And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
D3 cut more features then added, so revolutionary i can`t wait.
Do you ever quit with this nonsense?
It's much more fun to rage. See the thread 'does anyone else feel this way'. Another example of why I'll be betting Blizzard wont' be showing us in depth looks anymore.
The problem is not respect, but free respect. It will break the game in hell and inferno, because you'll always respect the skills for every boss, or every hard situations. Respect should be there only for reparing bad builds, but it should not be there for having all skills available to you for free.
By removing skill points, you can only customize by items .The problem is, that I need to find that runs, so i can play the way I want. I would like much more if runes where skills, and not items. Because if I don't get runes, i can't create the build I want. .Personally I don't like that diablo 3 is much more dipending on items, for customizing your build then it was in d2. But i see, that a lot of people like it, so different people different tastes.
I would argue to you, are you going to be switching with every new challenge that comes up? Probably not, so why would you assume every other player will too? When we get to the inferno farming stage, it's going to cost us a lot in time to be constantly switching, and I actually haven't read one player so far that plans on switching all the time. In fact ALL I read are players planning on picking one build and sticking to it. *if* people are so hell bent on switching (which they aren't) then they will just go to town to switch, or pay whatever fine you want slapped on them. It's not going to break the game, in fact it makes the game that much better =D
Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)
Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.
Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.
This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.
Also either you weren't around, or you're just forgetting, but people threw SHIT fits over D2! It was actually more whining then D3 is getting. People saw this strange outside style, and yelled they aren't being faithful to D1. People saw trailers where the hero was outside, in the sun! Omg lighting! The list goes on, on how vastly different D2 was to D1, and how people freaked out because they were afraid of change. D1 was an awesome game, how can you make an almost completely different game Blizzard?! Well, considering the majority of whiners on Dfans site D2 as their prime example of what a game should be, I would say D2 did very well.
And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.
Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)
Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.
Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.
This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.
No, it's meant to cash in on the original's name, otherwise this NEW game as you put it would have been called something new! It is a sequel, thus the number 3 after the title!
I was not around this site when D2 launched, no. But I can safely say that upon playing the D2 beta after playing D1 for many years is that they felt similar to me, despite the many mechanical changes. D3 does not retain that feeling.
You can't safely say that, because that's false. D2 retains almost no mechanical features from D1, if any. IF you had beta tested D2 after playing D1 for years, I'm almost positive you, like a huge part of the populace, would have raged at how different it was. Go play an hour of D1, then D2, then D3 (if you have beta). They might as well be three different games.
It's a sequel only technically. since it's a continuation of the story. Past that, it's completely different. The ONLY things that are the same are as follows; Isometric view, storyline, the barbarian. My whole point being that D3 is so vastly different, it can't be compared to something like God of war 1,2,3 in an argument that it should remain the same.
For me diablo game is not only the art style or lore or sound or atmosfer or gamplay or rpg elements in creating your character, and lvling him. Combination of all this elements maid the diablo game one of the games that I love. If you remove some part of that, you change the game, and that is the main reason that some people that played d2 are against the choices they made. I asure you, if this was some other title, people would love this game, and all would support it. But this is a sequel to diablo game, that doesn't look like diablo game. When making a sequel, the most important thing is to improve the components of all aspects of game, not to remove them, or change them drasticly.
Please re-read my posts as to why this isn't a sequel in the traditional sense, it's a brand new game. If you want to play D2 then go play D2. This isn't D2.5 as have been said, it's D3. It's completely different from the ground up, because it's a *new* game, not an expansion pack.
Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)
Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.
Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.
This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.
No, it's meant to cash in on the original's name, otherwise this NEW game as you put it would have been called something new! It is a sequel, thus the number 3 after the title!
I was not around this site when D2 launched, no. But I can safely say that upon playing the D2 beta after playing D1 for many years is that they felt similar to me, despite the many mechanical changes. D3 does not retain that feeling.
