Diablo III: 4 - Necros Aren't Just for Posts Anymore!

[lord_khaine]

Said person is really, really incompetent if his job is to manage relations with the fans.
The only meaningful explanation is that Blizzard is trying to court investors with the lure of mobile payout.

Of course, that comes across as a gigantic sellout to their hardcore PC fans.
It is almost like they are not realising they do have competition in every single niche on the PC market.

[GloatingSwine]

It is almost like they are not realising they do have competition in every single niche on the PC market.

They don't really have meaningful competition in any of them though.

There are other MMOs but none are as big as Warcraft and the Warcraft audience is basically locked in by sunk cost.

There are other online CCGs but none are as big as Hearthstone and the size of the playerbase is an inherent advantage for a competitive game (the sunk cost thing is less relevant as cards cycle out of standard so people can fall off the treadmill).

There are other shooters, but none of the ability base hero shooters stuck like Overwatch, and people who like tacticool shooters like CoD and Battlefield aren't necessarily in the same market.

And whilst Path of Exile exists it's not got anything like the market pickup Diablo 3 had and a Diablo 4 would have.

So Blizzard are just used to owning their niches.

Also, they seem to have genuinely gotten confused between Diablo fans and people who will pay in to a free to play mobile Diablo-alike. People obviously will pay in, because NetEase already has a bunch of games for them to pay into, so the Diablo fans must be doing that, right? They like Diablo, they must be playing some kind of Diablo methadone on their mobile, right?

You can tell they believed that because of the "don't you guys have phones?". They were genuinely shocked that the Diablo fan audience didn't want Diablo on their phones.

(Also they won't talk about monetisation, when that is literally the only relevant question people can ask right now, because it doesn't matter how "fun" the gameplay can be if the fun bits of it are all locked behind paywalls and gacha systems).

[Narkis]

Yeah, I don't think it's just an incompetent pr person anymore. A pr person doesn't get to make the decision to shift the best developers across all IPs to mobile.

Instead, I think it's a case of oblivious upper management wanting to chase the $$$ of mobile, and a dev culture that doesn't know or care about the differences between the PC and mobile audiences.

I think Blizzard as we knew it is effectively dead.

[Keltest]

Call me an optimist, but this still smacks of obvious failed PR to me. I cant help be reminded of that scene at the end of Raiders of the Lost Arc.

"We have top devs researching mobile games as we speak."
"Who?"
"Top. Devs."

[Erloas]

I had actually looked for a Diablo like mobile game, even a pay one, and I couldn't find any even worth the time to get started, let alone the obvious painful grind to anything interesting.

I have really only found a few mobile games worth playing and even the one I've been playing the longest has power crept past all appeal.
I think the main issue is that many mobile games are essentially just skins on a course in event driven programming. They've really lost much of what I would even consider a game.
Can blizzard do better? Maybe, but they aren't even doing it.

[Olinser]

I had actually looked for a Diablo like mobile game, even a pay one, and I couldn't find any even worth the time to get started, let alone the obvious painful grind to anything interesting.

I have really only found a few mobile games worth playing and even the one I've been playing the longest has power crept past all appeal.
I think the main issue is that many mobile games are essentially just skins on a course in event driven programming. They've really lost much of what I would even consider a game.
Can blizzard do better? Maybe, but they aren't even doing it.

This is the relevant point, and one of the main reasons people don't believe this is going to be just another freemium cashgrab crap not worth playing - and people who have played the build of the actual game that was available have not been particularly positive about the game.

BLIZZARD ISN'T EVEN MAKING THE GAME. That's what absolutely screams 'crappy gameplay cash grab'. If Blizzard themselves were making it I might believe that

But to farm it out to a different company? Every time they've done that the results have been mediocre at best, and usually totally crap.

Diablo Hellfire was mediocre, the additions were clunky at best, the tone/design of the new enemies were complete crap, the new dungeons completely destroyed the progression of the game because they took place in the middle so you were dramatically over-leveled for either the 'normal' dungeon or the new dungeons, and the 'puzzle' with the new boss was a complete joke. However it was at least functional with no major bugs and did have moderate reception so it wasn't a total disaster.

Starcraft Insurrection was complete and utter crap. When it was first released it was LITERALLY UNBEATABLE because they hadn't actually tested a couple missions.

Starcraft Retribution I didn't play but it was not particularly well-received either, although I believe some of the multiplayer maps they added were moderately popular.

