People were complaining that the problem with Diablo 3 was that it was supposedly balanced around the Auction House.
They were wrong.
The problem is that it wasn't.
And what almost certainly only started life as a small side feature in development meetings "hey wouldn't it be convenient if..." came to dominate a game that was never tuned for it.
That seems like a chicken and egg paradox to me. Whether the problems of the game stem from the game being balanced around the Auction House or the Auction House unbalancing the game, the central problem is still the damn Auction House.
Except for the fact that it has sold over 10 million copies [http://www.imediamonkey.com/2012/08/05/diablo-3-overtakes-warcraft-with-10-million-sales/], which is a massive success from Blizzard's/Activision's perspective.
Also, I'm inclined to say that if you buy something and get 200 hours of entertainment out of it, that seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Though that doesn't at all invalidate the criticisms about the endgame and how some of their design choices have thrown off balance and replay value.
Except for the fact that it has sold over 10 million copies [http://www.imediamonkey.com/2012/08/05/diablo-3-overtakes-warcraft-with-10-million-sales/], which is a massive success from Blizzard's/Activision's perspective.
Also, I'm inclined to say that if you buy something and get 200 hours of entertainment out of it, that seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Though that doesn't at all invalidate the criticisms about the endgame and how some of their design choices have thrown off balance and replay value.
They would have sold these 10 millions regardless of anything. It's DIABLO 3. What counts is the amount of players still playing it. How many are there? ...Diablo 2 is being played by 14 times as many, this tells everything.
200 hours are a success? I guess more than enough people got 200 hours out of Tetris, having paid 1?. How many hours did I get from Diablo 2? It's within the X0 000's. How many from Torchlight? More than 200. Can I think of any of the games I stated, smiling? Yes. Can anyone think of Diablo 3, smiling? No².
Diablo 3 is a failure and every try to justify the money we sadly spent into it is just as broken as the game itself.
There is so much truth to this that it just defied words.
I loved my first ~20 or so hours into Diablo 3. Then things started to go south - specifically that one out of maybe 20 rare items that dropped were useful to me, and maybe another 2 out of those 20 were useful to anyone. What idiot didn't put a seed into the random item generator to ensure that all (or at least most) rare items that dropped were useful to someone?
Using the blacksmith to make gear was equally frustrating. I'd spend 100 melted items worth of loot to make 10 new items, most of which were useful. It was just frustrating. I could forgive that most of the environments were retreads from D2. I joked about the largest castle in the universe. But the item thing just did the game in for me.
I can't imagine how someone made it 200 hours into the game without putting a bullet in their screen.
I enjoy the action, and don't have a huge issue with the dynamic of the auction house itself. It's saved me a LOT of tedious farming (Blood/Cow/Mephisto runs for days...)
The problem to me is that the items lost almost all of their personality/uniqueness. Sets are near non-existent, and the ones you can get have terrible incremental bonuses. Legendaries are fixed level, and there's only a handful that offer a useful mechanic (Justice Lantern, String of Ears, etc). For a game that is so much about the items you get, and where much of the complaints revolve around how you get those items, they sure did their best at making the items as generic/boring as possible.
The homogenization of the items (and the farming areas of the game) were intentional, with the purpose of "not locking players" into certain "required items" or farming routes. I agree with most of the philosophy behind the farming equalization, but purposely making the main rewards of the game less interesting... To me, was the single greatest mistake they made.
The other was the plot. It's SO BANAL. What little "dark" atmosphere they have left is quickly addressed by some npc spouting idiocy/being named a terrible pun (and I love puns, but this isn't Xanth). The other Diablo games weren't flawless examples of grim storytelling, but they managed to be interesting in their own ways without beating you over the head with puns and fan service. D3 does have its moments, but they are few and unsubtle, and usually quickly ruined/beat into the ground.
This right here is the closest D3 came to the previous games in terms of storytelling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlhWqmVeDno#t=85s
He's talking to Diablo, but it looks like he's talking to Leah
Of course, I listed these as issues I've seen. But merely adding flavor to the itemization might be too late to revitalize the game - and the plot/act structure is certainly not going anywhere.
