Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Liberator on March 19, 2012, 04:08:22 am

Title: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on March 19, 2012, 04:08:22 am
I don't know how much I can say, other than I am in the beta.  However, I can tell you unequivocly, if you like nothing else, blizz has popped for the best VAs in the business(One of the main NPCs(so far) is The Shepherd and Lord Balmung is slinging magic around).
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: TrashMan on March 19, 2012, 07:36:27 am
Does it have paladins?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on March 19, 2012, 08:12:39 am
There isn't, or if there is, it hasn't been revealed.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: TrashMan on March 19, 2012, 08:15:17 am
So..
you got a witch Doctor (which  is a copy/paste of hte troll shaman from warcraft)
you got the demon hunter (copy/paste of a night elf)
Barbarian (the only class from D2 to return)
Wizard (yay)

Am I missing something?

:(   I want my pally. I loved my pally.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on March 19, 2012, 08:18:00 am
There's also the Monk. Not sure what he's like.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Patriot on March 19, 2012, 01:04:52 pm
what, no necromancer? no assassin, no amazon, no anything besides the barbarian from D2?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on March 19, 2012, 01:05:46 pm
what, no necromancer? no assassin, no amazon, no anything besides the barbarian from D2?

Most of the classes have spiritual successors. They didn't want to bring the Necromancer back because they felt it was too perfectly optimized.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on March 19, 2012, 01:07:39 pm
Many elements from D2's classes have been separated and mixed into the new classes. The Demon Hunter, for example, is more or less a mix of the Assassin and the Amazon.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on March 19, 2012, 01:36:46 pm
After everything they've done to their other franchises, my opinion can be summed up as :doubt:
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on March 19, 2012, 01:51:02 pm
I actually like what they've done with Diablo 3.  I think it's the only series Blizzard hasn't ****ed up yet.

Yes, the gameplay has been "simplified" but it's more like it's been streamlined.  You don't get to pick your stats or your skill progression, but considering that you had little choice in stats in D2 (i.e. there is definitively a RIGHT and a WRONG build) and the skill progression in D2 forced you to be stuck with the same group of skills for a long time, the change to a variety of interchangeable abilities is actually rather fresh.  Even the shift to weapon-damage-determines-skill-damage makes a lot of sense from a balancing standpoint.  All-in-all, the improvements outweigh the increase in simplicity.

The graphics, while "simple", are crisp and run well on any modern machine.  The texture work is, as always, top-notch and the art direction is perfect.  Yeah, it looks "cartoonish" from a certain point of view, but only if the cartoon is a grimdark gritfest wherein everybody dies by being ripped apart from the inside by parasitic worms.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on March 19, 2012, 02:52:57 pm
When I last played the beta (several months ago), caster classes like the Wizard and Witch Doctor facerolled everything with superior high-damage crowd control spells and nobody ever got close enough to my Wizard to cause any damage at all.  My Barbarian and Demon Hunter were a lot less awesome, although my Monk did some great damage for a melee guy.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on March 19, 2012, 03:19:58 pm
It's a little different now, the barbarian particularly is bordering on ludicrous on the "softer" monsters, literally hitting them so hard that they fly apart in little chunks.

Something to remember about the difficulty settings, Blizz has said that they INTEND for normal mode to be a less challenging play mode.  It compensates for the other three being progressively more insane than the last.  I saw video from Blizzcon last year with one of the internal QA guys saying it would be virtual suicide to attempt even hard mode alone, nevermind Hell or Inferno mode.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on March 19, 2012, 04:52:39 pm
Yeah, the beta from when it started to where it's at now is a remarkable difference.  Blizzard really pulled their act together this time.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Fury on April 24, 2012, 04:41:49 am
I'm surprised there has been no comments on this topic considering Diablo 3 beta ran last weekend. Did anybody play it? I didn't but I'm curious how it was.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: TrashMan on April 24, 2012, 05:43:14 am
Looking at the old Diablo III screenies, I find the art direction there better. Blizzard North, ye shall be missed.

This seemed way cool:

(http://www.diablowiki.net/images/b/bb/D3-early-bone-screenshot2.jpg)

(from http://www.diablowiki.net/Diablo_III:_Blizzard_North_version)
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Gloriano on April 24, 2012, 03:41:18 pm
Tried the weekend beta, i think the game is quite fun trough i hate that you have to be logged in battlenet to able to play the singleplayer mode but then again the game is designed towards more to Co-Op and seems like the when ever there is maintance you can't play the game.

made a Demon hunter and Barbarian, both are quite good DH is quite powerful ranged damage dealer and barbarian is awesome close combat damage dealer
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Scotty on April 24, 2012, 04:45:05 pm
Tried the weekend beta, i think the game is quite fun trough i hate that you have to be logged in battlenet to able to play the singleplayer mode but then again the game is designed towards more to Co-Op and seems like the when ever there is maintance you can't play the game.

made a Demon hunter and Barbarian, both are quite good DH is quite powerful ranged damage dealer and barbarian is awesome close combat damage dealer

I think this has more to do with it being a beta than it does with it being required for single player on release.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on April 24, 2012, 04:54:21 pm
I'm pretty sure it was confirmed long ago that you'll need to be logged on even to play SP.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on April 24, 2012, 05:02:44 pm
Nope, blizz has stated that an internet connection will be required to play as even the single player games will be played on battle.net, with Rob Pardo even going to far as to answer a question about being able to play on a plane with the response, "I want to play Diablo 3 on my laptop in a plane, but, well, there are other games to play for times like that."

I think that is the most galling and arrogant things I've ever heard a developer saw in response to a player's concern about some aspect of a game they are working on.  It's insulting to the players and shows an awful disconnect from your customers that I'm afraid is becoming more and more prevalent at Blizz.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Gloriano on April 26, 2012, 09:44:02 am
Nope, blizz has stated that an internet connection will be required to play as even the single player games will be played on battle.net, with Rob Pardo even going to far as to answer a question about being able to play on a plane with the response, "I want to play Diablo 3 on my laptop in a plane, but, well, there are other games to play for times like that."

I think that is the most galling and arrogant things I've ever heard a developer saw in response to a player's concern about some aspect of a game they are working on.  It's insulting to the players and shows an awful disconnect from your customers that I'm afraid is becoming more and more prevalent at Blizz.

