Now that's what i'm talking about!
I believe we'll be hearing of the beta earlier than May, though. My guess is they're going to talk about the first impressions of the beta during their next financial conference. I'm pumped!
- FingolfinGR
- Registered User
-
Member for 17 years, 9 months, and 16 days
Last active Sat, Nov, 3 2018 14:09:13
- 41 Followers
- 5,410 Total Posts
- 100 Thanks
-
Feb 11, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Blizzard Hopes to Release Diablo III in 2011Posted in: News
-
Feb 10, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Activision Blizzard Q4 2010 Financial Results Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from italofoca
In other hand WoW's expansion come out very quickly and with unbeliavable amount of content. Kinda bores me.
Expansions are easier to produce since the game is already there and you only add content. Finishing and polishing the game takes significantly more time. Starcraft II had about 6 years of development before it was released, right? It's expansion will only take 18 months according to some Blizzard employees i think.
Expect the same with Diablo III. After it's out, about a year and a half later we're going to get the expansion. -
Feb 10, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Activision Blizzard Q4 2010 Financial Results Conference CallPosted in: NewsQuote from Shisou
Over 46 million American children have been born since Diablo 3 started production, if my calculations are correct. That's about a sixth of the country's entire population.
You're forgetting that the Diablo 3 that the original Blizzard North team developed failed the quality tests and was completely scrapped. The actual development started around 2005 (with some art pieces going all the way back to 2004).
PS. Who cares how many American children were born during that time anyway? If you wanted a really big number you should check China. There's lotsa kids being born there. -
Feb 9, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Activision Blizzard Q4 2010 Financial Results Conference CallI was a bit bummed but so far, even with the delays, Blizzard always delivered top quality games. A top quality game is what i've been waiting for so long. I wouldn't want a bad one just to get it early.Posted in: News
I'll wait. And when the game comes i'll be getting it immediately and will have fun with it for a good half decade to say the least -
Feb 7, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on BlizzCon 2011Yeah, the hopes are that we won't get to play a Diablo III demo next year... cause (as we hope) Diablo III will be out already. Still a few months till we can't have the game released before Blizzcon (April Beta start would be a release around Blizzcon )Posted in: News
-
Feb 7, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on BlizzCon 2011Posted in: NewsQuote from sef239_1122397
I read this on another site and thought it was awesome:
"Ok, rumours time!
Quote from BlizzCon 2010 announcement
-Hands-on play time with upcoming (Diablo3, Cataclysm) Blizzard Entertainment games.
And now about BlizzCon 2011
-Hands-on play time with the latest versions of Blizzard Entertainment games.
Just saying. :——)"
I'm convinced.
even if you're not right, i want to believe. +1 from me just for feeding my hopes there
just checked the press release...
2011:
Official Blizzard Quote:
In addition to serving as a gathering place for Blizzard Entertainment gaming communities, BlizzCon will offer attendees a chance to enjoy:
* Hands-on play time with the latest versions of Blizzard Entertainment games
* Discussion panels with Blizzard Entertainment developers
* Competitive and casual tournaments for players to showcase their talents
* Community contests with great prizes
* Commemorative merchandise based on Blizzard Entertainment’s game universes
* More activities and attractions to be announced
2010:
Official Blizzard Quote:
In addition to serving as a gathering place for Blizzard Entertainment gaming communities, BlizzCon will offer attendees a chance to enjoy:
* Hands-on play time with upcoming Blizzard Entertainment games
* Discussion panels with Blizzard Entertainment developers
* Competitive and casual tournaments for players to showcase their talents
* Community contests with great prizes
* Commemorative merchandise based on Blizzard Entertainment's game universes
* More exciting activities and attractions to be announced
identical -
Feb 7, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on BlizzCon 2011Posted in: NewsQuote from Sixen
:(. I end up missing class, haha. I missed two big tests both last year and the year before, but it was worth it, :D.Quote from Ent1ty
This is so unfair... Why do they have it in October they do realize school starts after september right?...sighI guess i'll have to just wait another two years if they keep heaving it in october...
