Diablo III Hands On

[dillinger88]

They started 'functioning' this way suspiciously soon after the Acti/Blizz merger, so something likely went wrong there. And in any case, this changes the actions not one single bit. In fact, it reflects on Blizzard even worse.

Correlation does not equal causation.

Also, Blizzard were nickel and diming way before the merger. Paid character transfer and name changers at RIDICULOUS prices, vanity pets etc.

Everyone likes hating on Activision, understandably so because they are a pretty awful company. I do too. But using them as a scapegoat for Blizzard's stupid decisions is a bit silly and somewhat fanboyish.

This "dumbing down" doesn't seem like a problem to me as RPGs are about immersion not filing paper work. If something can be done intuitively rather than picking where to put arbitrary numbers, then I'm all for it. Anyone who insults my intelligence for this opinion is actually the dumb one and can fuck off.

My biggest problem with the game is the real currency auction house pretty much legitimising slave-trade farming in China. Seriously. The fact that they charge you to list and item, take a cut of the winning bid and charge you to withdraw your money will literally will print money for them and I'm worried that they won't feel obliged to expand on the game because its not worth it financially.

And the removal of mod support

 

[Jake Martinez]

excuse me? are they destroying the thing that made diablo II my favorite game of all time? they have chopped down the talents tree??!?!?! whhhhhhhyyyyyy!!!! diablo II was a great game because of that. there was not ONE good build, there were serveral. each character had like 25 abilities, but you only focused on 2 or 3. there was huge customasation in gameplay and they took it away? please don't let it be. i'm already waiting for a diablo III for years, but now they are raping it.

I agree. I've made so many Diablo characters BECAUSE I wanted to try out all of the talent tree builds.

Limitations in this area are probably going to severely limit replayability for Diablo. Hell, it's one of the reasons why Dialbo II is still very populated years after it's initial release.

I'm going down on record as not being a fan of the over-simplification of video games that we are experiencing. I blame consoles, I really do - they've shown developers that a sure way to a bucketload of cash is to cater to the lowest common denominator, and let's be honest, the big developers only really care about making cash. Hand over fist if possible.

 

[BlackSaint09]

DEATH BY SNU SNU.

I haven't been very interested in Diablo 3 ever since I learned it was online only. Guess I'll just wait and see how the reviews turn out.

This is blizzard and Activision were talking about... Are you sure that youre going to find a single review thats unbiased?

 

[Simeon Ivanov]

I just want this game to be awesome ... but hey, it´s Blizzard, they have yet to release a bad game.

 

[The Human Torch]

Blizzard functions separately from Activision. Any and all decisions relating to the game's design is solely on Blizzard's part.

They started 'functioning' this way suspiciously soon after the Acti/Blizz merger, so something likely went wrong there. And in any case, this changes the actions not one single bit. In fact, it reflects on Blizzard even worse.

Blizzard made dubious decisions even before the merger ($25 server transfers in WoW?). They are a company out to make money, just because everybody seems to purview them as a charity, doesn't mean that they are. Has Blizzard taken a few money making advises from Activision? Sure, but it's BLIZZARD that has the final say on what they implement in a game. It's all them.

 

[The Human Torch]

Blizzard functions separately from Activision. Any and all decisions relating to the game's design is solely on Blizzard's part.

Lol I'm surprised that anyone still buys that shit. They're owned by Activision. They answer to Activision's shareholders. So of course Activision is going to have a voice in what they do. Anyone telling you otherwise, Blizzard included, is pure PR speak.

Activision owns Vivendi Universal, which in turn owns Blizzard. Every company always answers to their shareholders, but the final say is always with Blizzard. Does this mean that they don't get some advice from Activision's financial department? Of course not, but Blizzard has the final say.

All that I am saying that Blizzard is not the holy angel who's getting his wings smeared over with black, corrupt oil by Activision. They have made plenty of dubious decisions even before Activision came into the picture.