It's all about their Battlenet, they want to have it everywhere even when you play the single player, so you can stay connected with friends and being social etc..
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on April 26, 2012, 09:50:07 am
Obligatory but-if-I-play-games-it's-to-remain-hours-in-front-of-my-screen-not-to-be-social-I-hate-social

But in all honesty ? Don't give a ****, the computer I'll play it with is connected to internet 99% of the time anyway, aside from connection drops.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on April 26, 2012, 02:15:11 pm
Yeah, but the solution I would have preferred is just to lock SP characters out of MP.  It seems like it'd be easier and much more...elegant.

Then again this is modern game design, elegance seems to be a dying art.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on April 26, 2012, 02:33:42 pm
I doubt I'll be buying this always-online MMO-light at the $59.99 price point, especially since I saw the Torchlight 2 trailer on Steam which looks to be just like Diablo 3 but $40 cheaper.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on April 26, 2012, 04:59:05 pm
Meh, I got it for free...sorta.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 05, 2012, 06:15:59 pm
Go go Diablo 3 real money auction house where players can sell items for real hard $$$  to other players and Blizzard takes a fee for every transaction.

I won't be buying a game that blatantly monetizes gameplay. Period.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mefustae on May 06, 2012, 05:25:18 am
Go go Diablo 3 real money auction house where players can sell items for real hard $$$  to other players and Blizzard takes a fee for every transaction.

I won't be buying a game that blatantly monetizes gameplay. Period.

Welcome to every MMO from the past few years.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: The E on May 06, 2012, 05:43:44 am
Hell, if anything, the fact that it is possible to do this legally, as opposed to having to resort to mechanisms that bypass in-game economies is a good sign.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on May 14, 2012, 04:53:32 pm
So with the release imminent, who has already bought this or will end up buying it?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on May 14, 2012, 05:00:15 pm
Doubt I will, to be honest.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: BloodEagle on May 15, 2012, 04:15:47 pm
I won't buy this.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 15, 2012, 04:20:26 pm
I'm kind of getting it for free, since my brother bought a year of WoW, but doesn't want Diablo 3.

Not sure I'd go out and buy it if this wasn't the case, at least not yet, I don't much like the idea of having to wait several minutes to log into an online system just to play the single player game.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: LordPomposity on May 15, 2012, 04:51:23 pm
Naw.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on May 15, 2012, 06:15:57 pm
A guy I talked to said Diablo 3 was fun when the servers were up, and that his roommate couldn't even get the damn thing to install.  I'm definitely passing.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 15, 2012, 07:38:40 pm
Go go Diablo 3 real money auction house where players can sell items for real hard $$$  to other players and Blizzard takes a fee for every transaction.

I won't be buying a game that blatantly monetizes gameplay. Period.

Welcome to every MMO from the past few years.

You are quite mistaken I'm afraid. We are not talking about illegal/shady Ebay sales that can get your account banned...
Nope, in Diablo 3... it is the actual developer of the game offering and promoting "legal/official" item and gold sales for real $$$ -  while taking a cut for themselves for every transaction.

That is definitely something entirely new and entirely different... and entirely disgusting.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on May 15, 2012, 07:41:41 pm
So basically you're okay with it as long as it's not done by the developers, just everyone else.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 15, 2012, 07:50:32 pm
So basically you're okay with it as long as it's not done by the developers, just everyone else.

Yeah yeah so funny... so when did you stop beating your wife?  For the record, of course I am rather not "ok" with either... however...

... is the difference between shady ebay deals that most players shy away from due to fear of being hacked (by the goldsellers) or having their account banned (by the developers) ...  and an officially sanctioned real money/item/gold transfer system that basically turns the whole thing from a "game" into some sort of wierd casino really not apparent to you?

We are talking about an entirely different level of bull*hit here.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Scotty on May 15, 2012, 07:55:23 pm
I... what?

So, Blizzard removing the impetus to use shady Ebay sales and account bannings by making it a (optional) part of the game turns it into a wierd casino?  All they did was take it from the back rooms to a place they can actually, you know, make money off of it.  And keep players from getting cheated.  And keep their accounts from being banned for out of game trading.

I'm sorry, what's the bad part about this again?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 15, 2012, 07:57:32 pm
I... what?

So, Blizzard removing the impetus to use shady Ebay sales and account bannings by making it a (optional) part of the game turns it into a wierd casino?  All they did was take it from the back rooms to a place they can actually, you know, make money off of it.  And keep players from getting cheated.  And keep their accounts from being banned for out of game trading.

I'm sorry, what's the bad part about this again?

The implications for gameplay.

Also, as far as removing goldselling from the game there are much better systems, see Eve or GW2.
Those are controversial too... but they actually remove the motivation for farming items/gold to sell it for real $$$. Blizzard on the other hand... this is the hilarious part, promotes it. LOL.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Polpolion on May 15, 2012, 07:58:47 pm
Quote
All they did was take it from the back rooms to a place they can actually, you know, make money off of it.

This is what's wrong with it. They neutered the leveling system to nudge you into buying better items. I'd rather play games designed by people that enjoy making games, not by producers that want to get rich at the expense of the community.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Scotty on May 15, 2012, 07:59:55 pm
Oh, you mean the parts of the game that people already do?  You know, the parts that until now got them banned and they did it anyway?  The implications for gameplay that have already been realized for the better part of a decade?

Still not seeing the downsides.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 15, 2012, 08:08:00 pm
Oh, you mean the parts of the game that people already do?  You know, the parts that until now got them banned and they did it anyway?  The implications for gameplay that have already been realized for the better part of a decade?

Still not seeing the downsides.

So basically your argument goes along the lines of "theft happens", let's "legalize" theft for profit?
Do you really want to argue that the fact that "(illegal) real money transfers happen" is in any way or form a reason or justification for officialy promoting "real money transfers" and turning RMT into an integral part of the game?


For me it's simple: I don't gamble. And I will not buy or play so called "games" that incorporate real $$$ into gameplay. Voting with my wallet has never been that easy.


People were already joking that WoW often felt like a 2nd job.... ;) I guess that is what Blizzard is into nowadays.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Scotty on May 15, 2012, 08:18:28 pm
Ah, I see.  You've decided to qualify an entire industry (although I do use that word loosely) as theft because you don't like and/or understand it.  Clearly, this means Blizzard is stupid for wanting to be able to actually get something out of something that goes on whether they do this or not.

