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

[Computer991]

Oh I wish there was a mobile internet cafe that came with me whever I go.

It's called a cellphone and PDAnet

I get 15 MBPS Wherever I go.

[Dnicee]

http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/diablo3complaint


signed 

[Phil]

Naive and bitchy. Next time wait 2 weeks before buying a game and you wont have issues.

But if you could learn, you'd have learnt that lesson from WoW or SWTOR. Or maybe any EA game, almost all of which have game breaking bugs on release.

[NightRain]

Naive and bitchy. Next time wait 2 weeks before buying a game and you wont have issues.

But if you could learn, you'd have learnt that lesson from WoW or SWTOR. Or maybe any EA game, almost all of which have game breaking bugs on release.

You have to wait a month after every game release nowadays... every game is released at worst 50% finished and rest of the things are added in few months later via DLC. Like Battlestation Pacific does not have any Carrier vs Carrier battles because it has been added in as a DLC (A huge disappointment)

[Dnicee]

Naive and bitchy. Next time wait 2 weeks before buying a game and you wont have issues.

But if you could learn, you'd have learnt that lesson from WoW or SWTOR. Or maybe any EA game, almost all of which have game breaking bugs on release.

Oh really phil, when I pay 60 euros for a game 2 weeks after release I expect to be able to play it. Also because blizzard said the problem was fixed when I bought it. So take your navie and bitchy comment somewhere else.

Btw its not more then right to have high expectations when it comes to blizzard.

I dont even know what SWTOR is and I did not play WOW.

[Dnicee]

But I guess we could all do as you and roll over on your back and say. "Hey, its fine if you cant play the game one two weeks after release!"

[spinn72]

Ok so now I've played the game.

I'm sorry, but I can't support a game where the "real challenge" is supposed to come AFTER finishing all the content once. It's just a horribly flawed model. Look at games like Final Fantasy 10, horribly challenging the whole way through, and when you finish, if you want, there are bosses so hard, you need to gain 80-90 levels to even consider taking them on. ORIGINAL CONTENT. A CHALLENGE ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I've played through with a Monk supported by a Wizard, and neither of us have even died once. Throughout the entire game. Not even once. My monk managed to buy 2 +35 vit daggers early on in act 1 and from then on it wasn't even close.

Loot is pretty much one of the only similar features. Even then, it doesn't introduce anything that we haven't seen before, which is both a good thing and a bad thing, considering the horrifically long development time. I still couldn't quite shake why they went in a different direction from a gothic standpoint, and the game feels and plays a LOT like a PVM version of a LoL/HoN or DOTA clone, it even looks like one.

Don't even get me started on that my little pony bullshit.

[Unkn0wn]

Naive and bitchy. Next time wait 2 weeks before buying a game and you wont have issues.

But if you could learn, you'd have learnt that lesson from WoW or SWTOR. Or maybe any EA game, almost all of which have game breaking bugs on release.

In the case of Diablo it's not so much about game breaking bugs as it is about poor design to be honest. They pretty much got rid of eveything that made Diablo Diablo. I've concluded that D3 is officially the most disappointing sequel I have ever played. I gave it a shot, I really did, I even liked it at first, on the first playthrough, I have over 60+ hours of gameplay logged now, I wanted to love it, get addicted to it, but it just didn't end up feeling as great as D2 (LOD) did.

Most of the people I talk to who were also huge D2 fans agree, barely any of them still play. (Acti)Blizzard has ruined the franchise. (But has made millions regardless, since they sold so many copies on just the name alone, and some truly lame reviews that give it like 9.5 or 9) Not to make they'll make tons more on the Real Money Auction House, which is a complete disgrace .

There's still hope though, companies like Valve and various indie ones show the gaming industry is not ALL about milking the consumer

I've played through with a Monk supported by a Wizard, and neither of us have even died once. Throughout the entire game. Not even once. My monk managed to buy 2 +35 vit daggers early on in act 1 and from then on it wasn't even close.

To be fair, while normal is piss-easy, the game did become more challenging in NM and Hell. I didn't die once on my monk in Normal, but NM and Hell gave me a good fight occasionally. (Mainly just because of a 'hard' mob attribute combo like waller/arcane/blabla)

Inferno is just hands down retarded though, multiplying all monster HP and Damage x100 doesn't make the game even more 'challenging', it just makes it retarded. You'd think after 8+ years of development they'd manage to come up with something a little more innovative in terms of 'difficulty'.

I for one am looking forward to Path of the Exile though, may even check out Torchlight 2. Both games look amazing and will no doubt give me a much better bang for my buck (PoE is going to be free even lol and T2 is going to be 20 bucks) than Diablo does. They don't try to reinvent the wheel either, but both build on what has made the Diablo franchise so amazing, rather than trying something completely different in terms of core mechanics.

[AmPM]

Oh really phil, when I pay 60 euros for a game 2 weeks after release I expect to be able to play it. Also because blizzard said the problem was fixed when I bought it. So take your navie and bitchy comment somewhere else.

