Arcen Games

Other => Off Topic => Topic started by: zespri on May 15, 2012, 05:24:07 PM

Title: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 15, 2012, 05:24:07 PM
Stating the obvious: I was frustrated by the fact that it was not possible to get in the game for the first to hours. It seems that after the experience that they have with WoW and then Startcraft 2 and then Diablo 3 beta, they could have prepared better.

The requirement for permanent internet connection for single play and loosing half an hour of progress if internet goes down is horrendous too. They say it's not about DRM but I don't believe them.

But you know what, people are going to put up with this, and Blizzard knows it. Because what else can you do? Miss out on Diablo 3 because of it? Not going to happen.

I like the visuals in the game a lot. Al imagery is lovingly crafted and poor pleasure to look at. The gameplay is satisfying, however after having played two hours I feel impatient to level up since I feel that the combat options are really limited on the low levels (I think I got to 7th in two hours). Also not having ability to teleport to town to sale some inventory to free up space for new loot is annoying. I was told that the teleport will be given further ahead though.

All in all I'm seeing myself spending quite a bit of time with this game. Torchlight did start feeling a bit repetitive after awhile. It may happen with Diablo 3 as well. We'll see.

Anyone knows how multi-player works? Is it possible to play the main story-line with a friend? I'm sure I could have googled this one, but since we are all here =)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 15, 2012, 07:25:41 PM
Yeah...I already ranted about the DRM in D3.  I also have great issues with the Auction House that encourages pay-to-win. Optional or not, I don't appreciate that in the game. Both of those things made this game a deal breaker for me so I'm not getting it.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 15, 2012, 07:47:39 PM
Not getting it.  Multiple reasons: online required for single player, real-money auction house, unlimited anytime respecs (I know about Nephalem Valor, doesn't fix the problem) obliterates replay value, Blizzard's whole "social media" bent to their accounts which makes me not want to play with friends in SC2, and giving money to Blizzard supports Activision which is almost as bad as supporting EA.

Meanwhile, I could get Torchlight 2 and be just as happy and have none of those problems.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 15, 2012, 09:34:01 PM
Not getting it.  Multiple reasons: online required for single player, real-money auction house, unlimited anytime respecs (I know about Nephalem Valor, doesn't fix the problem) obliterates replay value, Blizzard's whole "social media" bent to their accounts which makes me not want to play with friends in SC2, and giving money to Blizzard supports Activision which is almost as bad as supporting EA.

Meanwhile, I could get Torchlight 2 and be just as happy and have none of those problems.

Yes. I'm actually sad that I can't do the same, al the while I do feel the same. I mean, every single complaint above - I agree with. You see, I started liking blizzard with Warcraft: Orcs & Humans. Played wc, wc 2 then diablo, then sc, then diablo 2, then wc3. And then WoW came about. When WoW started I was completely fascinated by it. I did not trust this whole MMORPG thing back then (ha-ha) and I was apprehensive that with WoW the best parts of blizzard experience would be killed. Amazingly this did not happen. Somehow they managed to mix the right ingredients, and although I hate both PvP and raids I spent very enjoyable 2 years in the world of warcraft. But then it became apparent, that not eveything nice and fluffy. Sure, I stopped playing WoW not because of this, but just because it got too old. 2 years! wow! I don't think any other game captured my attention for that long (I mean playing on regular basis). But certain things how blizzard managed community (I know, I know this is very hard thing, and with the amount of players it's hard to get right), how they decided to evolve the game... it did not feel right. It had no bearing on game play as such, but when the activision deal happend, I started wondering if it's time to stop loving blizzard.

Then startcraft 2 came about. Being non-competitive and not giving a shit about ladder and battle.net I regarded sc2 as lacklustre. Basically it's the same game as sc1 with modern graphics.  When I was pre-ordering sc2 just before its release I also pre-odered  diablo 3 at local retailer. From common sense perspective it's incredibly silly thing to do, I knew that the game would not be out for a year or more, but I decided that... well... that at that particular moment in time I don't care that much about that money that I spent on the pre-order. So I paid them just for the heck of it. I rarely if ever do this, so I figured, why not do it once =)

So basically from that point on back in 2010 I did not have a choice in not getting diablo 3. But even if I did, I would probably get it anyway. I guess this is remnants of my past respect for blizzard.

Well, I'm guessing it's really about time for me to stop. It does not mean I will never play any of their games, but I will certainly won't do any pre-ordering or collectors editions (which I was buying not because I wanted extra stuff, but because I felt that they deserved the money).

And I'll try my best to enjoy diablo 3. I'm looking forward to it.
 

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 16, 2012, 01:40:15 AM
Because what else can you do? Miss out on Diablo 3 because of it?

That's pretty much my solution, yes. But of course, I never played the others, so I can get away with that. From what I understand there was a good story in D2 that has everyone chomping at the bit to play 3? I tried the open beta and it was an okay enough ARPG but it really didn't have anything that grabbed me. It just made me want to go play Torchlight and Titan Quest some more. The only thing I'm waiting on is Torchlight 2 which doesn't have some great story hook to bring me back (not that that's a bad thing, but if that's the main reason people want to play the game, is the gameplay itself actually that good, or would you rather just read the story?) but just promises more great solid gameplay. (and is actually made by the people that made Diablo 2 :D)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 02:42:47 AM
It just made me want to go play Torchlight and Titan Quest some more.
Somehow Titan Quest was mind-numbingly boring for me. I think I put in about 6-8 hours and that was it. Torchlight though, while after awhile feels repetitive, still a great lot of fun.

I'm waiting on is Torchlight 2 ... [that] ... promises more great solid gameplay. (and is actually made by the people that made Diablo 2 :D)
The thing is Torchlight 2 will NEVER be able to have the same level of polish as Diablo 3.


Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 16, 2012, 10:52:04 AM
The thing is Torchlight 2 will NEVER be able to have the same level of polish as Diablo 3.

Polish is a very vague descriptor, what exactly do you expect TL2 to be lacking? Admittedly, I've only got videos of TL2 to compare to the few hours of beta time I put in to D3, but graphically they both seem fine and I like the aesthetics of TL2 better, but I can understand that being subjective. The gameplay appears to be as least as good as TL1, which was quick and responsive. I don't know what seems unpolished except perhaps that TL2 is still in an actual beta state whereas I'm pretty sure the Diablo 3 beta was a "beta" with massive quote marks, that is to say a demo to hook in purchasers.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Volatar on May 16, 2012, 02:34:54 PM
Path of Exile (http://www.pathofexile.com/) is going to be another, F2P alternative to D3.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on May 16, 2012, 03:02:21 PM
Heh... that's interesting.

The always on - glitch testing against accounts due to the real-money auction house is a bonus to me.  I believe you should be able to disconnect and NEVER use any of the online features, but that's a choice they made to not redesign a thousand internal pieces.

As for the social network meh.

Respeccing my primary dude?  Sweeeet!

Btw, it's not pay to win.  You can very happily go through the game without paying for a single thing.  Where the money will come in will be for that 'gotta have it'! pieces of set armor or random ultra-level gear for Nightmare level players.  Everyone else can go through 99% of the game without the real money auction house.  Though a lot may hit the in-game money auctions just to pick up uncommon stuffs.

Also, most people who can afford a triple A title on launch day have internet.  Sure, you might want it on your laptop while you're on a plane to kill off half an hour, but lets be honest, Diablo isn't marketed to a casual crowd anymore, if it ever was.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on May 16, 2012, 03:50:14 PM
I have the Torchlight 2 Beta and have also played Diablo 3.  Torchlight 2 is more fun because the loot is better  (they don't have to balance it for arenas) and the game is generally faster paced and more exciting. 

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 05:21:09 PM
Path of Exile (http://www.pathofexile.com/) is going to be another, F2P alternative to D3.
Do you know how are they going to profit? Uber items for real money or something else?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 05:27:32 PM
Polish is a very vague descriptor, what exactly do you expect TL2 to be lacking? Admittedly, I've only got videos of TL2 to compare to the few hours of beta time I put in to D3, but graphically they both seem fine and I like the aesthetics of TL2 better, but I can understand that being subjective. The gameplay appears to be as least as good as TL1, which was quick and responsive. I don't know what seems unpolished except perhaps that TL2 is still in an actual beta state whereas I'm pretty sure the Diablo 3 beta was a "beta" with massive quote marks, that is to say a demo to hook in purchasers.
Well, I'm sorry, but I can't pin-point what this is. When I saw Torchlight 1 I loved everything, it was a faithful diablo clone. I can't complain about the graphics at all - I quite like it. Game play is good too. But... the feeling that playing the game gives, whatever it means is different. There is some grandness for me about diablo it feels majestic. Where torchlight does not feel this way. You are free to laugh at me of course and tell me that there is no objective component in it, but I believe there is, I just can't figure out what that would be.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 16, 2012, 05:51:02 PM
I would like to get it, I would like to be Blizzard's customer, but the always-on-the-internet (and internet-hiccup=lost-progress) ... they're just pushing me away too hard.  For WoW I was willing to deal with those constraints because they were inherent in the nature of the thing, but here it's not necessary.  I'm sure it'd be more work for them to support offline mode, but for a $60 (iirc) game they can pony up the effort.  Probably 70% of the work I put into AVWW that's actually still there was getting MP working.

Torchlight 2 does look very interesting, not sure if I'll get it due to time constraints, but at least I don't feel like I'm being actively repelled by the developer's/publisher's business practices.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 06:00:28 PM
Torchlight 2 does look very interesting, not sure if I'll get it due to time constraints, but at least I don't feel like I'm being actively repelled by the developer's/publisher's business practices.

What game will you definitely get (any genre) that would fit into your time constraints?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 16, 2012, 06:02:29 PM
Path of Exile (http://www.pathofexile.com/) is going to be another, F2P alternative to D3.

They did an open beta for this last weekend, and I actually played through all of the game that appears to be there so far with a character. Only two acts so far, then you just zip back to the beginning on difficulty level +1. From what I've heard you have to go through it all a few times and then you the next act unlocked, which seems kind of lame. But it is still in beta, so maybe they'll fix that. They also have some balance issues to work out still. Overall, it was a decent ARPG that really tries to go for the old school Diablo-like grim dark setting. Everything about the land looks like a place you definitely wouldn't want to be. None of the character are in any way pretty, none of the settings are at all attractive. They range from dreary at best to deep dark and horrible at worst. Nothing wrong with that, but it does sort of drain me after a while. Whereas Torchlight with its much more shiny colorful feeling doesn't make me start feeling sort of exhausted after a while. But clearly Path of Exile had something going for it, because I did play it for several hours over the weekend. It does nail the kill > level > loot feeling pretty well if nothing else.

Do you know how are they going to profit? Uber items for real money or something else?

It appears that they're not going to profit very well. Their model seems to be buying more character slots, and vanity pets, and that's about it so far. But they give you plenty of character slots by default, so I think they'll need to tighten that up if they want to make any money off of it. Right now their F2P model seems to be, dare I say it, too generous.

Well, I'm sorry, but I can't pin-point what this is. When I saw Torchlight 1 I loved everything, it was a faithful diablo clone. I can't complain about the graphics at all - I quite like it. Game play is good too. But... the feeling that playing the game gives, whatever it means is different. There is some grandness for me about diablo it feels majestic. Where torchlight does not feel this way. You are free to laugh at me of course and tell me that there is no objective component in it, but I believe there is, I just can't figure out what that would be.

That's fair. If it's just 'I know what I like' then no one can't really argue with it. :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 06:26:38 PM
That's fair. If it's just 'I know what I like' then no one can't really argue with it. :)
I had it coming  :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 16, 2012, 07:30:22 PM
Torchlight 2 does look very interesting, not sure if I'll get it due to time constraints, but at least I don't feel like I'm being actively repelled by the developer's/publisher's business practices.

What game will you definitely get (any genre) that would fit into your time constraints?
Mass Effect 3 would have been an automatic buy since I loved the first 2 (particularly the 2nd), but that publisher also really outdid itself in efforts to make it hard for me to buy the game (though not as much as D3 is doing; if ME3 goes on a low enough sale I'll probably pick it up even if it does mean Origin, if evidence at that time points to said software being relatively innocuous).

I'll probably give Warlock's demo a try in a month or so after they've had a chance to patch some of the early bugs out, and if it is anything like a worthy modern take on what Master of Magic was I'll get that.

Soldak's Drox Operative will probably be an automatic "first day I'm aware of it being available" buy, because I love space adventure games and I've been really impressed by Depths of Peril and Din's Curse from them (in fact, if I had time that I wanted to sink into an action RPG it would probably be more Din's Curse rather than Torchlight 2).

The Warhammer 40k MMO sounds really interesting so I'll probably give it a whirl but dunno if I'll spring much money for it because I don't generally stick with any MMO long (talk about time constraints).  On that note, basically any Warhammer 40k game is going to get serious investigation from me (DoW2 and Chaos Rising were tooooons of fun; Retribution less so but still good).

In general I'm not aware of upcoming releases, though, so I couldn't tell you much :)  I know games I've liked in the past that I'd buy more of in a heartbeat but generally people don't make those kinds of games anymore :)  Space Rangers 3 would be an automatic buy, if they ever did one.  As would another Recettear (I had my hopes up for Chantelise but it's just a very different game style; will check out Fortune Summoners eventually).  And there are other obscure games I want more of that noone here would recognize so I'll save time not mentioning them :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 16, 2012, 07:45:41 PM
As far as I know, Origin still scans your hardrive without permission and you can still get banned from all your origin games if you even post on the EA forums.

EA has thus far, refused to back down or apologize for screwing its customers over like it does. >=(

I still haven't bought ME3 due to EA's insanity. I played ME2 so much too...just won't touch Origin at all. I won't be forced into software I don't want. I chose to be with Steam (and continue to choose). EA's move to force my hand to Origin will not happen.  I will choose when I want Origin. This means I also can't buy Simcity (5). Oh well. EA wants my business  they can back down this massively ridiculous power play they are conducting.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 07:55:02 PM
Space Rangers 3 would be an automatic buy, if they ever did one. 
They doing Space Rangers HD: Revolution (http://ru.spacerangershd.com/features/) right now, which is not Space Rangers 3, but rather a refurbish of Space Rangers 2. Updated graphics for menus, etc, ability to run on  most modern resolutions and operating systems, a new story line and new music. Not much. I know.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 16, 2012, 07:58:07 PM
As far as I know, Origin still scans your hardrive without permission and you can still get banned from all your origin games if you even post on the EA forums.

Get banned from  games if you even post on the EA forums? What do you mean?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 16, 2012, 08:07:01 PM
As far as I know, Origin still scans your hardrive without permission and you can still get banned from all your origin games if you even post on the EA forums.

Get banned from  games if you even post on the EA forums? What do you mean?

Many people who were banned on the EA forums would then lose access to being able to play any games tied to their origin account. This is an ongoing issue and some people were banned for ludicrous reasons, which meant they lost the ability to play their games unfairly.

EA refuses to acknowledge that it is a problem and those people are still banned to this day. It pisses me off because that's a big violation of freedom of speech in my opinion.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 16, 2012, 08:45:11 PM
I'll probably give Warlock's demo a try in a month or so after they've had a chance to patch some of the early bugs out, and if it is anything like a worthy modern take on what Master of Magic was I'll get that.

For what it's worth, I tried the Warlock demo and found it to be quite enjoyable. With the caveat that I never played Master of Magic, so I can't compare on that front. It's pretty much Civ + Fantasy. Some of the more fiddly bits of Civ, like city management, are thankfully streamlined, and there's no workers building improvements and roads all over the place. But otherwise, you're building units and taking over cities and generally fighting for world domination. The 'tech tree' such as it is, is probably the least impressive bit, since you don't research your way towards anything, you just get given an apparently random selection of 5 spells to research and when you unlock one then another one goes in its place. But being able to rain fireballs down on the enemy skeletons before shooting them with your goblin archers and then finishing them off with your summoned elementals is pretty fun, nonetheless. I probably would have bought it already if I wasn't already peeking out from behind a mountain of games to play and quite aware that the next big Steam sale is only about 6 weeks off.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on May 16, 2012, 08:54:03 PM
I actually own Warlock.  It's definately Civ light (to the point that you build buildings based on populations that you have little to no control over, they just build themselves) and the tech tree is more building oriented than anything else.

There is no spell-tree, it's random.  Things are weighted so you get the lighter weight ones first but even then it's a random pull.

There is a metric ton of minor issues with the game, but none outright game-wrecking.  There's annoying quirks that you have to work around, like not being able to kick your non-aggression pact friendly's troops out of your area, but they're sitting on something important so it won't function.  Another is the fiddliness of the controls and what's 'on top' and when.  Add enough of them together and it depends on how important these things are to you as to if you'll have a fun time playing it or you want to shoot your PC screen.

One of the frustrating things about it is things that were there, workign in the beta/demo, are missing in the real game, like removing your own buildings.  When you're 'walking your front' forward you don't need defensive buildings back there anymore, and cities max out at ~14 buildings, and really 10 is about the highest before you start to really peter off without heavy spell-stacks.

However, considering I'm at Turn 200 on my 5th game, it's obviously not TOO bad. :)  I barely played the old Master of Magic though, I forget why, but this is a decent successor for what I remember of the game.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 16, 2012, 10:16:47 PM
Despite me having bashed Blizzard countless times elsewhere, and actually planning on boycotting Blizzard some "friends" of mine gamed me by gifting me Diablo 3 (physical release day copy).... I admit.. that's when my boycott stopped.. despite nobody else in my friend group actually playing PC games they figured they could troll me nicely with that.. and oh boy did they get me.  8)

So yeah.... I have to admit, there is only 2 things I don't like in Diablo 3 (the game itself is pretty damn awesome)

1) Server maintenance and server blackouts keeping you from gaming, and we talking regularly here.
2) Lag.. wow I want to bash the reviewers in the head who wrote there is no lag. There is lag, and it's rare... but oh boy does it kill you when it comes. Also every "level change" seems to be sort of an instance.. and sometimes you spawn in one that's dead (ie, 100% packet loss) quickly followed by a "your net connection dropped" which of course, it didn't.
3) Usually I'd complain about the AH but.. well it's not yet active for RMT ;) Everyone gotta play fair and square for now which is good.

What I love doing though is destroy gold collectors income source. I am selling my stuff at 5xSale price instant buy. (In gold AH) and this seems to me what is best right now. Nobody goes into a 2 day bidding contest, they want the *thing* now. When its level 60 equipment and thus the true end-game uniques I guess things are different then. But you are likely not gonna see those before the 3rd difficulty (or play-through)


That said, if someone wants to play Co-op on HARD i'd love to... in European zone though.

That said, the games always-on DRM is extremely annoying.
Because of course, the game is a SP game at heart. There is so much to read and actually a lot of talking there is no way you can enjoy this game in MP properly. (in the first run, anyway)

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 16, 2012, 10:21:06 PM
Well, I don't blame you for playing it. I mean, it was a gift from friends and that'd just be disrespectful to them to not play it.  :D

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 17, 2012, 01:30:09 AM
1) Server maintenance and server blackouts keeping you from gaming, and we talking regularly here.
This is going to get sorted out the same way it did with WoW. Just give it some time.
That said, if someone wants to play Co-op on HARD i'd love to... in European zone though.
How long did it take you to play through normal?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 17, 2012, 05:08:42 AM
about 18 hours or so for normal ;) Playing Demon Hunter...  level 34'ish now

Find that on "nightmare" (Which is hard, I guess) things get pretty nicely hard now with new enemy patterns and certain events get a lot more fun. But it's still relatively easy. But I am only in the first cathedral level (and the quests there about) for now. That said, I died about 11 times against Diablo and funnily 7 times against the 2nd unique in the angel plane.. that guy had a rush attack that would instant kill me. And Diablo.. well I was doing 7 different approaches to that find.. found out that for end-bosses you really should forget about damage and just focus on SLOWING them the hell down, and never let them get near ;p (at least, as Demon Hunter)

Also died more often whenever one of the annoying "triple rush" squadrons came at me. Which in hell was every 2 minutes. I need a witch doctor or barbarian ;p

anyway.. anyone intersted can always add me on b.net now ~.~ eRe4s3r#2812 (I think)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: tigersfan on May 17, 2012, 09:35:36 AM
I think it being gifted to me would be the only way I play it as well. :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 17, 2012, 10:07:44 AM
I think even if it was gifted to me, the first time I couldn't play single player due to a queue, or ran into lag problems in a single player game, my head would explode.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 17, 2012, 10:57:58 AM
Space Rangers HD: Revolution (http://ru.spacerangershd.com/features/)
Thank you.  If I see it come out in English, auto-buy.  Even if it's just a new story line with everything else the same.

As far as I know, Origin still scans your hardrive without permission and you can still get banned from all your origin games if you even post on the EA forums.
Do you know where I can find proof of that?  It's not that I doubt EA is capable of it, it's that I also don't doubt that there are a fair number of folks out there who hate EA enough to distribute false information against them.  Not that you would do it, but if it's just third-hand info, etc.

Quote
EA refuses to acknowledge that it is a problem and those people are still banned to this day. It pisses me off because that's a big violation of freedom of speech in my opinion.
If the comments are being made on EA's forums, I don't think any legal concept of freedom-of-speech applies, because those forums are private property.  For the same reason that someone is free to call me an idiot as I walk by on a public street, but I have the right to ask (and, if necessary, compel) him to leave if he does it in my house.

What bothers me about EA's behavior there isn't the restriction on speech, and in theory if the "a forum ban can equal a game ban" is spelled out clearly in the game's EULA I don't even have a problem with them having that policy.  What bothers me is that they are practicing that policy and being dishonest in their refusal to consistently confirm/deny that it is their policy and conform their practice to their public statements.

If they would be honest about it either way, I wouldn't loathe them for it.  But if they exercised their legitimate freedom to make the contract terms "a forum ban can equal a game ban", I would in turn exercise my legitimate freedom to not buy under those terms :)  Unless it's ME3 on sale for like $10, in which case I'm happy to simply get it as a longish rental, because that's basically what buying something from EA is, often.

Quote
EA wants my business  they can back down this massively ridiculous power play they are conducting.
I think it's important that they be free to be idiots in terms of what terms they set for their new products (changing the terms on existing customers would be a different thing).  But they've also shown themselves willing to resort to dishonesty (the forum-ban=game-ban thing, as far as I can tell, and that whole "Steam's terms won't let us directly get new content to our users" line, which they imply to mean free content and which implication is patently false).  That, they're not at liberty to do.

Anyway, derailed there, the topic isn't bashing EA, it's bashing Blizzard!  Oh, wait, you mean we were actually saying positive things about something? ???
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: orzelek on May 17, 2012, 12:36:53 PM
1) Server maintenance and server blackouts keeping you from gaming, and we talking regularly here.
This is going to get sorted out the same way it did with WoW. Just give it some time.
That said, if someone wants to play Co-op on HARD i'd love to... in European zone though.
How long did it take you to play through normal?
I'm a bit slow and like to see whats under each stone - I have about 27h after finishing normal. Playing DH - but not sure if I will continue on Nightmare or go see other chars. I bought the game (altho at price quite a bit lower than 60 euros) and I won't regret it but need to be online part is also annoying for me. I have plans for coop tho so I will need to be online anyway.

As for server maintenance... what hours are you playing? I had no problems with maintenance and I think 1-2 errors from servers and I'm also in european zone. I get the lag spikes from time to time but nothing critical.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 17, 2012, 12:41:39 PM
In reply to Origin account banning. I view it this way, even the worst troll that paid for his product doesn't deserve to lose it via bans. It's just that he can't be allowed to affect anyone else's experience when he/she plays the game. At least, when getting banned for saying the wrong thing.

I forgot to mention the recent lies EA has been spreading around, which was really the final nail in the coffin for boycotting them. That crap about Steam is, just crap, especially since they still have a bunch of titles on Steam under their name, Shank and Shank 2 being the most recent releases. Yeah, Steam is sure stopping them...*sigh*.

EA resorting to dishonesty is just shameful. I wish they were just upfront in their honesty. At least then I can respect them for it. If they just want to move people to origin and don't want people buying from Steam, just say so.

As far as proof about Origin scanning your HD, it's actually in their EULA that you agree to allow them to scan your drives. Further quick research shows that they don't scan too much of your drive, but that's still too much for EA.  http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/24/eas-origin-eula-proves-even-more-sinister/  (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/24/eas-origin-eula-proves-even-more-sinister/). http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/lsoj6/still_thinking_eas_origin_is_harmless/c2vbjty (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/lsoj6/still_thinking_eas_origin_is_harmless/c2vbjty)

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 17, 2012, 02:00:30 PM
In reply to Origin account banning. I view it this way, even the worst troll that paid for his product doesn't deserve to lose it via bans. It's just that he can't be allowed to affect anyone else's experience when he/she plays the game. At least, when getting banned for saying the wrong thing.
If the EULA clearly says "you troll our forums, Thog break your game, and no talk to talky man" (or whatever the equivalent legalese would be), then the troll would not have a right to keep playing the game.  The problem is that EA is not being clear about, and really seems to be actively dishonest about:
1) Does the EULA include that a forum ban may result in a game ban?
2) Does the EULA include that EA does not even have to discuss the reasons for, or appeals about, a ban-decision?

If the EULA doesn't include either of those, or some equivalent broad "we can do whatever we want", then the folks losing access to their games (and being stonewalled by that "this decision is final, no discussion" policy which seems to accompany most such situations) have the right to sue EA for breach of contract (or something similar, at least in the U.S.).  Class-action might be the way to go there, if there are enough people.

But my guess is that EA has its rear-end nice and covered legally.  Though to some extent public lying can eventually get you into legal trouble.

Quote
As far as proof about Origin scanning your HD, it's actually in their EULA that you agree to allow them to scan your drives. Further quick research shows that they don't scan too much of your drive, but that's still too much for EA.  http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/24/eas-origin-eula-proves-even-more-sinister/  (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/08/24/eas-origin-eula-proves-even-more-sinister/). http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/lsoj6/still_thinking_eas_origin_is_harmless/c2vbjty (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/lsoj6/still_thinking_eas_origin_is_harmless/c2vbjty)
The first link is good reason to not accept the EULA (and not buy the game), because that's very broad permission indeed.  The second link seems to show that Origin isn't really doing anything fundamentally worse than steam (I guess you could argue that it doing it on initial install without asking is a problem, I dunno if steam does that, but Origin does seem to be restricting itself to potentially-relevant-to-customer-service information).

It's not that EA really deserves the benefit of the doubt anymore, but if we're not scrupulously honest in accusations towards even the most orcish of people, the result is generally just more problems.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 17, 2012, 02:07:19 PM
I hate EULAs.  I really, really wish they'd go away.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 17, 2012, 02:19:12 PM
I hate EULAs.  I really, really wish they'd go away.
I wish they, and the system surrounding them, were designed in such a way as to actually be reasonable to read and understand before installing.  But if a company expects a player to read a 40-page document written in apparently-deliberately-obtuse language and be bound to all the conditions therein... either the legal system has to default to "it's unreasonable, and therefore only common precedents regarding the merchant-customer relationship apply" or customers have to just not buy, or accept that they may actually have fewer rights after buying than before.  It's pretty weird.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 17, 2012, 04:31:12 PM
So I went ahead and tried to support that path of exile, that was mentioned earlier on the thread.
I entered the credit card details on their site and got "There was an error processing your request". I tried to log off and then log on, but was told "Invalid Login". On another machine where I still was logged it I could see my profile and all. I tried to issue a forgotten password request and I received a change password email in fact... but it said that my account name is blank!

So I click my change password link, and it prompts for a new password and then logs me it. But as soon as I logout I can't login again, having "Invalid Login".

What a collection of bugs! I feel really nervous when in response to me entering my credit card data I get a error. Looks like a credit card data harvesting site. And if I didn't know better that's what I would have thought. And if the state of their login machinery is any indicative of how they program things, I'd stay away from their game either. Hopefully different people are in charges of the game and the site.

Gosh! I just wanted to give them some money!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 17, 2012, 05:26:24 PM
I hate EULAs.  I really, really wish they'd go away.

Yeah, EULAs do need to burn in a fire....

@Keith 1st thing) yeah, that's the problem. Because there is no clear policy, we are all assuming the worst on these forum bans banning us from games, even going so far as to wonder if reviewing games by EA poorly will get our access revoked to games. I wish EA would just clarify it already. Until then, I just wont do business with them.

2nd) well, this is actually the same as what I said for the first thing. The permissions they are asking are overly broad.

It's sad too, because I did like what EA was doing when they published Mass Effect, Dead Space and a bunch of others. Then they went shady and it's really hard to trust what they are doing....

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 17, 2012, 06:13:55 PM
even going so far as to wonder if reviewing games by EA poorly will get our access revoked to games.
Oh, that would get hilarious in a hurry.  "Hey, let's deliberately wrong a group of people who by definition already write publicly and have an audience of our potential customers!  Now that's marketing strategy."

... the sad thing is, that's not fundamentally more stupid than some of the moves they've already made.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 17, 2012, 09:02:44 PM
even going so far as to wonder if reviewing games by EA poorly will get our access revoked to games.
Oh, that would get hilarious in a hurry.  "Hey, let's deliberately wrong a group of people who by definition already write publicly and have an audience of our potential customers!  Now that's marketing strategy."

... the sad thing is, that's not fundamentally more stupid than some of the moves they've already made.

Its the fact that I can believe it will happen is quite concerning...but lately, between Blizzard, Capcom EA and Activision, the major companies seem to be holding the fingers in their ears saying "lalalallalalalalala I can't heeeeeear you".

Although Capcom's latest game didn't do so well so maybe they'll remember they need to listen to the people that keep them in work...

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 18, 2012, 10:25:50 AM
On the plus side, the BattleTag friends list for D3 is much better than the RealID friends list which I have disabled because of friend-of-friend.  I hope this move to SC2.  Playing with friends would be nice.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 19, 2012, 10:57:55 AM
No, I won't touch D3 with a 10ft pole. Diablo, for me, has always been a single player experience. Sure, on occasion I've LANed with friends, but that was the limit of it. Forcing me into an always on fake-MMO-esque chain is just not acceptable. They could've made an offline option, but they decided against it because they want people to be exposed to the in-game auction house, where the REAL money will be made.

Piss off, ActiBlizzard.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 20, 2012, 07:46:18 PM
I for one, after playing the beta have had more fun loading up D2 and for the first time starting over with a mod.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 20, 2012, 07:47:50 PM
I for one, after playing the beta have had more fun loading up D2 and for the first time starting over with a mod.
Ever played Din's Curse?

Most fun I've had in an Action RPG.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Diazo on May 20, 2012, 09:19:17 PM
Heh, this is my Diablo 3: Median XL Total Re-work Mod for Diablo II (http://modsbylaz.hugelaser.com/)

Basically the same thing but the classes are totally redone and the monsters are reworked and.... really, everything except the storyline has been totally redone. (Warning on a difficulty spike though compared to vanilla D2.)

In case you have not guessed, I'm not getting Diablo 3. Always on DRM killed it for me. While I certainly play multiplayer, at heart I'm a single player gamer and I want to be able to run my own games without restrictions such as requiring internet access. Like when I'm at a friends house where I don't have access to the wireless..... (every saturday, and there is quite often times when we are gaming rather then visiting in real life.)

The real money auction house does not bother me, it is the logical extention of where we are going with online transactions and micro-payments. At least as implemented as it's not a pay-wall items are hiding behind, you could get that epic item to drop yourself, it's just not likely.

No comments on the EA thing, I don't really like them either.

D.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 20, 2012, 11:13:16 PM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 20, 2012, 11:48:50 PM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.

Not really any spoilers, it's mostly just complaining about D3 and then EA for a while.

Also I was playing TL2 for the beta weekend and it is amazing. I played all the content that's there with all 4 classes. That game needs to come out yesterday.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: tigersfan on May 21, 2012, 07:29:53 AM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.

Not really any spoilers, it's mostly just complaining about D3 and then EA for a while.

Also I was playing TL2 for the beta weekend and it is amazing. I played all the content that's there with all 4 classes. That game needs to come out yesterday.

I've not been keeping up with TL2, is there any mention of what the DRM scheme will be on it?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Volatar on May 21, 2012, 08:37:50 AM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.

Not really any spoilers, it's mostly just complaining about D3 and then EA for a while.

Also I was playing TL2 for the beta weekend and it is amazing. I played all the content that's there with all 4 classes. That game needs to come out yesterday.

I've not been keeping up with TL2, is there any mention of what the DRM scheme will be on it?

Not sure if they went with no DRM, but at the very least when you play singleplayer it is offline.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 21, 2012, 09:49:22 AM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.
By ton, you mean five, right?  Because as far as I can tell, there isn't any reason to have more than one character of each class. :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 21, 2012, 11:28:17 AM
I for one, after playing the beta have had more fun loading up D2 and for the first time starting over with a mod.
Ever played Din's Curse?

Most fun I've had in an Action RPG.

Yes, was fun, but not balanced (exploding arrows I think it was called? Boom. Win!)

Plus they don't allow you to summon (undead) army of minions. Which I always play as in D2.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 21, 2012, 11:31:33 AM
Heh, this is my Diablo 3: Median XL Total Re-work Mod for Diablo II (http://modsbylaz.hugelaser.com/)



hehe, that's the mod I'm trying.