 

[LorienvArden]

Ok, I was on the verge of ripping Blizzard a proverbial new one once I read about the in game auction house.
Pay to win ? REALLY ??

I didn't like it one little bit, but I think the model could be altered in some ways to give people EXACTLY what they want.

-Have a Singleplayer mode. Constant authentification should be necessary for Public games and anything that involves the auction system yes, but if somebody can't have a permanent internet connection, they should be allowed to play a private game at home.
-I understand that they don't WANT to provide a lan mode because of potential piracy issues, but the system should be designed that people at a lan party can play the game without immense lag.
-Enable Mods for private sessions.
The clear destinction between public and private games beeing that private characters wouldn't be able to play in public sessions and couldn't use certain features like auction houses etc.

In essence: just recreate the same system of Diablo2.
I know that enabling modding is a big investment, but It would be hugely benefitial to the lifetime of the game. The majority of the modders would propably be willing to wait for the implementation of such a feature after release.

Also, I figured that for the majority of my Diablo 2 experience - I haven't given a damn about random players online. I play it with my friends at home or over the internet, so unless I could actually make money from it by dropping some items in it from time to time, I wouldn't have any reasons to be bothered by them.

I'll still wait for the initial oppinions before I buy the game though. Ususally, I'ld have no hesitations about shelling out 50-60? for a Blizzard title, as I always felt I got a really good game for my money. This time, I'ld rather see and wait.

Also, this cynical person here should be heard on the matter:
http://www.youtube.com/user/TotalHalibut#p/c/2272A4EE84269E1F/3/GBrESZJlNvQ

 

[Rawne1980]

I can't believe I had any faith left in Blizzard after they were acquired by Activision.

Just feel the burning need to clarify this as it seems to be a common mistake by some people.

Activision didn't "aquire" or "buy" or "take over" Blizzard in any way shape or form.

Activision was merged with Vivendi (of which Blizzard is a part of) and thus Activision-Blizzard was formed.

It is still majority owned by Vivendi.

So for the record it was a merger with Blizzards parent company that led to Activision joining the scene NOT Activision buying Blizzard which some people seem to think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision_Blizzard

On topic.

I'm sure Diablo III will bring in a lot of money for Blizzard. Won't be a game i'll be playing myself but i'm sure others will love it.

With Zombie Island, Deus Ex and Skyrim coming up to keep me warm at night I just don't have room for it.

 

[ShadowyMOON]

So they removed the talent tree where you only focused on 3-4 skills and only used where the others were for synergies? You really want that back instead of having everything and six skills you can swap out on the fly?

I have no words to describe the amount of rose tinted glasses nostalgia BS and lack of common sense this thread has.

Have any of you played D2 recently? The rune system has tons more build variety than the old D2 skilltree, at least if you wanted to get past normal mode.

No mods - that sucks, agreed.

No offline - Hello there. In case you were living under a rock, there's this shiny game with a Blizzard stamp called SC 2. Guess what? It works pretty much THE SAME WAY. You really expected otherwise? Really?

Auction House - It was always there before, it's just legal now. I'm curious how it turns out.
Also, if you want to gather items on your own, don't use it. If you whine about PvP balance, you're one of the few crazy people that play Diablo for PvP. Sorry but that's a total minority right there, no one cares.
If people want to "Pay to win and own Baal in 2 seconds" it's their choice. No one forces you to use the system, no one forces you to play with them either. Get off your high horse.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Oh it is 'Cool' to hate on things Popular. Blizzard is Very Popular. So is Activision. Therefore, popular is bad and any game that must come from either developer will be bad. All because it is the popular thing to do.

Here we have someone who is woefully unfamiliar with the trajectory of corporate America. It's all about the sales. Depth is the enemy of mass appeal. If something appears obtuse or confusing, even temporarily, the never-ending quest for profit demands it be "fixed".