Btw its not more then right to have high expectations when it comes to blizzard.

I dont even know what SWTOR is and I did not play WOW.

I bought my copy release day, about 5pm. Never had a single problem connecting when the servers aren't down for a patch.

On the topic of difficulty...Diablo 1 and 2 were always easy as hell on Normal/Nightmare. Hell got a little harder but was easy enough to clear. This is the same, if you want the same level of challenge from D2 play on Hell. If you want to play something harder play Inferno. I can comfortably solo run Act 1, and parts of Act 2 on Inferno, with my Barbarian. People need to stop bringing crap gear and builds to fights in Inferno.

I was a much bigger fan of D1 over D2 though.

Path of Exile is ok, the combat is annoyingly slow until you get way up in the levels though, and it's no more challenging sadly. Lots of options for character growth, but only 1-2 good builds per character class. Guess what, it's also online only! OMG what evils!

[Unkn0wn]

The American servers are a lot more stable than the European ones FYI.

 

If you want to play something harder play Inferno. I can comfortably solo run Act 1, and parts of Act 2 on Inferno, with my Barbarian. People need to stop bringing crap gear and builds to fights in Inferno.

Problem is, lvl 60+ items (600+ dps) hardly drop on inferno act 1, and act 2 is a HUGE brick wall compared to Act 1, especially for melee. For some reason even the basic monsters hit much much harder than they do in Act 1. This means you have to farm Act 1... for gold... if you want better gear to stand a chance in Act 2. You're pretty much forced to use the AH, giant joke.

[AmPM]

Not really, you can get through Act 2 with low DPS if you want. Just need to stack a ton of armor, resists and HP and make sure to play defensive.

However, as I said, if you want the same difficulty as Hell in the other games, play on Hell. Inferno is a step beyond and by no means is it for everyone. Blizzard released some stats the other day, 1.9% of players are on Inferno.

[Unkn0wn]

However, as I said, if you want the same difficulty as Hell in the other games, play on Hell. Inferno is a step beyond and by no means is it for everyone. Blizzard released some stats the other day, 1.9% of players are on Inferno.

Well. it's still the 'endgame', the best place to farm and the only place to actually get 'endgame' gear, provided you don't just want to farm gold.

They should have just made inferno an 'extra' instead of a full-fledged difficulty level that is completely skewing the D3 economy and experience imo.

[AmPM]

Just because something is there doesn't mean you need to play it. You can stop on Hell, and gear for Hell.

Hell is too damned easy so I like Inferno. I am gearing for Inferno, and I play the AH as necessary to get the pieces I need. SO I have 3 games to play, the game about killing stuff, the game about my gear, and the game on how to get gear.

I love the AH, so much better than using forums for trading and sales.

[DarkSoldierX]

Just because something is there doesn't mean you need to play it. You can stop on Hell, and gear for Hell.

Hell is too damned easy so I like Inferno. I am gearing for Inferno, and I play the AH as necessary to get the pieces I need. SO I have 3 games to play, the game about killing stuff, the game about my gear, and the game on how to get gear.

I love the AH, so much better than using forums for trading and sales.

If you stop at hell then you pretty much have nothing else to get better at. You'd be stuck at so-so loot for your level and you wouldnt be progressing very much gear wise. Sticking to hell as a endgame seems like a shitty choice. I am still about a act away from inferno but from what everyone else says it is a bit bland in gameplay and I will be gimped a bit because I am a barb.

[Unkn0wn]

Exactly, they made inferno the only real 'endgame', so stopping at hell is pretty much like telling people to stop a game at 75 procent completion.

Inferno is a perfect example of a terrible design decision, either it needs to be the endgame and do-able by a majority of players or it needs to be an 'extra insane difficulty level' (with for example just better dropchances instead of actual better loot) while hell is reinstated as the actual endgame. You can't have it both ways really, people will want to complete the game, reach 'endgame' status.

[AmPM]

Exactly, they made inferno the only real 'endgame', so stopping at hell is pretty much like telling people to stop a game at 75 procent completion.

Inferno is a perfect example of a terrible design decision, either it needs to be the endgame and do-able by a majority of players or it needs to be an 'extra insane difficulty level' (with for example just better dropchances instead of actual better loot) while hell is reinstated as the actual endgame. You can't have it both ways really, people will want to complete the game, reach 'endgame' status.

Why should it be easy? Its not that hard, im running it with a dps barb with 2h. I can nearly 1 shot any mob in Act 1 and 2 hit most things in act 2. The part that really changes are the tactics and speed.

I play a Barb, and my Barb rocks. I should be clearing Act 2 next week.

*EDIT*

Ok, so now that I am not posting from my phone. I fail to understand how anything can be rewarding or even considered an "end game" when everyone and their incompetent friend can do it. Take WoW. No content in that game is hard enough to keep the majority of people out of it. It's like EIRR and it's constantly being dumbed down. What's the point in even playing at that point.