You got to play the demo, that's reason enough for most of us! Being in Europe isn't that easy to visit Blizzard events... give me a WWI in Europe NOW! -
Feb 7, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on BlizzCon 2011Judging by comments during the previous BlizzCon, Starcraft II had more panels because it was released 2010, while it had less panels with more info 2009. Diablo 3 had very few panels 2010 but quite a good bit of information. Wondering how many panels we're going to get for 2011. Perhaps it'll be a hint?Posted in: News
-
Jan 25, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Blizzard Explores Consolesnoticed it was offtopic and i cleaned it up a bitPosted in: News
enjoy! -
Jan 24, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Blizzard Explores ConsolesPosted in: NewsQuote from nickm83
Actually, leeching won't be an option in Diablo 3 so the first arguement is pretty invalid. It's not like "right i'm gonna leech to lvl 45 (since lvl 60 is the cap in Diablo 3) and i'll experiment with builds. Leveling the character will take time. Imagine leveling every single character by actually playing and think about how much time it takes. And yeah, 4 player limit and extremely hard enemies on 4/4 people games ensure there won't be rushing/leeching.
Also, the respec won't be "a little gold". It's going to take time and quests (from the little info we have so far). And lots of gold. To remove a skill point, not reset the whole skill setup. Quoting Bashiok here: "If you want to completely change your skills, you'd better start a new character".
Who said anything at all about leeching? Trist runs til 10ish, tombs til 20, cows til 24, ancients, norm baal runs til your high enough to kill nm ancients, then guy right to nm baal runs. You could do this with friends of the same level no problem, no leeching required, and all get up to hell baal runs with no rusher in probably 5-7 hours. Only exception might be if your all playing untwinked, but if you have some leveling gear set aside on an alt you should have no problems.
If you wanted to rush/leech you could just grush to hell chaos and get a new toon to level 80 in 2-3 hours.
We both know that it takes more time than that to get to the higher levels. You simply ignored the Nightmare content (that's like... 30 levels?) from the time to kill Baal normal till the time you're actually able to kill Ancients nightmare. Cause without someone to kill them for you you're in no way able to do it. And by the time you kill them you can kill them, you don't get as many free levels. Also keep in mind Diablo III will have different mechanics than Diablo II when it comes to xp and leveling.
Quote from nickm83Now on that part, think that quality won't come in masses. We don't know if there's going to be an Auction House or something like that, so we can't be sure how it's going to work out. Either way, the really cool stuff will be rare and the player will be up to decide what to charge for it. Is it 5 High Runes, or 20,000 gold? Do you really see a difference? I don't. Learning curve is not knowing what to charge for items. It's knowing what to pay for items YOU need. That's needed with any kind of economy too.
Yes I see a difference. Like I already said twice, you can't farm high runes throughout the entire d2 game, but will be able to farm currency everywhere in d3. This leads to an environment where mass time spent gold grinding can compensate for learning the game, and going for quality over quantity.
There is no learning curve with currency based economies. If there is an auction house you simply search for your item, and see what the other 10 are going for. If there is no AH you simply google it, just like every other game with currency items are going to have a relatively set value that doesn't vary much from sale to sale. If you barter every trade you do also comes along with the notion of how bad do I want what he has, and how bad does he have what I want. Currency is just bleh I don't need this I'm just gonna sell it and horde more gold away, and when I get 30k saved up I can definately buy that armor I want, because there is currently 17 sets of it for sale for that much in the AH.
Again, what's the difference in "paying 20.000.000 gold instead of 5 high runes"? Yeah, the guys that don't get lucky to find them (i only found a Ber rune and a few Ist runes back then) won't be able to trade for good gear? That's a good economy? Economy is economy. You get to buy stuff paying something you worked for. Yeah, a gold based economy will give access to people that aren't that lucky with drops, or simply dedicated enough to farm gold during lower levels. Those dedicated people will have to miss out on upgraded stash, upgraded artisans and other things. That's how things work. I still don't see any difference between saving 30 million gold and 500 High Runes except for the fact that lower level people won't be able to get rich... ever. Prices will go up and down depending on the demand and the gold availiable in the market. That's one healthy economy there. You get good gold for the very rare stuff? You spend it on the stuff you want. Be it for alts, or for better gear? It's up to you.
Quote from nickm83Gold sinks will exist. Gold farming might be possible, but stuff like wands, staves, armors etc that used to sell for awesome money in Diablo 2 won't give that much money. There's going to be substantially less gold from items in the game aswell, since with the new artisan feature, we'll salvage more than we vendor and we'll pay money to upgrade them and make useful items, socket them, upgrade gems etc etc.
