First I would say that I was a MAJOR defender of Blizzard through the build up to release. I didn't allow myself a single shred of doubt. Well, it has changed a little since then.
1) The story and the way they deliver the story. They created lore books to allow people to keep playing rather than stop. However any quest dialogue interrupts that lore book. So you either have to stop and listen (because moving ahead in the game invariably cuts it off to allow for new dialogue) or you go back to town and stand their listening to them (again...standing still). Pairing that with a dismal plot and character development I was heart sick knowing I waited 11 years for this product.
2) Caldeum. There was no area I was more excited to explore than that massive city. I loved Lut'Gholen in Diablo 2. This was the biggest waste of concept art the game saw.
3) Just the overall feel that they honestly missed the whole point of what Blizzard North had created and why it was successful. It's hard to fathom how they so easily dismissed the root areas that made the game stylistically awesome. Yes, Diablo 1 and 2 had really bright areas, but it also had a LOT of dark sections too. And never did the Gothic/dark vibes change because of pallet shifts. It stayed moody and foreboding.
edit for spelling
- BigEd781
- Registered User
-
Member for 11 years, 11 months, and 1 day
Last active Sat, Apr, 14 2018 11:57:13
- 0 Followers
- 811 Total Posts
- 74 Thanks
-
5
Uldyssian posted a message on Name your top 3 issues with the gamePosted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
phuzi0n posted a message on Does anyone else not pick up rares?Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
For anybody farming at a decent rate, no you're not. I have countless lvl 60+ gear that I can't even attempt to sell because my AH is full of 1 mill+ items that I'm waiting to sell even at heavy discounts and I still gather it faster than I can sell it. I have never had any ilvl 59 or less (excluding jewelry) item sell for more than 100k which is not remotely worth my time trying to sell. By trying to sell low priced crap you just prevent yourself from making more money off the high value items.Quote from RMrulz
Pick up and ID the ilvl 50-59 gear also. Well-rolled gear sells for a lot on the AH since there are so few people selling this gear to all the people leveling alts. You're leaving a ton of gold sitting on the ground by ignoring this gear.
-
1
n0c0 posted a message on Real money AH=Overpriced Gold AHNo, rmah doesnt increase prices on gold items, actually you make profit on most items if you buy with real money and sell for gold, considering cap for real money price is 250euro and cap for gold is abit over 2billion.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Prices on gold AH were high before RMAH launch aswell. -
2
RMrulz posted a message on Simple Loot SolutionBoP?Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
No.
No, no, no.
No.
NO. -
1
Bleu42 posted a message on The fun is over.. ToC nerfPosted in: Demon Hunter: The DreadlandsQuote from ZeroEdgeir
You call nerf cause you don't like the idea of having something taken away.
The thing is, it was never INTENDED to be this strong. It's a bug. They are fixing it. If it had intentionally been designed to be this ridiculously strong, and then they turned around on it, then they wouldn't have made such a large post regarding it. It would have been a "This is being nerfed cause it's too OP". They explained the mechanics of how the spell works, and why it bugged out.
You say nerf,
They say bugfix.
Guess which one is far more accurate?
WELL, if you really want to get technical, it IS a nerf considering they are lowering the damage of the skill, intended, bug or not. JUST to be technical =D -
1
proletaria posted a message on The Astronomical Discussion ThreadPosted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)Quote from TheDemokin
Quote from proletaria
Quote from TheDemokin
event A occurs, science applies knowledge of scientific laws and states that it was caused by B
event A occurs, religion applies knowledge of holy laws and states that it was caused by C
Certainly, a different method goes into both, however the similarity is in the fact that both attempt to explain the exact same phenomena based on their current knowledge and a system of beliefs.
Science isn't a system of belief.
To a certain degree, sure, but that is not relevant to the argument in that case.
Although there appears to be more things going for the M-theory. If that holds up against many attempts to prove it incorrect, that might be a ground for a massive change in sciences and everything that we know.
No, not to any degree. Your argument is completely invalid. -
1
Huminator posted a message on WTS Godly Amulet.Sorry to break your dreams. But your amulet isnt even worth half. Thoose amulets goes on auction for around 50 mill. In order to even pass 100 mill, its required the amulet is a tri stat amulet (crit, cit dmg, attack speed) with decent stats. Mainstats, res etc.Posted in: Wizard: The Ancient Repositories
Stop being naive. -
3
DontUseMyName posted a message on Server IP's related to drops?Every thread about this on the particular "cheating" forums got closed due to stupidity and unproved conspiracy.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
derpistan posted a message on problems levelingIf you get desperate or bored just look for a level 62-63 weapon with reduced level requirements, a 700 dps 1h or a 850 dps 2h will make a huge difference.Posted in: Wizard: The Ancient Repositories -
1
Zakaz posted a message on A farming questionIt's nearly impossible to say with certainty which will be more lucrative, even with all of the available numbers out there. Sure, you can realistically narrow it down to a single-digit percentage and make a comparison from there, but it's really hard to factor in player skill, build, gear, randomness of champions and their relative affix toughness, farming route effectiveness, etc.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Personally (CAUTION: anecdotal evidence ahead!) I've had much better luck in Act 3 with 0 to 21 MF (thanks Paragon!) than I did in Act 1 with 280 (again though, this is a barb versus DH, respectively). I daresay if the choice was mine, I would stick to Act 3 with 150% MF. Even with the changes to iLvl 61 and 62 items, the multiple times more probable chance of finding high iLvl items in later acts pushes it just out of reach, in my opinion.
