Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Diablo III, NOOOOOOOOO!!!

Aug 1, 2011#1

Dave

http://www.1up.com/news/diablo-3-requires-online-when-playing

It's shit like this that make me shake my head and sigh. Pirating games is rampant! What can we do about it? I know FUCK OVER EVERYONE! I'm sure that Comcast users will love having to be online all the time.

Must be online ALL the time to play. No internet? Tough shit. Guess you can play other games.
Added at: 07:57
From the lead dev:

While Pardo recognizes that people sometimes want or need to play offline (such as internet outages, or playing on a laptop during an airplane flight), he notes that the increased security, plus benefits like the above, outweigh those other concerns. "I want to play Diablo 3 on my laptop in a plane, but, well, there are other games to play for times like that."

Aug 1, 2011#2

Gusto

Media forum Dave? Really?

Aug 1, 2011#3

Dave

Oh, and put this in with the fact that the DIII auction house will allow you to sell items for real money, and you have a cash grab by Blizzard. Want to sell something? Blizzard takes a cut to post it and takes another cut if the item sells. Shit, even WoW doesn't have anything like that.

The more I hear the more I think I may have to take a pass on DIII, even though I've been waiting for years like everyone else.
Added at: 08:02
Damn! Wrong forum! MODS!!

:rofl:

Aug 1, 2011#4

Espy

Hey guys, I gotta go ban some guy real quick.

Added at: 08:06
Also, that sounds super stupid and I doubt that it's going to work. Someone's going to hack it to work without internet and BAM it's going to be all over the web.

Aug 1, 2011#5

Jay

Can't wait to read the massive rants from our raging anti-drm posters.

Aug 1, 2011#6

PatrThom

Jay said:
Can't wait to read the massive rants from our raging anti-drm posters.

I read that as "aging" anti-drm posters and thought, "Who does he think I am? Dave?"

This isn't so much about "the need for DRM" (for me). MMORPGs like WoW and others require a constant online connection by design. If you don't have one, the game won't work (it's all about the O with those games). And in that situation, it's totally acceptable and expected.

However, this isn't being billed as an MMO. It has some multiplayer elements, but it's not a full-fledged MMO. It doesn't need a full-time online connection to function, Blizzard (or Universal, more likely) just wants it to. If Blizzard wanted, they could just make it require a dongle, instead...except that would increase the per-unit cost, which would cut into their preciousss profitses. Honestly, I think that would probably be the better solution in this case (and this is probably the first time I've ever advocated a dongle). "Go ahead. Install the game on as many computers as you want, but you can only play it on the one with the dongle." If the game needs to "check in" with the Blizzard server whenever it generates some unique loot (e.g. to avoid item cloning/spoofing or to enforce limited quantities of unique loot), or require an always-on connection while doing multiplayer (via Battle.net) or during auctions, that's totally understandable. But the first time someone's flaky connection (or trolling rommate, or hitting some data cap) returns them to the login screen during a boss battle, Comcast won't get that blame, it'll be Blizzard.

Also, so much for trying to sneak some play in at work. There won't be any way to get in a quick 30min if my Internet connection reeks of Battle.net the whole time I'm playing instead of just checking in once when I launch.

--Patrick

Aug 1, 2011#7

Espy

Not knowing a ton about dongles, would it not be possible for a person to have 1 dongle that was update-able by a company like Blizzard, so that when they bought a new game it would put the needed licensure to run that game on the dongle? So Blizzard only has to sell you 1 dongle and you are set for life for blizzard games, etc.
It's not an elegant solution, but neither is always having to be online. I'm all for companies making it harder for the dickheads of the world who want to steal from them, but they have to be reasonable it seems or they risk driving away the non-dickheads who are actually willing to pay for their product.

Aug 1, 2011#8

@Li3n

Man, and me here thinking this was going to be about the skills no longer using skill points and being re-assignable on the fly.

http://diablo.incgamers.com/blog/comments/unicornda-day-dawns-new-info

The

Diablo 3 Beta test.
No start date yet. (Maybe during Wednesday’s conference call?) The beta goes right from the start of the game up to King Leoric. It’s demo-sized; less than half of Act One, but is nearly identical to the final game;

quests,

NPCs. The purpose of the beta is tech fixes, and to get feedback on early game content/features. The development team will continue to work on a number of game features (mainly

runestones) during the beta.

Skills changes.
The maximum number of skills is now 6, not 7. Yes, one less. Skill tiers have changed as well, and they now unlock at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24. (There are more skills per tier.)
A bigger change is the removal of skill points. Skills are now basically on/off, and you can switch between them freely. (The

respec system is always on.) Some skills scale up with your character’s level, others do not.

Attributes effect skill damage, as do items. Blizzard feels that the benefits of being able to switch skills regularly outweigh the loss of character customization that came from skill points.

Traits are gone.
Instead of Traits, characters now have access to passive skills at tiers, set to levels 10, 20, and 30. There are a lot fewer of these passives than there were of traits. I hope we get some better system info, and/or skill shots of the skills/non-traits, since I’m not entirely clear on them from the various descriptions I’ve read.

The

Auction House.
The big new feature reveal is an Auction House for trading. It’s similar to WoW’s auction house, and players can post trades for almost everything that drops in the game. Weapons, armor, runes, gems, gold, etc. Trading is realm-wide, with a very robust search/sorting option to find the mods you want on the item types you want. There are also systems to associate items of the appropriate level to your character.
The kicker, and what had our chat channel outraged, was the RMT aspect. There are essentially two parallel Auction Houses; one uses in-game currency (gold) and the other uses real world currency. Yes, dollars, euros, yen, coconut shells, or whatever your local currency is. Blizzard’s theory is that since there’s always been black market RMT, they might as well facilitate it themselves so players don’t get ripped off by third party hack sites.
Blizzard will not create items to sell; they’re purely facilitating player trading, while charging a small price for each listing. (To prevent spamming of junk items — each account gets a few free trades to start off.)

Battle.net account

Banners. AKA

E-Peen.
This new system shows off a banner/flag/pennant sort of thing for your account. It can be customized in color and design/logo, and the banner gains bells and whistles as your characters earn various achievements. The labeled screenshot demonstrates the options nicely. There are very many possible options, and the team means these to be quite distinctive; you’ll eventually recognize your friends at a glance just from their account banner.

The Battle

Arena.
The Arena will not be accessible to Beta testers. Yes, I agree. That sucks. They’ve changed the Arena from the round-based form we saw at Blizzcon 2010 to a death match style. For ten minutes the teams fight, dead characters respawn after a few seconds, and the team with the more total kills, wins.

Hardcore Arena character may yet get the sparring mode many HC enthusiasts have been pushing for all along, since the D3 strike team agrees with our estimates; that there simply won’t be a HC dueling community if the only option is permanent death.
The shared

Stash.

The stash is large. The shared stash is just as large, and players can spend gold to make it larger. Up to five pages/tabs in size, eventually. This is the shared stash, that all characters on an account can access. There is no option (yet) to increase individual character inventory or stash size.

Diablo III introductory cinematic.
Attendees were shown a portion of the game’s introduction cinematic. It detailed some of the plot developments leading up to Diablo III, and teased images from the later game plot developments. A giant-sized Diablo was shown erupting from the earth, and battalions of armored Angels were seen flying down to Sanctuary. There will also be individual cinematics for each character; attendees were shown an excerpt from the Demon Hunter’s.
The big surprise is that these cinematics are not the usual 3D, almost-real life looking cinematics we’ve grown used to. They were stylized and artistic; a sort of moving 2D mural, or a painting come to life. Most attendees are quite enthusiastic about how they looked, though it’s hard for people who didn’t see it to visualize. It’s not known if these are all the cinematics we’ll see, or if there will be the usual 3D style cinematics shown between acts, or at the conclusion of the game.

The

Dark Wanderer
The only interesting new bit of plot info given out at the event came courtesy of Chris Metzen. He revealed that they’ve done some (more) retconing, and that the Dark Wanderer’s identity has changed. He’s now been retroactively changed from the Diablo I Warrior to Prince Albrecht. Just how this works in the plot is unknown. In Diablo I, your hero killed Diablo, who was in Prince Albrecht’s body, then took the soulstone and jammed it into their own forehead. And thus became the Dark Wanderer. (We discussed this retcon on the new podcast, and were all baffled by it.)

Permanent

Inventory Items.
Joining the

Nephalem Cube as a permanent, reusable item in your inventory is the Cauldron of Jordan (used to sell items instantly, while not in town) and the Stone of Recall, which functions as an inexhaustible supply of Town Portals.

And what's with the pointless retconing?

Aug 1, 2011#9

PatrThom

Espy said:
would it not be possible for a person to have 1 dongle that was update-able

Yes, everything you mention is possible, and is being done right now by companies like Yamaha to protect their software (Cubase and others) with a USB key that can, in fact, store licenses for software. The music industry has been doing this for a really long time. It's still an imperfect solution, but better than requiring the always online connection.

--Patrick

Aug 1, 2011#10

Krisken

The more I hear, the more I am disappoint.

Aug 1, 2011#11

Chibibar

dongle is "hackable" (tough but doable. We use dongle system as security certificate for VPN to our network)

I can see the plus side on this.

Characters are save online. No more character hacks. Items are save online, no more item dupe. Selling items in auction for real money? hmm. That is questionable, but Blizz is cashing in on that. I hope there is none real money auction house that can buy/sell for gold also (with minimal listing fee and sale percentage as gold sink)

Do I like it? only for the stuff above because this is not MMO. unlike previous version, we CAN play offline.

I will have to see what they will do next.

Aug 1, 2011#12

Espy

Whoa Krisken. Slow down there with that massive rant. Yeesh. Like I have all day to read your ranting wall of text?

Aug 1, 2011#13

Krisken

Espy said:
Whoa Krisken. Slow down there with that massive rant. Yeesh. Like I have all day to read your ranting wall of text?

I know, I'm too wordy.

Aug 1, 2011#14

Dave

There will be a non-real currency Auction House, but will that one have good items or will people always try and post on the "real money" one? People with loads of cash will obviously have much better gear in game, which is great for Blizz but bad for everyone else.

Data capping and internet stability (I'm looking at you, Comcast!) are two of the biggest hurdles. I want to play my damned game!

Aug 1, 2011#15

Krisken

Dave said:
There will be a non-real currency Auction House, but will that one have good items or will people always try and post on the "real money" one? People with loads of cash will obviously have much better gear in game, which is great for Blizz but bad for everyone else.

Data capping and internet stability (I'm looking at you, Comcast!) are two of the biggest hurdles. I want to play my damned game!

The auction house will be obvious. Anything which is super hard to get will get shoved into the money one, especially if they have ladder challenges and reset it periodically. The first guy to throw up a major item on ladder will make a killing.

Yeah, not looking forward to being a wireless lappy trying to play Diablo 3, especially with constant drops. Imagine getting that one item you've been trying to get for ages and suddenly losing internet access, or beating that boss that took 4 tries only to have to do it again. Yuck.

On another note, the retconning is entirely unnecessary and probably disappoints me the most. Honestly, it's a big 'fuck you' to the older games and makes absolutely no sense.

Aug 1, 2011#16

phil

Jay said:
Can't wait to read the massive rants from our raging anti-drm posters.

I can't wait for the countless people saying they're going to pass on it because of stuff like this....followed by record sales of the game at launch.

Aug 1, 2011#17

Jay

What is the deal with the retcon?

Aug 1, 2011#18

@Li3n

Chibibar said:
I can see the plus side on this.

Characters are save online. No more character hacks. Items are save online, no more item dupe.

And for MP play i'd have no problem... but it would bee nice if one could have SP-only characters you can play offline too...

Aug 1, 2011#19

Dave

Jay said:
What is the deal with the retcon?

The original Diablo had you killing the big bad guy and then putting the horn on your own head, thus basically becoming Diablo in II. In III Diablo is the Prince again. You know - the guy you killed in #1.

Aug 1, 2011#20

Jay

Who was the Prince originally? When did I kill him?

Aug 1, 2011#21

phil

Jay said:
Who was the Prince originally? When did I kill him?

The prince was kidnapped by the Archbishop to be a host for Diablo in Diablo 1. You killed him at the end of the first game after he had taken Diablo's form.

This guy:

Aug 1, 2011#22

Jay

Oh, weird decision.

Aug 1, 2011#23

@Li3n

Dave said:
The original Diablo had you killing the big bad guy and then putting the horn on your own head, thus basically becoming Diablo in II. In III Diablo is the Prince again. You know - the guy you killed in #1.

No, not in Diablo 3, but in Diablo 2...the guy Marius follows is no longer the Warrior from D1, but the prince you killed (while being possed by Diablo) in the first game, which makes no sense (because as you can clearly see in the D1 cinematic whoever kills Diablo there put the soulstone in their forehead):

Aug 1, 2011#24

ScytheRexx

The biggest dissapointment is the fact you have to be online just to play. I really wish companies would move away from that, but from the looks of it that is just a dream. Everyone is making online required.

I don't really give a crap about the "RMT" Auction House, mostly because I don't care what others do with their money. Diablo 2 always had a horrible black market that gouged a few friends of mine, so this new auction system at least gives Blizzard some better control over that aspect. As long as they stick to the promise of not putting unique items that can't be found in the game for sale on the auction house, I really see no problem with it. I just know I won't be using it.

Aug 1, 2011#25

@Li3n

Well dude, you can always have the version you're using work offline... :whistling:

Aug 1, 2011#26

Shegokigo

I'm 100% fine with required online and RMT services.

Why? Because I'm a selfish bitch who is online 24/7 (I can count on 1 hand how many times I've been without internet in the past 2 years) and use RMT services from time to time (TF2 Crate Keys, Pets on WoW etc).

Besides, I've always seen Diablo as an MMO, not a single player game. Again though, I play all my single player games while I'm connected to the net anyway so *shrug*

Aug 1, 2011#27

Dave

Shegokigo said:
Again though, I play all my single player games while I'm connected to the net anyway so *shrug*

Most of us do. In fact, my PC is online almost all the time. But the major ISPs are attempting to place data caps and some just have shitty service. So the single player game which you paid for could be unplayable even though your system is up and functioning stable. And that's just wrong.

Aug 1, 2011#28

Shegokigo

Except you're buying it, knowing you need to be online and knowing you have shitty service. That's on "you" for buying it anyway.

Blizzard will react based on sales and I'm very sure the "affected" will not be the majority.

Aug 1, 2011#29

Dave

I'm probably going to treat DIII like hard drugs. I'm more than likely going to buy it but I'll be bitching and feeling like shit while I do it.

