Diablo III Has Single Player Online

[eNTi]

you should rename this from "experienced points" to "stating the obvious... again".

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

I think I may actually have to say thank you, Blizzard. These days, with all the excellent games coming out and my time dwindling with extra responsibilities, it gets hard to choose which to buy and finish. And Diablo 3, with it's forceful approach to how games should be in our near future, well you can fuck right off.

 

[Sean951]

The whole "no pause" thing baffles me. If it's a single player session, why the hell wouldn't they have a pause function? Obviously a multi-player session wouldn't, but single player? Seriously, who put the stupid juice in the devs coffee?

And I really, really don't like the whole name/password thing. I know it seems small and petty, but last time I checked, I'm giving them money, not the other way around. That means I shouldn't have to be hassled to save them hassle, it works the other way around in the consumer-provider interaction.

When did Blizzard get so moronic? Was it before or after Activsion bought them?

The security thing exists because it is quite common for people to lose their accounts, and Blizzard decided the best way to protect the user from themselves was an authenticator.

 

[deathjavu]

They're worried about people "cheating", except it's a single player game so there's no one to "cheat". They also have an auction house you can spend real money in, which they claim they won't post items in. But the person who posted the auction is anonymous.

2+2=

 

[Realitycrash]

So, is Diablo III restricted to five worlds as well? Five tiny, fucking levels that feature little to no variety? Or is it more "open world" (dare I say "Sandbox"?) that encourages exploring?

You mean five level themes with dozens of large, open, procedurally-generated levels that can bring almost infinite variety?

Calling Diablo 2 a "short game" given the number of choices, the replayability, the nightmare and hell modes and so on and so forth is seriously narrow-minded.

If you by "infinte variety" mean "Oooh, sometimes the right Temple/Cave/Oasis/Whatever is TO THE RIGHT this time, instead of DOWN AND TO THE LEFT. Gee, this is a completely new experience for me!".

And so what if it is replayable? I never questioned this. I just don't want to replay the same (very short) levels all over again.

 

[Realitycrash]

All I want to know about Diablo III is this; Is it horribly short, as Diablo 2?
I don't buy games to play online (WoW not included, but I'v given that up as well), I prefer singleplayer, and when I ran through Diablo 2 (plus the expansion) in around 16 hours, I got pretty pissed.
So, is Diablo III restricted to five worlds as well? Five tiny, fucking levels that feature little to no variety? Or is it more "open world" (dare I say "Sandbox"?) that encourages exploring?

It's going to be essentially the same. At the very least in the departments of linearity and size of the game world.

Thanks, I know not to buy it then.

 

[Realitycrash]

So, is Diablo III restricted to five worlds as well? Five tiny, fucking levels that feature little to no variety? Or is it more "open world" (dare I say "Sandbox"?) that encourages exploring?

You mean five level themes with dozens of large, open, procedurally-generated levels that can bring almost infinite variety?

Calling Diablo 2 a "short game" given the number of choices, the replayability, the nightmare and hell modes and so on and so forth is seriously narrow-minded.

If you by "infinte variety" mean "Oooh, sometimes the right Temple/Cave/Oasis/Whatever is TO THE RIGHT this time, instead of DOWN AND TO THE LEFT. Gee, this is a completely new experience for me!".

Last time I checked, that's part of the definition of variety, and yes, it does allow for almost infinite permutations. Meanwhile, sandbox games will be exactly the same each time you play them.

The game is DESIGNED to be played through multiple times. You know, like some games are. Devil May Cry and Dead Rising 2, for instance. And the levels themselves actually get much longer on higher difficulties. If you wanna complain about how you personally don't like it go ahead, but don't act like it's objectively bad or I'm going to yell at you over the internet again.

It might allow for "infinite permutations", but doesn't give me any NEW INFO. Instead of the road going left, it now goes right, but both takes me to the Temple of Doom, and both roads had the same amount of enemies and the same environment. It's like 7+5=12, and 8+4=12. It's the same goddamn result and it doesn't impress me. If levels actually get longer in the higher difficulty-levels, then the game gets longer, sure, but it really wouldn't impress me much. More of the same, more of the same.
Even though you can beat every game in only a few hours (or minutes), if you set yourself out to do it, some still take longer, and Diablo II isn't long from that point of view. What do I consider a long game? Dragon Age: Origins is long, it has plenty of sidequests, dialogue and the mainplot is massive in its own. Morrowind was fucking huge, especially with the expansions.
And you say that its ment to be played "over and over again"? Fine. I guess you were one of the guys that grinded it online for years (much like I have done with World of Warcraft), but I play Diablo for single-player action, and where is the point of me to grind it then?
I feel none. Higher difficulty does not equal incentive to continue grinding.

"Objectively a bad thing"? Have you any idea what "objective" means?
Sigh. No one can ever have an OBJECTIVE opinion, then it wouldn't be an opinion.