EDIT: I also really don't get how you're equating "Hey, this exists" with "You cannot play without using this feature".  It's optional.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Polpolion on May 15, 2012, 08:22:42 pm
Oh, you mean the parts of the game that people already do?  You know, the parts that until now got them banned and they did it anyway?  The implications for gameplay that have already been realized for the better part of a decade?

Still not seeing the downsides.

the hell are you smoking? I just told you. There is no skill tree.  It is a skill stick. They took out character creation and added more items because they want you to buy them. If people want to spend more of their own money on extra crap in games that's fine and dandy, but when developers start cutting basic features to coral you into shoveling extra money into their pockets that's when I stop playing those games altogether.

and yes, character generation is an essential feature of an RPG. The fact that you don't think it is demonstrates why I'm mad because it means Blizzard can get away with this ****.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Mikes on May 15, 2012, 08:25:02 pm
Ah, I see.  You've decided to qualify an entire industry (although I do use that word loosely) as theft because you don't like and/or understand it.  Clearly, this means Blizzard is stupid for wanting to be able to actually get something out of something that goes on whether they do this or not.

No. Theft/crimes in general was merely used as an example for the flawed logic in your argument: You proposed that the fact that illegal activities (gold selling/real money transfers in this case) happen... supposedly meant that there would be nothing wrong with legalizing them, promoting them... and profiting from them. (And sorry... but rarely do I  hear arguments more stupid than that.)

Of course "theft" as such, has nothing to do with companies who make games, even exploitive ones. Don't try to put words in my mouth that I neither said nor meant.


And nope, Blizzard isn't stupid. When exploiting your customers clearly works, then there is no business reason not to do it.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: BloodEagle on May 15, 2012, 08:58:40 pm
illegal

You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

Not unless I missed something major.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Scotty on May 15, 2012, 09:06:12 pm
Your argument still makes very little sense.  It has nothing to do with legal/illegal activities.  Trading outside of the game has never been "illegal" in the traditional meaning of the word, merely against the in-game rules.  This trading persists despite the implementation of penalties for such trading.  This trading is not an insignificant amount of money.  This trading would persist regardless of rules against it in the new game as evidenced by every game with item trading between players ever.

Seriously, the only changes to come out of this is that Blizzard makes money off of it, and players don't get banned for it. 
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 15, 2012, 09:15:59 pm
To be honest, the onward selling of goods isn't too much of a problem for me, since I have no interest in it and would not use the site, but I genuinely don't see it as all that different to something like the Sims 3 'store', where you pay money for post-release items and goods. I don't use that either, but as long as it is not required to pay extra, it's not really a problem.

In truth, I remember Diablo 2 threw out so many magic weapons by the late levels that I didn't have space to store the interesting ones, so why someone would want to go buy more is beyond me.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on May 17, 2012, 01:55:02 am
Oh, you mean the parts of the game that people already do?  You know, the parts that until now got them banned and they did it anyway?  The implications for gameplay that have already been realized for the better part of a decade?

Still not seeing the downsides.

the hell are you smoking? I just told you. There is no skill tree.  It is a skill stick. They took out character creation and added more items because they want you to buy them. If people want to spend more of their own money on extra crap in games that's fine and dandy, but when developers start cutting basic features to coral you into shoveling extra money into their pockets that's when I stop playing those games altogether.

and yes, character generation is an essential feature of an RPG. The fact that you don't think it is demonstrates why I'm mad because it means Blizzard can get away with this ****.
Umm, this is Diablo, there was NEVER character creation where you spent an hour crafting your perfect digital persona.  Also, I don't understand what part of the real money AH is like a casino.  It gives people with less time than money the option of having Inferno ready gear the same as people with more time than money that can grind it out.  The only thing even remotely "casinoish" is the random way loot drops and that's been standard in RPGs as long as there have been RPGs, if you don't like it, tough noogies.

The AH system exists in Diablo in the first place to combat cheating by figuring out how to do Duplicate items and virtually defeats gold farmers trying to sell their ****.  Blizzard is like the Soviets, they don't take a dump without a plan.  I can guarantee you this was WAY more thought out than you seem to think it was.  Also, I don't know about you, but I've never heard of an auction where the company processing the auction of goods doesnt' take a cut.

I also don't see what you mean about a talent stick.  There are a huge variety of talents that cater to a variety of play styles.  Yes you can only have 6 active skills available at once, but that's all you really need anyway.  I never played D2 multi, but I've heard about running around and juggling a dozen skills to be considered viable, and that just screams "gamey" to me and not fun at all.

From the way you talk, it sounds like you haven't tried it or at least watched someone playing it for more than 5 minutes.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: mxlm on May 17, 2012, 02:56:59 am
This is what's wrong with it. They neutered the leveling system to nudge you into buying better items. I'd rather play games designed by people that enjoy making games, not by producers that want to get rich at the expense of the community.
If "neutered" means "it's no longer possible to permanently **** your character" then yes, that's true*. If that's not what neutered means then no, that's not true at all.

I hadn't realized how much I liked D3's skill system until I gained my first level in the Torchlight II beta. The glacially slow, incremental gains from DII and its clones are deadly dull in comparison with D3's loadout system.

*Except not really. They abandoned D2's system because it sucked, not to nudge you into buying items.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: TrashMan on May 17, 2012, 03:21:45 am
you know what I find funny?

That the Metacritic score for Diablo III is lover than ME3.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Gloriano on May 17, 2012, 04:18:15 am
Diablo 3 is such a fun game, even trough it's basically same as diablo 2 but with better graphics and slightly diffrent story
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Polpolion on May 17, 2012, 01:01:25 pm
From the way you talk, it sounds like you haven't tried it or at least watched someone playing it for more than 5 minutes.

Funny you should say this, because when I posted I didn't have Diablo 3 and had no intention of buying it. But then my brother bought me a copy. Guess what? My fears were correct. It's babby's first diablo. I'm willing to say that it's a fun game, but seriously, I was hoping for a little more depth because the skill stick is totally stupid. If you disagree then we'll have to agree to disagree because I have completely different expectations for a Diablo game and I'm not going to change them just because people don't want to have to pick their own skills and attributes as they level up. And don't get me started on this all online all the time bull****. All in all I'm glad I wasn't the one that paid the $60 for it, but I'm also glad I'll have something to do for the next few days.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Unknown Target on May 17, 2012, 01:14:19 pm
you know what I find funny?