It doesn't matter if an item gives you 35000 gold or 3 gold when you sell it, the actually amount you get it going to be relative to the game. That aside, when you have to come up with sinks so people can't accumulate gold too fast, you already have a broken system. Gold is either going to be too hard to get to the point where the game is just an annoying grind fest, or is going to be massively accumulated over time, both of which are bad.
The only game I've ever played that came anywhere close to currency being useful without massive amounts of sinks, limited how much currency would spawn, and the more that was in game, the less you would get for things. The only real sink was you would get charged rent on your gear each day, with more expensive gear costing more to rent. The only reason it remained stable was because 10 million 1 month after the server went up, was still worth the same 10 million in terms of what you could do with it 5 years after the server was up. I've yet to see any other currency based game come anywhere close to being as stable. You'll end up thinking your rich with 500k a month after d3 starts, but 5 years down the road when people have 20billion saved up, and a noob gets on and plays for a month, he'll realize he's dirt poor and everyone else has years of currency horded away. The design is fail right from the start.
So if i were to be inactive for a month, i'd lose all my gold? That's game breaking right there. I worked for armor and gold, why have it taken away? I'm the hero who saves the world, i have to pay taxes for stuff i worked for? If i get much gold, it's either cause i traded something or i farmed it. Either way, it's up to my dedication (and luck) to get it. IF gold doesn't have too much value, alternative currencies will definitely come up (be it high lvl gems or something else) or the prices in gold will go up. Again, part of a healthy economy based on demand and supply.
Quote from nickm83There's many ways to cause grief, true. But PK was a very obvious one. It's one thing to PvP and another to gank people that do PvE while they're focused on something else. And let's not forget the regular exploits of PK'ing in Diablo 2, like TPPK (just a thought). Votekick could very well be used to kick someone who sucks at playing, someone who's annoying or someone who just goes AFK and lets everyone else do the killing.
I guess if you win more then you lose on the game, and if your adult enough to just lose an accept the fact you just got pwned when you do lose, you look at pk, from both sides of the fence, as fun. If you just lose every time and can't handle losing to someone who knows the game better or just outsmarted/outplayed you in that instance, then yeah, I guess your right, it is nothing but grief.
However, there are plenty of ways around it regardless, so if you think it is nothing but grief yet do nothing to avoid it you deserve the aggravation. You want to do some Baal runs, you start a pub run, and soon as you get 8 people you start slapping a password on so no random people can join and mess things up for your run. If you make a few friends this way, or have a few friends already, its pretty easy to get 8 man runs going on a daily basis. That's why the password feature is there, for your protection, if you want to constantly pub and never private, its part of the game.
Also you always get plenty of warning when someone is going to pk you. Its not like a big message saying SAUSAGE HONKEY HAS HOSTILED YOU doesn't appear on your screen, and you have to wait for them to come find you and kill you. During this time you could just save and exit and go to a different game. Its actually the most annoying thing that can happen to a pk'er when everyone just leaves and you don't get any kills.
So you don't want to password your games, or leave your game. You could just kill the guy. Even if you want to say you can't with a pvm build and all that good stuff, that is just not true. If your running baal for example, and get pk'd, to put it bluntly, your a moron. Someone hostiles you, and your at the throne room. There is only one way in. Just send a couple guys to spam attacks on the entry point and its insta death the second the would be pk'er walks in. But there I go again, expecting people to actually learn little tips and tricks as they play the game, curse this evil learning curve thing I enjoy so much.
It's not about winning or losing. It's about being out of place. Right, i do see a big warning that someone hostiled me. But i also want to kill the boss that i was after when i entered the game in the first place. There's no honor to kill a player already softened up by a boss. No matter how easy it could be for a team to kill the guy who's trying to PK. I just don't want to have to bother with him when i'm in a game that's for PvE.
If you want to show you're awesome, do it on even terms in the arena. With someone that actually bothered to make a spec that's good for killing people instead of monsters (MMO experience shows that PvP builds are made for burst dmg while PvE make sure you have good dmg over longer time).
That said, i wouldn't mind a "free to hostile" kind of game (like hardcore perhaps?) that would allow people there that had the same mindset as you. Would be interesting to see how many would actually decide to play there and what they'd be aiming for.
Quote from nickm83They didn't remove PK to implement aesthetic rewards. They removed PK to implement Arenas, that are pretty meaningful. The rewards are just a bonus. Just like the PvP Ladder.