Aug 1, 2011#30

SpecialKO

Meh, I get the worries about data caps, but how intensive are the bandwidth requirements really? If they're high, then the always online thing is bad, but if they're low (comparable, say, to WoW), then the only folks who are out of luck are the ones who didn't like Diablo/D2 MP. And I truly wonder how large that player base actually is (Blizz probably has pretty good numbers on that one).

As to the RMT thing, this is just Blizz trying to get a piece of the pie that others have always baked in their oven. As long as Blizz themselves doesn't put items/gold/doohickies on the market, it's probably not going to be much different than the black market D2 days, except that you won't be sending money through a badly-translated-from-Chinese knock-off of Paypal to a guy on some random website who swears that you'll receive the item in a couple days.

Aug 1, 2011#31

PatrThom

I would probably complain about this a lot more if I were still schlepping my computer over to friends' houses to play co-op (still probably have that null-modem cable around somewhere), but that sort of thing gets done more over broadband now anyway. I will miss offline play during my ISP's annual days-long outages, but I won't miss packing up all my gear into the car (20" CRTs are somewhat of a pain to transport). Also, I probably won't be able to pick up the game until the first or second expansion comes out anyway, so by then maybe they'll have their act together.

--Patrick

Aug 1, 2011#32

Jay

ScytheRexx said:
The biggest dissapointment is the fact you have to be online just to play. I really wish companies would move away from that, but from the looks of it that is just a dream. Everyone is making online required.

I don't really give a crap about the "RMT" Auction House, mostly because I don't care what others do with their money. Diablo 2 always had a horrible black market that gouged a few friends of mine, so this new auction system at least gives Blizzard some better control over that aspect. As long as they stick to the promise of not putting unique items that can't be found in the game for sale on the auction house, I really see no problem with it. I just know I won't be using it.

Holy shit, Joaquin Pheonix posts on our forums. I loved you in Gladiator.

Aug 1, 2011#33

figmentPez

Yeah, I've had this argument before. I remember being told to get better internet. I don't have any better options. I can get dial-up, satellite or one single cable company. I can't even get 3G wireless at my house. My cable works fine, most of the time... but for the past couple weeks it's gone flaky on me at least once a day while I've been using it.

So, I won't be buying Diablo 3, or any upcoming Ubisoft titles.

Aug 1, 2011#34

Chibibar

it will be awful tempting on Blizz part not to put "special items" on the auction house (or might do it DLC style)

Aug 1, 2011#35

ScytheRexx

Chibibar said:
it will be awful tempting on Blizz part not to put "special items" on the auction house (or might do it DLC style)

Blizzard has been pretty good about keeping a "line" that they have yet to fully cross when it comes to pay services, though they have been getting to the edge over the years. It is my hope that they continue posting the games from free and having all extra money transactions are filler items or vanity items, because those things I can ignore. It is when they start selling gear themselves, by just spoofing their own items, that I will never buy another Blizzard game again.

Aug 1, 2011#36

@Li3n

figmentPez said:
So, I won't be buying Diablo 3, or any upcoming Ubisoft titles.

Well Heroes 6 is supposed to work offline in SP... if it's true buying it while ignoring the other games might send a message...

Oh, and did you hear, if you also don't pirate it it just means that the system works: http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/07/28/ubisoft-our-drm-is-a-success

Aug 1, 2011#37

Frankie Williamson

That's hilarious, considering those games also didn't sell as well. Ubisoft, could it be that no one wants to play your shitty games, paid for or not?

Aug 1, 2011#38

Hailey Knight

While Pardo recognizes that people sometimes want or need to play offline (such as internet outages, or playing on a laptop during an airplane flight), he notes that the increased security, plus benefits like the above, outweigh those other concerns. "I want to play Diablo 3 on my laptop in a plane, but, well, there are other games to play for times like that."

You heard it first from the devs: just play other games.

As for paying for shitty internet service, where I live, it's Comcast or dial-up.

But for all we know, this isn't the horror of Assassin's Creed 2 DRM where you lose your progress if the internet goes out.

And if it's single-player, I'm sure it can still be pirated. For me, I have zero interest in Diablo, so I don't give a shit. Blizzard's kind of lost me at this point; not for doing anything wrong, but just not producing anything that interests me anymore.

Aug 1, 2011#39

Dei

If the being online to play thing bothered me I would have never bought SC2. The Auction House thing pisses me off though, and I hope to God it never makes it to WoW. As it stands, I'm going to be playing Torchlight 2 and probably holding off on Diablo III until I see how many of my friends will still buy it..

Aug 1, 2011#40

Allen who is Quiet

Dei said:
If the being online to play thing bothered me I would have never bought SC2. The Auction House thing pisses me off though, and I hope to God it never makes it to WoW. As it stands, I'm going to be playing Torchlight 2 and probably holding off on Diablo III until I see how many of my friends will still buy it..

I think the logic there is people are going to spend real money on in-game assets anyway, so Blizzard might as well be the shady corporation that profits off that.

Aug 1, 2011#41

Mathias

ScytheRexx said:
Blizzard has been pretty good about keeping a "line" that they have yet to fully cross when it comes to pay services, though they have been getting to the edge over the years. It is my hope that they continue posting the games from free and having all extra money transactions are filler items or vanity items, because those things I can ignore. It is when they start selling gear themselves, by just spoofing their own items, that I will never buy another Blizzard game again.

Is this line somewhere around the area where they decided to whore out to purchasable mounts, name changes, or pve to pvp realm changes? You know stuff they said they'd never do in a million years before they found out they could make an easy buck doing it. I surprised that they haven't just flat out came out and started selling gold for real money.

I can't really blame Blizzard too much though. If I had as stupid a fanbase as they do (almost as rapid as Apple Fanbois and Star Wars freaks), I'd be raping them for cash too.

Diablo 3 still sounds good to me. I don't mind online 24/7 one bit.

Aug 1, 2011#42

Shegokigo

Purchaseable mounts, name changes and pve to pvp realm changes do not unbalance gameplay. Selling gold for real money unbalances gameplay by unbalancing the ingame economy.

That's the line.

Aug 1, 2011#43

Mathias

Shegokigo said:
Purchaseable mounts, name changes and pve to pvp realm changes do not unbalance gameplay. Selling gold for real money unbalances gameplay by unbalancing the ingame economy.

That's the line.

I'm guessing WoW is going to switch to free to play with micro-transactions within the next two years. If the DIII system works well (i.e Blizz getting more money in their pockets), don't be shocked to see it applied to the WoW AH.

It's working well for TF2. Hell I finally caved and bought my spy the damn Fez so I could silently declock my deadringer.

Aug 1, 2011#44

Shegokigo

Only thing I've bought on TF2 so far are keys. I just can't help it! I've limited myself on how much I spend per month but damn is it tempting. I can DEFINITELY see buying a set piece if you're not playing enough to amass the ridiculous amount of items needed to trade with the Trade Nazis though.

I wouldn't be shocked if WoW stays Subscription based but adds alot more micro transactions, they have the numbers needed to stay that way.

Aug 1, 2011#45

Tress

As always, vote with your wallet. If you find these changes to be unacceptable then just don't buy the game. Everything else is just a waste of time.

Aug 1, 2011#46

ScytheRexx

Mathias said:
Is this line somewhere around the area where they decided to whore out to purchasable mounts, name changes, or pve to pvp realm changes? You know stuff they said they'd never do in a million years before they found out they could make an easy buck doing it. I surprised that they haven't just flat out came out and started selling gold for real money.

As a person that has played Blizzard games since they came out with Rock and Roll Racing on the SNES, I can honestly question the validity of your claim, that they said they would"never in a million years" offer extra services at a cost.

What they have said, however, is they won't sell items that offer a game-breaking advantage at the high end. They have yet to do just that. Name changes, server transfers, and mounts, etc... are all fluff, you don't need them to play and they don't bestow a gameplay advantage. They are services that I am more then happy to pay for when I desire it. Free would be better for me, yes, but not better for Blizzard when Joe Ninja decides to change his name/server/look/race every week because "hey why not its free!".

Just to reiterate, Blizzard does not keep all its promises, and it would be silly to say they have. However, the one promise they have kept so far is that they have not sold the items or services they said they would not sell, those being ones that bestowed large in game advantages (buying end game gear directly from them, gold, etc...).

Hell, even this new AH in Diablo 2, the majority of the money goes to the person that SOLD it, meaning the player. Blizzard could have just walked in and said "screw you guys it's our store" and yet they are letting the players control it, the player gaining the MAJORITY of the points that they can (supposedly) cash in for money (or credits that can be used towards other, in-game items, it's still so up in the air.) That is pretty big lose of products when they could have just done something like the Champions Online C-Store or something.

I hate to be the guy always defending Blizzard, I get pissed at them too, and have been for most of Cataclysm. I just like when the complaints versus them are valid ones, and not imaginary ones.

Aug 2, 2011#47

@Li3n

Interesting piece: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/36292/Opinion_Diablo_3_And_Keeping_Players_At_Bay.php

And seriously, telling people to just play something else is like the worst sign ever...

Aug 2, 2011#48

Mathias

@Li3n said:
Interesting piece: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/36292/Opinion_Diablo_3_And_Keeping_Players_At_Bay.php

And seriously, telling people to just play something else is like the worst sign ever...

Holy shit. I can't for the life of me understand the "I can't play on a plane" argument. I think telling people to play something else is a valid option. You're all bitching about a very minor, niche example. For the majority of gamers, they play at home with an online connection. Cut off the mobility in a game, and people get their panties in a bunch. Need to play games on a plane (you ADD riddled addict, you)? Invest in a Gameboy. And in my humble opinion, if you're traveling with a laptop without underlying business purposes requiring said laptop to explicitly play games while going on vacation, then you need to re-evaluate your life.

If playing on the road really means that much to people: Smartphone + tether = internet on your laptop. Problem solved.
Added at: 07:22

ScytheRexx said:
As a person that has played Blizzard games since they came out with Rock and Roll Racing on the SNES, I can honestly question the validity of your claim, that they said they would"never in a million years" offer extra services at a cost.

What they have said, however, is they won't sell items that offer a game-breaking advantage at the high end. They have yet to do just that. Name changes, server transfers, and mounts, etc... are all fluff, you don't need them to play and they don't bestow a gameplay advantage. They are services that I am more then happy to pay for when I desire it. Free would be better for me, yes, but not better for Blizzard when Joe Ninja decides to change his name/server/look/race every week because "hey why not its free!".

Just to reiterate, Blizzard does not keep all its promises, and it would be silly to say they have. However, the one promise they have kept so far is that they have not sold the items or services they said they would not sell, those being ones that bestowed large in game advantages (buying end game gear directly from them, gold, etc...).

Hell, even this new AH in Diablo 2, the majority of the money goes to the person that SOLD it, meaning the player. Blizzard could have just walked in and said "screw you guys it's our store" and yet they are letting the players control it, the player gaining the MAJORITY of the points that they can (supposedly) cash in for money (or credits that can be used towards other, in-game items, it's still so up in the air.) That is pretty big lose of products when they could have just done something like the Champions Online C-Store or something.

I hate to be the guy always defending Blizzard, I get pissed at them too, and have been for most of Cataclysm. I just like when the complaints versus them are valid ones, and not imaginary ones.

Before server transfers were even available they explicitly stated they had no plans to ever allow such a thing. Then they stated that they would never do pve to pvp transfers and both faction pvp servers- then they did it. http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/07/05/breakfast-topic-paid-services/ That is game breaking to some extent, abide not as big a deal as in game cash transactions would be.

All I'm stating is that I would not be surprised if Blizzard whored out to micro-transactions in WoW.

Aug 2, 2011#49

Krisken

No. The plane thing is stupid. Worrying about bandwidth restrictions and being dropped isn't. Blizzard can eat a dick for taking such a callous attitude toward their fans.

Aug 2, 2011#50

Shegokigo

Jay would eat a dick before Blizzard would.....

Aug 2, 2011#51

Chibibar

The only thing I can see Blizz might be doing is doing something that "Spiral Knight" does (which isn't too bad)

For those who don't play
Spiral Knights has two currency
Crowns - earn via in-game and use to purchase stuff
Energy - This can be bought via real money.

You get 100 free energy that you can use to quest (takes 10 per level dungeon, when you go down another level, it takes 10 more) which is not too bad if you don't die.
You can spend your reserves (the purchase energy) to keep going
You can resurrect yourself via energy (cost 5 and then double each time you resurrect until you leave the dungeon)
You spend energy to CRAFT items (i.e. weapons, armor, helm, guns, swords, and shield)

Now what makes this system interesting.
The energy market (Puzzle pirate does this also) that players can set buying/selling price for 100 units of energy. So player control the market.
Energy is constantly being use since there is a sink for it and so does crown.

I can totally see WoW can go into this method via Crystals (cost real money) and gold. IF WoW go F2P.
Crystals - use in crafting and instance run or possible raid run (you can repeat if you have the crystals)
Crystal market to trade

so essentially Blizz can sell gold "indirectly" since the players will be the one offering gold for crystals, but players will be the one buying the crystals from the store. (a rough idea)
maybe eventually (or use it also) that Crystal can be use to change name, move characters and purchase special mounts (kinda like AP points in Global Agenda)

Aug 2, 2011#52

PatrThom

I don't know about y'all, but I still dive back into Daggerfall occasionally. I dusted off my copy of Darkstone when Kati was looking for something new to try after finishing the original Diablo. Kati regularly revisits HoMMII and HoMMIII, as well as her bi-annual fascinations with Betrayal in Antara and Lands of Lore 2. I still have a standing promise from Kati to do a joint run (her first) through Riven some day (It'll be like a romantic movie night of puzzle solving). I will still happily kill a few days with Age of Empires (I, II, or III) or MoOII*, or even the original StarCraft or Diablo/Diablo II.

My single biggest concern is the server sunset. By requiring always-online-authentication, Blizzard is saying that, at some point in the future, they are going to retroactively kill every copy of DiabloIII ever sold. When Blizzard (ie, Universal) decides the game has become unpopular OR they decide that it has gone on long enough and is siphoning players from their other, newer games, they will shut off the authentication server and every copy of D3 out there will die. D3 will get a big [CLOSED] sign across it. Then it won't just be people on planes who don't get to play, it'll be everyone, all at once.

I don't mind going into an MMO with the idea that I'm merely renting the experience. After all, I know it going in. That's the nature of MMOs (with some rare exceptions). But when I buy a "standalone" game, I expect it to run as long as I have the hardware for it**. I don't want someone out there telling me, "Ok, you've played that game long enough, you can't possibly still be having fun with it, so we're taking it away. There are plenty of our other new games out there if you want more fun."

--Patrick
*It might have come out in 1996, but it was still for sale on Atari's site until the end of 2010, fer cryin' out loud.
**And I have the hardware to run pretty much anything released before 2006.