So basically they're 1 for 3 in 3rd party games that were released.

[The_Jackal]

So let me get this straight.

Blizzard not only explicitly denies the rumor, but announces MORE mobile freemium crap.

Yes, but here's the problem: The companies that are rolling out mobile-friendly, freemium games are raking in absurd cash. Of course, it's not guaranteed that Blizzard/Activision/EA will be able to replicate the success of games like Fortnite, GTA Online, and League of Legends, but that isn't going to stop them all from trying. Remember when WoW was the boss of the beach and every other week, there was another competing MMO trying to horn in on the market? Well, this is what Blizzard has been reduced to: Riding the me-too train toward micro-transaction laden mobile game drivel.

Is Diablo: Immortal's release a PR failure? Sort of, in so far as they wildly misread the nature of the Blizzcon audience, and the Blizzard brand's audience. But the bigger picture is that three's a lot of money making greedy games for morons with phones, and Activision will be gunning for that market, hard. Our only recourse as PC gamers is to not contribute to their cash grabby tactics. Don't buy lootboxes. Don't fund the games you don't want to see, or you're part of the problem.

[Psyren]

I'm not against mobile Diablo conceptually. And I've actually heard some positive feedback from people who tried it on the floor, with the main complaint being "too easy". That's concerning to me since it's the same problem D3 had at launch (followed by a massive difficulty spike at Inferno to drive the RMAH).

It all comes down to how they monetize it and what the core loop ends up being. Like will the microtransactions be purely cosmetic? Will there be crafting? How "drop-in/drop-out" will the game actually be in practice?

For me, Bellular said it best - if they had simply had a brief teaser for D4, even just a logo and nothing else, they would have avoided a lot of backlash. Just something to let people know that they're actively working on a PC entry too. Bethesda is smart enough to do that, I don't see why Blizzard failed at it.

[Resileaf]

I'm not against mobile Diablo conceptually. And I've actually heard some positive feedback from people who tried it on the floor, with the main complaint being "too easy". That's concerning to me since it's the same problem D3 had at launch (followed by a massive difficulty spike at Inferno to drive the RMAH).

It all comes down to how they monetize it and what the core loop ends up being. Like will the microtransactions be purely cosmetic? Will there be crafting? How "drop-in/drop-out" will the game actually be in practice?

For me, Bellular said it best - if they had simply had a brief teaser for D4, even just a logo and nothing else, they would have avoided a lot of backlash. Just something to let people know that they're actively working on a PC entry too. Bethesda is smart enough to do that, I don't see why Blizzard failed at it.

And Bethesda did not hype their mobile games to high heaven either. Blizzard very much acted like their mobile game was going to be the next big main series game, something that mobile games, by their nature, are not.

[Psyren]

I can understand hyping the experience though; Diablo Immortal looks to be a hell of a lot closer to a "core game" than something like Fallout Shelter.

What I can't understand is why they left it at DI and didn't even tease development on anything for PC. (Actually what I really can't understand is why DI itself can't be on PC, but I aired that grievance earlier.)

[Seerow]

I can understand hyping the experience though; Diablo Immortal looks to be a hell of a lot closer to a "core game" than something like Fallout Shelter.

What I can't understand is why they left it at DI and didn't even tease development on anything for PC. (Actually what I really can't understand is why DI itself can't be on PC, but I aired that grievance earlier.)

Honestly I would have been more hyped for a fallout shelter style game. It being an attempt at a main series game is actively hampering my opinion of it.

I'd have played the hell out of a Diablo idle game, or a turn based dungeon crawler, or even a Pokemon go clone (imagine walking around exploring for demons to fight with some simplistic ar combat as you collect loot to fill in Cain's book).

Like I don't hate mobile games. I came into blizzcon expecting one (admittedly I expected something else with it), but I never expected them to try to make a real Diablo game on mobile. I find it hard to swallow the idea that this game will actually feel like Diablo rather than a shallow knock off.

[Resileaf]

Honestly I would have been more hyped for a fallout shelter style game. It being an attempt at a main series game is actively hampering my opinion of it.

I'd have played the hell out of a Diablo idle game, or a turn based dungeon crawler, or even a Pokemon go clone (imagine walking around exploring for demons to fight with some simplistic ar combat as you collect loot to fill in Cain's book).

