EPT- team deathmatch is not gonna happen anytime soon, because they feel it's impossible to meet "high quality blizzard experience"
- duels will come with patch 1.7 early in 2013
GG diablo 3
PvP Blog is out
| Forum Index > Diablo 3 |
|
Corvi
Germany1406 Posts
- team deathmatch is not gonna happen anytime soon, because they feel it's impossible to meet "high quality blizzard experience" - duels will come with patch 1.7 early in 2013 GG diablo 3 | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
| ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
Seriously, this is a disaster of a development process. | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:16 Kickboxer wrote: In the list of top 10 most botched things of all time this game is somewhere between Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the Pepsi commercial that vaporized MJ's hair. haha this made me laugh... never thought I just wouldn't care what diablo had to say ;(( Sad day... such potential! | ||
|
Goshawk.
United Kingdom5338 Posts
| ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
 ((I am a combination of mad, sad, and disappointed. I feel like someone just told me about Santa Claus. | ||
|
Corvi
Germany1406 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
zomgE
498 Posts
not adding arena is definitely weird since it's the thing they were advertising and not dueling. | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:16 Kickboxer wrote: In the list of top 10 most botched things of all time this game is somewhere between Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the Pepsi commercial that vaporized MJ's hair. Holy fuck THis is gold | ||
|
Blix
Netherlands873 Posts
| ||
|
Caryc
Germany330 Posts
just make pvp possible and people will make rules to balance it out anyways,same thing as in d2. | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
This reminds of a sports team that is just failing epicly and has all all-star players... you have to just blame someone and move on. Or else your fans really just leave (too late for d3 probably). | ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/7415514923 | ||
|
BoilOlo
United States139 Posts
"Simply fighting each other with no other objectives or choices to make gets old relatively quickly." but apparently playing the same 4 acts with the same monsters and same weapons isn't??? if this is the case for something that isn't even released yet, why not give us, the devoted community, new monsters, new weapons, and new areas to clear for a game he qutoes himself as "designed to be a PvE-first kind of game"? and as far as the PvP thing, the game should have been released with it from the start. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
I can't beleieve how bad the development of D3 is. All my friends gave up on the game, and I gave up on it too, but told myself that this is Blizzard and they never quit until a game is profitable, and with the state of D3 they would NEVER be able to sell an expansion until things are fixed. So (even though all my friends thought I was crazy) I thought that there may be some hope for the future. But this is just a JOKE right now. After all these months they basically are giving us no information on the PvP mode???? This also brings up the question, why the HELL was the blog delayed for a month???? "Sorry, we need a little more time to tell you NOTHING!". I guess they had to take a few extra weeks to come up with BULLSHIT to fill in the gaps of nothing. They probably had absolutely nothing to report so they planned a quick duel mode to give people something at all! This is such a bad situation that even if a brand new indie company was developing this game, most people would say that's no excuse for this. But this is fucking Blizzard, a company who made like 3 or 4 of the 5 biggest games ever!!! It's a damn shame that Blizzard isn't the same company as they used to be, and it makes me kind of ashamed that I'm actually going to be buying HotS.... These people don't deserve our money! | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
This "Blog" is a complete waste of time. | ||
|
Big G
Italy835 Posts
| ||
|
Zozo
Brazil2579 Posts
| ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
| ||
|
Aceace
Turkey1305 Posts
He said absolutely nothing. I mean NOTHING. Let me write another PvP blog: "We tried team deathmatch. Blablablabla. Then we removed it. We will give somekind of duel blablabla.. But we don't have any info about that. We blablabla crazy runes blablabla fireballs blabla swing crazy-ass swords blablabla..........." | ||
|
kAra
Germany1379 Posts
| ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