You can't safely say that, because that's false. D2 retains almost no mechanical features from D1, if any. IF you had beta tested D2 after playing D1 for years, I'm almost positive you, like a huge part of the populace, would have raged at how different it was. Go play an hour of D1, then D2, then D3 (if you have beta). They might as well be three different games.
It's a sequel only technically. since it's a continuation of the story. Past that, it's completely different. The ONLY things that are the same are as follows; Isometric view, storyline, the barbarian. My whole point being that D3 is so vastly different, it can't be compared to something like God of war 1,2,3 in an argument that it should remain the same.
Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)
Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.
Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.
This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.
Also either you weren't around, or you're just forgetting, but people threw SHIT fits over D2! It was actually more whining then D3 is getting. People saw this strange outside style, and yelled they aren't being faithful to D1. People saw trailers where the hero was outside, in the sun! Omg lighting! The list goes on, on how vastly different D2 was to D1, and how people freaked out because they were afraid of change. D1 was an awesome game, how can you make an almost completely different game Blizzard?! Well, considering the majority of whiners on Dfans site D2 as their prime example of what a game should be, I would say D2 did very well.
And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.
I hope you all eat your words after they release a single-player version..
Personally? I think that'd be tits to have a single player version, but since ( Blizzards words ) there's no intention of ever making one, for the already 1 million times stated reasons, it's no skin off of my back. It sucks when you can't connect to the internet, I get that. But realize that's a very small minority of people planning on playing D3 at all, and you must sacrifice the few for the many; In this case take out single player, but make the game as a whole much more enjoyable because of the increased security.
The game is not free from hacks, and never will be, but its much harder to make hacks and not to be baned. Also real hacks wont happen until the game is released, and you will not see them on youtube or be available for download on internet, until blizard finds about it, and starts baning.
Oh don't worry I'm not naive enough to believe there will never be hacks. I just advocate for the online only just because of how effective it will be at stalling / stopping hacks and dupes =D
actually, i do take them seriously and i'm sure i have reported about 10x as many bugs as you have. i have also offered some specific balancing issues between the classes as i have experience in the area being a part of S2 Games' hero balancing and patch server pre-testing private group. and also, i am not a "kool-aid drinker" there are many problems with this game which i will be outlining in a large and detailed post once i have completed my run through of the witch doctor, the final class that i have to play before i have experienced the ENTIRETY of the beta (that means exploring every dungeon, killing every mob, using every skill in every room, opening every box, destroying every crate, clicking on everything that can be clicked on and using every skill on every mob type in every situation). one thing i do not do is nitpick about stupid shit like this that doesn't deserve blizzard's attention and time which should be spent elsewhere on far more important matters than giving you the false sense of customization that stat allocation is. that out dated, out moded, cumbersome, and ultimately useless mechanic which adds nothing to the gameplay and should NEVER BE MENTIONED ON THIS FORUM AGAIN.
Yes, your e-peen is humongous, it is so much bigger than mine...
your logic is flawed. kind of like your argument about how if you played offline your experience would not be affected by the dupers who are allowed an avenue through the offline option to ruin the gameplay experience for the rest of us. yes, you would not be affected, but the rest of us would. this is just another example of your me-me-me instant gratification mindset that has driven you to post this lengthy "criticism" of a bunch of shit that you think is wrong but is really just your preference. like how the UI looks. that is a preference and it is one that almost nobody else shares.
Please refrain from personal attacks and putting forth your opinion as fact.
My logic is not flawed. If "I" was allowed to play offline, duping/hacking/cheating would not affect "me". That everyone playing online only means that those things will affect me now, and I have no choice about it. Have no doubt about it, those things will happen.
