DiabloFans

I love how Diablo looks, personally. It reminds me of the DI Diablo a bit more. Reptilian and and bipedal. The weirder the shape, the better.

Trust? A company? lol No, I don't trust anybody.

Doesn't mean they can't make an enjoyable game, though.

I watched Priest recently. It actually wasn't that bad and I liked it. Kind of a religiously themed Blade with elements of The Book of Eli but with much better visuals.

Hmm. Assuming I don't care for online play due to the RMA and the fact that I don't like Hardcore, explain to me what my motivation is for buying a product with DRM designed to shit on paying customers again? I mean, half the time I play SP games it's because I want something to play in my MMO downtime due to SPECIFICALLY the "online only" feature of MMO's. o.O

I'll have to stick with Torchlight and wait for Grim Dawn, I guess.

TL is a very hit or miss game. The mods is really what does it for me.

Quote from nickostick_4058945

But based on your statement, people in Russia and Ukraine have 0 internet.

I didn't say that. I'm gonna end that here. I don't want to keep arguing with someone who's either intent on twisting what I said, or has REALLY horrid reading comprehension.

Quote from Kiserai

Since your sight be so clear and your comparisons so many, by your own words, please kindly direct us all here to the game that's doing what Diablo 3 will be doing and with even greater quality, since Blizzard's quality has been plummeting so quickly?

Are you trying to use the "if there's no alternative than the thing we have is great and amazing!" argument? It's a false one, I hope you realize.

Most companies right now do not make Hack&Slashes. Although there is Torchlight 2. Which I'll probably end up playing instead of this. No matter how unpolished TL 2 is, it's going to better than Diablo 3 because it doesn't fuck up the player or have an RMA, + mods, I've seen the results in TL 1 and they were great. Grim Dawn looks interesting as well. But I was always able to enjoy Hack&Slashes outside the Diablo franchise. Nox, Sacred - I liked these more than DII. I had fun with TQ. Demon's Souls >>>>>>>>>>>>> DI + DII + DIII already. Some blind fans will see everything without the "Diablo" sticker as bad, so my statement will be ignored here, but I won't have that issue.

SW:TOR will probably be relatively close to WoW, as well, without all the money hogging garbage.
SCII is not that great, either, I find AoE III a much better game overall, even though I was unhappy with AoE III changes compared to AoE II, but SCII feels like a weak graphic update with partial downgrades, while AoE III is a very solid, standalone game with many interesting implementations.

Besides, when was the last time Blizzard did something that wasn't WarCraft, StarCraft, or Diablo? Are they running off their own current success, or mere past success "It's Blizzard so I must buy it"? Really, SCII was not that great. It wasn't. I got it because I liked SC1 and because all my friends were getting SCII. I have significant trouble getting into it these days. WoW was good during vanilla/TBC, which was some while ago. I play it because of a guild. In fact, I feel dirty about that right now.

Quote from Kiserai

You rail on and on about not respecting a company or playing it's games, and the obvious implication is apparently you don't think Blizzard deserves our respect or money. If that's true, are you buying the game? If not, why are you still posting here?

I do not believe you have the right to ask a poster from 2006 why they're here. I've been here before DIII was even announced. People who like games come in different forms. Some are blind insane fans who will buy everything relating to their favorite game and grind to 99. Some acknowledge it as a worthwhile title they want to see a continuation towards. I've spent ~4 years on this forum, waiting, watching, what Diablo III was becoming. Perhaps it's time for me to leave, but this forum is not the official forum that exists solely for buttlicking Blizzard. This forum is full of real, living people, who have opinions. And so we make those opinions heard. I'm sorry you think only die hard new Blizzard(tm) fans can post here.

Quote from Kiserai

There are companies that do such things and they deserve to be held responsible

When we're discussing that company, I'll discuss that. Just like I don't harp on HoN's recent F2P change on Dark Souls forums, that doesn't make much sense, does it?

Quote from Kiserai

but you're using very serious and dramatic language for something that is ostensibly a non-issue for 95% of the player base.

I am a far seer you could say, I take little things and see how they extrapolate into the future, becoming huge. I know that I have to fight for every little crumb, every step of the way, or all will be lost in the numbness that people have when things change... slowly. But slow change is still change. Bad things other companies do at least are recognized as bad things. This isn't.
One person not murdering doesn't excuse their stealing as OK.

Quote from Kiserai

If this was going to alienate any notable portion of the player base Blizzard wouldn't be doing it, because even by the logic of pure greed, it's in Blizzard's greedy interest to get as many people playing (read: paying) as possible.

Blizzard doesn't have proper numbers on their actions, though.