That the Metacritic score for Diablo III is lover than ME3.

Truth:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: QuantumDelta on May 17, 2012, 03:49:00 pm
Polpolion; the skill system will grow on you, as well the being online all the time (well.. if you have any friends :P)
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 17, 2012, 04:03:34 pm
From an article on the online character saving feature..

Quote
While your "character" progress is saved, all the maps, mobs, side quests, and dungeons reset every time you load and not only that but their locations change (they are server generated too). This means that if you are disconnected in the middle of a dungeon, not only can you not resume and finish, but you may not even find the dungeon again as it can instead be replaced with a merchant house or who knows what else. Only quest related dungeons are consistently placed on the map (albeit in varying locations) but what lies inside also resets with the rest of the map so you'll be starting on the first floor yet again.

I find that extremely worrying, because if these things are generated at server level, then the server is not only a form of DRM, but a noose around the players neck making them reliant on the Blizzard servers always being available, I can pull out Diablo 2 and play it now, I wonder if the same will be true of Diablo 3 in a decades' time?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Polpolion on May 17, 2012, 04:18:17 pm
You can imagine how pissed my brother was when he got home yesterday expecting to play his hundred dollar collector's edition but couldn't because the servers were down. If you think I'm mad about what Diablo 3 is you clearly have never run across either of my older sibliings. :p
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on May 17, 2012, 05:01:34 pm
Quote
I find that extremely worrying, because if these things are generated at server level, then the server is not only a form of DRM, but a noose around the players neck making them reliant on the Blizzard servers always being available, I can pull out Diablo 2 and play it now, I wonder if the same will be true of Diablo 3 in a decades' time?
Same argument goes for Steam as a whole.  Also, the original Diablo servers still work today, 15½ years after release.


A quick little review of Diablo 3:

Collector's Edition: Overall, Blizzard probably makes more profit off of a regular copy of the game than the Collector's Edition.  It's not perfect, but it's still one of the best CEs I've seen in a long time.  ★★★★★.

Polish: The launch was temporarily disastrous, but was largely fixed on the launch day (albeit 20 hours into the day).  There are a couple rare (but severe) bugs, but beyond that the game is very well-presented and free of noticeable issues.  Blizzard-quality release (both good and bad), as always.  ★★★★.

Gameplay: Lack of character customization is not so much of a downgrade but rather a sidegrade.  I can't fault the game nor praise it for its choice here.  Diablo 2's character creation caused you to have a single build which would be difficult to change from (and a single set of correct stats for whichever build you picked), and Diablo 3 obviously avoids this issue.  However, the lack of being able to choose the order in which you learn abilities can be aggravating at times.  Beyond that, the combat is simplistic but gets more complicated when the difficulty levels go up, and has a real challenge to it in Nightmare and beyond.  The act of killing is intensely satisfying for many reasons, and it's overall a very fun game to play, even though it's a very classic, been-there formula.  ★★★★.

Sound and Visuals: The game looks like a moving painting.  When stuff happens, it's clear and doesn't get in the way of the gameplay, yet it looks very good.  There is a lot of blood, gore, and explosions, as expected of a Diablo game.  The fidelity of the art and technical prowess of the game are not top-of-the-line, but the art design is excellent overall.  The sound effects are crisp, meaty, and highly varied, overall exuding quality.  The music is also pretty good, easily one of the better tracks Blizzard has made.  ★★★★★.

Content: If you explore everything, talk to everyone, and listen to all the lore, this game has a respectable length to it.  If you set out to do everything, you probably won't finish in one day.  In a group of friends who seek to see everything, the normal difficulty alone will be a 20-30 hour experience.  The later difficulties are longer.  Beyond that, every class has as many skills as their Diablo 2 counterparts, but the rune-enhanced versions of those skills bring the variety much higher than the previous game (different artwork for runed skills, too).  There are fewer items than LoD, but more than vanilla Diablo 2, though each armor piece now has 16 tiers which go all the way up through the last difficulty level.  There is enough item content via random drops, crafting, sets and legendaries, gems, etc. that the game will last a long time for any interested player.  Almost every area of the game is randomized as well, containing random events, dungeons, and layouts.  You will not see every possibility on one playthrough, by any means.  ★★★★★.

Story: Fleshed out way more than previous Diablo games, but still fairly cheesy/badly-written.  The voice acting is good, but the lines are not.  Still, I have to chalk it up as something of an improvement.  The cinematics are wonderful, though.  ★★★.

Online: Bad launch aside, the Battle.net service could use some improvements.  I won't list them here, but suffice it to say that it needs some work.  This is especially troubling considering that this is an online-only game.  It's usually not laggy, though, so that's good.  The Real-Money Auction House is fairly disturbing, but I can't fairly judge it until I see it in action next week.  It could end up being beneficial for the title, rather than a detractor.  Who knows?  ★★★.

DRM: Online-only.  This is advertised reasonably well, but ought to have a larger warning on the box/website/etc.  There are reasons for doing this, but more reasons against doing it.  ★★.


For this type of game (Co-op Action RPG), the score weights are as follows: Collector's Edition - 0.2, Polish - 1, Gameplay - 2, Sound and Visuals - 1, Content - 1.5, Story - 1, Online - 1.5, DRM - 1.

Overall Rating: ★★★★
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 17, 2012, 05:13:04 pm
Actually, most Steam games would continue to work perfectly well without Steam so long as just the login server is functioning. It's content-dependent servers, such as the ones run by Ubisoft, and now Blizzard that require far more investment and server-power are the ones that worry me.

For example, as long as the system accepts my password, I could play Skyrim, Supreme Commander etc, but I could not play Anno 2070 if their own private servers went down, because my data is stored there, rather than on my system. If that data goes, then the game loses about 40% of its functionality.

That's where my concern lay, not the question of whether simple multi-player servers are working, but ones that rely instead on storing and generating user-data in an external location.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Ace on May 17, 2012, 05:18:39 pm
Overall agree, but... well I'd knock the art down one star a bit mostly for this one big issue that's been cropping up:
Generic Blizzard design and some enemies that art direction wise make no sense. WoW is the worst culprit for this being an issue. Oddly enough Starcraft 2 avoided much of this. (minus the retroactive Draenei-Protoss similarities due to their ripping off Protoss art direction for the space goats...)