Act 3 and I already have...18 followers (including my merc).

Still trying to decide which merc to use. Act II on paper I like most, but I already have 17 melee minions so they get crowded out / can't retreat. Act III wizard looks awesome, but he uses spells can't use items to boost those spells (sword and shield on a wizard? blah!). So I might just go back to Act I archer who spams volleys of deadly arrows.


The next game I might buy is Torchlight II. Just waiting for the demo (too late for me to try the beta, I only learned there was a beta yesterday)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on May 21, 2012, 12:53:46 PM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.
By ton, you mean five, right?  Because as far as I can tell, there isn't any reason to have more than one character of each class. :)

Hardcore mode.

Or if you want to play through using a different set of skills/playstyle. While sure you could change skills up on one character, if you want to play through completely with different styles new characters of the same class isn't that crazy (though the early levels would be a little dull). I could se making new characters of the same class to play through with friends if you really like one type of character as well.

I got it, but haven't had much time to play it, in large part due to the online DRM feature which I despise (also being very busy, I'm behind on my AI war game too!). When I have played it though, I quite enjoyed it. Its a very fun game, and I love the amount of strategy/builds you can make in a single class without having to start all over due to one wrong skill/wanting to try something else out. Having to regrind up a new char because you want to allocate skills differently isn't fun replay value, its a grind. That said the online thing is a huge pain in the butt and I hate it.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on May 21, 2012, 03:07:35 PM
I just played through the story in mp mode with some friends which was the point of the game to me.  However...

The online mode isn't really a problem. really, if it 'burps' it takes less than 15 seconds to get back online.  Menu and char swaps are QUICK (well, compared to Final Fantasy and previous Diablos).  Character rebuilds are handy and really, it's just more along the lines of you have a ton of skills and can choose what and when you want to use them, it's just hard to keep everything handy at once.  I think it's a pretty nice system.

If you like Diablo-ish games, it's a lot of fun and isn't really a big deal.  I could have done without the "Princess is in another castle" routine at the tail, but that's another story.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 21, 2012, 03:44:07 PM
I've not been keeping up with TL2, is there any mention of what the DRM scheme will be on it?

I'm not sure. I'll be buying it via Steam so that'll be my DRM. It's great fun though.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 21, 2012, 07:31:35 PM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.
By ton, you mean five, right?  Because as far as I can tell, there isn't any reason to have more than one character of each class. :)

 ::) Fail at reading.

But anyway, I have one of each plus rolling hard-core characters. They needed 10 slots but only have nine.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 21, 2012, 08:19:30 PM
I'm not reading the whole thread because I want to prevent spoilers, but I am going to say I absolutely love Diablo 3. I have so many alts now that I keep relogging in to reequip characters. I'm not making a quick run for the ending, just having fun making awesome characters.
By ton, you mean five, right?  Because as far as I can tell, there isn't any reason to have more than one character of each class. :)

 ::) Fail at reading.

But anyway, I have one of each plus rolling hard-core characters. They needed 10 slots but only have nine.

Tis a joke, I thought, pointing out that aside from hardcore characters you only need 5.

Gone back to using a Wizard (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xViZ38xRQr0) for my D2 mercenary needs. My whole undead army does physical damage, so I need a magic damage dealer on the chance a monster is immune to physical damage. The mod allows you to custom create your own gear that allows my merc to have his very narrow and unique needs be met...mainly, by lowering enemy resistances so that they cannot be immune to his lightning bolts of doom.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 21, 2012, 08:41:11 PM
Diablo 3 accounts getting hacked left and right despite usage of Authenticators. Looks like Blizzard is getting its teeth kicked in for its decisions around this game. Doesn't help that the service is still flaky as heck and people are getting errors, lags and DCs.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/05/21/shout-at-the-devil-blizzard-acknowledges-diablo-iii-hacks/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RockPaperShotgun+%28Rock%2C+Paper%2C+Shotgun%29

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 21, 2012, 09:39:17 PM
Diablo 3 accounts getting hacked left and right despite usage of Authenticators. Looks like Blizzard is getting its teeth kicked in for its decisions around this game. Doesn't help that the service is still flaky as heck and people are getting errors, lags and DCs.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/05/21/shout-at-the-devil-blizzard-acknowledges-diablo-iii-hacks/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RockPaperShotgun+%28Rock%2C+Paper%2C+Shotgun%29

King

Just goes to show that no amount of security can protect against hacking.

And in the process you cause great inconvenience for the consumer.

And the worst case in this case is that it's caused by connecting to other people! So you got to play singleplayer (which still needs internet) to not get infected at all. But even then I hear complaints it could.

The only fool proof ways to prevent the problem would be to play true single player or you could play LAN with friends, but alas, not allowed.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 21, 2012, 10:12:07 PM
Diablo 3 accounts getting hacked left and right despite usage of Authenticators. Looks like Blizzard is getting its teeth kicked in for its decisions around this game. Doesn't help that the service is still flaky as heck and people are getting errors, lags and DCs.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/05/21/shout-at-the-devil-blizzard-acknowledges-diablo-iii-hacks/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RockPaperShotgun+%28Rock%2C+Paper%2C+Shotgun%29

King

Just goes to show that no amount of security can protect against hacking.

And in the process you cause great inconvenience for the consumer.

And the worst case in this case is that it's caused by connecting to other people! So you got to play singleplayer (which still needs internet) to not get infected at all. But even then I hear complaints it could.

The only fool proof ways to prevent the problem would be to play true single player or you could play LAN with friends, but alas, not allowed.

Sounds like Torchlight 2 pre-orders have gone up significantly as well. I'm hoping the really bad press Blizz has gotten from D3 makes other developers hesitate before making DRM decisions like this again. Or at least, that's my hope but unfortunately, D3 also sold a ton of copies too so....gah......

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 21, 2012, 10:29:46 PM
Most fun I've had in an Action RPG.

I 100% agree. If you can survive the horrendous graphic.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 21, 2012, 10:42:04 PM
And the worst case in this case is that it's caused by connecting to other people! So you got to play singleplayer (which still needs internet) to not get infected at all.
Where did you read this?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 21, 2012, 10:45:54 PM
And the worst case in this case is that it's caused by connecting to other people! So you got to play singleplayer (which still needs internet) to not get infected at all.
Where did you read this?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/21/breaking-blizzard-diablo-iii-player-accounts-hacked-items-and-gold-stolen/

"One theory suggested by players on the Battle.net forum revolves around hijacking session identifiers, which would allow hackers to take over accounts without alerting Blizzard’s authentication server. Again, this remains unconfirmed.”

This is partly based off numerous reports of players with the paid authenticator getting hacked. The authenticator makes it very difficult to be hacked on the player side. However, by someone intercepting and/or foiling the handshake between player and server, sudden a hack becomes more reasonable for a new system.

This would explain why a whole region went down in prime time (sunday night local Europe time)
 
On the one hand, its not official, but on the other hand, it will never be official because the only way it could be official would be if the owners say so and they NEVER will say so because if they do they will damage their long term money making model of taking a tithe (or tax, or fee, or whatever you want to call) off the money auction house they are planning.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 21, 2012, 11:18:03 PM
And the worst case in this case is that it's caused by connecting to other people! So you got to play singleplayer (which still needs internet) to not get infected at all.
Where did you read this?

Even single player people are reporting getting their accounts hacked.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 21, 2012, 11:58:17 PM
Even single player people are reporting getting their accounts hacked.

Well, they may be just getting on the bandwagon of the complaining crowd - you don't know if they did not have a trojan, send their password to "support person", etc. It's really difficult to figure out what truth is if you don't have reliable sources of information.

It seems that the wave of hack was caused by a particular technique, the details of which will remain unknown. Of course it's a certainty that there will be other people compromised differently.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 22, 2012, 12:05:59 AM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/21/breaking-blizzard-diablo-iii-player-accounts-hacked-items-and-gold-stolen/

"It has been suggested that the EU servers were taken offline following a SQL injection attack, but this remains unconfirmed"
Really? Do they even know what SQL injection attack is?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 22, 2012, 12:07:18 AM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/21/breaking-blizzard-diablo-iii-player-accounts-hacked-items-and-gold-stolen/

"It has been suggested that the EU servers were taken offline following a SQL injection attack, but this remains unconfirmed"
Really? Do they even know what SQL injection attack is?

Forbes doesn't know a lot of things....I quit reading their stuff for a while now.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 22, 2012, 12:14:34 AM
*shrug*

I never mentioned SQL injection. I linked that article to post where I got my theory of the handshake snatching from. I only mentioned forbes it was sourced by this:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/zingularity/2012/05/21/stolen-handshakes-session-id-hijacking/

and I never heard of them but saw forbes and thought (welp, at least I heard of them)


As I said. With anything of this nature, the biggest names in business won't touch this because they cannot prove it. So those who either take chances, and risk "not knowing what they are talking about", or are so tiny that they just want spotlight take it up.

The only ones who can prove it have their interests to cover it up, distort, and ignore it for there is money directly involved in the future.

As a result of this both lack of information and lack of interest in news agencies to devote significant resources (because at the core this is a very niche story) there is not the normal level of scrunity that business may normally get.


The end result is this:

Players who use authenticators are probably getting hacked. Players who use single player are probably hacked. Whole servers are going down in prime time with no explanation. The games are required to be online, the security of the servers have never been truly tested, and there is massive financial gain in hacking this game.

Ultimately, its up to you to connect the dots and decide for yourself what has happened. But none can disagree that its leading to a lot of frustration that is a result of being forced to connect a server to play.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 22, 2012, 07:39:48 AM
Yeah, according to Blizzard, nothing happened. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5149619846
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on May 22, 2012, 08:27:23 AM
I have it but am without a permanent internet connection at home and thus unable to play.

I have, however, been thoroughly enjoying Diablo 2 again.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 22, 2012, 09:31:24 AM
Yeah, according to Blizzard, nothing happened. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5149619846

It's aggravating, but we can't be sure what happened.

Blizzard's response is actually interesting. Not in what they said, but in what they did not say. See below.

One the other hand you have galore of players saying they have been hacked for various reasons. Hundreds if not thousands of responses.

Blizzard you would hope would want to give an honest response. However, in my experience, it is very difficult if not impossible to have a company admit something on their side allowed hacking. That is assuming they would make no further money after a game sale. So when you combine that with the fact Blizzard will be making a ton of money in the future for a feature that depends on the customers trust you get them in the situation of deny, deny, deny.

And for the players, you can't filter out the real ones from the fake ones. Some certainly are making it up. Some others have been hacked from the traditional sense on the player end. But when you have so many, some saying despite authenticators, some showing logs of their character giving away items to a lvl 1, and other signs of hacking it makes me think.

Something is amiss here.

I've read through the Blizzard response, and here's another thing. They have not stated one way or another actually whether Battle.net. Is compromised. They never talk about it. The whole post is filled with generalizations that while technically true don't address this situation. It's a cookie cutter response.

...

"  From the blizzard response"

   
 We'd like to take a moment to address the recent reports that suggested that Battle.net® and Diablo® III may have been compromised.
So they are going to talk about Battle.net and Diablo III directly?
Historically, the release of a new game -- such as a World of Warcraft® expansion -- will result in an increase in reports of individual account compromises, and that's exactly what we're seeing now with Diablo III.
True. I wonder why that is? The players who migrate over from WoW or other games don't get any stupider.
We know how frustrating it can be to become the victim of account theft, and as always, we're dedicated to doing everything we can to help our players keep their Battle.net accounts safe -- and we appreciate everyone who's doing their part to help protect their accounts as well.
True. But my friends who have been hacked would disagree. Especially how they get hundreds of false emails about fakes claiming their accounts were hacked but when it happens for real they hear nothing.
You can read about ways to help keep your account secure, along with some of the internal and external measures we have in place to help us achieve our security goals, at our account security website here: www.battle.net/security.
Nothing wrong with that. Good, good
We also wanted to reassure you that the Battle.net Authenticator and Battle.net Mobile Authenticator (a free app for iPhone and Android devices) continue to be some of the most effective measures we offer to help players protect themselves against account compromises, and we encourage everyone to take advantage of them. In addition, we also recently introduced a new service called Battle.net SMS Protect, which allows you to use your text-enabled cell phone to unlock a locked Battle.net account, recover your account name, approve a password reset, or remove a lost Authenticator. Optionally, you can set up the Battle.net SMS Protect system to send you a text message whenever unusual activity is detected on your account, keeping you aware of important (and possibly unwanted) changes."
These are good things. But this is all so far generic stuff. Not addressing Battle.net itself. All these so far are security measures the player can use. But players are all using these things and still getting hacked. My friend is my personal connection, but I've heard it hundreds of other times as well. But they still rely on being safe during the handshake. All the security and defenses are on the player side. But what about Battle.net itself being comromised? When are we going to talk about the orginal sentence?

[Rest of post is blizzard saying if they notice something unusual they ask for more info]

Oh, I see. You are going to talk about it directly. But you spend the whole post telling players how they must beef up security. Nothing at Blizzard could possibly be wrong.


After telling my Dad this situation he said it reminds him of the Ford Pinto situation. It is cheaper to roll back accounts then it would be to admit any error on their part.

P.S. Yes I mad. My friend over the night got hacked. He has all the security functions blizzard mention but still got hacked. He said it happened after a night of public games then going to sleep.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 22, 2012, 09:35:39 AM
Blizzard is in a tricky situation security-wise because D3 is a big enough target to attract the attention of organized crime.  And, with very few exceptions, "network security" is something that really only exists until someone with enough resources decides it wants to get through it.

And then there's the PR situation they're in (partly as a result of the security situation), which might be worse ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 22, 2012, 06:32:27 PM
Auction house is next to unusable now, and when I try to submit a ticket I'm getting "An unknown error has occurred." on the site. Blizzard, I thought better of you! No, really.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 23, 2012, 03:56:11 AM
What really aggravates me is that Blizzard does not announce down-time properly. And the rest of their communication is a joke. The game has a launcher, yet no b.net related status news appear in IT. Basically, the one thing that really matters, namely whether you can play or not, only appears after you start the game. You can not even know whether b.net for D3 is down without actually starting Diablo 3. And even then you still have to try to log-in or not to know whether it's really down.

They said its gonna be down 3am to 9am for Europe (AGAIN!) (already a 6 hour down-time again) in GMT+1
Then at 9 am, they open up, and set a dead-men counter that shuts it all down again 15 minutes later.

No explanation why or what.

Stuff like this just makes you not like Blizzard. Also how after SC2, WoW and Wc3 they still have Battle.net issues.. that is really telling.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 23, 2012, 08:40:58 AM
You lot act as if you're surprised. How could you not see this coming the second the "always online" was announced?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 23, 2012, 11:28:52 AM
You lot act as if you're surprised. How could you not see this coming the second the "always online" was announced?
A triumph of hope over experience.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on May 23, 2012, 12:01:04 PM
I know this is a diablo thread, but I saw mention of Din's Curse and it popped up to me since I never heard of it before. I noticed it even has a mac version, has it held up fairly well? I'm curious how it compares to the others of the genre, a little off-topic but I figure another ARPG isn't that far off base.

I'm sad that path of the exile isn't mac as it looks interesting - though they claim they'll look into it after release, I've heard that line many times. Sometimes its even true.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 23, 2012, 12:02:38 PM
I know this is a diablo thread, but I saw mention of Din's Curse and it popped up to me since I never heard of it before. I noticed it even has a mac version, has it held up fairly well? I'm curious how it compares to the others of the genre, a little off-topic but I figure another ARPG isn't that far off base.

I'm sad that path of the exile isn't mac as it looks interesting - though they claim they'll look into it after release, I've heard that line many times. Sometimes its even true.

Yeah....if it doesn't work for you now, best to wait for them to improve it and then buy it. Much as I'd like to trust developers, I'm still waiting for a fix for Skydrift.....

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on May 23, 2012, 12:14:01 PM
I know this is a diablo thread, but I saw mention of Din's Curse and it popped up to me since I never heard of it before. I noticed it even has a mac version, has it held up fairly well? I'm curious how it compares to the others of the genre, a little off-topic but I figure another ARPG isn't that far off base.

I'm sad that path of the exile isn't mac as it looks interesting - though they claim they'll look into it after release, I've heard that line many times. Sometimes its even true.

Yeah....if it doesn't work for you now, best to wait for them to improve it and then buy it. Much as I'd like to trust developers, I'm still waiting for a fix for Skydrift.....

King

Right, I find its never worthwhile to get excited about "we'll look into it later", as its just asking for disappointment. And if later I hear a mac version is available, nice surprise!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on May 23, 2012, 12:37:04 PM
I wish Din's Curse had made it on to Steam. I probably would have bought it long ago. I am tempted, but 20 bucks is just a little high for that, considering that's equal to TL2's price. Of course if it were on Steam and then on sale, I would surely snap it up in a second.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on May 23, 2012, 01:05:11 PM
How does Din's Curse compare to others of the genre though? Its strength's/weaknesses, it sounds interesting. And it has melee rogue options I saw, I love melee rogue classes.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 23, 2012, 02:09:51 PM
How does Din's Curse compare to others of the genre though? Its strength's/weaknesses, it sounds interesting. And it has melee rogue options I saw, I love melee rogue classes.
Procedurally arranged towns and quests with real consequences.

Example:
- You generate a new town and arrive.  It's got a lot of earthquakes.  The last one had a lot of disease.
- One of the quests is to kill a boss on level 3.  Another quest is to rescue a shopkeeper on level 2.
- You save the guy on level 2, but the boss on level 3 gets away and is building a recon totem on level 6, so you get a quest to kill him there.
- You try, but can't get down to level 6 fast enough (a bit too completioninst, perhaps), so the recon totem is finished and the boss moves down to level 9.  You now have a quest for the recon totem on 6 and the boss on 9.
- You go after the boss, but because of the recon totem the town is getting attacked relatively frequently and you start losing main questgivers.  There are various expendable townsfolk, but  if you lose all 3 main questgivers (you can rescue new ones to replace missing ones, but it's usually pretty deep down), you lose the town.  But to win the town you have to complete all the main quests for the town.  So better knock out that totem, or be real quick about things.

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 23, 2012, 05:26:26 PM
caved in and bought TL2.

The finisher was when I saw some of the awesome items you can get.

One of them is called the Emperor's Wraith.

It's a crossbow that fires bolts.

The Emperor's Wraith is bolter.

Another is a belt that in its description belonged to a mage of the north star.

With references like this, the game itself is calling to me.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 23, 2012, 05:44:54 PM
Yea, I finally got Magicka when I saw a promotional image that... that... I can't spoil it with words.  Look at the top banner of: http://www.magickapedia.net/wiki/Main_Page

There's a lot of wizards there.  Guess which one sold that copy?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 23, 2012, 05:55:38 PM
Din's Curse is a brilliant dungeon hack. It actually puts PRESSURE on you to do something, or the monsters will do stuff for you. Usually wrecking your village. They'll cause uprisings, attack the town, start "gangs" to defeat other gangs. It's awesome. It doesn't look very pretty, and has balance issues, but the balance issues can be handled with the balance mod on the Din's Curse forums.

It really is a gem.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 23, 2012, 06:05:02 PM
For more info on Din's Curse and a demo: http://www.soldak.com/Dins-Curse/Overview.html (http://www.soldak.com/Dins-Curse/Overview.html)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 23, 2012, 06:59:18 PM
You lot act as if you're surprised. How could you not see this coming the second the "always online" was announced?

Us lot? Yes, we are the unwashed masses that surely didn't see this coming… Or maybe we just didn't care and wanted to play Diablo 3.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 23, 2012, 07:02:43 PM
Or maybe we just didn't care and wanted to play Diablo 3.
If only it were so easy.

(mostly kidding)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 23, 2012, 07:09:06 PM
Or maybe we just didn't care and wanted to play Diablo 3.
If only it were so easy.

(mostly kidding)

I see what you did there.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 23, 2012, 07:43:17 PM
You lot act as if you're surprised. How could you not see this coming the second the "always online" was announced?

Us lot? Yes, we are the unwashed masses that surely didn't see this coming… Or maybe we just didn't care and wanted to play Diablo 3.

So.....how's that working out for you?

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 23, 2012, 09:29:21 PM
You lot act as if you're surprised. How could you not see this coming the second the "always online" was announced?

Us lot? Yes, we are the unwashed masses that surely didn't see this coming… Or maybe we just didn't care and wanted to play Diablo 3.

So.....how's that working out for you?

King

Working out great. I'm keeping two of my characters at relatively the same level. I don't have any problems logging in. Sometimes I get lag spikes, which is annoying, but it hasn't caused me to die (actually, I haven't died at all yet). I had trouble logging the first day, but since then it's been going smoothly.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on May 24, 2012, 01:09:14 AM
Working out?  Just fine.

Other than the occassional Auction House maintenance, haven't really had a problem with it at all.  Playing along just fine on my KILL-LOOT-EVALUATE-KILL AGAIN! cycle.  Occasionally the background changes from swamp to desert to indoors.  Cool, MORE KILL.  MOAR LOOTZ!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 24, 2012, 05:36:52 AM
Now i know what people say when they say that Inferno is unbalanced, it's not just unbalanced. A certain spider cave area is actually impossible (as in, without corpse hopping) when you have certain combinations of enemies (and with impossible, I mean elite groups that nobody on the world has ever managed to beat)

like fast vampire blocker arcane spiderlings

And I am not really a fan of the respawn mechanic. For SOLO that you can't get revived means some mobs you have to guide to the respawn point or you can't beat their regeneration speed. (regenerating mobs suck, by the way)

I found, that Inferno is actually easier SOLO...

Anyhow, I found the first set item (I was under the impression they don't exist ,p) sadly its a mage set... so I guess I'll be playing a mage next ;P Mages ought to have very easy time with focus on INT (i hear you need about 600 resistance against all to manage inferno easily)

But all that said, Inferno is a true and honest challenge. With some very broken situations and combinations of enemy perks that are extremely imbalanced.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 24, 2012, 06:39:52 AM
Now i know what people say when they say that Inferno is unbalanced, it's not just unbalanced. A certain spider cave area is actually impossible (as in, without corpse hopping) when you have certain combinations of enemies (and with impossible, I mean elite groups that nobody on the world has ever managed to beat)

Wow! Just wow! You are already on inferno! It took me 18 hours just to get through first 2 acts on normal. It will probably be several months when I get to inferno... actually I think I just give up earlier.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on May 24, 2012, 07:16:39 AM
Yes, I know of many combinations of mobs that are impossible to kill.

Shielding and mortar plus another bad chacteristic is an annoying one.

There are at least a half dozen characteristics (more like a dozen from anecdotes) where if a mob gets two of them its 95% impossible and if they get three it is 100% impossible to beat them.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 24, 2012, 09:33:43 AM
Not even a Diamond Skin+Energy Armor(w/Force Armor)?  Because that is near un-killable when you run with no Vitality gear.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 24, 2012, 10:05:20 AM
Also, I'm gonna state my point clearly here. I'm not attacking your enjoyment or saying that Diablo 3 is a bad game. I'm attacking Blizzards (or more likely Activisions) business practices and their locking down on gamer freedom. That's what I'm attacking. Diablo 3 can be a stellar game for all I know (I haven't played it, remember?), but with what they've done with it, I have no will to ever touch it either.

As a side note, I'm also kind of flabberghasted at people that defend this kind of behaviour. How is this in any way beneficial to the gamer?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 24, 2012, 11:01:52 AM
To a large extent, if a game is ridiculously fun, most players feel no particular need to attack or defend the surrounding business practices.  Whatever they may be.

To do so distracts from enjoying the ridiculously fun game.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 24, 2012, 12:59:02 PM
To a large extent, if a game is ridiculously fun, most players feel no particular need to attack or defend the surrounding business practices.  Whatever they may be.

To do so distracts from enjoying the ridiculously fun game.

Would explain why everyone willingly downloaded Origin to play ME3....

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on May 24, 2012, 01:54:39 PM
Would explain why everyone willingly downloaded Origin to play ME3....
Believe it or not, there's a finite amount of damage Origin can do to you, and even-more-finite amount of damage it's actually likely to do to you :)

That said, yea, haven't gotten ME3 because of that, and would have autobought it on release on steam, possibly twice due to hitting the button too enthusiastically.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 24, 2012, 03:11:36 PM
Would explain why everyone willingly downloaded Origin to play ME3....
Believe it or not, there's a finite amount of damage Origin can do to you, and even-more-finite amount of damage it's actually likely to do to you :)

That said, yea, haven't gotten ME3 because of that, and would have autobought it on release on steam, possibly twice due to hitting the button too enthusiastically.

Heheh, yeah, same here on the Steam thing. Alas....

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on May 24, 2012, 08:06:42 PM
Also, I'm gonna state my point clearly here. I'm not attacking your enjoyment or saying that Diablo 3 is a bad game. I'm attacking Blizzards (or more likely Activisions) business practices and their locking down on gamer freedom. That's what I'm attacking. Diablo 3 can be a stellar game for all I know (I haven't played it, remember?), but with what they've done with it, I have no will to ever touch it either.

As a side note, I'm also kind of flabberghasted at people that defend this kind of behaviour. How is this in any way beneficial to the gamer?
To a large extent, if a game is ridiculously fun, most players feel no particular need to attack or defend the surrounding business practices.  Whatever they may be.

To do so distracts from enjoying the ridiculously fun game.

Certainly not defending it. I have railed against this kind of DRM multiple times and vigorously. It has deterred several of my purchases. However, in this case we are talking about Diablo 3. For some of us early middle-aged folk, Diablo is a childhood memory for us. We wasted all the time in the world on the original, more than that on the sequel, and more than likely tried to get that fix from all kind of games including Titan quest, torchlight, and more. But Blizzard does it best at creating a truly polished experience across all levels.

So in spite of the DRM and not in defense of it, yeah I'm playing it. I'm also having a good time. I've had some close calls due to lag spikes. I've had some issues with synchronization on multiplayer. But, I haven't died yet. I know ahead of time for hard-core just how much leeway I need to give myself. I wish there had been an off-line version. I wished the same thing about Starcraft 2. But what are my choices…pout while 5 million people get to enjoy their childhood again or maybe for the first time? Boycott by myself while Blizzard makes millions? And for what?

If I thought that holding out would have any effect on these horrible business practices, I certainly would do it. I'm not buying anything from EA anymore because of their policy and horrible platform that is a blight upon the gaming world. And I think that kind of gamer activism is working on them; they are listening. But in the case of Diablo, it's not working, it's not effective, and I would rather have what fun there is to be had than not.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 24, 2012, 09:48:47 PM
Ok, so I'd like to say something about the gameplay. I'm not a hard core gamer, I take my time to do things in game and I do not like competition. Also I'm not a good gamer, I enjoy playing but most of my friends play better than me.

Diablo has been and is a lot of fun for me. I started with Monk and currently I'm level 27. I'm 22 hours in, 18 of them to finish first to acts on Normal.
At first the game was ridiculously easy. Everything around just died when you merely thought of it. Haven't used a single healing potion for first few levels. The first death was the Act 1 Boss, I died to it once. In the Act 2 things started to pick up a bit, but just a tiny bit. However I felt that the choice of spells is... well limiting.

They did away with respecs in Diablo3, which I think is great. You can't practically respec in the middle of a battle, but pretty much anywhere else. You can at the same time use 6 spells, one of which is your left mouse click attack. So two spells go to you left and right mouse buttons and another for to 1,2,3,4 on the keyboard (of course you can re-bind). So out of pool of spells you have you can choose 6 at a time. All available spells are divided in 6 groups and in each group there are 3-4 spells. Each spell can be augmented by this spell specific rune. There are about 5 runes for each spell. In addition there are 3 slots to choose from the pool of about 15 passive skill that are not bound to keyboard or mouse.

The character build calculator can get a rough idea what it looks like http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/barbarian

Of course skills and runes are unlocked gradually as you level up. There are not much to choose from on lower levels.

Also you can choose from one of the three followers, that also get unlocked in the process of levelling. I'm actually not quite sure what they are good for (anybody?) as their damage is about one fifth of what you are doing. They have four spell slots and in each slot you can choose one of the two given spells for this slot. There are also a few equipment slots for followers so you can give them a weapon, rings, necklace and an implement.

By the end of Act 2 I died probably 3-4 time, that is just before the battle with the Act 2 boss. Note, that I didn't really dwell a lot on the skill choice, every time I levelled up I briefly reviewed them and moved on. After I died 5 times in a row to the Act 2 boss, I had to think for a bit and changed my skills. This helped and I downed the Act 2 boss after a few more tries.

Act 3 started with quite sharp difficulty increase. I might need to re-think my skills again but in the first 4 hours of Act 3 I probably died  half a dozen times. I also noticed that the battles became more interesting. This boils down to enemy group composition and how individual enemies in the group behaves. It is quite satisfying to figure out how most efficiently to deal with this or that enemy group.

Also by reading what other players write about playing on higher difficulty level it seems that more layers get added to the gameplay.

Also played about 20 minutes with a wizard and was dying a lot until realizing (duh!!!!) that you have to move as a wizard, otherwise you get 3-4 hits killed. When you start with monk, you just can be in the centre of enemy group and be hitting them at your leisure.

I see myself playing Diablo 3 for quite awhile.

Now the bad: Auciton house is... well. If the game was the same state as AH, it would be impossible to play. AH is literally unusable. Lot of weird glitches, unbearable slowness. Searches not always work. Bought items don't appear for hours. Sometimes weird sums of gold appear in the incoming list, that can't be transferred to stash. Often actions time out, and a lot of time the whole AH is down. If it was the whole product, I would say it's utterly broken.

Disconnects. Yes, not often, but if you just before the end of the quest after clearing a big dungeon, they are infuriating. So far I had to of these infuriating ones. I had a dozen of others which where more tolerable because I didn't moved far yet, so if they keep happening and resetting me I'd just put Diablo 3 aside for awhile until stability restores.

Always on sucks. DRM sucks. AH issues suck. The game is great.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 25, 2012, 02:53:36 AM
the AH being broken as hell is the reason I am just scrapping everything I find lately, it's completely pointless to try selling it. Also I laugh at some of the prices in the AH... nobody is gonna pay 2 million gold for a unique item, if it were a SET then MAYBE (i have so far, found -1- single Set item)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 26, 2012, 02:06:19 AM
Always on sucks. DRM sucks. AH issues suck. The game is great.
Awesome wrap up. Thanks!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on May 27, 2012, 02:30:42 AM
I personally felt set items were far too rare in D2. You'd end up with 2-3 Set Items during a playthrough and all of them from different sets. Ugh.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 27, 2012, 07:52:38 AM
Ok, 28 hours in, Act 3 boss (normal) is down. This fight was kind of anticlimactic. I have not even died once! It's the first act-level boss that I did not die to!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 27, 2012, 08:38:52 AM
Set Items are even rarer in Diablo 3 and they are totally broken and worthless.. why? because they got random stats. Yes, you read that right. Set items with random stats. LMAO

That means mage set can actually end up not giving you any direct bonus relevant to mage skills or needs. Same for legendaries, rares, and every other item. This is why sometimes blue items can be better than golden ones or even legendaries. How Blizzard thought that is good design is beyond me. I guess they really want to peddle their 15% fee real money AH once it goes life. Obviously the only thing thats gonna in demand is going to be gold, which is hilariously rare in this Diablo.. I mean rare as in, it's rare to find a single good item with gold find increase, particularly when you want to craft or fuse diamonds. (and train both guys to level 10) this comes to bite you...

Also set bonus is so miniscule you are better off just finding a good golden item for your needs. Or craft it.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 29, 2012, 02:46:30 AM
Guys, who knows, how diablo 3 handles chars of different levels in the same party?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 29, 2012, 10:29:43 AM
As far as I can tell, you're just different levels.  So if you've just beat Normal and play Nightmare with your level 34, and your buddy has a level 54 that's beat Hell and joins your Nightmare game, he'll cakewalk everything while you struggle to kill stuff (the mobs are twice as hard to kill because of 2 people, and it is your first Nightmare run).  By Act II you'll be just focusing on limiting your own deaths.  In Act IV you'll be trying for a record 10 seconds of consecutive life.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 29, 2012, 03:26:24 PM
As far as I can tell, you're just different levels.  So if you've just beat Normal and play Nightmare with your level 34, and your buddy has a level 54 that's beat Hell and joins your Nightmare game, he'll cakewalk everything while you struggle to kill stuff (the mobs are twice as hard to kill because of 2 people, and it is your first Nightmare run).  By Act II you'll be just focusing on limiting your own deaths.  In Act IV you'll be trying for a record 10 seconds of consecutive life.
Thanks, what about XP, will a low-level char get any?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on May 29, 2012, 04:10:27 PM
If your levels are within a reasonable range (which I don't have specifics on) you'll get xp.  If you're way out of range (say, a level 1 tagging along with a level 15), they have to hit the enemy to get xp.  They'll get quest xp but really they get one-shotted a lot.  Too much for value in the powerleveling arena.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 29, 2012, 09:30:43 PM
Thanks.

