Really, it's not even released yet, and this "journalist" is already claiming it isn't ready yet. What a hackneyed article.
They're referring to the lack of pvp initially. And they're kind of right...
Yes, but it's blizzard who defines what complete is. As it has been said, they only release something when it's ready. That means that if they were to release the first 5 levels, that would still count as being ready; because they did release it.
Yes, that was a fallacy, but the first part is still true.
A review probably wont be out for a week or two since professional reviewers test at least 90% of the game for the review to be adequate enough - that's unless some companies were given early access to 'private' servers just so they could get a review out on time that we don't know about. Especially since inferno will hold quite a large portion of the game, and its not expected to be cleared for at least a month without using cheesy tactics and glitches.
No doubt some websites and companies will pump out reviews before they complete inferno, but I'd be hesitant to read it since it would technically be missing the fundamental part 'endgame'.
As for ratings? I hate to sounds biased but I'm still expecting 9's and 10's since I believe the game is an perfect example of a game in 2012 should be all about - easily accessible for anyone, replayability will be high, and it will hold a strong community. Unfortunately most die-hard Diablo 1 & 2 fans will be upset without a doubt, but if some of these changes weren't made they may as well have just made a HD version of Diablo 1 & 2.
Yes, but it's blizzard who defines what complete is.
No, and that's the point. The critic defines what complete is. Actually the critic defines pretty much anything within his article. If you're a critic...you're almighty. You may be cruel or you may be merciful. You may be just or you may be tyrannic.
The thing is: we get to be critics ourselves when we criticize a critic's article. We're almighty aswell, so we can just say: that critic is retarded as hell. And that's where his power ends.
D3 is already dead-set in tracks to become a a critical financial hit
A few good and well-considered points there, and thanks for serving the country.
BUT...
Actually, the people who make the game do matter. Is this a two-edged sword? Sure, a totally new team might be much better about taking an honest survey of old mechanics and throwing out stuff that just doesn't work (potion spamming, TP abuse, stupid/redundant min/maxing and the other weakness of non-freespecing). BUT, the old team would DEFINITELY have had higher standards for things like randomized environments, been less forgiving of godawful NPC voice-acting, had a more diverse approach to character and monster art, etc.
And, as far as it being a financial hit - maybe, but not in the way you're intending. A one-time injection of 300 mil is great! But, guess what, WoW even at current slightly faded levels revenues that every ten weeks. Eroding that sub base is really, really stupid business. Funny how the fanbois get worked up on this account, even when the math is incredibly straightforward. WoW is the most profitable entertainment product in thousands of years of human history, and eroding it for a one-time sale is just bizarre.
- It's when you say a single criticizing comment about the game and get called idiot for it, you know the essence of what it's like to be a bigot. Has happened to me many times on this very board. Football fans, atheists and other opinionated folk are no different.
Often enough, it's not what you intend to say, but how a person states it.
I've seen well constructed criticism get away on this site. I've also seen people talk crap, get overly opinionated (both ways), and people insult others even before retaliated. So that might be something to think about, especially the term fanboy. It's become a curious little internet slur, which really adds a great deal to any a discussion and lends so much to a person's validity.
Why would we care about reviews of a game we have been following for 4 years? Like they are going to say something we don't already know? Yea right :-P
watch the movie shallow hal.
no matter what anyone says, if you think something is awsome then its awsome. if you playing what you think is the best game of all time haveing fun doing what you like and someone says the game sucks is that automaticly gonna make the game suck for you, hell no.
i never listen to reviews where people put bricks of texts explaining shit. i have one question did you enjoy it, yes or no , i dont need a 50 paragraph breakdown about if the skill system had this with something else it may have been better i just want to know if it was a fun game.
Some of what he says does make sense. I mean, in the past have had this vague inkling of worry that the game may not live up to the greatness I want it to achieve. There is no fault to be had in that.
There are some facts I don't agree with though:
I’m certain Diablo 3 will have the awesome lore and thrilling cinematics we’ve come to expect from Blizzard, but story isn’t what made Diablo what it is, what kept people playing for a decade.
The story of Diablo has always fascinated me. Since the atmospheric tomes you discovered in D1, to finally encountering an angel in D2, the allure as to why I initially played Diablo was always the draw of the world and its tale. In D3 they've taken it to the next level, really raising the bar how they tell the story of Sanctuary.
Sure, the reason why I keep playing on was the addictive gameplay, but the reason why I'm jumping out of my skin with excitement right now isn't getting to Inferno, or end game item hunting, it's to finally see the ramifications of Tyrael's actions more than a decade ago.