On December 28 2012 04:00 kAra wrote: this is unbelievable, how can he call that shit a blog I don't know, Failsafe had some worse ones. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345209 On June 16 2012 04:08 Failsafe wrote: I have today decided to apply to Blizzard Entertain products to create the game to be recognized "Starcraft 3." Blizzard's great success in the creation of Starcraft II: WoL is that Blizzard successfully demonstrates itself to be capable of producing a game like Starcraft 2. The great victory won is evidence that 'a-move Zerg', Infestorz 3 talentz, and 255 or infinite unit selection is a serious design flaw. The insight provided from this social commentary on the greatest humanitarian crisis known to man (the 'Untouchables' in India) is abolished. Thus, Blizzard is the most valuable company on the planet despite its known human or animals' rights infringements. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
graan
Germany589 Posts
| ||
|
Iranon
United States983 Posts
Okay, so here's the deal. We know you're all asking for PvP, and it'll be here Soon™. Probably next year. We'll see. For now, we have no meaningful details of any kind to share with you. Frankly, internal testing showed that implementing PvP in our game wasn't fun at all, even the testers quit after a few hours. Also, we've dug ourselves an impossibly deep hole as far as class balance goes, so we're going to try to brainstorm some flashy ways of distracting you from that first. There, I saved you from having to read the article. | ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
fire Jay wilson. | ||
|
Slackzftw
Germany361 Posts
| ||
|
cdpham
United States41 Posts
| ||
|
Gorvin
United States22 Posts
| ||
|
hoby2000
United States918 Posts
GG Blizzard. First SC2 now D3. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + [image blocked] | ||
|
-UMADIMSTYLIN-
Cuba292 Posts
| ||
|
Footler
United States560 Posts
| ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/il8zb.jpg) | ||
|
Andre
Slovenia3523 Posts
I'm more interested in how the dueling system will work. Would be great to have some kind of a tournament-like structure in game and custom arenas to battle it out with others. Community made tournaments with certain item/spell restrictions could make up for some fun PvP play. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
To Blizzard releasing a shitty multiplayer TDM that will go largely unused doesn't count as 'having PvP' and yet you people bitch about it? Yeah Blizz kinda blows and dropped the ball on a timely PvP release, but between releasing crap to fulfill their obligation and releasing a good PvP mode they're aiming for the latter. I don't know why you all would want the former. Anyways to me this indicates we're probably going to see something that borrows a bit from the MOBA genre in terms of objectives & mix of PvE content with PvP. | ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
On December 28 2012 05:54 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why people are mad about TDM, at least we get dueling. If TDM really has no objective and no ranking-system, then it's just temporary mindless fun. I'm more interested in how the dueling system will work. Would be great to have some kind of a tournament-like structure in game and custom arenas to battle it out with others. Community made tournaments with certain item/spell restrictions could make up for some fun PvP play. I bought diablo 3 because PvP was promised. I don't have any desire to farm loot only to be able to farm for loot faster. | ||
|
Footler
United States560 Posts
On December 28 2012 05:54 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why people are mad about TDM, at least we get dueling. If TDM really has no objective and no ranking-system, then it's just temporary mindless fun. I'm more interested in how the dueling system will work. Would be great to have some kind of a tournament-like structure in game and custom arenas to battle it out with others. Community made tournaments with certain item/spell restrictions could make up for some fun PvP play. I don't think you understand. You are getting dueling and that is it. 1v1 outside of a town. <-- that is the dueling 'system.' I'll be surprised if they even let us team up and duel outside of town, not to mention the 4 player cap that I'm sure will remain unchanged. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On December 28 2012 06:02 Bosu wrote: I bought diablo 3 because PvP was promised. I don't have any desire to farm loot only to be able to farm for loot faster. I don't.... They promised a game that would have PvP without a concern for balance, no ladder, and under the assumption that gear was likely to play a deciding factor in who wins or loses. Why would this be desirable at all to you? | ||
|
Risljaninasim
Netherlands228 Posts
