Diablo3: what do you think about it?

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[UndeathWrath]

Are you complaining that they set it up the same way they set up Diablo 1 and Diablo 2...? I'm pretty sure they were wildly popular for a reason, why break what isn't broken by making everything open world? Did you even play the first two diablos?

Diablo 2 had open world pvp noob. I never even played it and know that. Right we should still play the same games that were around in 1996 since none of em were "broken." We should still be playing clones of Command and Conquer: Red Alert instead of awesome CoH let alone EIRR. Awesome logic brah oh yeah fuck skyrim why did we even make that when you can play SNES legend of zelda: link to the past haha. (still great game tho)

[AmPM]

TBH, other than updated graphics and options due to those, most older strategy games and rpgs were as good or better than they are currently. Skyrim was ok, but got easy and boring fast. CoH is cool, but Warcraft 2 was amazingly fun. I won't even touch vCoH because it's terrbile.

WoW/SWTOR are so much worse than EQ or DAoC.

I mean we could keep going.

[DarkSoldierX]

You are going to have a hard time in the next few years. Everything is going online required or cloud based.

Doesn't change that the cons seem to far outweigh the pros.

Diablo 2 had open world pvp noob

With the exception of towns, yeah, thats what I remember. Thought I should add that in.

TBH, other than updated graphics and options due to those, most older strategy games and rpgs were as good or better than they are currently. Skyrim was ok, but got easy and boring fast. CoH is cool, but Warcraft 2 was amazingly fun. I won't even touch vCoH because it's terrbile.

WoW/SWTOR are so much worse than EQ or DAoC.

I mean we could keep going.

I think I have to disagree on Wc2 being better then VCoH. But I definitly agree with skyrim getting way too boring way too fast compared to older games. And my god fable became absolutely shit when fable 2 and 3 came out. Somebody ask me how Fable 1 to this day is still funner than those two pieces of shit.

Can't comment on the MMO's because I only played a bit of EQ when I was younger, and I have only a little bit of WoW experience.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Everything is going online required or cloud based.

I am fine with cloud based, or even an internet connection required. But what Diablo 3 did was quite fail to its buyers.

Also D3 is ridiculously short with people beating it ere hours after its launch

We should still be playing clones of Command and Conquer: Red Alert instead of awesome CoH let alone EIRR.

No the comparison to C&C and COH is not right in this context, what it is more like is the fact that C&C red alert IS better then red alert 3.

C&C is better then red alert 4.

Deus ex is better then the new one.

Neverwinter nights 2 and all before it were better then its "spiritual predecessor" Dragon Age.

There are very few 'main stream' companies that haven't made this mistake, often by *revelation* building upon instead of simplifying. The Total War series is a shining example of NOT fucking your games, Rockstars Max Payne 3 was another example, anything of sid myers is generally top of the line. (this bottom section is just to prove im not one of those people who just say a games terrible because its 'new')

[I2ay]

Diablo 2 had "open pvp", but you had to flag yourself for PvP and it almost ALWAYS happened outside of the amazon village. The randomly generated 50 feet beyond the village more or less was the arena of Diablo 2. And why would they change the flow of Diablo 3? People loved the game play of the first two diablos, and after 11 years people aren't looking for some ground breaking new flow to the story of the game.

[Demon767]

omfg i cant be bothered reading 5 pages of you bitches whining like women.

Is Diablo3 like Diablo 2 and 1. That is my question.

[Nug]

Diablo 3 = Diablo 2  (gameplay)

[spinn72]

Oh my god, if anyone says any strategy game is better than Warcraft 2 I might die.

I just went to an op shop the other day and got the battle.net edition for 50 cents, then found a mod that would let me play it in a better resolution... AWWW YEAHHHHHH.

Diablo 3 can wait, bitchez.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Is Diablo3 like Diablo 2 and 1. That is my question.

Its like a very easy diablo 2.

[UndeathWrath]

If vermillion and co. stopped derailing threads...