32 hours to beat the game on normal for me. Have not died to act 4 boss either.
Now I'm going to play with my friend (who is just starting out) which means I'll need to roll a new char.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: thelonecarrot on May 30, 2012, 06:28:40 PM
Have been struggling with my internet for stability so I decided to hold off playing more Diablo 3 and do a little retrospect playing of Diablo 2.

Having reached Hell Difficulty in D3 before having too many problems I feel I got a fairly good idea of the game. Having played half of act I of D2 with 8X player difficulty turned on I can safely say that there alot of things that have been improved on.

My biggest issue with D2 has always been the times it devolved into a stat stick war. By essetialy removing 'attack rating' and just leaving dodge chance in the game D3 actually does feel more action based of a game. How I fight and where I position myself (I have a lvl 52 Demon Hunter) is way more important than before. There's less swinging a weapon and missing repeatedly and more emphasis on actual mobility and action.

Where D2 could feel like a real time D&D videogame at times, your stats mattering more than your inputs; D3 makes me feel that 'I' have real control over how a fight will turn out by my decisions and not the spec of my gear.

This is the most important change in feeling that I've gotten so far between the games. Gonna keep playing more D2 just to see what else I notice and because 8X player difficulty makes the game a proper challenge early on, something seriously lacking in D3 early on. They really need to add a player X difficulty option in.

Plus anyone up for multiplayer D2 let me know. A big 8 player deatthball sounds like great craic.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on May 30, 2012, 10:10:31 PM
Where D2 could feel like a real time D&D videogame at times, your stats mattering more than your inputs; D3 makes me feel that 'I' have real control over how a fight will turn out by my decisions and not the spec of my gear.

To that I can answer with a quote from Blizzard (http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/6018173/Game_Design_Update-5_28_2012#blog)

Quote
We've also seen some people saying our intention with Inferno is just one-shot you to make it difficult. While damage is a bit spikier than we'd like, we're actually seeing a pretty significant number of people attempting Inferno without sufficient gear. There's a good chance that returning to the previous Act to farm upgrades will do the most to help you survive.

Emphasis is mine.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on May 31, 2012, 04:57:30 AM
That last quote is particularly fun on this forum, where the longest and most heated debates have surrounded ways to prevent players from having to farm and grind! Imagine if someone complained that continent 5 was too hard in Valley and Chris just turned around and said we needed to farm more!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on May 31, 2012, 02:14:29 PM
Well that is not an issue because login servers in the EU are down the entire day now. Classic Blizzard support, no Information, no ETA
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on May 31, 2012, 02:32:05 PM
Well that is not an issue because login servers in the EU are down the entire day now. Classic Blizzard support, no Information, no ETA

Had I bought this game, I think I'd be demanding a refund at this point.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on May 31, 2012, 02:56:18 PM
I haven't had any issues stateside with the servers.  I did however, have one thing happy that annoyed me greatly.  I paused the game so I could eat dinner.  I was in the middle of a dungeon and didn't want to lose the progress I had.  I still had a lot of back-tracking to find the quest objective.  After I came back down, I found out it logged me out.  When I get back in, I'm at the start of the dungeon with nothing mapped, and the dungeon layout is different, so I lost all my progress.  I was gone about 30-40 minutes.

Edit: The reason I finally decide to get D3 was because I can do BattleTag friends instead of RealID friends, and for research to see how their ability system felt since my current project has some Diablo-like elements.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on May 31, 2012, 10:22:08 PM
I haven't read anything in this thread, but I just want to say that I do not like Diablo 3.

The horrible DRM, forced online play, 4 player max, Real-money Auction-House, no death penalties (except hardcore which is ridiculous), 60 level cap, massive login errors, queue wait times just to log in, getting kicked for AFKing in your own single-player game.  The story is 7-8 hours long?

After 12 years of development this?

I'm sorry, but Blizzard has become a horrible, money-grubbing company and nobody can deny it.

I'll stick with Torchlight 2 which for $20 offers:
1. Offline play.
2. Full LAN support.
3. Full Mod support.
4. Death penalty options.
5. Can start the game on the hardest difficulty, without having to grind through it 3 times.
6. No player cap.
7. Awesome community mods (this deserves to be mentioned twice, since D3 won't even let you mod their game whatsoever).
8. Stats and skill points.
9. The first Act of Torchlight 2 is apparently as big as the entire game of Diablo 3.  The developers say the entire game will span 3 huge acts, and a 4th boss act, and will take about 40 hours to complete, and that's if you're rushing.
10. New Game+, which is like Diablo 3's Nightmare/Hell/Inferno mode, except you can restart the game infinite times for harder challenges - giving it literally infinite replay value.

So in closing, if you bought D3 you wasted your money and are supporting a company that is no longer trustworthy or commendable.  Wait for TL2, that is all.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 01, 2012, 06:59:08 AM
Bit preachy, that last one. :)

Personally, I've held off buying Torchlight 2 because it's main selling feature was, "It's more Torchlight... but it's got multiplayer!!" - which appeals very little to me.

But I'd certainly not tell someone they wasted their money on it for that reason!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 01, 2012, 07:31:00 AM
I hope by now everyone heard of Star Forge?

http://www.bluesnews.com/s/132657/starforge-demo

Because If there is one thing I want it's a *way better* Minecraft.. and holy moly this one looks a LOT better
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 01, 2012, 04:14:54 PM
I hope by now everyone heard of Star Forge?

http://www.bluesnews.com/s/132657/starforge-demo

Because If there is one thing I want it's a *way better* Minecraft.. and holy moly this one looks a LOT better
Watched this game play video - nothing like Daiblo 3!


(Kidding, kidding  :) )
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 01, 2012, 05:09:12 PM
Yeah but unlike Diablo 3 this one actually worked yesterday ("demo" is fun, but it's earliest possible ALPHA, so yeah ,p)

I am actually stumped how boring the world in Diablo 3 is, how small, how... pointless. You could be walking through barren walls with talk-bots it would not make a difference. All that detailing is lost to a completely unbelievable static world that is completely pointless. Heck, you could abstract shops to menu items and it would not even make the game worse. Blizzard really lost their touch
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 01, 2012, 06:40:12 PM
Yeah but unlike Diablo 3 this one actually worked yesterday ("demo" is fun, but it's earliest possible ALPHA, so yeah ,p)

I am actually stumped how boring the world in Diablo 3 is, how small, how... pointless. You could be walking through barren walls with talk-bots it would not make a difference. All that detailing is lost to a completely unbelievable static world that is completely pointless. Heck, you could abstract shops to menu items and it would not even make the game worse. Blizzard really lost their touch
Erm... I'm surprised by your use of word "pointless". What is the point of ANY game world? Is WoW world pointless? Is Skyrim world pointless? What about Dragon Age? What is the point of them when they are NOT pointless?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 01, 2012, 09:06:44 PM
Yeah but unlike Diablo 3 this one actually worked yesterday ("demo" is fun, but it's earliest possible ALPHA, so yeah ,p)

I am actually stumped how boring the world in Diablo 3 is, how small, how... pointless. You could be walking through barren walls with talk-bots it would not make a difference. All that detailing is lost to a completely unbelievable static world that is completely pointless. Heck, you could abstract shops to menu items and it would not even make the game worse. Blizzard really lost their touch
Erm... I'm surprised by your use of word "pointless". What is the point of ANY game world? Is WoW world pointless? Is Skyrim world pointless? What about Dragon Age? What is the point of them when they are NOT pointless?
Personally I think WoW and Dragon Age are pretty pointless.  I just don't get a kick of these games whose only purpose is to make you grind away in a fantasy world for hundreds of hours or more.  If I just want to be part of a story I can watch a movie or go outside and make my own story - it's free and I'm actually getting exercise in the process.

For an RPG game to be a non waste-of-time, in my opinion, there needs to be a heavy skill aspect and/or PVP option.  If you're literally just spinning your wheels like in Diablo 3, doing the same repetitive grind over and over, then yes, huge waste of time.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 02, 2012, 02:31:56 AM
Yeah but unlike Diablo 3 this one actually worked yesterday ("demo" is fun, but it's earliest possible ALPHA, so yeah ,p)

I am actually stumped how boring the world in Diablo 3 is, how small, how... pointless. You could be walking through barren walls with talk-bots it would not make a difference. All that detailing is lost to a completely unbelievable static world that is completely pointless. Heck, you could abstract shops to menu items and it would not even make the game worse. Blizzard really lost their touch
Erm... I'm surprised by your use of word "pointless". What is the point of ANY game world? Is WoW world pointless? Is Skyrim world pointless? What about Dragon Age? What is the point of them when they are NOT pointless?

With pointless I mean it has no purpose. Why are we required to walk through towns with static npc's? What for? Why is story transmitted over Click - Monologues ? Why don't we have choices in how quests go and that is how story is pushed? Heck, Why aren't we playing some more or less evil characters who tackle different quests differently? Why aren't towns actively defending or under attack.

Everything in Diablo 3 reeks of laziness. They have the world, but they don't DO anything with it. They have random maps but how they use it is nearly entirely broken (repeating patterns everywhere). And to boot the world is extremely small with very little to find. (Events are few and far between). Dunno who said that but Diablo 3 is like an open world museum. Enemies and sets are in it but they do not interact with each other. (You can guide monsters into towns and see the reactions that brings ... /none\ that is)

To think this game was in development more than 6 years you got wonder what they actually did half of that time....

I think in some sense Diablo 2 was actually more advanced, it had more regions, better tilesets, darker mood (in quests) Well I got my fun out of Diablo 3 but it is not a *great* game. As far as hack and slash goes this is just mediocrity.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 02, 2012, 09:17:17 AM
With pointless I mean it has no purpose. Why are we required to walk through towns with static npc's? What for? Why is story transmitted over Click - Monologues ? Why don't we have choices in how quests go and that is how story is pushed? Heck, Why aren't we playing some more or less evil characters who tackle different quests differently? Why aren't towns actively defending or under attack.
Din's Curse had already been made :)  If you haven't played that, you should (you probably already mentioned doing so earlier in the comments, but I'm too lazy to go check).

(I agree it would have been awesome if Blizzard had done that too)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 02, 2012, 12:12:48 PM
Yeah I played Din's Curse.. actually that's what I am gonna do now ;p Maybe there are some mods...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 02, 2012, 01:19:01 PM
Yeah I played Din's Curse.. actually that's what I am gonna do now ;p Maybe there are some mods...
Check out Bluddy's balance mod.

http://www.soldak.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3515
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 02, 2012, 06:47:05 PM
Well it seems that this balance mod does indeed actually balance the game properly, for the original was hopelessly broken and .. well, badly designed all around. But that balance mod + the same dudes GUI mod fixes the game up very nicely. Well off to play Dins curse now with zeh Mod ;p

But I am a bit surprised Dins curse didn't attract more moders. I assume it's because support just kinda died mid-way....
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: thelonecarrot on June 02, 2012, 09:09:30 PM
Where D2 could feel like a real time D&D videogame at times, your stats mattering more than your inputs; D3 makes me feel that 'I' have real control over how a fight will turn out by my decisions and not the spec of my gear.

To that I can answer with a quote from Blizzard (http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/6018173/Game_Design_Update-5_28_2012#blog)

Quote
We've also seen some people saying our intention with Inferno is just one-shot you to make it difficult. While damage is a bit spikier than we'd like, we're actually seeing a pretty significant number of people attempting Inferno without sufficient gear. There's a good chance that returning to the previous Act to farm upgrades will do the most to help you survive.

Emphasis is mine.

Oh blizzard why you say such stupid things, even though they are through.

Yes stats and gear matter just as much as before, wasn't my intent to say otherwise. More that the removal of attack rating has made the game better at hiding "the stat stick war" that is going on. Thus forcing me to think differently than I did in D2. A shift in the way I find myself thinking and not how the game actually works. Plus swinging at air is lame.

The other thing I've found throgh replaying D2 is how alive the world felt. D3 just doesn't have this till the third act and then only at certain points (watching a hell worm thingy dash through the battle below before popping up beside you is pretty awesome).

I feel this is mostly due to the focus on story characters that follow you from act to act rather than a focus on the local colour i.e. the vendors.
From Akara to that crazy alchemist in act III; the vendors brough life to every area in a way that D3 cannot achieve through background chatter. That said I think alot of the random chat is okay but you don't get to know the people talking, they are just randomers. It was funny to hear Lysander in act II talk about missing the chat of the harem girls because it was him saying it. Who said the lines was as important as the lines themselves.
Heck I remember getting every statement out of the act III assasin despite the fact she did nothing plot wise.

The biggest failing here was in heaven in D3, aside from being really short for a final act, what was heaven? What lasting impression did it leave? It's heaven! How can you make it the most bland area in your game! It left no lasting impression on me.
Which leads to the lore books. As awesome as they were (especially in how they opened up the heavens) they are a poor replacement for NPC's.
The telling of the lore was linked and interweaved with the people in D2 adding to both areas. Even if it was just Deckard telling dirty stories about nuns!; it added so much. Two birds with one stone, world and lore through people, even if the lore was a bit weaker in D2 as I recall (still replaying Act I)


Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 02, 2012, 10:13:20 PM
Yeah I played Din's Curse.. actually that's what I am gonna do now ;p Maybe there are some mods...
Check out Bluddy's balance mod.

http://www.soldak.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3515
Thanks for this.

I had never heard of Din's Curse prior to this thread - but after reading some of this thread, I can see why.  I absolutely hate badly polished games with great potential, that the company just leaves half-baked.

This is why I love Arcen so much, because you guys just keep making your game better and better.

Anyway, with the balance mod the game might be worth buying but $30 is a pretty steep price for what I'm willing to pay for it.  Looks fun though!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on June 03, 2012, 06:57:46 AM
GRRR! WHY did you have to go mention Din's again, keith? *installs*
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 03, 2012, 01:10:23 PM
To be honest it isn't really worth 30$ given that they stopped fixing extremely annoying bugs midway and just threw an imbalanced expansion to cash in while NOT fixing bugs.

While the mods fix the game up to playable, there are still EXTREMELY annoying issues, Like the "your villager hungers, safe him with 1cp" nonsense, you gonna see that 50 times a single game. Or the flickering target info of doom. At least in that regard, D3 has no glaring bugs.. except the Inferno Act2+ instant kill stuff. And just watch real pro gamers play Inferno act 2 or 3 or 4.. you see people instant dieing from stuff you can't even see hitting them. So Blizzard is telling lies when they say that good equipment can protect you against this. Elites of certain enemies do more than 150000 damage with 1 hit, and they shoot (literally) a stream of attacks at you. Like the wasps or the bringers of pestilence (act3).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Bluddy on June 03, 2012, 04:20:01 PM
To be honest it isn't really worth 30$ given that they stopped fixing extremely annoying bugs midway and just threw an imbalanced expansion to cash in while NOT fixing bugs.

While the mods fix the game up to playable, there are still EXTREMELY annoying issues, Like the "your villager hungers, safe him with 1cp" nonsense, you gonna see that 50 times a single game. Or the flickering target info of doom.

To be honest, the main focus of the game is the dynamic town and the dungeons, the enemies that fight each other etc. The skills aren't that well balanced in the main game, but that doesn't detract that much IMO. It's just that some skills are much better than others.

In terms of number of real bugs (ie. not balance issues), there really aren't that many. The flickering target info is annoying and I'm sure Steven will deal with it in the next patch once he finishes the Drox alpha. And you're right that the hungry NPC thing just doesn't work. I tried to fix it but didn't manage to, so I'm just going to remove it in the next version of the mod (whenever I get to it).

The main issue is that Soldak is a one-man show. Unlike Arcen, they don't have the resources to continue patching a game while developing another one. And none of Soldak's games have been successful enough to justify sticking with the same game and releasing continuous patches for it like AI War.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 03, 2012, 05:58:06 PM
To be honest it isn't really worth 30$ given that they stopped fixing extremely annoying bugs midway and just threw an imbalanced expansion to cash in while NOT fixing bugs.

While the mods fix the game up to playable, there are still EXTREMELY annoying issues, Like the "your villager hungers, safe him with 1cp" nonsense, you gonna see that 50 times a single game. Or the flickering target info of doom.

To be honest, the main focus of the game is the dynamic town and the dungeons, the enemies that fight each other etc. The skills aren't that well balanced in the main game, but that doesn't detract that much IMO. It's just that some skills are much better than others.

In terms of number of real bugs (ie. not balance issues), there really aren't that many. The flickering target info is annoying and I'm sure Steven will deal with it in the next patch once he finishes the Drox alpha. And you're right that the hungry NPC thing just doesn't work. I tried to fix it but didn't manage to, so I'm just going to remove it in the next version of the mod (whenever I get to it).

The main issue is that Soldak is a one-man show. Unlike Arcen, they don't have the resources to continue patching a game while developing another one. And none of Soldak's games have been successful enough to justify sticking with the same game and releasing continuous patches for it like AI War.

Hah I didn't even realize you were the same Bluddy as on the Soldak forums and the changelogs ;)

Wasn't there a huge post of how the Soldak dev regretted making that weird Kivi's Underworld casual game that basically just a redone Din's Curse just less... good?... It boggles the mind what insanity rode him them. Instead of improving the great concept of Din's Curse (and before that, Depths of Peril) with a 2nd expansion that improved controls, physics, feel, graphics, and everything else he made off-shoot games that had nothing to do with the relatively good game he made.

It's really no wonder he didn't have a success story with his games though, by all accounts even Din's Curse is exceptionally ugly in a technical sense, lots of lightning and collision glitches, and the game engine does not use any modern features. I don't even understand why, it'd be a simple engine upgrade, art assets could even remain the same! Instead of wasting time with other games this is the 1 good game he has. And instead of fixing it (Heck, he should have hired YOU Bluddy given your great mods) he wastes more time on other games that will never be a success unless he gets 1 game to a level where steam would say, yes, we take that!

And quite honestly, he should have patched Din's Curse before Diablo 3 release and get it on Steam. That would have netted him "better than D3" recommendations and lots of sales.

Why.. why is Din's Curse not on Steam?

Edit: Added quote because of page flip ;p

Not on GOG, not on steam. How does he expect to earn money that way? (not to mention that the game should not be more than 20$ with expansion) overpriced and underadvertised. Sadness
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 03, 2012, 06:15:04 PM
Wasn't there a huge post of how the Soldak dev regretted making that weird Kivi's Underworld casual game that basically just a redone Din's Curse just less... good?
Kivi's happened after Depths of Peril, before Din's Curse.

And while I don't regret our having made it, Tidalis was a somewhat similar situation for us: not at all related gameplay wise to AIW, but we were hoping that a more casual game would reach a broader audience (i.e. more money).  Didn't work out so well ;)

And Kivi's isn't really a bad game, it's just not as interesting as DoP or DC, which feel a lot more innovative.

Quote
that will never be a success unless he gets 1 game to a level where steam would say, yes, we take that!
Depths of Peril is on steam, though it took a while.

Quote
Why.. why is Din's Curse not on Steam?
I'm not sure how aware you are of how it works, but getting on steam is not a matter of snapping ones fingers.  I would be 100% shocked if Steven hasn't tried his best to get it on steam; getting DoP on there was probably a pretty big win for him.

As for GoG, it wasn't really into the "new indie games" part of its business when DC came out, and while we don't have anything up there I don't expect it's much more profitable than Impulse, GG, etc.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 03, 2012, 06:19:49 PM
Yeah, Valve has a record of not allowing certain games on Steam for reasons that are pretty vague. Though how some awful games get on the store, I'll never know. I wish Valve would simply not allow bad games to exist on the store if they're going to be choosy. Its a slight annoyance I have, though its not one that comes up often. Valve is odd with the ones that it rejects...

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 03, 2012, 07:03:57 PM
I didn't even know DoP was on steam.. that is.. sad ;)

By the way Keith... you say Tidalis was supposed to be for casual market yet it is easily the most complex game....  in it's entire genre ;) And that is a compliment (just obviously, a bad one if you aimed at the casual market ,p)

I guess I just wish he would polish Din and DoP properly, add a BETTER graphics engine and better control feeling, butter up some of those animations and effects and release this proper + Bluddy modified balance. DoP and Din are the most exceptionally ugly games that I love. But I am an artist so yeah... I look at this stuff and get sad that so much potential is wasted. Sure good graphics don't make a bad game good, but bad unpolished graphics *can* make a good game bad.

And given that most api's (not sure what Din and DoP uses, OpenGL or D3D, in any case both support far superior graphic features and have well documented /api's\ (does one say it that way? I guess I mean, features that are well documented ;P ) to implement them. And better graphics and animations are Nr.1 thing for DoP and Din imo, I mean.. just look at that DoP trailer on Steam, that is not making me want to play that game! ;p
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on June 03, 2012, 07:23:17 PM
I am a huge Soldak fan, perhaps the biggest one around other than Bluddy.  The lead designer of DoP and DC is aware of everything you are saying about patches and marketing, Eraser, but one man can only do so much and Steam has not been kind to him.  Right now he is developing a very, very promising looking game which combines all the best parts of DoP (the covenant system) and DC (the dynamic world) into a much prettier game than both of these.  The game is called Drox Operative and will be set in space (a space ARPG).  Think of it as a 4X game that is taking place around you, and you are just one of the many ships in the galaxy.  You can influence other races, help them acquire technology, improve your own ship, set them at war against each other, help them fight their wars, etc.  It should go into beta either this month or next, and it is a much more solid and professional looking product than they've ever made before.  Check out the Soldak website for more info.

One of Steven Peeler's (the lead designer at Soldak) great virtues is that he knows the game he wants to make before he makes it.  He sets out with a very precise and well thought out design idea and he is usually able to fulfill his ambitions quite gracefully given the modest resources he has to work with.  It is not always pretty or perfectly balanced, but it is always a very fleshed out idea brought from paper to screen. 
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 03, 2012, 07:53:56 PM
Yeah but how long would it take him to patch the hunger and flickering targeting issue in Din's Curse? You can't tell me that is impossible or that he doesn't know how. Having such issues (that anyone playing the game will INSTANTLY notice) left open is just not gonna do him any favors. Especially not if patching them would take him 10 minutes. While leaving them in will annoy anyone who plays, forever.

Sure you can play despite this (though you can not ignore the constantly starving population ~.~) but this is about pride in your work. Either you fix your stuff till it works right, or you don't. That is how I judge developers. If he doesn't bother patching such minuscule issues in his most recent game, then Drox will have equally annoying issues that he will never patch.

I once trusted Indy devs, that was before I bought SOTS2 and Stronghold 3. Now I judge developers how they support their games when issues crop up
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 03, 2012, 07:58:16 PM
Yeah but how long would it take him to patch the hunger and flickering targeting issue in Din's Curse? You can't tell me that is impossible or that he doesn't know how. Having such issues (that anyone playing the game will INSTANTLY notice) left open is just not gonna do him any favors. Especially not if patching them would take him 10 minutes. While leaving them in will annoy anyone who plays, forever.

Sure you can play despite this (though you can not ignore the constantly starving population ~.~) but this is about pride in your work. Either you fix your stuff till it works right, or you don't. That is how I judge developers. If he doesn't bother patching such minuscule issues in his most recent game, then Drox will have equally annoying issues that he will never patch.

I once trusted Indy devs, that was before I bought SOTS2 and Stronghold 3. Now I judge developers how they support their games when issues crop up

Well, he does have to make a living. Constantly patching and fixing a "dead" game, doesn't make you any money. Pride is one thing, but some don't care/have time for pride in one's work. Maybe the fix would only take a little bit of time, idk. But that's still time and time is a rare commodity.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on June 03, 2012, 08:16:46 PM
I have asked him about the time it would take to patch and he has said that the patching itself, while time consuming, isn't really the problem.  The problem is getting a new patch out to all the distributors and insuring compatibility between versions.  Since he isn't on Steam and he doesn't have the kind of setup that Arcen does, he can't just roll out patches.  Apparently it is a huge hassle and once he has actually finished a patch (which takes as much or more more than a week) he then has to spend another week haggling with 5 or six distributors, some of whom don't even respond to him.  This is why Bluddy's work on the balance mod is so valuable.   
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 03, 2012, 08:23:03 PM
But why doesn't he have an autopatcher like Arcen does? If patching is such an hassle maybe he should solve that problem first and foremost? Clearly it is not going to get ANY better with a new game added to the mix.

I just realized that Arcengames spoiled me. AI War had a nifty auto patcher for a long while and all further games had it (and it's awesome). I just can't fathom why any developer would NOT do that with priority. Pushing beta patches out quickly is extremely vital to build a community. When between report to patch and patch release is at best 2 days you have created more customer satisfaction than you ever could any other way.

Actually, this is why I loved AI War. You could be influencing a balance discussion a day ago and when you wake up the next day the patch is out doing exactly that. There is nothing better than that. Not to mention that gives you very powerful word of mouth (Support is great, he responded directly to my issue and fixed it within a day).

And just for the record... fact is I had some crazy issues with Unity Port of AI War back in the days and several people spend weeks figuring out how to fix it and at the end of it we arrive at a point where that bug is fixed .. that is how you make people HAPPY. Other developers would say "only 1 report of this bug? Irrelevant!"
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 03, 2012, 10:06:32 PM
By the way Keith... you say Tidalis was supposed to be for casual market yet it is easily the most complex game....  in it's entire genre ;) And that is a compliment (just obviously, a bad one if you aimed at the casual market ,p)
Oh yes, we realized that not long after it was done.  Basically: every game we ever make is going to be pretty hardcore in some way or another.  We just can't help it :)

Tidalis has actually made what would have been an acceptable return for the kinds of game in that sort of genre, but they typically take like... maybe 1/4 or less the man-hours we actually spent on it, or something like that.  Overkill for the win!

Anyway, yea, DoP and DC could go from fun, innovative games to some truly special things with even half the post-release support that AIW has gotten (split between them).  But Steven's got to pay bills, and this is his only job (unlike Chris's situation during the development and first several months of post-release support for AIW) and while that kind of ongoing support does have an eventual payoff if done well, the far-and-away more common (and, frankly, reliable) approach to getting more revenue is, well, making new games :) 

Not sure how he grew his patching method, but it's pretty common to have a very cumbersome one.  Chris had to do a lot of upfront work to make his possible, but I don't really know the details as I wasn't involved at that stage.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 03, 2012, 10:54:31 PM
Not to constantly echo Keith today, but I'd say that Arcen is a rare gem among game developers as far as post-release support is concerned. I have gone through...idk...let's just  say 125 games played by now. The only games with the exception of anything tied to Arcen that actually have an auto-patcher that come to memory is Tribes: Ascend and MMOs in general. This suggests to me that patching games and giving them support is just not a popular notion in the game development community. Unless you have a freemium model then you'll get tons of "support" from the dev team...  Even on iOS, where updating an app is a lot easier to setup, most of my games tend to only get a few patches here and there and then they're done. There are some exceptions, but for the most part, development pretty much stops dead after release. (Which is a huge disappointment to me, I had hopes that this would change).

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 03, 2012, 11:58:40 PM
Even MMO developers have an excuse to constantly update, because their customers are constantly paying money.

What's Arcen's excuse?  No excuse.  We will not excuse your awesome Arcen, you must accept it.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 04, 2012, 05:39:05 PM
The main issue is that Soldak is a one-man show. Unlike Arcen, they don't have the resources to continue patching a game while developing another one. And none of Soldak's games have been successful enough to justify sticking with the same game and releasing continuous patches for it like AI War.
That's the part I never understood. I mean the thing that the you garden variate indie would not have resources for that type of stuff is pretty understandable. How Arcen manage to do this is beyond my comprehension. It's not that their games so much more popular or that they have that much more resource. Ok two developers, not one. I don't think that another developer would do it for Soldak. So it remains a bit of mystery.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 04, 2012, 05:50:36 PM
Wasn't there a huge post of how the Soldak dev regretted making that weird Kivi's Underworld casual game that basically just a redone Din's Curse just less... good?... It boggles the mind what insanity rode him them. Instead of improving the great concept of Din's Curse (and before that, Depths of Peril) with a 2nd expansion that improved controls, physics, feel, graphics, and everything else he made off-shoot games that had nothing to do with the relatively good game he made.

Yes, Soldak dev mentioned that he had some thought regarding this, but never actually published them. My take on Kivi Underworld is this. I personally like this game. It is much simpler than DC and much more streamlined and self contained. This simplicity is appealing. I also understand why it never took off: too simple for hardcore players who enjoy DC to nerdy to bridge the gap for the "casual" players. The reason why he regretted creating it? I can think of one only - it was a waste of time money-wise he probably spent doing it more than it sold for. Once again: the experience is nothing like DC, it's much more mindless, but I like KU for what it is.

It's really no wonder he didn't have a success story with his games though, by all accounts even Din's Curse is exceptionally ugly in a technical sense, lots of lightning and collision glitches, and the game engine does not use any modern features. I don't even understand why, it'd be a simple engine upgrade, art assets could even remain the same! Instead of wasting time with other games this is the 1 good game he has. And instead of fixing it (Heck, he should have hired YOU Bluddy given your great mods) he wastes more time on other games that will never be a success unless he gets 1 game to a level where steam would say, yes, we take that!

Yes. Yes. Yes. Could not agree more.

Not on GOG, not on steam. How does he expect to earn money that way? (not to mention that the game should not be more than 20$ with expansion) overpriced and underadvertised. Sadness
I'm probably different from most of the players in this respect, but If I like the game for me it does not matter if it costs 10$ or 80$. I do by games because they are on special or because they are cheap, but I have to stop doing that because in most cases I end up not playing them. And those that I end up playing I'd pay twice the price I paid for them easily.

I guess I just wish he would polish Din and DoP properly, add a BETTER graphics engine and better control feeling, butter up some of those animations and effects and release this proper + Bluddy modified balance. DoP and Din are the most exceptionally ugly games that I love. But I am an artist so yeah... I look at this stuff and get sad that so much potential is wasted. Sure good graphics don't make a bad game good, but bad unpolished graphics *can* make a good game bad.
I think that only most hardcore genre lovers can look past graphics in DoC.

Think of it as a 4X game that is taking place around you, and you are just one of the many ships in the galaxy.  You can influence other races, help them acquire technology, improve your own ship, set them at war against each other, help them fight their wars, etc.
I of course heard of this before as I'm reading his twitter, but reading these lines above... You know, usually this description would have me jump up and down in anticipation. But for this particular game I can't stop thinking: just another game that is going to look like.... DoC.

I just realized that Arcengames spoiled me. AI War had a nifty auto patcher for a long while and all further games had it (and it's awesome). I just can't fathom why any developer would NOT do that with priority. Pushing beta patches out quickly is extremely vital to build a community. When between report to patch and patch release is at best 2 days you have created more customer satisfaction than you ever could any other way.

Actually, this is why I loved AI War. You could be influencing a balance discussion a day ago and when you wake up the next day the patch is out doing exactly that. There is nothing better than that. Not to mention that gives you very powerful word of mouth (Support is great, he responded directly to my issue and fixed it within a day).

And just for the record... fact is I had some crazy issues with Unity Port of AI War back in the days and several people spend weeks figuring out how to fix it and at the end of it we arrive at a point where that bug is fixed .. that is how you make people HAPPY.

And this is a part of the mystery. For all I know this is humanly impossible. Otherwise everybody would be doing this.

Other developers would say "only 1 report of this bug? Irrelevant!"

Lol. I actually had a situation, where I reported a bug on a forum and got an annoyed response from a dev saying "why people do not read forums, it's all been discussed many times". The thing is, the particular bug I reported was never discussed (I politely asked to provide me with relevant link and was ignored in response). I do search forums before posting feedback. It's just happened so that the whole relevant area was so buggy, that they dismissed any issues about it, because there were so many. This, I find quite frustrating.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Bluddy on June 04, 2012, 06:07:09 PM
The main issue is that Soldak is a one-man show. Unlike Arcen, they don't have the resources to continue patching a game while developing another one. And none of Soldak's games have been successful enough to justify sticking with the same game and releasing continuous patches for it like AI War.
That's the part I never understood. I mean the thing that the you garden variate indie would not have resources for that type of stuff is pretty understandable. How Arcen manage to do this is beyond my comprehension. It's not that their games so much more popular or that they have that much more resource. Ok two developers, not one. I don't think that another developer would do it for Soldak. So it remains a bit of mystery.

I think a part of that is the attitude towards tools. Soldak's great, but it has an old-school attitude in some ways, and one of those ways is that they seem to like building their tools from scratch. I can understand that, being an engineer myself, but it really slows down development and limits one's options.

Infrastructure is a huge thing, especially for a small Indie dev. One small part of that has already been mentioned: by working out an automatic update scheme early on, Arcen have created a foundation that allows them to contact their player base quickly and fix their games or just provide players with the latest iterations. For Soldak, this is a huge pain, and not having that added infrastructure hurts them in the long run. The targeting bug could have been fixed a year ago if they had auto-updates.

But this extends to other realms as well. Soldak programs in C++ vs Arcen's C#. C# is not only safer to code in, it's also hugely more efficient in terms of coding time. Arcen builds their games on top of Unity, which is a well-tested engine used by hundreds of developers. This means that there is less chance for bugs, and that if they want to, they can insert into their game the latest tech used by the industry because it's already included as part of the engine. Soldak has its own custom engine, and it's one straight out of 1999. Because it has only been used for 3 games, the engine is buggy, and adding capabilities is difficult -- I'm sure there's tons of spaghetti code inside. That's why it's not trivial to add even 3d effects that were used 10 years ago -- this stuff isn't easy to do from scratch: it's a lot of math and engineering. Soldak's engine didn't even have perspective projection until Din's Curse came out!