One thing I did see the other day was a random timed dungeon "Crumbling Depths". That gave you a few minutes to reach a vault, and was filled with unique packs. Unfortunately it was in a 4 player a2 Inferno game, with only one other player near me when we started the dungeon. Didn't exactly beat the timer. Also, with hundreds of hours played, this was the first time I encountered this dungeon (to be fair, I hate Desert levels, so generally avoid A2)
But interesting dungeon mechanics like that, if sprinkled throughout everywhere, would probably go a long way towards keeping the end game interesting. If they want to make everything equally viable (items or areas), SOMETHING needs to balance it by standing out in interesting ways.
Argh, I babbled about this for much too long. And probably repeated myself more then intended.
Also, Nightmare act 2 is the worst. NOBODY plays that longer then they have to. Which means nobody to group with when leveling.
It's things like this that should make all gamers wary of pre purchasing or jumping on the "big game of the day" wagon. Oh, it's Diablo of course it'll be good! Well, hold on there. If it was a single player game with multiplayer components like D1 and D2, it probably would have been very good. One of the biggest mistakes of D3 is designing it to be an MMO right from the get-go. That of course includes the DRM and RMAH (or just an AH at all).
I might pick up D3 when it's in the bargain bin. D2 is a very fondly remembered game and for that, I owe it to myself to play the sequel. But I cannot support this shit Blizzard is doing lately. Starcraft 2 campaign was atrocious. The level designs were ridiculous and constantly shackled the player, and the story was absolutely pointless for most of it. Doesn't hold a candle the SC1, which was easily one of the best games I ever played. Sure, they did a good job on MP, but not everyone is playing for that. Just like in D3. Some people, shockingly, want to play games solo and get that gear through their own work. Blizzard just seems to not realize this at all anymore, and care only about multiplayer/MMO type stuff.
Also, did you guys know people have made $10,000 to $20,000 USD from the RMAH?
http://www.reddit.com/r/Diablo/comments/xqv2r/ive_made_10000_legitimately_from_the_d3_market/
Also, did you guys know people have made $10,000 to $20,000 USD from the RMAH?
http://www.reddit.com/r/Diablo/comments/xqv2r/ive_made_10000_legitimately_from_the_d3_market/
One thing you have to ask yourself before you claim there is no Diablo III end-game, have you actually killed Inferno Diablo? No? Then what's your problem?
The fact is that there actually is more end-game here then what Diablo II ever had. In Diablo II you could boost to Hell Baal in a matter of hours. And yes, you could lvl to 99, but face it, whouldn't you rather have an really badass boss then and eternal endless grind to lvl 99? (Edit: Before anyone comment, yes i am aware of the Diablo II clones and the über bosses, but the recuirments and luck needed to get to those bosses should not factor them in as end-game, they should be categorized as "completionists-bonus-content")
As for farming, it's odd that the items that actually matter are random generated and not stat-set uniqes like in Diablo II. It actually opens the possibility for more varied game-play.
And if we're to compare Diablo III to Diablo II one last time, in Diablo II you could farm Baal, Mephisto, Pindleskin or Forgotten Tower for runes. In Diablo III you can pretty much farm anywhere you want and still be effective about it.
This myth that there is no Diablo III end-game is more of an hate-bandwagon then an actual fact. Open your eyes people and realize that Diablo II was not that great of an game. Felt like this had to be said, take it for what it is and have a nice day.
I didnt buy the game but from my understanding Blizzard killed the community of the game by
removing the lobby. The only reason to do this is to boost auctions by preventing bartering.
Seems like greed is going to kill the cash cow.
I had fun with Diablo for the 100 hours that I put in until I made it to Inferno, but once it was going to become a grindfest, I stopped playing. Sure I could level up an alt, but I didn't really see the need to.
The problem as I see it is very much what the author is stating, there is no possibility to find a usable drop in the game, EVER! After the game play that I put in I just finally got tired of never getting that "Oh WOW!" moment where I would get some sort of amazing drop, because the game isn't coded to allow for those moments. Instead the "Oh WOW!" comes from sifting through the AH looking for a great deal, thinking about it, it makes me think that I'm going bargain shopping with my wife. But this time I'm doing it for virtual items so that I can go buy other virtual items easier, and without the promise of sex afterwards! Ok possibility of sex afterwards...