PK didn't add anything but grief to PvE. Sure, it was fun for the one that attacked. But for the other guys that had a PvE build? Not that much fun. Diablo 2 was flawed in many different ways (as it was well made in others). That particular part was a failed feature taken from the original Diablo. There's nothing meaningful in killing people that aren't trying to kill you. It's the exact opposite.
What's this pvp ladder you speak of?
Yeah so I'm just beating a dead horse now, but pk added enjoyment to the game, unless you were horrid at it. You keep insisting it was only fun for the attacker, but that is simply not true. I couldn't imagine going on and running 20-30 chaos/baal runs a night and never having anyone make a pk attempt at me. I could go run chaos 100 times and not die. Its just the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over. People trying to pk my runs was the only possible random event that would ever happen. Being able to get bored of it and go make a pk attempt at someone else was just an added bonus. But yeah I guess if you never wanted to learn how to get better at the game and come up with some tricks on how to pwn people, then its easier just to lump pk in the grief category and talk about how unfair it was, even though another player couldn't do anything you weren't capable of doing.
PvP ladder will be there, along with a PvP matchmaking system to make sure you're playing against people at a similar skill level as yours. The more you progress, the higher you get up the ladder getting achievements, titles and all kinds of aesthetic rewards.
Again on the gameplay part: it's not about skill. It's about doing something you enjoy, opposed to HAVING to do something you don't like. I did PvP playing Diablo. When i wanted. I did the same playing Warhammer Online too. Lord of the Rings Online too. But again, when i felt like it. I don't like some random moron to come and attack me when i'm busy with something. Sure i can take some time off to kick his ass, but perhaps i'm not into PvP that much.
Also, it's not like we'll be doing the same thing over and over again for weeks to get to the level cap or to get the equipment we want. It's a new game, don't judge it like it's the previous game. We have very little information as of now for the actual end-game, except for the fact that we're going to be around 55 by the end of Hell, with the level cap being 60.
-
Jan 22, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Blizzard Explores ConsolesPosted in: NewsQuote from nickm83
Sure, you can say its a learning curve. Even if it is, a learning curve that requires you to create a completely new character is obviously excessive. You can have learning curve where you're able to learn the class (if you're good) by the end of the leveling process, or at least during the leveling process, instead of the extremity of D2's "learning curve."
Yeah its totally excessive to have to level a new character that you can hit level 80 with in a day easily if you know what your doing. Even if your a total first timer, and actually do manage to mess up a character so badly you just can't do anything with it, you know, like putting 1 point into everything, big deal, it probably only takes a couple days of trying to play that character before you realize its a total fail.
What do you consider an acceptable learning curve? One where you just say WHOOPS I MESSED UP and get to instantly undo it? Heck I'd even agree with a 5 minute timer to reset your last skill point, just in case someone happens to have a lag click or something. Yeah I'd also agree having to remake a character that you realized at some point totally stunk if it took 3 months to get to that point was excessive, but it only takes a matter of days even if your slow to get to that point. Considering if you play online you can also transfer over your items to a new character so its not even a total loss, this learning curve is not extreme at all.
Actually, leeching won't be an option in Diablo 3 so the first arguement is pretty invalid. It's not like "right i'm gonna leech to lvl 45 (since lvl 60 is the cap in Diablo 3) and i'll experiment with builds. Leveling the character will take time. Imagine leveling every single character by actually playing and think about how much time it takes. And yeah, 4 player limit and extremely hard enemies on 4/4 people games ensure there won't be rushing/leeching.
Also, the respec won't be "a little gold". It's going to take time and quests (from the little info we have so far). And lots of gold. To remove a skill point, not reset the whole skill setup. Quoting Bashiok here: "If you want to completely change your skills, you'd better start a new character".
Quote from nickm83Yea, having it so people can just scam to get high quality items for low quality ones, because theres no good way to find out how much an item is worth, is clearly a better system. You shouldn't have to learn the economy by trial and error. You should just get what you deserve for having a good item. There doesn't have to be a learning curve for everything you know.
So you think a learning curve for character building that might cost you a couple days worth of play time while your dabbling with a new idea on a character is excessive, and you don't want any learning curve on the economy.
I'd just go play a first person shooter where everyone has the same character and the same items if I wanted this. Character building and economy are two of the things that set rpg's apart from first person shooters, why would you want to neuter them down rather then amplify them? I don't want the game to hold my hand and walk me through so I don't ever have a chance to mess anything up or maybe do something foolish with my character, what fun is learning the game if you always know whatever choice your making is the right one. When it gets to that point there is NOTHING left to learn.