Anyways I'm skippin on diablo 3 because of its short campaign and lack of significant pvp for my taste. Just going to start dark souls again with my buddy now that theyve made lots of great changes and fixed some multiplayer issues. Incredibly long campaign, stunning visuals, fearsome bosses, great feeling combat, adrenalyne rush of world invasions, etc.

Hell I played it for quite a while and didn't come close to finishing it. My god the catacombs were enormous and extremely challenging at first!

Diablos shiny new appeal will quickly fade...

And the comparison I made was between generations of games, not sequels. Hence why we have squads, cover system, doctrines, etc in CoH that were revolutionary for an rts. Still the highest rated rts of all time.

[spinn72]

If vermillion and co. stopped derailing threads...

Anyways I'm skippin on diablo 3 because of its short campaign and lack of significant pvp for my taste. Just going to start dark souls again with my buddy now that theyve made lots of great changes and fixed some multiple issues. Incredibly long campaign, stunning visuals, fearsome bosses, great feeling combat etc.

Hell I played it for quite a while and didn't come close to finishing it. My god the catacombs were enormous and extremely challenging at first!

Diablos shiny new appeal will quickly fade...

And the comparison I made was between generations of games, not sequels. Hence why we have squads, cover system, doctrines, etc in CoH that were revolutionary for an rts. Still the highest rated rts of all time.

I went back and replayed Demons and Dark Souls a few months ago, I'm telling you, the second time around, they're nowhere near as frustrating because you know what you're doing, they're just really exciting. I played a cleric the first time around, the second time I was a mage type character. If you mix it up and, say, use dex based weapons (or for Dark Souls, Faith based), it's much more enjoyable, it'll feel like a different game.

Anyone heard much about Dragons Dogma? Looks kinda like Amalur.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Anyone heard much about Dragons Dogma? Looks kinda like Amalur.

Amalur's shield implementation really made me sad, and resulted in me not getting it. If i equip a shield i don't want to magically pull it from thin air to hold it in both hands.

Dragons Dogma on the other hand i just played the demo, was a fucking blast, i think its a must get.

[Sachaztan]

"By purchasing a game like Diablo III, you are no longer buying a product, you are buying the right to use a product at the discretion of its owner. It’s the equivalent of leasing a car for an indeterminate period of time, during which the owner can withhold the use of the car at any time without penalty."

[nikomas]

"By purchasing a game like Diablo III, you are no longer buying a product, you are buying the right to use a product at the discretion of its owner. It’s the equivalent of leasing a car for an indeterminate period of time, during which the owner can withhold the use of the car at any time without penalty."

Hear hear, the man speaks the truth!

[Phil]

People that didn't like D1 and D2 really shouldn't be in this thread at all. If you were hoping that D3 would suddenly be a completely different game, then you are delusional.

The campaign is irrelevant in Diablo games, just a way to introduce different areas. In this iteration it is slightly longer than in D2, and everyone who says otherwise doesn't remember how you could beat the game in a couple hours. The story is horrible, as it always was.

Diablo does not have a single player mode. D2 used to have it, SP only characters. You remember those? Probably not since nobody used them. The online thing is not a DRM, but a hacking preventative measure. Anyone who has played D2 knows that hacking is something Blizzard has to fight really really hard in Diablo games. As for the "indeterminate period of time", I am REALLY not worried about BattleNet going down any time soon.

As for it being too easy, it gets harder very quick, just like the previous games.


Anyway...
You are free to dislike the game, but don't make it out to be a bad game. It is a good game for people who wanted a D2 sequel (based on 2 days and 34 levels).

[spinn72]

Amalur's shield implementation really made me sad, and resulted in me not getting it. If i equip a shield i don't want to magically pull it from thin air to hold it in both hands.

Dragons Dogma on the other hand i just played the demo, was a fucking blast, i think its a must get.