Yes, what I posted was criticism about what I experienced in my initial run-throughs of the Beta. They are notes that I jotted down as I was playing so that I would not forget them afterwards. That they were issues that I noticed while playing, means that they were issues! Yes, some may be small nitpicks, but the point is I want Diablo III to be as polished a game as I know it can be, thus the list of things that I would like to see altered. I know they all won't, but at least it won't be because I didn't mention them.
all in all, spare us your stupidity and just go back to playing d2. this kind of review is not constructive at all. you just keep saying how things feel "off" (i.e. they don't feel like d2, the game you obviously have played 24/7 for the past 10 years, never touching a single other game that has come out since).
And there you have one of the "Kool-Aid drinkers" I was talking about...
People can have differing opinions to your own and still be right! Wow, who'd a thunk...?
The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one... Also, you know when you make references to Kool-Aid like that you're referencing the Jonestown Massacre, right? That shit was an international tragedy - little children were forced to drink poison. Have some decency, man!
Isn't cutting and pasting "out-of-context" statements fun!
I'm kind of confused - beta atm only lets us get to 13 - but I'm seeing play videos of level 23+
That's because those videos are from people using a fake beta server (emulated). Of course this is 'illegal' and will get you banned if you're caught =D
What?! You mean the online only aspect isn't stopping cheating and hacking! I don't understand...
It's actually doing JUST that. No one has been able to get a character onto the actual beta, let alone items or corrupted files. Thus, hack / dupe free.
I'm kind of confused - beta atm only lets us get to 13 - but I'm seeing play videos of level 23+
That's because those videos are from people using a fake beta server (emulated). Of course this is 'illegal' and will get you banned if you're caught =D
my beta impression is the game is really easy. i know its a beta, but damn. feels like a 5 year old can do it. like their was no feel of it being semi a challenge, kinda like killen the blood raven in d2. its so easy that my first time playing threw with a witch doctor not even one of my zombie dogs died. I also played a monk and had to get used to his 3rd strike attack. still thought game was easy.
id love to see more content and the difficulty ramped up some. I dont even own beta but have played it. wish i did own it cause id be playing now.
Some people have been complaining they dont like alot of mods on items. im used to playing rpgs, so that was not a problem for me.
still feel the game looks cartoony but i kinda like it. while some dont. def thinks their should be more blood and gore. i just feel theirs not enough difficult parts in the beta. its really lacken of content.
i do love how certain classes feel different then others. like playen a witch doctor i might use 1,2,3,4 as to a monk usen 2x left clicks then a right for his third strike buff. controls for dif classes can be fun. or be a diff play style and get a new experince from another class.
wish i owned beta so i could right more but playen a friends so i only get limited time if at any.
still think its to early to say how this game will pan out. just way to much missing content to even be judged.
What you need to realize though is that the beta is not for your enjoyment of content, it's so you can help Blizzard find bugs. The beta has very limited content on purpose, as to not spoil the story. And if you weren't aware, the beta is only the first 1/3 of act 1 on normal, it's supposed to be very easy. When you get into nightmare, hell, and then inferno that's where you're going to be pulling your hair out because of how hard it is =D They also have stated they will not be giving additional content or difficulty for the very same reason they don't want to spoil the game.
In the middle of the 3rd Defiled Crypt, trying to track down the Jar of Souls with my new Witch Doctor (4th playthrough now), Connection Error. And now I can't reconnect, it keeps timing out.
Why oh why did Blizzard have to put bull**** we don't need and does not enhance play in any way, shape, or form into the game structure?
have you not ready anythign about why its online only? 100x less piracy/hacking/duping. and they especially need this with the RMAH so there isnt a super influx of fake goods for real money or people hacking the game and making real money. its a lawsuit waiting to happen. while the game will still eventually be hacked in some way and people will figure out small ways to dupe, it SIGNIFICANTLY reduces it. having the full game be on your computer makes it almost stupid-simple to hack and dupe.
That is not why it's online only. That may be what they say and a by-product of their actions, but it is not the reason. It's simply to make sure that every single person playing the game will try and use the auction house, which will be where they make their money. If you are playing offline, you are not using the auction house, thus Blizzard can't make any money off you.