Those are some of the things that make the difference. But truthfully, even having one more programmer on the team makes a big difference. When you're the only programmer, you tend to write cryptic code (with no comments) that only you can understand. You don't worry too much about infrastructure, because you figure you know the code inside out. But within a couple of years you start forgetting the code, and you feel the pain of not having planned out the architecture better. When you have 2 programmers working together, the communication and the breakdown in communication that results from unclear/badly engineered code forces them to write clearer code and to plan out a scalable, reusable architecture.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 04, 2012, 06:16:43 PM
I think a part of that is the attitude towards tools.

What did you just call me?

But this extends to other realms as well. Soldak programs in C++ vs Arcen's C#. C# is not only safer to code in, it's also hugely more efficient in terms of coding time. Arcen builds their games on top of Unity, which is a well-tested engine used by hundreds of developers. This means that there is less chance for bugs, and that if they want to, they can insert into their game the latest tech used by the industry because it's already included as part of the engine. Soldak has its own custom engine, and it's one straight out of 1999. Because it has only been used for 3 games, the engine is buggy, and adding capabilities is difficult -- I'm sure there's tons of spaghetti code inside. That's why it's not trivial to add even 3d effects that were used 10 years ago -- this stuff isn't easy to do from scratch: it's a lot of math and engineering. Soldak's engine didn't even have perspective projection until Din's Curse came out!

I wonder if he is using the same technology to make Drox Operative. Do you know?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 04, 2012, 06:38:51 PM
Bluddy.. while Unity is well tested there are some issues with it that are hilariously annoying and are a nightmare to fix.

For a blast from the past (don't ask how i still have the link ,p) (by the way, this is the bug i meant)

http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=937#c4801

You should read this bug report in its entirety to understand why I don't much like Unity and absolute adore Arcengames.. I mean that bug? That was insane

This is the bug report that pretty much made me adore Arcengames though. ^^ It's a good thing x4000 got that Death Adder mouse... hehe or I might have gone insane! ;p
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on June 04, 2012, 07:00:12 PM
Unity is fun. Endless Space is using it too. 90% of the problems are with the Steam overlay causing shift to stay stuck on. Just like the good old days of AI War. :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 04, 2012, 07:12:34 PM
It's worth noting that they don't use the Unity GUI but their own coded system for GUI (on top of the Unity Engine).. that is probably why it is so pretty.. not that Unity GUI is ugly, but it cant do a lot of the stuff they do in their GUI

Anyhow.. I wonder how we got to talking about Soldak and support by indy devs from how we like Diablo 3 ;p I find this topic a lot more Interesting now though, hehe
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 04, 2012, 08:14:04 PM
So after palying Diablo 3 on normal with Monks, I decided to do Act I with every other class.

I think that monk is the easiest to play (at least in the first act and Wizard is the hardest). The difference I'd say quite considerable. If with Monk a have not died once in Act I and have not used healing potions at all, with wizard I was dieing a lot and was running out of potions pretty fast. I had to go to AH and by a proper weapon before being able to beat skeleton king. I wonder if this difference in difficulty intended or do I simply suck as a ranged class?

Another intersting thinig is that with Witch Doctor and Wizard you can use any allowed weapon with all your spells, but with Demon Hunter you can equip non projectile weapons but you "signature" spells are not working with anything but projectille. I found it extremely surprising. What is the point to run with the sword if you main spells simply don't work with it? Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Bluddy on June 04, 2012, 08:17:46 PM
I wonder if he is using the same technology to make Drox Operative. Do you know?

He is, but space games in general need very minimal engines/resources. This is why space is a really great topic for games. All you need is some scrolling backgrounds, a few objects, and spaceships. Anything that's mechanical doesn't need a high polygon count to look good, which is why spaceships and cars look good even in old games, while humans, monsters and animals seem lacking if they don't have a polygon count that matches what the current generation can do.

Bottom line is, with some good art direction, even a less capable game engine can make a space game look great, so don't let it deter you. While the engine isn't the best in Soldak's games, the games themselves are awesome.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 04, 2012, 08:21:43 PM
It's worth noting that they don't use the Unity GUI but their own coded system for GUI (on top of the Unity Engine).. that is probably why it is so pretty.. not that Unity GUI is ugly, but it cant do a lot of the stuff they do in their GUI
Yea, we wound up making our own GUI layer for AVWW too, though we still use the Unity GUI for active textboxes (the one the cursor is actually in).  But that's just because we didn't want to spend the time implementing our own textbox, so I imagine we'll exterminate the last of the GUI.(whatever) references later.

The Unity GUI thing isn't really all that bad, but it hasn't had the work done on it that their main rendering stuff has seen, so it's got lots of quirks that get in the way for serious projects.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: StevenPeeler on June 12, 2012, 11:28:57 AM
Hey everyone, I just wanted to drop in and answer a few things.

We do usually support our games pretty well. The time period between when Depths of Peril came out and the latest patch is almost 4 years. However, this year we haven't been updating things as well as normal. The specifics aren't important because ultimately it's my fault. This should change shortly though, because I'm planning a DC patch soon after Drox Operative goes into beta.

While I'm on the topic of patches, Arcen's patch rate is nothing short of awesome. :)

Our codebase is in C++ like Bluddy mentioned, but it is pretty clean and easy to work with. Fixing things is usually not the problem. Doing all of the portal stuff is the exhausting part.

Now days when I talk to up and coming indie developers I point them towards Unity. Unfortunately when I started Soldak almost 8 years ago there really weren't many viable, reasonably priced engine choices like Unity.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 12, 2012, 11:16:24 PM
Surprise posts ftw ,) Was it google alerts? ;P

I still have no idea what kind of game Drox is going to be so yeah..  any plans on more media releases when the beta comes (gameplay videos.. obviously ,p) ? And your own patching system?

I am sorry If i sound particularly negative but certain games of 2011 (Sots 2, Stronghold 3) have made me a lot more doubtful about Indy devs... and their promises. Never gonna pre-order any game I don't already know in and out, and never again a game from Paradox until a year has passed.

Anyway, nice to see you here...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 12, 2012, 11:25:51 PM
Surprise posts ftw ,) Was it google alerts? ;P

I still have no idea what kind of game Drox is going to be so yeah..  any plans on more media releases when the beta comes (gameplay videos.. obviously ,p) ? And your own patching system?

I am sorry If i sound particularly negative but certain games of 2011 (Sots 2, Stronghold 3) have made me a lot more doubtful about Indy devs... and their promises. Never gonna pre-order any game I don't already know in and out, and never again a game from Paradox until a year has passed.

Anyway, nice to see you here...

What's your issue with paradox? I am genuinely curious, except for the bugs in Magicka I haven't heard anything bad about them.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 13, 2012, 01:31:01 AM
Sword of the Stars 2 is published by Paradox, and Paradox did exactly 0 QA and They lied before release about the state of the game I don't even care what the reasons are or were, fact is Paradox released the game NOT Kerberos and thus, the one to blame for the mess that is SOTS2 is Paradox. As publisher it is their business whether a game is ready or not.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 13, 2012, 01:40:18 AM
Sword of the Stars 2 is published by Paradox, and Paradox did exactly 0 QA and They lied before release about the state of the game I don't even care what the reasons are or were, fact is Paradox released the game NOT Kerberos and thus, the one to blame for the mess that is SOTS2 is Paradox. As publisher it is their business whether a game is ready or not.

Ah....yes....that game. I do not blame you at all for being unhappy about that game, I was rather...disappointed that anyone would release a game in that poor of a state and sell it as high as they did with little to no warning. Although I guess I missed that Paradox published it. *whoops*. That game is a failure on many levels...I still don't get how Paradox could have released that game as it was. Surely someone took a look at it...you would think.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 13, 2012, 02:29:19 AM
Given that they actually released the wrong version on steam release I highly doubt it. (not that there was a huge difference, but the release version before fix literally did not even start) ^^ And knowing how steam releases work, there is literally NO WAY that Paradox could not have known or found this. Even after a "coming out" We still do not even know why this release happened this way. Paradox never said anything about what happened, only Mecron did. And that was not exactly.. detailed.

Anyhow.. the game has gotten slightly less buggy since that day but it has not yet reached the state I would call "release ready".... that would be fine if it hadn't been sold to us as "release ready" nearly 8 months ago at full price.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on June 13, 2012, 06:59:07 AM
8 months ago Paradox had an atricious QA for their games at the start. Hearts of Iron 3 has been a huge bugfest when it started.

However, I think SotS2 was the straw that broke the camels back. I say this because lately I haven't seen any bad paradox games at release. Their newest large game, Crusader Kings 2, is playable almost bug free right out the box, and with patches 2 months after release there are no bugs I see.

On another hand, they have a mod for their EU3 game called Magni Mundi or something. That game was meant to be out early this year, it has not. It has not because Paradox put their foot down and said "Game too buggy, not ready for release." Now they don't know what will happen to it, whether it is scrapped and said with it explicitly saying "BETA" or whatever. What they won't do is allow to be released fully because it doesn't pass QA.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 13, 2012, 08:39:15 AM
SotS2's state was a surprise to me after the Magicka "release" (boy was that a rocky ride, but they did get it cleaned up).

I am sorry If i sound particularly negative but certain games of 2011 (Sots 2, Stronghold 3) have made me a lot more doubtful about Indy devs... and their promises.
Wait, what?  You yourself said that in Sots2's case the main fault for the state of the release was with the publisher.  Granted, the definition of "indie" is pretty amorphous, but all the ones I'm aware of include the "does not have the traditional developer-publisher relationship" (or, more briefly, "self-publishes").  Basically, no game published by Paradox would be indie.  Not that I really care a whole lot about whether a game is or is not, but I'm trying to make sense of your statement ;)

On another note, Crusader Kings 2 is a very nicely done game.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 13, 2012, 09:30:46 AM
Well I blame both equally but for different things ;p

Crusader Kings 2 is a ok I guess safe for the combat system which is why I don't play these games, but not a 3rd party game on Paradox. For their own games Paradox seems to actually (mostly) care now.

Speaking of Indy, thats a good point. I am not even sure what definition I mean, I just call them that because of their games ,) If we go by publisher then any game on Steam would not be indy. So clearly the definition is odd to begin with.

Anyhow... broken games released with full price are a sure fire way on my "gonna rant everywhere I go about that" list. And don't even get me started on the *design* flaws of SOTS2...  :D
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: StevenPeeler on June 13, 2012, 09:44:34 AM
Surprise posts ftw ,) Was it google alerts? ;P

I still have no idea what kind of game Drox is going to be so yeah..  any plans on more media releases when the beta comes (gameplay videos.. obviously ,p) ? And your own patching system?

It's usually google alerts, but in this case one of our gamers pointed out this thread.

We will probably release some videos and we will definitely release a demo at some point in time.

Currently our patching system is like it has been in the past. We can usually patch our games fairly often before we start getting on portals though.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 13, 2012, 10:23:14 AM
Thanks for dropping by, Steven :)  I do recall DC patches coming pretty quick during its beta.  I have fond memories of that first beta version: it totally wiped the floor with me because the quest progression rate and such nerfs hadn't happened yet ;)

@eRe4s3r:
Speaking of Indy, thats a good point. I am not even sure what definition I mean, I just call them that because of their games ,) If we go by publisher then any game on Steam would not be indy. So clearly the definition is odd to begin with.
That's another point of confusion: distributor != publisher.  Valve distributes our games, for instance, but they're certainly not publishing them :)  Similarly, iirc, the Paradox folks are behind GamersGate, but that doesn't mean Paradox (or GamersGate) is the publisher of all the stuff on there.  It's kind of like in retail: Walmart might be selling (distributing) a game, but aren't doing any publishing, etc.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 13, 2012, 11:28:37 AM
What does publishing even mean? Honest question. If steam puts a game on their platform that's pretty much what I consider "publishing" or do you mean when someone invests money in a game (but then, that is not a publisher, but an investor..)

seems like that term came from an age when there were only brick stores. I would assume most "Indies" do not need retail sales at all. When they are on Steam, that is.

Or put differently, what does Paradox actually do?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 13, 2012, 11:55:48 AM
Or put differently, what does Paradox actually do?
Their involvement in each of the games they're publishing (leaving aside the ones they develop internally) is probably different, but a few things that the "publisher role" can include that a distributor would not:

1) Being involved in decision making about what the game should be, specifically pre-release (and possibly before work really even starts at all).  This may or may not be a "publisher actually has the authority" situation, but it often is.

2) Provide upfront funding (this is generally very "expensive" money for the developer in terms of the publisher's corresponding cut of the actual revenue).

3) Do most/all of the actual advertising/promotion/etc.

4) Work out distributor agreements.  This used to be one of the most important parts: sure, you could develop a game, but how could you distribute it?  Walmart doesn't talk to indies, they talk to publishers.  Shareware/etc worked for some people, but it was hard to make a living.  This is less important now with digital distribution, but even there getting on steam is not an easy thing for an indie.  Having a publisher like Paradox behind you makes that a lot easier.

5) Own the intellectual property and/or rights to produce sequels/expansions/etc (which may or may not include rights to the "story" part of the IP, code technology, etc).


As you can imagine, having a publisher can be both a great enabler and an incredible frustration.  In theory it could be a great relationship if you were working with people with absolute integrity and who had confidence in you, but in practice there's a lot of... well, problems.  I don't want to turn this into a rant.  Your imagination suffices, I'm sure :)  There's a lot of indies out there, even among people who could get a publisher if they wanted one, and there's a reason for that.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 14, 2012, 02:10:06 AM
The wikipedia article on the subject is unusually well referenced for its brevity.

Quote
Indie game developers are not financially backed by publishers and usually have little to no budget available,[7] thereby generally relying on Internet digital distribution schemes.[8] Being independent, indie developers do not have controlling interests[9] or creative limitations[10] and do not require publisher approval[11] as mainstream game developers usually do.[12] Design decisions are thus also not limited by the allocated budget.[13]

Actually, there are pretty strong parallels with book publishers or record labels.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on June 14, 2012, 09:19:39 AM
Actually, there are pretty strong parallels with book publishers or record labels.
More than just parallels, book publishers, game publishers, and record labels are all pure, distilled evil.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 14, 2012, 10:36:52 AM
I agree with Hearteater.  As soon as gaming development becomes a business, instead of a hobby that the developers get paid for, it typically becomes garbage (see Diablo 3).

This is how, with much smaller budgets and teams, Indie companies can make such superior games - we've been seeing a lot of this lately.

This pretty much goes for any aspect of life though.  When money is your first priority you've lost sight of what's really important as a person.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 14, 2012, 10:58:03 AM
More than just parallels, book publishers, game publishers, and record labels are all pure, distilled evil.
I wouldn't go that far; I think that if the people involved are honestly trying to do the right thing and have adequate compentence in their own field and confidence in the competence of the other side, it could work out pretty well.  Though I think the amount of overhead reduces the potential, and once you get to a certain number of people having all those things true of all of them is quite rare.

So in practice the "good outcome" rarely happens, because people are generally used to just looking out for themselves and viewing business partners as a sort of mix between opportunity and threat.  Which leads to the actual developers (be they programmers or musicians or authors or whatever) getting really small royalty percentages, etc.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on June 14, 2012, 11:22:29 AM
The disconnection is likely in the fact that publishers are businessmen and developers are loving artists and customer-focused. It leads to some rather funky things.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on June 14, 2012, 01:22:15 PM
The problem with publishers is they were all created in an age of printed paper and vinyl.  Their business is designed to operate around those things.  Now we have electronic distribution, which reduces distribution costs to a tiny fraction.  Why are ebooks 8.99?  Because paper books are.  What are publishers doing about the changes in their industry?  Lobbying for laws, filing patents, and suing everyone they can to keep their outdated business model alive.  Because they would rather continue making the profits they make now by blocking all progress in their industry, than innovate themselves.  We have corporations large enough now, that it is more cost effective to destroy than create.  It used to be "innovate or die".  Now its "die innovators."
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 14, 2012, 02:26:19 PM
Speaking of pricing of e-books, I would never pay more than $4.99 for a book nowadays, that is, new freshly released ones. You can imagine where I have to get most of my (already in paper form owned) reading material and how much "new" stuff I buy. I have a kindle....

Because, let's be real. Most e-book versions of already existing books SUCK. Bad graphics, not adapted to the different readers, bad page flow..... Also when we come to trilogies (or worse) I would not even consider buying books singularly anymore.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 03:55:09 PM
I agree with Hearteater.  As soon as gaming development becomes a business, instead of a hobby that the developers get paid for, it typically becomes garbage (see Diablo 3).
Yep, Diablo 3 is very good game that is great fun to play - you should try it!  :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 03:59:32 PM
Because, let's be real. Most e-book versions of already existing books SUCK. Bad graphics, not adapted to the different readers, bad page flow..... Also when we come to trilogies (or worse) I would not even consider buying books singularly anymore.
Yep, world is not there yet, but I think it will be. I got kindle last week, surely it's a nicer experience than reading from iPhone (which I have been doing last 2 years).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 14, 2012, 03:59:46 PM
Quote
Yep, Diablo 3 is very good game that is great fun to play - you should try it!  :)
It's got a 4.0 from over 5,000 reviewers - most of these ex-Blizzard fanboys who were disgusted with the game.  Some people made an account just to say how awful it is.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

I could go into detail about why the game fails so miserably, but suffice it to say that Blizzard's greed has ruined any chance it had.

No, it's a shining example of what happens when profit becomes more important than gameplay (also League of Legends).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 04:34:04 PM
It's got a 4.0 from over 5,000 reviewers - most of these ex-Blizzard fanboys who were disgusted with the game.  Some people made an account just to say how awful it is.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii
I could go into detail about why the game fails so miserably, but suffice it to say that Blizzard's greed has ruined any chance it had.
No, it's a shining example of what happens when profit becomes more important than gameplay (also League of Legends).
Most vocal does not mean right. I do agree that all the gripes are valid and that game would be better if they were not there, but it's still a great game despite all of these. I think it's a huge accomplishment. For me the real measure is how I feel playing the game. I can say that in past two years I have not spent even half of hours on *any* game that I've already spent on Diablo 3. There could be all sort of logical arguments, but I know what I feel, and that is that I'm enjoying this game more than other games and I think this is the ultimate measure. And I sure know that many other people like it too. You see, with something such big as blizz and diablo there always be haters. It's the nature of the game. It's also obvious that those who inclined to dislike blizzard for their greediness are going to use every single argument that can think of to support their point of view, so that everyone would be bitching about always-on (and rightly so) was obvious from the start.

So in the end, it's all of course quite sad but it's not as fatal as you say. I have a suspicion that a lot of people are driven by emotion and just don't let themselves enjoy the game because they are blindsided by all this negative publicity.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 14, 2012, 04:42:48 PM
I played more AI War than Diablo 3..  already burned out from Diablo 3 after just 70 hours (seen all events, and got a feel for all classes) seen Inferno and noticed it sucks beyond imagination.

It's also pretty insane I played Diablo 2 for about 150 hours and never once actually got to the last difficulty. On the other hand I played Sacred 2 (which I now consider superior to Diablo 3) for about 200 hours and didn't even *see* everything. I think I only saw about 75% (later levels are very challenging and you can't dawdle around) and best of all, later difficulties really drop you VASTLY superior loot. So you have an incentive not to not "farm" anything. Regular enemies can drop stuff just as good (and often superior) to boss enemies... Ah yes, Sacred 2.. feel like playing that again ;P

Regarding e-books, I can only hope Amazon pushes the e-books ahead because with this pricing in Europe they are destroying the e-book market. Amazon kindle sold millions, and those millions are not going to be willing to pay extra cash for an e-book. They now have infinite choice and already there are *HUGE* TB large author packs in certain illegal sites. And the draw to those is big, as you can imagine and the speed to share a book with a friend is gone from "prohibitive hassle" to "instant copy and transfer". Nowadays everyone I know strips even legally bought e-books off their DRM so they can share it with their friends and family properly. Still stumped the market is so completely missing the wants of its customers.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 14, 2012, 04:54:13 PM
Quote
Most vocal does not mean right.
Certainly not, but in this case, yes.

Quote
For me the real measure is how I feel playing the game. I can say that in past two years I have not spent even half of hours on *any* game that I've already spent on Diablo 3.
Well unfortunately, how you feel playing the game really says nothing about its quality, nor is it a good way to quantify for anyone else how good it is.  A cocaine addict may feel good when he's smoking crack, a masochist when he's cutting himself, but that doesn't make the activity healthy or productive.

Quote
There could be all sort of logical arguments, but I know what I feel, and that is that I'm enjoying this game more than other games and I think this is the ultimate measure.
Your argument almost boils down to religious zealotry.  "It doesn't matter how much logical evidence there is against my beliefs, I know how I feel".  Well the way you feel about something doesn't dictate much of anything, and certainly not to anybody else either.  If how you feel about something is the only measure of its importance, then just about anything becomes valid.

Quote
And I sure know that many other people like it too. You see, with something such big as blizz and diablo there always be haters. It's the nature of the game.
Sure, every game has its detractors - but let's look at previous Blizzard Titles:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/st...ngs-of-liberty
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/warcraft-iii-reign-of-chaos

All of these games have gotten overwhelmingly positive reviews, even from the fans.

You act like there's some kind of conspiracy theory out to get Blizzard, but it's nothing like that.  In the past, the vast majority of players have had no problem giving their games good reviews.  Diablo 3 is a bad game, that's the only explanation for the negative feedback, and the players have given many valid reasons as to why:

-Forced online play for a single-player game.
-No LAN support for a game made in 2012.
-Constant login problems and overloaded servers that many players have to deal with.
-Auction house which ruins the drop rates and forces the players to use it in order to beat Inferno.
-Hacking and exploits already rampant less than a month after release (so much for security).
-No modding support that Blizzard is so famous for.
-Level 60 cap, which makes it completely obvious they are going the WoW route of releasing microexpansions.
-I could go on forever but do I need to?

Quote
It's also obvious that those who inclined to dislike blizzard for their greediness are going to use every single argument...
You act like being inclined to dislike a company for becoming greedy and corrupt is a bad thing.

Quote
So in the end, it's all of course quite sad but it's not as fatal as you say. I have a suspicion that a lot of people are driven by emotion and just don't let themselves enjoy the game because they are blindsided by all this negative publicity.
The negative publicity was well-earned sir.  And if anybody here is being driven by blind emotion, its yourself - since apparently, contrary to all reason and evidence, the way the game makes you feel is the only thing that matters.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 04:59:21 PM
On the other hand I played Sacred 2 (which I now consider superior to Diablo 3) for about 200 hours and didn't even *see* everything. I think I only saw about 75% (later levels are very challenging and you can't dawdle around) and best of all, later difficulties really drop you VASTLY superior loot. So you have an incentive not to not "farm" anything. Regular enemies can drop stuff just as good (and often superior) to boss enemies... Ah yes, Sacred 2.. feel like playing that again ;P

It's interesting, what games tick and what do not. I did not like Sacred 2 at all, neither did I like Titan Quest. But I liked Hellgate London very much. And unfortunately I can't really put my finger on why. All these four games are the same genre and share a lot of common....
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 14, 2012, 05:08:37 PM
Yeah Sacred 2 must be something that tickles something unique for Germans because I know a lot of Germans that love it. Tis pretty weird. ^^

I really love how "hitting" stuff feels in Sacred 2 though. It has a nice "saturated" feel to it.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 05:11:06 PM
Well unfortunately, how you feel playing the game really says nothing about its quality, nor is it a good way to quantify for anyone else how good it is.  A cocaine addict may feel good when he's smoking crack, a masochist when he's cutting himself, but that doesn't make the activity healthy or productive.

...

Your argument almost boils down to religious zealotry.  "It doesn't matter how much logical evidence there is against my beliefs, I know how I feel".  Well the way you feel about something doesn't dictate much of anything, and certainly not to anybody else either.  If how you feel about something is the only measure of its importance, then just about anything becomes valid.

...
And if anybody here is being driven by blind emotion, its yourself - since apparently, contrary to all reason and evidence, the way the game makes you feel is the only thing that matters.
I'd like to point out that above the comes closer to personal attack that I would have liked. For that reason I'll refrain from responding to these ones. No offence taken, but there is no point to keep exploring in this direction.

You act like there's some kind of conspiracy theory out to get Blizzard, but it's nothing like that. 

You misinterpret my act.

In the past, the vast majority of players have had no problem giving their games good reviews.  Diablo 3 is a bad game, that's the only explanation for the negative feedback, and the players have given many valid reasons as to why:

-Forced online play for a single-player game.
-No LAN support for a game made in 2012.
-Constant login problems and overloaded servers that many players have to deal with.
-Auction house which ruins the drop rates and forces the players to use it in order to beat Inferno.
-Hacking and exploits already rampant less than a month after release (so much for security).
-No modding support that Blizzard is so famous for.
-Level 60 cap, which makes it completely obvious they are going the WoW route of releasing microexpansions.
-I could go on forever but do I need to?

You don't. I agree with most of the point and the ones I don't agree with are not worth arguing.

Quote
It's also obvious that those who inclined to dislike blizzard for their greediness are going to use every single argument...
You act like being inclined to dislike a company for becoming greedy and corrupt is a bad thing.

Well, two points here. First, I think that despite the fact that Blizzard made some unpopular decisions, the game is still great. So I think that to dislike a game for the greediness of the company that made it is making oneself disservice. Second, making money and maximizing profit is the point of any business and a game developer company as a business. So blaming them for reaching their main objective would be odd.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 14, 2012, 05:39:40 PM
Quote
I'd like to point out that above the comes closer to personal attack that I would have liked. For that reason I'll refrain from responding to these ones. No offence taken, but there is no point to keep exploring in this direction.
No offense intended, it's just difficult to get people to see why, "It feels good" isn't really an explanation for anything.  It gets tiring to hear this argument repeatedly, whether it be on the topic of religion, politics, abusive relationships, video games, or anything.  The way something makes you feel is important, but you also have to take everything else into account.  If the ONLY reason you're doing something is because it feels good, that can be rather dangerous or disingenuous to say the least.

I've said this before, but even if Diablo 3 was the most enjoyable game in the entire world, I still wouldn't buy it.  What Blizzard is doing to the gaming world with there decisions is unforgivable.  Can you imagine if every company started making these same decisions for their own games?  What if Arcen started making their games online-only, no LAN, and building the entire game around what could make them the most money.  I rest my case.

Quote
Second, making money and maximizing profit is the point of any business and a game developer company as a business. So blaming them for reaching their main objective would be odd.
As I said before, making money shouldn't be the main objective.  Arcen's main objective is making a good game and doing something they love.  They made CoN when they were practically going bankrupt, and still gave most of the profit to charity.

Sure, they are an Indie company, but even big companies still do this as well.  Valve puts quality before profit, they hire small, tight-knit teams and they are all very close.  Ask any Valve employee they are all paid and treated well there, and it shows in their games.

I'm sorry, I won't be buying a game from companies who have made it blatantly obvious that their first priority is money.  And Blizzard - literally- could not have made it any more obvious.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 07:44:55 PM
I'm sorry, I won't be buying a game from companies who have made it blatantly obvious that their first priority is money.  And Blizzard - literally- could not have made it any more obvious.

I'd rather a company be honest than trying to appear something that they are not.

Well the way you feel about something doesn't dictate much of anything, and certainly not to anybody else either.
Apparently enough people feel the same as myself so that the game sells better than any other: www.neogamr.net/news/diablo-iii-is-mays-number-one-best-selling-us-retail-game
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on June 14, 2012, 09:43:57 PM
Quantity =/= quality. Ever. It's called the lowest common denominator

Or do you consider reality TV to be among the greatest TV?

Or Call of Duty the paragon of FPS? (Newest one, not orginal or older ones)

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 14, 2012, 09:49:44 PM
Quantity =/= quality. Ever. It's called the lowest common denominator

Or do you consider reality TV to be among the greatest TV?

Or Call of Duty the paragon of FPS? (Newest one, not orginal or older ones)
Luckily for Blizzard, quantity is what matters =)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on June 14, 2012, 09:53:16 PM
I see. If you don't care that you are supporting an ever increasing decline in quality, well, I can't save you from your folly. I only wished it didn't come back to hurt me, too.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on June 14, 2012, 09:55:21 PM
Well, I can't say I agree with the detractors in all cases, but here's the short form.

I have never had a problem being online except when they do server maintenance at 3 in the morning... when I should have been in bed anyway.  I'm not saying they don't exist, just not for me.  Also, lag occassionally can be a problem but very rarely.  For me.

Are they obvious about wanting to make money?  Oh lord yes.  The RMAH charges $1.00/sale, and an additional 15% if you transfer your money out to paypal.  That means no micro-purchases, everything's in dollars, not a few pennies here and there.  They've shot themselves in the ass with that one.  However, that's their choice.  Luck with that, just don't shut down my authentication servers and keep the Gold AH up.

Does the game drag on farming?  Ayuuuppp.  Did D I and II?  Ayuuuupppp.  I personally don't see a lot of difference in the farming in D III vs. D II.  Oh, were the areas a little more interesting? Yeah, some.  Siege weapons and the like actually attacking you until you got 'up the hill' and things.  However, you farmed incessantly to play at the higher levels.

Hell is about Inferno on the last game, it's up there.  Inferno's WAY the heck up there.  One of the mistakes I believe Diablo III makes is not that the gear isn't good enough, it's that you level TOO FAST, so you level out of your area's gear without farming for better too quickly.  This inspires people to push past an area too early.  This comes from a game design mentality and understanding your gamers.  Diablo tends to attract VERY hardcore players who love to constantly get 'better stuff!'.  When that 'better stuff!' is 15 levels under you, you feel like you're not in the right place, so you move forward, and get trounced.

All that said, I *like* DIII.  Oh, it's no AI War, but it's amusing.  I get to play with different skills and watch big numbers go blasting away at my enemies.  I can drop back to Normal with my main and eat things.  Pointless but amusing.  The areas vary from wide open areas to thin corridors and things in between, allowing for a variety of skill tactics.  Multi-player with my buddies is a blast, trying to figure out the best way to organize ourselves.

It's nothing but a farming grind.  It's a fun way to kill an hour or two on an evening.  (shrugs)  With an RMAH in play I understand the always online bit, it helps to cut down on hacking.  No, it doesn't defeat it, but it helps.  It allows for immediate balancing of certain things since most of it doesn't need to be on the client.  It's not a perfect solution, but what is?  It was worth a try and I'm quite sure Blizzard knew they were risking a lot by using it.  I'm kind of impressed they stuck to their guns on it.  It's not like you installed it and were surprised, it's right there on the box and if you purchase online it's in big bold letters.  Anyone who purchased DIII and DIDN'T know they were always online needs to learn to stop drooling at the counter and paying for things without even looking at them.

I'm not a fanboy of Blizz but they haven't done wrong by me with DIII.  It's about what I expected.

As to Sacred 2... great game right up until the point where you start running into the bugs in it (ie: Blowguns won't shoot after a certain speed), which is about the time you go to the website of the company, realize they've shut their doors, and you're screwed.  Very annoying.  That CD is now a coaster on my table to remind me to ALWAYS search online for issues and to determine patch support before I buy a product.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 14, 2012, 10:10:07 PM
bl...blow guns don't shot past a certain speed? This is the first time I ever heard of this bug... do you have the expansion?

And did you try this http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php5/Sacred_2:Community_Patch
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on June 14, 2012, 10:18:03 PM
I should mention I picked it up on XBox, which means any patches I got had to go through XBLA.  And no, they don't.  They start to 'gap' shots.  It was only one of many minor bugs that eventually added up to my annoyance levels that I turned the game into a coaster.  You wouldn't see the majority of those bugs until Game++ though.  It's been a long time since I goofed with it but there were hidden restrictors for magic find, odd things that would happen while mounted due to stat mod, things like that.

Edit: Oh, regarding the gapping? You get the sound and action but no damage output.  It's hard to notice at first until you realize things you were killing at x rate (werewolves in the swamp for me when I first noticed) are dying slower even though the only modification you did was a faster attack rate.  Part of that's because you're already landing 2+ shots/second, so it's hard to see.  It doesn't break the game, just one of those little things that annoyed me far beyond what the impact was because it would never be patched, and I just got a hair more frustrated with it every time I played my main.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 15, 2012, 01:49:34 AM
Sorry to hear you had such issues but I understand why you would be angry about that. I thankfully got it on PC and the support for that was pretty good. Not awesome but.. good. And they patched pretty much all major issues on PC.. not sure what version the xbox got stuck on.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 15, 2012, 02:40:46 AM
I think it's a bit of a stretch to imagine all publishers as 'evil', frankly.

In fact, it's not even true that they're all 'businessmen', insofar as that's their defining feature.

Sure, we live in capitalist societies. That makes most of us capitalists, whether ideologically we'd identify ourselves such or not. We exchange our efforts for money and exchange that money for goods and services. Many of which we need to live, or to grant ourselves a minimum acceptable standard of living. We invest in things. We acquire assets. We speculate. An imperative to have money runs through our collective psyche. There are exceptions, of course, but on the whole this is simply the nature of capitalist society.