For instance
Spoiler:
Magdha doesn't work as a Diablo character design. She looks like something out of WoW. The fairy demon shoulderpads just don't work and it's hard to take her seriously as the head of an evil witch's coven.

The second bad one is:
Spoiler:
Azmodan, who simply looks like a Mannoroth re-hash.

Oddly enough Diablo's own design works:
Spoiler:
Since it incorporates elements of the other evils from the game and has a few quasi-feminine features from Leah
.

Some of the boss-fights being more or less WoW raids was a bit disappointing too. There's a few moments that simply reeked of "yup it's a Blizzard product" instead of outright always screaming that "no this is Diablo and not every other blizzard game from the past 10 years."
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on May 17, 2012, 06:24:09 pm
I would give the art, if it were a separate score, a 4/5, yes.  But the score included sound and music as well.

Also the part I meant to quote on my OP was the part of "what if XYZ went down?"  Steam going down would have a similar concern as battle.net going down.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on May 17, 2012, 06:35:59 pm
Also the part I meant to quote on my OP was the part of "what if XYZ went down?"  Steam going down would have a similar concern as battle.net going down.

No, not really. In fact, not at all. Steam can go down after you've logged in and your library will run, battle.net going down means your game craps out.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: mxlm on May 17, 2012, 06:49:25 pm
Yeah, Steam going down isn't an immediate issue. D3's servers crying means you can't play. Not exactly the same

I have completely different expectations for a Diablo game and I'm not going to change them just because people don't want to have to pick their own skills and attributes as they level up.
http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2012/5/3/diablo-3s-ability-system.html
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on May 17, 2012, 07:35:47 pm
Also the part I meant to quote on my OP was the part of "what if XYZ went down?"  Steam going down would have a similar concern as battle.net going down.

No, not really. In fact, not at all. Steam can go down after you've logged in and your library will run, battle.net going down means your game craps out.

The main difference is the immediacy.  Without Steam, a lot of games would eventually cease to be useful or attainable legally, while bnet going down would have an immediate effect.  Both are online systems that act as DRM for games, whose absence would cause major problems.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 17, 2012, 08:11:31 pm
The point is that Steam itself does not store or generate game-related data on its own server. If Steam itself failed then it would actually be a simple procedure to allow authorised games to skip the DRM. The risk I see with Diablo 3 is that it appears some of the data is generated externally. In other words, even if the DRM were removed, the game would still be reliant on the functionality and availability of those servers.

That, to me, is introducing an Achilles Heel into the system, where the player is connected by a digital umbilical cord to the company, always relying on their continued existence. Whilst I freely accept there's little danger of Blizzard going under any time soon, I don't feel comfortable with that kind of knife being held to my throat.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on May 17, 2012, 08:16:04 pm
The main difference is the immediacy.

As Flipside has continuously pointed out, this is again not true. If b.net is down, there is no way to play D3 at all. Period. End of discussion. You can't even crack it.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on May 18, 2012, 12:17:36 pm
You can't even crack it.
You're new to the internet, aren't you ?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on May 18, 2012, 01:09:53 pm
Hey someone tell me if this game puts a huge amount of effort into its story but completely wastes all the interesting tonal and plot hooks from the end of the last game, then concludes on a ridiculous 'happy ending' with choral music and zero catharsis or satisfaction, tia
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on May 18, 2012, 01:45:19 pm
Well, I don't spoil much, but given that it's been at least 2 decades since the worldstone was shattered, the plot hooks from that time have probably died off or retired to old(er) age.  Cain has a 20 something neice of sorts to give you an idea of how long it's been.  I will be frank however and say that the "mysteries" are not that mysterious and it's probably because I've been reading a lot of blizzard stuff.  A lot of it is unbelievably obvious with events that I haven't even seen yet having been telegraphed much earlier.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on May 18, 2012, 01:48:47 pm
There was some interesting intimation towards the end of LoD that Tyrael had destroyed the Worldstone for his own purposes, possibly demonic corruption/whatever (Blizzard loves corrupting ****). Does that go anywhere?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dragon on May 18, 2012, 02:00:24 pm
You can't even crack it.
You're new to the internet, aren't you ?

See:
The risk I see with Diablo 3 is that it appears some of the data is generated externally. In other words, even if the DRM were removed, the game would still be reliant on the functionality and availability of those servers.
It'd be like trying to crack an MMO to run offline in a singleplayer mode. Sure, you can circumvent the DRM, but you'd also need to establish a server with stolen/reverse engineered program that would generate this missing data.
Steam does no such thing and is, at it's core, a glorified shortcut that additionally checks if the game is legit. I bought Red Faction on Steam and had to download a patched .exe to get it to run properly on Vista. This, on the other hand, prevented me from using Steam to run it. The game worked perfectly (well, as perfectly as a 15 years old game can run on Vista anyway) though.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on May 18, 2012, 02:05:58 pm
At least one UbiSoft game (AC2 I believe) used similar DRM, and iirc it was still cracked pretty rapidly.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: The E on May 18, 2012, 02:26:36 pm
Ubisofts' implementation depended on getting regular pings from the ubi servers, this implementation basically removes part of the game data from the client.

Writing a dummy server that responded to pings was probably easy, writing a server that can do what the battle.net server apparently does will probably be more difficult.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on May 18, 2012, 02:37:34 pm
Are you sure? I'm pretty sure there were actually elements of game content that had to be downloaded when you reached them. That's how the technique was discussed at the time on RPS.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 18, 2012, 03:04:59 pm
I have Anno 2070 which is one of the Ubisoft games that uses the new system. If it cannot find the servers then you cannot access your previous saved-data and the software is coded to disable certain functions in the menu. Also, whilst the original campaign (a very short 6-mission thing) is available with the game, you cannot play any other missions (called World Missions iirc) without being logged into the Ubisoft servers, and if you lose connection whilst playing the game, then a load of things get disabled mid-game, such as being able to store goods in your main 'base' because that info is stored online.