Not that I care about pure greed. People are numb, that's why they accept these things. Marketing is all about making people who don't need it think they need it. Then people become the marketers, as if hypnotized.

I am not good at persuasion or conviction. I'm just here to let people know they're not alone. I'm not here to convince you - I can't. You either see it or you don't.

RMAH. I didn't even look at anything else. I'm not going to - it doesn't matter.

Quote from Gharbad

You vote now that you won't buy it, but you know you will.

Some will, some won't. Your statement has no value as it is a blind no-loss prediction.
Every poster on a fan-forum is treated that way. Come to a forum of a game you care absolutely nothing about, say you won't buy it, you'll be told you will.
See how worthless your statement is now?

Quote from calpurnia12

You seem to be posting on these forums just fine, maybe you can make the same trip out of your village?

I'm not in the village at the moment, it was an example situation. I'm sorry you have no reading comprehension.

Quote from nickostick_4058945

IF it takes that 1 activation, I'm sure finding 5 mins of internet to activate it wouldn't be difficult nor "inconvenient". If you can't have more than 5 mins of internet at a time you shouldn't have a computer, let alone be buying Diablo 3.

Ever tried to find internet in a 2nd world country? Funny, there are tons of people in Russia and Ukraine playing Diablo II because it had no problems of that nature at all. But apparently according to you we shouldn't be able to. I guess Diablo is an America-only game now? Have amazing internet and live in the best country or GTFO?

THIS is what I'm talking about.

Quote from Kiserai

you know very well what 'this day and age' means

I know what is meant by it. I also know it does not exist. Diablo II was pirated up the whazoo. SCII was pirated in BETA. This is nothing new. This changes nothing. Absolutely. Nothing. It's not new. It's not "this day and age". It's "the day and age that existed for the past 30 years of gaming".

Quote from Kiserai

making this move that might very well save Blizzard very serious amounts of money at the the cost of annoying a microscopic portion of the player base is simply pragmatism.

Money should never be above the benefit of humankind.
Blizzard earns tremendous money, everyone should be well aware of that. Blizzard screwing over portions of the playerbase, that ONCE WERE THEIR OLD PLAYERBASE THAT MADE THEM SUCCESSFUL, however miniscule now (you lack the statistics on this), for some untraceable amount of money, is a sign of a very bad moral sense. And regardless of how many times people may claim that a company is only a business, there are lines to be drawn, lines after which a company should no longer be respected and their games played.

I could somewhat try to begin to comprehend this if DIII was an SP only game. It's not. DIII is 90% a multiplayer game. SP won't hurt them. Mods won't hurt them. Them barring and blocking those things is a very bad sign for the customers of a company whether you see it or not. I don't know why you're so concerned about the profits of a company that earned 15 * 6 million * month for 6 years, instead of YOURSELF. I look out for ME, I look out for my fellow GAMERS, not companies and their publishers.

Quote from Kiserai

But saying that creating a better experience for the 95%

Wait, what? Where did this come from? This change doesn't affect the 95% at all.

Quote from Kiserai

The money they save could very well fuel further development, more server hardware, more employees, the next expansion.

15 * 6 million for 6 years should have fueled something. It didn't. You can't fuel art. It's limited. This money goes in Blizzard's pocket and nowhere else, don't kid yourself.
More employees do not make better games. At most they can make more content, even that is doubtful. That's only relevant to MMO's, anyway, Diablo won't get any new content.
More expansions do not make better games (WotLK). In the past I have played games without expansions for ages without even knowing there was an expansion and never feeling the need. Expansions are often an excuse for lack of features early on.
Server hardware? There's absolutely nothing wrong with the servers of Heroes of Newerth - that company is in the process of dying. How much money does Blizzard need to approach the server quality of tiny sub-indie dying companies?

I'm sorry, I am not blind. I know what's out there, and I can make comparisons. Blizzard has been _falling_ in quality, rather than rising.

Quote from Kiserai

You can't please everyone but you can please most and whether people are nostalgic for LAN (or genuinely need it, as you do) very few people will actually see it as a big deal or even a notable one. I think there are some like you who at least have an understandable anger over the issue, most of the rest just want to complain to fill the void until they get to play.

I guess my college friends who want to play SCII over LAN but can't because the internet sucks in their dorm/college or throttles games are just filling the void until they get to play some other game with the same limitations.

OK.

LAN is viable beyond far to reach places. I was talking about offline SP, though, but LAN is in the same basket.

Quote from Kiserai

Honestly in this day and age I don't think it's all that unreasonable.

There is no 'day and age' of which you speak of.
It is unreasonable if you care about your players' convenience, which Blizzard obviously does not.
I'm in a village far away there's no internet here. I got my SCII copy. Install- crap I can't play it.
This is done for supposed (not guaranteed) profit while hurting the players.