Aug 2, 2011#53

Jay

Shegokigo said:
Jay would eat a dick before Blizzard would.....

Aug 2, 2011#54

Chibibar

PatrThom said:
I don't know about y'all, but I still dive back into Daggerfall occasionally. I dusted off my copy of Darkstone when Kati was looking for something new to try after finishing the original Diablo. Kati regularly revisits HoMMII and HoMMIII, as well as her bi-annual fascinations with Betrayal in Antara and Lands of Lore 2. I still have a standing promise from Kati to do a joint run (her first) through Riven some day (It'll be like a romantic movie night of puzzle solving). I will still happily kill a few days with Age of Empires (I, II, or III) or MoOII*, or even the original StarCraft or Diablo/Diablo II.

My single biggest concern is the server sunset. By requiring always-online-authentication, Blizzard is saying that, at some point in the future, they are going to retroactively kill every copy of DiabloIII ever sold. When Blizzard (ie, Universal) decides the game has become unpopular OR they decide that it has gone on long enough and is siphoning players from their other, newer games, they will shut off the authentication server and every copy of D3 out there will die. D3 will get a big [CLOSED] sign across it. Then it won't just be people on planes who don't get to play, it'll be everyone, all at once.

I don't mind going into an MMO with the idea that I'm merely renting the experience. After all, I know it going in. That's the nature of MMOs (with some rare exceptions). But when I buy a "standalone" game, I expect it to run as long as I have the hardware for it**. I don't want someone out there telling me, "Ok, you've played that game long enough, you can't possibly still be having fun with it, so we're taking it away. There are plenty of our other new games out there if you want more fun."

--Patrick
*It might have come out in 1996, but it was still for sale on Atari's site until the end of 2010, fer cryin' out loud.
**And I have the hardware to run pretty much anything released before 2006.

Yup. Essentially, it is like MMO. Once it is shutdown, it is down.
Knowing the community out there, I'm sure someone will figure out on HOW to make their own Diablo III server (they did everything from EQ to SWG)

Aug 2, 2011#55

SpecialKO

PatrThom said:
When Blizzard (ie, Universal)

Complete side-note, Vivendi hasn't been "Universal" since 2006

Aug 2, 2011#56

ScytheRexx

Mathias said:
Before server transfers were even available they explicitly stated they had no plans to ever allow such a thing. Then they stated that they would never do pve to pvp transfers and both faction pvp servers- then they did it. http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/07/05/breakfast-topic-paid-services/ That is game breaking to some extent, abide not as big a deal as in game cash transactions would be.

I understand what you are saying, although those are instances of them adding services they never planned to add. There is a difference between not planning such services in the first place, and assuming they implied they would never charge for those services if they ever did change opinion. I seemed to think you were implying they were charging for services they said they would never charge for, but now I see you are just mentioning that they added services they at once point said they wouldn't do. Seems in the end we were discussing different points.

PatrThom said:
I don't know about y'all, but I still dive back into Daggerfall occasionally. I dusted off my copy of Darkstone when Kati was looking for something new to try after finishing the original Diablo. Kati regularly revisits HoMMII and HoMMIII, as well as her bi-annual fascinations withBetrayal in Antara and Lands of Lore 2. I still have a standing promise from Kati to do a joint run (her first) through Riven some day (It'll be like a romantic movie night of puzzle solving). I will still happily kill a few days with Age of Empires (I, II, or III) or MoOII*, or even the original StarCraft or Diablo/Diablo II.

My single biggest concern is the server sunset. By requiring always-online-authentication, Blizzard is saying that, at some point in the future, they are going to retroactively kill every copy of DiabloIII ever sold. When Blizzard (ie, Universal) decides the game has become unpopular OR they decide that it has gone on long enough and is siphoning players from their other, newer games, they will shut off the authentication server and every copy of D3 out there will die. D3 will get a big [CLOSED] sign across it. Then it won't just be people on planes who don't get to play, it'll be everyone, all at once..

This is a valid concern, however, we have to wait and see how they handle it at that point, when the servers are actually shut down. Diablo 1 is still playable on Battle.net, even though the game is 15 years old. Same for StarCraft, or even the WarCraft 2 Battle.net Edition.

Even then, the authentication and locking off of the content is mostly client based. If, for whatever reason, Blizzard does decide to shut down Battle.net, they could patch in to remove the authentication and allow people to make "offline" characters. An example of them changing a game with the times was a various StarCraft and Diablo patchs that removed the need for cd-rom authentication when the games reached a point that authenticating them became obsolete.

As greedy as Blizzard have become these days, I don't think they would literally screw you out of a game down the line. Maybe WoW, just because it's so heavy on the Blizzard server side and would never work as a pure single player game, but Diablo 3 is a different beast, and I would be both stunned and appalled for them to just say "Sorry, games over, bye" on such a game should Battle.net get discontinued.

Aug 2, 2011#57

Jay

When can we pre-order this game? I'm bursting out of my pants in anticipation.

Aug 2, 2011#58

Adammon

I won't be buying D3, but I'll be playing it just fine offline. Making the pirated version of a game more enticing than the paid version is not good business sense.

Aug 2, 2011#59

Shegokigo

More enticing how exactly? Because of the online required?

Aug 2, 2011#60

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
I won't be buying D3, but I'll be playing it just fine offline. Making the pirated version of a game more enticing than the paid version is not good business sense.

You're assuming they want you as a customer, as opposed to the online multiplayer crowd that is willing to use RMT.

Aug 2, 2011#61

Adammon

Shegokigo said:
More enticing how exactly? Because of the online required?

Online Required means "Offline Disabled" and I travel enough to want to play my games when I want, wherever I want (As seen by the plethora of games on my laptop). The fact that I can pay $0 and get an "Offline Enabled" game doesn't really encourage me to pay $60 for "Offline Disabled". Typically you'd want people to pay for more features, not less. Even things like NWN2 I bought on Steam, I have to set to Offline so I can play on the road.
Added at: 20:50

SpecialKO said:
You're assuming they want you as a customer, as opposed to the online multiplayer crowd that is willing to use RMT.

Fair enough. I don't even mind the RMT stuff - pay for what you want. I don't even care if it gives another person an advantage because that will just kill the game for Blizzard over time anyways. All these changes suggest to me that WoW's crashing and Blizzard is looking for another online cash cow in D3.

Aug 2, 2011#62

Jay

Can't disagree with that logic.

Aug 2, 2011#63

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
All these changes suggest to me that WoW's crashing and Blizzard is looking for another online cash cow in D3.

I doubt WoW is crashing yet, but I completely agree that Blizz is looking for another cash cow.

The actual Blizz people (as in Ent, not Act-Blizz) are far from stupid, there's no way that they think they can keep realistically riding the WoW-cow for much longer than maybe one more expansion at most before audience starts leaving for something that is based on more than MMO-circa 2004.
Added at: 16:04
Which reminds me, has anyone heard more news about Titan? I'm assuming we'll hear more at Blizzcon, but anything new?

Aug 2, 2011#64

Chibibar

SpecialKO said:
I doubt WoW is crashing yet, but I completely agree that Blizz is looking for another cash cow.

The actual Blizz people (as in Ent, not Act-Blizz) are far from stupid, there's no way that they think they can keep realistically riding the WoW-cow for much longer than maybe one more expansion at most before audience starts leaving for something that is based on more than MMO-circa 2004.
Added at: 16:04
Which reminds me, has anyone heard more news about Titan? I'm assuming we'll hear more at Blizzcon, but anything new?

Blizz is planning ahead. Blizzard is a business. Business are created to make money (they just happen to make a games which lots of people like which is a bonus) More and More MMO are trying to be the next "WoW killer" so Blizz is looking ahead (my opinion)

There are two different group of "pirates" IMO.
One - they will never pay for anything. These are the people you will never get money from.
Two - people who are willing to pay if the price is right. We have people on this board that are willing to shell out 10-20 for a game, but maybe NOT 60$ for the SAME game (usually wait for a sale)

Aug 2, 2011#65

Hailey Knight

Chibibar said:
Two - people who are willing to pay if the price is right. We have people on this board that are willing to shell out 10-20 for a game, but maybe NOT 60$ for the SAME game (usually wait for a sale)

I don't see people as pirates for paying for something, and I'm guessing you meant people who are not willing to pay 60, so they torrent it, and not that the people who wait for sales are pirates.

Aug 2, 2011#66

Chibibar

Quotemander Prime said:
I don't see people as pirates for paying for something, and I'm guessing you meant people who are not willing to pay 60, so they torrent it, and not that the people who wait for sales are pirates.

that is correct. They will torrent it, play it and maybe buy it when it is on sale.

Aug 2, 2011#67

Zappit

This...is really, really disappointing. I hated the limits for single player on Starcraft 2 and the one account per disc thing for Battlenet - it's the reason I really don't bother with it much now - but this really seems to go even farther. Bleck. Sorry, Blizzard, Zap's done.

Aug 2, 2011#68

Tress

If you want to play Diablo III but don't like some of Blizzard's decisions, there are alternatives.

Aug 2, 2011#69

Shegokigo

Chibibar said:
that is correct. They will torrent it, play it and maybe buy it when it is on sale.

That is 100% the kind of person that I am. I will always hop on a game that I "got a hold of" and played the hell out of the moment the price is within my "range" ($5-30). Especially Collector's Editions.

Aug 2, 2011#70

Jay

Shegokigo said:
That is 100% the kind of person that I am. I will always hop on a game that I "got a hold of" and played the hell out of the moment the price is within my "range" ($5-30). Especially Collector's Editions.

Completely agree.

There's a thread that I created earlier this year where I agree heavily to this and have done so myself in the past. Many of you don't agree to this, doesn't bother me.I didn't pay a cent for Dragon Age 2, did any of you? Mmmmmm?

As long as game companies take portions of content out the game and then ask me to pay more money (not DLCs like Shadow Broker who are legitimately great additional content and worth the extra few bucks but things such as Dragon Age's Sebastian is not). Some games I'll pay full price for due to previous experience with the game company (Valve, Blizzard) or their type of content (Bioshock, Elder Scrolls, heck Dead Island can suck a dick but I'm pre-ordering it because I WANT GAMES LIKE THAT) but I get I'm VERY apprehensive about everything else, trying not to get screwed by over-hyped, incomplete games with greedy uncaring publishers dump literal shit on us and try to take us for saps.

What do I do? I create my own demo and eventually buy their games if they deserve it.

For example $10 for Oblivion, Mass Effect 2 or Fallout 3 with all the DLCs is a heck of a deal and worthy of a purchase. Paying 50$ for New Vegas with a game engine less stable than Courtney Love is another matter altogether.

Will I buy Diablo 3? Even with all the hoopla? Of course.

Blizzard hasn't disappointed me yet.

Let me know the day where they remove a default playable character from the game and ask for $10 to unlock it and I'll start talking with my serious face.

Aug 2, 2011#71

Hailey Knight

Pretty much the only company I make sure to buy from brand new and pre-order from is Atlus. I'm pre-ordering Skyrim not because I care about supporting Bethesda, but because I want to play it day one. I adore the Assassin's Creed series, but Ubisoft has so many followers, I just don't feel the need to get AC: Revelations until there's a little bit of a price drop. I can say that for most games.

I'm not pre-ordering Diablo III because I don't get any enjoyment from its kind of game. I only bought Magicka because I heard it was funny, and then found out my computer can't even run the damn thing, so I still don't know if it was worth the few dollars.

Aug 2, 2011#72

Shegokigo

How could you be excited about Skyrim day one? Their track record is NOT good for launches..... If you're buying it on console though? Yeah, go right ahead.

PC? I'll wait till the Goty edition is out, the mod community has made the amazing game a legendary one, and the bugs are finally ironed out after the 10th patch.

Aug 2, 2011#73

Jay

I'd suck a di-

Wait, you're actually right..

Aug 2, 2011#74

Hailey Knight

Shegokigo said:
How could you be excited about Skyrim day one? Their track record is NOT good for launches..... If you're buying it on console though? Yeah, go right ahead.

PC? I'll wait till the Goty edition is out, the mod community has made the amazing game a legendary one, and the bugs are finally ironed out after the 10th patch.

Yeah, I know about the PC situation, but I'll be playing Skyrim on my PS3 and HDTV. I already have enough PC games I can't even play on my piece of crap video card.

Aug 2, 2011#75

PatrThom

I know that Blizzard could release a patch to remove the online requirement. And I'm also saying that I will be much more likely to buy the game if/when that happens.

--Patrick

Aug 3, 2011#76

Chibibar

Jay. I didn't buy dragon age 2 cause I didn't finish dragon age 1

I'm waiting for the GOTY edition.

But I am one of the few who don't download game that I didn't buy

Aug 3, 2011#77

Shegokigo

You also have the kind of money to buy hundreds of dvds and lifetime Mmo membership so I'm willing to guess we might not be in the same income bracket

Aug 3, 2011#78

Chibibar

Shegokigo said:
You also have the kind of money to buy hundreds of dvds and lifetime Mmo membership so I'm willing to guess we might not be in the same income bracket

We sacrifice going out

we hole up in our home.

Aug 4, 2011#79

Dave

Tress said:
If you want to play Diablo III but don't like some of Blizzard's decisions, there are alternatives.

Also Grim Dawn.
Added at: 12:48
Blizzard devs are surprised at the reaction! Shocked, I say!

Aug 4, 2011#80

Adammon

So the argument basically boils down to "WoW does it so why can't Diablo do it?"

Analogous to you can play chess while sitting, why can't you do that in football?

Aug 4, 2011#81

PatrThom

Adammon said:
you can play chess while sitting, why can't you do that in football?

...Or boxing. Amright?

--Patrick
(http://wcbo.org/content/index_en.html for the curious. Can't embed links here at work)

Aug 4, 2011#82

SpecialKO

As a completely unscientific Halforums survey, how many folks regularly played D2 offline?

I certainly did not, whether I was playing solo or grouping.

Aug 4, 2011#83

Adammon

I almost always did (and still do on occasion).

Aug 4, 2011#84

Mathias

If DRM isn't the issue behind the online only motivation, then I'm not really sure why they care so much if someone creates offline characters etc...

As much as I don't care about online only games that "phone home", I can't really see the point they're trying to make with not offering an offline mode of play. The dev's should just come out and say, "we want online only because it just sounds more "high tech".

Aug 4, 2011#85

Krisken

I always played off line.

Aug 4, 2011#86

Chibibar

Mathias said:
If DRM isn't the issue behind the online only motivation, then I'm not really sure why they care so much if someone creates offline characters etc...