Edit : As I understand it, losing connection in Diablo 3 is even more catastrophic because of the procedural generation, it means that, whilst the achievements your player has may be preserved, the game you were playing will have actually changed by the time you get back in.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Turambar on May 18, 2012, 03:07:03 pm
Wow.  I no longer have any desire to pick up Anno 2070.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 18, 2012, 03:08:55 pm
To be honest, had I known, I wouldn't have bought it, I love the Anno series, but this really was pushing things a bit too far. It's why I don't go near Ubisoft games any more.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: mxlm on May 21, 2012, 03:17:23 am
At least one UbiSoft game (AC2 I believe) used similar DRM, and iirc it was still cracked pretty rapidly.

D3's client:server relationship is essentially the same as WoW's, and that's very much not the system UbiDRM uses. There are private WoW servers but A: they're not actually the same as playing on Blizzard's servers because the operators had to guess at some of the things going on server-side and B: Blizzard has successfully sued the pants off one outfit, and more will likely follow.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on May 21, 2012, 08:28:55 am
I've heard vague talk that DRM issues aside this game is sort of shallow and unengaging, please abuse/disabuse me of this notion
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on May 21, 2012, 08:41:30 am
I've heard similar reports, from what I understand this one wasn't developed by Blizzard North, who were the people who created Diablo 1 & 2, I've heard a few people say that it feels more like a 'generic Blizzard game' rather than a natural progression to the series, and that some of the enemies are too 'Warcrafty' to sit comfortably in the Diablo universe.

That said, I haven't actually played the game yet, so that is based entirely on hearsay.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Polpolion on May 21, 2012, 08:52:03 am
I've heard vague talk that DRM issues aside this game is sort of shallow and unengaging, please abuse/disabuse me of this notion

This is pretty much true. The combat is mildly enjoyable but, unsurprisingly, the story isn't all that impressive. And without character creation it's really impossible to **** up in this game. The weapons really aren't all that interesting either, but that can probably be fixed in patches/expansion packs like D2. Pretty much since I've actually played the game I've felt that it was a fun little game. A good diversion for a couple weekends, but not worth the $60 and hardly a worthy Diablo title. But take my opinion with a grain of salt, some people seem to enjoy the new skill system.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Spoon on May 21, 2012, 09:51:23 am
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii/user-reviews
While most of them seem to be hateful responses to blizzards apparant incompetence at preparing the servers for launch day.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Ghostavo on May 21, 2012, 10:13:59 am
I've heard similar reports, from what I understand this one wasn't developed by Blizzard North, who were the people who created Diablo 1 & 2, I've heard a few people say that it feels more like a 'generic Blizzard game' rather than a natural progression to the series, and that some of the enemies are too 'Warcrafty' to sit comfortably in the Diablo universe.

That said, I haven't actually played the game yet, so that is based entirely on hearsay.

The people who developed Diablo 2 have long since abandoned Blizzard.

The last game I've heard they made was the train wreck that is Hellgate: London.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Ravenholme on May 21, 2012, 10:55:44 am
I've heard similar reports, from what I understand this one wasn't developed by Blizzard North, who were the people who created Diablo 1 & 2, I've heard a few people say that it feels more like a 'generic Blizzard game' rather than a natural progression to the series, and that some of the enemies are too 'Warcrafty' to sit comfortably in the Diablo universe.

That said, I haven't actually played the game yet, so that is based entirely on hearsay.

The people who developed Diablo 2 have long since abandoned Blizzard.

The last game I've heard they made was the train wreck that is Hellgate: London.

And Torchlight, I believe. They went different ways.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on May 21, 2012, 03:57:56 pm
I've heard similar reports, from what I understand this one wasn't developed by Blizzard North, who were the people who created Diablo 1 & 2, I've heard a few people say that it feels more like a 'generic Blizzard game' rather than a natural progression to the series, and that some of the enemies are too 'Warcrafty' to sit comfortably in the Diablo universe.

That said, I haven't actually played the game yet, so that is based entirely on hearsay.

The people who developed Diablo 2 have long since abandoned Blizzard.

The last game I've heard they made was the train wreck that is Hellgate: London.

the people who created D2 are coming out with a new diablo-style game called Torchlight 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVcsv3XWIAg
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: mxlm on May 21, 2012, 09:06:34 pm
I've heard vague talk that DRM issues aside this game is sort of shallow and unengaging, please abuse/disabuse me of this notion

D3's skill system is the best thing to happen to the genre since Diablo.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on May 21, 2012, 09:15:47 pm
It is actually very interesting.  Skills do damage as a percentage of the equipped weapon's damage so they all scale pretty well and the fact that they're all automatically unlocked prevents a player from permanently gimping their character through an accidental skill choice.  The rune system is very interesting allowing the same skill to have different passive effects applied to it, all altering the skill in a different way.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Ace on May 21, 2012, 10:00:53 pm
The percentage of weapon damage is probably the best mechanic they did. If Skyrim balanced magic and shouts using that it'd be very interesting. (even if using spells in both hands you'd have an "equipped" staff or weapon that gives base damage) It'd solve a lot of scaling issues in that game.

I also like how the rune system can drastically change abilities and the overall idea of having fewer but more flexible skills.

Unfortunately when it comes to things like art direction, plot, and enemies it's the same generic Blizzard game we've had since Warcraft III. I've already complained about some of the character design, and the point still stands.

It's odd in that the game mechanics, combat, etc. I like but the overall art direction and setting is such a rehash that I can't find myself to want to play after going through it once.

The odd choices on randomization also don't help, with overland areas having "chunks" randomized but not to the full extent to Diablo 2. There's also some set pieces that they don't randomize that probably should have been
Spoiler:
the areas leading up to Leoric for instance should probably be more randomized
.

Also by not really including bosses/quest objectives in sectioned off non-randomized chunks of the map you lose all of the fun that made certain things like the Butcher work in Diablo. The new event setup is nice, but it feels like they're few and far between when every level should probably have 1-3 events.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: FlamingCobra on June 01, 2012, 06:15:27 pm
I actually like what they've done with Diablo 3.  I think it's the only series Blizzard hasn't ****ed up yet.

Yes, the gameplay has been "simplified" but it's more like it's been streamlined.  You don't get to pick your stats or your skill progression, but considering that you had little choice in stats in D2 (i.e. there is definitively a RIGHT and a WRONG build) and the skill progression in D2 forced you to be stuck with the same group of skills for a long time, the change to a variety of interchangeable abilities is actually rather fresh.  Even the shift to weapon-damage-determines-skill-damage makes a lot of sense from a balancing standpoint.  All-in-all, the improvements outweigh the increase in simplicity.

