I liked how Warhammer did their scenario type spawned instances. It was something you could do when you where not questing. You could include some kind of machanic like this with these types of matches. Hold the line, cap the flag, other little fun instances to add to the fun.
I disagree. I think casual gamers stick to one genre more than hardcore gamers. Because they don't play a lot of games, they tend to stick to the ones they know they will like. Hardcore gamers understand the differences in game genres and are not afraid of the different playstyle. Although some diehards will only play one genre.
I think that Diablo 3 has very little competition out there. People who want to play D3 will play D3 no matter what other games are out there at the moment. I also think that Blizzard has enough popularity that even casual gamers recognize the name and may be interested in trying Diablo for their first time.
I am a casual gamer, meaning I don't play more then a few hours a week. I will play and buy whatever is fun, even if I don't get to play it as much as I would like. It just means it takes me longer to get to the end game. If a game is really fun, I will play it more and ignore the others.
Still don't understand where this obsession with high resolutions is coming from.
Gotta agree. I will buy a new monitor next monday, and it will be a 18,5" widescreen LED display. I could afford to buy a bigger one, but I don't need it. When you have a smaller display, it's easier to see at a glance what's happening on the screen. I think it's quite essential in fast-paced games like Diablo.
I've been using a 24" wide screen for a while now, it works well for games. I just like having a proper field of view, which I think is important to the fact of the utter caos which will be Diablo 3. Think about how cramped it might get with everyone spamming on all those monsters. I kind of think that since Diablo 3 isn't really a competative game you should have the option. There may be other ways to deal with PvP, which to me is secondary to the rest of the game.
Because of the StarCraft comment, I'm assuming everybody missed the point.
Are you talking about a higher resolution = actually expanding the field of view?
I doubt it. Of course, the dreaded wide screen will give you an advantage, but nothing beyond, I'm pretty sure of it. I wouldn't be fair in PvP, and it wouldn't be fair anywhere. The ability to target far beyond someone else's range is in my opinion broken, even by PvE standard.
Yeah, more field of view than resolution I suppose. My bad, SC2 does allow high resolution, but it doesn't effect the field of view.
I personally prefer 1920 x 1200 as I have a large wide screen lcd. I know in SC, where they are worried about competitive edge it's important to keep the resolution the same, but do you think it will be adjustable in D3? I would like it if I could use my whole screen at max res.
One point worth clarifying. Apple doesn't allow flash apps on their devices less because of security and more because of app control and sales. If they allowed flash apps, anyone could develope a flash application that will work on the iPad and iPhone and bypass their appstore.
imo installing the game via disk will be alot faster.
collectors edition is only cd yet standard should be both.
but each version can get a online client.
Hopefully they will use the same system they used for the latest WoW expansion. You pre-ordered the game from Blizzard and it downloaded in the background, so it would be installed and ready to use at the exact moment of the release.
Looking at it as 3 years of Diablo 3 = 540 is unfair. Fact is you're going to spend many times more on things you don't even think about. Go to a fast food store 3 times and you're likely to spend $10-$15.
This only applies if you spend money without first examining if it will fit in you're budget. I make under $1400 a month (after tax etc.) have $600 rent, $600 in school loans plus internet (needed for work) gas/electric bus ticket(also needed for work), and of course groceries. So my finances are really tight and unnecessary expenditures (like eating out or monthly game fees) are out of the question. For me it is perfectly fine and in fact necessary to determine.
I think this is a good point. If they would like the game as widely assessable as they say they want it, they can not charge a fee that people can not afford. I would guess a lot of people in their target are in the same boat as you.
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark.
Thats all? 6 years for a game?
Geeze, thats so -low-. Of course, we want subscription fee and a total of 500$ spent on a single game over a decade just to make it last longer.
We don't have enough developers ripping us off, now there's people demanding it even more.
Yes, 5-6 years on one game with the same content is enough for me. No one was "demanding" anything of the such, no need to exaggerate my point to make your own. I would just prefer paying a small fee for new things to keep it interesting.