As an experienced gamer for going on 15 years, I don't need to have my shit dumbed down. I'm not a fucking soccer mom. I'm not the elderly. I'm not 8. When companies start catering to those other groups and stop giving two cents about me, I stop supporting them. I also rip them, because I'm free to do so. Then I take my dollars elsewhere (Torchlight 2).

As far as I can tell they are just a bunch of fuckin' morons. However that is just me, they have yet to play it and are just bitching just to *****. A normal mind would say 'Wait until the game has been released before using any Judgement or hatred upon the game' however that is called the brain. Most don't seem to have them nowadays.

This point is very fair. We shouldn't pass firm judgment on a game before we play it. I think it's sensible to voice concerns about certain aspects of its direction in a reasonable manner, though. I also think the inclusions of "always online" and "microtransactions" are sufficiently incendiary as to warrant outright disdain.

Anyways, I'll say what I said in all of the DA2 hate threads whenever someone decided to paint us as a bunch of, well, haters: monolithic publishers are consistently pushing games to be more accessible, more casual, more simplistic because that is how they maximize profits. This approach doesn't necessarily create better games. Just more profitable ones. If there's no "push back" from experienced gamers demanding more depth and complexity, there's no reason for these publishers to cater to any other demographic. That's a bad thing.

In the case of DA2, the hate clearly impacted sales very negatively. Figures show that it barely sold 2 million copies, 1.5 million fewer than the original. That's what happens when a) you cut a bunch of corners, and (crucially) b) the players call you out on it in a very public manner. We all know Diablo 3 will sell just fine and make a ton of money for Blizzard and Activision, but I'm betting some of their decisions will also positively impact Torchlight 2 sales.

 

[Project_Xii]

I hope all rage and "preorder" cancelling keeps going until release. By then, the player base will be refined down to a nice, pleasent bunch of people who don't give a crap about all the meaningless things everyone else is getting their knickers in a twist over, and will just want to have fun playing the game solo or with other people. The less whiners the better.

Like Torchlight 2 is going to be amazing in any way. Lol.

 

[Project_Xii]

Bah. Stupid double post.

 

[Odlus]

The advertised PvP aspect of the game? Well, it just went to hell and snug itself between devils buttcheeks. You can't have competitive PvP if You "buy power" through RMT. Diablo is not and never was a game of skill, it's game of gear. Want to win in PvP - shell out few hundreds bucks. Hurray.

I don't really want to get into this petty shit-storm, but I do want to comment on this because I'm seeing it a lot.

Blizzard has said since they first started talking about D3's PvP that is NOT going to be "competitive." They said it's never going to be "balanced" and they have absolutely no desires to make it into an "esport." Anyone who's been dreaming of climbing through the ranks of any "competitive Diablo 3 PvP scene" was kidding themselves; it's not going to be anything more than a sidegame put in for when people decide they'd rather kill each other than play co-op in a co-op game (which is how Blizzard has always described Diablo 3, which is also why they disabled the ability to go hostile in the first place).

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Like Torchlight 2 is going to be amazing in any way. Lol.

I don't know, the original didn't have a great deal of replay value, but it was a surprisingly polished and functional hack'n'slasher in the post Diablo 2 generation - not as good as Titan Quest, but certainly better than any of the Dungeon Siege games (ugh). Particularly good considering the devs are basically just indie. Having said that, Torchlight II could be better because most of the things that didn't convince me to play the game through any more than once (no multiplayer, few character choices, samey skills) are things they're apparently addressing in the expansion, so put that on top of an already solid game and you have something that could be more than just decent. The thing is, previously I thought they were being ambitious trying to compete with Diablo III, but Blizzard, benevolent and all-knowing gods that they are, have been kind enough to create them an entire market for a Diablo clone that DOESN'T have real-money trading, DOESN'T forbid LAN or offline singleplayer, and (I could be wrong about this) DOESN'T give the modding community a giant middle finger.