Like I don't hate mobile games. I came into blizzcon expecting one (admittedly I expected something else with it), but I never expected them to try to make a real Diablo game on mobile. I find it hard to swallow the idea that this game will actually feel like Diablo rather than a shallow knock off.

Especially considering they've hired a team that is famous for making shallow Diablo knock-offs. XD

[Olinser]

Honestly I would have been more hyped for a fallout shelter style game. It being an attempt at a main series game is actively hampering my opinion of it.

I'd have played the hell out of a Diablo idle game, or a turn based dungeon crawler, or even a Pokemon go clone (imagine walking around exploring for demons to fight with some simplistic ar combat as you collect loot to fill in Cain's book).

Like I don't hate mobile games. I came into blizzcon expecting one (admittedly I expected something else with it), but I never expected them to try to make a real Diablo game on mobile. I find it hard to swallow the idea that this game will actually feel like Diablo rather than a shallow knock off.

Yeah the fact that Blizzard isn't even bothering to make it themselves is what convinces me more than anything that this is just a crass cash grab trading on the Diablo name.

See my post above - so far Blizzard is 1 for 3 on out-sourced content (actually 1 for 4 if you count the never-released outsourced Starcraft: Ghost).

[Winthur]

Honestly I would have been more hyped for a fallout shelter style game. It being an attempt at a main series game is actively hampering my opinion of it.

So were Bethesda fans at the reveal. Todd was on stage talking about Fallout 4, and then in the middle of it went "Oh by the way guys, we did some tinkering with mobile technology in our spare time and we put out this". Cheers all around from everyone. Hell, I have edgy opinions about the Fallout franchise, worthy of an NMA account (which I don't have) and I still enjoyed Fallout Shelter for the... 2-3 hours I generally sink into mobile games outside of my 3DS.

Compare this to the Diablo Immortal reception. It really wouldn't have gone this bad if it weren't for the heaps upon heaps of complete audience misreading.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Yeah the fact that Blizzard isn't even bothering to make it themselves is what convinces me more than anything that this is just a crass cash grab trading on the Diablo name.

See my post above - so far Blizzard is 1 for 3 on out-sourced content (actually 1 for 4 if you count the never-released outsourced Starcraft: Ghost).

Eh, I would count Starcraft: Ghost in Blizzard's favor. They knew it wasn't going to be up to snuff, that it would never be capable of being brought up to snuff, and so they pulled the plug rather than releasing the mess. They protected their branding by careful selection.

Which is the exact opposite of what D:I is doing.

I wouldn't have minded a "D2 Remastered" much in the same way that Starcraft was remastered. Just give it a new coat of paint, bump up resolution to modern standards, and bob's your uncle. It'd have sold like hotcakes. Maybe even run it in the D3 engine if you like. It would take more work doing the assets in the new engine, but it would fix a lot of problems at the same time. And if you want to tack on a cosmetics shop, fine, I can ignore it and those who like the cosmetics can pad Blizzard's budget.

I wouldn't have minded D2/D3 on mobile, if it was done in-house instead of a freemium pay-to-leet business model. I mean, come on, even a potato by today's standards can run D2. Even older smart phones are more than capable of running it. Toss in some daily quest things that don't take a whole lot of time (think GRifts or Keymaster hunting) to play while you are on the run and unable to play the actual game, and bob's your uncle.

But this? Yea, no. And Blizzard has consistently been failing to 'get the hint' and doubling down. I'm betting this is rolling down from Activision, though. I don't think even Blizzard has gotten this tone deaf yet, I mean this is almost EA levels of fail.

[Olinser]

Eh, I would count Starcraft: Ghost in Blizzard's favor. They knew it wasn't going to be up to snuff, that it would never be capable of being brought up to snuff, and so they pulled the plug rather than releasing the mess. They protected their branding by careful selection.

Which is the exact opposite of what D:I is doing.

I wouldn't have minded a "D2 Remastered" much in the same way that Starcraft was remastered. Just give it a new coat of paint, bump up resolution to modern standards, and bob's your uncle. It'd have sold like hotcakes. Maybe even run it in the D3 engine if you like. It would take more work doing the assets in the new engine, but it would fix a lot of problems at the same time. And if you want to tack on a cosmetics shop, fine, I can ignore it and those who like the cosmetics can pad Blizzard's budget.

I wouldn't have minded D2/D3 on mobile, if it was done in-house instead of a freemium pay-to-leet business model. I mean, come on, even a potato by today's standards can run D2. Even older smart phones are more than capable of running it. Toss in some daily quest things that don't take a whole lot of time (think GRifts or Keymaster hunting) to play while you are on the run and unable to play the actual game, and bob's your uncle.