So once the game became more about playing the AH than playing the actual game, that was when I checked out. I'll probably go back and play it more in the future because I had fun with it, and the fights could be satisfying, but zero possibility of a drop diminished the satisfaction that I got from it. It's like going to play a slot machine and never hitting a jackpot, eventually you just walk away.
When I realized the formula being employed to keep me playing it quickly diminished the desire to play. WoW, that is.
D3 just has a more base formula, which is strange, given Blizzard's track record with WoW. I guess the lack of a subscription fee dwindled efforts on their end.
Why are people complaining about this?. D2 had an real money auction house, it just wasn't legal (stone of Jordan anyone?). Many, many people paid real money to buy those hard to get items through ebay and other means. Blizzard has just made that whole process more accessible to everyone in an attempt to get rid of the constant gold-seller spam (which hasn't worked, why are people still trying to sell gold?). But yeah, this poster is in complete denial about how D2 actually worked.
For my part, I never bought items for D2 and i've never used the auction house in D3. That's my choice and it hasn't impacted my enjoyment of the game in any way. People in complete denial about item sellers in D2, now whining about how it's no longer "underground" in D3... well that's just whiners for you I guess.
Because actually designing the game for such a feature as opposed to that feature not being there and being actively fought against changes things. It does so two-fold. Not only does the effect of a foreign currency - cold hard cash - now have a vastly bigger influence on the game's economy, but the game is now actually designed in a way to maximize profits from said feature. In a nutshell, a much bigger amount of trade happens in an out of game currency, and you are subject to finding more shit loot.
Neither this "choice" of yours, nor your complete ignorance on the matters of game economies or loot tables, make the realities of this design decision go away. And by the way, while you run around calling people whiners, keep in mind that it's just as easy to call your ass a sheep or a fanboy.
The funny thing is that Blizzard's official stance was adamantly against real money influence in their games right up until they decide to facilitate their own approach to it. Man, I gotta find that quote again.
his1nightmare said:
jon_sf said:
his1nightmare said:
In the end Diablo 3 is simply one thing, a terrible failure from all angles.
Except for the fact that it has sold over 10 million copies [http://www.imediamonkey.com/2012/08/05/diablo-3-overtakes-warcraft-with-10-million-sales/], which is a massive success from Blizzard's/Activision's perspective.
Also, I'm inclined to say that if you buy something and get 200 hours of entertainment out of it, that seems like a pretty good deal to me.
Though that doesn't at all invalidate the criticisms about the endgame and how some of their design choices have thrown off balance and replay value.
They would have sold these 10 millions regardless of anything. It's DIABLO 3. What counts is the amount of players still playing it. How many are there? ...Diablo 2 is being played by 14 times as many, this tells everything.
200 hours are a success? I guess more than enough people got 200 hours out of Tetris, having paid 1?. How many hours did I get from Diablo 2? It's within the X0 000's. How many from Torchlight? More than 200. Can I think of any of the games I stated, smiling? Yes. Can anyone think of Diablo 3, smiling? No².
Diablo 3 is a failure and every try to justify the money we sadly spent into it is just as broken as the game itself.
Be fair, man, from a financial perspective Diablo 3 is a pretty much unmitigated, huge success. The next time you want to say something to the extent of what you said before, just say that Diablo 3 is a terrible failure from all non-financial angles.
I'm not calling Diablo 3 a failure in any way and i'm not ignorant of in game economies (they're completely stupid and for stupid people and i'm aware of that which is why I avoid them). The only failure I see, is that people are complaining about something that doesn't have to any effect on them in any way shape or form. I mean it's like those people who complain about gay marriage, you don't have to go to the wedding and you don't have to buy them a present. So complain about something that does have an effect... like the always online DRM and lag. Seriously, the auction house is a complete non-issue for anyone with an IQ over... oh thanks for the example captcha, Crest (the toothpaste).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