Not all of us are stuck in cities with perfect high speed internet 24/7/4/12. Old school gamers especially value freedom a lot, this limits.

This game doesn't satisfy the parameters to be an MMORPG. I really don't know what you're talking about. Online-only games have existed for ages (Savage, HoN), doesn't make them MMO's lol.

The offline only thing is dumb but that's a different topic.

The whole offline restriction thing often means I either have 2 version of the game (offline-capable by shady means + normal), or have a secondary SP game to play when my internet randomly dies.

I don't like it.

I am not sure how I'm supposed to build a character now. That aspect always attracted me more than the looting/gearing aspect. Now it's gone, unless I missed something. There are still runes I guess. But not what I'm looking for.

This is not Nox. Or WoW, for that matter.

What's up with all these vids recently?

I knew Monk could use shields long ago. Even posted it in my thread on weapons.

I find soccer rather boring to watch either way. Not a bad sport by any means, but there are very few sports that I can actually WATCH.

Quote from arsonal3

I play Torchlight and have those sort of buffs. Not to mention that is the direction they're taking buffs, they've changed the Monk's Auras to work like that. I hated having to have a skill which just offered a bonus without my active participation like the old Paladin.

There's no functional difference between a buff and a passive assuming buff length = buff cooldown. So I really don't see the point.
Active participation? One more button to click? You sound like those SC players who think automining simplifies the game.

Quote from arsonal3

The neat thing we're finding out right now is that it may not "reduce" the time between uses but delay the cool down.

What's the difference? o.O Are you talking about cast time?

Quote from arsonal3

So I did a little bit of looking around to see how the over all skill layout for all the classes. Mainly tier 7 skills have functions either as AoE damage, or some other type. WD has summon army, a DoT which summons a pet if it kills its target, and a big AoE. Wizard has the Familiar or Teleport. Monk has a Aura, Multi-strike ability, or AoE. I guess my thought is that Tier 7 are cool abilities but not a straight up damage attack. They seem more additive then just an attack.

Hmm.
Summon.
DoT.
AoE.
Summon.
Movement.
Aura.
Damage.
AoE.

I guess my thought is I see 4 straight up damage abilities, with at least one damage ability per class.
I would accept the DoT's if this was a crawler but with how many enemies Diablo typically has, and how quickly they go down, DoTs seem kind of pointless, except for bosses (see my above comment about bosses). Unless it's a massive DoT, I'm confused about the "its target" thing in tha tcase.

Quote from Equinox

My calculation attributes that you only pick one skill per each tier.

I was arguing from that originally, but I was told that may be wrong currently. Even then, this makes the situation worse, much worse. You may easily end up with 1-2 builds per class if that is true.

Quote from Equinox

I was thinking about this idea that certain specs can't work without other skills, I believe only one skill has a requirement of another skill.

It's hard to say considering how little info we have on the skills right now.
One example is that since WD's tier 1 skills are Dog and Plague, and assuming we can only choose one skill per tier, if he chooses Plague, Sacrifice becomes pointless. Except maybe it works with Parasite.
In fact, Dog and Plague may very well define a strong wall between the summoner WD and caster WD. Hybrids are still possible with the other spells but not pure builds. In DII, getting bone armor doesn't mean I can't summon skeletons.
If he chooses a curse ability in too many tiers, he'll be forced to compensate with damage abilities. There are going to be many forced damage-utility tradeoffs. And since the choices are blocked out strongly, they won't be soft tradeoffs like in DII (slightly less damage, slightly more defense).
Horrify and Soul Harvest don't make much sense together.
Overall, the curses will most probably cancel each other out. So will the damage abilities.
You can't combine stuff like Firebomb and Acid Storm.
Poison Dart is the stronger single target spell in lower tiers, if I understand right, which means it may end up having priority over other skills. Any skill that has a uniqueness state may block others out.
Haunt and Locust Swarm are the same thing, doubt we'll see these together.

Quote from Equinox

Oh I just base the last sections on what I've seen. No matter where you go people reach consensus on what they consider the best by some mathematical formula. Then they are argued over if there is no clear leader. I never care for this and just make my own build, playing with friends means I don't have to worry about being the BEST build.

What they consider the best is rather irrelevant. It's most important that Blizzard follows players after launch and adjust according to player builds, not their formula.
It's really not about best builds per se, but about drastic differences between builds (balance). Some build dealing 1k more damage then another is not an issue. But if there's a Hammerdin alike build in DIII it needs to be hit by the nerfbat.

I just wonder if they're not making their balancing job a lot harder with all these mechanics. They have to balance tiers and cooldowns now, instead of one skill vs another.