That's my 4 cents. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
Then how about posting a min. bid instead of wasting people's time hoping for someone to offer you 50m+? You seem to have a minimum in mind, why not share it?
What if you went into Best Buy and wanted to buy a router? You saw no price tag, so you asked an employee "how much". They responded with "offer". "Ok" you say, "how about $20?". They laugh in your face and tell you to get out of their store with your lowball offers. Annoying, isn't it?
1
1. Lack of randomness:
- why they thought pre-made environments would be good for the longevity of the game is beyond me. No one is going to farm the same Act III for 5+ years, it is just dull.
2. Drops
- Drops suck, period. Even after 1.0.4 they suck, though I do get excited when I see a legendary now, which is great. 40 hours of playing since the patch and I found one item of value, no upgrades I can use myself. We can debate back and forth on this, but it's not complicated; playing a game only to farm items when good items almost never drop is just stupid and not fun.
3. Useless features
- Mostly environmental drops, but also rare elites. So they had a botting problem... did they not see that coming? Their solution; make environmental drop rates garbage. Great, now it is a non-feature for *everyone*. Why even have them? I pass chests and pots, they're not worth the time needed to open/break them. Rare elites are just better to avoid as they are a waste of time... so why even have them?
On top of that:
4. Art - Looks like WoW, way too cartoonish. I don't feel like I'm playing a "dark" game, never have I felt like I was in the bowels of some dangerous area. It's just "meh".
5. Stupid skills that no one will ever use and devs/CM's claiming there are billions of viable builds. Uh-huh.
6. The fact that it took so long to make. Why did this take so long? What about this game is so awesome and complex to justify such a ridiculously long development schedule?
7. The AH. Yeah, the AH. It's not the same as D2 trade, whatever people may say. It creates a centralized place for a massive number of people to trade items for gold without being online at the same time. That makes for a much larger impact than trade in D2 ever had. I can understand why it would seem like a good idea, but I think it just introduced a slew of problems, and I don't believe for a second that drop rates aren't balanced around it (how could that possibly be true?)
8. Online-always. 'Nuff said.
So yeah, the same old stuff. I think the entire team was just extremely naive about what would and would not work. They didn't have the experience needed to create a Diablo successor.
There are good things about the game, mainly, the gameplay itself, which is 100% awesome and unrivaled by any ARPG currently on the market... for now (*hint* *hint*, Marvel Heroes).
2
1
1
Dude... throw it away, all of it. It can do you no good. If you happen to be with a new girl who finds she may be disgusted as you said. If she doesn't mind and would like to use them... then you have a different sort of problem. Do you want a girl who is ok with using second hand "toys"?
2
I realize that this is directed toward the "rabid haters", but I see no provision for those who see real problems with the game but are in fact reasonable. As a result, you have painted anyone who disagrees with you as "unreasonable", and comments such as this:
again paint us as people who are somehow invested in the failure of Diablo III. I'm sure you would count me as one of the "detractors", but I don't "grudgingly accept [the patch] as positive", I think it *is* positive, in every sense of the word. It is a patch which incorporates changes that I and people like me have been begging for.
We want the game to be fun. We want the focus to be on fun and not on so-called "balance". When a decision point arises wherein the developers/project managers have to make a choice between something which is potentially OP (but perhaps fun) and a possible nerf, we want them to err on the side of fun (i.e., leave as is), not caution (i.e., "nerf bat!"). We want a game where there are perhaps too many powerful weapons/builds/whatever rather than too few.
I think the developers are seeing that the majority of the playerbase feels this way and are making changes accordingly. For that I am pleased because I want DIII to succeed. I want to be enjoying this game 5+ years from now, but to achieve that, changes need to be made. I like the direction that the game is going and I am willing to be patient.
On topic: no, I don't like those who bitch and moan while proposing no reasonable alternative. I don't like those who troll near every thread with nonsense about how "blizz sucks", how they're incompetent, how they are money hungry, soulless pigs. Conversely, I don't care for those who unthinkingly defend poor design choices. No reasonable person likes either side very much I would wager. Both extremes suck and they make the community worse.
1
Combat is about 1000x better than DIII. Disproved.
2
1
Going to have to agree with this. The entire thread is based upon a faulty and inflammatory premise.
1