On a sidenote: i'm still playing the game and enjoying it. | ||
|
tomwizz
524 Posts
"After working for a few years we still have no idea how to make PvP work, So we give you a Dueling instead." GG Diablo3 team. And this game still doesn't have a custom chat channel, I don't think duel will be fun like D2. | ||
|
reki-
Netherlands327 Posts
| ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Ryps
Romania2740 Posts
| ||
|
RabidSeagull
United States220 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:16 Kickboxer wrote: In the list of top 10 most botched things of all time this game is somewhere between Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the Pepsi commercial that vaporized MJ's hair. LOL. One of the funnier posts I've read on these forums, simple yet hilarious | ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:39 Praetorial wrote: I wrote a thread about it on Blizz forums http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/7415514923 O.o my thread exploded and is now hovering at the top of General Discussion. And as to why they don't fire him - it's not a major concern since they've already made enough money off of the franchise, and he's not costing them anything but fans. | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On December 28 2012 06:22 reki- wrote: What they don't want is a forum full of 14yo whiners that complain that pvp is imbalanced because they would have to balance pvp and that's not what they are intending to do. No they dont. Did you ever pvp in d2? Shit was inbalanced as hell, and yet it still happened. They don't HAVE to do shit about the crybabies. Those will always exist, no matter what. There's no point in even trying to please them. You might as well please the rest of the playerbase by letting us whack the crap out of each other. Of course it's "mindless" it's fucking diablo. So is farming. I just want to go in 5v5 and spam buttons and die or get kills. Why is that so difficult to understand? It's ok if I go into mp10 and just spam buttons, but not against other players? What a backward ass thought process. | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
I honestly feel bad for every non-management designer and artist and programmer working on this project. If this is the kind of shit we see being released to the public it must be an absolute backstabbing nightmare clusterfuck of failure and politics on the internal side. Regardless, the entire Diablo 3 team has been an unmitigated disaster and if Blizzard doesn't completely purge and reboot a huge portion of it then I would call that a good sign that the company is beyond saving. | ||
|
Lokian
United States699 Posts
The incentive to PVP should be betting, or even getting the other's entire gear. I think thats rewarding enough. Regarding balance, I think skills just needs to be scaled. The real imbalance come from the equipments, which was always like that in diablo 2. You don't need to balance that since those items can always get better. | ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
On December 28 2012 06:22 reki- wrote: What they don't want is a forum full of 14yo whiners that complain that pvp is imbalanced because they would have to balance pvp and that's not what they are intending to do. bunch of 14yo whiners that would play they game. now you just get a bunch of pissed of XXyo guys that dont play the game. its sad what a huge fail this is.if they atleast ONCE not insist on their stubborn ways they couldve just went with the d2 pvp model as a start from release. people happy having fun and maybe some leagues emerge that balance the game with rules. that wouldve made lotsa people happy (and maybe less wouldve quit after the initial dissappointment of inferno with something else to do) and given them huge data on what people do,like and balance. instead we have this clusterfuck. evryone is pissed off, we maybe get basic dueling soon that shoudlve been in from release and the years long promised pvp mode is benched cause after years and years they couldnt come up with anything. in addition to that it seems like they are going to do some horde mode whatever pseudo multiplayer competition pve thing instead of basic pvp. just meh. it always baffles me how devs totally ignore the roots of a game and refuse to learn from the past. /edit mp&uber patch was good tho,just a bit late. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
| ||
|
Tyree
1508 Posts
