AzrealMaximillion said:
WhiteTigerShiro said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
Obviously a hyperbolic point for emphasis, thanks for coming out. I honestly hate how people get vilified for criticizing Blizzard on this. This is a below standard release and handling of a game overall and will be remembered as such at the end of this year I'm sure. Yes there are a few bugs that come after patches but very rarely has one game gotten hit with as much of a lack of quality control and testing as this game, at least this year. This is pretty bad overall.
Dead Island and Rage would like to have a word with you*. It's amazing how people are so quick to forget about games that launch in a (literally) unplayable state, then see a game that has very few bugs like D3 and come-up with phrases like "Yes there are a few bugs that come after patches but very rarely has one game gotten hit with as much of a lack of quality control and testing as this game". You seriously sound a complete buffoon who's JUST getting into the gaming industry, but trying to sound as-if he's been around since the beginning.
*And just keep in mind, that's just two examples from the past year, let alone games I could pull-up from the past 10 years if I really wanted to.
1.Rage and Dead Island came out last year.
2.Neither were majorly massive releases, let's be honest.
3.Neither of those games had issues with hackers, or badly thought out DRM. Yes they had bugs but over time were fixed. Neither had something as ill-thought out as the RMAH and the online single player, which will affect D3 for the rest of its cycle rather than patched out.
4.Neither of those 2 games had the expectations to being particularly good before release, unlike D3.
Thanks for coming out.
1. You're right, they DID come out last year. That's why I said "from the past year", as oppose to "from this year".
2. Go ahead an wallow in your denial, like this makes any kind of difference.
3. Both of which are things that they announced well before hand, so they can hardly be attributed to being part of the "botched release". I guess you can insist on fighting for the "little guy", the guy who doesn't keep-up with the news in the gaming world and does no research before making a $60 purchase, but at this point it makes you wonder what kind of moron commits $60 to something he knows nothing about.
4. That's kinda like your point #2, except that it's a flat-out lie rather than just boring ole denial.
And oh, I'm sure you could name a list of games that came out in a bad state. So could the average gamer. Difference is its still rare that it happens. For every game you name that came out like crap in any given year, there were literally dozens of other that came out just fine. Don't be thick. We don't live in a world where the majority of games come out non-functional. Realize that before you call anyone a buffoon (nice by the way, not enough people use the word).
I called you a buffoon because you said that you've never seen a game release get botched so badly (paraphrasing, since I don't feel like checking the exact quote). Yes, I'm aware of games coming out in the state that Dead Island or Rage did are a rarity, but the point is that they exist. To have never seen a game botched as badly as D3 was is to either live under a rock, or to be completely new to the gaming world.
No one here is saying that no other game company puts out a functionally bad release. YOU'RE assuming that. We know that Rage and Dead Island came out in a crappy condition, we talked about it LAST YEAR.
And yet, your statement heavily implied that you believed this to be the case. I mean really, if a game with only one or two bugs is the worst release you've ever seen, then clearly everyone else is releasing pure gold. Also, I like how you emphasize "last year", as though everything that happens in the gaming industry is wiped clean the instant our clocks tick over to the new year; like we log everything on an etch-a-sketch, and every year we need to shake it clean to make more room. The point is, it happened. What's next? You're gonna scoff at someone writing-up a Holocaust documentary because "Psh, dude that happened over 50 years ago, who the hell cares anymore?"
So yes, I apologize for bringing up the archaic past of 9 months ago in response you claiming that no game release has ever been so bad as D3.
Look my point is that we're criticizing Blizzard now because the release of D3, one of the flagship franchises, has been handled so badly it looks like John McCain's presidential campaign in game form. And as consumer, we're going to give shit to Blizzard so that hopefully they don't fuck up this massively again. I don't see a problem with that, but apparently you do.
No, you're criticizing Blizzard because D3 isn't just a graphical remake of D2. There's
absolutely noth very little wrong with D3 if you take-off those rose-colored glasses that you use for looking at D2. In fact, it's amazing how often people will deride D3 for being a sub-par sequel, listing reasons that were also true of D2.
I don't know how what distinctions you draw between "unplayable" and "a few bugs" but Error 37 kinda made D3 unplayable. Lag in single player makes the game not enjoyable and when you get booted out of your single player game because of lag, you're currently NOT playing it, making it temporarily unplayable. Getting your character hack makes that character unplayable. These aren't "a few bugs". These are major fucking problems.
I'll give ya credit for bringing that up, and it is admittedly a tough one. On the one hand, server issues
did render the game "unplayable" in a fair-enough definition, but on the other hand it would have been foolish for Blizzard to buy the assload of servers they would have needed for the first couple of days, which would then quickly go unused as the post-release hype died down. It's kind of a tricky angle, and they have at least tried different things to try and mitigate the server lag that comes on release day (staggering releases, and such). However, no matter what they do, day one is always a lag-fest.
I suppose this is the part where you beat that "always online DRM" horse (the poor thing), but the Diablo series (contrary to your personal preferences) has always been very multiplayer focused; so it lacks the same tone that you could have for something like Assassin's Creed. Sure, some people
choose to specifically stay offline, and I'm not saying it wouldn't have been nice if that option was there, but to deny that the servers wouldn't have been lagged to heck on those first couple days if it was there would be foolish. So even if there was an offline mode, we'd still be right back to square one of figuring out how to reasonably deal with release day server lag.
onte VS Virgil style; jedi vs jedi; no me vs titan QTE bullshit)... think DFO, but open world, and future, and 3rd person...
