Thoughts on Diablo 3

[Zaik]

Had been having fun up until a little while ago.

Barbarian + hell difficulty = :/ I've been in act 1 most of the day, requires all competent people to do anything other than die every time you run into a pain in the ass ability combo like jailer desecrator, or frozen plagued, or arcane enchanted ANYTHING.

Occasionally you run into neato ones that are actually fun to fight and not frustrating though.

Edit: Also vampiric desecrator/plagued. I don't know how many times I've seen a barb summon the three stooges(or a witch doctor throw a bunch of pets at it) on that kind of group and make them all invincible for at least 15 seconds, usually longer with the duration increasing rune. I did it a few times in nightmare before I learned, but this is an entire play through later :/

Wait , you went up in difficulty and then stopped having fun? You do know what difficulty settings is for ... Right?

Also question about hell difficulty . Is it like diablo 2 where monsters have imunities or do they just do an insane amount of damage? The former makes it hard if not impossible to solo , where as the latter might just require thinking ahead .I'm only on normal With a barbarian , but the game so far is REALLY easy . See i like challenge so , i was wondering if i should just go an make a hardcore character or if i should just wait it out .

Also , anyone else curious what blizz is gonna nerf first?

"Difficulty settings" in Diablo 3 don't work like difficulty settings in other games, that's how you continue to progress(not to mention once you reach a certain level you lose access to public games in nightmare anyway). And it isn't that it isn't fun, it's that it's only fun if you're grouped with other competent players. I've been preferring having two people in game to 4 lately, less people in the equation seems to result in less error overall(on my part as well).

Since I'm a Barbarian, I have no idea if they have specific immunities because I just do melee damage. There obviously haven't been any melee immune enemies or anything though, even though there is clearly a melee resistance stat showing up on gear. Perhaps they're saving those guys for inferno.

 

[Bostur]

I'm not sure on the difficulty. Act I normal is pretty damn easy, but then so was Diablo 2 at that stage. The first fight I remember posing any kind of problems in D2 was the Act II boss, so we'll see how the rest of normal plays out.

My main concern with the difficulty is the lack of random environments. Whether the randomization in D2 was earth shattering or not, it at least shook things up a LITTLE bit as you playing through to a decent difficulty level. Having to slog through ultra-casual to get to the same exact thing only moderately more difficult is feeling a little painful, and anachronistic to boot. This fixed difficulty is, alas, another thing Diablo shares with MMOs.

Most of the dungeons are randomized as far as I can tell. I went back doing a few of the achievements on Skeleton King and had to find a different path each time.
In the outdoor environments, the side dungeons and special events seems to be in randomzied positions.

I also find the difficulty level to be off. Normal mode is dull, and I may end up uninstalling it before reaching a higher level.

 

[Zeh Don]

...Stop it with the nostalgia, Diablo 2 wasn't as perfect, nor customizable as you are making it to be.

The reason you have a Diablo 3 today is because we had Diablo 2 yester-year. And, frankly, the Diablo 3 you have is a fucking slap in the face to anyone who played Diablo 2. So, was it perfect? Well, it's twelve years later and no one has managed to beat it yet. Not even it's own sequel. So, it's about as perfect as we've seen so far.

So, please, stop it with the fanboy-ism. It's an underwhelming sequel, with lacklustre gameplay that doesn't justify the inflated cost. Torchlight 2 isn't amazing, sure, but it's $20.00, doesn't require an internet connection, is longer than eight hours and remains true to it's own series - Torchlight 2 is a proper, well crafted sequel.
Diablo 3 is a 5/10 game, at best. Assuming the servers are even working, of course.

 

[Waaghpowa]

I never got into the original Diablo games, so my opinion isn't worth much. But I will say that I'm enjoying this one. Love how I'm building my monk for health regen so I can take on hundreds of mobs at a time and not die.

 

[SuperSuperSuperGuy]

I've never played a Diablo game before, but I'm looking into buying this particular game. I can't yet, though, because my goddamn computer sucks. Namely, I'm having extreme gaming graphics issues. ANYWAY, I wanted to ask what people's problem with auto-skill point allocation is. Whenever it's an option, like in Mass Effect, I usually just go with it. And what about level-based skill learning? I'm not sure if anyone really complains about it in games like Final Fantasy 4; Rydia will always learn Bio at level 26, and not any earlier. To be honest, I find games in which you can allocated points to skills and stats freely needlessly stressful. I mean, what if I put too many points into the wrong things? I may want skill A right now, but what if I need skill B later? From what I've heard, I think I'd enjoy Diablo 3's skill and stat system more than Diablo 2's.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I've never played a Diablo game before, but I'm looking into buying this particular game. I can't yet, though, because my goddamn computer sucks. Namely, I'm having extreme gaming graphics issues. ANYWAY, I wanted to ask what people's problem with auto-skill point allocation is. Whenever it's an option, like in Mass Effect, I usually just go with it. And what about level-based skill learning? I'm not sure if anyone really complains about it in games like Final Fantasy 4; Rydia will always learn Bio at level 26, and not any earlier. To be honest, I find games in which you can allocated points to skills and stats freely needlessly stressful. I mean, what if I put too many points into the wrong things? I may want skill A right now, but what if I need skill B later? From what I've heard, I think I'd enjoy Diablo 3's skill and stat system more than Diablo 2's.