The graphics, while "simple", are crisp and run well on any modern machine.  The texture work is, as always, top-notch and the art direction is perfect.  Yeah, it looks "cartoonish" from a certain point of view, but only if the cartoon is a grimdark gritfest wherein everybody dies by being ripped apart from the inside by parasitic worms.

Explain to me how BLizzard ****ed up starcraft 2
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on June 01, 2012, 06:19:06 pm
Explain to me how BLizzard ****ed up starcraft 2

The campaign story was the laziest piece of **** I have ever seen.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: FlamingCobra on June 01, 2012, 06:37:19 pm
I rather liked it for the most part except the end felt kind of  :doubt:
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on June 01, 2012, 07:11:45 pm
I rather liked it for the most part except the end felt kind of  :doubt:

You are the cancer that is killing storytelling.

I'm being generous here, too.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on June 02, 2012, 08:01:32 am
Played D3 for a while now, and my honest evaluation is, unless you got it as a Freebie, it's not really worth the hassle. The connection problems cause no end of trouble even re-entering a saved game, the server seems to be shut down for updates at least once a day which, if you are halfway through a dungeon, means you really have to hope you can complete it within the 15 minute restart warning.

Basically, whilst the game itself is passable, but nothing special, the online connection thing moves it down a league because the very least I expect from my games is to click 'Resume Game' and have it resume the game, rather than tell me "Error 300008 - Cannot create game".
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Zacam on June 02, 2012, 03:18:53 pm
You are the cancer that is killing storytelling.

I'm being generous here, too.

And I'm being generous with a mild warning. As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: General Battuta on June 02, 2012, 04:05:24 pm
Blizzard is the malignant sarcoma that has disfigured storytelling, are you a tiny cell in its swollen corpus
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Spoon on June 02, 2012, 04:28:17 pm
Blizzard is the malignant sarcoma that has disfigured storytelling, are you a tiny cell in its swollen corpus
  :lol:


I tried the demo version that a friend gave me, and to be honest I was bored to tears with D3.
I completed the game literally with one hand, cause all the input that the game requires of you is left click for walking and right click for killing everything. It's all I did, walk up to mob. Hold right mouse button to fire the same spell at them (and shoot bow/wand if mana was depleted) over and over again. If situation requires it, walk away and kite. Pick up loot. Walk to the next mob. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
The boss was exactly the same **** gameplay wise, but it occasionally required me to shift the fingers from my left hand out of my nose and onto the keyboard to press 1 and 2. I was bored all the way to the end of the demo and was glad that I could uninstall it. Never before have I seen a game which such hype and sales numbers that bored me so much. Afterwards I checked the diablo boss fight on youtube and witnessed that the witchdocter playing it did nothing but shoot his blowpipe at the big fearsome prime evil until it slowly died. SUCH DEEP GAMEPLAY.
I dare say that even a recent call of duty title, singleplayer would be more amusing than this drab.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on June 02, 2012, 07:07:25 pm
Blizzard is the malignant sarcoma that has disfigured storytelling, are you a tiny cell in its swollen corpus

Please don't escalate, I know you're not quite saying what was said previously, but it's close enough to paraphrasing to make moderating it difficult. Consider this a request.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on June 02, 2012, 08:48:28 pm
Blizzard is the malignant sarcoma that has disfigured storytelling, are you a tiny cell in its swollen corpus
  :lol:


I tried the demo version that a friend gave me, and to be honest I was bored to tears with D3.
I completed the game literally with one hand, cause all the input that the game requires of you is left click for walking and right click for killing everything. It's all I did, walk up to mob. Hold right mouse button to fire the same spell at them (and shoot bow/wand if mana was depleted) over and over again. If situation requires it, walk away and kite. Pick up loot. Walk to the next mob. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
The boss was exactly the same **** gameplay wise, but it occasionally required me to shift the fingers from my left hand out of my nose and onto the keyboard to press 1 and 2. I was bored all the way to the end of the demo and was glad that I could uninstall it. Never before have I seen a game which such hype and sales numbers that bored me so much. Afterwards I checked the diablo boss fight on youtube and witnessed that the witchdocter playing it did nothing but shoot his blowpipe at the big fearsome prime evil until it slowly died. SUCH DEEP GAMEPLAY.
I dare say that even a recent call of duty title, singleplayer would be more amusing than this drab.
It's Diablo.  You act like you were expecting T3H B3S73ST G4M3Z EV4R!  It's a dungeon crawler, that's all Diablo ever has been.  The fact that it has as much story in it as it does kind of gives credit to Blizzard.  It's not perfect, I would have changed a lot of things.  But it's a damn fine for being NOTHING MORE THAN A DUNGEON CRAWLER.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: NGTM-1R on June 02, 2012, 08:49:20 pm
As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.

I refer you to Battuta's, and my own, posts regarding the line-by-line objective rather the subjective qualities of SC2's writing over in Wings of Liberty thread, particularly when it's possible to do objective comparison via time invested in various themes and similar things with SC1.

We're a little beyond differences of opinion in this case. There is quantifiable bad stuff in the wings.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Spoon on June 02, 2012, 10:02:13 pm
It's Diablo.  You act like you were expecting T3H B3S73ST G4M3Z EV4R!  It's a dungeon crawler, that's all Diablo ever has been.  The fact that it has as much story in it as it does kind of gives credit to Blizzard.  It's not perfect, I would have changed a lot of things.  But it's a damn fine for being NOTHING MORE THAN A DUNGEON CRAWLER.
I act like I expected at least some degree of *fun* in the game, matey. There are apparantly millions (going by the sales numbers) that find fun in this game. I didn't see it.
I played a lot of ****ing stone soup, that's NOTHING MORE THAN A DUNGEON CRAWLER too. "cept it has very little in the way of graphics. But at least it has amusing gameplay. Something I cannot quite say about D3. 
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: BlueFlames on June 02, 2012, 10:12:14 pm
Also worth noting that saying, "This entire sub-genre has sub-par writing and boring/repetitive gameplay," does not actually serve to mitigate the complaint that a particular entry in that sub-genre has sub-par writing and boring/repetitive gameplay.  You're just damning the rest of the sub-genre, not defending the game you set out to defend.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 02, 2012, 10:21:26 pm
Diablo 3 has a rather large fault in the way of the difficulty curve.