 

[SonofSeth]

I played WoW a long time, none of these issues affect me in the slightest.

Will buy on midnight launch.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Waah Waah. People just need something to QQ about. I have to go on this internet thing to play my game? But I'm scared and overwhelmed! Get with the times grandpa! If you don't like it go make a better game.

Out the door with you and your trolling. Now.

World of Warcraft "pirate" servers? They are called emulation servers and they do not break any international copy write laws

Wrong on both sides. Hosting private servers is violating WoW's TOS and a bannable offense. Copyright has nothing to do with it.

OT: Isn't it wonderful how gaming has evolved since the 80's but now in the 2010's it's DEVOLVING. It's time to wake up and stop praising the melee of mediocrity and demand developers actually put some fucking effort into their games and stop defrauding us. Yes I'm looking at you, EA.

Captcha: annointed ceesra

 

[AngryPants]

So... it's going to be a Torchlight with lag? Uhm... Why do I have the feeling I'd prefer Torchlight 2?

We all understand that they're trying to shove pirates off, but for how long are they planning to do that at the expense of their customers? Someone got to stop all this DRM/Online Activation(now online single player?) crap soon, before it went too far.

 

[BaronOfStuff]

Looks like I'm STILL going to be playing the first two.

 

[Realitycrash]

It might allow for "infinite permutations", but doesn't give me any NEW INFO. Instead of the road going left, it now goes right, but both takes me to the Temple of Doom, and both roads had the same amount of enemies and the same environment. It's like 7+5=12, and 8+4=12. It's the same goddamn result and it doesn't impress me. If levels actually get longer in the higher difficulty-levels, then the game gets longer, sure, but it really wouldn't impress me much. More of the same, more of the same.

And of course, random dungeon #232 in whatever sandbox game you like (that encourages exploring) is completely different from this because it has two levers to pull instead of one.
I mean, I have no problems if this is what gets you to enjoy the game. But you have to consider the hilarity of that statement.

Even though you can beat every game in only a few hours (or minutes), if you set yourself out to do it, some still take longer, and Diablo II isn't long from that point of view.

So your argument is "if I completely ignore the point of this game and go straight for the finish line, the game is too short for me". Well, yes, it's that type of game.

"Objectively a bad thing"? Have you any idea what "objective" means?
Sigh. No one can ever have an OBJECTIVE opinion, then it wouldn't be an opinion.

Of course I have an idea what "objective" means. It comes with general statements about a game that can be right or wrong. Such as the ones you implied: lack of variety, not encouraging exploration.
Now I'm not the one to keep arguing what your words sounded like instead of what you meant, but if you really meant it as personal opinion you should have said so.

I'm about go out and get drunk, so I don't have time for a "proper" reply, all I can say is: Too few sidequests, not enough dialogue, not enough varied environments. Had they made about twice the content (twice the amount of "levels" you can go to) I probably wouldn't be complaining.
For me, the game is short. But I'm sure it's excellent to grind online.
Glad you enjoy it, I sure did not.

 

[CaptDom]

I bought a PC to turn my back on consoles and their shitty narrow-minded shoot-first-ask-questions-later DRM policies.

Battlenet for this, Origin for that; makes me think of Steam almost a positively positive light... when they let me log into 'my own' games that is. My entire library is online only *sadface* (if only steam had an proper offline mode instead of a sick joke using those words as its name)

am I alone or do the words USER-NAME and PASS-WORD often look like GIVE-UP and GO-AWAY?

All those people who were looking forward to WabloIII that are now crying into their preview articles and keyboards, I can think of maybe one positive thing to say; AT LEAST THERE WON'T BE FEELINGS GUILT AND HEARTACHE ABOUT PIRATING IT SEEING AS HOW IT'S NOT EVEN WORTH IT.

BLIZZARD - Y U NO RESPECT ANYTHING?

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Whenever my government approves the construction of a private toll road the surrounding transport infrastructure will often be strategically altered from its original layout into a different layout. The purpose of the change will enviably be so that more traffic is channelled or encouraged to patron the new toll road and they do this at the expense of reduced functionality for non-users. It is complete utter bullshit and while I certainly won't be buying it, there is a strange sort of inevitability of the game's success and the continued erosion of player privileges. Post release I can see a lot of players shrugging their shoulders at what the big deal was when they stop playing Diablo 3 and trade in their gear at the online store for a small discount on another Blizzard game.

But as Lando Calrissian said, "This deal is getting worse all the time."

 

[RA92]

Dear me, point-and-click adventures are quite the rage these days!

 

[Twilight_guy]

Personally I never had a problem with Diablo 2 where you couldn't pause either and I think pauses are kind of unnecessary because Diablo has towns.

Yes you could. Playing in single player you couple press the 'Esc' key on your keyboard (top left) and the game would pause.

Hum guess I had that wrong. I distinctly remember getting killed during a pause screen must have been mutliplayer.