But it’s easy to lose the author’s creative vision, the essence of the work, and while the result may be a great novel in its own right, it may disappoint fans of the original.
He makes it sound so impossible. People have succeeded at this in the past, even in cases where no advice is even at hand. At the very least Blizzard is in developing the game, and there are still some of the people around who saw the previous titles go through development.
We should at least have faith that one of the most beloved franchises in the world is getting worthy attention for a sequel.
Because they’d never made a Diablo game before. They had managed to create a doppelganger of a Diablo game, but there was always something not quite right, and they were scrambling to figure it out at the eleventh hour.
That's a bit unfair. I will admit even I felt annoyed by the incessant delays, but I will say that at least it meant they were dedicated to improve the product. Insinuating that they're in a way too incompetent to fully achieve their task is rather shortsighted. Improving a system tp make the game displays anything but incompetence. The game is also far from a 'doppelganger', in fact, some people have moaned that it's straying from the Diablo philosophy.
On another note, I don't get why people go off on the new designers, especially Jay Wilson. The man has crafted some good games, and he was responsible for two RTS titles that I honestly consider the best RTS games to date, even better than SC. I think D3 has definitely been entrusted in capable hands.
On another note, I don't get why people go off on the new designers, especially Jay Wilson. The man has crafted some good games, and he was responsible for two RTS titles that I honestly consider the best RTS games to date, even better than SC. I think D3 has definitely been entrusted in capable hands.
lol you know one of the lead developers for Diablo 3 made command and conquer 4 , right?
The one game that arguably killed the entire franchise.
I for one, do not think Blizzard recieves preferencial treatment when it comes to reviews. Their games are just pure polish and shinnyness.. even if there are some flaws, the sheer glintyness of the games is enough to give them high scores.
The "Fanboy" in me would be lying if I said I didn't care what Diablo 3 will score on reviews. I want it to get 10s!! I know it wont, but I want it to!
To me the one thing that may hold it back, and cause reviewers to score it 8.5 instead of 9.0 or 9.0 instead of 9.5, or 9.5 instead of 10 (I dont think any serious reviewer will score it less than 8.5) is that PvP didn't make launch. I predict nearly every review ending with a line that reads like this:
"With all of this awesomness, its a shame the game didn't ship with PvP, while you don't find your self missing it due to the huge amount of replayability, insanely difficult end game and vast amount of content to e xplore, you still know that its missing, and it should be there."
And as a result they'll knock of .5 points. Sad really. Cause I think 99% of people would agree: Give me the game 4-5 months faster, you guys work on PvP, we'll be fine over here, waiting
lol you know one of the lead developers for Diablo 3 made command and conquer 4 , right?
The one game that arguably killed the entire franchise.
True, but he also worked on Command and Conquer 3, arguably the best game in the series, or at least on par with the first. Then he also worked on both Battle for Middle Earth 1 and 2 and on C&C Generals. So I'd those four great titles more than balances it out.
And not to mention they also have a designer who worked on Baldur's Gate 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins. This guy knows RPGs.
Throughout its development, critics have pointed out similarities between Diablo 3′s and World of Warcraft’s art style and mechanics. Should this have been a surprise? The game was essentially made by World of Warcraft developers.
The 3 guys you see in the Developer Diary videos? Never touched WoW. The word "essentially" is thrown in so that he has a fall back if some of the other members of the team may have at some point worked on WoW. But the fact is, the creative/engineering vision behind Diablo 3 did not work on WoW.
Re: "Fanboyism"
Many times members of the Blizzard community find articles like this and then point out in very good detail how many things the are simply incorrect factually in the author's writing. The immediate response is always "silly fanboys, drinking the Blizzard Koolaid," but if you took 2 minutes to google, you would see that they are, in fact correct.
The author goes to great lengths to detail the histories of those not working at Blizzard and doesn't even mention the names of the current Diablo development team.
Gamespot will probably give it a 9.0 - 10.0 score. Not that the game doesn't deserve it, but that website is so biased and favors the ones who pay more.
Well in the American culture, our various outlets are biased because in order to receive an early review copy you have to be liked by the company, though this is how it works pretty much everywhere. A review copy is usually a full game copy not a Chapter one beta like we had. So right there is bias, then they get gifts, directions, invites to parties, ect,. ect,.
Then you have to keep in mind this is ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, they hold majority share of games. What business is this? Gaming. If you piss them off you will no longer receive games for a majority of AAA blockbusters coming out. You would blow your arm off if you screwed with them. Your like a taxi driver who's job depends on their relationship with Big Oil.
