• 1

    posted a message on Why do people always say Diablo 3 was a failure?

    This is something that has always perplexed me, D3 came out in 2012 with RoS in 2014 that's 6 years ago for the last expansion and not only does it still receive constant updates regardless of the fact it has no in-game shop or subscription (Please tell me any other game that has this level of developement attention without any in-game shop or sub) but it also still has hundreds of thousands of people playing it to this day.

    When it first came out, the content was challenging and interesting. It lasted a large majority of the player base a good month before they started to get a bit bored and the several patches to come while it wasn't the most exciting I mean I know I and many others still played it. When RoS came out it was bloody amazing, I loved everything about it and sunk huge amounts of time into it... Sure eventually I got bored but just because I'm bored now doesn't mean the games bad, no game could hold my attention for ever.

    A lot of people I see who say the game was a failure either didn't play the game at all and seem to just jump on the band wagon or played the game for 800 hours and then went "this games terrible". To which I say what? Please show me the list of games you have which have no sub, no in-game shop and have still taken so many hours from you before you stepped away. There are also those that slate it for not receiving content updates that match PoE to which I say again no game without some form of in-game shop recieves such treatment so that comparison just makes no sense.

    My only assumption is that people wanted it to be like when they first played Diablo 2 and got lost in the game for years. But that would simply be impossible, Diablo 2 was from a different time with less options, less resources to gain information, less saturation of the market and for many the first time they even stepped into an online world so simply interacting with another player seemed amazing. If people expected Diablo 3 to take them back to when they were 12 years old and first stepped into Diablo 2 then ofcourse it was going to fail in there eyes as this is an impossible level to reach.

    Is there something i'm missing, what reasons do people have to view this game as such a huge failure while other games which have taken 1/10th of your time before getting boring are seen as massive successes (I know people who spent 80 hours in Skyrim and claim it is the best game they have ever played yet spent 500 in Diablo 3 and claim it to be a massive dissapointment), why was Diablo 3 held to a standard so much above any other Buy to Play game?

    Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Diablo 4 Duriel fight sneak peek.
    Quote from overrider»

    Quote from Blessed Mother»

    That's nothing like the Siegebreaker. Relax yourself. And if anything the Siegebreaker is like Duriel, not the other way around.

    If you chose to go this route , then calm your tits bro.

    Apart from the different model, looks exactly the same fight . I was expecting a fatality of some kind based on certain conditions, like a hp threshold.

    And btw learn to accept the fact that your opinions are not unanimous. People can really be split into 2 categories. Those who can accept that fact and those who don't.

    I'm curious, what about this fight makes u think claim this looks like "exactly the same fight"? I mean if your referring the model (i.e. that some-what centaur like appearance) then I guess.. Somewhat, but then again Duriels appearance was set wayy before Siegebreaker so I guess one could say Siegebreaker was somewhat inspired by Duriel.

    Other than that though, the two fights seem completely different. Unless ofcourse your really generalizing like saying "well both fights have grabs and adds" but one could use that logic to say every boss is a carbon copy of every boss.

    Posted in: Diablo IV: Return to Darkness
  • 1

    posted a message on Mobile game isn't the problem, delivery was.

    So I see a lot of people arguing "how can you be so against a game that isn't even out yet", but the problem isn't the game itself. Diablo Mobile could be kinda fun, and it makes sense from a organisation PoV because it's an untapped market if u get a good game in that genre on mobile. The problem is the delivery.

    So first, we've got the fact they clearly and intentionally hyped up a Diablo announcement with tweets, videos and making it first in line on the main stage. Sure this got downplayed a little, nobody expected D4 but it was still hyped. Second we've got Blizzcon, which is a place their fans go to some of which pay thousands to get to... Blizzard fans are prominently PC gamers, because thats where their games are and most PC gamers are of a more "hardcore" variant as such not really into mobile games (and even if they was, it wouldn't be at the forefront of there desires).

    Ok, so we've got a bunch of hyped up PC gamers spending thousands to go support there favourite dev and what does the dev do... It announces a mobile game. How out of touch with your audience do you have to be to think this is a good idea? To think the reaction is going to be good? To think this is what the people want? They even said it on stage "we're trying to reach new audiences". Well that's great, but you DON'T do that in a convention that is filled with your current audience that spent thousands to go there.... You do that outside of these conventions.

    So this leaves 2 questions....

    1. Is Blizzard so ludicrously out of touch with it's audience that it genuinely thought announcing a mobile game in this situation was a good move.

    2. Does Blizzard are so little about it's current audience/Diablo in general that it knew this would be the reaction and did it anyway?

    Either way you look at it, this is bad.


    Mobile game isn't the problem, the delivery and the concerns that brings regarding the company are.

    Posted in: Diablo: Immortal
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.