Diablo III Patch Settles Your Disputes With Duels

[marurder]

Who plays Diablo 3? I didn't get it because of the online requirements...

D3 is a game made that failed. Blizzard has clearly dropped their standards since Diablo 2 and everything post D2.

 

[DrunkenMonkey]

So I take it the whole offline patch still hasn't come around yet, shame, damn shame.
I got D3 in the mail right around I lost my internet connection for a month and just sent it right back for being too much of a damn hassle.

 

[Steven Bogos]

So I take it the whole offline patch still hasn't come around yet, shame, damn shame.
I got D3 in the mail right around I lost my internet connection for a month and just sent it right back for being too much of a damn hassle.

I wouldn't hold your breath on an "offline" patch. As well as Blizzard being insistent that D3 is an "mmo-lite" and should always require online, the way the actual server framework of the game works is that pretty much ALL of the information is stored server side. This includes monsters, dungeons, characters. Very little info is actually stored on your computer, making an "offline" patch extremely difficult if not impossible.

 

[TK421]

Some of us aren't entitled little pricks

Your argument would be totally valid, if the game were free. But a lot of people paid money for a game that didn't meet their expectations, and they felt ripped off. There is nothing unreasonable about paying good money and expecting a good product in return.

I understand expecting a good product and not receiving something that you felt was worth what you paid for. It feels really bad to get ripped off, it's happened to me too. Being pissed off about this is completely valid as well. What bothers me is that everyone is still complaining every time the game is even mentioned. It is ok to complain. It is ridiculous to complain nine months later at the mere mention of a game patch.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

PvP was a -if not THE- vital part of D2's longevity.

For a vocal minority only.

Was there something you were trying to say?

It's uh... it's all pretty much right there. Not really sure what went unsaid that wouldn't just be redundantly restating what was said in that one simple sentence.

Edit: Unless this is one of those Grammar Nazi things, where you pretend to not understand what a sentence means because it isn't flawlessly worded. I'm sorry, was "Only for a vocal minority" the proper way to word it? I generally like to keep up on my grammar, but heavens forbid that I miss a rule here or there. ;P

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

So I wish to know what you meant.

My point is that in all the years and in all the time that I've spent playing D2 or posting on forums talking about it, I very very rarely met anyone who was into the PvP in the game. Oh but boy howdy if they don't wanna tell you about how it's just the life blood of the game, the only damn reason that anyone plays it anymore. Yeah, never mind the hundreds of people I met in-game and out who were only really interested in the PvE aspect of the game, those few people I met who were into the PvP are what kept D2 pumping all these years.

I'm not saying that you aren't allowed to enjoy the PvP in D2. Knock yourself out. I'm just saying that the PvPers are the minority of the over-all D2 community. Just that they like to blow it up to sound like they're the only community left in the game.

Hence, "To a vocal minority only". Because sure, for them it was the reason for D2 to last so long, but by no means is Diablo lost without its PvP.

 

[TK421]

It is ridiculous to complain nine months later at the mere mention of a game patch.

Some of us find Diablo 3 (among other things) nothing short of a disgrace on the part of Blizzard. Some find the story that is now considered "canon" revolting and insulting. Some of us want to see them crash and burn. Some of us just find joy in pointing out just how pathetic they can get in terms of game design.

Good thing nobody appointed to decide when it becomes ridiculous to "complain" about something. Would you mind telling us what you're basing this assertion on, perchance?

I would be happy to oblige. Other things are going on in the industry, not to mention the rest of the world. There are bigger things happening, new games coming out, and new innovations, both good and bad. Some of these things are really awe-inspiring, and some of them are nearly terrifying. In light of all these things going on, it really bothers me to see people taking the time to turn out in droves and shit all over the good things that are happening to D3, at every opportunity. It really ruins any real discussion about how the patches could affect the game, and certainly ruins the reading experience for those of us who actually care about the new developments.

 

[TK421]

And I'm truly sorry about that reading experience part. Truly there is nothing more important than the reading experience of someone who can't stand a company they like being criticized.

I'm going to start with this. I don't give a damn about blizzard. I never said anything about them. At all. In fact, this is the first time I have even mentioned their name in this thread, you can check.

Where does the assumption that one cannot care about Diablo and other things within the industry/world come from?

You make a valid point.