But that doesn't define us.

So, yeah. People want to play games. Other people want to make games. And some people just want to make money off of anything. But are video games the best way for people who have no interest in them to make money? Sometimes, sure. On the whole, though, it's far more likely that people are involved - at any level - because they have an interest in it. But business is complicated. Sometimes you need competency more than you need interested parties; and sometimes you need investment more than anything.

Is it ideal? No. But it is[/i] fundamental to our economic systems. Systems which allow us access to a wider range of games than ever before. And systems, lest we forget, which also encourage the free enterprise through which independents are able to succeed.

Point is: there are many ways we can be agents for change towards a better world for video games; but thinking of an agency as 'evil' is rarely ever one such way. That kind of vilification just gets in the way.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 15, 2012, 04:29:29 AM
It would be better if games could made by people who want to make them (and who don't need to "sell" anything to be able to live properly). The "always" consumption economy is at an end anyway. I give it at best another 30 years and then capitalism will have so UTTERLY failed that nobody will ever again even consider it for centuries to come. And by then finally we will be able to either live in caves again, or we end up making the first true self-decided evolution of mankind, we stop greed and assorted. And we work on a culture that is BY the people not FOR (all) the people.

If we are agents for change we first have to start by ending capitalism. Because capitalism leads this world into the apocalypse. When the resources run out (and there is only *when*) we can no longer have economies based on interest and taxes. At that pivotal point humanity has the 1 and only chance to decide how to continue existing. And that also will define whether humans start actually working on culture again (something that is completely gone now, there is no actual western culture left in between starving artists and pop crap). Culture is when society takes part in art, not when art is made to earn money on the back of a society.

In fact, the current culture has absolutely nothing to do with 99.9% of the entire population of the world. Only very few privileged are defining the current paid-for-culture and I detest it (the culture this produces). The only good music is that of those who make it for themselves, and then share it. The best games are those people make for themselves FIRST. Currently there is no way around earning money, but when the sole goal of a game is to earn money it is already utter crap by definition. Because to earn *more* money you cut out things that would actually define the game properly but narrow its target group. Diablo 3 is the perfect example, dumbed down into brainless simplicity that even my cat could play, if it could hold a mouse.

So yeah, Indy devs are not going to make the epic games that could really push a genre forward a decade. They make interesting games yes, fun games, even.. yes.. but they do not ever advance the genre. Because the genre is defined by how the biggest games define it, and they do not redefine a genre anymore. Why should they.

Anyway, my anti-capitalism rant is over ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 15, 2012, 08:15:45 AM
I saw the discussion on D3 and was alarmed that the thread had gotten back on-topic.  Then I saw it turn to a discussion on capitalism and an urge to hit the red "panic" button eventuated ;)

Personally I think the need to either make a game commercially viable or have a fair pile of cash to support oneself despite the lack of commercial viability is a good... form of accountability, for lack of a better phrase.  It actually helps keep the focus on customer-service (if one has integrity; otherwise an alternative focus is on no-holds-barred marketing/etc tricks).

Doesn't mean there aren't a number of games I want to make and if noone else likes them I don't care ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on June 15, 2012, 08:21:06 AM
I don't mind companies making money if they're doing it by making me enjoy my brains out. It's when they start making money at the cost of my enjoyment I mind. ActiBlizz does just that with their RMAH and always online bullcrap.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 15, 2012, 03:07:34 PM
At least Diablo 3 and capitalism are perfectly related to each other ;) Without capitalism, would Diablo 3 have been made, or been better? I think .. yes.  ;D

But yeah, this topic would be wasted just on D3 ;p Besides, it asks "do we like Diablo 3" and so a "not really.. because" will always spin into the off-topic land of ponies and pie
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 15, 2012, 05:14:18 PM
At least Diablo 3 and capitalism are perfectly related to each other ;) Without capitalism, would Diablo 3 have been made, or been better? I think .. yes.  ;D
You are a Bolshevik, you are from east Germany and you are longing for the "old times"! (This is meant as a joke).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 15, 2012, 05:58:15 PM
Hehe, as a gamer I only really care what form of society produces the best cultural output. I would highly doubt the Bolsheviks would have made Diablo 3 though, I think it'd even be illegal (the game is based on exploiting human greed /loot\) :D :D :P
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 15, 2012, 06:10:04 PM
Hehe, as a gamer I only really care what form of society produces the best cultural output. I would highly doubt the Bolsheviks would have made Diablo 3 though, I think it'd even be illegal (the game is based on exploiting human greed /loot\) :D :D :P
But at least they would get rid of capitalism that is in the way =) But as history shows it's not as easy to get rid of as lenin and marx thought. I doubt that what russia did not do in 70 years the world would do in 30.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 15, 2012, 06:30:24 PM
Well there is also to consider that Lenin perverted Marx's teachings. Marx never wanted an oppressed lower class of any kind in fact he never even wanted a class based society to begin with (he never finished his writings on that topic, sadly) so anything claimed as Marxism now is further perverted by so called "Marxist writers" who assume and push something that Marx likely never would have considered viable.

The true sadness is that socialism as preached and taught is NOT what socialism was going to be before human greed and perversion got it's grips on it. Thinking we might be better off with an AI commanding over us. Because as long as those in power are in power they are a class, and there is some argument to be had whether a nation does need politicians. Whether humans even need nations in a globalized society. But you are right, It is highly unlikely anything happens next 30 years, apart from the endless downfall of capitalism. My only real fear is that it falls before I die.. Because I can't imagine that once this system fails the world will be a better place, unless we get some serious ethical and moral guidance in the future. I actually think nations will fall when capitalism falls. Corporations will likely become "nations". And that sounds even worse than what we have now.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wanderer on June 16, 2012, 05:51:26 AM
The true sadness is that socialism as preached and taught is NOT what socialism was going to be before human greed and perversion got it's grips on it.
Barring my bias on Darwinism, you're correct.  However, Marx believed in an intrisic human value of morality, rather than an instilled one.  Sorry, but i've got to lean towards Heinlein on that one.

Quote
I actually think nations will fall when capitalism falls. Corporations will likely become "nations". And that sounds even worse than what we have now.

(paraphrased, I'm not up to google at the moment...)
"The republic of America is not a democracy, but we all look up to it.  Why? Not because it's a shining star, but because it's the best that's wandered past our vision of hope to control our lives in a long time."
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 16, 2012, 08:34:44 AM
Although I find the idea of attributing a singular and cohesive ideology to an individual, such as to produce a concept of 'Marxism', rather misguided - I mean, he said and wrote a lot of stuff, and some of the stuff doesn't necessary reconcile (or need to reconcile, even) with some of the other stuff - I like to think he was first and foremost a sort of economically-minded future historian.

His body of work - even that which is more politically charged towards the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie - seats as its fundamental premise the notion that the stage of history capitalism invokes will bring about an end to the notion of economic scarcity, paving the way for a socialist and ultimately communist society. The fact that it will also bring about many conditions - alienation, exploitation and the like - which themselves inevitably cause its own downfall into the next stage, does not detract from its position as necessary step, from what we can discern of Marx's opinion.

I guess that's what gets me most about the strength of anti-capitalist sentiment in the world today. The best known of its opponents in modern political thought, friend to the people Karl Marx, thought it vital for the stabilisation of economics. For the good it would do.

But hey, he was just a guy. Maybe he was wrong about some things. About a lot of things. Personally, I look around: I look at the economic social structures which came before, which exist elsewhere in the world today; I look at what capitalism has done for the world, the bad and the good; and I look at how every day human beings seize capitalism and humanise it, make it more social. I look at all that and I think maybe Marx knew a thing or two. But maybe his scope was just slightly out.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 16, 2012, 10:07:24 AM
I was told that Marx's analysis of the problem (Capitalism) was spot on, but his solution was flawed.

Nobody is perfect.  For something as deep and nuanced as human government/politics, it's hard for 1 man to know all of the consequences of any given strategy.  That's one reason why people are so afraid to let go of Capitalism - what would we move to? 

People already have the idea that Communism and Socialism don't work, though the Capitalist-Socialist hybrids of East Europe seem to be doing pretty damn well right now, with the highest employment rate and quality of living in the world (as well as low crime and great education). 

Personally, I'd like to see a Resource-Based Economy.  I've researched the idea a lot, and it seems like it could work really well.  Of course, like any idea, it could also fail miserably, but at this point I think we have to try something new.  If things keep going at their current rate, most of humanity will die off when the fossil fuels run out.  Change will happen - whether by choice, or by inevitability.

http://www.thevenusproject.com/en/the-venus-project/resource-based-economy
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 16, 2012, 11:18:59 AM
resource based economy has the problem that most developed nations (that's in the name) already developed all their resources and depleted them mostly and thus all people there work not with their own resources. Also the venus project says this grand line

Quote
By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.

Notice that
1) Not everyone (as in, the developed nations) could actually maintain the standard of living they already have.
2) Very high living standard is very relative, and very subjective.

There is also that those who own resources would be gods, and those who don't less worth than slaves. A resource based economy would only be the old monarchy system all over again, except kings are now those who sit on mines or farms, or those corporations who run those farms and mines. With a resource based economy 99% of the worlds population also could no longer pay for anything. Most people do not have access to any resource of their own. Actually, one thing I definitely do not want coming is resource based economy ;P

Because, if you try to adapt everyones standard of living to the same level, a lot of very powerful western people would be downgrading quite drastically. Is a computer very high standard of living? If you ask a sudanese? What about making video games, music? Who would feed those who do that?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 16, 2012, 01:12:41 PM
resource based economy has the problem that most developed nations (that's in the name) already developed all their resources and depleted them mostly and thus all people there work not with their own resources. Also the venus project says this grand line

Quote
By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.

Notice that
1) Not everyone (as in, the developed nations) could actually maintain the standard of living they already have.
2) Very high living standard is very relative, and very subjective.

There is also that those who own resources would be gods, and those who don't less worth than slaves. A resource based economy would only be the old monarchy system all over again, except kings are now those who sit on mines or farms, or those corporations who run those farms and mines. With a resource based economy 99% of the worlds population also could no longer pay for anything. Most people do not have access to any resource of their own. Actually, one thing I definitely do not want coming is resource based economy ;P

Because, if you try to adapt everyones standard of living to the same level, a lot of very powerful western people would be downgrading quite drastically. Is a computer very high standard of living? If you ask a sudanese? What about making video games, music? Who would feed those who do that?
The first thing I want to say is that I think you're making a lot of assumptions about a resource-based economy without knowing much about it.

The vast amount of resources we have on the Earth (still) is enough to feed, shelter, and clothe the entire Earth population many times over, the main problem is how it's being misused and the cost of transportation.
Quote
Geothermal energy utilizes, what is called “heat mining”, which, through a simple process using water, is able to generate massive amounts of clean energy. In 2006 an MIT report on geothermal energy found that 13.000 zettajoule of power are currently available in the earth with the possibility of 2.000 ZJ being easily tapable with improved technology. The total energy consumption of all the countries on the planet is about half of a zettajoule a Year. This means about 4000 years of planetary power could be harnessed in this medium alone. And when we understand that the earth’s heat generation is constantly renewed, this energy is really limitless. It could be used forever!

These energy sources are only a few of the clean renewable mediums available. And as time goes on we will find more. The grand realization is that we have total energy abundance without the need for pollution, traditional conservation, or in fact a price tag!

And what about transportation?

The prevailing means of transportation in our societies is by automobile and aircraft. Both of which predominantly need fossil fuels to run.

In the case of the automobile, the battery technology needed to power an electric car that can go over a hundred miles an hour for over two hundred miles on one charge exists, and has existed for many years. However, due to battery patents controlled by the oil industry, which limits their ability to maintain market share coupled with political pressure from the energy industry; the accessibility and affordability of this technology is limited.

There is absolutely no reason, other than pure corrupt profit interest, that every single vehicle in the world cannot be electric and utterly clean with zero need for gasoline.

As far as airplanes, it is time we realized that this means of travel is inefficient, cumbersome, slow, and causes far too much pollution.

This is a mag-lev train. It uses magnets for propulsion. It is fully suspended by a magnetic field and requires less than 2% of the energy used for plane travel. The train has no wheels, so nothing can wear out. The current maximum speed, of versions of this technology as used in Japan, is 361 miles per hour. However, this version of the technology is very dated.

An organization called ET3, which has connections with The Venus Project, has established a two base mag-lev that can travel up to 4,000 miles per hour in a motionless, frictionless tube, which can go over land or under water. Imagine going from L.A. to New York for an extended lunch break, or from Washington D.C. to Beijing China in 2 hours. This is the future of continental and intercontinental travel. Fast, clean, with only a fraction of the energy useage we use today for the same means.

In fact, between mag-lev technology, advanced battery storage, and geothermal energy; there would be no reason to ever burn fossil fuels again. And we could do this now, if we were not held back by the paralyzing profit structure.
This technology is already a reality, but Capitalism keeps us from pursuing it.

When you say people that "own" the resources would be rich, you are stuck in the Capitalistic mindset.  "Rich" wouldn't be a concept, because money wouldn't exist anymore.  Nobody would own the resources, the resources would belong to everybody.

There would be no ruling hierarchy or democracy, most of the major decisions will be made using algorithms and technology:
Quote
When computers eventually have sensors extended into all areas of the physical and social complex, we will be able to achieve centralization of decision-making. In a global resource-based economy, decisions would not be based on local politics but on a holistic problem solving approach.

This centralized system could be connected to research labs and universities, with all data monitored and updated constantly. Most of the technology needed for such infrastructure management is currently available. The major difference between today's computer technology and the system we recommend is that our system extends its autonomic nervous system (environmental sensors) into all areas relevant to the social complex. It coordinates a balance between production and distribution, and operates to maintain a balanced-load economy. This technology of industrial electronic feedback can be applied to the entire global economy.

For example, with electrical sensors extended into the agricultural region, computerized systems would manage and control agriculture by monitoring the water table, insects, pests, plant diseases, soil nutrients, and so forth. The information processed will enable us to arrive at more appropriate decision-making based on feedback from the environment.

Computers and artificial intelligence will serve as catalysts for change. They will establish scientific scales of performance. It is doubtful that in the latter part of the twenty-first century people will play any significant role in decision-making. Eventually, the installation of AI and machine decision-making will manage all resources serving the common good.

This will result in a more humane and meaningful approach for shaping tomorrow's civilization that is not based on the opinions or desires of a particular sect or individual. All decisions would be made on the basis of a comprehensive survey of resources, energy, and existing technology without allowing any advantage to a particular nation or select group of people.

This may be accomplished with large-scale, computer-based processors that can assist us in defining the most humane and appropriate ways to manage environmental and human affairs. This is essentially the function of government. With computers processing trillions of bits of information per second, existing technologies far exceed the human capacity for processing information and they can arrive at equitable and sustainable decisions about the development and distribution of physical resources. With this potential, we would evolve beyond political decisions made on the basis of power and advantage.
It's appropriate that I'm posting this on the AI forum :D, but in all seriousness, can we please just skip the "AI taking over humanity discussion", you've watched too many Sci-Fi movies.

Computers are reliable, honest, and unbiased.  On any aspect which requires human decision making (such as say moral issues like crime and punishment) only the experts will vote, not the common citizens.  Why would a common citizen vote for something they haven't been trained in and know nothing about?  This is the major problem with Democracy.  Studies have shown that Democracies create only mediocre governments because the people voting aren't intelligent enough to make good choices.

http://news.yahoo.com/people-arent-smart-enough-democracy-flourish-scientists-185601411.html

Also yes, some people's standard of living may have to drop to make it fair for everybody.  I don't think that's too much to ask.

Quote
What about making video games, music? Who would feed those who do that?
It's estimated that if technology took over most of the jobs that would be needed with a Resource-Based Economy (and plenty of things like business and fast food could disappear), only about 10-20% of the population would have to work at any given time.  On the contrary, people would have much MORE time to do things they loved, like making music or video games.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 16, 2012, 03:45:51 PM
Computers are reliable, honest, and unbiased.

Computers do what they are programmed to do. And it's people that are programming them. And they are NOT reliable, honest, and unbiased. By extension, programs are not either.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 16, 2012, 04:06:30 PM
Once again, all decisions that couldn't be made by computers would be made my experts instead.  The computer's job would simply be to most cleanly and efficiently monitor the world economy and make changes as necessary.  How to program that would be a vote among experts.

That's a heck of a lot better than letting everybody vote - the results of which we've seen.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 16, 2012, 05:32:37 PM
I would be highly amused to see the result if the constitution and bill-of-rights of the government of my country (the U.S.) had been entered into a computer and no law or executive order or supreme-court decision could be made binding unless said computer did not find any contradiction between it and the founding laws.  Of course, just having those laws/orders/decisions have to be expressed in precise enough terms for such analysis would be a tremendous difference.

The error messages would be great.  But I don't think I could give any examples without starting conversations I don't want to have ;)

Anyway, a computer would probably be an improvement in degree over a written constitution, but not an improvement in kind on the issue of stopping later generations from simply ceasing to pay attention to it (or reprogramming it with a very large axe).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 16, 2012, 06:55:16 PM
I don't see how it gives any more or less incentives to follow the laws than our system does now.

People are going to follow the laws, or they aren't.  Generally, the reason people don't follow the laws is not because they have some intrinsic problem with authority, it's typically because they are unhappy with their situation and/or have been raised in an abusive environment.

It's been statistically proven that poverty and crime go hand in hand.  This is why the countries with the least wealth disparity have the least amount of crime.  If the Resource-Based Economy gets rid of the poverty, it most likely gets rid of the crime.

Also of note - in Jacque Fresco's view of the Resource-Based Economy, jails and punishment don't exist, only rehabilitation.  Considering that punishment is one of the main motivators of crime, this dynamic shift in our attitudes could possibly wipe it out completely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMSsi4Krd5Q
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 16, 2012, 07:59:50 PM
Quote from: Wingflier
... *snip*
When you say people that "own" the resources would be rich, you are stuck in the Capitalistic mindset.  "Rich" wouldn't be a concept, because money wouldn't exist anymore.  Nobody would own the resources, the resources would belong to everybody.

There would be no ruling hierarchy or democracy, most of the major decisions will be made using algorithms and technology...

But just because you say resources belong to everybody resources are NOT infinite, they can not belong to everybody unless everybody got a LOT less than 7 billion and everybody suddenly got responsible, and crime was eliminated as are wars.. And how would you make anyone do work that nobody wants to do, like construction, maintenance and assorted services without which you could not actually do anything but which requires huge labor with very little reward particularly for large projects?

You are forgetting the main-line of population that earth can support in equilibrium is 2 billion that's assuming everyone would have the HIGHEST current standard of living and eat like an above average American (not just a "high" standard of living). So unless you have a way to get 5 billion people to go away elsewhere I don't see resource based economy ever reaching a level where its sustainable. Even if sustainable, you would be competing against entropy at the very least so your resources would always dwindle making space exploration for resource retrieval mandatory no matter what. And while you say most resources are abundant that may be true, but you forget that only 20% of the world even has access to the products of said resources. The rest is busy not to starve.

And if you argue that we could sustain 7+ billion, yes we could, unless you want to have a planet to live on in 200 years. Because climate change won't suddenly stop, as you could never get everyone on boat, at least half the world would compete against you with capitalism and might even wage war for your resources. Only real way for such a project like Venus to work out is an extinction event where at best 2% to 3% of the human race survives. With a strong control of birth rate, resource and power consumption. I guess I am just too jaded to see how resource based economies could get over this problem. The fact is, someone who works for nothing, might be inclined to work for money to get more than you offer him for free. You can not stop greed in humans
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 16, 2012, 11:35:16 PM
Quote
But just because you say resources belong to everybody resources are NOT infinite
Excuse me which resources aren't infinite?  The resources that we need to survive are infinite for all intents and purposes.  Food, water, wood, electricity (geothermal, tidal, etc.), rock, metal, we aren't likely to run out of these anytime soon.  Fossil fuels yes, but the idea is to get away from fossil fuels since they are so finite.

Quote
they can not belong to everybody unless everybody got a LOT less than 7 billion and everybody suddenly got responsible, and crime was eliminated as are wars..
As I said, crimes are committed for many observed reasons, most of which are caused by Capitalism and/or economic disparity and bad education.  This is a proven fact.  Educated people brought up in a good environment don't commit crimes.

And I don't think it's too much to ask for the human race to be responsible for its own actions.

Quote
And how would you make anyone do work that nobody wants to do, like construction, maintenance and assorted services without which you could not actually do anything but which requires huge labor with very little reward particularly for large projects?
Obviously initially there would be a HUGE amount of work involved, since you're basically creating an entirely new world.  However, in the end (after the project was finished) machines could do most of the construction and maintenance jobs.  Besides, why do you act like nobody wants to do these jobs?  Some people love construction, they make it their career.  For pretty much every job there are people willing to do it.

Quote
You are forgetting the main-line of population that earth can support in equilibrium is 2 billion that's assuming everyone would have the HIGHEST current standard of living and eat like an above average American (not just a "high" standard of living)
Where are you getting these statistics?  I don't think that's true.

Quote
So unless you have a way to get 5 billion people to go away elsewhere I don't see resource based economy ever reaching a level where its sustainable. Even if sustainable, you would be competing against entropy at the very least so your resources would always dwindle making space exploration for resource retrieval mandatory no matter what. And while you say most resources are abundant that may be true, but you forget that only 20% of the world even has access to the products of said resources. The rest is busy not to starve.
Granted population control would be a major issue, but at least it would be dealt with on a global scale.  High birth rates are, once again, a product of poverty and bad education (you starting to see a pattern?).  That's why in highly educated places like and Japan and The Netherlands they are literally having a crisis because their population isn't having children anymore.

To your comment about entropy, I'm not sure you understand how the Earth's ecosystem works.  The Earth has been supporting life for millions of years, if we preserve and protect that delicate system, it will continue to produce.

Quote
And if you argue that we could sustain 7+ billion, yes we could, unless you want to have a planet to live on in 200 years. Because climate change won't suddenly stop, as you could never get everyone on boat, at least half the world would compete against you with capitalism and might even wage war for your resources.
Once again, I'm not sure where you're getting these numbers.  I think we can sustain 7 billion people quite easily with improved technology and global cooperation.

Quote
Only real way for such a project like Venus to work out is an extinction event where at best 2% to 3% of the human race survives.
The way we're headed now, this kind of event is not unlikely.

Quote
With a strong control of birth rate, resource and power consumption. I guess I am just too jaded to see how resource based economies could get over this problem. The fact is, someone who works for nothing, might be inclined to work for money to get more than you offer him for free. You can not stop greed in humans
You're thinking of Communism, and that's a completely different system. 

Quote
Communism being similar to a resource-based economy or The Venus Project is an erroneous concept. Communism has money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders. The Venus Project's aim is to surpass the need for the use of money. Police, prisons and the military would no longer be necessary when goods, services, healthcare, and education are available to all people. The Venus Project would replace politicians with a cybernated society in which all of the physical entities are managed and operated by computerized systems. The only region that the computers do not operate or manage is the surveillance of human beings. This would be completely unnecessary and considered socially offensive. A society that uses technology without human concern has no basis of survival. Communism has no blueprint or methodology to carry out their ideals and along with capitalism, fascism, and socialism, will ultimately go down in history as failed social experiments.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 17, 2012, 12:24:14 AM
Well, for the 2 billion that is a famous research project by Paul R. Ehrlich , and it's actually in the range of 1.5b to 2b

http://dieoff.org/page99.htm (authors recap of the study)
http://www.worldpopulationbalance.org/3_times_sustainable
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimum_population#Estimations

Quote
Excuse me which resources aren't infinite?  The resources that we need to survive are infinite for all intents and purposes.  Food, water, wood, electricity (geothermal, tidal, etc.), rock, metal, we aren't likely to run out of these anytime soon.  Fossil fuels yes, but the idea is to get away from fossil fuels since they are so finite.

First off, everything you convert into something that can not be converted back. Most chemicals would not fit that group, most rare earths in extreme modernized production technology would. As you can no longer recycle the modern tech equipment properly in the newest and latest production technologies. How would you even begin to recycle a single consumer item with at least 600 different materials used in it? You would have to create specific extraction procedures for all 600 materials, and you would need billion times more energy than was used to create it.

Secondly, when something breaks in high technology, it can not be repaired. Or did you ever hear of someone repairing a broken GPU core or CPU core or a LCD screen?

Quote
As I said, crimes are committed for many observed reasons, most of which are caused by Capitalism and/or economic disparity and bad education.  This is a proven fact.  Educated people brought up in a good environment don't commit crimes.

Drugs, Drug cartels, human trafficking, sex trade - unless you handily forget that neither of these crimes have their source in greed, but in a human caused demand. You may argue that the demand has to be fought, yet it is irrelevant, If I wanted I could probably think of at least a hundred crimes of all manners educated people commit, like murder out of jealousy, anger and greed. Which you can not eliminate even if you remove money and trade from the equation. That's assuming actually that you make trade of ANY KIND illegal too...

Quote
Obviously initially there would be a HUGE amount of work involved, since you're basically creating an entirely new world.  However, in the end (after the project was finished) machines could do most of the construction and maintenance jobs.  Besides, why do you act like nobody wants to do these jobs?  Some people love construction, they make it their career.  For pretty much every job there are people willing to do it.

Because the people who love construction work are maybe 1 in 1000, the others only do it for the money. Remove money, and you have the few people who love doing it.

Second problem would be how you train jobs, you would have to assign jobs to people (as in, forcing them) if you have a worker shortage where robots can not help.

Quote
To your comment about entropy, I'm not sure you understand how the Earth's ecosystem works.  The Earth has been supporting life for millions of years, if we preserve and protect that delicate system, it will continue to produce.

And that life hasn't reached space for millions of years, until we came. Hasn't forged, smelted and created new compounds. Hasn't mastered light and fire quite literally. You are thinking of only food, water / electricity, the only 3 resources that are in relative abundance. The others have to be mined, refined, and are rare. Given that a resource economy would need to focus on a 100% recycle rate you will be fighting natural decay of materials and products. Loss of parts and thus, loss of resources.

Maybe you have a point and that system is a good one, but you can not change the whole world. In so far as that is the requirement for this idea, it is a pipedream. The world will not change, you have to start regionally and independently to make ane example that your society would work. You obviously would have to do that on the ocean though. However, already that would require technology nobody has developed, the problem of food production would not even exist with arcologies, but you see any of those standing around? By idealists? By researchers? A lofty plan full of "if" and "eventually" does not make a good strategy for the future.

Fact is that capitalism is what drives the development to remove human workforce out of the equation of production and that is the end for capitalism, yet it is also what drives the development of robotics and super-high tech stuff, like quantum computing which is required for AGI development, which is what's required for an intelligent and adaptable robot workforce. But there is no development that makes humans change. Humans if anything, got more contempt and care even less than they did 100 years ago. Though we think about the future we can not shape it, only stupid politicians can, and they will never do that. The Venus project is a extinction event post-society study. It can not, and will not work in the current world. And changing the world is out of the scope.

If that extinction event comes, and I am still around, the Venus Project will likely succeed if it prepares properly or even causes the extinction event. Maybe we ought to not call it extinction if some survive to rebuild. But the point is that the current world has to go down the drain with a minimal destruction to the infrastructure and resources/landscape/climate. And that is even more unlikely than the Venus Project succeeding while I am alive ;)

what will likely happen is that humans just fizzle out somewhere in 300 or 500 years. Some may survive unless we blow the world up proper, and those might have a chance of a better world but that is unlikely, given that in a Armageddon scenario most technology would be lost, quite literally, given that everything is stored digitally nowadays. What will definitely happen is a REAL resource crisis in 2050 which is what will trigger a full blown economical downfall. Capitalism will not go away in 40 years. Because people live longer than that. You would need to think beyond 100 year time-span for a system change where capitalism is replaced by X. You will find VERY few people who would put money and resources in a plan that only happens 100+ years later with the goal to make said money and resources.. in todays terms, worthless ;p
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 17, 2012, 12:09:31 PM
Quote
First off, everything you convert into something that can not be converted back. Most chemicals would not fit that group, most rare earths in extreme modernized production technology would. As you can no longer recycle the modern tech equipment properly in the newest and latest production technologies. How would you even begin to recycle a single consumer item with at least 600 different materials used in it? You would have to create specific extraction procedures for all 600 materials, and you would need billion times more energy than was used to create it.

Secondly, when something breaks in high technology, it can not be repaired. Or did you ever hear of someone repairing a broken GPU core or CPU core or a LCD screen?
While I agree with you in principle, my point was that the necessities we need to SURVIVE are all recyclable.  You're talking about luxuries, which are important, but not as important as giving every person on the Earth a decent quality of living in terms of food to eat, clean water to drink, and a place to live.

I would sacrifice my quality of life if it improve the quality of life of the entire world - that's a small sacrifice to make and I would expect anybody to do the same.

Secondly, even the high quality materials are finite when you consider space travel.  Back in the 60's when we were devoting all of our resources to the space race, look how much we got accomplished.  Nowadays the U.S. spends less than .1% of their income on space-related projects.  If the world spent all of its time and energy to exploring space and establishing new worlds, who knows where we could be in 100 years.  This is the problem with Capitalism - there is no profit in researching the final frontier.  Even now, the Dutch plan to send a permanent group of settlers to Mars in 2023 to live their until they die, and add more settlers every 2 years.  The resources of space are infinite, we would never run out, but all of that will just be a pipedream as long as we belong to a Capitalistic society.

Quote
Drugs, Drug cartels, human trafficking, sex trade - unless you handily forget that neither of these crimes have their source in greed, but in a human caused demand. You may argue that the demand has to be fought, yet it is irrelevant, If I wanted I could probably think of at least a hundred crimes of all manners educated people commit, like murder out of jealousy, anger and greed.
I would attribute all of these things to bad education.  People who are drug and sex trafficking, as well as slave trading, view human beings as objects or business models.  This is absolutely caused by Capitalism.  The people who step over everyone else to become rich and famous were badly educated, and that's all there is to it. 

Find some examples of people brought up in good families and educated in The Netherlands, or other hybrid Capitalist-Socialist societies, who turn out to be murderers, drug traffickers, and rapists - good luck.

People are not born evil or seflish, they are educated and abused to that point.  Take away the negative stimulus and replace it with a positive environment and most people will turn out well.

Quote
Because the people who love construction work are maybe 1 in 1000, the others only do it for the money. Remove money, and you have the few people who love doing it.
.1% of 7 billion people is still 7 million people.  That's plenty.

Quote
And that life hasn't reached space for millions of years, until we came. Hasn't forged, smelted and created new compounds. Hasn't mastered light and fire quite literally. You are thinking of only food, water / electricity, the only 3 resources that are in relative abundance. The others have to be mined, refined, and are rare. Given that a resource economy would need to focus on a 100% recycle rate you will be fighting natural decay of materials and products. Loss of parts and thus, loss of resources.
Once again, most of this is nullified by space travel.

Besides, who knows what creative solutions we can come up with when we are all working together to find an answer.  1 man working in a lab came up with a food solution that has saved billions of people from starvation, he won the Nobel Peace Prize. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug

1 man working in his garage came up with a solution to end world dehydration.

http://www.ted.com/talks/view/lang/en//id/613

Imagine if we had 7 billion minds working towards the solution to these complex issues, we could have them solved within a generation.

See, this is the problem with society nowadays, everybody is so cynical.  Everybody thinks "Things will never change", "There will always be poor people", "This is the way it has to be".  But realize that your attitude is a big part of the problem.

1,000 years ago, can you imagine how someone would have responded if you said, "One day, we won't have King and Queens, all of our decisions will be made by the votes of the people".  Everybody would have laughed at you or worse.  To be so closed-minded to think that we can't come up with solutions to these problems baffles me.  Or to think that nothing will ever change for the better.

Quote
Maybe you have a point and that system is a good one, but you can not change the whole world. In so far as that is the requirement for this idea, it is a pipedream. The world will not change, you have to start regionally and independently to make ane example that your society would work.
I'm not so sure about that.  In the age of the internet and cell phones, we have the ability to reach practically the whole world now.  Look at the Occupy Wallstreet Movement, it's already worldwide and seems to be growing in strength everyday.  You seem to have little faith in people, but I'm not convinced we can't all band together for a brighter future.

Quote
However, already that would require technology nobody has developed, the problem of food production would not even exist with arcologies, but you see any of those standing around? By idealists? By researchers? A lofty plan full of "if" and "eventually" does not make a good strategy for the future.
Refer to my example above.  If you have 7 billion people looking for a solution, you'll find it very quickly.  The problem is that we can't find solutions, it's that there's no funding for it, because there's no profit in it.

Quote
But there is no development that makes humans change. Humans if anything, got more contempt and care even less than they did 100 years ago. Though we think about the future we can not shape it, only stupid politicians can, and they will never do that. The Venus project is a extinction event post-society study. It can not, and will not work in the current world. And changing the world is out of the scope.
I don't think changing the world is out of the scope.  Granted, there are a lot of obstacles - Corporations, Politics, Religion, and many more - but the worse things get, the more open people are to change.  The world has changed in the past, I see no reason why it won't change again.  Humanity and life in general is always evolving.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 17, 2012, 03:37:46 PM
 :o :o :o :o :o

This is anything but Diablo 3 lol.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 17, 2012, 03:39:49 PM
:o :o :o :o :o

This is anything but Diablo 3 lol.