Can you give a bad score? Yes but it's usually under restriction for instance if you gave a 9-10 score to a game you can put out the review immeidately after release. As part of your contract for accepting a review copy, and accepting all their gifts. Anything below 9 can not be put out till a week or two later.
Any other reviews are probably using the open beta as a review, and you can do that. You have to realize how business works, they are in business to make money. Faster reviews put out means more money, if they were going to give Diablo 3 a 8.5 the editor would come in and take the journalist off to the side and explain to him how making money works and then bump it up to a 9.0 minimum or he can be fired. Take a look inside the magazine next time you have one what's advertised inside? Mostly other games, if a company a HUGE company like ACTIVISION BLIZZARD pulled all their ads from a magazine, that magazine could face some serious issues.
This is why if you want a REAL and HONEST review you have to wait up to one month to receive them or get them from online blog sites as those do not require the heavy money required to do a print and publish job.
I don't really care what reviews are going to say, I tried beta for myself...
I get pissed off when I don't get into betas for MMOs, because I see it as my own "review" or "demo" of the game so I can decide already if I like it or not. Got recently into The Secret World beta and the game sure looks promising, although I think Funcom is gonna rush their MMO again like Age of Conan. Only Guild Wars 2 left -.-
Although I never got into Diablo 3 closed beta, I tried open beta and I had so much fun I decided to order CE straight away!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yes, but it's blizzard who defines what complete is. As it has been said, they only release something when it's ready. That means that if they were to release the first 5 levels, that would still count as being ready; because they did release it.
Yes, that was a fallacy, but the first part is still true.
No doubt some websites and companies will pump out reviews before they complete inferno, but I'd be hesitant to read it since it would technically be missing the fundamental part 'endgame'.
As for ratings? I hate to sounds biased but I'm still expecting 9's and 10's since I believe the game is an perfect example of a game in 2012 should be all about - easily accessible for anyone, replayability will be high, and it will hold a strong community. Unfortunately most die-hard Diablo 1 & 2 fans will be upset without a doubt, but if some of these changes weren't made they may as well have just made a HD version of Diablo 1 & 2.
No, and that's the point. The critic defines what complete is. Actually the critic defines pretty much anything within his article. If you're a critic...you're almighty. You may be cruel or you may be merciful. You may be just or you may be tyrannic.
The thing is: we get to be critics ourselves when we criticize a critic's article. We're almighty aswell, so we can just say: that critic is retarded as hell. And that's where his power ends.
What a douche of a reviewer..
A few good and well-considered points there, and thanks for serving the country.
BUT...
Actually, the people who make the game do matter. Is this a two-edged sword? Sure, a totally new team might be much better about taking an honest survey of old mechanics and throwing out stuff that just doesn't work (potion spamming, TP abuse, stupid/redundant min/maxing and the other weakness of non-freespecing). BUT, the old team would DEFINITELY have had higher standards for things like randomized environments, been less forgiving of godawful NPC voice-acting, had a more diverse approach to character and monster art, etc.
And, as far as it being a financial hit - maybe, but not in the way you're intending. A one-time injection of 300 mil is great! But, guess what, WoW even at current slightly faded levels revenues that every ten weeks. Eroding that sub base is really, really stupid business. Funny how the fanbois get worked up on this account, even when the math is incredibly straightforward. WoW is the most profitable entertainment product in thousands of years of human history, and eroding it for a one-time sale is just bizarre.
I've seen well constructed criticism get away on this site. I've also seen people talk crap, get overly opinionated (both ways), and people insult others even before retaliated. So that might be something to think about, especially the term fanboy. It's become a curious little internet slur, which really adds a great deal to any a discussion and lends so much to a person's validity.
Honestly some of the things this guy says has merit.
no matter what anyone says, if you think something is awsome then its awsome. if you playing what you think is the best game of all time haveing fun doing what you like and someone says the game sucks is that automaticly gonna make the game suck for you, hell no.
i never listen to reviews where people put bricks of texts explaining shit. i have one question did you enjoy it, yes or no , i dont need a 50 paragraph breakdown about if the skill system had this with something else it may have been better i just want to know if it was a fun game.
There are some facts I don't agree with though:
The story of Diablo has always fascinated me. Since the atmospheric tomes you discovered in D1, to finally encountering an angel in D2, the allure as to why I initially played Diablo was always the draw of the world and its tale. In D3 they've taken it to the next level, really raising the bar how they tell the story of Sanctuary.