As much as I don't care about online only games that "phone home", I can't really see the point they're trying to make with not offering an offline mode of play. The dev's should just come out and say, "we want online only because it just sounds more "high tech".

I have no issue for "check in/check out" system of character or phone home on initial launch, but constant online play (forcing) for a game that is NOT MMO is silly IMO.
If Diablo 3 is going to be MMO, then yay go online like WoW.

Aug 4, 2011#87

PatrThom

I believe I logged into Battle.net with Diablo II one time, hated the spam, and never went back.

--Patrick

Aug 4, 2011#88

Hailey Knight

It's starting to sound like Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles with "bring your friends into your world."

Their surprise is hilarious to me.

Aug 4, 2011#89

Dave

I only played offline.

Aug 4, 2011#90

Krisken

I was talking to a group of friends about this last night. They were all pretty disgusted by the whole thing and almost to a man said that if this didn't change they were more than happy to spend their time playing Torchlight 2 instead.

Aug 4, 2011#91

Rovewin

I always played offline except for when a friend wanted to do a ladder run when it was resetting. I hated how trying to play online it always first took a long time to update usually cutting my set aside play time in half. I hate that in starcraft 2 also. Thats why it took eight months or so for me to finish the campaign because I usually just wanted to play for 30 minutes or so before I had to leave somewhere and having to wait for it to update every time even though I only did single player was infuriating and frankly kept me from playing it most of the time.

Aug 4, 2011#92

SpecialKO

Wow! Unexpected, but interesting.

Aug 5, 2011#93

ScytheRexx

SpecialKO said:
Wow! Unexpected, but interesting.

Same here, I never played offline, it is interesting to see so many others actually play offline as the basis for their game play.

Then again, Torchlight was a very well done and popular spiritual successor to Diablo, and it was entirely offline, so I should have realized the market was there. Hopefully Blizzard will realize that, but probably not. I think they are to set in turning the new Battle.net 2.0 into a entirely online social experience, and are going to dig themselves a hole if they are not careful.

Aug 5, 2011#94

Dave

I just loaded D2 on my PC again last night. I'm a level 16 Barbarian named ARGH.

Man I love that game.

Aug 5, 2011#95

PatrThom

Heh. My favorite barbarian is named Thag. He Leap-s very unsoftly and carries a 2H Axe.
When I want to dual-wield, I usually break out my assassin.

Soon as I find my 4th code*, Kati and I will probably dive back in.

--Patrick
*I've finally assembled all 4 CDs, but I'm missing one of the sleeves. I've never been able to find all 4 of them at one time.

Aug 5, 2011#96

ScytheRexx

I find it rather odd that out of all the classes, the Barbarian was the only one to return. Weirder still is Blizzard confirmed last year the Barbarian we play is technically the SAME ONE from Diablo 2, just much older. (Well... unless you decide to make a female version)

I hope much like The Wanderer (screw your silly retcons), The Summoner, and Bloodraven, we get cameos of the D2 "characters". I will be giddy like a school girl if I get to see the old Necromancer.

Aug 5, 2011#97

Jay

We should do a HF-Only 8? player D2 run. We create LVL 1 newbies, all join the same game and play all night YEAAAH!

Aug 5, 2011#98

Dave

Don't know about all night but I'd be up for a game. I love D2.

Aug 5, 2011#99

Overflight

Shegokigo said:
How could you be excited about Skyrim day one? Their track record is NOT good for launches..... If you're buying it on console though? Yeah, go right ahead.

PC? I'll wait till the Goty edition is out, the mod community has made the amazing game a legendary one, and the bugs are finally ironed out after the 10th patch.

...but...but...CLOTH MAP!

http://kotaku.com/5815032/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-has-a-cloth-map-naturally

Aug 5, 2011#100

Shegokigo

Pre-Order items do kill me though, very hard to get those later on.

Aug 5, 2011#101

Adammon

Jay said:
We should do a HF-Only 8? player D2 run. We create LVL 1 newbies, all join the same game and play all night YEAAAH!

I'm in for that (Not all night).

Aug 5, 2011#102

Azurephoenix

Chalk up another one who only played/still plays Diablo 2 in offline mode.

Aug 5, 2011#103

Dei

I dunno, I get so annoyed at game graphics. I have Diablo II installed on my PC, when I found out I could link my CD-Key to B.Net and download it since I lost the discs, but when I loaded it I couldn't stand it.

Aug 5, 2011#104

Shannow

I honestly have absolutely no problem with Blizzard doing this. I know I will be getting it day one.

For now, I think I will bust out Titan's Quest again and play some to get me back into the Diablo mood.

Aug 5, 2011#105

Jay

What about weekly D2 sessions? Such as a Friday Night 8 to 11 PM?

Aug 5, 2011#106

figmentPez

Dave said:
Also Grim Dawn.

And now Bastion is coming to the PC as well.

Aug 6, 2011#107

Ravenpoe

This thread made me buy torchlight. I'm in love with it.

Aug 6, 2011#108

ScytheRexx

Ravenpoe said:
This thread made me buy torchlight. I'm in love with it.

It's probably the best spiritual Diablo around, taking a lot of the things I loved about the second one, and putting it into a nice, dungeon crawling package of the first one. I just wish it had more class selection, but going with the Diablo vibe the three classes they did have felt pretty much on par with the first game.

Aug 6, 2011#109

PatrThom

Yep. I haven't played any of the Torchlights yet, but I know that:
Like Diablo? Get Darkstone.
Like Diablo II? Get Torchlight. Or Dungeon Siege.
We'll see what happens come E3/D3 2012.

--Patrick

Aug 7, 2011#110

Ravenpoe

PatrThom said:
Yep. I haven't played any of the Torchlights yet, but I know that:
Like Diablo? Get Darkstone.
Like Diablo II? Get Torchlight. Or Dungeon Siege.
We'll see what happens come E3/D3 2012.

--Patrick

I'd actually say Torchlight is a nice combination of the best parts of diablo 1 and 2. Especially if you play on hard or above (for that diablo feel)

Aug 7, 2011#111

Jay

Torchlight is a heck of a game. Looking forward to their next one. Heard they may be working on a MMO too.

Aug 7, 2011#112

Math242

i played the shit out of Torchlight but only on hard hardcore. I lost my high lvl Barbarian to the end boss. haven't played sinc

Aug 7, 2011#113

Hailey Knight

Math242 said:
i played the shit out of Torchlight but only on hard hardcore. I lost my high lvl Barbarian to the end boss. haven't played sinc

You lost him to it? If you die, you lose your character?

Aug 7, 2011#114

Tress

Quotemander Prime said:
You lost him to it? If you die, you lose your character?

Only if you turn on the "hardcore" option. Which he apparently did.

Aug 7, 2011#115

Adammon

After all the discussion on Torchlight in this thread, I went and downloaded. Great game, very impressed. And a lot of stuff D3 is borrowing...

Aug 7, 2011#116

Krisken

Yeah, I have to find the download key so I can put it on my lappy.

Aug 7, 2011#117

Ravenpoe

Adammon said:
After all the discussion on Torchlight in this thread, I went and downloaded. Great game, very impressed. And a lot of stuff D3 is borrowing...

Torchlight comes by it naturally. Runic, the developer, was founded by some of the same founding members of Blizzard North, developers of Diablo. The music composer is also the same.

Aug 7, 2011#118

ScytheRexx

Ravenpoe said:
Torchlight comes by it naturally. Runic, the developer, was founded by some of the same founding members of Blizzard North, developers of Diablo. The music composer is also the same.

Some of the best developers come out of Blizzard if you ask me, Arena.net, the guys behind Guild Wars and the hugely hyped Guild Wars 2, were also guys who moved away from Blizzard to start a new studio, even taking one of the guys who helped created the original Battle.net.

They have come into their own very well since then, and can't wait to see how well Guild Wars 2 does. I hope it is a huge success.

P.S. This is not really counting the game from hell that shall not be named.

Aug 7, 2011#119

Adammon

Ravenpoe said:
Torchlight comes by it naturally. Runic, the developer, was founded by some of the same founding members of Blizzard North, developers of Diablo. The music composer is also the same.

Hah, that's neat. No wonder the music in Torchlight sounds so much like the music in the main city from Diablo; even similar themes. Torchlight is definitely more 'fun' focused than story focused, so I have to give them props on getting the balance right.

Aug 8, 2011#120

SpecialKO

ScytheRexx said:
P.S. This is not really counting the game from hell that shall not be named.

I think we can reliably close the gate on that one.

Aug 8, 2011#121

Espy

Heh.

Aug 8, 2011#122

Math242

Tress said:
Only if you turn on the "hardcore" option. Which he apparently did.

yes, i love playing these games on hardcore mode.

I've lost 5-6 heroes but the barb on the last boss broke my gamer's heart.

Aug 8, 2011#123

Gryfter

Espy said:
Heh.
View attachment 2444

It's so funny because it's true :rofl:

Aug 8, 2011#124

Tress

Math242 said:
yes, i love playing these games on hardcore mode.

I've lost 5-6 heroes but the barb on the last boss broke my gamer's heart.

I can't remember... is there an extra benefit aside from bragging rights?

Aug 8, 2011#125

ScytheRexx

Tress said:
I can't remember... is there an extra benefit aside from bragging rights?

Nope, it's all bragging. Some people get a thrill knowing they can be killed forever at some point, as it makes reaching the end and capping the character all the more satisfying. On the flip side though, losing said character is all the more crushing.

Aug 8, 2011#126

Hailey Knight

There's no saved game?

Aug 8, 2011#127

Ravenpoe

Quotemander Prime said:
There's no saved game?

Saving in torchlight is done automatically. The game is saved when you switch levels, as well as when you exit the game.

Aug 8, 2011#128

ScytheRexx

Quotemander Prime said:
There's no saved game?

Yes, it will save the game automatically.

If you play Hardcore though, it will delete the save when you die. There is no way to go back.

Aug 9, 2011#129

Math242

It has nothing to do with bragging rights. The game is 100x more intense and you just can't rush everything and not give a shit about what you do.

Aug 9, 2011#130

ScytheRexx

Math242 said:
It has nothing to do with bragging rights. The game is 100x more intense and you just can't rush everything and not give a shit about what you do.

I can see that in Torchlight, but Diablo 2 it was about bragging rights, being online and all. I think even in Torchlight it does have a bit to do with bragging rights, even if that's not the entire point, I know if I had a max level hardcore I would probably brag a little to my fellow players on Steam (though I don't, since I don't find fear of death to be an alluring prospect in games)

P/S. Damn you Torchwood for being in my brain today!

Aug 9, 2011#131

Math242

it's torchlight

just sayin'

Aug 10, 2011#132

@Li3n

Mathias said:
And seriously, telling people to just play something else is like the worst sign ever...

Click to expand...

Holy shit. I can't for the life of me understand the "I can't play on a plane" argument. I think telling people to play something else is a valid option. You're all bitching about a very minor, niche example. For the majority of gamers, they play at home with an online connection. Cut off the mobility in a game, and people get their panties in a bunch. Need to play games on a plane (you ADD riddled addict, you)? Invest in a Gameboy. And in my humble opinion, if you're traveling with a laptop without underlying business purposes requiring said laptop to explicitly play games while going on vacation, then you need to re-evaluate your life.

I was talking more about the level of hubris a company must have to officially tell people to just use another product...

But really, it's not just about being on a plane, it's about not being able to play if the internet goes down... it's not bloody electricity, and the game isn't a MMO, there's no reason why i shouldn't be able to play it then besides the fact that the company decided not to let me...

If the connection drops right when i'm close to killing a boss i know that it's an easily avoidable issue that they decided not to avoid...

Aug 10, 2011#133

Adammon

Tycho of PA fame had an interesting point on Diablo3. The PVP in Diablo3 doesn't result in any kind of upgraded gear or abilities, simply titles and rankings - and PVP has not historically been the focus of Diablo 3 anyways. Diablo 3 is a dungeon crawler at its heart, single player or coop. By duplicating items or hacking characters, who are you really cheating besides yourself?

Oh right, Blizzard's revenue stream.

Aug 10, 2011#134

Ravenpoe

Adammon said:
Tycho of PA fame had an interesting point on Diablo3. The PVP in Diablo3 doesn't result in any kind of upgraded gear or abilities, simply titles and rankings - and PVP has not historically been the focus of Diablo 3 anyways. Diablo 3 is a dungeon crawler at its heart, single player or coop. By duplicating items or hacking characters, who are you really cheating besides yourself?

Oh right, Blizzard's revenue stream.

Diablo 2 had a fine system. Closed, online only characters so you could avoid dupers and cheaters (to an extent) and open offline possible characters. Players had the choice.

Aug 10, 2011#135

PatrThom

^ That.

--Patrick

Aug 10, 2011#136

Azurephoenix

Blizzard wants to cash in on players selling items and to do that you have to have all characters stored online... period.

I agree though that Diablo II had a great system. I remember having awesome dungeon crawls with a few friends over the LAN... good times... good times... (that are no longer to be had... thanks Blizzard).

Aug 10, 2011#137

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
Tycho of PA fame had an interesting point on Diablo3. The PVP in Diablo3 doesn't result in any kind of upgraded gear or abilities, simply titles and rankings - and PVP has not historically been the focus of Diablo 3 anyways. Diablo 3 is a dungeon crawler at its heart, single player or coop. By duplicating items or hacking characters, who are you really cheating besides yourself?

Oh right, Blizzard's revenue stream.

I'm confused, how are they making more money from people who aren't already inclined to use the RMT side of the AH?

Aug 10, 2011#138

Adammon

SpecialKO said:
I'm confused, how are they making more money from people who aren't already inclined to use the RMT side of the AH?

That's like asking "How does the liquor make money from people who don't drink?" They don't; they're just making sure they're inserting themselves into every transaction to make sure that you have ample opportunity to spend money. It's like putting the milk at the back of a grocery. You have to walk through the entire grocery to get the milk - and hopefully while you're there, you'll pick up some gum, maybe some bread, oh and I need cereal and cat litter.

Now don't get me wrong, it's smart marketing and sales, but don't for one second think that they're making the offline disabled as a convenience for the player.

Aug 10, 2011#139

Chibibar

Adammon said:
That's like asking "How does the liquor make money from people who don't drink?" They don't; they're just making sure they're inserting themselves into every transaction to make sure that you have ample opportunity to spend money. It's like putting the milk at the back of a grocery. You have to walk through the entire grocery to get the milk - and hopefully while you're there, you'll pick up some gum, maybe some bread, oh and I need cereal and cat litter.