I feel that Inferno is actually a bit too easy in Act 1.

[I2ay]

it needs to be the endgame and do-able by a majority of players

You are the reason WoW took a nose dive to shitville after BC, please never talk about game design again. Not everyone should be able to do everything. Its the HARDEST difficulty for a reason, not everyone is suppose to be able to beat the hardest difficulties of games. Lets just make everything easy enough so everyone can do it, fuck people who are going to put a lot of time into it and want it to be hard none the less. They SHOULD have content meant for hardcore players, and it SHOULD be too hard for the majority of people. If you want to try Inferno, which is the hardest difficulty for a reason, expect to die, don't complain that its too hard.

[Unkn0wn]

I play a Barb, and my Barb rocks. I should be clearing Act 2 next week.

I doubt it, unless you'll be farming gold all week. Also, skipping special mobs doesn't count, anyone can clear inferno that way. Also, I fail to see what is fun in getting 2 - 3 shotted constantly, kudos if you find that fun, but I'd think gamers had higher standards in 2012. Having to kite monsters in D3 inferno as melee because you can't tank for more than a few seconds is NOT fun, it's fucking boring.

You are the reason WoW took a nose dive to shitville

I almost stopped reading your post when you compared a Diablo game design to Wow. Please never talk about diablo game design again. Heck, they ruined Diablo by moving it closer to Wow, the 'dps determines everything' completely wrecked itemization.  Also, you clearly didn't even read my post. I never implied inferno currently is 'too hard' per se, just because it is do-able by the majority of players, doesn't mean it's going to be easy. You can make something incredibly hard, take large amounts of skill (this isn't the case for inferno or D3 in general mind you) and really good items, that doesn't necessarily mean it's not do-able by most players.  (It just means it may take a long time before it is do-able) The problem with inferno is that it's broken, melee classes hit a brick wall in act 2 and are almost excluded from progressing, this leaves only the ranged heroes, who even with the best gear in the game still die in a couple of hits. (Which is RETARDED, there's no challenge in having everything kill you super fast, nor is it particularly fun to die that way.)

But hey, I have absolutely no experience in game/mod design, unlike you  

Unlike you I've actually played inferno, you're probably defending it while being entirely clueless, like the majority of 'inferno fanboys'

Learn to read before you try to flame someone next time.

[I2ay]

I compared game design in terms of difficulty, not in gameplay mechanics. There was a point in BC where only a select few guilds could actually down Illidan, those were the hardcore guilds that put a LOT of time into it. If there was no stupid hard inferno, what are the people who put a stupid lot of time into Diablo 3 suppose to do? Continue chilling in Hell? I hear replaying something thats easy to begin with for gear that makes it easier is a lot of fun...I'm saying there should be something to caters to hardcore players. Something that is HARD for even the Hardcore group. While its still POSSIBLE for everyone, which inferno is, they will most likely give up pretty quickly. Theres nothing wrong with a difficulty that most people won't actually be able to beat, if anything its a good thing.

[Unkn0wn]

I compared game design in terms of difficulty, not in gameplay mechanics. There was a point in BC where only a select few guilds could actually down Illidan, those were the hardcore guilds that put a LOT of time into it. If there was no stupid hard inferno, what are the people who put a stupid lot of time into Diablo 3 suppose to do? Continue chilling in Hell? I hear replaying something thats easy to begin with for gear that makes it easier is a lot of fun...I'm saying there should be something to caters to hardcore players. Something that is HARD for even the Hardcore group. While its still POSSIBLE for everyone, which inferno is, they will most likely give up pretty quickly. Theres nothing wrong with a difficulty that most people won't actually be able to beat, if anything its a good thing.

Did you even play Diablo 2? Because if you did you wouldn't be talking this nonsense. Diablo 2 LOD Hell wasn't incredibly hard, with a good skill/stat build, some skill and 'good enough' items it was very do-able, i.e the majority of the players progressed to it eventually. Are you saying the hardcore crowd had nothing to do after clearing hell? That's just nonsense, you do realise the reason diablo 3 is such a massive box office hit is because of D2 LOD, right? Yet somehow we are to believe you, over statistical proof of its success and HUGE re-playability. Wow players trying to Wow-ify diablo is exactly what ruined it, this is a good example of that.  Having to cater to some imaginary (or at least very insignificant) hardcore player gripe with D2... D2 item finding was SUPER addictive, it was coined 'item fever' for a reason. The fact that this aspect of the game was more or less wrecked by Blizzard is a huge reason why D3 will never have the longevity D2 had.

Also, in regards to added content, again they could have just thrown a few more super duper hard 'secret' levels into the mix, that would have been much more preferably over completely wrecking the diablo 3 endgame the way they did. Not to mention, again, that you know, getting 1 - 3 hit killed by every mob and having to deal with retarded 'mob combos' (like invulnerable minions, vortex, frozen, molten) doesn't qualify as 'challenging' difficulty.