Sure, the reason why I keep playing on was the addictive gameplay, but the reason why I'm jumping out of my skin with excitement right now isn't getting to Inferno, or end game item hunting, it's to finally see the ramifications of Tyrael's actions more than a decade ago.
He makes it sound so impossible. People have succeeded at this in the past, even in cases where no advice is even at hand. At the very least Blizzard is in developing the game, and there are still some of the people around who saw the previous titles go through development.
We should at least have faith that one of the most beloved franchises in the world is getting worthy attention for a sequel.
That's a bit unfair. I will admit even I felt annoyed by the incessant delays, but I will say that at least it meant they were dedicated to improve the product. Insinuating that they're in a way too incompetent to fully achieve their task is rather shortsighted. Improving a system tp make the game displays anything but incompetence. The game is also far from a 'doppelganger', in fact, some people have moaned that it's straying from the Diablo philosophy.
On another note, I don't get why people go off on the new designers, especially Jay Wilson. The man has crafted some good games, and he was responsible for two RTS titles that I honestly consider the best RTS games to date, even better than SC. I think D3 has definitely been entrusted in capable hands.
lol you know one of the lead developers for Diablo 3 made command and conquer 4 , right?
The one game that arguably killed the entire franchise.
The "Fanboy" in me would be lying if I said I didn't care what Diablo 3 will score on reviews. I want it to get 10s!! I know it wont, but I want it to!
To me the one thing that may hold it back, and cause reviewers to score it 8.5 instead of 9.0 or 9.0 instead of 9.5, or 9.5 instead of 10 (I dont think any serious reviewer will score it less than 8.5) is that PvP didn't make launch. I predict nearly every review ending with a line that reads like this:
"With all of this awesomness, its a shame the game didn't ship with PvP, while you don't find your self missing it due to the huge amount of replayability, insanely difficult end game and vast amount of content to e xplore, you still know that its missing, and it should be there."
And as a result they'll knock of .5 points. Sad really. Cause I think 99% of people would agree: Give me the game 4-5 months faster, you guys work on PvP, we'll be fine over here, waiting
And not to mention they also have a designer who worked on Baldur's Gate 2, Knights of the Old Republic, Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins. This guy knows RPGs.
The 3 guys you see in the Developer Diary videos? Never touched WoW. The word "essentially" is thrown in so that he has a fall back if some of the other members of the team may have at some point worked on WoW. But the fact is, the creative/engineering vision behind Diablo 3 did not work on WoW.
Re: "Fanboyism"
Many times members of the Blizzard community find articles like this and then point out in very good detail how many things the are simply incorrect factually in the author's writing. The immediate response is always "silly fanboys, drinking the Blizzard Koolaid," but if you took 2 minutes to google, you would see that they are, in fact correct.
The author goes to great lengths to detail the histories of those not working at Blizzard and doesn't even mention the names of the current Diablo development team.
Actually, about a dozen went to FSS, not thirty. There's a few other factual errors, as well.
If anything, they will be biased against blizzard because they will want to show how "tough" they are.
http://www.wowhq.com
Then you have to keep in mind this is ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, they hold majority share of games. What business is this? Gaming. If you piss them off you will no longer receive games for a majority of AAA blockbusters coming out. You would blow your arm off if you screwed with them. Your like a taxi driver who's job depends on their relationship with Big Oil.
Can you give a bad score? Yes but it's usually under restriction for instance if you gave a 9-10 score to a game you can put out the review immeidately after release. As part of your contract for accepting a review copy, and accepting all their gifts. Anything below 9 can not be put out till a week or two later.
Any other reviews are probably using the open beta as a review, and you can do that. You have to realize how business works, they are in business to make money. Faster reviews put out means more money, if they were going to give Diablo 3 a 8.5 the editor would come in and take the journalist off to the side and explain to him how making money works and then bump it up to a 9.0 minimum or he can be fired. Take a look inside the magazine next time you have one what's advertised inside? Mostly other games, if a company a HUGE company like ACTIVISION BLIZZARD pulled all their ads from a magazine, that magazine could face some serious issues.
This is why if you want a REAL and HONEST review you have to wait up to one month to receive them or get them from online blog sites as those do not require the heavy money required to do a print and publish job.
I get pissed off when I don't get into betas for MMOs, because I see it as my own "review" or "demo" of the game so I can decide already if I like it or not. Got recently into The Secret World beta and the game sure looks promising, although I think Funcom is gonna rush their MMO again like Age of Conan. Only Guild Wars 2 left -.-
Although I never got into Diablo 3 closed beta, I tried open beta and I had so much fun I decided to order CE straight away!