Now don't get me wrong, it's smart marketing and sales, but don't for one second think that they're making the offline disabled as a convenience for the player.

bingo! We say we don't use RMT side of AH for now, but when we are farming for gear and someone is selling the Sword of UBer destruction +50 with 2 gems of sauce for like 5$ (yea right) you might incline to pick it up since it is only 5$

Aug 10, 2011#140

Dave

Interesting article on the whole thing, including information I didn't know before - that the "real money" AH is going to be totally anonymous. This gives a great edge to Blizzard to cheat and destabilize or stack the ladders with epic loot purchased unfairly by those with more money than sense.

http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2011/08/blizzard-and-two-level-deception.html

Aug 10, 2011#141

Chibibar

Dave said:
Interesting article on the whole thing, including information I didn't know before - that the "real money" AH is going to be totally anonymous. This gives a great edge to Blizzard to cheat and destabilize or stack the ladders with epic loot purchased unfairly by those with more money than sense.

http://www.pixelpoppers.com/2011/08/blizzard-and-two-level-deception.html

I know Blizz said they won't put items up "now" but I know they might do it later. It is not a firm rule or "law" of the land. It is out there.

Aug 10, 2011#142

SpecialKO

Adammon said:
don't for one second think that they're making the offline disabled as a convenience for the player.

Didn't they explicitly acknowledge that as an understandable issue, just one that they felt was negligible?

Chibibar said:
bingo! We say we don't use RMT side of AH for now, but when we are farming for gear and someone is selling the Sword of UBer destruction +50 with 2 gems of sauce for like 5$ (yea right) you might incline to pick it up since it is only 5$

So you're complaining about Blizzard taking a piece of a transaction you're voluntarily agreeing to enter? :confused:

I can understand the people who are upset about possibly being unable to temporarily play their game while being unfortunately tied to Comcast's bandwidth caps, but now you're blaming the store for anticipating and prodding your needs.

Seeing as how we have yet to see the slightest evidence that Blizz will actually enact P2W or tune the game so it's inevitably required, if you don't want Activision to take another piece of your wallet, don't spend money on the RMT AH.

Aug 10, 2011#143

Chibibar

SpecialKO said:
Didn't they explicitly acknowledge that as an understandable issue, just one that they felt was negligible?

So you're complaining about Blizzard taking a piece of a transaction you're voluntarily agreeing to enter?

I can understand the people who are upset about possibly being unable to temporarily play their game while being unfortunately tied to Comcast's bandwidth caps, but now you're blaming the store for anticipating and prodding your needs.

Seeing as how we have yet to see the slightest evidence that Blizz will actually enact P2W or tune the game so it's inevitably required, if you don't want Activision to take another piece of your wallet, don't spend money on the RMT AH.

I have no idea where you are getting that I am complaining on any part. I personally don't care about constant online, RMT (which I probably use). I am buying Diablo III and going to play the heck out of it.

Aug 10, 2011#144

Adammon

SpecialKO said:
So you're complaining about Blizzard taking a piece of a transaction you're voluntarily agreeing to enter?

I can understand the people who are upset about possibly being unable to temporarily play their game while being unfortunately tied to Comcast's bandwidth caps, but now you're blaming the store for anticipating and prodding your needs.

Seeing as how we have yet to see the slightest evidence that Blizz will actually enact P2W or tune the game so it's inevitably required, if you don't want Activision to take another piece of your wallet, don't spend money on the RMT AH.

Hell, I'm not even spending money on the game. I'm a first-day pirate and I'll be merrily playing offline by myself.

Aug 10, 2011#145

Dave

As I stated before, I'll probably buy it but hate myself the whole time I'm playing it.

Aug 10, 2011#146

SpecialKO

Chibibar said:
I have no idea where you are getting that I am complaining on any part. I personally don't care about constant online, RMT (which I probably use). I am buying Diablo III and going to play the heck out of it.

Sorry, it sounded like you were getting behind the "Activision is going to sneak into my wallet and take my monies" crowd for a second there. My mistake.

Aug 10, 2011#147

Azurephoenix

I'm not going to buy this until the first big price drop... even if that's a long while away.

Aug 10, 2011#148

Gusto

Honestly, with SW:TOR coming out in a couple months and Mass Effect 3 around the corner, it might be a long time before I even consider Diablo 3, without even considering any of this shit.

Aug 10, 2011#149

Frankie Williamson

Yeah, it has to compete with games I will play. Never played Diablo 2 and I only played the first on Playstation.

Aug 10, 2011#150

PatrThom

Dear God, man. That interface was atrocious!
(even if you could control two players)

--Patrick

Aug 10, 2011#151

Frankie Williamson

My brother and I played through it together sitting next to each other so it wasn't that bad.

Aug 11, 2011#152

Chibibar

SpecialKO said:
Sorry, it sounded like you were getting behind the "Activision is going to sneak into my wallet and take my monies" crowd for a second there. My mistake.

No worries. that is why I use

I figure Blizz was gonna cash in on the "black market of virtual items" that exist in any games for ages. I was surprise such things wasn't available on WoW first. Micro Transaction is big bucks (if done right) Is Diablo III heading in to the "right direction" that is kinda iffy. I have to see it, but make no mistake, with anonymous listing, you know Blizz will be highly tempted to put up some Epic super rare items 2-3 months from now (so make it like some player got lucky) and bank on it

or sell gold.

Aug 11, 2011#153

Jay

SpecialKO said:
Didn't they explicitly acknowledge that as an understandable issue, just one that they felt was negligible?

So you're complaining about Blizzard taking a piece of a transaction you're voluntarily agreeing to enter?

I can understand the people who are upset about possibly being unable to temporarily play their game while being unfortunately tied to Comcast's bandwidth caps, but now you're blaming the store for anticipating and prodding your needs.

Seeing as how we have yet to see the slightest evidence that Blizz will actually enact P2W or tune the game so it's inevitably required, if you don't want Activision to take another piece of your wallet, don't spend money on the RMT AH.

Please don't use colored text. On a dark theme it looks like shit.

Don't know why people use it, perhaps it makes them feel special but in reality just makes me ignore their posts.

Aug 11, 2011#154

SpecialKO

Jay said:
Please don't use colored text. On a dark theme it looks like shit.

Don't know why people use it, perhaps it makes them feel special but in reality just makes me ignore their posts.

Um, I'm not. I'm using the default.

EDIT: Unless one of the themes is broken again.

Aug 11, 2011#155

ScytheRexx

SpecialKO said:
EDIT: Unless one of the themes is broken again.

Be careful if you copied the test from another word processor. I sometimes have it happen where I type my messages in yahoo (so my boss does not realize I am slacking and just thinks I am writing an e-mail) and when copied it carries over all the formatting options, including a lot of the defaults. For instance I made a post here once that for some reason had the "black text" tag, making it impossible to read on the darker themes.

The best way to check is hit Edit and click the button in the top right, the BB Code Editor, and see if you have any code hiding in there.

Aug 11, 2011#156

SpecialKO

ScytheRexx said:
Be careful if you copied the test from another word processor. I sometimes have it happen where I type my messages in yahoo (so my boss does not realize I am slacking and just thinks I am writing an e-mail) and when copied it carries over all the formatting options, including a lot of the defaults. For instance I made a post here once that for some reason had the "black text" tag, making it impossible to read on the darker themes.

The best way to check is hit Edit and click the button in the top right, the BB Code Editor, and see if you have any code hiding in there.

Not doing anything like that, but good idea on the code check.

EDIT: Interesting...on that quoted post Jay was having issues with (and only that post), there's a color being applied, even though I posted it in the standard forum interface like I do all my posts. Huh.

Aug 11, 2011#157

SpecialKO

Because no one has posted it yet.

Aug 11, 2011#158

Hailey Knight

That's not real, is it?

Aug 11, 2011#159

SpecialKO

Quotemander Prime said:
That's not real, is it?

No, no. Here's his real one.

Sep 20, 2011#160

Dave

Diablo III beta opened today. Anyone get an invite?

Sep 20, 2011#161

Gusto

Dave said:
Diablo III beta opened today. Anyone get an invite?

Zen did.

Sep 20, 2011#162

Dave

WHAT?!? Sonofa-! I want mine, dammit!

Sep 20, 2011#163

Allen who is Quiet

Dave, do what Zen did. Sleep with somebody who works at Blizzard.

Sep 20, 2011#164

Dave

Allen who is Quiet said:
Dave, do what Zen did. Sleep with somebody who works at Blizzard.

Think he'll let me?

Sep 20, 2011#165

Jay

So, I just checked my email.....

I'm so sorry.

Sep 20, 2011#166

Hailey Knight

Jay said:
So, I just checked my email.....

I'm so sorry.

I don't care about Diablo III, but you've gotta be fucking kidding that you'd get a beta invite for SWTOR and Diablo III. Your system and/or resume must be really impressive.

Sep 20, 2011#167

Allen who is Quiet

Dave said:
Think he'll let me?

Couldn't hurt to ask.

Sep 20, 2011#168

Vrii

I'm in, too!

Sep 21, 2011#169

Frankie Williamson

Got in.

Isn't going to play it.

Sep 21, 2011#170

LordRendar

Didn't get in.

Sep 21, 2011#171

Chibibar

me neither

Sep 21, 2011#172

Piotyr

Frankie Williamson said:
Got in.

Isn't going to play it.

Then...why did you opt in?

Sep 21, 2011#173

Dave

Piotyr said:
Then...why did you opt in?

And can it be transferred to someone who would use it?

Sep 21, 2011#174

@Li3n

Dave said:
And can it be transferred to someone who would use it?

Not without giving the person access to his bnet account...

Of course he could always temp change his password and then change it back after...

Sep 21, 2011#175

Frankie Williamson

That's basically what's happened, I gave a friend my pretty well unused Bnet account to Diablo 3 his heart out.
Added at: 16:26
PSSSST, DON'T TELL BLZZRRRRD.

Sep 27, 2011#176

ScytheRexx

Sep 27, 2011#177

<name missing>

ScytheRexx said:

Yeah, i have the client too... show us your bnet account if you want to prove it... and your password if you want us to be friends.

Sep 27, 2011#178

Dave

Yeah, Rexx!

Sep 27, 2011#179

Shegokigo

Is there any point of me picking up this game at any point? I never played the first 2 and when I tried to go back and play the second part about a year or two ago, I just couldn't get into it. I also didn't get very involved in Torchlight, even though I own it. I've yet to have a "dungeon crawler with point/click mechanics" appeal to me.

Sep 27, 2011#180

Necronic

Its worth picking up to at least give it a go. If you don't like it, you don't like it.

Best way to describe it though (since you haven't really played it) is that its like WoW that has been streamlined and then doped to the eyeballs with meth and crack.

Sep 27, 2011#181

ScytheRexx

Only had a short period to play last night, but the game definitely has all the charms I missed about Diablo, with the added bonus of the character being a little more "talkative". No longer is the class a wooden mute, but actually has conversations with the NPCs and even throws out quips, like I entered a cellar only for my Wizard to muse were all the treasure was hidden.

They also have "Lore Messages" which are a lot like the recorded messages in Bioshock. The older games has stuff like this that was static, but Diablo 3 you can listen while still playing. So you find a book or see a new enemy and you can listen to a little information about it either told by the book writer or Deckard Cain. I really love thing like that since it lets you get a little more involved with the place.

The skill system is very different then what I was expecting. I could explain it but it's better just to experiment with it yourself, they have a skill calculator setup on the community site. I actually am liking the system because it limits your skills you can use while also giving you a lot of control over how the skills change and react using runestones. Could be lots of customization in it.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/game/

Sep 27, 2011#182

Tress

Shegokigo said:
Is there any point of me picking up this game at any point? I never played the first 2 and when I tried to go back and play the second part about a year or two ago, I just couldn't get into it. I also didn't get very involved in Torchlight, even though I own it. I've yet to have a "dungeon crawler with point/click mechanics" appeal to me.

If you didn't like the second one and didn't like Torchlight then there's no way you're going to like this. I'm amazed you even thought there would a chance that you would like this.

Sep 27, 2011#183

Shegokigo

I dunno, some games do massive overhauls to engines/genres that they can transend. Was wondering if this would be one of them. *shrug*

Sep 27, 2011#184

Tress

Shegokigo said:
I dunno, some games do massive overhauls to engines/genres that they can transend. Was wondering if this would be one of them. *shrug*

Ah. In this case Blizzard is sticking close to the formula, so I don't think you'd like it. I could be wrong, of course.

Sep 27, 2011#185

Shegokigo

Well for example:
I've never liked RTS games, however I loved Starcraft 1 and played it for years. Starcraft 2 came along and I had no interest.
I'd never had interest on online multiplayer FPS games, but I play TF2 on a daily basis now.
I was never into board style strategy games, but love the hell out of FFT.

So this was simply a question of whether it transcends it's genre and is a game that even non-fans of the genre will get into.

Sep 27, 2011#186

Chibibar

Shegokigo said:
Well for example:
I've never liked RTS games, however I loved Starcraft 1 and played it for years. Starcraft 2 came along and I had no interest.
I'd never had interest on online multiplayer FPS games, but I play TF2 on a daily basis now.
I was never into board style strategy games, but love the hell out of FFT.

So this was simply a question of whether it transcends it's genre and is a game that even non-fans of the genre will get into.

You may like like it according to the some of the site and changes from Diablo 1 and 2. Since it is a "remake/overhaul" of the story, it is better you DIDN'T play D1 and 2

Sep 27, 2011#187

Shegokigo

Oh, it's not a continuation of the story? That's actually pretty good news for me. Thanks Chibi.

Sep 27, 2011#188

Chibibar

Shegokigo said:
Oh, it's not a continuation of the story? That's actually pretty good news for me. Thanks Chibi.

well....... There is a big stink of that D3 kinda "retro changes" major events from 1 and 2

which upsets a lot of people.

I personally did NOT get into beta (I am hoping) but from the stuff I read, I feel it is a re-telling/re-make/re-new (whatever you wanna call it) of the story and kinda start all over.
Either way. I think it will be pretty cool to play IMO

Sep 27, 2011#189

ScytheRexx

Chibibar said:
You may like like it according to the some of the site and changes from Diablo 1 and 2. Since it is a "remake/overhaul" of the story, it is better you DIDN'T play D1 and 2

This is not true at all.

The story takes place 20 years after the events of Diablo 2 and ties heavily into the mythos of the last games. The start of the game is a meteor literally crashing into the Cathedral from Diablo 1, where Deckard Cain and his adopted niece Leah are doing research, which causes your character to travel to New Tristram. The second quest you get involves killing the undead that have taken up residence in the burned out remains of the original Tristram, after it was destroyed in Diablo 2.

