*** The Official Diablo III Thread ***

Status
Not open for further replies.
bhavv said:
I doubt it will be a flop, but most games over the last couple of years that have promised a lot and been really hyped up havnt been anywhere near as good as they were hyped up to be.
Click to expand...

The thing about Blizzard games is not that they are revolutionary - they take existing game features and seamlessly combine them into something fun to play. That has always been Blizzard's key to success.
Take WoW for example - it wasn't anything new even when it was launched - it was just polished and fun. Same with diablo 2, warcraft 3, etc. I for one am very happy with the graphics design direction they chose - not because my machine won't handle it otherwise - simply because it allows them to focus more on making it a fun game to play, while it retains a timeless easy on the eye look.
 
I didnt find WoW polished or fun.

I couldnt stand the game. I also dont understand how there is any link between grapics and gameplay, nor do I believe that better graphics = worse gameplay, but rather the opposite. Gameplay is not going to to be improved by a weaker graphics engine.
 
bhavv said:
I didnt find WoW polished or fun.

I couldnt stand the game. I also dont understand how there is any link between grapics and gameplay, nor do I believe that better graphics = worse gameplay, but rather the opposite. Gameplay is not going to to be improved by a weaker graphics engine.
Click to expand...

You didn't - 12 million people did. Better graphics may not always translate into worse gameplay but it's not a rare phenomenon where graphics are the only thing a game has going for itself. Gothic 3 anyone? Maybe Blizzard games just aren't your type - just like I could never get into Sacred - in which case all you can do is wait for Torchlight 2 (although in all fairness I find D3 graphics superior to those of T2).
 
Actually the thing I didnt like about WoW wasnt the generic same as everything else gameplay, it was having to pay so much money in fees for such an obsolete game engine.

Gothic 3 was also a brilliant RPG, even better after the community patch came out, one of the best single player RPGs I have ever played.
 
bhavv said:
Actually the thing I didnt like about WoW wasnt the generic same as everything else gameplay, it was having to pay so much money in fees for such an obsolete game engine.

Gothic 3 was also a brilliant RPG, even better after the community patch came out, one of the best single player RPGs I have ever played.
Click to expand...

Both I and metacritic average scores disagree with you on how brilliant a RPG Gothic 3 was ;). Another example of 'I'm so pretty but also very shallow' would be FF XIV. It's free now - yes, mainly because the game was launched in a dire state. On a side note £8.99 a month is a pretty standard price for mmo's to charge. Heaven forbid Blizzard should be making money out of that game :P
 
Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
Both I and metacritic average scores disagree with you on how brilliant a RPG Gothic 3 was ;).
Click to expand...

No it doesnt:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/gothic-3/user-reviews

The people giving bad reviews obviously didnt install the patches before playing.

I will keep this simple: Gothic 3 (without Community Patch 1.73) 4/10 Gothic 3 (with CP 1.73) 9/10
Click to expand...

Also, if we are judging by metacritic, then WoW is a much worse game than Gothic 3:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm/user-reviews

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft/user-reviews
 
Last edited:
bhavv said:
No it doesnt:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/gothic-3/user-reviews

The people giving bad reviews obviously didnt install the patches before playing.



Also, if we are judging by metacritic, then WoW is a much worse game than Gothic 3:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm/user-reviews

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft/user-reviews
Click to expand...

By your links I also see that WoW has received more positive feedback than Gothic 3. And the negatives? A whole lot of them from butthurt kiddies who got their classes nerfed, got their accounts hacked out of their own fault, or angry that top level consists of routine activity (which mmo doesn't?) - by contrast the negatives with regards to Gothic 3 are about how bugged the game is or how bad the combat mechanics are. Do you really want to put those two complaints on the same level?
Saying that the game got better after a community-made patch also tells me one thing: lack of dev support. Wanna hear a funny thing? Diablo 2 - the game that got released at the beginning of the previous decade was fairly recently (last year I think?) patched by Blizzard in response to community feedback. That is why Blizzard's games are loved by so many.
 
Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
lack of dev support.
Click to expand...

They went bankrupt didnt they? Both Jowood (Gothic 3), and Ascaron (Sacred 2) went bankrupt and out of business, the devs no longer had a job, went elsewhere and dev support for those games were abandoned.

Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
And the negatives? A whole lot of them from butthurt kiddies who got their classes nerfed, got their accounts hacked out of their own fault, or angry that top level consists of routine activity (which mmo doesn't?).
Click to expand...

Actually I see and have heard plenty of valid complaints against WoW from people who didnt like the game, and dont fall into your 'butthurt' category.