King
Just wait until the heroes rush in, slaughter everyone, break all the crates and pots, loot the place, count the coins, and wonder how much they can sell the other stuff for as they run back to town.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: LaughingThesaurus on June 19, 2012, 06:02:24 PM
I think I'll post my two cents about Diablo 3... I don't know how well loved it is here, but I honestly didn't really like it. I don't own it, somebody I know does, and in open defiance to the ToS, I ended up playing it on his account, after spending a lot of time watching him. Honestly, I got to act 2 on normal and just quit playing because I honestly found other action-RPGs much more fun.

First of all, I just don't like the skill system. I can't like it. I don't think character progression should exist without permanent decisionmaking. I played a mage, right? I hated the fact that all of my skills were useless or boring for the most of act 1. I had fun with maybe two skills, and only one of them did damage. Sure, I can create my FPS-like skill loadout anyway I want at any time, but I'm still just arbitrarily locked away from things. It's this weird combination of a pure action game and a pure, true action-RPG or even traditional RPG, which just doesn't work for me. I kept playing mostly waiting for myself to finally unlock something fun to use that wasn't magic missile with increased damage from a rune.

Second of all, the online-only thing is just brutal. This has partly to do with me never really getting a grasp of how to play, but the latency really kills action games for me. There are so, so many occasions where I would get hit when I was clearly not being touched by an enemy weapon or projectile, which is not fun at all. I've grown to be able to just eat hits and not really get personally irritated, I had an issue like that when I played Gauntlet games (damned archers). I just can't do that in a game like Diablo 3 where damage is nontrivial. The worst part is, I'm sure this is entirely why I had so much fun with Diamond Skin. I could finally avoid enemy attacks. As far as connection loss, well, the person I happen to use the account of lives with me. I watched him lose 5 Neph Valor stacks when his connection accidentally gets unplugged, and I have never seen the guy so frustrated in his life. This is just with him playing single-player, too. Both of us would have likely had a better experience if we could just play offline.

While I haven't experienced it, I have seen it, and I know that Inferno is ridiculous. Being particularly 'into' game design, and having some level of common sense, I understand that you simply don't make something just impossible enough that your testers can't beat it, double HP and damage on enemies, then ship it to the public. That is a horrendously ham-handed way of doing things. I've said my piece, and I'll shut up about it before I go off the rails. I expect better from Blizzard.

The point is, I just didn't like Diablo 3. I didn't find it fun beyond my first few levelups, and I'm glad nobody wasted the money so that I could play something that I wouldn't enjoy past act 2. I'm going to be spending my time with Torchlight 2, AVWW, and AI War instead.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on June 20, 2012, 11:14:03 AM
This topic...O_o
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on June 20, 2012, 05:56:43 PM
Also of note - in Jacque Fresco's view of the Resource-Based Economy, jails and punishment don't exist, only rehabilitation.  Considering that punishment is one of the main motivators of crime, this dynamic shift in our attitudes could possibly wipe it out completely.

Apologies for probably not putting enough effort into understanding your argument before responding; sometimes I browse at work and I don't really have time here to consider a position and respond intelligently. But that line made me think of a rather interesting short essay (http://www.angelfire.com/pro/lewiscs/humanitarian.html) by C.S. Lewis that takes the completely opposite view. When you do away with all idea of 'punishing criminals' and replace it with 'rehabilitating the sick' instead of finding that you've become a great and merciful humanitarian, you end up crueler than the worst tyrant.

And uh... then he killed Diablo and looted a sword. Yeah! On topic woo!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 21, 2012, 12:25:37 AM
One thing I will say about C.S. Lewis is that he was an outspoken Christian, so his stance was most likely tainted by that belief.  It is very common for people of any religion to try to make the world fit into their religious view, rather than realize that the world actually doesn't resemble their religion whatsoever.

The Bible makes it very clear that human beings are born in sin, evil and in need of redemption - constantly tempted by the devil and whose only salvation can come through Jesus Christ.  That we must constantly pay for the sins of our 2 original ancestors, Adam and Eve, and that only through the acceptance of ritual human sacrifice could that debt be paid.

Now if you actually believe this, which most Christians do, you can't deny that it would taint your impression of human beings.  So I'm sorry but anything C.S. Lewis says, I have to view through this light.  You can't be a Christian without accepting what the Bible says on this topic - and therefore you can't be objective about actual human behavior.

C.S. Lewis was a writer - not a psychologist, not a social worker, not a school teacher - a Christian writer.  He may have even been a good writer, but that doesn't convince me that he knows anything about human Psychology or human behavior, he's not qualified to make those kinds of distinctions.

Everything he wrote in this essay seems to reflect only his biased opinion - I see no studies or evidence to back up any of his claims.  He seems to find the idea of Humanitarian rehabilitation abhorrent for some unknown reason - but most likely because he's a Christian, and because Christianity is a religion of justice and punishment for those who will not conform.  Anybody who thinks eternal torture for finite crimes is an acceptable punishment, or supports this kind of insanity, is morally bankrupt in my opinion.  I really don't care who they are.

Dr. James Gilligan is a famous American Psychiatrist and Author, who was once Director of Harvard’s Institute of Law and Psychiatry Division, and who has studied patients in prisons for over 30 years, notes that most violence stems from guilt, punishment, and economic disparity.

Dr. Gilligan was brought in as Director of Mental Health for the Massachusetts prison system because of the high suicide and murder rates within their prisons. When he left ten years later the rates of both had dropped to nearly zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Gilligan

He has written many books and articles on the subject.  Violence is his most famous book, though you can read some of his other works simply by searching, or watch many of his videos online.

http://www.amazon.com/Violence-Reflections-National-James-Gilligan/dp/0679779124
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZjm7yOHwE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMSsi4Krd5Q

Point is, I trust a proven expert over a famous Christian author, whose worldviews prevent him from seeing things clearly.


Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on June 21, 2012, 01:53:34 AM
Woah there. I've got a long standing rule against debating religion on the internet, because it's about as productive as breaking rocks by hand, but slightly more painful. I just linked that article because I thought it was an interesting take on the subject, and doesn't really rely on any Christian underpinning to reach its conclusion. That said, if your response to it boils down to, as I read it, 'Christians can only make Christian arguments and in my view all Christian arguments are wrong' then there's nothing I can say to defend it: forget I mentioned it. The only way through that particular blockade is pages and pages of arguing religion, for which I refer you to my first point.  ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 21, 2012, 05:27:59 AM
Everyone's worldview prevents them from "seeing things clearly", whatever that might mean. That's not even a postmodernist point. It's just obvious.

My worldview, for instance, leads me to see any outright vilification, denigration or simple dismissal of others' worldviews - capitalism, Christianity, whatever - as laughably misguided.

But as with Bob, I've no desire to get involved in a theologically-based conversation on the internet or anywhere else, frankly - they rarely end well for anyone!

Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 21, 2012, 08:44:51 AM
Woah there. I've got a long standing rule against debating religion on the internet, because it's about as productive as breaking rocks by hand, but slightly more painful. I just linked that article because I thought it was an interesting take on the subject, and doesn't really rely on any Christian underpinning to reach its conclusion. That said, if your response to it boils down to, as I read it, 'Christians can only make Christian arguments and in my view all Christian arguments are wrong' then there's nothing I can say to defend it: forget I mentioned it. The only way through that particular blockade is pages and pages of arguing religion, for which I refer you to my first point.  ;)
Couple things:

The point I was trying to make was not that Christians can only make Christian arguments - my point was that C.S. Lewis WAS making a Christian argument in the article you linked.  He mentioned the scripture several times throughout the essay, and talked about "What bad men actually deserve".  It seems clear to me that his motivations were Christian.  I could be completely wrong, but regardless, I still think he has no idea what he's talking about. 

Secondly, I appreciate your desire not to start any fires by arguing religion online, but would you be more comfortable discussing religion in person?  It seems to be me that most people who say they don't want to discuss religion online, simply mean they don't want to discuss religion.  That's fine with me, as the AI War forums probably aren't the best place; but I think that religion in America is something that needs to be discussed.  This social stigma we have against talking about it is extremely harmful, because I consider it to be one of the main problems with the country.  The current war on gay rights is a great example.  So in other words, I think it's pretty disingenious to defend something if you're not willing to explain your reasons why (which I would be happy to do so with you in another venue).

Quote
Everyone's worldview prevents them from "seeing things clearly", whatever that might mean. That's not even a postmodernist point. It's just obvious.
In the example we're discussing, one person's worldview was backed up by evidence and reason, the other person's seemed to be a religious rant on why people should be punished.

Also, the meaning of "seeing things clearly" should be pretty obvious, unless you think that nothing is true or real, in which case I have no desire to continue discussing with you.  I simply mean some people see the truth of reality better than others do, because they have no religious biases and can make decisions based on the evidence, not ancient tradition.

Quote
My worldview, for instance, leads me to see any outright vilification, denigration or simple dismissal of others' worldviews - capitalism, Christianity, whatever - as laughably misguided.
It wasn't intended to be an outright villification, though it may have seemed that way.  Everything I said about Christianity is true is it not?  We are born in sin and must accept human sacrifice or spend eternity in hellfire.  If you actually believe that madness it WOULD taint your perception of human beings wouldn't it?

I think if you have a problem with that you have a problem with Christianity, not my explanation of it.

Secondly, consider the topic we're discussing.  We're talking about punishing people, often for their entire lives, for a single mistake.  We're talking about vilifying a human being for something that could probably be fixed through rehabilitation.  I'm sorry, but if you want to take the stance that punishing a human being and taking away their life is helpful to society, you better be ready to back that up.  You better be ready to back your motives for that up.  If your motives are Christianity (which C.S. Lewis' seemed to be), then you better be ready to back those up too.  This isn't something I'm going to take lightly, nor should you.

Quote
But as with Bob, I've no desire to get involved in a theologically-based conversation on the internet or anywhere else, frankly - they rarely end well for anyone!
Unfortunately I must point out that your stance on this issue (the default stance) is very harmful to society.  Sometimes, people's feelings need to be hurt because there's something they need to hear.  If we never discuss the main problems behind our nation (which I think are religion and politics) how can they ever get fixed? 

The AI War forums may not be the place, but I'm happy to discuss it with you anywhere you would like.


Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 21, 2012, 09:03:37 AM
You, sir, presume to know an awful lot about my stance based on very little indeed!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 21, 2012, 09:07:19 AM
I don't actually!  That's why I want to discuss it with you!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 21, 2012, 09:35:13 AM
We have a very mature community here so I was willing (with trepidation) to let the capitalism discussion go on (in most internet communities that would have been sufficient material for a flame-war).  But I think I'm going to have to draw the line before a theologically-charged discussion.  I would really like for our community to be such that we could conduct such things in a peaceful way without making lots of other people (i.e. customers) uncomfortable but I really don't see that happening.  Just as if I was running a retail games store I wouldn't want folks going hammer and tongs over an issue like this in the middle of the sales floor (even if I agreed with everything being said) ; not great for the desired atmosphere.

Private conversations are fine, of course :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 21, 2012, 09:52:57 AM
I believe I mentioned in my post that the AI War forums aren't the place for this, for that very reason.

I don't really mind if people's feelings get hurt because sometimes that's an indication of a productive discussion, but I don't want to make Arcen look bad either.

So please feel free to PM me, I'd love to continue this discussion on Skype or anywhere else!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 21, 2012, 10:25:48 AM
I believe I mentioned in my post that the AI War forums aren't the place for this, for that very reason.
I confess that I didn't read the posts other than to figure out what was going on :)  A bit pressed for time.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 21, 2012, 06:38:35 PM
There's a reason why we don't discuss politics, religion or...something else I swear there's a third topic. Because as a general rule of thumb, there is no way to have a civil discussion about either topic without emotions getting involved. Heck, I can't have a political discussion with my own family without it getting heated, how can I expect to have a civil discussion with people on the interwebs? Why is it this way? Because politics and religion shape our view of the world and we all (including me) believe our view is right. Even if its wrong. And we don't want or like being wrong. At least, I think that's how it goes. Might be wrong (haha). ;)

Just my 2cents, lets get this back to Diablo 3 because holy moly religion has nothing to do with Diablo 3.....except that it has Angels...and Demons.....oh bugger all. ;)

Anyway, latest patch now requires people who initially buy the game to wait 72 hours as a TRIAL Account to make sure your not going to fraud someone. Truly, Blizzard knows good customer service practices. NOT. I gotta say, buying this game just seems like a stupid idea at this point. Your locked to a server all the time, you can't play the game for much for 72 hours, what's the point?

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/06/21/digital-diablo-iii-purchases-restricted-for-up-to-3-days/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RockPaperShotgun+%28Rock%2C+Paper%2C+Shotgun%29

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 21, 2012, 07:08:13 PM
I wonder if it's 72 hours of playtime? Would not it be nice to do the skeleton king over... and over... and over.. and over...

Not it's sure not 72 hours of play time. Can some one explain to me in plain English, why they are doing this? How is this going to prevent or even deter fraud?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 21, 2012, 08:14:49 PM
I wonder if it's 72 hours of playtime? Would not it be nice to do the skeleton king over... and over... and over.. and over...

Not it's sure not 72 hours of play time. Can some one explain to me in plain English, why they are doing this? How is this going to prevent or even deter fraud?

It is 72 hours real-world-time as I understand it and their "belief" (I'm all sorts of clever today ;)) is that they hope spammers/frauds will do their nefarious deeds within that 72 hours, thus allowing them to ban the accounts before it affects the servers.

I don't think they realized they can wait 72 hours and then do their stuff.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 21, 2012, 08:24:59 PM
I don't think they realized they can wait 72 hours and then do their stuff.

They can't be THAT stupid. There are many people reviewing and re-reviewing these decisions I'm sure. The should be another reason.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on June 21, 2012, 09:09:16 PM
I have 63 hours played in Diablo.  I have a level 51 and 37 and I should be doing Hell difficulty (although I'm still messing around in Nightmare Act 3 since I'm doing it multi-player).  72 hours is huge.  That's "finish the game 3 times" long.  So being restricted to level 13 and Act 1 for 72 playtime hours would be insane.  No one could replay that content for 72 hours.  That would be like waterboarding someone.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 21, 2012, 09:33:54 PM
They can't be THAT stupid. There are many people reviewing and re-reviewing these decisions I'm sure. The should be another reason.
Normally I would agree with you, but I've worked IT for part of a large organization (15,000 or so employees, 200+ years old) and I saw some strange decisions get made.  Like, "this cannot possibly be in anyone's best interest, even the people at the top" stuff.

Particularly when legal concernspanic was involved.

That said, Blizzard hasn't yet done anything on that order that I'm aware of, so yea, I think there's got to be another explanation.  Not one I'd like any better, but another one. 

Maybe they wanted to do their retail partners a favor (this is digital-download-version only, right?). 

Maybe they lost a bet.  Maybe they got drunk.  Maybe both.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on June 22, 2012, 12:46:43 AM
The 72 hours bit isn't to prevent crime in game, its meant to catch nefarious ppl who use fraud on another's credit card to buy game.

Of course, in the process of stopping crime, everyone new suffers.

Yuck, yuck, yuck!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 22, 2012, 01:22:11 AM
The 72 hours bit isn't to prevent crime in game, its meant to catch nefarious ppl who use fraud on another's credit card to buy game.

It kind of makes sense this way.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 22, 2012, 02:54:15 AM
This is truly insane. Seriously, this is.. this is beyond words. There are stupid decisions, there is corporate necessary evil of DRM (EA, Ubisoft) but Blizzard really sets the bar here. That is the lowest of the low. That is putting together all the reasons why I HATE always-on. And NONE of the reasons why would I love it.

The *only* reason they do that is because of the RMT AH. .. Heh i can't even rant. This is the most absurd thing I ever heard.

"Hey, buy our game, its the full version and its fulll price.. it's just the demo for 3 days though." Wow.... I am tempted to give my game back, I am not going to support something like Blizzard ever again.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on June 22, 2012, 02:57:17 AM
This is truly insane. Seriously, this is.. this is beyond words. There are stupid decisions, there is corporate necessary evil of DRM (EA, Ubisoft) but Blizzard really sets the bar here. That is the lowest of the low. That is putting together all the reasons why I HATE always-on. And NONE of the reasons why would I love it.

The *only* reason they do that is because of the RMT AH. .. Heh i can't even rant. This is the most absurd thing I ever heard.

"Hey, buy our game, its the full version and its fulll price.. it's just the demo for 3 days though." Wow.... I am tempted to give my game back, I am to going to support something like Blizzard ever again.

Your not alone, I just heard that Blizzard was forced to give Koreans Refunds of Diablo 3 (lots of angry gamers over there over the DRM) by the Korean Fair Trade Commission. People are not happy with Blizzard and quite frankly, I hope this black eye tells everyone to back down on this always-on DRM decision.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on June 22, 2012, 08:53:37 AM
Yeah, when I read this I thought it was an elaborate troll at first. Christ, are they trying to shoot themselves in the foot with the bazooka?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 22, 2012, 08:54:34 AM
It's probably just a misunderstanding.

 ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 22, 2012, 09:01:09 AM
At this point I couldn't care less if Blizzard as a company shut down forever.  I didn't buy the game because I saw this coming from a mile away (starting with the announcement of the RMAH), but I urge anyone who did to get a refund.  This kind of business practice is unacceptable and detrimental to the gaming world.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 22, 2012, 09:25:52 AM
It's definitely an argument for avoiding making a game whose business model is susceptible to criminal activity (particularly organized crime).

The game itself being susceptible is fine; our games can be pirated (very easily, if it were any easier you could accidentally pirate it).  But it doesn't interfere with our meeting our goals.

But if the business model itself (i.e. the project's chance of meeting its financial goals) can be threatened by criminal activity, and there's sufficient motivation for that kind of activity (so probably has to be something pretty high-profile), then you're really between a rock and a hard place:
- Either you let the mafia-types run all over the place, because of not wanting to put effective controls in place that compromise the experience for everyone.  And to some extent the criminal activity will probably hurt the experience for a lot of people, depending on the exact mechanics involved.  And you probably don't wind up making the money you were hoping to make.
- Or you try to put effective controls in place (not that this 72-hour rule really strikes me as effective, just somewhat of a pare-down) and risk annoying every customer (every digital customer, in this case).

I mean, short of actually getting law enforcement involved on a pretty large scale, I don't see how Blizzard can win both sides of this.  The way they're going, I don't think they're going to win either side.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 22, 2012, 09:47:33 AM
You can make a pretty good argument that pirates were never a real part of your customer base to begin with.  If you look at these people as freeloaders who, if they had no way to access the game, wouldn't play it, then it doesn't seem like such a big concern does it?

Totalbiscuit makes some good points about it in this video (fast-forwarded to the appropriate time):  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9WbqdYuba4#t=3m50s

I'll be totally honest, when I first started playing AI War several years ago I didn't pay for it at first (I didn't really like it at first anyway, so I never got past the demo).  But as the game was continually updated and improved, I believe I did pirate it and play it quite a bit.  Then I finally bought my copy of all 4 games just to support the company and try the expansions.  But I played quite a few games with my friends where I gave them my keys so we could play past the two hour mark.  I encouraged them to buy the game themselves if they liked it and support an Indie company.  I'm not sure if any of them did, but I ended up buying 3 more copies of all 4 games in the end anyway.

So now I have 4 copies of AI War and all its expansions because Arcen has been so good to me and because I want to support them.

I would have NEVER done this if I even got a hint that you were forcing DRM on me or being greedy about your business practices.  I don't think Arcen would have made a single buck more if they added some intrusive DRM, and would probably have made quite a bit less.  Who knows how many people have pirated your game, and maybe played it for hundreds of hours.  It's better to let them do that, than to ruin it for the people who actually care about your company.

I think Blizzard is getting exactly what they deserve.  I heard in Korea there is basically a mass re-sale of the game because the community there is so unhappy with it.  I hope other gamers follow that example.  http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/korea-vs-blizzard-government-raids-seoul-office-to-determine-is-studio-broke-the-law-with-botched-diablo-iii-release/

When 6 million people buy your game, it is not necessary to have this kind of DRM.  Blizzard has literally become the epitome of a greedy, profit-driven company, and I hope everybody can see it now.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 22, 2012, 09:56:01 AM
You can make a pretty good argument that pirates were never a real part of your customer base to begin with.  If you look at these people as freeloaders who, if they had no way to access the game, wouldn't play it, then it doesn't seem like such a big concern does it?
I think that's a bit simplistic but yes, some portion of those who pirate would fall in that category.

Anyway, when I said that our games are susceptible to criminal activity (piracy) but that it doesn't interfere with our goals, what I was implying was that even if piracy were physically impossible we would not make much more money than we do.  I don't think the marginal difference would be zero, and I think it would be positive (more than counterbalancing the "extracurricular advertising" aspect of piracy), but I don't think it would be big.  Certainly not big enough to justify even seriously considering any countermeasure that would inconvenience legitimate customers in any way (note, the serial key does not primarily exist to prevent piracy, it exists so our demo can be the exact same program as the full game and so our expansions don't have to modify the executable or whatever).

I think what Blizzard's concerned about with this 72-hour-rule isn't people getting a copy of Diablo without paying for it, it's what they might do to impact their AH market.  Or something like that.  Far be it from me to insist that there's a coherent reason behind such a decision :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 22, 2012, 10:05:33 AM
Also, to clarify: it's not an arbitrary 72 hours; it's however long it takes them to complete their authorisation checks, which will not be longer than 72 hours maximum.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 22, 2012, 10:22:25 AM
This would not even be a problem if Diablo 3 wasn't trying to a pseudo MMO.

No other game has this issue, not even Diablo 2

1) They do not EVER touch RMT for a good reason
2) Loot games with random tables with RMT are in some nations considered illegal gambling
3) RMT in games can be used for money laundering (but don't tell Blizzard)
4) no local server management means botters can mask themselves by joining legitimate games then leave, blizzard never knows a thing

Hence, no other game would ever do a AH with RMT. If you do RMT you are part of the farming and laundering economy whether you want it or not. But it is really no surprise Blizzard CEO was braindead enough to ignore the 60k posts against online only gaming in D3, but I guess he figured it's just a minority. Now we can't even play locally without any AH crap in our games, and if you ever open a game to the public you get ghost visits from botters

At this point the Diablo 3 emulator is maybe 40% done, and once it is, Blizzard will never again see me use any of their service. I just wish I could get a refund for the friend who got me this game mainly to make a point.

But really it is amazing what a huge trainwreck diablo 3 is, and let's not even get me started about the patches.. they fix the opposite ends of the problems....
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on June 22, 2012, 10:54:28 AM
Tell me more about this Diablo 3 emulator...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 22, 2012, 01:04:53 PM
It's not anywhere near complete or fully working if you meant to ask that.... but at least it's kinda in progress.. just like lacking most quests / events and some skill functions for now. It'll probably take a good year before it becomes a replacement for the original servers ,p
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on June 26, 2012, 05:55:13 PM
http://www.alexc.me/a-scientific-explanation-why-diablo-3-is-less-addictive-than-diablo-2/417/
And also linked from there:
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5270834615?page=1
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on June 27, 2012, 01:50:02 AM
"Honest" Diablo 3 Trailer
http://www.gamefront.com/our-honest-diablo-3-trailer/

;) Very well done
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 27, 2012, 11:55:51 AM
"Honest" Diablo 3 Trailer
http://www.gamefront.com/our-honest-diablo-3-trailer/

;) Very well done
I think "Bitter Diablo 3 Trailer" would be a more appropriate term, but yes, it does have some valid points :)

If playing a game in single-player ever involves lag-caused death, something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on June 27, 2012, 12:05:15 PM
What is "single player"? Oh! I see. You mean "multiplayer without other people". Why are you looking at me like that?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on June 27, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
What is "single player"? Oh! I see. You mean "multiplayer without other people". Why are you looking at me like that?
We're considering how much loot you would drop.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on July 08, 2012, 09:10:18 AM
What is "single player"? Oh! I see. You mean "multiplayer without other people". Why are you looking at me like that?
We're considering how much loot you would drop.
*dies laughing* I couldn't even come up with anything clever to reply, because I was laughing so hard.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on July 09, 2012, 05:18:40 AM
Found this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eyWdH6i9N8) today. I can't stop laughing.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on July 09, 2012, 09:51:36 AM
Found this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eyWdH6i9N8) today. I can't stop laughing.
Towards the end there was actually a slight variation where the axe paused right on hitting one of the big guys, and I wondered if it was physically resistant or something.  Then the flash plugin snapped out of it and the video resumed without variation; it had just been a lag spike.

Seems oddly appropriate.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on July 09, 2012, 11:54:46 AM
Found this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eyWdH6i9N8) today. I can't stop laughing.

Needs more lags, server crashes and server errors.

King
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zebramatt on July 09, 2012, 11:59:47 AM
I pretty much feel that way about all Diablo games, and many other games besides.

Doesn't mean I don't enjoy the bubble popping fun though!  :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on July 09, 2012, 02:00:48 PM
Found this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eyWdH6i9N8) today. I can't stop laughing.

Was expecting the point where in a flash the heroes die.

Again.

and again.

and again.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on July 11, 2012, 09:35:38 AM
That's the flash about Hell. This was likely normal/Nightmare :P
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on August 03, 2012, 06:20:18 AM
hee-hee http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/08/03/wow-loses-1-1m-subs-in-one-quarter-blames-diablo/
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on August 03, 2012, 08:50:31 AM
hee-hee http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/08/03/wow-loses-1-1m-subs-in-one-quarter-blames-diablo/
I guess it's all a matter of perspective but it's pretty funny to me that someone would be bothered by going down to grossing $90,000,000 per month because another one of your products just made $60 a pop off those customers (not counting the RMA)... I guess life is different when you have shareholders :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: BobTheJanitor on August 03, 2012, 07:56:09 PM
I wish that RPS article had some sort of citation for that information. I don't see one at all. I'd just like to know where they're getting those numbers. MMO populations always seem to be extremely hard to find solid data on. [citation needed]
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on August 03, 2012, 08:48:32 PM
I wish that RPS article had some sort of citation for that information. I don't see one at all. I'd just like to know where they're getting those numbers. MMO populations always seem to be extremely hard to find solid data on. [citation needed]

Blizzard/Activision had their....idk what they call them exactly but their public announcements to their shareholders about how well they did, how well their products did and etc here just recently. So that's probably what RPS is referencing.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on August 04, 2012, 02:16:48 AM
I never realised this thread existed, and just from a brief look it definitely went to some weird places!

It's probably worth noting that according to the release the majority (?) of the subscriptions lost were in Asia.

I'm not sure how the release of MoP will go for them. Anecdotally, pretty much nobody I know is excited about it, but that might change when the prerelease events or patches start. Guild Wars 2 and Planetside 2 are taking up most of the excitement bandwidth, but at a September 25 release date it might be far enough away from Guild Wars 2 that the honeymoon period will be over. I'll be surprised if they see a big drop in subscribers.

For my part, I didn't get into Starcraft 2 very much - I thought the single player had enjoyable gameplay but a story that seemed to retcon Brood War out of existence and ended by depowering and objectifying one of the most iconic female characters in gaming. The multiplayer I didn't like very much because of the "blink and you'll miss it" battle speed, where most games culminate in one ten second-long battle.

Then comes Diablo 3, with a story so badly conceived and executed that it shatters the believability of the world. Not only does it have villains who monologue, completely guileless, like they're on a cartoon - it literally was co-written by a kids' cartoon writer. Er, not that there's anything wrong with writing cartoons or things for kids, but it was a funny coincidence!

The environments were often fun to explore, and I liked the art (and blowing up some of the scenery was pretty entertaining - talk about bubble-popping!) but there were so many story interruptions and so many set pieces that it was very difficult to get into them, and if I did it wouldn't be for long. The combat was just... completely unfun and uninteresting. The abilities were sometimes nice in isolation, but so much of the gameplay boiled down to "press this one when you have no mana, and this one when you have mana, and maybe press this one when it's off cooldown because cooldowns are fun!"

No interesting story to draw me in and no fun gameplay make for a game I just have no reason to want to play (HI BORDERLANDS).

Anyway, sorry if I'm derailing the thread by talking about Diablo 3! :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on August 04, 2012, 12:30:35 PM
Quote
For my part, I didn't get into Starcraft 2 very much - I thought the single player had enjoyable gameplay but a story that seemed to retcon Brood War out of existence and ended by depowering and objectifying one of the most iconic female characters in gaming.
Depowering and objectifying Sarah Kerrigan:  Please explain how Starcraft 2 did this.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on August 04, 2012, 12:37:10 PM
Quote
For my part, I didn't get into Starcraft 2 very much - I thought the single player had enjoyable gameplay but a story that seemed to retcon Brood War out of existence and ended by depowering and objectifying one of the most iconic female characters in gaming.
Depowering and objectifying Sarah Kerrigan:  Please explain how Starcraft 2 did this.

Yes, I'd like to hear this too, as I played that game and she was pretty much the same badass she was in SC1...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Coppermantis on August 04, 2012, 12:39:54 PM
I don't 100% agree, but this is the arguement used by most of the people on the battle.net Story forums:

In Brood War, Kerrigan was tricky, smart and powerful. Whereas in WoL you have her set up to be a Damsel in Distress, forced into the role of Zerg Queen, hoping for Raynor to rescue her. She doesn't have any of her classic evilness, she simply makes threats as the Dominion/Raiders stomp her army at every turn.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on August 04, 2012, 12:58:37 PM
Interesting, Blizzard plays the corruption card (and to a lesser extent the utter-destructurion-of-previous-personality card) so incredibly hard in so many of the things it's done that I'm really surprised that they would have backed up a bit on Kerrigan.  I never played SC2.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 04, 2012, 01:03:27 PM
I played sc2. I think what you see happening with Kerrigan is that there is a point to the war. I don't want to spoil the ending for everyone, but I don't see her being a damsel in distress. She's always been used, and that's how I see her.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on August 04, 2012, 01:30:13 PM
I loved Kerrigan in Wings of Liberty (having not played the SC1 campaign).  The entire story was wonderfully done - the character development, the plot twists, the hopeless love story.  Seriously, if the Starcraft story had ended there forever, I would have been completely happy with that.

Wings of Liberty was Raynor's story, and Raynor loved Kerrigan.  In HotS, I think Kerrigan will become the lead role, and we'll get to see her old personality come back in force.  If it's true that "the swarm" had corrupted who she really was, it would make sense that she was conflicted.  Now that she has been released from the "mind control" aspect of the Zerg, they can start getting into the nitty gritty of her true character.  If the story is anywhere near as good as Wings of Liberty, I'm sure it won't disappoint.

RTS is the one place that I still haven't given up on Blizzard.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on August 04, 2012, 02:31:43 PM
I'll try and explain my point of view. A lot of it is based on the ending of the game and how that colours the rest of the story, so if you don't want spoilers then please skip this post. :) Please note a couple of things before reading:

1. it's totally okay if the story didn't come across to you that way. If you enjoyed the story and I didn't then, well, it sounds like you got the better end of the bargain, right? :) On the other side of the coin, how the story came across to me doesn't mean I viewed it "wrong" - how I felt is how I felt.

2. the story is probably a lot better if you never played Starcraft, and in particular Brood War. That is because Chris Metzen has learned somewhere along the way that retconning beloved universes to fit whatever story takes your fancy this year is a good thing. This had good results in Warcraft 3 (and the foreward to the Warcraft Archive talks about how Richard A. Knaak phoned Metzen one day with a really awesome idea for a retcon, so that might be where it all began) but the same attitude has carried over to WoW, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3, with what I'd argue are bad results.

So, to start off with some essential background: in the original Starcraft, there was no big romance between Raynor and Kerrigan. They actually get off to a pretty bad start and maintain a respectful distance from then on, which isn't super long because Kerrigan gets captured by the Zerg (though you don't know this at the time) on level 8 or so. Later, in the Zerg campaign, she turns out to be the Overmind's grand new creation and becomes Infested Kerrigan.

A bunch of things happen and the Overmind dies. Infested Kerrigan turns into the Queen of Blades we all know and love. The United Earth Directorate turns up and some bizarre teaming up with Kerrigan against them ensues, surprisingly enough followed by her stabbing her allies in the back to great effect. Part of the stabbing in the back involves her cheesing Fenix with Spawn Broodling, which is like the complete opposite of the glorious death in battle the Khala demands. Raynor is super mad at this, not so much because he's into the Khala but because Fenix is his best friend. He follows this by declaring that whatever humanity was left in Kerrigan is long gone and that one day - maybe not soon, on account of just having had his entire army trashed by her sudden but inevitable betrayal, but one day - he will find and kill her.

Yeah.

So anyway, with that brief summation out of the way we come to Starcraft 2. Right at the start of the game we see Raynor looking wistfully at his photo of Kerrigan, not with the sadness of murderous intent too long denied but with the sad reminiscence of, perhaps, love long lost. Oh oh, we're off to a bad start here.