Blizzard stated that when they were creating Bnet 2.0, they were making it so good that you would not ever want to play offline, that it would be a choice and that you would be insane to choose the offline version with all of the "bonuses" they were throwing into the online version. I guess in their mind "playing the game in the first place" is a bonus...
If I was playing offline, dupes/hacks/cheating would not be an issue, as I would not be playing online to experience them! I would also be able to play if Blizzards servers hiccuup!
Hi,
I totally Agree with You. Imagine now, playing Diablo II only Online... That would be so awful, with those dupers/hacers/boters.
Bay the way, what we are buying from Blizzard now? For me it is not game, its only permission to access theirs servers.
I thought it could prevent Cheats, but as for now, it seems easy to dupe.
As far as Diablo 3 no ones actually, technically duped on the beta. There was a glitch with the selling / buyback from vendors, but no one has corrupted a game file and loaded it onto Bnet in the form of an item. This reason this is significant is because the glitch is server side, and obviously has already been found out. These are easy to fix. But if someone finds a workaround for loading up / changing item codes and goes undetected, then that's a problem. But, just like WoW is online only, there won't be any dupes that last for any amount of time. Obviously dupes / hacks will be found, and the new setup will make it extremely easier for Blizzard to catch and stop them. And don't worry, they will want to stop them. The RMAH alone presents many legalities which need to be followed, and in order to cover their own asses they need to stop hacking, and more importantly duping.
THIS, is the main reason Blizzard wants online only. It's a LOT easier to handle whatever problems arise, and a lot easier to slowing down / stopping hacking. Yes, it's true Blizzard wants to make money (surprise!), but they would anyway even with an offline version (how many people played online almost all of the time on D2?)
Off topic: Did the D3 beta desktop icon change? I could have sworn it didn't have that brown symbol behind it before ? ><
UI: It's just Humongous. Why is the health/resource and everything in between bar so damn big? Is the UI scale set to "Blind People"? I wish they would have a UI Scale option like in World of Warcraft. I really don't need the UI so overly large and in my face like it is currently.
The RMAH: Why is this so poorly implemented? The search functions just plain suck. Why can I not filter by only equipable items? Why can't I choose specific values for stats etc? Why didn't they copy the excellent layout and function of the WoW auction house and tweak that to fit their needs?
Another grip with the RMAH is it searches based on the character you have selected. You can change which character it's searching for with a drop down, but if you name all your characters the same (which I did and this is a feature of the game) then you can't tell which character is which class...
Currently the RMAH seems really under developed. I hope it gets a major UI pass before release.
I actually don't have an issue with the UI, but my question would be what size monitor are you using? I know blizzard took out some features in the beta for settings (such as ultra settings and whatnot) and I'm thinking they might have a UI scale with release. But maybe a tiny monitor displays it wrong, idk =D
Edit : Just checked to make sure I just didn't notice. I use a 27" monitor and I must say if anything, the char UI including the orbs might be a tad small. It might just be a problem depending on monitor size =P
It's much more fun to rage. See the thread 'does anyone else feel this way'. Another example of why I'll be betting Blizzard wont' be showing us in depth looks anymore.
I would argue to you, are you going to be switching with every new challenge that comes up? Probably not, so why would you assume every other player will too? When we get to the inferno farming stage, it's going to cost us a lot in time to be constantly switching, and I actually haven't read one player so far that plans on switching all the time. In fact ALL I read are players planning on picking one build and sticking to it. *if* people are so hell bent on switching (which they aren't) then they will just go to town to switch, or pay whatever fine you want slapped on them. It's not going to break the game, in fact it makes the game that much better =D
ty sir =D
Please re-read my posts as to why this isn't a sequel in the traditional sense, it's a brand new game. If you want to play D2 then go play D2. This isn't D2.5 as have been said, it's D3. It's completely different from the ground up, because it's a *new* game, not an expansion pack.