But this? Yea, no. And Blizzard has consistently been failing to 'get the hint' and doubling down. I'm betting this is rolling down from Activision, though. I don't think even Blizzard has gotten this tone deaf yet, I mean this is almost EA levels of fail.

Well its in their favor that they realized it, but I included it in the 1 for 4 as a failure because they chose to outsource a game, and company they outsourced to failed to produce an acceptable game. It was just Blizzard rejecting it rather than the customers, but the game produced was unacceptable.

[Erloas]

I think the biggest issues, at least for me personally, just comes from the free and massive aspect.

Free means grind, and while Diablo is known for grinding, D3 is pretty much at my tolerance for it. In fact it is past my personal tolerance, but if I'm playing with a friend then it is ok. I'm not sure how they're going to monetize it exactly, but it usually means making things annoying enough that you want to skip it. I've done IAP in a few games, but only one on mobile and I regret that now. The biggest issue is usually that there is never enough, WOT and MWO I could buy a garage slot or specific 'Mech and be done, it didn't require constant purchases. Maybe if they find a really good balance of casual access and IAP... but given their failure to read the consumer base, I'm not betting on that. I don't know the NetEase games to know their track record.

Then the massive. The draw of Diablo has been the tight gameplay and character design. That would be hard enough to transfer to mobile, but adding all of the issues inherent with large groups of players and I'm just not seeing it happen. Especially since so many of the other mobile games I've looked for to do this gate multiplayer behind a lot of grinding before you even get there and that why I want a mobile Diablo-esque game is to play with one or two specific people. I just think the chances of a clunky mess are too high.

[The_Jackal]

I think the biggest issues, at least for me personally, just comes from the free and massive aspect.

Free means grind, and while Diablo is known for grinding, D3 is pretty much at my tolerance for it. In fact it is past my personal tolerance, but if I'm playing with a friend then it is ok. I'm not sure how they're going to monetize it exactly, but it usually means making things annoying enough that you want to skip it. I've done IAP in a few games, but only one on mobile and I regret that now. The biggest issue is usually that there is never enough, WOT and MWO I could buy a garage slot or specific 'Mech and be done, it didn't require constant purchases. Maybe if they find a really good balance of casual access and IAP... but given their failure to read the consumer base, I'm not betting on that. I don't know the NetEase games to know their track record.

Then the massive. The draw of Diablo has been the tight gameplay and character design. That would be hard enough to transfer to mobile, but adding all of the issues inherent with large groups of players and I'm just not seeing it happen. Especially since so many of the other mobile games I've looked for to do this gate multiplayer behind a lot of grinding before you even get there and that why I want a mobile Diablo-esque game is to play with one or two specific people. I just think the chances of a clunky mess are too high.

Here's the problem with free = grind. The way freemium gets you to crack you wallet is by gating LOTS of rewards behind TONS of grind, often more grind than any human can reasonably do. So even disregarding the huge likelihood that you'll get some dumpster-tier pile of unplayable excrement for actual gameplay, I simply don't see a F2P ARPG being remotely enjoyable to play and actually profitable from microtransactions at the same time. This is precisely the problem which Destiny 2 contended with when the Eververse store was initally put in. The reward rate for getting the cosmetics from play was so low, it was simply impossible for even a hardcore player to get enough resources to get all the cool rewards. The resulting hue and cry from the community caused Bungie to revert the model to something achievable by a human, at which point cash purchases have more or less dropped off a cliff.

[GloatingSwine]

I'm not against mobile Diablo conceptually. And I've actually heard some positive feedback from people who tried it on the floor, with the main complaint being "too easy". That's concerning to me since it's the same problem D3 had at launch (followed by a massive difficulty spike at Inferno to drive the RMAH).

None of the feedback you can get on how this game plays right now is meaningful.

Firstly none of the paywalls that are going to exist in the final version between the player and the kind of experience being demoed are present for the demo. And secondly because the sense of progression that is the fundamental reason for playing a game like this will, in the final version, be inextricably linked to its monetisation model. So anyone who plays the game without the monetisation present is not going to be able to meaningfully describe the real end user experience (an increasing problem with AAA games of all stripes, even when the publishers don't sneak the microtransactions in a few weeks after launch so none of the reviews can mention them).