It's not auto point allocation. There really isn't any "point allocation" at all. Here's how it works.

You start with two skills. LMB, and RMB.

Eventually, at set level intervals, you add four more, triggered off the number keys.

In the default hand-holding mode, there are four options for each skill. In elective mode, you can choose from amongst all available options for each skill. New options unlock at set level intervals.

Additionally, you can set a rune for each skill. There are 5-6 runes for each skill, again unlocked at intervals.

Finally, you can have three passive skills, chosen from a pool of options. (unlocked at intervals).

Early on, and with elective system turned off (it defaults to off) this system feels quite restrictive. If you don't care for the skills you're getting in those initial few levels, you're pretty much boned until you put in some work leveling. Later on, it provides decent scope.

There's really no way to accidentally gimp yourself as you can change your skills around at any time. You're not locked into anything. So I highly recommend turning elective mode on in the gameplay options straight away and leaving it on. It just gives you a lot more flexibility and lets you shape the character a little more to your preference, instead of being locked into Blizzard's "suggestions".

Here's what Blizzard could have done. Revamped Diablo 2's graphics (D3's are only marginally better) kicked all the spambots off Battle.net and you'd already have a better (cheaper) less bullsh***ty game than Diablo 3 that still plays great.

They're significantly better, actually. Which is not to say they're remarkable, but Diablo 2 is not an attractive game. Diablo 3 also has a better sense of pop and impact, better particle effects, nice physics effects, etc.

Whether we really need more loot n' grind ARPGs is a question worth asking, and I'm really not sure we do, but let's not be ridiculous about the visuals.

 

[girzwald]

What i hate about D3 is the crafting and drop system is clearly made in favor of people getting worthless things most of the time, moreso than in D2, to keep them playing. But this time, its so blizzard can make bank on the RMAH.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

So...let me ask a question. I played the beta and it left me with a sour taste, so I cancelled my Collector's Edition D3 and, instead, put that money towards Borderlands 2 Collector's Edition.

Was this decision a good use of money, in your opinion? (To be clear, I've pre-ordered the Collector's Edition with the scaled loot chest.)

 

[unstabLized]

I like it a lot. I'm not a usual type of player of these games, so I guess my opinion counts a bit less, but the game is overall fun, the skill system works for me, and the graphics are alright. So far, I've been playing non stop with a Wizard,and although its not usually the strongest character in the party, it can mess stuff up at a lot of different points. Designs look fine to me, story is.. eh, although I don't care for that too much. Although, it goes without saying that i prefer the game A LOT more when its in coop mode. Single would get boring really fast for me. I don't know why, Coop just makes me feel a lot better. Been taking the game slower then usual, don't want to run through the entire thing.

So yeah, score wise, I would give it around.. 8.5-9/10, so even though it's over priced, it's still a good game in my opinion.

 

[Ryotknife]

What i hate about D3 is the crafting and drop system is clearly made in favor of people getting worthless things most of the time, moreso than in D2, to keep them playing. But this time, its so blizzard can make bank on the RMAH.

this.

horribly this.

blizzard is known to make significant itemization snafu's in wow (as in nobody who played that class for over a hour would itemize a set for that class that way), but D3 takes it to a whole new level.

it is very common to use one item for 10-15 levels, because 1 out of every 100 magical item will be decent (not great, but usable) for you. same goes for rares, even legendaries.

i got my first legendary after 16 hours of play. it was one of the worst items ive ever seen in my entire life. utterly worthless to anyone.

Blizzard did not perform as well on D3 as they did on SC2. D3 is still a decent game, it just doesnt live up to "old school" blizzard standards. overall i would give it a 7.5-8/10

 

[SlaveNumber23]

Its great, the combat is fun and flows well and all the classes are unique compared to each other and fun to play as well. The companions offer a lot of personality, I love the banter between them and the hero, as well as how they hate on each other sometimes. My one criticism is that, for Acts 1 and 2 on the first play through at least, the game is a little too easy, but then again at least its better than being frustratingly hard. The coop is a lot of fun but the game strengthening enemies for every person you coop with doesn't seem balanced, it feels like the enemies aren't strengthened enough, especially the bosses. The server issues are unfortunate but, in my experience they haven't been anywhere near as bad as people make it out to be. Also I never played any of the other Diablo games so I don't have the ungrateful 'isn't true to the series' bias bullshit.

 

[girzwald]

What i hate about D3 is the crafting and drop system is clearly made in favor of people getting worthless things most of the time, moreso than in D2, to keep them playing. But this time, its so blizzard can make bank on the RMAH.

this.

horribly this.

blizzard is known to make significant itemization snafu's in wow (as in nobody who played that class for over a hour would itemize a set for that class that way), but D3 takes it to a whole new level.

it is very common to use one item for 10-15 levels, because 1 out of every 100 magical item will be decent (not great, but usable) for you. same goes for rares, even legendaries.

i got my first legendary after 16 hours of play. it was one of the worst items ive ever seen in my entire life. utterly worthless to anyone.

Blizzard did not perform as well on D3 as they did on SC2. D3 is still a decent game, it just doesnt live up to "old school" blizzard standards. overall i would give it a

7.5-8/10

ive been playing for a combined 24 hours, and havent seen 1 legendary.

And i feel you about the using 1 item for 10-15 levels. I got a nice 2h sword mid/late act 3 on normal, was using it till mid act 1 on nightmare. Not because I wanted to, but because nothing better would drop.

 

[Dio]

But can't I just like the game people? Maybe you think I don't deserve an opinion as I did not played diablo II or WoW. But I am enjoying this thoroughly. Just got into nightmare! =D

 

[Sunrider]

Halfway through Act 2 on Hell, playing as a Witch Doctor, and I think it absolutely DESTROYS Diablo 2 in almost every aspect. I kinda miss my Paladin, but my Monk alt is really fun too. I love it.
I played Diablo 2 when it was new, and I made it through Nightmare twice, I think. Never bothered with anything harder, because it bored me to tears. Not D3 though. Can't put my finger on exactly what, but I love it. I hope Torchlight 2 brings something different to the table so I can play both. Looking forward to it.

 

[OManoghue]

I have a guest pass, but it's fun enough. I have to decide by level 13 whether or not I wanna buy it.

 

[Exocet]

...Stop it with the nostalgia, Diablo 2 wasn't as perfect, nor customizable as you are making it to be.

The reason you have a Diablo 3 today is because we had Diablo 2 yester-year. And, frankly, the Diablo 3 you have is a fucking slap in the face to anyone who played Diablo 2. So, was it perfect? Well, it's twelve years later and no one has managed to beat it yet. Not even it's own sequel. So, it's about as perfect as we've seen so far.

So, please, stop it with the fanboy-ism. It's an underwhelming sequel, with lacklustre gameplay that doesn't justify the inflated cost. Torchlight 2 isn't amazing, sure, but it's $20.00, doesn't require an internet connection, is longer than eight hours and remains true to it's own series - Torchlight 2 is a proper, well crafted sequel.
Diablo 3 is a 5/10 game, at best. Assuming the servers are even working, of course.

Listen up, I've been Playing the Diablo series from the first day the first reinstatement came out. I've seen it's ups and downs.
Saying Diablo 2 was perfect is blatantly ignoring numerous things, including the fact that two entire acts were considered fucking boring, and the the skill system is in theory good and solid, but in reality, you dump the points required in previous skills and spells only to get the 2 you would wanted to use.
The interface was clunky, even by 2000's standards.
I can go on and on and on.
It was still a great game, but calling it perfect? Not a chance in hell. It was sometimes a drag, but I loved it as such.

Lackluster gameplay, I would like you to show me how, because last I checked, it was muct more engaging than D1 and D2's combined, being able to used more than 2 skills/spells and all.
D3 is only 8 hours long? Why yes, on normal difficulty. Congratz, you finished the tutorial. Start making hardcore characters, and we'll see if it's still only 8 hours long. 8 Hours, I might add, that will consists in you knowing roughly where you are going in the wild and liking every moment, rather than going on for hours in a dreary landscape.

And you have the nerve to call me a fanboy, then hold up Torchlight as a messiah. It's a great game, and the second one is on my watch list, but sometimes, people want *GASP* change, and not sticking to the same exact thing for decades. Diablo 2 changed from Diablo 1, just as Diablo 3 changed from Diablo 2. If you don't like the changes, don't go around telling others that since you don't like them, they are for the worse.

EDIT: I also love how you seem to think I'm defending the game as if my life and honor depended on it. I still have complaints about the game, as I have with all games.