The only overhaul is more of a light retcon to the old games, with the origin of the warrior/dark wanderer character being changed to that of the lost son of King Leoric, named Aiden, who returned to Tristram to find his father insane and his brother possessed by Diablo. One of the NPCs from Diablo 1, Adria the Witch, is even going to be a major character this time around, and hinted as the possible the mother of Leah.

P.S. The male Barbarian is even the same Barbarian from Diablo 2.

Sep 27, 2011#190

Shegokigo

Oh... bummer.

Sep 27, 2011#191

ScytheRexx

Shegokigo said:
Oh... bummer.

Not really if you enjoyed the story for the last two games. I wanted to see it continued rather then a reboot.

Sep 27, 2011#192

Shegokigo

I'm sure you (and original fans) would but it's one of the few things that would have turned me onto D3.

Sep 27, 2011#193

ScytheRexx

Like I mentioned before though, they seem to be dropping little lore hooks and other things that bring you up to speed with the old games. While to get the whole experience you would want to play all of them, the new one, I think, will stand on it's own very well.

If gameplay is the issue, I have to say the new skill system looks pretty neat. It allows you a lot of customization, because while you have like 21 skills you can use, you can only equip 6 to be active. Then with those 6 you can change the usage of the skill further through Runestones, like for instance I can alter the Demon Hunters raven companion to be a group of Ferrets that collect my gold for me, or change my undead hellhounds the Witch Doctor summons to be on fire constantly or have a chance of being revived when killed. Playing a Wizard and want Meteor to be different? Put a Runestone in to convert it into a freezing comet that slows. Fill the three passive bonus slots and you can really tune your class with things like faster running speed, more offense, more defense, or better utility.

Once you find a skill set you enjoy, you can even take it into the new Arena, allowing you to fight other players of a similar skill range, all hopefully trying different skill sets.

In the end though, if you didn't like Diablo 2 because you couldn't get into the story, you may not like Diablo 3 even with the lore hooks. You can already tell in the first few minutes a lot of the game and the story are going to hinge on meeting familiar faces and seeing familiar locations.

Sep 27, 2011#194

Shegokigo

It wasn't the story that turned me off as much as the gameplay.

Sep 27, 2011#195

Chibibar

ScytheRexx said:
.

This is not true at all.

The story takes place 20 years after the events of Diablo 2 and ties heavily into the mythos of the last games. The start of the game is a meteor literally crashing into the Cathedral from Diablo 1, where Deckard Cain and his adopted niece Leah are doing research, which causes your character to travel to New Tristram. The second quest you get involves killing the undead that have taken up residence in the burned out remains of the original Tristram, after it was destroyed in Diablo 2.

The only overhaul is more of a light retcon to the old games, with the origin of the warrior/dark wanderer character being changed to that of the lost son of King Leoric, named Aiden, who returned to Tristram to find his father insane and his brother possessed by Diablo. One of the NPCs from Diablo 1, Adria the Witch, is even going to be a major character this time around, and hinted as the possible the mother of Leah.

P.S. The male Barbarian is even the same Barbarian from Diablo 2.

Ah. I personally wouldn't count that as "light retcon" I mean they pretty much took the ending of the 1st and the premise of the d2 and thrown out the window (it was the warrior who did the shard in the head thing and starting of 2)

Sep 27, 2011#196

ScytheRexx

Now then that will depend on what you didn't like. Was it the core style of game, or the mechanics behind the skills?

I think where Diablo 3 will shine over D1/D2 is going to be the way it handles the skills. Rather then D1, which let you have everything without limit no matter the class, or Diablo 2, which has three mostly ridged trees you went down (similar to WoWs talents), the Diablo 3 system gives you all the skills and then lets you pick the ones you like and tune them. It leave you open to experiment with some strange combinations. Want to concentrate on group play and healing? You can technically give the Monk class skills tuned specifically for that purpose. Want to make the Barbarian an AOE powerhouse? Tune your skills to do more area damage.

You can also add in "Followers" into the single player, which are basically the next evolution of Diablo 2s mercs, having real histories and unique skills, plus they level with you. Playing a Demon Hunter with a Templar ally may be a lot different then when you play with the Enchantess ally.

If your issue is more the core of the game, the idea of running into a room and brutally murdering monsters with flashy, powerful spells. Then nothing will change in that regard, it's very faithful to the formula. The game was designed to be pretty easy in Normal, and then grow harder once you get into Hard and Nightmare modes. If you like a challenge, try Hardcore Mode and get through Nightmare, and prepare to someday eat your keyboard when a fetish kills you.

Ah. I personally wouldn't count that as "light retcon" I mean they pretty much took the ending of the 1st and the premise of the d2 and thrown out the window (it was the warrior who did the shard in the head thing and starting of 2)

That didn't change. It was still the warrior.

You have to understand, the warrior had no backstory. Neither did the Rogue or Sorcerer. They had no names or purposes other then showing up when stuff started getting crazy.

What they did was rather then leaving his history a mystery, they gave him a backstory so that we understand who he was and why he was there. He is still the Warrior, he is still the Dark Wanderer, but before that, before he showed up with his sword and shield, he was King Leoric's lost son.

Adding some spoilers. I already kind of mentioned a bit of this but avoided one revelation. If you don't want to know how the story is developing based on what we learn in the beta, don't read below.

So the story goes that after Aiden (The Warrior), the lost son of King Leoric, killed his brother to stop Diablo, he put the stone in his own head and returned to Tristram before the events of Diablo 2. He kept the stone hidden, but Adria the Witch sensed something was stiring inside him and attempted to "comfort" him. And by comfort I mean BOW CHICKA BOW WOW BOOM. Aiden, now the Dark Wanderer, was slowly losing himself, so he left Tristram, and Adria, realized soon a shadow would fall on the town worst then the one before, left not long after. Her one night with Aiden ended up siring a child, Leah, which she would later give up to Deckard Cain for reasons that have yet to be revealed. Deckard Cain raised her like a daughter and protege after the events of Diablo 2, and took her to New Tristram so they could study the old Cathedral, gaining insight into the possibility of Diablo and the Prime Evils returning.

Dec 11, 2011#197

Frankie Williamson

Well I know why I'll never play this game, any server hiccup or connection hiccup and you get to start over again.

That is savagely annoying.

Dec 11, 2011#198

Ravenpoe

Frankie Williamson said:
Well I know why I'll never play this game, any server hiccup or connection hiccup and you get to start over again.

That is savagely annoying.

Is this a new problem found, or are you saying that because all character information is stored server side? While I don't like the occlusion of offline characters, I played strictly realm-only characters in Diablo 2, and I never once lost a character to a server hiccup. At worst, I lost a couple of minutes of character progression, and I think that was only during the beta.

Dec 12, 2011#199

Frankie Williamson

I didn't lose a character, I meant start an area over again. Twice now I haven't been able to finish the second level of this dungeon because I'd get disconnected and have to start at the beginning. It's very annoying.

Dec 12, 2011#200

Bowielee

I've pretty much decided that I won't get this unless my circle of friends state that it's completely unmissable. I loved Diablo 2, but the only multi-player I ever did was over LAN.

I just don't really have a strong urge to get this one.

Dec 12, 2011#201

Bowielee

I just figure I'll get Torchlight 2 instead.

Dec 12, 2011#202

Ravenpoe

Frankie Williamson said:
I didn't lose a character, I meant start an area over again. Twice now I haven't been able to finish the second level of this dungeon because I'd get disconnected and have to start at the beginning. It's very annoying.

Fair enough, but you can't really judge the stability of a game from the beta. That's why it's the beta.

Dec 12, 2011#203

Ravenpoe

mr_thehun said:
But the thing is blizz is putting the quality of my experience in my service providers hands. There are only a few sp's I would trust with my junk in their hands.

In Diablo 2, if you dropped from a game, it would stay active for around ten minutes, giving you time to rejoin it. I wonder if blizz will implement something like that.

Dec 12, 2011#204

Necronic

Good lord there is a lot of whining in here.

Dec 12, 2011#205

Bowielee

Necronic said:
Good lord there is a lot of whining in here.

I'm not whining. I just literally have seen nothing about the game that excites me. While i find the persistent online connection to be dubious at best, even the earliest news hasnt really made me say, Damnn, cant wait to play this.

Dec 12, 2011#206

Necronic

Wasn't really talking about your posts. But really the persistent online stuff is pretty much here to stay, so...you know.....dealwithitbro.

Also, someone said that Hardcore mode is about bragging rights. It can't be about bragging because hardcore players would never waste their breath talking to the regular pubbies. The idea of trying to impress them is just illogical. It would be like showing off to my cat.

In all seriousness though it's just about making the game more interesting/less of a grind. Once I started playing hardcore I never went back. Makes lag spikes something that will tempt you to put a fist through your computer monitor though.

Dec 12, 2011#207

Frankie Williamson

I'm whiny because I'm irritated that 4 times now I've been unable to make any progress because of a hiccup in connection?

Dec 13, 2011#208

Necronic

No you're whiny because you've done nothing but complain about why you will never play this game. While you continue to play it. And seriously, discoing in a beta is pretty much standard.

Dec 13, 2011#209

Frankie Williamson

Disconnecting may be standard, losing progress up from the start of the last stage of a dungeon that took 15 minutes to click through the enemies over and over shouldn't be.

It'd be like disconnecting in world of warcraft and having to start the entire instance over again.

Dec 13, 2011#210

PatrThom

Maybe what they're REALLY beta testing is not gameplay, but to find how tolerant a player is to getting disconnected. How much progress they can stand to lose, etc.
If so, you should complain early, and often.

--Patrick

Dec 13, 2011#211

ScytheRexx

Betas are designed for things to screw up so we report it and try to get it fixed before it turns into a real huge problem at release. I have yet to have the disconnect issue, but make sure to send in reports about it so that Blizzard knows, I am sure others are already, but the more they get the better we can make sure it does not carry into release. If we don't report it, or too few report it, they may not find it a big enough deal to fix. We have to make sure to keep the pressure on.

Dec 13, 2011#212

Frankie Williamson

It gets reported, that's for sure.

Dec 14, 2011#213

Necronic

Frankie Williamson said:
Disconnecting may be standard, losing progress up from the start of the last stage of a dungeon that took 15 minutes to click through the enemies over and over shouldn't be.

It'd be like disconnecting in world of warcraft and having to start the entire instance over again.

Or like disconnecting close to the end of a 1000 ticket BF3 map and loosing all the points you built up in that match. Which happens quite regularly. And the game is still awesome.

Dec 15, 2011#214

@Li3n

Necronic said:
Or like disconnecting close to the end of a 1000 ticket BF3 map and loosing all the points you built up in that match. Which happens quite regularly. And the game is still awesome.

I would say something about letting the devs screw you and ruining gaming, but frankly if you're playing a FPS in MP for the points and can't enjoy it otherwise there's something wrong with you in the first place...

But Diablo is more about advancing in the story and in skills... even in MP, unless you're PvP-ing. A better comparison would be losing your SP progress in a FPS...

Dec 15, 2011#215

Necronic

You obviously don't know what it means to get IR for your tank.

Dec 15, 2011#216

Adammon

Necronic said:
You obviously don't know what it means to get IR for your tank.

Or IR flares for a heli. Stupid design decisions...grr.

Dec 15, 2011#217

Necronic

All heli's should die so it doesn't matter.

Dec 15, 2011#218

Adammon

Necronic said:
All heli's should die so it doesn't matter.

I take you for a ride, you change mind.

Dec 15, 2011#219

Necronic

I actually love using the side vulcan guns on the one heli and the cannon on the assault heli.

But I still believe that all heli's should die.

Dec 15, 2011#220

Adammon

Like I was saying in a different thread, I am an ace Huey driver. You load me up with two gunners and we wreak glorious havoc.

The new maps have mobile AA which make that pretty useless though

Dec 15, 2011#221

Ravenpoe

We're not talking about Diablo anymore, are we?

Otherwise, I've have some major complaints to make about the game's direction.

Dec 15, 2011#222

Frankie Williamson

Ravenpoe said:
We're not talking about Diablo anymore, are we?

Otherwise, I've have some major complaints to make about the game's direction.

What's the issue, it feels like Diablo to me. Kind of Diablo meets Guild Wars I guess with the limited skill choices.

Dec 16, 2011#223

Telephius

Frankie Williamson said:
What's the issue, it feels like Diablo to me. Kind of Diablo meets Guild Wars I guess with the limited skill choices.

Though maybe I am the one who has it going over my head but I think he is referring to 'helicopters and modernized war in Diablo'

Dec 16, 2011#224

Frankie Williamson

Yeah, the joke went over me something fierce at the time.

Dec 16, 2011#225

ScytheRexx

Ravenpoe said:
Otherwise, I've have some major complaints to make about the game's direction.

The talk about modernized war and Diablo is giving me horrible flashbacks of Hellgate: London, which funny enough, was the first game released by the original creators of Diablo after they left Blizzard.

Dec 16, 2011#226

Necronic

Adammon said:
Like I was saying in a different thread, I am an ace Huey driver. You load me up with two gunners and we wreak glorious havoc.

The new maps have mobile AA which make that pretty useless though

They really need to fix the AA so that it can't be used to shoot ground troops. Because :cripes: that is way too powerful.

Jan 15, 2012#227

@Li3n

BTW, did you guys see the 15 years anniversary video? For some reason they edited the original one to take out shots of Tyrael, Diablo and another angel.

Here's both versions:

Modified:

Original:

The differences start at around 10:20.

Jan 15, 2012#228

ScytheRexx

The other angel is Imperius, one of the Angiris Council. He is supposed to be one of the angels that hates humanity, finding them to be a perversion tainted by the demonic. Him and Tyreal used to be best friends, until Tyreal decided to defend humanity, which put the two at odds over the years.

I can see why they removed them though, they are rather spoilerish.

Rumor has it that the "star" that falls from the sky is Tyreal, and that he had a battle with Imperius, who wants to destroy Santuary and humanity. Tyreal loses the battle and is thrown from the High Heavens. The images in the trailer show the possible flashback to this battle, or may even show a future battle, as loading images have hinted that the final act of the game is going to take place in the High Heavens, rather then the Burning Hells. As for the Diablo images, that's because it's getting more and more obvious that Diablo took over a female body this time around, and they are trying a tiny bit to hide the fact the new Diablo host is likely going to be Leah.

Jan 16, 2012#229

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
The other angel is Imperius, one of the Angiris Council.

Yeah, that's the consensus, but no one actually posted any definitive proof...

As for Diablo's host... the pictures released way before where way more spoilery, in the video you can't even see it's hips.

Jan 16, 2012#230

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Yeah, that's the consensus, but no one actually posted any definitive proof...

Well at BlizzCon they showed off concept art of all the angels of the Angiris Council, and Imperius has the most unique armor. The CGI angel is pretty much using the same armor as the concept so it be very likely it is Imperius.