[Psyren]

None of the feedback you can get on how this game plays right now is meaningful.

*snip*

Well, sort of. I think a partial picture is still better than nothing. If the basic gameplay of moving, aiming abilities and dodging affixes is bad, then nothing you mentioned is going to save it. All the stuff you mentioned can absolutely sink the game, no arguments here, but we can at least evaluate the basic gameplay in this new medium.

[Kadesh]

PTR Headsup that are essentially 'we know we done ****ed up here is a little something to stop you playing PoE, because we' re giving you big damage numbers
- QoL upgrades: +5 Stash Tabs, Primals show up with Red Beam, Red Outline, and Red Pentagram on field, Stash and minimal, Keystones are now stored on mats, Paragon Points can't be changed mid rift
- Season 16: non stackable RoRG effect, free random primal when you complete first level 70 grift.
- Sets:
-- LoN: 500% Buff per Ancient
-- big damage sets for most class sets apart from Necromancer sets.

I might push for a LoN melee Curse necromancer (Requiem Cereplate definitely needs to give Cannibalize as a bonus rune also)

[ShneekeyTheLost]

You know... I just realized that D:I was an even bigger blunder than I had originally realized.

Stop and think for a moment. D3 is available... on the Switch. Which... drumroll please... IS MOBILE! And is more ergonomically suited to gaming than a phone using a touch interface, because the controls are to each side of the screen so your hands aren't obscuring the playing area.

So D:I is almost literally an inferior port of a game they have already released for a system they already support, and one that most of the fanbase who care about mobile gaming already possess.

[Psyren]

We just got the promotional Diablo Switch as a Christmas present for each other. Planning to jump into the new Grandeur Season with it, which supposedly gives a passive RRoG effect (i.e. freeing up a ring slot for a number of builds, and potentially enabling a couple of brand new ones.)

I'm prefacing with that because I wanted to make the point that I don't think saying "they have Switch Diablo, so Phone Diablo shouldn't exist" makes sense. There are a number of places I won't bring my Switch that I will bring my phone - places like work, bars, public transportation, or the DMV. And in terms of raw install base, there are almost certainly more people with phones, even higher end ones that could run a game like Immortal, than there are folks with Switches - particularly if you go outside of the US and Japan markets. If they design Immortal properly, these could end up being places where knocking out a quick bounty or rift could make sense and scratch that itch when I'm not able to partake in a more dedicated gaming session, much like firing up a quick match in Hearthstone, including an AI match against an adventure or dungeon run boss.

My problem isn't that Phone Diablo exists - I don't think it's a bad idea, if they can get the gameplay to feel at least somewhat like the real thing. My main problem has been the disregard towards folks who DO want more PC Diablo. Had they teased D4 or even just another D3 expansion alongside Immortal, I would've been totally on board.

As for our first foray into Console Diablo - yeah, it's all right. we jumped in at Expert Difficulty and while we've already died a couple of times, we're grokking the controls fairly well and the new "dodge roll" ability feels responsive, though it's pretty useless if monsters box you in.

[GloatingSwine]

My problem isn't that Phone Diablo exists - I don't think it's a bad idea, if they can get the gameplay to feel at least somewhat like the real thing. My main problem has been the disregard towards folks who DO want more PC Diablo. Had they teased D4 or even just another D3 expansion alongside Immortal, I would've been totally on board.

My problem isn't that phone Diablo exists, my problem is that phone Diablo is cast iron guaranteed to be an exploitative lootbox driven trashpile which exists to prey on compulsive gamblers because that's what mobile games are like, and what Netease games are like.

[Psyren]

My problem isn't that phone Diablo exists, my problem is that phone Diablo is cast iron guaranteed to be an exploitative lootbox driven trashpile which exists to prey on compulsive gamblers because that's what mobile games are like, and what Netease games are like.

Which is why it hinges on the gameplay as I said. If it's not fun to play without spending a dime, then it's going to fail hard.

Using Hearthstone as an example, the Dungeon Run and Witch Hunt modes don't require any cash at all, and you can get hours of fun out of those. Casual play and several of the tavern brawls can be done F2P as well.

If they build the core loop around the monetization - which, unfortunately, they've done before with the RMAH - then they will get similarly bad results.

[GloatingSwine]

Which is why it hinges on the gameplay as I said. If it's not fun to play without spending a dime, then it's going to fail hard.

Ethically and critically yes.

Commercially probably not.