Now on that part, think that quality won't come in masses. We don't know if there's going to be an Auction House or something like that, so we can't be sure how it's going to work out. Either way, the really cool stuff will be rare and the player will be up to decide what to charge for it. Is it 5 High Runes, or 20,000 gold? Do you really see a difference? I don't. Learning curve is not knowing what to charge for items. It's knowing what to pay for items YOU need. That's needed with any kind of economy too.
Quote from nickm83Again, how do you know that the best way to get gold in D3 won't be the best way to get other stuff? That would obviously be the best way to go about it, and would eliminate the problem you present. And like I said before, there doesn't have to be a learning curve for everything.
I guess you just want to ignore whatever I say, must go hand in hand with your extreme dislike for any learning curve at all in the game. You can farm gold right from the first monster you kill in the game. Allowing this with the currency would be the same as high runes dropping from zombies in the blood moor in d2. Wealth grinding then just becomes a game of who puts the most time in, rather then having quality of how well you grind as a factor.
I'd rather know that because I took the time to learn the game and make a good character that can kill fast and has a good mf set up, know where to farm for what if I'm looking for specific items(like torches), and knowing my items well enough so I'm only keeping items with value rather then picking up every piece of junk and wasting time trying to trade and mule garbage, I am going to consistently gather a large amount of wealth in a 2 hour period then someone who's clueless does in 10 hours. A gold economy does not allow for this to happen. It becomes much easier to overcome a game knowledge deficit by simply grinding for endless hours and hording currency. I can see why someone opposed to having to learn the game though, would be opposed to this type of design.
Gold sinks will exist. Gold farming might be possible, but stuff like wands, staves, armors etc that used to sell for awesome money in Diablo 2 won't give that much money. There's going to be substantially less gold from items in the game aswell, since with the new artisan feature, we'll salvage more than we vendor and we'll pay money to upgrade them and make useful items, socket them, upgrade gems etc etc.
Quote from nickm83And how would that problem be solved if I could PK? If theres 5 people and theres 3 of you, that means it would be a 3v2 in your favor, and considering its actually a limit of 4 people in a game, it would be a 3v1. So yea, how is me getting killed along with not getting that chest/boss kill better than just not getting that chest/boss kill?
I can tell you've never actually defeated a would be pk'er in D2, because you immediately say if would get you killed on top of still not getting your chest/boss kill. My point was, if I can vote you out with a votekick system you have no chance to do anything at all. If there is pk and I try to do it via pk, you might actually just kill me, get your stuff, and laugh in my face, or you might flee and come back when we're gone, or you might just die. I'd rather have those three potential options then the undefendable grief of a votekick system.
There's many ways to cause grief, true. But PK was a very obvious one. It's one thing to PvP and another to gank people that do PvE while they're focused on something else. And let's not forget the regular exploits of PK'ing in Diablo 2, like TPPK (just a thought). Votekick could very well be used to kick someone who sucks at playing, someone who's annoying or someone who just goes AFK and lets everyone else do the killing.
Quote from nickm83Ok yea, if its simple as reporting someone and they get banned, sure. But if you've ever played WoW you know that Blizzard:
1. Doesn't just ban people for swearing.
2. Is able to look at what actually happened through chat logs, etc.
Which is simply why you have to make sure you come across as stupid. Being stupid isn't a bannable offense. I was just saying, no matter what type of formal anti-grief systems you can conjure up people will find ways around them. From my personal experience being able to just pk such people is far more effective then any formal anti-griefing measure I've ever seen implemented. They either just don't work, make the game less interesting in other ways, or are easy to use to your own advantage if you want to grief people.
So you like having arena matches, but you don't like a designated arena? I don't really know what to say. Theres still going to be plenty of PvP, but its just separated from PvM. And how is it any more meaningless than in D2? You still get ears and now you get titles and other aesthetic rewards. I really don't see the problem.
I don't mind pvp matches, and I don't mind a designated arena, as long as these aren't my only options. It'd be the equivalent of joining a duel game in D2. I spent plenty of time in duel games, it was pretty fun. Aesthetic rewards however, are utterly meaningless. Its like the ears in D2, nobody cared about them. They didn't mean anything at all, you couldn't do anything with them. Stripping out pk in favor of aesthetic rewards is completely and utterly stupid as far as I'm concerned. Blizzard would be better off just stripping PK if they really want to go that route, and rather then waste time on aesthetic rewards just everyone take a day or two off, rather then implement something entirely meaningless.