Yeah, I played Amalur for about five hours and I'm still waiting for it to get even slightly good.. For a game that was talked up so much, it's damn awful. No interesting loot, levelling is bland and abilities are recycled, and combat is so uninvolved, I might as well not be there..

I know you've got a good taste in games, and if you say Dragons Dogma is good, I'll be getting it .

People that didn't like D1 and D2 really shouldn't be in this thread at all. If you were hoping that D3 would suddenly be a completely different game, then you are delusional.

The campaign is irrelevant in Diablo games, just a way to introduce different areas. In this iteration it is slightly longer than in D2, and everyone who says otherwise doesn't remember how you could beat the game in a couple hours. The story is horrible, as it always was.

Diablo does not have a single player mode. D2 used to have it, SP only characters. You remember those? Probably not since nobody used them. The online thing is not a DRM, but a hacking preventative measure. Anyone who has played D2 knows that hacking is something Blizzard has to fight really really hard in Diablo games. As for the "indeterminate period of time", I am REALLY not worried about BattleNet going down any time soon.

As for it being too easy, it gets harder very quick, just like the previous games.

Have you played Diablo 2 recently? It's awful.. the second you join any server, you're spammed by bots advertising cheap loot and character levelling. You can buy a lvl 99 char for less than $10.. I'm happy they've taken these preventative measures.

And one thing I can't get my head around is these people complaining about Error 33 or whatever it was.. They purchased the game and were complaining that they couldn't play it at 12:01.. is this really a valid reason to give it a 0 score on metacritic?

I'm slowly and slowly becoming more furious and cynical at gamers who think they're entitled to everything. I guess this is what Tank must feel like with us bitching about EIRR progress .

[Sachaztan]

And one thing I can't get my head around is these people complaining about Error 33 or whatever it was.. They purchased the game and were complaining that they couldn't play it at 12:01.. is this really a valid reason to give it a 0 score on metacritic?

I'm slowly and slowly becoming more furious and cynical at gamers who think they're entitled to everything. I guess this is what Tank must feel like with us bitching about EIRR progress .

https://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/05/16/why-online-single-player-games-are-a-bad-idea.aspx

This is the reason why people are giving it a 0.

This game is one step in the wrong direction of drm and anti-hacking.

[spinn72]

This has been happening for years. Remember how you used to always need a CD to play, then patches would be released disabling that protection?

Or even better yet, why are people rating a game 0 that they're probably going to love the hell out of, after only being locked out for 3 hours due to server issues? What does it achieve?

[Spartan_Marine88]

You see, its the fact that you are paying 65$ for a working game, this is what you are promised. And its not working out of the box thats a problem. Sloppy programming combined with companies that have gotten to used to getting the money no matter what has lead to poor service and that is the major issue.

When you get the pre-order numbers you do, its easy to prepare your servers for the amount of people ready to log in, the fact that they were not raised a lot of questions.

And fuck Tank and anyone else when it comes to bitching about people being cynical and complaining. This is the one and only fucking industry where lack of quality and broken product is ALLOWED and accepted to be actively made. There is no quality control, but people seem to think its acceptable for video games and that pisses me off.

In the Auto industry if you make a lemon (broken car from the start) it gets bad reviews and usually recalled and people get something back usually, so why aren't game companies allowed to be a little responsible?

[Sachaztan]

This has been happening for years. Remember how you used to always need a CD to play, then patches would be released disabling that protection?

Or even better yet, why are people rating a game 0 that they're probably going to love the hell out of, after only being locked out for 3 hours due to server issues? What does it achieve?

It's so painfully obvious that I don't understand how you can not see it.

The worse reviews a game gets, the less money it makes.

In the end the companies are supposed to see that releasing broken content eats into their profits so that the next time they make a game it will be seen as more cost-effective to fix it rather than cut corners like last time.

A company will cut as much corners as it thinks it can get away with. A company with a track record like Blizzard can get away with pretty much anything unless the customers bite back.