These games aren't designed to be fun to play, they're designed to provide a compulsive experience through the same triggers as gambling (anticipation of reward in a randomised environment), so they can extract money from problem gamblers.

Netease's existing phone Diablo, Endless of God, even has an automatic mode so you don't even have to play the gameplay.

[Psyren]

Ethically and critically yes.

Commercially probably not.

Here's the thing though - just because something is a commercial success doesn't mean they won't be willing to retool it for critical success too if they drop the ball. We saw that happen with D3 itself, which sold more than enough copies at launch that they could have gotten away (fiscally) with doing nothing, but they still revamped the gameplay loop via Loot 2.0. We saw the same with games like No Man's Sky and Destiny 2 (eventually...) and it looks like we're about to see the same with Fallout 76.

These games aren't designed to be fun to play, they're designed to provide a compulsive experience through the same triggers as gambling (anticipation of reward in a randomised environment), so they can extract money from problem gamblers.

I agree with you: lootboxes are gambling and should be regulated as such. I don't think their very existence robs a game of fun - Overwatch and Hearthstone disprove that - and futhermore we don't even know if DI will have them yet. There's a lot of potential for downside here, but that's all it is right now, potential.

Netease's existing phone Diablo, Endless of God, even has an automatic mode so you don't even have to play the gameplay.

Putting aside that no Diablo title has been free of automatic play, I heard nothing about that mode being in DI from Blizzcon myself. Even if it shows up, I'd have no intention of using it - though I do have Progress Quest on my phone

[GloatingSwine]

Here's the thing though - just because something is a commercial success doesn't mean they won't be willing to retool it for critical success too if they drop the ball. We saw that happen with D3 itself, which sold more than enough copies at launch that they could have gotten away (fiscally) with doing nothing, but they still revamped the gameplay loop via Loot 2.0. We saw the same with games like No Man's Sky and Destiny 2 (eventually...) and it looks like we're about to see the same with Fallout 76.

I'm not so sure.

Remember that this is not a Blizzard game, it's a Netease game. I do not think the Chinese mobile market's equivalent of EA is going to care about the critical perceptions of western media.

Also, Blizzard are not what you think they are. Not any more. It's increasingly clear that it's Activision calling the shots, and they want more releases and more cost cutting. That'll mean less support for already released products.

(And whilst you think Destiny 2 has course corrected, remember that Activision are not happy with the numbers for Forsaken and are planning to monetise the current players harder)

[Olinser]

Here's the thing though - just because something is a commercial success doesn't mean they won't be willing to retool it for critical success too if they drop the ball. We saw that happen with D3 itself, which sold more than enough copies at launch that they could have gotten away (fiscally) with doing nothing, but they still revamped the gameplay loop via Loot 2.0. We saw the same with games like No Man's Sky and Destiny 2 (eventually...) and it looks like we're about to see the same with Fallout 76.



I agree with you: lootboxes are gambling and should be regulated as such. I don't think their very existence robs a game of fun - Overwatch and Hearthstone disprove that - and futhermore we don't even know if DI will have them yet. There's a lot of potential for downside here, but that's all it is right now, potential.



Putting aside that no Diablo title has been free of automatic play, I heard nothing about that mode being in DI from Blizzcon myself. Even if it shows up, I'd have no intention of using it - though I do have Progress Quest on my phone

Lootboxes for cosmetic rewards is fine.

ANY item or drop that actually affects actual gameplay being attainable only from lootboxes it completely unacceptable.

[Psyren]

I'm not so sure.

Remember that this is not a Blizzard game, it's a Netease game. I do not think the Chinese mobile market's equivalent of EA is going to care about the critical perceptions of western media.

Also, Blizzard are not what you think they are. Not any more. It's increasingly clear that it's Activision calling the shots, and they want more releases and more cost cutting. That'll mean less support for already released products.

(And whilst you think Destiny 2 has course corrected, remember that Activision are not happy with the numbers for Forsaken and are planning to monetise the current players harder)

I can't stop you from being a cynic, I can only speak for myself and what I intend to do - which is judge the finished product (harshly, if need be.)

Lootboxes for cosmetic rewards is fine.

ANY item or drop that actually affects actual gameplay being attainable only from lootboxes it completely unacceptable.

Warframe has randomized mod packs - lootboxes with gameplay items in them, in other words - and nobody considers it exploitative. I don't believe in blanket rules, rather context is everything.