I'd like to derail slightly to talk about a bit of a problem with Raynor's characterisation throughout the story. At the start of the game, we're presented with the marketing-friendly line, "It's time to kick this revolution into overdrive!" And Raynor certainly delivers on that pretty well, succeeding in everything he attempts to do from that point onwards. The problem is, after that he frequently ends up in cutscenes moping about how nothing is going their way and life's not fair and nobody even commented on his last livejournal post and so on (full disclosure: I have a livejournal). His negative attitude really clashes badly with the continual success he meets and makes his characterisation appear a bit incoherent.

So throughout the story we meet with Kerrigan. Part of the problem with Kerrigan is she seems very... listless. Passive. She doesn't really seem to ever do anything, and the few things she halfheartedly attempts (with what's presumably still the most fearsome force in the Koprulu sector) are easily thwarted by the plucky Raynor and his motley band.

Let's skip over the rest of the game, since it's really pretty random for the most part. At Char, we're also presented with some weird stuff. The Confederate fleet launches a frontal assault. To recap, this is the same Confederacy that had its entire fleet destroyed, followed by Arcturus Mengsk putting together a fleet of whatever random ships he could find - mostly privately-owned ones - and then getting that destroyed, too. Maybe doomsday fleets just come in cereal boxes in the future (but not Zerg cereal boxes, apparently).

This fleet manages to break into Char and Kerrigan, powerless to do anything but run into your entrenched defenses of lots of whatever it is you brought over and over, is defeated and turned into naked human Kerrigan. Raynor kills his new old best friend and walks off into the sunset in his chunky power armour with the naked Kerrigan.

So when I say depowering and objectifying, I'd be talking about this iconic female character who's repeatedly shown to be ineffective, who ends up stripped of her power (and clothes) against her will and carried away as a prize by the male lead.

What makes the whole thing even more tragic is how much stronger the story and characters (especially Raynor's) could be without the love story retcon. When Zeratul reveals to Raynor that Kerrigan needs to be saved to save the galaxy, that could have been a powerful moment - he suddenly finds himself needing to help the woman he's sworn to kill. Instead, it's turned into an excuse for Raynor to do what he wants to do anyway - save his girlfriend - and is completely robbed of any emotional impact.

It's a real shame.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 04, 2012, 03:11:28 PM
Great post. I'm going to cover my spoilers with the black text color. Just highlight it.


 It looks like what really bothers you is the fact that Jim picks her up and walks off into the sunset with her appearing to be naked.

You have to understand that in the original, Jim and his ragtag band liberate Kerrigan, who is the product of a secret program to create what we know as ghosts. They do become friendly, despite the wisecracks. I don't remember any acrimony, actually, and when Kerrigan goes on a mission with Jim and gets surrounded, he quite understandably flips out and wants his friend back.

I'm certainly not the only person who saw it that way and viewed it as a love story. It's interesting to me that you leave this part out and jump right into her role as the leader of the swarm. I mean that genuinely- that is an interesting interpretation. If I remember correctly, a lot of the hype around the game was about this love story. Kerrigan and Jim exchange words several times during the expansion set of the original game, and it's always with teasing. In fact, they were in it together against the UED! They both acknowledge their differences, and their new lives as mortal enemies, but not without a hint of sadness on Jim's part. Kerrigan actually has to remind him she's not the same woman.

Fast forward to your comments about being an ineffective leader. The entire story was told from the Terran point of view. Of course it's going to have a lot about the space cowboy. I think we should withhold judgment because she is not fawning all over Jim, she is not playing the hapless leader.

Yes she does get carried out by her old flame, but does this damn the entire story to being sexist? Love lost was one of the main themes of the original.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on August 04, 2012, 03:45:07 PM
Great post. I'm going to cover my spoilers with the black text color. Just highlight it.


 It looks like what really bothers you is the fact that Jim picks her up and walks off into the sunset with her appearing to be naked.

You have to understand that in the original, Jim and his ragtag band liberate Kerrigan, who is the product of a secret program to create what we know as ghosts. They do become friendly, despite the wisecracks. I don't remember any acrimony, actually, and when Kerrigan goes on a mission with Jim and gets surrounded, he quite understandably flips out and wants his friend back.

I'm certainly not the only person who saw it that way and viewed it as a love story. It's interesting to me that you leave this part out and jump right into her role as the leader of the swarm. I mean that genuinely- that is an interesting interpretation. If I remember correctly, a lot of the hype around the game was about this love story. Kerrigan and Jim exchange words several times during the expansion set of the original game, and it's always with teasing. In fact, they were in it together against the UED! They both acknowledge their differences, and their new lives as mortal enemies, but not without a hint of sadness on Jim's part. Kerrigan actually has to remind him she's not the same woman.

Fast forward to your comments about being an ineffective leader. The entire story was told from the Terran point of view. Of course it's going to have a lot about the space cowboy. I think we should withhold judgment because she is not fawning all over Jim, she is not playing the hapless leader.

Yes she does get carried out by her old flame, but does this damn the entire story to being sexist? Love lost was one of the main themes of the original.

Well, I'll point out I never called the story "sexist," let alone "the entire story!" Yours is an interesting interpretation of the first Starcraft and very different to mine. I can see how that'd make someone feel better about Starcraft 2's. I will say you do need to ignore the death of Fenix and Raynor swearing to kill Kerrigan for the sequel to make sense that way, though.

And yes, a lot of it comes down to the ending scene. It totally colours the rest of the game.

Re: what she's doing, that isn't pure speculation, it's influenced by the scenes with Zeratul, where she carries on about how nothing matters and what have you. I can imagine someone seeing that differently, too.

It's also possible that Heart of the Swarm will put all of this in yet another new light and even redeem the character, and the limited amount of promotional stuff I've seen looks promising, but I think Wings of Liberty should be able to stand on its own merits to the extent that's possible.

Thanks for discussing this civilly despite seeing it totally differently, by the way. :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on August 04, 2012, 04:36:15 PM
*Caution - May Contain Spoilers*


Quote
So, to start off with some essential background: in the original Starcraft, there was no big romance between Raynor and Kerrigan. They actually get off to a pretty bad start and maintain a respectful distance from then on, which isn't super long because Kerrigan gets captured by the Zerg (though you don't know this at the time) on level 8 or so. Later, in the Zerg campaign, she turns out to be the Overmind's grand new creation and becomes Infested Kerrigan.

A bunch of things happen and the Overmind dies. Infested Kerrigan turns into the Queen of Blades we all know and love. The United Earth Directorate turns up and some bizarre teaming up with Kerrigan against them ensues, surprisingly enough followed by her stabbing her allies in the back to great effect. Part of the stabbing in the back involves her cheesing Fenix with Spawn Broodling, which is like the complete opposite of the glorious death in battle the Khala demands. Raynor is super mad at this, not so much because he's into the Khala but because Fenix is his best friend. He follows this by declaring that whatever humanity was left in Kerrigan is long gone and that one day - maybe not soon, on account of just having had his entire army trashed by her sudden but inevitable betrayal, but one day - he will find and kill her.
I didn't play SC1 so maybe this huge hole didn't ruin it for me.

To me, the entire thing starts out as a love story (SC2 I mean), and it just excels from there. 

Quote
I'd like to derail slightly to talk about a bit of a problem with Raynor's characterisation throughout the story. At the start of the game, we're presented with the marketing-friendly line, "It's time to kick this revolution into overdrive!" And Raynor certainly delivers on that pretty well, succeeding in everything he attempts to do from that point onwards. The problem is, after that he frequently ends up in cutscenes moping about how nothing is going their way and life's not fair and nobody even commented on his last livejournal post and so on (full disclosure: I have a livejournal). His negative attitude really clashes badly with the continual success he meets and makes his characterisation appear a bit incoherent.
I don't think it's incoherent at all.  It's the same reason why these rich stock traders and financial tycoons can have so much money and still be miserable - life revolves around love.  You can have all the victories or treasure in the world, but if you're missing love it's all for nothing.  I think Raynor was happy with his victories, but he knew that with every victory (especially against the Zerg), he simply got 1 step closer to having to kill Kerrigan.  Raynor didn't know if he would have to kill Kerrigan, but it was his greatest fear.  He wanted to save her but it wasn't until the end of the story (literally last mission) that he realized it was possible.  I think on some level he believed he would have to kill her, and that ripped him apart inside.  Also, I chose the "path" where you kill the Scientist woman on the Terran planet that goes bad by siding with the Protoss.  So that was like a really big foreshadowing to both Raynor and I that this wasn't going to end well.

When he "saves" Kerrigan at the end, I was literally so emotionally involved I was nearly crying.  I watched the video over and over again.

But basically, I think we'll see Kerrigan's "true" side in this new expansion.  In other words, instead of making her the strong, domineering female in the last game, I think they chose to prevent this one from ending "happily ever after" (obviously), so we'll get to see some more of her true character.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Coppermantis on August 04, 2012, 07:02:52 PM
Oh definitely, she looks much more like Sc1 Kerrigan in the HotS trailers. Her lessening in Wings of Liberty could be due to the game's focus on the Terrans, with the Zerg being more of a background thing until the very end.


Also, it's really weird for me to see people liking WoL's story. In the Battle.net forums, you can count the people who liked it on one hand, and they're all hated for this reason. But such is the way with AAA game forums.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 04, 2012, 07:18:36 PM
Thanks for discussing this civilly despite seeing it totally differently, by the way. :)

Yes, I appreciate it also. It's nice to have a good Starcraft nerd discussion, civilly and whatnot. I haven't gotten to do that in a long time, I used to debate lore with my buddies all the time. Sometimes I think blizzard forgets that the storyline is absolutely imperative to a lot of the players. That's what made World of Warcraft suck so much. The entire story previously had been about racial tension, and it just turned into monster bashing. Not to mention the Draenai lore fiasco, which instead of fixing they just left broken. They are an impossibility!

Also, I would argue that killing Fenix in the original doesn't preclude true love, as technically Kerrigan is infested. 

In regards to Kerrigan acting nihilistic, again I think this is all from the perspective of the Terran army. It's really hard to judge her character when the entire story is told from the point of view of Jim. Do you remember the rumblings about a fourth race? Technically, each of these races are descended from the other in attempts at creating the perfect species, with the Zerg being the race that evolves the quickest. There is supposed to be a fourth race, but they could never balance it. I'm thinking we will find out about this plot in one of the sequels.

When he "saves" Kerrigan at the end, I was literally so emotionally involved I was nearly crying.  I watched the video over and over again.

But basically, I think we'll see Kerrigan's "true" side in this new expansion.  In other words, instead of making her the strong, domineering female in the last game, I think they chose to prevent this one from ending "happily ever after" (obviously), so we'll get to see some more of her true character.

Agreed, wingflier. I must have watched that last scene five times, it was so heroic. It's a little sad that it turns people off like yllamana (anomaly or is this a Sponge music reference?). I don't think it's meant to be sexist or damsel in distress. It's the space cowboy who has traveled the stars, endured the losses of thousands of soldiers, friends, and more to be with this woman, and at long last his dreams come true in one sparkling sunset.

It's true, the cyborg is a sap deep deep down… And honestly it was a moment of happiness to have a happy ending in Starcraft for once.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Coppermantis on August 04, 2012, 08:45:44 PM
ge her character when the entire story is told from the point of view of Jim. Do you remember the rumblings about a fourth race? Technically, each of these races are descended from the other in attempts at creating the perfect species, with the Zerg being the race that evolves the quickest. There is supposed to be a fourth race, but they could never balance it. I'm thinking we will find out about this plot in one of the sequels.[/color]


SPOILERS:

Actually, the Terrans weren't involved in the original Xel'Naga Cycle. From what I understand, the Xel'naga enhanced the Protoss with their psionic powers, but the Protoss experiment didn't turn out well so the Xel'Naga adbandoned them. They then created the Zerg, but this time they used an Overmind to hopefully ensure greater success, with the intention that the Zerg and Protoss would eventually merge peacefully to spawn the next generation of Xel'Naga. However, the Overmind turned against the Xel'Naga for whatever reason and killed most of them.

The Fourth race is the Hybrids that we encounter in the Protoss Missions in WoL. With the current information available, it would seem that the Hybrids are a merging of Protoss and Zerg somewhat like the Xel'Naga intended except manipulated by the "Dark Voice" aka "The Fallen One", whose name indicates it is a Fallen/Corrupted Xel'Naga.

The Prophecy that Zeratul uncovers speaks of "One who will break the cycle of the [Xel'Naga]", presumably Kerrigan. She will do so by keeping control of the Zerg, thus keeping the Dark Voice from doing the same and merging the Zerg and Protoss. Hence the need to "rescue" Kerrigan, as her survival is imperative to the survival of all three races. Unfortunately, this means that Raynor is unable to avenge Fenix without dooming the Universe.


Please note that the above is accurate only as far as I have researched/experienced, so there may be errors.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 04, 2012, 09:27:35 PM
That's correct, I just didn't want to rehash the whole chain. Anyway, my comments about the fourth race remains as important to Kerrigan.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on August 05, 2012, 02:00:02 AM
Well, part of what's interesting about Kerrigan's character to me is yes, she's infested, but she also seems to have her own free will. The question there becomes: how much of this is Kerrigan? I think it makes her a much less interesting character if it just becomes oh, she's just infested and that's why she's evil. The part in Brood War where Raynor swears to kill her implied to me that he doesn't think any redemption is possible for her, either. Having all that washed over weakens the story for me.

All that aside, I didn't mean to start a huge Starcraft 2 discussion. :) It was just part of the pattern I've seen in Blizzard's games for a while. It sort of makes me wonder if the only reason I liked Blizzard's stories in the first place was the storytelling limitations letting me interpret it differently to the intent of the author. That culminated in Diablo 3, where the most of the writing and execution is so poor that I find it impossible to get immersed in the game. I certainly never had that problem in Wings of Liberty - despite its flaws, the story was only really ruined for me by the ending. I liked Raynor and wanted to see him succeed. Diablo 3... well. :(

I can forgive a poor story for good gameplay (and as I said, I thought SC2: WoL had very entertaining and polished single player gameplay). I can forgive poor gameplay for a good story (hi Bioware!). When the gameplay is uninteresting and the story has no hook I just don't want to play at all.

I think "hook" is probably an important word there. I don't think my standards for enjoying a story are all that high - what I really need is a reason to care about it and the characters in it. Borderlands might be an example: I bought it because it was highly recommended but I found all the characters to be unlikeable (except the robot, and he might have been trying too hard) and the setting and premise uninteresting, so it left me no desire to get into it further. I don't think SC2: WoL had a very good story, but I liked Raynor - there's the hook.

Heck, even AI War has a better hook: you're saving the entire human race (though I guess that's weakened somewhat by the rebels and marauders existing. What the heck, guys!! Story inconsistency!!!!). It's a bit of a cliched thing to be doing, but there's a reason it's so popular. ;) AVWW doesn't have the same hook, but it has the great setting to explore to draw you in. I wonder if that'd feel better if you couldn't just run over the top of all the areas using the world map.

Er, anyway. Point is, Diablo 3 was pretty disappointing. :(
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 05, 2012, 11:08:25 AM
Diablo has always been a campy tale. It's about burrowing underground to destroy what could pass for a devil character. The characters you meet along the way, it's supposed to be fun and humorous. I do not think it's supposed to be a story you take seriously.

The real question is, for all of its problems, are you going to purchase Heart of the Swarm? I bet it has a lot about Kerrigan.  ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on August 05, 2012, 11:30:54 AM
Diablo has always been a campy tale. It's about burrowing underground to destroy what could pass for a devil character. The characters you meet along the way, it's supposed to be fun and humorous. I do not think it's supposed to be a story you take seriously.
Well, that's the thing, right? The storytelling changed a lot between the second and third games. Perhaps the big difference was that in the second game you could see what you wanted to see in it - it's more open to interpretation. With the third installment that isn't so much the case, and perhaps that's the difference rather than the story they intended to tell being different.
The real question is, for all of its problems, are you going to purchase Heart of the Swarm? I bet it has a lot about Kerrigan.  ;)
I don't know. The little marketing movie I saw looked promising, but I'm feeling a bit burned by Wings of Liberty and Diablo 3. Maybe? I did enjoy the single player campaign of WoL until the end. It's a tricky question. Is it my responsibility as a customer to not buy it because the story might be bad? I certainly don't think buy/don't buy is the extent of your decision as a customer, because I think providing feedback is a lot more valuable than just not buying something alone, but there's got to be a point where you should put your foot down.

It's not a must-buy for me anymore. I guess we'll see if I buy it before release anyway! :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Cyborg on August 05, 2012, 12:33:40 PM
That's cool. I'm buying it for the single player. I look forward to seeing what happens next, maybe jump on multiplayer for a couple games and realize that I can't beat anybody and that will probably be it. I'm hoping it's reasonably priced.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on October 07, 2012, 04:42:49 PM
Did not want to start a new thread, but just came a cross this piece of news:

World of Warcraft apocalypses:  http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/10/07/reports-entire-cities-dead-on-certain-realms

I've believed that give all the battle.net experience Blizz should be close to bullet-proof security-wise. Now I'm not so sure. I think that what happened is th that over last few years the company changed key people in many areas, and what we perceive as blizzard has little to do with what blizzard as it used to be even 5 years ago.

My patience with them starts wearing thin. I think I'm not going to get heart of the swarm and what not.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on October 07, 2012, 05:05:16 PM
Did not want to start a new thread, but just came a cross this piece of news:

World of Warcraft apocalypses:  http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/10/07/reports-entire-cities-dead-on-certain-realms

I've believed that give all the battle.net experience Blizz should be close to bullet-proof security-wise. Now I'm not so sure. I think that what happened is th that over last few years the company changed key people in many areas, and what we perceive as blizzard has little to do with what blizzard as it used to be even 5 years ago.

My patience with them starts wearing thin. I think I'm not going to get heart of the swarm and what not.

I decided that I'm just going to watch YouTube vids because my only interest in Starcraft II is its story. And I'm never going to be competitive.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on October 07, 2012, 05:15:56 PM
The problem with WoW i find is that each expansion gives more of the same...

there is nothing earth shattering. Even the devs know this which is why they dropped from 10 level expansions to 5 level expansions. For cata they claimed it was time was devoted to improve the main land for the base games, which i decided was an OK reason.

For the pandas though? I don't even know, since I haven't kept tract for over a year now. But it was another 5 level increase, for more of the same grind for a dungeon which you can only do weekly, a dead pvp universe due to randomly summoned guards, etc.

The game feels to...controlled...for lack of a better world. There is no "I'm going to hunt some weaker players to loot!" in pvp, for example. And this is on the worlds were pvp is supposed to be encouraged. My best memories of WoW were on the mainland where I engaged with pointless, intense, and completely random pvp battles with other players for nothing more then bragging rights.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on October 08, 2012, 03:42:25 PM
Every expansion of WoW appeals to the current customers. There's never anything new to lure old players (and new) back to the game.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on October 08, 2012, 03:53:55 PM
Every expansion of WoW appeals to the current customers. There's never anything new to lure old players (and new) back to the game.
That's a fairly sweeping statement ;)  Both WotLK and Cata brought me back for a little while.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on October 08, 2012, 06:06:41 PM
KEITH, I never would have mistook you for a WoW player in my wildest dreams.

*Puts on expensive glasses*

"Well let's see here,

Yes - your business resume says you've developed and played thousands of hours of AI War, Master of Orion, Dwarf Fortress and WORLD OF WARCRAFT?!"

YOU'RE FIRED GET OUT OF HEREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on October 08, 2012, 06:23:32 PM
It's a fun game :)  Eventually got tired of it, but I think that goes for nearly any game.

Got a fair number of design ideas from it; mostly of the "do not do this" variety, but that's valuable too.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: chemical_art on October 08, 2012, 06:30:37 PM
Every expansion of WoW appeals to the current customers. There's never anything new to lure old players (and new) back to the game.
That's a fairly sweeping statement ;)  Both WotLK and Cata brought me back for a little while.

The issue is that the business model is regressive at this point.

You aren't really luring new players, and less and less players are coming back after falling off due to that stage's of the game's emphasis on weekly dungeons.

The first run from lvl 1 - 60 is amazing on how rapidly new things are learned. You can access a new group of dungeons every week if you play on any regular basis during this time.

After 60 the time to access a new wave of dungeons falls off pretty quickly, and during cata it was just getting tedious playing the same dungeons for a month.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on October 08, 2012, 06:38:11 PM
The issue is that the business model is regressive at this point.
Perhaps.  I think it's a case of "what would be the best game design?" taking a back seat to "what would give the best mix of investment risk and reward?".  Even if they keep tapering off on subscriptions by 1 or 2 million per year they'll still have made several swimming pools full of gold coins after 3 or 4 years before getting into the realm of needing to shut it off.  I don't know how much longer they're actually wanting to keep WoW as it is as a going product.  I'm sure they have other things they want to do.  Like many (former and current) WoW players.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on October 08, 2012, 09:40:07 PM
It's just too hard to tell what exactly their problems are from the outside. Everyone agrees they need "faster content releases" and Blizzard themselves have been saying that since not so long after the game came out. Cataclysm was missing an entire raid tier and a half and it still had a very long lag time between its last patch and the next expansion.

The game has certainly made huge strides forwards in the quality of its releases. At the same time, it has lots of problems. It's hard to say why it has those problems, though - the PvP balance took a real nosedive in Cataclysm, for instance, but Blizzard's sort of suggested they're paralysed by not wanting to change things any more than is absolutely necessary because people really dislike frequent class balance changes. Without working there it's not really possible to know what they actually think of the problems or what those problems are caused by.

It's funny - my friends got really into Guild Wars 2 and I picked it up and loved it. There are so many cool things in that game, but at the same time it was really released a bit too early and has significant problems in just about every aspect of the game. I ended up checking out the Mists of Pandaria pre-release stuff when it rolled around... and found Guild Wars 2 had made me a WoW fangirl and reminded me why WoW is the success it is - for everything it does wrong, it does so much right that other MMOs don't, even down to simple things like the way monsters move around.

Er, anyway. I have absolutely no idea what would have caused the Rapture. I haven't seen any details anywhere. I wouldn't really want to speculate on what the cause was or if it was new or old without some evidence one way or the other.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on March 12, 2013, 02:38:11 AM
Space Rangers HD: Revolution (http://ru.spacerangershd.com/features/)
Thank you.  If I see it come out in English, auto-buy.  Even if it's just a new story line with everything else the same.

It's getting released 15th march on steam.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 12, 2013, 10:53:00 AM
Space Rangers HD: Revolution (http://ru.spacerangershd.com/features/)
Thank you.  If I see it come out in English, auto-buy.  Even if it's just a new story line with everything else the same.

It's getting released 15th march on steam.
This could be perilous for my current project's timeline.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on March 12, 2013, 11:26:53 AM
Clearly you just need to pull 24 hour shifts to get it all done before the 15th, and naturally preemptively fix bugs/suggestions before anybody can report it. ;)

Neve heard of space rangers so I'll check this out.

To be in topic to a blizzard game. Anybody tried heart of the swarm out? I'm tempted to grab this for the single player, so curious how the campaign is.

Doubt I would touch multiplayer with a ten foot pole though ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 12, 2013, 11:32:16 AM
SC2 multiplayer is not as scary as everyone thinks.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on March 12, 2013, 11:36:32 AM
HotS: the story is better, the gameplay is very similar. I think it's safe to say that if you liked Wings of Liberty then you will like Heart of the Swarm.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on March 12, 2013, 11:43:10 AM
SC2 multiplayer is not as scary as everyone thinks.

I've dabbled before in wings of liberty. It's not a matter of being scary. It's a matter of it simply not being enjoyable to me. Especially at the game speed they use.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on March 12, 2013, 11:51:41 AM
The "blink and you'll miss the battles" multiplayer speed definitely hurts the experience for me. I have a lot of trouble controlling the units in any meaningful way in fights because of it.

I haven't tried HotS multiplayer yet. I have tried some games against the computer. They have a new game mode that uses a matchmaking sort of concept to put you against computer opponents of your skill level. From memory, it's a bit like their old coop vs AI system except it sets the difficulty for you. You can still play custom games against the computer if you want instead using the custom game interface. I kinda like the new thing, but the computer still doesn't seem to know how to wall, which is sort of bad for its early-game survivability (can you say "ling go"?).

I enjoy the multiplayer (or non-campaign, say) modes as the price of admission to understand the pro games well. They help me learn the units to an intuitive level that it's hard to pick up from blurry streams.

ETA: oh, and I wanted to add the new training modes and the AI matchmaking system are in Wings of Liberty after the 2.0.4 patch, so you can just check them out there if you want. I thought the training modes were really nice - three modes of increasing complexity with restrictions on what you can build and continual advice from the computer.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on March 12, 2013, 01:03:15 PM
SC2 multiplayer is not as scary as everyone thinks.
It depends.  If you want to be in Diamond or Masters (I made it to Diamond Rank 1 in my division temporarily when WoL was released), it's very scary.  It's probably the most difficult game I've ever played.  But if you're just trying to relax in Bronze tier, then I guess it doesn't really matter how well you micro, or how many times you can click per second.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on March 12, 2013, 01:39:04 PM
I'm also not a fan of the speed at which the game plays in SC2. I can see how someone competitive likes it a lot, because it adds tension. But I'm more of a grand strategist, so I prefer games such as Supreme Commander: FA, for instance.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 12, 2013, 01:46:46 PM
Yea, I like certain kinds of "losing is fun" games, but if I'm losing because I'm not thinking fast enough or clicking fast enough, I'm not having fun.

But the esports of dota-likes and sc2 and such is fascinating to me, as a spectator.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mánagarmr on March 12, 2013, 01:47:49 PM
Quote from: keith.lamothe
But the esports of dota-likes and sc2 and such is fascinating to me, as a spectator.
This absolutely!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on March 15, 2013, 08:47:10 AM
So. I grabbed this mostly for single player (and maybe coop versus AI/custom games). On normal difficultly the levels really seem on the easy side. It's fun though, there's quite a few levels which are troop control without base building which I appreciated.

I was also super excited that in the campaign thy got rid if needing to inject larva, which if you're not familiar with it is a spell you have to cast on every one of your bases every 30 seconds or so if you play Zerg. It is incredibly tedious and if you don't do it you half troop production and can easily get stomped. Tangent aside. I was glad to see it gone in the campaign.

Jumped into a vs AI battle, and it was back! Y U mock me blizzard?  Guess vs AI I go back to playing as humans, its that annoying heh.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 15, 2013, 09:22:12 AM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on March 15, 2013, 09:23:58 AM
I kinda saw it the opposite way: that it wasn't any fun so they took it out of single player, but left it in multiplayer for some reason.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 15, 2013, 09:30:51 AM
Macro in Starcraft is essentially a glorified version of Diner Dash. It's a time management game where you have many small tasks you need to complete as efficiently as possible. The balance between macro and micro are what contribute to the game's high skill ceiling.

Every race has a periodic macro mechanic like spawn larvae. If you removed all three of those mechanics, they would still be pretty balanced, butt he skill ceiling would be lowered across the board as a result.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 15, 2013, 09:42:06 AM
By the way, if any of you here play and are looking for someone for a friendly match, a fun team vs AI, or someone to play a game of Starjeweled or whatever, feel free to contact me at my battle tag (Mick#1457). Just say you're from the Arcen forum so I know who you are.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on March 15, 2013, 09:56:59 AM
Personally I find the inject larva to be an awful mechanic and wish MP followed the SP mechanic. Or at least let it be used as an autocastable. It's perplexing that they streamline other aspects like showing optimal worker amounts and the like but left in that in my opinion awful mechanic.

Edit: which custom maps are fun btw?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 15, 2013, 12:44:37 PM
which custom maps are fun btw?

Nexus Wars and Desert Strike are good casual fun.

I like to put in a quick game of Starjeweled now and again.

The expansion brought me back to the game after a long hiatus, so I don't really know what the newest flavor of the months are now. Fortunately, it appears that the custom game browser is *light years* ahead of when Starcraft 2 first came out. Now it's like an app store with ratings/reviews and descriptions on things.

You could get a ton of fun out of the game and never actually touch SC2-proper.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Diazo on March 15, 2013, 12:52:59 PM
Kind of interesting that way isn't it?

How would you like some Touhou with your Starcraft? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIkPcMbR5HE)

Actually kind of amazing how powerful that engine/editor is.

D.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Aklyon on March 15, 2013, 02:13:59 PM
It could look better, but I'm surprised how well that works Diazo.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on March 15, 2013, 02:18:23 PM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Who cares?

It's not like they'll be on your team like in DotA...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on March 15, 2013, 02:36:50 PM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Who cares?

It's not like they'll be on your team like in DotA...

I think you are misunderstanding what I meant.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Wingflier on March 15, 2013, 02:43:48 PM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Who cares?

It's not like they'll be on your team like in DotA...

I think you are misunderstanding what I meant.
What does it matter if it readies them for Ranked?  If they don't inject larva, they'll simply be placed with other players who also don't inject larva.  I see no negative drawback by removing that from the campaign.  It's only in the game to begin with, literally, to make the game more micro-intensive for the Zerg.  The developers felt that, compared to the other races, Zerg wasn't clicking enough.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on March 15, 2013, 02:56:31 PM
Space Rangers HD: Revolution (http://ru.spacerangershd.com/features/)
Thank you.  If I see it come out in English, auto-buy.  Even if it's just a new story line with everything else the same.

It's getting released 15th march on steam.
This could be perilous for my current project's timeline.
Hurray time line is saved. The game is out but I get "not available in your region". It's probably only for russians http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on March 15, 2013, 03:14:07 PM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Who cares?

It's not like they'll be on your team like in DotA...

I think you are misunderstanding what I meant.
What does it matter if it readies them for Ranked?  If they don't inject larva, they'll simply be placed with other players who also don't inject larva.  I see no negative drawback by removing that from the campaign.  It's only in the game to begin with, literally, to make the game more micro-intensive for the Zerg.  The developers felt that, compared to the other races, Zerg wasn't clicking enough.

Pretty much sums up why I never bought Star Craft 2. ^^ Just watching a let's play of the campaign is going to be well enough.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 15, 2013, 05:17:51 PM
Hurray time line is saved. The game is out but I get "not available in your region". It's probably only for russians http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/
...

Argh.

Do you know if the game itself is in russian?  Or is there an english version.

Region restrictions or no, I figure I can find a legitimate way of getting a copy.  But I wouldn't wade through something other than english.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 15, 2013, 05:19:24 PM
The developers felt that, compared to the other races, Zerg wasn't clicking enough.
... Yea, I think it's a good thing I never got that game :)

Not saying that makes it bad, but if the developer mindset _ever_ results in "let's make a change solely so players in situation XYZ have to click the mouse more", then I'm out.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: yllamana on March 15, 2013, 06:57:34 PM
The developers felt that, compared to the other races, Zerg wasn't clicking enough.
... Yea, I think it's a good thing I never got that game :)

Not saying that makes it bad, but if the developer mindset _ever_ results in "let's make a change solely so players in situation XYZ have to click the mouse more", then I'm out.
They made a design choice that there should be "macro mechanics" which are basically these arbitrarily added chores that you have to do for your production to perform at maximum capacity. I guess if you wanted to add such a thing to AI War you might remove the auto-reactor management stuff, remove the circular queues, limit the queues more, then make production costs subtracted upfront. Doing these things quickly and accurately while dealing with other pressures would become an important part of playing the game well. I think the comparison to Diner Dash is good, and it's unfair to characterise it as "solely to make players have to click the mouse more." It's about having that element of managing all these different things under intense time pressure.

All I mean is... it's not quite as dumb as it seems. :) It's not entirely to my taste either as I'd rather see that focus applied to managing the battles and such, but there it is. It has, you know, its own unique and beautiful place in the tapestry of the universe.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Coppermantis on March 15, 2013, 07:48:03 PM
I had mixed feelings about them removing the inject larva from the campaign. Their reasoning was that they wanted macro not to be the focus in the campaign game, but it essentially teaches players bad habits if they later want to get into multiplayer.
Who cares?

It's not like they'll be on your team like in DotA...

I think you are misunderstanding what I meant.

The thing is, the campaign is not there to prepare you for multiplayer. That's what the training mode and vs. AI are for. In the campaign, there are already all sorts of army units and heroes that you will never see in multiplayer. The fact that Kerrigan is a major part of your army in most missions already sets the campaign far apart from multiplayer.

Even in WoL, the campaign has all sorts of differences. You don't get Orbital Command until later on, and there are tons of unique units. Going solely off the campaign, a newbie would go into a barracks and wonder why he couldn't build firebats or medics.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on March 15, 2013, 09:36:56 PM
Hurray time line is saved. The game is out but I get "not available in your region". It's probably only for russians http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/
...

Argh.

Do you know if the game itself is in russian?  Or is there an english version.

Region restrictions or no, I figure I can find a legitimate way of getting a copy.  But I wouldn't wade through something other than english.
Looks like it's not localized (yet?) This http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/?cc=ru gives me Notice: This title only includes Russian language.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on March 15, 2013, 10:14:14 PM
Hurray time line is saved. The game is out but I get "not available in your region". It's probably only for russians http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/
...

Argh.

Do you know if the game itself is in russian?  Or is there an english version.