Normal: Completable by a small child.
Nightmare: Reasonably difficult, a decent enough challenge unless you abuse the Auction House (in which case you can breeze through it).
Hell: MUCH harder, will be too hard to finish without the use of the Auction House by the time you're in Act 3.  Some elite packs will kill you over, and over, and over.
Inferno: Dive-bombing straight off of the deep end into nigh-impossible territory.  The majority of elite packs are much harder than the boss fights, and some of them are statistically unkillable (perhaps due to bugs).  In Act 4, most players can die in 1 hit even with 70k+ HP.  Auction House (and I'm talking big money, like 500k per item minimum if you wanna be good) is mandatory past the Skeleton King.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: karajorma on June 02, 2012, 10:40:26 pm
As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.

I refer you to Battuta's, and my own, posts regarding the line-by-line objective rather the subjective qualities of SC2's writing over in Wings of Liberty thread, particularly when it's possible to do objective comparison via time invested in various themes and similar things with SC1.

We're a little beyond differences of opinion in this case. There is quantifiable bad stuff in the wings.

There is however a huge difference in civility between saying someone is wrong and calling them a cancer simply because they happened to like something you didn't.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: LordPomposity on June 02, 2012, 11:12:54 pm
too hard to finish without the use of the Auction House by the time you're in Act 3.
Auction House (and I'm talking big money, like 500k per item minimum if you wanna be good) is mandatory past the Skeleton King.
Begin countdown until somebody who has no idea how the auction house works shows up to imply this is an intentional design feature that is part of some nefarious conspiracy.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: BloodEagle on June 03, 2012, 12:37:59 am
As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.

I refer you to Battuta's, and my own, posts regarding the line-by-line objective rather the subjective qualities of SC2's writing over in Wings of Liberty thread, particularly when it's possible to do objective comparison via time invested in various themes and similar things with SC1.

We're a little beyond differences of opinion in this case. There is quantifiable bad stuff in the wings.

There is however a huge difference in civility between saying someone is wrong and calling them a cancer simply because they happened to like something you didn't.

At least he didn't call him a Virgo.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Zacam on June 03, 2012, 05:41:02 am
As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.

I refer you to Battuta's, and my own, posts regarding the line-by-line objective rather the subjective qualities of SC2's writing over in Wings of Liberty thread, particularly when it's possible to do objective comparison via time invested in various themes and similar things with SC1.

We're a little beyond differences of opinion in this case. There is quantifiable bad stuff in the wings.

And? I don't care about who is RIGHT or who is wrong. I'm saying, make your point in as polite a fashion as possible. Because looking like you are acting like a dick about pointing out when you feel or think somebody is 'WRONG ON TEH INTERNET' doesn't resolve the problem in a meaningful fashion.

Actually, let me just re-phrase that: I don't CARE. Warning issued by an Administrator. Have a nice day.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Ghostavo on June 03, 2012, 08:18:50 am
As stated, differences of opinion are all well and fine, but lets try and keep it civil please.

I refer you to Battuta's, and my own, posts regarding the line-by-line objective rather the subjective qualities of SC2's writing over in Wings of Liberty thread, particularly when it's possible to do objective comparison via time invested in various themes and similar things with SC1.

We're a little beyond differences of opinion in this case. There is quantifiable bad stuff in the wings.

There is however a huge difference in civility between saying someone is wrong and calling them a cancer simply because they happened to like something you didn't.

At least he didn't call him a Virgo.

Someone born between the 23rd of August and the 22nd of September? The scoundrel...
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: X3N0-Life-Form on June 04, 2012, 04:46:36 am
most players can die in 1 hit even with 70k+ HP

Holy profanity-filter! Player hitpoints can raise that high or is it simply a raw unreduced damage-from-monster figure? Or else?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Liberator on June 04, 2012, 07:14:37 am
On inferno difficulty it is indeed possible for player HP to reach that high.  It is also possible for elite level creatures with certain ability combinations to one shot you.  It is deliberately this way, players can pretty well one shot anything anyway, so all this means is that the playing field is level.  This is after 3 playthroughs mind you.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Gloriano on June 05, 2012, 03:18:49 pm
playing as barbarian on inferno is like there is quite a lot bosses since some simple packs can be quite deadly.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: SpardaSon21 on July 06, 2012, 10:17:08 pm
Yes, I'm doing a bit of a necro but it seems safe to finally ask this now that everyone is done arguing (for now, although I may end up resurrecting the argument :nervous:).

My BattleTag is SpardaSon21#1542, and does anyone want to join me for gratuitous monster slaying?
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 07, 2012, 02:36:37 am
I might, if I get my sister to convince me to buy it.


EDIT

Sooo, finally bought it and played it. My impressions :

- Haters gonna hate, I loved the new artistic direction.

- Enjoyed the story, especially the twist at the end of Act III, while I was excepting something like that, I didn't quite expected it to turn out like it did.

- Very much liked the character building with the followers (I only played solo for now), nice addition compared to the storytelling of the previous titles.

- The gameplay is both faithful enough to the Diablo spirit and modern enough compared to older titles. If you don't like spending the game just clicking (I'm looking at you Spoon), what the **** are you even doing in that thread to being with :p

- Difficulty : Normal, as mentioned on top of page, is retardedly easy, which isn't surprising those days. From what I heard though, the other difficulties become very quickly quite a challenge. Will see when I get there.

All in all, already being a Diablo fan, I didn't regret the sixty bucks I sent that way.
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Flipside on July 09, 2012, 10:18:44 pm
To be honest, I did manage to complete the game (not that this is difficult on Normal difficulty), but it suffers from Bioshock syndrome. Now I know the story, I really have no vested interest in playing the whole thing again just to get shinier weapons, especially when those weapons are statistically no better when you take the difficulty into account...
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: Fury on July 09, 2012, 11:49:51 pm
If you don't like spending the game just clicking (I'm looking at you Spoon), what the **** are you even doing in that thread to being with :p
And here I thought you hated click-spam too. :p
Title: Re: Diablo 3
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 10, 2012, 12:55:44 am
I hate weapons that make you click spam in ME3 because it is not Diablo. This is. So it's all good.