@Li3n said:
As for Diablo's host... the pictures released way before where way more spoilery, in the video you can't even see it's hips.

Well I think removing the CGI was mostly a side effect to removing the image that came before it, which really drives home the spoiler.

Jan 16, 2012#231

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
Well at BlizzCon they showed off concept art of all the angels of the Angiris Council, and Imperius has the most unique armor. The CGI angel is pretty much using the same armor as the concept so it be very likely it is Imperius.

No floating crown though... but the spear is the same for sure .

ScytheRexx said:
Well I think removing the CGI was mostly a side effect to removing the image that came before it, which really drives home the spoiler.

Except that between Tyrael and Diablo there's a image that stayed exactly the same... looks more like they just removed the cinematics...

Jan 16, 2012#232

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Except that between Tyrael and Diablo there's a image that stayed exactly the same... looks more like they just removed the cinematics...

Put the two side by side, and you will notice they removed a lot of the concept art, not just the cinamatics. The one I was speaking about earlier occurs right before the "Diablo" cinamtic, and is one of the Lord of Terror with a very... new form. That concept art does not appear in the modified one, and was replaced with concept art of the cathedral window, right before cutting to Deckard.

Jan 17, 2012#233

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
Put the two side by side, and you will notice they removed a lot of the concept art, not just the cinamatics. The one I was speaking about earlier occurs right before the "Diablo" cinamtic, and is one of the Lord of Terror with a very... new form. That concept art does not appear in the modified one, and was replaced with concept art of the cathedral window, right before cutting to Deckard.

Yeah, i just meant that your comment that they cut it as a side effect is off.

Jan 17, 2012#234

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Yeah, i just meant that your comment that they cut it as a side effect is off.

Not really. Think about it, it works better when pictures lead into similar pictures. Having a Diablo concept lead into a Diablo cinematic fits, but once that concept was removed, and they instead used the church window, it was better to utilize Deckard, since that scene is him looking up at that very church window. This is also why they removed the Barbarian and Demon Hunter concept arts, replacing them instead with more location concepts since that is what they were focusing on for most of that section.

We can agree to disagree, but I think the removal of the cinematic as a byproduct of removing the concept to not be off at all, it's just good editing.

Jan 17, 2012#235

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
We can agree to disagree, but I think the removal of the cinematic as a byproduct of removing the concept to not be off at all, it's just good editing.

Well pffft... artists!

Jan 20, 2012#236

Kovac

The most fun I got out of Diablo 1/2 was playing co-op with my friends at a LAN, unfortunately with the persistent online stuff looking like it is here to stay they have all bailed on buying it. And since my main motivation in getting the game was co-op I guess that I might as well forget about picking it up as well and wait for Torchlight instead.

I'm sure that D3 will still sell well enough but it does make me wonder how many sales have been lost which could have been avoided by having some kind of offline mode.

Jan 21, 2012#237

@Li3n

So, did you guys see the latest changes: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/4325959/Systems_Changes-1_19_2012#blog

This game is so never coming out...

Jan 21, 2012#238

Ravenpoe

@Li3n said:
So, did you guys see the latest changes: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/4325959/Systems_Changes-1_19_2012#blog

This game is so never coming out...

Whelp, there goes two more years.

Jan 21, 2012#239

Hailey Knight

@Li3n said:
So, did you guys see the latest changes: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/4325959/Systems_Changes-1_19_2012#blog

This game is so never coming out...

Ha:

No one will remember if the game is late, only if it's great.

Has he not been to the internet before?

Jan 21, 2012#240

@Li3n

Quotemander Prime said:
Has he not been to the internet before?

Well no one seems to remember that Operation CWAL was anything more then a cheat code, and they actually thought the game might be out by Christmas 2011, so he's not that wrong...

Jan 21, 2012#241

ScytheRexx

I am not sure how I feel about some of the system changes, and I find the loss of the mystic to be pretty sucky. Will have to try out the changes on the Beta.

Hopefully we can see a Q2 release this year, I don't think the system changes themselves are going to delay the game another year, they are not that large.

Jan 23, 2012#242

PatrThom

Hey, just remember that those of us who are not part of the beta won't miss any of the stuff that gets left out of the shipping version.

--Patrick

Jan 28, 2012#243

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
I am not sure how I feel about some of the system changes, and I find the loss of the mystic to be pretty sucky. Will have to try out the changes on the Beta.

Well...

Feb 1, 2012#244

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Well...

To be honest I have been so busy in Skyrim and Arkham City that I have not yet tried out the changes. Will have to do that sometime tonight now that I beat Arkham City and worked on a few of the challenges.

Feb 16, 2012#245

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
To be honest I have been so busy in Skyrim and Arkham City that I have not yet tried out the changes. Will have to do that sometime tonight now that I beat Arkham City and worked on a few of the challenges.

And...

Feb 16, 2012#246

ScytheRexx

Man you really want to know!

To be honest, it does not really feel all that different from when I played before. It actually feels a lot closer to Diablo 2 then the last interation of the Beta, and that is about it. Adding back in Town Portals, selling off trash to vendors, the stats feeling a bit more simple. Part of me is likes that, but another part of me enjoyed the newer designs they had going that made it stick out more from the last two games.

At least they are keeping the skill system, which I find very fun, and removed the requirement to go to town to switch out skills, which I am happy about. I liked being able to change skills on the fly, and having a short cooldown is a good enough drawback.

I don't play it often right now, but that is because it is always difficult for me to value investing to much time into betas, knowing all my characters will be deleted. I actually had a "high level" Wizard in one of the earlier iterations, that was deleted in one of the patch updates two months ago or so, and after that I just lost the desire to keep throwing new characters up knowing they will be obliterated, possibly by the next patch. I just log on now and then to look for bugs, and that is about it.

Feb 16, 2012#247

@Li3n

It's only 13 levels... 2-3 days of play at most... i'd think getting bored of so little content would be more of a deterrent then wipes...

And yeah, they really should have kept the salvaging, and just increase the needed parts while decreasing the salvage you get from whites until picking them up was inefficient, but still gave you something extra if you wanted...

And the skills i think the best compromise would be if like you had 12 you can change around any way you want into the 6 slots... and then only having to go to town, or even do a small quest for a respec of the 12... so an all the same class party wouldn't have the same abilities available all the time...

Feb 19, 2012#248

@Li3n

So the rune system is now more or less a passive skill unlock one: http://diablo.incgamers.com/blog/comments/diablo-3-beta-patch-13-official-notes/comment-page-1

I think i would have preferred if they also kept the rune items, and just make them into class specific rune-items... like Rune Essence of Arcana would be a Wizard rune, and to unlock the passive runes for a skill you'd have to consume them to unlock the next rune for the skill you want... and to unlock the next level you'd need to combine runes... and you wouldn't need to keep them in the inventory for any longer then until you have the level or rune needed for the next skill unlock...

Oh, and Int giving you more Res is great.

Feb 20, 2012#249

Jay

Is there a fucken release date yet?

Or open beta?

Getting tired of seeing the word Diablo 3 and having jack shit in my hands for it.

Feb 20, 2012#250

ScytheRexx

Jay said:
Is there a fucken release date yet?

If it makes you feel better, the last patch is marked as "Retail", so we should be very close now.

Feb 21, 2012#251

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
If it makes you feel better, the last patch is marked as "Retail", so we should be very close now.

No announcement yet = at least 2 months away...

And i'm guessing theRetail thing is like the way it works for D2 and WoW, it's no longer a test patch... and likely the changes are supposed to be permanent... now the actual beta testing can begin...

Feb 21, 2012#252

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
And i'm guessing the Retail thing is like the way it works for D2 and WoW, it's no longer a test patch... and likely the changes are supposed to be permanent... now the actual beta testing can begin...

When they mark a game/patch as "Retail" or "Release" it means it's the gold version of that item. Any patches after it are going to be small quick ones to narrow out any release bugs. That is how it always worked.

Feb 21, 2012#253

@Li3n

Yeah, somehow i doubt it went gold before they even announced a release date...

Feb 21, 2012#254

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Yeah, somehow i doubt it went gold before they even announced a release date...

Remember, "Retail" does not means its 100% done, it just means that the version you see now is the one that will, ultimately, end up on the disk. That means they are moving into production. Any patches we get now will be for a "Day One" release, getting loaded the first time we log into Battle.net. They did the same thing for SC2.

And it's not exactly far fetched to believe they would make the "Gold" patch before announcing the release date, probably due to issues like having to make sure they get everything printed on disks and the packaging developed in time. They have had issues in the past of "jumping the gun" on packaging, causing it to be outdated by the time the game is released. They try to avoid that these days, more so considering the changes the game has undergone since Beta started.

Feb 22, 2012#255

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
Remember, "Retail" does not means its 100% done, it just means that the version you see now is the one that will, ultimately, end up on the disk. That means they are moving into production. Any patches we get now will be for a "Day One" release, getting loaded the first time we log into Battle.net. They did the same thing for SC2.

See, that's where i disagree... i think it's more that this is the version of the skill/rune etc systems that will end up on the disk, but they'll probably have more patches for the beta, but just ones that are mainly bug fixes and number adjustments...

As for packaging, i doubt that it would take them more then 2 months, and since they moved the expected release to Q2 no way they're releasing it in less.

Feb 23, 2012#256

ScytheRexx

Now this is a bit odd. I understand Diablo 3 has more hype then it will probably in the end be able to fulfill, considering how much it's like the original, but you don't have to shoot yourself in the foot over it Blizzard.

A recent post by one of the Community Managers, Bashiok.

On a more serious note, I too worry that we won't be able to meet the expectations people have built up for themselves. Part of my job is managing people's expectations, so... eh... stop it. Stop thinking about how awesome this game could be. Just imagine it's a new M. Night Shyamalan movie. Sure Sixth Sense was amazing and Unbreakable had it's moments, but this right here is the sequel to The Village ... or The Happening ... or Signs ... or any of the movies besides the two I first mentioned. So just like, lower those expectations, but still definitely buy the game please, and everything will be just fine. K?

Really? You are really comparing it with The Happening or The Village? You make it sound like it's going to be shit, that's not the way to get people excited to buy the game.

Feb 24, 2012#257

@Li3n

Facetiousness is not your friend i see?

Feb 24, 2012#258

ScytheRexx

@Li3n said:
Facetiousness is not your friend i see?

Maybe. It's probably the service side of me that expects community managers to be professional rather then compare their game to horrible movies as a form of tongue in cheek humor. I understand now it was likely just a badly done joke.

Feb 24, 2012#259

Telephius

scytherexx said:
Maybe. It's probably the service side of me that expects community managers to be professional rather then compare their game to horrible movies as a form of tongue in cheek humor. I understand now it was likely just a badly done joke.

When you are dealing with an internet community like the WoW/Blizz userbase sometimes tongue in cheek will be more effective than old fashioned face to face customer service. Most of the wow forums posters(ie the loud ones, not sure who nice the diablo ones are) dont undertsand classical professional courtesy and tend to take it like robotic The Man speak and then hate it more so than humourful self depreciation.

Feb 25, 2012#260

@Li3n

ScytheRexx said:
I understand now it was likely just a badly done joke.

Really, "likely"...

Telephius said:
Most of the wow forums posters(ie the loud ones, not sure who nice the diablo ones are) dont undertsand classical professional courtesy and tend to take it like robotic The Man speak

Wait, isn't that exactly what classical professional courtesy is... unless we're talking about classical diplomacy, where the goal was to insult your counterpart using seemingly flattering words...

And old fashioned face to face customer service in the gaming industry was way more unprofessional back in teh day when the actual devs posted in forums...

Mar 15, 2012#261

Dave

Release date: May 15, 2012.

http://us.battle.net/en/int?r=d3

Mar 15, 2012#262

ScytheRexx

It seems the PVP Arena was what was holding them back. Now that they dropped it temporarily they can officially post a release. Can't wait to continue the story past the skeleton king.

Mar 15, 2012#263

Bowielee

So, yeah, prepurchased the digital copy. Totally Pavlovian response. I'm kind of ashamed about how easy it is for this company to get me to buy stuff from them.

Mar 15, 2012#264

Shegokigo

I really need to play Diablo 1&2.....

Mar 15, 2012#265

@Li3n

I knew i should have stayed 5 more minutes at work an post from there... i would have beaten Dave to it by a couple of minutes...

Oh well... guess the following still works:

Told you guys it would be 2 months between announcement and release... I SEE THE FUTURE!!!!!

Mar 15, 2012#266

Bowielee

@Shego Diablo 2 is, hands down, one of the best games ever made. I'd highly recommend it. You can get the battlechest that has the first two games and the Lord of Destruction expansion.

Mar 15, 2012#267

Shegokigo

Thing is, I do already own them. Just that the gameplay was so tedious in Diablo 1 that I couldn't get past it.

Mar 15, 2012#268

Bowielee

Really, I could give you a 2 or 3 sentence summary that would let you skip D1 entirely. Frankly, 2 is far superior to it in story and gameplay.

Mar 15, 2012#269

ScytheRexx

D1, being the first real hack and slash, was a lot slower. They were still figuring out the whole thing.

D2 better refined the system with better skills, faster gameplay and movement. Nothing like playing a Barbarian and leaping around the screen like a muscle man on crack while whirlwinding the face off pygmies. Though my favorite class is still the Necromancer with my huge army of skeletons.

Mar 15, 2012#270

Bowielee

I loved the Assasin. Though, you have to have the LoD expac. to play as her. I was also fond of the Necromancer.

Here's that summary that could let you skip diablo 1

You kill Diablo. It turns out that he is the prince that you were sent to find. Diablo possesses a host by having them come in contact with this red crystal. After you defeat him, the twist is that you then take the crystal and plunge it into your forehead, becoming Diablo's new host.

Mar 15, 2012#271

Dei

I have Diablo I and II and I've never beaten either because the playstyle of that type of game always ends up annoying me. I reinstalled DII recently, got passed part I for the billionth time, then stopped playing again.

Mar 15, 2012#272

ScytheRexx

Assassin would be my third pick, the only class I never really got into was Druid, not sure why but it never appealed to me like the others.

Mar 15, 2012#273

SpecialKO

Loved the paladin, druid and sorceress here. Actually, liked all the classes, just those three in particular.

Mar 15, 2012#274

AshburnerX

This may be my next game. Have a $50 amazon gift card burning a hole in my pocket.

Mar 15, 2012#275

Bowielee

SpecialKO said:
Loved the paladin, druid and sorceress here. Actually, liked all the classes, just those three in particular.