You can't safely say that, because that's false. D2 retains almost no mechanical features from D1, if any. IF you had beta tested D2 after playing D1 for years, I'm almost positive you, like a huge part of the populace, would have raged at how different it was. Go play an hour of D1, then D2, then D3 (if you have beta). They might as well be three different games.
It's a sequel only technically. since it's a continuation of the story. Past that, it's completely different. The ONLY things that are the same are as follows; Isometric view, storyline, the barbarian. My whole point being that D3 is so vastly different, it can't be compared to something like God of war 1,2,3 in an argument that it should remain the same.
This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.
Also either you weren't around, or you're just forgetting, but people threw SHIT fits over D2! It was actually more whining then D3 is getting. People saw this strange outside style, and yelled they aren't being faithful to D1. People saw trailers where the hero was outside, in the sun! Omg lighting! The list goes on, on how vastly different D2 was to D1, and how people freaked out because they were afraid of change. D1 was an awesome game, how can you make an almost completely different game Blizzard?! Well, considering the majority of whiners on Dfans site D2 as their prime example of what a game should be, I would say D2 did very well.
And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.
Personally? I think that'd be tits to have a single player version, but since ( Blizzards words ) there's no intention of ever making one, for the already 1 million times stated reasons, it's no skin off of my back. It sucks when you can't connect to the internet, I get that. But realize that's a very small minority of people planning on playing D3 at all, and you must sacrifice the few for the many; In this case take out single player, but make the game as a whole much more enjoyable because of the increased security.
Oh don't worry I'm not naive enough to believe there will never be hacks. I just advocate for the online only just because of how effective it will be at stalling / stopping hacks and dupes =D
It's actually doing JUST that. No one has been able to get a character onto the actual beta, let alone items or corrupted files. Thus, hack / dupe free.
That's because those videos are from people using a fake beta server (emulated). Of course this is 'illegal' and will get you banned if you're caught =D
What you need to realize though is that the beta is not for your enjoyment of content, it's so you can help Blizzard find bugs. The beta has very limited content on purpose, as to not spoil the story. And if you weren't aware, the beta is only the first 1/3 of act 1 on normal, it's supposed to be very easy. When you get into nightmare, hell, and then inferno that's where you're going to be pulling your hair out because of how hard it is =D They also have stated they will not be giving additional content or difficulty for the very same reason they don't want to spoil the game.
As far as Diablo 3 no ones actually, technically duped on the beta. There was a glitch with the selling / buyback from vendors, but no one has corrupted a game file and loaded it onto Bnet in the form of an item. This reason this is significant is because the glitch is server side, and obviously has already been found out. These are easy to fix. But if someone finds a workaround for loading up / changing item codes and goes undetected, then that's a problem. But, just like WoW is online only, there won't be any dupes that last for any amount of time. Obviously dupes / hacks will be found, and the new setup will make it extremely easier for Blizzard to catch and stop them. And don't worry, they will want to stop them. The RMAH alone presents many legalities which need to be followed, and in order to cover their own asses they need to stop hacking, and more importantly duping.
THIS, is the main reason Blizzard wants online only. It's a LOT easier to handle whatever problems arise, and a lot easier to slowing down / stopping hacking. Yes, it's true Blizzard wants to make money (surprise!), but they would anyway even with an offline version (how many people played online almost all of the time on D2?)
Off topic: Did the D3 beta desktop icon change? I could have sworn it didn't have that brown symbol behind it before ? ><
I actually don't have an issue with the UI, but my question would be what size monitor are you using? I know blizzard took out some features in the beta for settings (such as ultra settings and whatnot) and I'm thinking they might have a UI scale with release. But maybe a tiny monitor displays it wrong, idk =D
Edit : Just checked to make sure I just didn't notice. I use a 27" monitor and I must say if anything, the char UI including the orbs might be a tad small. It might just be a problem depending on monitor size =P