What is depressing and sad is just how little i cared when i read this news, i am (or well..was) a huge Diablo and Blizzard fan, and they have botched this game so badly from the start that i dont even care about anything regarding the game. I know, cool story bro etc, if they tomorrow said they accidentally deleted all our characters i would not even give it a shrug. The *only* thing that would make me give a shit about this game and its inevitable expansion pack if they fired Jay Wilson and whoever has been responsible for how this game has been run into the ground. In 2010 they had a rune system, skill tree and PvP + Arenas, we are 3 years away soon from that and we have less. Its not that firing Jay Wilson would make the game instantly better but at least it would offer a happy yet bitter ending to this goddamn nightmare that has been Diablo 3. I could finally close the book on it and just be happy that those who weren't qualified were at least removed from their position. SC fans have no idea how lucky we are, the biggest complaint about Bowder we got is he likes rocks on maps and says terrible terrible damage. Whereas Wilson has done the unthinkable, forget about John Romero because Daikatana had no chance of ever being good, forget that fat guy who was responsible for Duke Nukem Forever because all Duke ever was, was a relic from the 1980s action movies in stale even at that point Doom clones. Wilson did far worse than them, in his words, fuck that loser | ||
|
Big G
Italy835 Posts
| ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
MasterCynical
505 Posts
| ||
|
Dotq
Norway235 Posts
If they couldnt see from the very beginning that powerfull gear / skills would make d3 pvp imba as fuck they are idiots. As for incentive to play it??? LADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEERRRRRRRRRR | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
| ||
|
Kergy
Peru2011 Posts
Shelved my copy. Called the cops. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:48 Zozo wrote: How can these people keep their jobs? We fire people over being late, let alone not working for 5 years. They rode the wave of diablo 2 well enough to get people to buy D3 blindly. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:26 Chairman Ray wrote: When PvP has been in development for this long, this kind of thing is completely unacceptable. An apology letter would have been appropriate a few months ago, but not this late. At this point, people have spend countless hours of time and even money so that they can gear up their character in anticipation of PvP. Absolutely, *especially* since they delayed the PvP blog... and for what? To get our hopes up to crush them it looks like. The dueling announcement is a total joke. They know it's not balanced but they're ok with giving it to us. The rest of the PvP features they aren''t giving us because it's not balanced... If anything Dueling should have been available from Day 1 and that would have given them some insight into what was going to break PvP. Instead PvP is probably going to be part of the expansion at this rate and still be terrible. | ||
|
Parametric
Canada1261 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:13 Dotq wrote: In what other work would you not get fired for failing like this..... If they couldnt see from the very beginning that powerfull gear / skills would make d3 pvp imba as fuck they are idiots. As for incentive to play it??? LADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEERRRRRRRRRR I think i remember them saying that they wouldn't even try to balance PvP, doesn't really matter, RMAH and AH in general hamstrung a lot of decisions imo. | ||
|
Silentenigma
Turkey2037 Posts
LoL... They are trying to balance pvp in wow for like 7 years and game is still imbalanced as shit.What an absurd excuse.They should just admit that they made a unfinished/untested game and sold it too early just for money.Since activision merged with blizzard all I see is greed from that company. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
Looks like PvP is no longer a promise. Blizzard took out PvP in the product description, and added in dueling. Wonder if it is actually legal to edit their product features after people have purchased the game. | ||
|
setzer
United States3284 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
All you had to do was flag players for combat, add an aura to reduce damage&healing, and make an arena(s) for 1v1 combat. That's about 2 weeks of development at most. Who the fuck cares if it's not balanced, it's so gear dependant that balance is going to be fickle at best. Instead more than 6 months after release they've almost finished the 1v1 portion. Are you fucking serious? | ||
|
Confuse
2238 Posts
| ||
|
sickle
New Zealand656 Posts
| ||
|
dartoo
India2889 Posts
Hmm...did they say PvP will eventually release in vanilla D3? Or will it magically show up in the expansions, that you'd have to pay for. | ||
|
Trevoc
United States145 Posts
| ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On December 28 2012 10:55 Amui wrote: I was expecting PvP to be polished, with multiple game modes. All you had to do was flag players for combat, add an aura to reduce damage&healing, and make an arena(s) for 1v1 combat. That's about 2 weeks of development at most. Who the fuck cares if it's not balanced, it's so gear dependant that balance is going to be fickle at best. Instead more than 6 months after release they've almost finished the 1v1 portion. Are you fucking serious? Yes 2 weeks of development... sure. IN that time they will code everything and create artwork and bug test everything. I'm pretty sure you have no idea what goes in to making a game. Just creating 1 tree to go in the arena can take days, you've got to concept it, then 3d model it, then code in how it reacts to the environment around it.... its not just draw a tree, plonk it somewhere in the map and its done. Everyone seems so entitled these days, if they don't feel its up to scratch why would you want it in the game? D3 players have spent every day since release talking about how they released the game too quickly and how they should have waited, but when they do just that.... everyone complains!!!! you are all children, please grow up. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
| ||
|
Trevoc
United States145 Posts
On December 28 2012 11:57 emythrel wrote: Yes 2 weeks of development... sure. IN that time they will code everything and create artwork and bug test everything. I'm pretty sure you have no idea what goes in to making a game. Just creating 1 tree to go in the arena can take days, you've got to concept it, then 3d model it, then code in how it reacts to the environment around it.... its not just draw a tree, plonk it somewhere in the map and its done. Everyone seems so entitled these days, if they don't feel its up to scratch why would you want it in the game? D3 players have spent every day since release talking about how they released the game too quickly and how they should have waited, but when they do just that.... everyone complains!!!! you are all children, please grow up. We PAID for the features on the cover art. One of the features is not in game and probably won't be until Spring. We have every reason to be mad about this | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
On December 28 2012 11:57 emythrel wrote: Yes 2 weeks of development... sure. IN that time they will code everything and create artwork and bug test everything. I'm pretty sure you have no idea what goes in to making a game. Just creating 1 tree to go in the arena can take days, you've got to concept it, then 3d model it, then code in how it reacts to the environment around it.... its not just draw a tree, plonk it somewhere in the map and its done. Everyone seems so entitled these days, if they don't feel its up to scratch why would you want it in the game? D3 players have spent every day since release talking about how they released the game too quickly and how they should have waited, but when they do just that.... everyone complains!!!! you are all children, please grow up. Please tell me you're joking. Being upset about losing $60 to what is basically turned out to be a scam.... is acting like a child? Any other company that advertises something, charges money for it, and then doesn't deliver gets sued. But we're wrong to complain when it happens to us? Okay. | ||
|
OFCORPSE
Sweden355 Posts
| ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
EPic Epic Fail. Blizz continually fails to understand the most basic things about gamers. Yes we like chat rooms yes we like to kill other people. Yes there are people that do not need an achievement every time to feel good about ourselves. No, We dont like things being promised to us that we have to wait for past release. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On December 28 2012 12:35 OFCORPSE wrote: I'm SO glad I cashed out when I did :D lucky, how much did u get? | ||
|
Bibbit
Canada5377 Posts
| ||
|
VirtuallyJesse
United States398 Posts
| ||
|
dartoo
India2889 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:48 Wuster wrote: Absolutely, *especially* since they delayed the PvP blog... and for what? To get our hopes up to crush them it looks like. Yeah I'm thinking they did not want to make the blog before xmas, just to try and squeeze as much sales as possible,plus prevent more rage at acti-blizz. Also remember that the blog was supposed to go up last month-ish, but jay that these things "were not up to him to decide". | ||
|
Emnjay808
United States10656 Posts
because they feel it's impossible to meet "high quality blizzard experience" Cut the bullshit Blizzard. | ||
|
Trozz
Canada3454 Posts
I made an abridged version. No words were added. | ||
|
Bibbit
Canada5377 Posts