A game that must be constantly given new content to stay entertaining is not a game I would play. Building the game on replayability is much better and it is what Diablo 3 is based on. If a game is replayable then it doesn't need content patches. Expansions should be more than enough to refresh the game.
Players host the games on the SC2 Battle.net model so there are no massive server costs like for MMORPGs.
I have never needed support, I use Google for that, so I don't see why I would want to pay for support.
Expansions, yes, Diablo 2 had one in 10 years and WoW has had many. But you're right, there is not a massive server cost.
I like playing D2 mods since for the most part they added a lot to the game.
I know that I would get bored with WoW quite quickly and I do not like playing online that much to begin with. The thing that I do not like is that they try to please the larger fan base and quite often I do not fit into that base since I want a game that is a lot more difficult.
Agreed, I rarly fit into that bell curve myself. Although I find myself more casual as I get older, and not finding as much time for gaming as I use to.
I also like the fact that the community is policed and not left to wild wild west style gaming. Although that is fun in it's own right, duping and such ruined the game in many ways.
I support a subscription feature of this game because I believe the model worked out very well for WoW. I appreciate the fact that content, updates, services, etc. all are updated regularly and have kept that game going for a long time. I imagine what this would have done for Diablo 2....
Diablo 2 is still going strong compared to other games that are at least 10 years old.
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark. I would have loved more expansions and content. I like how you can see the graphical differences in WoW from the old worlds to the new worlds. So much improved over that time span and the game grew along with it. I guess the biggest thing for me is that I like to stick to a good game for a long time and I want it to keep me engaged and exciting. I feel WoW being on a subscription model kept it fresh and kept it in Blizzards warm dev arms
I support a subscription feature of this game because I believe the model worked out very well for WoW. I appreciate the fact that content, updates, services, etc. all are updated regularly and have kept that game going for a long time. I imagine what this would have done for Diablo 2....
0
0
I am a casual gamer, meaning I don't play more then a few hours a week. I will play and buy whatever is fun, even if I don't get to play it as much as I would like. It just means it takes me longer to get to the end game. If a game is really fun, I will play it more and ignore the others.
0
I've been using a 24" wide screen for a while now, it works well for games. I just like having a proper field of view, which I think is important to the fact of the utter caos which will be Diablo 3. Think about how cramped it might get with everyone spamming on all those monsters. I kind of think that since Diablo 3 isn't really a competative game you should have the option. There may be other ways to deal with PvP, which to me is secondary to the rest of the game.
0
Yeah, more field of view than resolution I suppose. My bad, SC2 does allow high resolution, but it doesn't effect the field of view.
0
0
0
Hopefully they will use the same system they used for the latest WoW expansion. You pre-ordered the game from Blizzard and it downloaded in the background, so it would be installed and ready to use at the exact moment of the release.
0
I think this is a good point. If they would like the game as widely assessable as they say they want it, they can not charge a fee that people can not afford. I would guess a lot of people in their target are in the same boat as you.
0
0
Yes, 5-6 years on one game with the same content is enough for me. No one was "demanding" anything of the such, no need to exaggerate my point to make your own. I would just prefer paying a small fee for new things to keep it interesting.
0
Expansions, yes, Diablo 2 had one in 10 years and WoW has had many. But you're right, there is not a massive server cost.
0
Agreed, I rarly fit into that bell curve myself. Although I find myself more casual as I get older, and not finding as much time for gaming as I use to.
0
0
Very true, and I appreciate that fact, but for me the game got redudant around the 5-6 years of playing it mark. I would have loved more expansions and content. I like how you can see the graphical differences in WoW from the old worlds to the new worlds. So much improved over that time span and the game grew along with it. I guess the biggest thing for me is that I like to stick to a good game for a long time and I want it to keep me engaged and exciting. I feel WoW being on a subscription model kept it fresh and kept it in Blizzards warm dev arms
0