoW on it's turn.
People will sell what they think sells well.
Playing: WF
Played: WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL (2005), GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH (RIP), STO, TSW, TERA, EVE, ESO, BDO
Tried: EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus, AA
The game has nice art, but it definitely has a different art style and feel.
Obviously the first two games were a lot darker. They had a lot more blood. The butcher was a lot scarier. It was like playing through a survival horror game that happened to be an actionrpg. The world had a realistic, gritty, dark, depressing feel to it. The CGI scenes lent to this. There were no goofy classes like Monk and Witch Doctor that look like Cartoon Characters. I was never a big fan of the Barbarian even in the second game. The fighter fit a lot better.
D3 is a very nice looking, but cartoony game that was clearly toned down for this age where everything is blown out of proportion and mass market appeal is attempted to be reached. The characters in the game never really scare you in any way. The main bad guy in the game uses a pretty young girl as his host. Diablo is a big cartoony monster with big breasts and hips sticking out. It's hard to be afraid of it. As mentioned the Monk and Witch Doctor are throw offs from games like World of Warcraft which were never intended to be scary. Overall it's a pretty game to look at but doesn't really have much life to it. Everything is to politically correct for a world that is supposed to be filled with evil to defeat. Then again that is the case with many games these days.
I believe Diablo and many other early RPGs came from the medieval setting which was definitely more gritty and had more gritty traditional classes like Mage, Fighter, Theif, Cleric. Dark worlds that represented the times they took place in. Even when games take place in a medieval setting these days they don't really represent those times accurately in any way because it wouldn't be politically correct and it wouldn't have mass appeal to different demographics.
Diablo sold however many copies it sold at over three times the price of Minecraft. When the D3 expansion comes out, it will be selling at $60 a pop too, and people are going to buy the heck out of that. D3 has a smaller audience willing to spend more money than Minecraft. Maybe more than EQNL. Definitely more than the other games mentioned.
Different games, different markets, different marketing strategies. In the end, the money made will determine a lot of what happens next. But that doesn't mean MMORPGs will be more like ARPGs though. Developers can sell what the market supports and selling more ARPGs for more money per sale doesn't mean the MMO or MMORPG market is going to spend more money per sale for ARPG like MMOs or MMORPGs.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
MMOs have been more like ARPGs for the last 7 years or so, like WoW.
And its killing the genre, not helping it.
The main problem is that games are still real time turn based, but pretend to be FPS. In pretending to be FPS they lose a lot of their strategic elements. Even World of Warcraft had a large variety of abilities for different situations. Now you have only a few abilities, but it's still real time turn based so you don't have the complexity of twitch based combat. What you end up with is a really simple an boring real time turn based combat.
GTA says hi. The future of gaming.
Diablo could be bigger if they would develop a fully 3-d open world instead of squatting on the IP.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Like Marvel Heroes or Path of Exile or insert a few hundred other ARPGs.
There are already a lot of them.
Did you forget that Diablo 2 succeeded before Diablo 3?
They've been cloning ARPGs for almost two decades now...
Main Game: Eldevin (Plat0nic)
2nd Game: Path of Exile (Platonic Hate)
Heck forget the ARPG thing I'm more worried about these games copy/pasting MOBA combat and having 3-4 abilities and an ultimate. ESO, GW2, EQN all lean very heavy toward this and I really dont want MMORPG combat to be more like playing SMITE.
Then again theres a fine line between EQ2 ability bloat and redundant abilities vs feeling like your playing a MOBA with 4-5 abilities. There a Goldilocks area in the middle that is just right.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Why not? MOBA combat seems to be more fun to me than traditional MMO combat .. and if it is more fun to many, it is a good thing.
Not when it appears to be taking over every recent and upcoming game, it's not. With development houses so eager to play follow the leader, I am not at all happy with this trend as it will likely lead to no new MMOs that will appeal to gamers like me.
So trying new style of combat will not suit you who just want the same old combat system again, and again? Got it.
Personally i am ready to go with more actiony combat, FPS combat, and other ideas. And who says everyone will be doing the same thing? There will be ARPGs with D3 type combat, 3D action combat like GW2, and i am more than happy to see more MOBA combat too.
Which means they will be MMOARPGs, or MOBAs, but what they won't be is MMORPGs, which have a pretty clear and specific definition and feature sets.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
15 million is pretty impressive. I'm not a fan of those type of games, but it seems like a LOT of people are.
15 million spread over PC and 2 consoles. That is pretty much Blizzard standard sales records over 2 years.
It has nothing to do with old D2 players etc... It is just standard sales figures.
Hearthstone with its free to play mechanics will probably double that number spread over PC, tablets and mobiles.
It doesn't mean squat for MMO's that a card game suddenly has 30 million players.
The name Blizzard sells millions. That's all to it.
In this respect, I wonder if Blizzard can topple LoL with Heroes. My guess ? Yes, because LoL doesn't have the Heroes of Blizzard and quite frankly LoL isn't that good. There is still a wide margin of growth in that genre.
I believe more in a surplus of choices : AND an MMO about WoW AND a card game AND a dota Game all within the same Lore system.
----
To talk about Diablo though: I think the hack@slash needs an overhaul in mechanics. Not 3D, but the mechanics in trading and a more open world. Seriously doing 4 times the same content is bad. But the market needs this kind of non pvp games where you combat against the system in solo or co op mode.
PvP is nice, but people want to win against systems too and there is still a huge market asking for hack&slash, but it needs to be in an open world and non repetitive WITH trading and AH's - at least for basic mats and crafting purposes.
All of which Diablo 3 in RoS is lacking in a Big way unfortunately. The AH for basic mats trading like Gems etc should have stayed in, the world should be freely travelled, the dungeons should be truely random and the professions overhauled.
Take that and add the existent hardcore perma death mode and I would play D3 endlessly like so many others.
RoS doesn't offer this.
All just semantics .. i personally don't care what the games are called, but if they are fun ... so what if the feature sets are changed for the better ... i am all for it.
I don't think an open world would do anything for a ARPG ... since combat are tuned for small groups anyway.
Random dungeons .. you didn't read .. it is in RoS.
In other words, you don't care if anyone else is catered to, as long as they cater to you. One day, you may find yourself on the receiving end and you won't like it much when other posters use the same attitude you do for their arguments . People have different tastes, not one of them is better than the other and they all deserve the respect and consideration of the game developers.