Ten Years Later, Lessons From Diablo III's Auction House Disaster Have Not Been Remembered

gamespot.com:

There's no disputing that, after the decade-plus long wait for it, Diablo III was not the game so many had had hoped for when it launched 10 years ago. Aside from numerous launch-day woes highlighting its reliance on a persistent online connection--no offline mode was available--Diablo III suffered from a critical balance problem. In a game where the progression of loot is critical to its enjoyment, it was hampered by a grand idea: What if players could sell in-game items between each other, even for real-world money?

Diablo III's Auction House seemed like an interesting idea. Loot that you gathered through traditional play could be put up for sale in-game, letting you trade for better, more character-specific items or just allowing you to make real money for the hours you've spent hacking away at demons. But the problems with this approach didn't take long to surface. For one, Diablo III's loot system was unsatisfying. You got lots of it, with items flooding out of the bodies of slain foes, but most of the time it was either of low quality or not useful for your chosen class. Compounding this frustration was the ever-present temptation of the Auction House--if I couldn't get the crossbow I wanted, why not just buy it? And if I can buy it, why play at all?

You need a javascript enabled browser to watch videos.

Want us to remember this setting for all your devices?

Sign up or Sign in now!

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: Diablo 3 Is Perfect For The Switch

Diablo, and action role-playing games of the same ilk, are all structured to elicit one reaction for its players: a near-insatiable urge to continue getting better and better loot. It's the singular goal that