This user review pretty much sums up WoW for me, and is something that I strongly hate about such games:

it's all about kill 30 pigs and collect 100 livers which will take you about 2 hours to do it, and then you'll find yourself doin the same thing over and over again and pay for it, while dealing with the 10 year olds, and it'll be all about who's got better gear in the end, waste of time and money!!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bhavv said:
They went bankrupt didnt they? Both Jowood (Gothic 3), and Ascaron (Sacred 2) went bankrupt and out of business, the devs no longer had a job, went elsewhere and dev support for those games were abandoned.
Click to expand...

Jowood went bankrupt recently. Why? Because their last few games were of poor quality. I'm guessing the Sacred games didn't quite sell well enough to keep the company alive, either.

This user review pretty much sums up WoW for me, and is something that I strongly hate about such games:
Click to expand...

Then you clearly haven't been playing the game lately because Blizzard have introduced a lot of variety into the game as time went on. Interaction with immature players is pretty much a given in any multi-player game that's accessible to the average player. Nothing Blizzard can do about it, nor should they be faulted for it.
 
Last edited:
Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
Then you clearly haven't been playing the game lately because Blizzard have introduced a lot of variety into the game as time went on.
Click to expand...

Such as? Any actual story driven quests, different missions and a plot line like in Guild Wars?

I havnt played the game any longer than a month, and it was all 'kill this, collect that' with absolutely no story or lore.

Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
Interaction with immature players is pretty much a given in any multi-player game that's accessible to the average player. Nothing Blizzard can do about it, nor should they be faulted for it.
Click to expand...

In the games I play, I dont have to play with such players if I dont want to. In fact I dont have to play with anyone else at all if I dont want to.

Diablo 3 is one of those games, at least I think it is.
 
Last edited:
Cat_In_Pyjamas said:
Jowood went bankrupt recently. Why? Because their last few games were of poor quality. I'm guessing the Sacred games didn't quite sell well enough to keep the company alive, either.



Then you clearly haven't been playing the game lately because Blizzard have introduced a lot of variety into the game as time went on. Interaction with immature players is pretty much a given in any multi-player game that's accessible to the average player. Nothing Blizzard can do about it, nor should they be faulted for it.
Click to expand...

The problem with sacred 2 wasn't that it was poor quality it actually was that the devs put too much in the game which ended up causing problems both in the timeline of the game's launch , the cost of development and the problems the game had on launch. The game after the first few patches was a lot on fun to play.

The other issue sacred 2 had was in the stupid choice of having different distributors for the different region. which screwed up the royalities as well ascausing further issues with the expansion being launched in europe but not in the US. This particularly put financial pressure on Ascaron to get the expansion out the door and it was released bugged which unfortunately wasn't fixed as by that time Ascaron had exssentially shut down
 
bhavv said:
Such as? Any actual story driven quests, different missions and a plot line like in Guild Wars?
Click to expand...

Plenty of story driven quest lines - especially after the old world revamp but they were present even during vanilla wow times. What I find is that a lot of players simply don't bother reading the quest text and then complain that the game has no story to tell which is absolute nonsense.

Top level quests have been put on random cycles so as to prevent players doing the same one quest every day.

I havnt played the game any longer than a month, and it was all 'kill this, collect that' with absolutely no story or lore.
Click to expand...

Which level did you get to and when was this?

In the games I play, I dont have to play with such players if I dont want to. In fact I dont have to play with anyone else at all if I dont want to.

Diablo 3 is one of those games, at least I think it is.
Click to expand...

The irony of that statement is...so is WoW - if you wish to pay 8.99 a month and play it solo, you can. Granted - you won't be able to visit certain dungeons alone but there is plenty to do in the form of achievements to keep someone occupied for months. Even when you play in groups you can limit yourself to the people you know and you won't have to interact with 10 year olds.
 
bhavv said:
Actually I see and have heard plenty of valid complaints against WoW from people who didnt like the game, and dont fall into your 'butthurt' category.

This user review pretty much sums up WoW for me, and is something that I strongly hate about such games:

"it's all about kill 30 pigs and collect 100 livers which will take you about 2 hours to do it, and then you'll find yourself doin the same thing over and over again and pay for it, while dealing with the 10 year olds, and it'll be all about who's got better gear in the end, waste of time and money!!"
Click to expand...

Rofl, this is a total joke. Pretty much every game is about doing something repetitively when you strip everything away. CoD is just shooting people over and over. Rock Band is just hitting the same buttons in sequence for the same songs. Forza is just about driving your car around in big circles.

I'm actually belly laughing that you're trying to compare WoW with games like Gothic 3. I don't play WoW anymore, but you're talking about something that is probably going to go down as the most financially successful game in history.

People love Blizzard and their games because they are one of the few developers left that actually seem to care about the stuff they produce, rather than pumping out thinly veiled rehashes every year to fleece their fan base.
 

The most recent announcement for those who have missed it. Although I am really posting this to try and get the thread back on topic :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom