Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[webadict]

I've never had the "server issues" that everyone else apparently had. No idea about that. Do you really think they're going to throw the same server infrastructure that WoW uses at a game that has no monthly fee? Also, would it look better to not patch issues that exist, and pretend the game is perfect?

Blizzard: Buy our new online-only video game! Don't expect us to have the infrastructure to support it though because it's not WoW!

They could've... you know... not had it online only? That might've helped a bit.

[dogstile]

I've never had the "server issues" that everyone else apparently had. No idea about that. Do you really think they're going to throw the same server infrastructure that WoW uses at a game that has no monthly fee? Also, would it look better to not patch issues that exist, and pretend the game is perfect?

I've been reading through this with interest, but I had to jump in on this one. Really dude, really? They force you to be online, they should support you. They want the auction house to make them money, so they better hurry up and implement it, then they can use it to support the game if its really that taxing.

[Darkmere]

I've been reading through this with interest, but I had to jump in on this one. Really dude, really? They force you to be online, they should support you. They want the auction house to make them money, so they better hurry up and implement it, then they can use it to support the game if its really that taxing.

Yeah, I said I have had no connectivity issues and I meant it. They have supported me. I'm not going to rage out over problems I haven't had anymore than people who had problems will disregard them because I've been playing fine. The servers are up, I can login (I did a minute ago to check the RMAH commodities). It works, for me. I'm not sure what I should be angry about?

[buckets]

I didn't buy the game yet and I got a feeling I won't buy it. I just got a feeling I would regret it. The discussion section in the official forums are crying out loud "DON'T BUY THIS GAME!" Is it that bad?

After some patches maybe.

It's a heap of fun, there's just another nma type thing going on sadly.

nma?

National Medical Association
National Mining Association
No Mutants Allowed
Northwest Motorcycle Association
National Motorists Association
National Motosport Association
Next Media Animation

Oh soz, I should've writen that a little clearer. I meant No Mutants Allowed, remember when Fallout 3 happened? The bandwagon of angry that much of the internet hopped on? That's what I was meaning.

[Andir]

I think Blizzard 'turned' far too 'corporate' to care about their fans anymore. They won't listen to anything that goes around in the official forums. It seems everything in the game works towards encouraging RMAH. I hope I'm just being judgemental. I'll see it for myself when I buy the game, if I do.

I'm confused. You dismissed the game less than an hour ago and now you're agreeing with posts that follow textbook trolling guidelines, without even playing the free trial to see if it's fun at all?

I'm confused... most people say that the real game doesn't start until after the trial period let's you see... how are you supposed to make a viable argument about a game when the trial is at best an extended tutorial that doesn't show you even a fraction of the "content" of the game that people keep saying is great?

[fenrif]

Yeah, I said I have had no connectivity issues and I meant it. They have supported me. I'm not going to rage out over problems I haven't had anymore than people who had problems will disregard them because I've been playing fine. The servers are up, I can login (I did a minute ago to check the RMAH commodities). It works, for me. I'm not sure what I should be angry about?

Noone expects you to rage over problems you don't have, that's completely not what were talking about. We're talking about the idea that a game can be designed to require a certain type of server infrastructure and then not provide it because "it's not WoW."

It's great that you haven't had any connection issues, but many many other people have. I don't really get why you keep bringing it up though. :S

[Leatra]

For the record, I wasn't trolling. It was merely a comment about how the game looks like. If you take that as trolling, you are obviously a fanboy. If I was trolling I would keep going.

[Darkmere]

I'm confused... most people say that the real game doesn't start until after the trial period let's you see... how are you supposed to make a viable argument about a game when the trial is at best an extended tutorial that doesn't show you even a fraction of the "content" of the game that people keep saying is great?

If you've never played it at all, how is that a more valid opinion than taking a day or two to play the trial? It's at least enough to show you how the skill system works, how (granted, very easy) combat works, all that. All I'm saying is, there's a chance to play part of the game for free, so if someone's curious, why not take advantage of it?

It's great that you haven't had any connection issues, but many many other people have. I don't really get why you keep bringing it up though. :S

I wasn't the one who brought up connection issues. Partly because I don't really think issues fixed in the first week or two of a game's life will permanently besmirch it's reputation. Assuming service remains as stable as it has been for the last couple weeks, I doubt anyone who plays will use it as a valid complaint in a month or ten.

For the record, I wasn't trolling. It was merely a comment about how the game looks like. If you take that as trolling, you are obviously a fanboy.

Ah, so we're at that point. Well, take a look at what I said again, I never said you were trolling. I said judging the game based on the official forums was hasty, and you should try it yourself. As already pointed out, some of the things that were mentioned there don't even exist yet (the game's forcing me to use RMAH gold! but you can't buy RMAH gold yet.), or are simply wrong (They're making it all harder! right after a nerf patch).

The game isn't perfect. Neither was D2. But I did feel I got my money's worth out of it, and pre-LoD D2 was pretty barebones as well. All I'm saying is, if you're interested at all, you at least owe it to yourself to try it out firsthand.

[Leatra]

I thought RMAH went live after reading this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/06/13/why-diablo-3s-real-money-auction-house-should-not-be-your-summer-job-2/

or this http://www.neoseeker.com/news/19504-diablo-3-real-money-auction-house-is-up-bids-already-exceeding-200/

And I enjoyed pre-LoD D2 but it was probably because I rarely played multiplayer.

Even if these articles are all lies, I'm sure it will happen soon since we aren't talking about the good ol' Blizzard anymore.

[fenrif]

I wasn't the one who brought up connection issues. Partly because I don't really think issues fixed in the first week or two of a game's life will permanently besmirch it's reputation. Assuming service remains as stable as it has been for the last couple weeks, I doubt anyone who plays will use it as a valid complaint in a month or ten.

I'd still love to hear why a game that requires you to use an online infrastructure doesn't have to actually provide it because it's not WoW. You didn't bring them up originally, but now that the conversation has moved on you keep going back to that point instead of explaining why you think this is acceptable behaviour from Blizzard.

[nenjin]

The game isn't perfect. Neither was D2. But I did feel I got my money's worth out of it, and pre-LoD D2 was pretty barebones as well. All I'm saying is, if you're interested at all, you at least owe it to yourself to try it out firsthand.

I disagree with this for a couple reasons. #1, the starter edition and practically the whole of normal mode do not give you an accurate representation of what the game is about. #2, because of #1, you have to pay $60 to even know if you'll like the actual game.

Maybe you're one of those people that doesn't mind a spoon-fed demo period and are willing to make your judgment based solely on that. Personally, if I'd known how much of a shit grind the actual Diablo game was going to be, I would have never bought it.

[SalmonGod]

I thought RMAH went live after reading this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/06/13/why-diablo-3s-real-money-auction-house-should-not-be-your-summer-job-2/

or this http://www.neoseeker.com/news/19504-diablo-3-real-money-auction-house-is-up-bids-already-exceeding-200/

Not to mention...

So all I can say is... I've started making money off the RMAH. 

[Darkmere]

The complaint was that you "had to buy gold on the RMAH." The commodities (gold, gems, crafting junk) section of the RMAH is not active. I should also mention that there are still trading forums that work on bartering, just like D2 does/did. And you can choose not to use any of them.

As has been said, the fact that things exist doesn't "force" you to use them.

I'd still love to hear why a game that requires you to use an online infrastructure doesn't have to actually provide it because it's not WoW. You didn't bring them up originally, but now that the conversation has moved on you keep going back to that point instead of explaining why you think this is acceptable behaviour from Blizzard.

Eh, servers have been working and stable for a while now. Yes, I do think fixing problems is acceptable behavior, and as far as I can tell the problems have been fixed. Explain why a problem that existed in the past but is no longer a problem is grounds for panning a game ad infinitum?

I disagree with this for a couple reasons. #1, the starter edition and practically the whole of normal mode do not give you an accurate representation of what the game is about. #2, because of #1, you have to pay $60 to even know if you'll like the actual game.

Maybe you're one of those people that doesn't mind a spoon-fed demo period and are willing to make your judgment based solely on that. Personally, if I'd known how much of a shit grind the actual Diablo game was going to be, I would have never bought it.

I actually thought the starter content gave a decent feel for the gameplay through somewhere mid-hell difficulty. There were difficulty ramp-ups, which is about par for the course in a Diablo game, and they felt appropriate to me. I also didn't expect a demo to fully illustrate and model the entire course of endgame; that's not what a demo is for.

As for grinding... well, D2 was mostly the same. IIRC the best path to getting high-level runes in D2 (and thus, the best gear, because runewords, yo) was to run Lower Kurast thousands of times opening the 2 randomly placed super chests that had a 0.5% higher chance of dropping runes. This wasn't an issue for most people, as everyone who was anyone had the same duped Enigma chestpiece, but that's another issue.

Hack 'n Slashers tend to be grindy. The problem is (and I even stated as such a few pages back in this thread) that there isn't much of an approachable goal with D3 yet. D2 had level cap, I guess, but it was so nebulous towards the end that it seemed pointless. All your skills were available by level 30, and the hell-viable ones were level 24 or 30, so after that point you were just putting stat points into Str/vit, or skill points into things you already had, to increase the numbers. And synergies, because you had to, to make even bigger numbers. It was still a grind, but it was a grind with a goal you could define for yourself.

So, if I can have a turn...

D2 had online-only content (realm- and ladder-only runewords, uber tristram, uber diablo, annihilus charms), rampant duping (to the extent that a game event revolved around duped SoJ's), skills that never worked over the entirety of the game's life, pigeonholed build options (synergies), cheap monster tactics (Iron Maiden, Duriel's spawnrush as you zoned in), just plain bugs (mana burn doing something like 250X the amount it should have), and an obviously rushed out the door 4th act. What about it was so timeless, especially when D3 has some of the same issues?

[AustralianWinter]

I'm too casual for D3, I gather.

[fenrif]

Eh, servers have been working and stable for a while now. Yes, I do think fixing problems is acceptable behavior, and as far as I can tell the problems have been fixed. Explain why a problem that existed in the past but is no longer a problem is grounds for panning a game ad infinitum?

How do you know the server is stable and the problems are fixed if you never had any problems in the first place?

That it was a problem at all is grounds for questioning the game and the company that made it, but I'm not even talking about that. I just thought the idea that Blizzard obviously wouldn't give the game the support it requires becuase it isn't wow, and that's ok, was worth questioning. Did you think it was a non issue because it didn't effect you, or because it could get fixed eventually?

Do you think they've fixed the problem by providing the server infrastucture the game needed, even though it isn't WoW? Or is it because less people are playing it concurrently now that it's been out for a month or so?