Explain what you mean by "shit all over the good things", please. The statement itself means that either people think something is a good development - and then shit on it (which hasn't happened), that people think what you're calling a good development is actually bad (in which case you're free to debate them on that), or what's being shit on is not actually the thing you take issue with being shit on.

I was referring to the patch, which adds more content to the game. This is good for those who play the game. Most of the posts said nothing about the patch, they just trashed the game in general.

It ruins no discussion. You are more than free to logically pick apart the posts of people you deem to be irrationally hateful of Blizzard or whatever it is that's being talked about. You are more than free to present counter-arguments to everything that's being said. To say that non-positive statements about a news post (even predominantly so) ruins any real discussion and your "reading experience" is to say that what you were looking for wasn't discussion, but rather a circlejerk.

Actually, what I'm saying is that the over-population of negative posts towards the game in general(and not the patch referred to in the article) just turn the entire discussion into an Anti-Diablo3 circlejerk.

Spoiler

You can always stay out of the comment section if that's a problem. It really is that simple.

Spoiler

Another valid point, but I went to the comment section to see what other people thought about the patch and how it would affect the game. What I got was a bunch of people bitching about D3 and not even mentioning the patch, which is what the article was about in the first place.

 

[TaboriHK]

I have even less interesting in D3 than Blizzard did in getting this feature to the players in a timely fashion.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

This feature should of been implemented from the beginning. Doing it now is pointless because it is not balanced at all. The people who have been playing all this time and are over lvl 60 paragon level will literally one shot your character that you haven't played since release or a few months after (if you had quit by then).

This won't bring me back to D3, but I will definitely do so once the next expansion comes.

 

[TK421]

That's curious. Now from what I understand, non-confrontation is a key component of a circlejerk. Neither "fuck that", nor "Guy, I think you're wrong about this" is non-confrontational in the least. It's further defined by a lack of and aversion to opposing points of view, which exactly defines the tone of your first post. "Be nice or go away" was the gist of it, and that is the definition of looking for a circlejerk. Nobody, or next to nobody, on the "entitled baby hater" side, actually has the same approach to discourse.

I think our biggest problem is lack of proper communication. one of us will say something, the other guy will refute it, and then we'll come back and say what we meant. I wasn't trying to say that no one should come and hate on the game, I was saying that everyone doesn't need to come and hate on the game. If you show up to the comments, and there are already 3-4 posts saying the same thing, you don't need to post the same thing too. Contrary opinions are good, but the same contrary opinion twenty times is just redundant. That's what I was originally trying to get at.

 

[TK421]

Whether it's redundant is also irrelevant. I'd call into question your very use of the word redundant because this isn't the same person repeating himself over an over, but that's something for another time. It's "redundant", under your definition, if something good gets overwhelmingly praised, and I doubt you'd have a problem with several people in a row coming in and praising something; it's "redundant" to recommend something in several different threads, et cetera.

Actually, I would have a problem with it. It would still be a bunch of people just taking up space all saying the same thing.

And let's be honest here.

Some of us aren't entitled little pricks and are happy with the game(or at least don't constantly whine about it), and it is getting really old listening to people complain anytime D3 has a patch.

That people shouldn't come and hate on the game is exactly what you were saying. The least you could do is have the courtesy of admitting it.

No, I wasn't saying that you shouldn't hate on the game. I was on mobile and didn't really have the time to write out my complete thoughts, therefore only a fragment of what was in my head got posted, while my brain told me that everyone would know what I meant. Should have come back when I got home to edit/revise rather than waiting until the next day, would have created a lot less confusion/controversy.

 

[TK421]

Whether it's redundant is also irrelevant. I'd call into question your very use of the word redundant because this isn't the same person repeating himself over an over, but that's something for another time. It's "redundant", under your definition, if something good gets overwhelmingly praised, and I doubt you'd have a problem with several people in a row coming in and praising something; it's "redundant" to recommend something in several different threads, et cetera.

Actually, I would have a problem with it. It would still be a bunch of people just taking up space all saying the same thing.

That's fascinating. Nutshell your stance on this, please. Is it "something shouldn't be said twice"? Where do you draw the arbitrary line and why?

Whatever it is, I'm probably going to massively disagree and be thankful you don't have any actual authority to enforce something like this.

No, not twice, but when the majority of the posts all say the same thing, it's too much. If I did have that authority (which I never will, I don't have the time to run a website), I doubt anything would change, all the same topics would be there but the threads would probably be a lot shorter.