Region restrictions or no, I figure I can find a legitimate way of getting a copy.  But I wouldn't wade through something other than english.
Looks like it's not localized (yet?) This http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/?cc=ru gives me Notice: This title only includes Russian language.
Gotcha, makes sense.  Well, they'd better step on it! ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on March 26, 2013, 02:04:53 AM
I must say it DOES have a language selection control (on the screenshot at the very top) but it's a bit.... one-sided.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on October 17, 2013, 01:03:19 AM
Hurray time line is saved. The game is out but I get "not available in your region". It's probably only for russians http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/
...

Argh.

Do you know if the game itself is in russian?  Or is there an english version.

Region restrictions or no, I figure I can find a legitimate way of getting a copy.  But I wouldn't wade through something other than english.
Looks like it's not localized (yet?) This http://store.steampowered.com/app/214730/?cc=ru gives me Notice: This title only includes Russian language.
Gotcha, makes sense.  Well, they'd better step on it! ;)

It's supposed to hit steam tomorrow
http://spacerangershd.com/2013/10/08/greatest-news-in-the-universe
http://steamdb.info/app/214730/
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on October 19, 2013, 02:40:59 PM
It's supposed to hit steam tomorrow
http://spacerangershd.com/2013/10/08/greatest-news-in-the-universe
http://steamdb.info/app/214730/
Awesome, yea, it's showing up now :)  Would insta-buy, but then I'd probably be overly tempted to insta-play, and I probably won't have time for the kind of play SR motivates until holiday vacation.  Ah well, glad to know it's ready when I am :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on October 19, 2013, 04:26:12 PM
On topic of Diablo. I'm not quite sure I understand the closure of AH. The argument is "players buy top gear and then they have no reason to play since best gear IS the goal and they've reached it" I mean they spend money to buy the gear and Blizzard takes the cut, (and the game does not have subscription). So what's wrong? Blizz still get their money. And without AH, how are they going to profit from the game? (I mean in the long run)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Mick on October 19, 2013, 04:39:45 PM
I'm sure they will profit just fine from expansions.

I was actually a big advocate of the auction house at first because of how it facilitated trading of items.

The thing is though, I've found it pretty much removed all the magic of finding items out of the game. Things that dropped were only there to get me gold so I could buy the items I wanted, and it just didn't have the feeling of the game that D1 and D2 did (where in those I didn't trade, but simply relied on only the items I found). Not to mention, I was super excited about the crafting system in this game, but the AH by design made crafting useless.

So in the end I think getting rid of the AH is the right choice, and I'm glad Blizzard is willing to take extreme measures in order to improve the longevity of the game.

I should clarify that I'm talking about the gold AH. I'm completely indifferent about the real-money version because when I play Diablo I only play in hardcore mode.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: orzelek on October 21, 2013, 01:21:06 PM
...
The thing is though, I've found it pretty much removed all the magic of finding items out of the game. Things that dropped were only there to get me gold so I could buy the items I wanted, and it just didn't have the feeling of the game that D1 and D2 did (where in those I didn't trade, but simply relied on only the items I found). Not to mention, I was super excited about the crafting system in this game, but the AH by design made crafting useless.
...

This is one and only required reason to remove AH.
I haven't played for some time but when I reached Inferno there was only one way - go to AH and buy yourself a kit or get murdered insane amount of times until you find stuff yourself that can match AH or at least come close. Amount of grind to gather items by yourself is to much.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: LaughingThesaurus on October 23, 2013, 11:20:31 PM
Because it was so easy to find items via auction house, Blizzard saw no need to give, say, rare or legendary items a reasonable drop rate. I'd heard and seen firsthand accounts of people getting no such items after 4-6 full playthroughs. I'm not even talking GOOD items, I'm just talking any item of decent rarity at all. However, because of how easy it is to actually trade and sell items on the auction house, if the drop rate were the same as it should be in a single player game, the auction house would be absolutely flooded with the stuff.

Me, I generally prefer to abstain from anything that will take away fun from a game. I see no need to do something as efficiently as possible if that takes the fun out. The auction house removed fun from the idea of finding your own items, but it was impossible for me to find items on my own. So, I got to act 2, and then gave up on the game. My skills were crap (I was a wizard, I had like 2 good attacks), all the items were either terrible or things I couldn't use, everything was just pretty garbage. And, I tried this game when Torchlight 2 wasn't even out yet. I'd rather play Torchlight 1 of all things than Diablo 3, because that at least was fun. Not hard, but god, you at least got places in it without everybody else's garbage helping you out.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 03, 2014, 08:55:56 PM
Those who played it recently, can you explain wtf is adventure mode. Internet says "Adventure Mode is a game mode for Diablo III that was introduced with Reaper of Souls.[1] Here, all the game's waypoints are unlocked, and players can access any waypoint at any time" But all waypoints is unlocked anyway if you select a scene at the end of a game act, that always has been the case. So why Adventure Mode?

Also with no AH, is there any kind of trade between players still possible? Like swapping gear within a party?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on September 03, 2014, 09:05:20 PM
Adventure mode is a mode in which you can travel anywhere in any of the acts whenever you want and in whatever way you want.  Instead of completing the story line  featured in the acts (i.e. story mode), you complete randomly generated quests in the same game world that the story took place in.  You get special rewards for adventure mode which, when accumulated, will get you access to special randomly generated dungeons with very good rewards. Adventure mode only becomes available once you've beaten story mode.  Adventure mode also features blood shard drops, which will allow you to buy mystery items from the gambler in town.

As for trading, it is no longer possible unless you are trading with a player who was in the game with you when the traded item drops.  I think you have up to 2 hours to trade with anyone who was in game with you for a drop.  Other than that, there is no trading between players and absolutely no trading between strangers.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on September 04, 2014, 02:17:51 AM
I've actually been playing diablo a lot lately. Reaper of souls, the new greater rifts from the latest patch, and the item-drop rebalance has really made it a different game from when it was first released. I've been having a blast playing it.

Basically "adventure" mode is a way to play the meat of the game (killing guys/beating bosses) without having to go through the campaign. It lets you teleport around the campaign map and do "bounties" for rewards. You can also fight any of the bosses and just explore if you want to. It doesn't change enemy spawn rules or anything though. So if you go to an act 1 location, you still fight act 1 enemies - they're just scaled to your level and game difficulty (which you can thankfully now adjust from the get go).

A new feature is rifts - which are basically randomized dungeons where unlike the other modes, the enemy pool of each level is randomized. So you might be on a tile set from act 2, but you'll have a mix of enemies from all the different acts (it's typically like 4-5 enemy types per a dungeon floor). Boss and enemy density tends to be a lot greater than in regular play as well.

Recently they added greater rifts. Which are basically the same concept as rifts, except with a time trial added to it. If you finish a greater rift in a certain amount of time, you can advance to a harder rift, and repeat the challenge. These feel really tense and it does a good job pushing you to the limit in a way that's exciting (especially if you do it on hardcore mode). The rewards from greater rifts are incredibly nice items as well.


The above post pretty well summarizes trading. There isn't any except with people playing with you at that given time.  Gear drops have been massively retuned since the days of the auction house. I never got any gear worth a damn in those days, (I didn't use the auction house either). Now good gear drops more frequently, and it's smart about dropping stuff that works with your stats. So you don't end up with a ton of useless INT gear as a STR class. There's also some interesting affects you can get from gear and not just boring stat increasers. That's pretty rare to find though.

All in all, I would say the diablo of today is completely different from where it was a year ago and it is very much worth a second look.

It still has the online only thing though, which is a downer. But other than that, it's been greatly improved - provided you have both the base game and the expansion that is.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 04, 2014, 05:00:48 AM
Thank you. There used to be shared stash, and private character stash. Did they do away with it?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on September 04, 2014, 08:09:26 AM
There is still one stash and it is shared among all characters. They added an additional tab in the expansion, but you have to buy it using gold.

If there are any big arpg fans around here might I recommend Grim Dawn?  It is still early access but it is already great and has a ton of content and characters already. It is scheduled for full release early next year, but so far I am liking it better than D3.  It has a much grittier world and huge skill trees on which you have to spend points.  It is much more like D2 and you can play offline too.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 04, 2014, 09:37:23 AM

If there are any big arpg fans around here might I recommend Grim Dawn?  It is still early access but it is already great and has a ton of content and characters already. It is scheduled for full release early next year, but so far I am liking it better than D3.  It has a much grittier world and huge skill trees on which you have to spend points.  It is much more like D2 and you can play offline too.

I'm definitely keeping an eye on Grim Dawn. Probably gonna be picking that up some time after full release. At the moment, though, I'm well into Path of Exile. Tremendous ARPG. The skilltree is insane, check out https://poebuilder.com/ to see the full scope. There are so many ways to creatively customize your character abilities. Pretty good free-to-play model, too. Online only, but you can still play solo. The latest Forsaken Masters free expansion has added a lot of content, too. You can now customize your own hideout! The one major downside is that desync can be a problem, particularly for Hardcore mode. Other than that, a very impressive title.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: orzelek on September 04, 2014, 12:21:36 PM
I've got suck in recently by Path of Exile ;)

I do have Grim Dawn but mostly waiting for Arcanist there atm. It has quite a bit of content currently and I played it a bit - keeps with Titan quest mechanics with a new theme.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 04, 2014, 12:36:16 PM
POE is much more enjoyable to me that D3. It isn't perfect, but it is more fun and the updates have been keeping it much fresher. Especially playing in the leagues is a ton of fun. The depth to the game just keeps increasing so much.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 04, 2014, 05:10:59 PM
I duuno, I like Diablo 3, tried POE, not so much.

So anyway I've done the first ACT again now after a big break with a new char. and it's even easier than before. I remember dying a few times by Butcher the first time around, and this time, the whole fight was like 1 minute and I did not even have to heal. I thought it was easy the first time, but now I think 3yo can play it and succeed. Thankfully there is a difficulty setting, so I'm not going to complain.

Now what I would like to know is: does it matter what to do with loot for new heroes?  I'm just selling everything because I don't think all this loot is going to be any value for any other char of mine, they will get their own. Right? Also selling vs scraping, does it matter at this stage?

Cheers!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on September 04, 2014, 05:32:40 PM
Yeah if this is your first playthrough then you can totally sell everything.  As for the difficulty sliders, you'll get better rewards for playing on a higher difficulty so it's always worth it to crank it up when you think you can.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on September 04, 2014, 05:49:16 PM
I salvage instead of selling items. That way you can craft some potentially nice gear. This is a great way to speed up another character through the ranks.  It's basically a gamble, but it's a nice way to get decent gear when you level faster than you can get gear.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 04, 2014, 06:45:14 PM
Must... resist... spending... money... on... online-only (single-player)... game...
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 04, 2014, 06:52:06 PM
Must... resist... spending... money... on... online-only (single-player)... game...
Lol. Would you like me to buy it for you? (This offer only extends to  keith.lamothe the famous programmer from Arcen Games studio)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 04, 2014, 06:55:03 PM
That's very kind of you (though I am not famous and hope never to be), but in general I'm just trying to avoid supporting that sort of developer/publisher decision (make single-player require an internet connection).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 04, 2014, 07:07:52 PM
That's very kind of you
Nah, there risk you would take me up on this was really small. (Although I was prepared to follow through)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on September 04, 2014, 07:58:59 PM
Must... resist... spending... money... on... online-only (single-player)... game...
Lol. Would you like me to buy it for you? (This offer only extends to  keith.lamothe the famous programmer from Arcen Games studio)

How many copies of AI war would you need to buy for that?  :D


Also, I would try out PoE. But no official mac support, and I'm very much disinclined to use wine or bootcamp anymore these days.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Castruccio on September 04, 2014, 10:56:44 PM
That's very kind of you (though I am not famous and hope never to be), but in general I'm just trying to avoid supporting that sort of developer/publisher decision (make single-player require an internet connection).

Buy Grim Dawn instead!  Get an ARPG, and help support an indie!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 04, 2014, 11:00:14 PM
I'm glad they're making the game, but I generally reserve actual purchasing for once it's out of early access :)  Mainly because I really prefer not to play early-access as otherwise my chance at enjoying the game is spent on a less-than-complete experience.  In some cases it's more than good enough, and perhaps that would be the case with Grim Dawn judging by what folks are saying.  It doesn't sound as compelling an experience as D3, though.  Interesting, but not "want play now".
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 04, 2014, 11:16:42 PM
That's very kind of you (though I am not famous and hope never to be), but in general I'm just trying to avoid supporting that sort of developer/publisher decision (make single-player require an internet connection).

Buy Grim Dawn instead!  Get an ARPG, and help support an indie!
I'm not into early access. Will consider after release.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Misery on September 05, 2014, 12:45:28 PM
I'll second the suggestion of trying out Path of Exile.  There really is a whole lot going on with that game.

And that skill tree... well, you'd have to see that for yourself. 


Whole thing is a very well made/polished game of this sort, with alot more complexity than usual. 
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 05, 2014, 12:51:16 PM
Started Path of Exile but have been staying away due to the expansion's destruction of the game servers. Still, what I played of it intrigues me. (I'm sure the servers are back up now)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: orzelek on September 05, 2014, 01:25:42 PM
One drawback of playing PoE is that you will need to get used to various form of desync. It happens more or less often but it happens and you need to be more careful because of that.
Expansion added some more special missions and some of them are notorious in desyncing and it's quite dangerous there.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 02:30:41 PM
Desyncing even in singleplayer?  Even in non-expansion stuff?  How much progress are we talking about losing, and how often?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 05, 2014, 02:49:35 PM
Even in single player you are still playing on a remote server. The desyncs are fairly minor. I play in Hardcore exclusively (you die and that's it) and I haven't had any issues despite winning the game and moving up to the final boss on the second difficulty.

Understand the POE ends up being a lot about wiping out large packs of enemies, so AOE is pretty standard for every single character. As a result, a desync of a mob a short distance doesn't save it. It certainly isn't ideal and if memory serves D3 is much better about that not happening. But the desyncs aren't really a concern for me.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 02:51:25 PM
Fair enough, just wanted to know what I'd be in for.

From AIW, the word "desync" conjures the phrase "fate worse than death" ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 05, 2014, 03:02:52 PM
In diablo sometimes you char moves a short distance instanteniusly, which I think also a form of getting out of desync. This happens fairly rarely to me though. May be once in several hours. I think this is mostly because of the internet connection rather then something else.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 05, 2014, 04:03:22 PM
Nah, in POE it generally means "something isn't where it appears to be" which can be bad if you need to kill it, but since you've got a lot of leeway with AOE, all that matters is if you get close :) .
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 04:04:09 PM
So basically Warheads > Heisenberg? :)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: madcow on September 05, 2014, 04:07:43 PM
Wait. So is PoE online only too?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 04:10:04 PM
Yea, I guess with all the nether planes in these kinds of games they have to be hosted in datacenters surrounded with the proper hexagrammatic wards, gellar fields, etc.

If it got loose on a customer's personal machine... hoo boy.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 05, 2014, 04:31:15 PM
Yes, POE is online only. It is also free to play. If you do feel like spending money, your choices are almost all cosmetic. About the only non-cosmetic thing I can think of off hand is more bank space. You can buy a ton more if you want. If you want to spend any money, I recommend getting the 6-tab premium tab bundle. You can rename those tabs and change their color. That's all I've spend with them and its covered me since the game came out. With no sale that $20, but I seem to recall I got them on sale for $10. Honestly, they deserve your money for not making stupid prices that are impossible to use. $20 = 200 pts. $5 = 50 pts. Tabs vary in price: 15, 30, 40, 150 or 200. Very easy to spend all your points exactly. I hate that "$20 = 204 pts...and everything is priced using prime numbers!"
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 04:37:56 PM
Yea, I don't have the same philosophical objections to online-only singleplayer if it's free.  And normally I'm happy to essentially donate to a free game I really like (whether getting something in return or not).  Given the combo I'd probably not give any money, if Dota2 can give me an offline mode, so can POE ;)  Though I'm guessing what they did was basically take the D2 model and choose to avoid the divide between vault-characters and non-vault-characters, opting for just the former.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 05, 2014, 04:54:28 PM
That's what they did. And actually the POE economy is amazing. There are no coins at all. They've managed to make something extremely special there. Gotta run, but it is fascinating from a design and behavior perspective.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 04:55:55 PM
Cool :)  My download's at 57%, so we'll see.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 09:12:53 PM
"A character with this name already exists."

And this matters to me why?!


;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 05, 2014, 09:21:51 PM
Ok, I'm surprised at the breadth of names already taken, but I eventually picked one.

Next problem: is there any way to disable the lightning flashes in the first area, and similar effects?  Torchlight 2 had such an option or my wife and I wouldn't have gotten past the first zone.  The POE lightning flashes are actually way worse; my wife would get a migraine in less than a minute probably (meaning I'd have to stop the game immediately if she came in the room, which isn't so great in an online game) and honestly it's making my head hurt a bit too.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: zespri on September 05, 2014, 09:50:24 PM
Ok, I'm surprised at the breadth of names already taken, but I eventually picked one.

Diablo 3 does not have this problem.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Misery on September 05, 2014, 09:51:03 PM
"A character with this name already exists."

And this matters to me why?!


;)

Holy hell I haaaaaaaaate when that happens. I really do.

Get that crap enough on forums or similar sites.  Where if I cant use "Misery" or like, the two other names I'll use when that one is taken, I'll stare blankly at the screen for like 20 minutes before either MAYBE thinking of something, or giving up. 

A bit more determination when it comes to actual games, where it's still irritating, but I'll sooner or later resort to just smashing random syllables together in no particular order.


I love the games where having the same name just seriously doesnt matter.  As on Steam itself, as well.  Works well for something like Dota, too.  Dont wanna be Misery23096721075 on there, really...



As for the bit with the lightning.... uhhhh.... derpy answer, but have you tried just dropping all of the graphics options to their lowest points?

I should think that if doing that doesnt stop it, there probably isnt a way to do it.   Of course a direct option to stop that sort of thing would be nice, but that'd make too much sense, yes?   I dont recall seeing anything like that in there.  Though I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 05, 2014, 11:36:48 PM
Yeah, names issue is my biggest grip actually about POE.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 06, 2014, 07:04:31 AM
Yeah, names issue is my biggest grip actually about POE.

It wouldn't be so bad if the game didn't disallow using spaces. I refuse to call my char Pepi_81_ploxnoripperino or some other mess. At least it makes me think harder and come up with more original names for my chars... I guess.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 06, 2014, 08:59:59 AM
I've taken to using a prefix for all my characters. A lot of streamers do this too. It leads to long annoying names, but you basically never see the name after creation. So if my prefix is "Heart" I'll just think up a character name and add that in front. It works fairly often.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 09:19:27 AM
Well, a quick google of "path of exile turn off the lightning flashes" turned up a bunch of threads with people pleading that the twilight strand flashes be optional, and one mentioned that the devs had explicitly stated they would not add such an option.  Torchlight 2 also has an opening zone with a lot of ambient lightning, and it has such an option (disable weather effects, or something like that) that worked great for me.

I guess I could just play Torchlight 2, but I'd really like to see POE's design in action.  I also don't want headaches, and had to turn off POE after less than 3 minutes of playing that zone (I figure past that zone it's not so bad).  Apparently there's some kind of POE "particle control app" out there to help in a 3rd party kind of way, so I'll look into that.  If that doesn't work the next step is probably "uninstall POE".
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Ok, turns out that there's apparently a policy of banning for any 3rd party program, including just cosmetics.  And I can understand the logic as removing fog or whatever could give advantages, etc.

So looks like it's not the game for me, regrettably.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 09:50:03 AM
Ok, going for epic triple-post.

Took one guy's suggestion and just made the window as small as I could and turned down all the effects (though I don't think that last did much) and just tried to push through the first zone to the town.  Thankfully I happened to pick a path which led directly to the boss and the gate into town, so I'm out of migraines-ville for now.

Fireball gem levelled up during the first zone, that was interesting.  Looking forward to seeing what else is going on :)  The "skill sea" is not news to me but actually playing it is.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 06, 2014, 10:06:08 AM
Most players after several characters just skip straight to the town. Run through ignoring mobs, kill Hillock, your in town. Sometimes you might need to get to level 2, but that's just a handful of mobs. That's pretty much how all my character's start now.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 10:15:20 AM
Yea, it seems workable.

It just was a very worrisome set of first impressions.


"Hi, I'd like to play a single-player ARPG, with this character."

"Sorry, that name is taken"


"Single player!"

We Don't Care


"How about this one?"

Taken


(repeat a few times)


"A ha, I'm in the gam- Aghhhh my eyes burn!  Can I turn off the lightning flashes?"

No


"But Torchlight 2 (a contemporary game in precisely the same genre) let me do exactly that, in exactly the same situation!"

We Don't Care


"Ah, there's this third party tool that I could use to crank it down..."

We would Ban you


"Single player!"

We Don't Care


"I can tell this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 06, 2014, 11:53:34 AM
Yeah, fortunately the first area with the lightning flashes is super short, so you shouldn't have to put up with it for long. I can't recall any other such headache inducing weather effects further on in the game (although I'm not particularly sensitive to this stuff). For me, POE started a little slow, but once I started getting used to the skill system and really began tweaking my char build, things started to get interesting. There are so many different combinations of skills gems with support gems with passives that make it the perfect game for theorycrafters.

For example, if you were to link a spell totem, incinerate, blind, and multiple projectiles gem you've now created a triple blinding flamethrower totem skill. There are many combinations that would just be terrible in practice, but nevertheless it's still fun experimenting. This depth to the character building process is probably the aspect of the game I like the most.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 04:45:38 PM
Yea, I'm only level 8 and I'm already seriously digging the skill sea.  Building up my minion army and incineration powers, step by step... where's the "Enclave Starship" keystone?  It's so much easier to lob fireballs with meatshields deployed.

What they did with flasks is also a stroke of genius.

And I really like the coinless economy.

The socketing of abilities into items is also an improvement, adding interdepencies that make decisions about both things more interesting.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 06, 2014, 04:48:04 PM
What they did with flasks is also a stroke of genius.
Yeah, Flasks are an amazing design. They only get deeper as magical flasks and other special flasks appear.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 06, 2014, 04:52:40 PM
Yea, I saw one of those for movement speed.  In general, the idea of potions:

1) That I actually use when I see a need.
2) That aren't fiddly (I don't have to keep rebuying them, etc)
3) That aren't overly spammable.
4) That motivate me to kill things rather than wait around.

... genius.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 06, 2014, 06:07:55 PM
I don't know if you've been messing with the shop recipes (http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Vendor_Recipes) at all, but basically the shop works like the herodric cube from Diablo. Two early-game valuable receipes are:

Portal Scrolls -> Identify Scrolls 1:1 (the reverse does NOT work)
3 Flasks of the same size and type -> 1 Flask of the next size up (if you use 3 magic (blue) flasks, the new flask will be a random magic (blue) as well)

Also note that selling identified vs unidentified stuff gets you different things. Identified stuff gets you Alteration Shards and sometimes other stuff depending on the properties of the item you sell. Unidentified stuff gets you Transmutation Shards. Both are good and used for different things. Technically selling identified is better because you sometimes get extra stuff too, but I don't sweat identifying every blue before selling. Yellows should generally always be identified before selling (at low level).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 06, 2014, 06:24:51 PM
Yeah, the flask system is great. Not only does it do the basic job beautifully, but as Hearteater says there is also a fair bit of depth to the system, too. For example, you could roll a healing flask with an additional armour bonus during flask effect. Or a movement flask with an anti-curse effect. Tweaking your flask setup to suit your char and playstyle adds that little extra bit of customizability.

Also, regarding shop recipes. A good one, although probably for a little later in the game, is a red/green/blue linked weapon or piece of armour, which trades for a chromatic orb.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on September 08, 2014, 11:50:52 AM
To mention migraine inducing flashes.. you ever played WD with 7+ minions and a spammy main attack in Diablo 3 hitting on a big target that's blocking half the screen (happens most seriously with the siege worms in act 3)?

I can't even look at the screen without going blind when that happens. I am not epileptic, but giant white flashing enemies (1 flash for each hit) right in my face is not my idea of a good time. I actually avoid those enemies entirely now.

The only reason I never got far in PoE is that combat feels so dry and soul less you might as well be hitting a sand castle with a paper towel.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Aklyon on September 08, 2014, 11:55:45 AM
Also, regarding shop recipes. A good one, although probably for a little later in the game, is a red/green/blue linked weapon or piece of armour, which trades for a chromatic orb.
I've had one of those drop in the first area before. Not particularly helpful (I'd prefer the wisdom scrolls from random other gear unless I'm in standard where I have too many scrolls), but nifty.

And alteration shards tend to be more useful later than transmutation shards for what they turn into (both for vendor traded currency, or trading with other people), but not hugely important like hearteater mentioned.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 08, 2014, 01:21:07 PM
Quote
The only reason I never got far in PoE is that combat feels so dry and soul less you might as well be hitting a sand castle with a paper towel.

Interesting. For me, the combat has been quite satisfying. Indeed, on my latest character I've just added Infernal Blow as an alternate weapon slot ability so that my enemies explode upon death, which seems like a very chunky and satisfying attack. My previous char also used a two handed axe with the Heavy Strike ability, which felt pretty nice and weighty to use. Maybe the combat felt poor because you picked a more "slappy" build. Barrage on a wand, perhaps... in any case, combat seems very solid to me.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: eRe4s3r on September 08, 2014, 01:43:20 PM
Quote
The only reason I never got far in PoE is that combat feels so dry and soul less you might as well be hitting a sand castle with a paper towel.

Interesting. For me, the combat has been quite satisfying. Indeed, on my latest character I've just added Infernal Blow as an alternate weapon slot ability so that my enemies explode upon death, which seems like a very chunky and satisfying attack. My previous char also used a two handed axe with the Heavy Strike ability, which felt pretty nice and weighty to use. Maybe the combat felt poor because you picked a more "slappy" build. Barrage on a wand, perhaps... in any case, combat seems very solid to me.

I played necromancer or whatever I thought would lead to it ;p Didn't feel very visceral or satisfying, the sounds aren't delivering oohmph, the visuals don't feed back into my brain properly, and tada, I think "what the hell am I doing with my life playing this?" that's the moment I uninstall games ;P Maybe it was just the lag... POE never ran very smooth for me for some reason.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 08, 2014, 02:12:00 PM
Quote
I played necromancer or whatever I thought would lead to it ;p Didn't feel very visceral or satisfying, the sounds aren't delivering oohmph, the visuals don't feed back into my brain properly, and tada, I think "what the hell am I doing with my life playing this?" that's the moment I uninstall games ;P Maybe it was just the lag... POE never ran very smooth for me for some reason.

POE is definitely not the most well optimized game. I don't have any problems with general lag, but occasional desync can pop up from time to time (pretty dangerous on hardcore). Sounds like it just didn't float your boat for whatever reason. Combat early in the game can feel a bit sluggish until you boost your attack and movement speeds and start getting your character in order, so it might be worth you playing on for a bit... although it seems like this game is just not your cup of tea.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 08, 2014, 02:20:31 PM
The biggest downside to me in POE is a lot of character builds just don't work until you get much higher level (with the talent points to hit everything you need). As a result, leveling as your "final" build is often very difficult, if not impossible. It is often at least extremely slow. I find that cheating really, to throw on a Bow and shotgun my way through content for 60 levels before switching to my Trap-based Dominater or whatever. But they've been doing a lot to increase build diversity and that appears to be more important to them than how "broken" a build can be which allows for some crazy builds (like abusing Dominate to take control of 90%+ of the mobs you encounter).
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 10, 2014, 04:01:50 PM
I'm in Act 2 on Cruel and it's been a lot of fun in general.  Just had the game d/c in the middle of a boss fight after about 2 minutes of most everyone standing still (I kept running around in hopes that it might somehow reduce the chance of my dying when it "caught up"), though, leading to yet another "singleplayer!!!" moment :)

I certainly won't play Hardcore with that kind of possibility on the table.  "Oh, by the way, for the last 20 seconds you weren't actually dodging monsters and stuff, you were instead just standing there like a moron because of a hiccup in the internet connection.  You'd probably be surprised how much damage that boss can crank out in 20 seconds.  I hope you didn't like that character!"  Though I guess in PoE you don't lose the character, it just gets "demoted" to a non-hardcore league?

Other than that my only notable concern is that the game doesn't seem very challenging.  The Act 1 boss on normal difficulty pushed me pretty hard, and there were a few random-rare monsters with nasty spells that almost got me, but other than that everything (including the Act 1 boss on cruel) has been pretty easy.  My only death was to some non-boss monsters in an Act 3 sewer because I got sloppy while running through monsters to get to the next map.  Possibly the witch+minion+fire approach is a bit OP?  Or is it not supposed to actually get hard until merciless?  Or the "maps" you can pick up?

Not that I mind a relatively-easy game, just wondering if I'm missing something.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Hearteater on September 10, 2014, 04:11:20 PM
The game does get harder. Cruel Act 3, especially the end can be rough. But Merciless is when it starts to get real. And once you've got that covered, you'll hit Maps. Those are when the crazy starts. See, they are dungeons that you access via Maps that drop. Each dungeon type is a different map. And they have levels, which indicates the level of monsters in the map, but also the level of items. Now you can enchant these maps just like items, but instead of getting normal properties, they get properties that make the map harder (http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Map). For example, a Map with "of Suffering" has all players taking constant Chaos damage while in the map. Further, you only get 6 tries at clearing the map (there are 6 portals into the map when you activate it, they disappear when entered so you can only enter a map once/portal).

So combine crazy map mods with crazy monster mods, and it can get very interesting.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Aklyon on September 10, 2014, 04:15:19 PM
The game does get harder. Cruel Act 3, especially the end can be rough. But Merciless is when it starts to get real. And once you've got that covered, you'll hit Maps. Those are when the crazy starts. See, they are dungeons that you access via Maps that drop. Each dungeon type is a different map. And they have levels, which indicates the level of monsters in the map, but also the level of items. Now you can enchant these maps just like items, but instead of getting normal properties, they get properties that make the map harder (http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Map). For example, a Map with "of Suffering" has all players taking constant Chaos damage while in the map. Further, you only get 6 tries at clearing the map (there are 6 portals into the map when you activate it, they disappear when entered so you can only enter a map once/portal).

So combine crazy map mods with crazy monster mods, and it can get very interesting.
Also, theres Master Cartographer Zana now. So you can get maps, inside maps. That can drop maps, which may or may not have her and her map-in-a-map as well.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 10, 2014, 04:16:41 PM
And then when you've beat the very last recursive monstrosity, while you're picking up the infinite number of drops, some dude rolls up the map ;)
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 11, 2014, 10:59:11 AM
Quote
Though I guess in PoE you don't lose the character, it just gets "demoted" to a non-hardcore league?

Yeah, you just get demoted to standard.

Regarding the difficulty, things are supposed to get harder near Act 3 Cruel (as Hearteater says), which is around about where my hardcore char is now. Generally things don't seem too difficult... but then you enter a corrupted zone with insane mods and come up against something you weren't expecting, and things start getting real scary. It's hard for me to gauge the level of challenge in standard as I only play hardcore which changes how the game plays a lot, but I think there will come a point where you may potentially hit a wall in terms of how well your char can handle the content, which is where you might need to focus and concentrate on your build and playstyle a lot more in order to progress.

Quote
My only death was to some non-boss monsters in an Act 3 sewer because I got sloppy while running through monsters to get to the next map.

You took out Dominus first try!? Props!
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 11, 2014, 11:08:06 AM
Dominus's normal-diff encounter doesn't seem built to challenge a minion build.  Was a bit hairy with the various uniques running around during the beginning, but after that, well, evidently my 7 Insurance Executives (Zombies) and 10 Philosophers (Skeletons) had a lot to discuss with the boss.  I'm really only there to replenish the army and firestorm anything whose death is behind schedule.

Merveil was much harder, the first time around.  Though knowing to stack cold resist by the time I faced her on Cruel helped a lot.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 11, 2014, 11:20:00 AM
Dominus's normal-diff encounter doesn't seem built to challenge a minion build.  Was a bit hairy with the various uniques running around during the beginning, but after that, well, evidently my 7 Insurance Executives (Zombies) and 10 Philosophers (Skeletons) had a lot to discuss with the boss.  I'm really only there to replenish the army and firestorm anything whose death is behind schedule.

Merveil was much harder, the first time around.  Though knowing to stack cold resist by the time I faced her on Cruel helped a lot.

Nice. I've actually got a level 30 summoner on the go which it sounds like I should really get back to. I'm presuming your coterie simply tore apart the second form of Dominus in double quick time?
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: keith.lamothe on September 11, 2014, 11:21:26 AM
Yea, the second form was something of a non-event.
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Pepisolo on September 11, 2014, 11:23:27 AM
Yea, the second form was something of a non-event.

And my first hardcore char ripped to the guy... minions OP!  :D
Title: Re: Do you like Diablo 3?
Post by: Aklyon on September 11, 2014, 01:36:15 PM
Ah, firestorm. Thats probably my favorite skill in general, followed by arc (more directed than firestorm but otherwise about as good a support with minions), glacial cascade (not good with minions since its an ice spell, but pretty fun with cold snap and/or herald of ice), and reduced duration lightning warp.