Separating it from pvp however, is lame. In d2 for example, the pvm was easy. Once you got good at it, it was just outright simple. PK added more spice to pvm then any pvm feature they could ever implement would. Your not just fighting some ai trash monsters, or some uber boss that once you learn the trick to beat it you can kill it with no problem over and over again. When you have to fend off a player its a more dangerous situation then dieing once in 300 runs because you hit a lag spike, but yet again, I could see how someone who has an extreme dislike for any meaningful type of learning curve would hate the most challenging portion of the game.
They didn't remove PK to implement aesthetic rewards. They removed PK to implement Arenas, that are pretty meaningful. The rewards are just a bonus. Just like the PvP Ladder.
PK didn't add anything but grief to PvE. Sure, it was fun for the one that attacked. But for the other guys that had a PvE build? Not that much fun. Diablo 2 was flawed in many different ways (as it was well made in others). That particular part was a failed feature taken from the original Diablo. There's nothing meaningful in killing people that aren't trying to kill you. It's the exact opposite.
-
Jan 21, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Two Stashes, No Jewels, New Shrines and the Enigmatic SentryJust asked the question! Let's hope we get a reply! I really liked the Evil Urns aswellPosted in: News
-
Jan 21, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Two Stashes, No Jewels, New Shrines and the Enigmatic SentryAs a sidenote, remember that with auto-stats, there wont be any way to boost your stats except Gems and Charms. And considering the simple way Blizzard seems to take, stats will work to improve damage etc on the long run ( Core Attribute Changes to D3 for more in-depth info).Posted in: News
That said, seeing how certain gems (i think it was emerald) boost attack speed on weapons etc) i think they replace the functionality of Jewels while removing their totally random aspect.
PS.
Quote from Don_guillotine
Quote from Ophion
He is a news reporter A stepbelowabove mod.
Yeah, I never used the sharing either in TL because it was too boring to play twice, even with a different class.
Ye heretic! Thine wrongdoings have been corrected!
Mods ban people, but news team is where the magic happens.
So technically, we do the dirty work to make you guys look good!
We're definitely above! -
Jan 19, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Blizzard Explores ConsolesDiablo II had awful design at certain parts and was very unforgiving to new players (or players that wouldn't bother reading guides) or even that had lag and missclicked something.Posted in: News
PK was a source of grief, all i can say is good riddance.
DDO is a MMORPG and not at all comparable to the Diablo III systems that have been revealed.
As for the colors? A matter of taste, really, but if you look at the latest gameplay bits and pieces we have, it seems that it starts low and builds up (as are the rules of great drama). The feeling is very dark, there actually IS some storytelling that won't slow you down. Gold makes the game have an actual economy and doesn't kill the people that just start (or start over) for not having high runes to trade with (that's not bartering, it's a made up currency since Diablo II didn't have one).
So far so good. Diablo III will be a PC game for starters and they're "exploring" the possibilities of a decent console port. Not the other way around. Blizzard are so popular for being great at making PC games and that's not about to change. -
Jan 1, 2011FingolfinGR posted a message on Happy New YearsHappy New Year guys!Posted in: News
Let 2011 bring us health, wealth and Diablo III! - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
0
^^ This.
It was said a good while back, though, not sure if it's still valid.
0
I also strongly dislike the way most companies try to fight piracy: DRMs that tend to make the lives of people who actually buy the games hard instead of actually protecting their product. Most "software pirates" simply install the patch and rid themselves of the issues the paying customers have to live through.
Either way, I don't think a country could/should act on it alone. It should either be an international agreement (as to which sites to include to the said list too) or there shouldn't be anything at all. Cause if it only goes one way, there's no telling what kind of sites the States (or any country that does the same) could include and for what reasons (propaganda/keeping people in the dark on certain matters being the obvious one).
0
Looking like this!
0
0
0
Best Diablo-clone I've tried to this day is still Titan Quest, though. Felt way better than Torchlight. I'd strongly suggest you get it too. Should be extremely cheap right now.
0
0
Forum Guidelines
Thread Locked.
0
Thread Locked.
0
Please continue the discussion there.
0
Closing this now.
0
0
0
Thread Locked.