Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

gamerant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 769 posts

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#91

Post by ThatPlayer »

still_grokking wrote: post #71
xuki wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple/Google revenue will see a big decline if those games are regulated. Most if not all the top grossing games on mobile follow the same spending pattern, and a big chunk of app stores' revenue come from those games.

And that's exactly the reason almost all mobile game are utter trash. Of course that was caused because the app-"economy" was broken from day one on: You couldn't and still can't call out fair prices on mobile software. People weren't and aren't willing to pay those. So you have to make the software "free" and sell your user's data, or charge one or two bucks and use some other immoral scheme to get your actual costs…

My thoughts on the mobile gaming market are similar. There's great plenty of good ports of games like Slay the Spire, Civ VI, or even XCOM II. Problem is the majority of interested parties already have 'better' devices they'd prefer to play it on, so the prospect of paying even the discounted price that these ports have is too much.

So now you're left with people who haven't tried better games, and with all the good-enough free ones, how can even a discounted price full game compete?

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#92

Post by Termitiono »

chii wrote: post #75
matheusmoreira wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're just people with an addiction Yes. These games are straight up designed to be habit forming and should be regarded as equivalent to gambling and addictive drugs. I've been down that rabbit hole myself. Daily tasks and rewards offer positive reinforcement. Timers create a schedule for players, place a cap on their progression and establish negative reinforcement by punishing days of inactivity. Player groups…

so the question becomes whether people should be allowed to spend money any way they see fit, even if that spending isn't great for themselves. Like someone who's very invested in their hobby, they could be dropping tens of thousands of dollars into it (depending on the hobby of course). Why are those not considered the same as wasting money on mobile games?

Because a normal hobby is not designed to be addictive.

A hobby like wood working doesn't push you to do woodworking every day and there are not people behind this non existing mechanism who design it like it.

Also normally a hobby costs money due to physical parts of that hobby. A software engineer as a hobby only needs some computer, would worker needs a metal saw.

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#93

Post by stavros »

bsnal wrote: post #72
holoduke wrote: post #4

Lootbox games: I don't understand why these kind of games are not getting banned or heavily restricted. There is absolutely not a single positive thing about these games. Moral doesn't matter.

It’s your choice whether to install them or not. Let’s stop treating people like children please.

If this were true, people wouldn't literally die of addiction. Addicts aren't reasonable adults, addiction is a condition.

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#95

Post by x3ro »

bsnal wrote: post #72
holoduke wrote: post #4

Lootbox games: I don't understand why these kind of games are not getting banned or heavily restricted. There is absolutely not a single positive thing about these games. Moral doesn't matter.

It’s your choice whether to install them or not. Let’s stop treating people like children please.

You mean like... all the actual... children who play these games? Should we stop treating those like children too?

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#96

Post by monkey_monkey »

rightbyte wrote: post #6
jack_pp wrote: post #2

I've watched a lot of discussions about this from twitch streamers and I'm not sure where I stand.. On the one hand I'm amazed at how good this game looks on mobile and if you're just the type to casually play a game not really caring about being the best at it you could have fun playing it for free or for very cheap. On the other hand this game is clearly exploitative and while other games like Hearthstone or Clash…

Casinos are banned in many places and also banned for kids in most places. Clash royale is sad, becouse it is a extremely good game if it were not for the pay to win leveling mechanics. I used to play it alot but it became too frustrating meeting bad players with low ELO but high level cards that you essentially couldn't win over unless they messed up bad. Edit: To level up all cards in Clash Royale you also have to…

I've played Clash Royale since almost when it was launched, and I've spent about $10, mainly for a couple of months of Pass Royale.

My secondary clash account is staying as Level 1, ie with no upgraded cards at all, and I regularly beat level 10/11 players.

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#98

Post by gambiting »

ValentinPearce wrote: post #81
gambiting wrote: post #54

The thing is - is it necessary to have the best gear to enjoy the game? As a different example - I'm sure it would cost tens of thousands of dollars to max out your characters and gear in Genshin Impact, but I've played very enjoyable 100h+ and it's perfectly fine even if you don't have the max ascended characters and gear, I have a feeling those are there basically for the wales to spend money on but aren't necessar…

A big part of Diablo (or at least of Diablo 3) once the story is finished is to go as far as possible in the post game features. Most people I know who have played Diablo would tell me their rift tier, paragon level (might be a different term in English but they play in french so that's the term I know). So for new players, it might not be that big of a deal, but for players wanting to play more Diablo the game is te…

Well yes, the question is, when is a hardcore player going to run into this limit? After 20 hours? 50? 200? The further it is along the line, the fewer people it's going to affect. If you can have a great experience for the first 100 hours, that's still pretty good in my book.

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#99

Post by [deleted] »

michaelmrose wrote: post #70
taurath wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investors love the monetization model and they get to decide what is just right and moral in our system of economics. The “fiduciary duty” to investors means sociopathy is the only way that businesses are allowed to conduct themselves. If you can make money, you MUST make it. Someday I hope we find some way as a society to give value to other things. Its not really working out.

> sociopathy is the only way that businesses are allowed to conduct themselves. It would be great if we could stop spreading this misunderstanding. Fiduciary duty is a duty not to deliberately destroy shareholder value. Basically you can't set it on fire or loot it. It is not and has never been a duty to do absolutely anything anyone can possibly conceive of that will enrich the shareholders. Leaders are free morally…

[deleted]

Re: It costs $110k to fully gear up in Diablo Immortal

#100

Post by jhrmnn »

chii wrote: post #75
matheusmoreira wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're just people with an addiction Yes. These games are straight up designed to be habit forming and should be regarded as equivalent to gambling and addictive drugs. I've been down that rabbit hole myself. Daily tasks and rewards offer positive reinforcement. Timers create a schedule for players, place a cap on their progression and establish negative reinforcement by punishing days of inactivity. Player groups…

so the question becomes whether people should be allowed to spend money any way they see fit, even if that spending isn't great for themselves. Like someone who's very invested in their hobby, they could be dropping tens of thousands of dollars into it (depending on the hobby of course). Why are those not considered the same as wasting money on mobile games?

Never thought of that, good point. I guess in the end if we wanted to find the boundary for harmful/tolerable addiction, we might not be able to find it, it’s a continuous spectrum. I guess in the end intent would need to decide the ethics—is the product designed to leverage addiction or is it designed to enable people to have fun, which might lead to addiction?
Post reply on HN