I never really played as the paladin. I mostly stuck to the Necro, Barbarian, and Assasin. The druid was kind of meh until you got the later levels of "were" spells

Mar 16, 2012#276

AshburnerX

My entire problem with Diablo 2 was that it wasn't viable to have a HUGE RAMPAGING HORDE OF SKELETONS as a Necromancer once you got to the final chapter... but it works perfectly for all the chapters before that. So by the time I got there, I had spent a shitload of points I couldn't get back on a skill that wasn't any good anymore.

I'm really hoping Witch Doctor pets work better in this one.

Mar 16, 2012#277

Krisken

Actually right now the Skelliemancer is BAD ASS. You need a lot of high end equipment for boosting the skellies, but they can really beat face.

Mar 16, 2012#278

Bowielee

A) the game is over a decade old, so yes, the graphics are a bit dated, but they still look good.

B) I have no idea what type of system he was running it on, but there haven't been glitches for years after they fixed the companion pathing problems.

Mar 16, 2012#279

Bowielee

Again, I don't kno what type of system he was playing on, but you can go full screen, so the tiny thing is a non issue. Seeing as it's maintained a constant player base since release AND the copies of the battlechest still sell well, I'd say you're in the wrong and it's just not to your taste.

Seeing as it was Shego that asked about if it was worth playing, and she doesn't care about aged graphics as much, I'm sure that's not figuring in her decision.

I have no idea what you mean by "features".

Sounds like it's just not your cup of tea. I however, have played it again recently and still loved it.

Mar 16, 2012#280

Bowielee

eh... arguing that it's a terrible game will not go well for you. As for me, I'm dropping out of the argument.

Mar 16, 2012#281

Bowielee

You're saying that it's aged so poorly that people shouldn't even play it anymore. That is a horrible argument, and if I were you, I'd brace for the shitstorm that will be coming when people with normal sleep schedules start reading this

Also, yes, you're right, the graphics look HORRIBLE:

Mar 16, 2012#282

ScytheRexx

Amorous Eyes said:
Good game (there it is again), but it was never pretty. One color scheme (brown) with some red thrown in here and there.

That is rather funny, considering D3 has a lot more color and many fans were complaining about how lacking in "dark, gothic" feel department it was. Say what you will about the style, but I think when played on the proper screen it still looks great.

Realize, it was a 2D game that came out before the HD craze, and all 2D games of that time and before it, when blown up to try and put on a 32" 1080p, are going to look pretty bad. StarCraft 1, Baldur's Gate, Fallout 1, all of them look "horrible" when put on a screen they were not designed for. I played an emulation of Monkey Island awhile back and it looked like shit when I attempted to full screen it, I don't hold that against it.

I love Torchlight too, it's a great game, but I would never tell anyone not to play D2 and just to play Torchlight, they both should be played because playing D2 helps you better appreciate where the genre is going and how well it has continued to evolve. Torchlight was the next evolution, and now D3 continues on from that. Whether Torchlight 2 continues from there will remain to be seen, but hopefully they do.

Mar 16, 2012#283

Dave

I recently started a game and I agree with both of you. The game is a blast but it doesn't age well. Again, it's a 10 year old game so it just makes sense that it doesn't look that good any longer.

I wish they'd have been able to blow the screen up more than it is. Looking at it in 800x600 just seems stupid now.

And I LOVED the paladin. Put all your points into Vitality to max out your hit points. Get Thorns. Watch the creatures kill themselves as they hit you.

Mar 16, 2012#284

Ravenpoe

Dave said:
I recently started a game and I agree with both of you. The game is a blast but it doesn't age well. Again, it's a 10 year old game so it just makes sense that it doesn't look that good any longer.

I wish they'd have been able to blow the screen up more than it is. Looking at it in 800x600 just seems stupid now.

And I LOVED the paladin. Put all your points into Vitality to max out your hit points. Get Thorns. Watch the creatures kill themselves as they hit you.

A higher resolution would be nice, but 800x600 is the best it can do. Since it uses sprites, increasing the resolution also increases the view distance, which can break some challenges of the game.

Mar 16, 2012#285

ScytheRexx

Dave said:
I wish they'd have been able to blow the screen up more than it is. Looking at it in 800x600 just seems stupid now.

That has always been the problem with using sprites. It's like attempting to load up a raster image in Photoshop and increasing it's size by 200%, all the edges and general definition turns to blurry shit. They would have had to redraw the sprites at a higher resolution, all of them, including every angle a character model or monster would appear. Considering HD was not a craze until a few years later, not much reason to put in that investment.

Mar 16, 2012#286

ScytheRexx

I liked the added color. It can be gothy with color, right?

I like the color too, all I am pointing out is that such can be subjective. Some people actually prefer the dark, drab coloring. It's why every military game for whatever reason is tinted brown, and why some people complain that Mist of Pandaria, an expansion to a game that was already colorful, is too colorful.

Well, I kind of came from the assumption that everyone had already played Diablo II. So if someone said to me they wanted to play it again, I'd advice Torchlight instead. I was a pretty hardcore gamer back then though and have played way too many games.

Well if they already played D2 then it would be good for them to try out new games, though I wouldn't hold it against them if they prefered D2 over Torchlight. I liked Torchlight but the lack of multiplayer really killed the replay value, something I know Torchlight 2 is fixing. All we are saying is, you can prefer one newer game over the old one, but be fair to the old one (it had it's time), and tell people to at least give it a try and come to their own conclusions, because for all they know they might prefer D2 over Torchlight in the end, and I would hate to rob them of that just because you find the resolution a little low. (This is implying they are new players to the genre)

Mar 16, 2012#287

Shegokigo

Interesting Fact: I've never played a Hack and Slash Dungeon Crawler to completion. Yet I own Diablo 1 & 2 and Torchlight. Honestly I've never gotten past 2-3hrs of each game. For some reason they don't seem to draw me in.

Mar 16, 2012#288

ScytheRexx

Shegokigo said:
Interesting Fact: I've never played a Hack and Slash Dungeon Crawler to completion. Yet I own Diablo 1 & 2 and Torchlight. Honestly I've never gotten past 2-3hrs of each game. For some reason they don't seem to draw me in.

Maybe it is the difficulty?

The way the game is designed, the first difficulty level is usually pretty cake walk. It has a few harder moments that jump at you, but mostly you roll over stuff till the last acts a few hours in. I always found that this made getting into the gameplay a little slow starting out, but ramps up a lot as you move into new acts and difficulties.

Once you get to the hard and nightmare difficulties, that is when I find myself having the most fun. It's not overly difficult and you still steamroll a lot of monsters, but the monsters are more plentiful, there are more with random modifiers (fuck you Fallen Shaman with Lightening), you have more cool skills, and it just feels more satisfying. Do the super-boss fight they added in one of the last patches and my goodness, it's insane.

Mar 16, 2012#289

Dave

Shegokigo said:
Interesting Fact: I've never played a Hack and Slash Dungeon Crawler to completion. Yet I own Diablo 1 & 2 and Torchlight. Honestly I've never gotten past 2-3hrs of each game. For some reason they don't seem to draw me in.

You need to get yourself a good heaping of GRIMROCK!!

Mar 16, 2012#290

Shegokigo

ScytheRexx said:
Maybe it is the difficulty?

The way the game is designed, the first difficulty level is usually pretty cake walk. It has a few harder moments that jump at you, but mostly you roll over stuff till the last acts a few hours in. I always found that this made getting into the gameplay a little slow starting out, but ramps up a lot as you move into new acts and difficulties.

Once you get to the hard and nightmare difficulties, that is when I find myself having the most fun. It's not overly difficult and you still steamroll a lot of monsters, but the monsters are more plentiful, there are more with random modifiers (fuck you Fallen Shaman with Lightening), you have more cool skills, and it just feels more satisfying. Do the super-boss fight they added in one of the last patches and my goodness, it's insane.

Well I think the issue was the storyline in both to be honest. There virtually wasn't one for the hours I played Diablo or Torchlight. Perhaps I didn't give them enough time but if after 2-3 straight hours there's still no semblance of something interesting going on, I lost "hype".

Mar 16, 2012#291

ScytheRexx

Well I think the issue was the storyline in both to be honest. There virtually wasn't one for the hours I played Diablo or Torchlight. Perhaps I didn't give them enough time but if after 2-3 straight hours there's still no semblance of something interesting going on, I lost "hype".

Really? I thought D2 did a great job telling the story. You can watch each acts cinematics by themselves and they tell a bit of the story about what is happening. Torchlight was little more odd, it took me awhile to understand what was happening with the crystals and such.

If story is an issue for you, D3 may be more interesting for you. The story is told constantly though all the little missions, you can collect books that are read to you to explain new information, some NPCs will follow you to explain plot points, and even our player characters for the first time are fully voiced, having conversations with the NPCs when you get quests. Bosses are also more vocal and seem to appear more often to taunt you, etc...

Mar 16, 2012#292

Bowielee

ScytheRexx said:
Really? I thought D2 did a great job telling the story. You can watch each acts cinematics by themselves and they tell a bit of the story about what is happening. Torchlight was little more odd, it took me awhile to understand what was happening with the crystals and such.

If story is an issue for you, D3 may be more interesting for you. The story is told constantly though all the little missions, you can collect books that are read to you to explain new information, some NPCs will follow you to explain plot points, and even our player characters for the first time are fully voiced, having conversations with the NPCs when you get quests. Bosses are also more vocal and seem to appear more often to taunt you, etc...

To be fair, she said diablo's story didnt draw her in. The story of the first game is pretty anemic. D2 however is interesting from the word go

Mar 16, 2012#293

ScytheRexx

Bowielee said:
To be fair, she said diablo's story didnt draw her in. The story of the first game is pretty anemic. D2 however is interesting from the word go

Ah missed she was not talking about two. Yes, Diablo 1 is pretty story light.

Mar 16, 2012#294

Ravenpoe

I may be the only person that preferred Diablo 1.

Then again, I was one of those people who played variant characters to make the game harder. Like the naked mages (wears no gear or weapons) or the beyond naked mage (wears only cursed gear). Granted, the core game may have been a bit too easy if I had to make such restrictions for challenge, but it was still fun.

Mar 16, 2012#295

Jay

Releases a few days before my wedding... damn it.

Mar 16, 2012#296

Necronic

Are people in here seriously complaining that a 12 year old game doesn't look good today on a 32" monitor?

Because seriously if you can FIND a game that old that still looks good let me know.

Mar 16, 2012#297

SpecialKO

Jay said:
Releases a few days before my wedding... damn it.

Well, it will keep you out of your fiancee's hair, and there's no way you'll see her in her dress. Just get someone to slap you and make you put on your tux in time.

Mar 16, 2012#298

Necronic

Launch date is May 15

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/03/15/diablo-iii-launches-may-15th/

Mar 16, 2012#299

Bowielee

Necronic said:
Launch date is May 15

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/03/15/diablo-iii-launches-may-15th/

pst, go back a page...

Mar 19, 2012#300

AshburnerX

Krisken said:
Actually right now the Skelliemancer is BAD ASS. You need a lot of high end equipment for boosting the skellies, but they can really beat face.

Well that was a lie... got up to Diablo. He chain casts his fire wave, all my skellies die. He uses his chain lightning, all my skellies die. Even my Golem can't take more than two hits. Decrepify doesn't help at all.

It's impossible for me to beat him because I run out of corpses to raise as skellies. So yeah... Skelliemancer? Still just as gimped as before.

Mar 19, 2012#301

Krisken

You need to get better at Diablo 2.

Mar 19, 2012#302

Dave

But that video isn't the Diablo fight now, is it? Diablo throws out that lightning ring that kills everything and then skelemancers are just boned.

Mar 19, 2012#303

Krisken

Dave said:
But that video isn't the Diablo fight now, is it? Diablo throws out that lightning ring that kills everything and then skelemancers are just boned.

Ok, this is how you beat Diablo early on (because you will, if you are smart, put a point in Clay Golem).
Cast Clay Golem. Hit Diablo early with the curse that increases the damage he takes, when the Golem dies bring it back. If you run out of mana go back to town, get your mana back and recast the Golem.

This will definitely be the hardest fight in the game as the Skellies are not yet big enough to stay alive against Diablo's Ring of Fire. Once you get past this, the game is a fucking cake walk, even later battles against Diablo (the skeletons will just be too big/do too much damage).

I've probably played more Diablo 2 then just about any person here. I do know what I'm talking about with this game. If I start this game up again, my wife will probably kill me.

Mar 19, 2012#304

AshburnerX

That guys lvl 89. I'm only 26 (trying it normal) and only have 4 points in Mastery (with another+3 from my wand) so far. I haven't even gotten around to doing Summon Resist yet. I'm thinking Skelliemancery might only be viable in the end game. I may have to grind some more points in Skeleton Mastery.

EDIT: Yeah, I took a point in Clay. So i just need to run back and forth using my golem?

And yeah, it's just this one fight. Everything else has been a cakewalk.

Mar 19, 2012#305

Krisken

Yup, I didn't kill Diablo until I made lvl 30 as a Skelliemancer. Stick with it, you'll be frustrated now but later on you are going to eat face so much you'll wonder where the difficulty is.

Mar 19, 2012#306

AshburnerX

Krisken said:
Yup, I didn't kill Diablo until I made lvl 30 as a Skelliemancer. Stick with it, you'll be frustrated now but later on you are going to eat face so much you'll wonder where the difficulty is.

What difficulty? This is literally the ONLY fight in the game that causes me any trouble. It's a rare day I have to re-summon a single skellie.

I'll try the golem thing.

Mar 19, 2012#307

Krisken

I'm warning you, though, it still won't be easy. You're going to be running (a lot) and recasting (a lot).

Mar 19, 2012#308

Ravenpoe

Skellimancer is great in multiplayer, as it is the only class that is free to chat as much as he likes during combat, letting you insult everyone else constantly.

Mar 19, 2012#309

AshburnerX

Alright, I took him out. I kinda lucked out and he kept targeting my Clay whenever I summoned him, instead of using one of his AOEs. The Skellies took him down fast after that.

Is there a reason I'm not seeing any more slotted equipment drops? Does the magic effect "x% increased chanced of magic items dropping" decrease the slotted drops? Because I'm swimming in pgems and runewords and I haven't gotten anything decent to use them in.

Mar 19, 2012#310

Krisken

Oh, oh god, that's a bigger topic than I want to tackle! Hold on a sec...

Any questions you have about Magic Find and how it affects the game can be found here.

Increased magic find will reduce the drop of normal items, which include socketed items. In Act 5 you will gain the ability to socket an item, but you'll want to save this for when you need it most later in the game as it is level dependent.

Mar 20, 2012#311

Bowielee

I hate having Diablo 3 just sitting in my hard drive taunting me with it's unavailability until May.

Forums