On December 28 2012 14:23 Trozz wrote: This blog is so bad. I made an abridged version. No words were added. Haha "Putting people into BlizzCons is good enough" :D Wp! | ||
|
Skyro
United States1823 Posts
| ||
|
Geneq
Poland165 Posts
high quality blizzard experience There is no such thing anymore | ||
|
Ryan307 :)
United States1289 Posts
I'm so glad I decided against grinding to paragon 100 To be fair I've had some fun in hardcore though :D | ||
|
Azaryah
United States55 Posts
On December 28 2012 08:13 Dotq wrote: In what other work would you not get fired for failing like this..... The CIA | ||
|
fuzzylogic44
Canada2633 Posts
| ||
|
HyunA
Romania362 Posts
RIP Blizzard february 1991 - may 2012. | ||
|
aliquis
Austria38 Posts
I think that speaks pretty much for itself... | ||
|
nimbim
Germany984 Posts
| ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On December 28 2012 19:16 HyunA wrote: If Jay Wilson will show his face at the next Blizzacon, i think people should boo him and throw things at him. This is totally unacceptable and altho it hurts me to say this, Blizzard is nothing but a wreck of what it used to be. RIP Blizzard february 1991 - may 2012. ... why? Diablo 3 sold millions of copies and many players played for hundreds of hours. Diablo 3 scored 88 on metacritics. (The Diablo got 94 (topping the original Starcraft, which scored 88), Diablo 2 got just 88 too, Lord of Destruction only 87.) Wings of Liberty got score of 93. Despite declining playercound, WoW still seems to be a big game in the MMO genre. Does anyone really doubt that a yet-to-be-announced Diablo 3 expansion will do for the game what so far any Blizzard expansion did? | ||
|
Callynn
Netherlands917 Posts
Anyone got an idea what that alternative might be? Are we talking about WoW-style battlegrounds (as they said that those pose less problems)? Maybe they mean some sort of PvE speedrun challenges between teams? Anyway, scrapping a poor product doesn't have to be a bad thing, the bad thing is that they make everyone wait and give us excuses. On December 28 2012 19:16 HyunA wrote: If Jay Wilson will show his face at the next Blizzacon, i think people should boo him and throw things at him. This is totally unacceptable and altho it hurts me to say this, Blizzard is nothing but a wreck of what it used to be. RIP Blizzard february 1991 - may 2012. I think your attitude says a lot more about you than about Blizzard. I find it quite repulsing that you call upon people to boo at someone. | ||
|
MacroHeroWanabe
France26 Posts
If they feel like it's not enough of a content just make some more content guys! But please let ppl play deathmatch for fun as minor game mode and focus on something bigger for later... I don't care if CC wiz or whatever build or item is imbalanced and that I might get bored after a few hours because I don't use it, there's plenty of time to patch it later . IMO players just want to have a good old bloodbath in the arena they teased us with at blizzcon ^^ The best thing to do, as stated some ppl, would be to give tools to the comunity to improve it in some way but I don't feel like it is something they want... | ||
|
HyunA
Romania362 Posts
On December 28 2012 20:45 Callynn wrote: What I don't understand is why no one here realizes this means they are working on something different PvP related that could potentially make the game more fun. Anyone got an idea what that alternative might be? Are we talking about WoW-style battlegrounds (as they said that those pose less problems)? Maybe they mean some sort of PvE speedrun challenges between teams? Anyway, scrapping a poor product doesn't have to be a bad thing, the bad thing is that they make everyone wait and give us excuses. I think your attitude says a lot more about you than about Blizzard. I find it quite repulsing that you call upon people to boo at someone. Well i was just saying, not that i would really do that. I'm pretty sure a lot of people had it with this BS, especially on diablo 3. The game is basically the same from the beggining and altho i didn't admit it until recently, it pretty much sucked after i finished the acts for tens of times. Very few real tweaks and innovations and very little communication with the community. I was defending them (the people who call the shots, not the actual programmers, designers, etc. who made an excellent game) until very recently, as i said. But it's not worth it anymore. | ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
| ||
|
Ambre
France416 Posts
We must admit though that Blizzard has some huge balls for doing this. They know how bad it is for their PR, image and business in general. IMO there are very few chances that D3 reach a good player base now. That game is probably the first (and terrible) big failure by Blizzard =/ It's sad. | ||
|
Jetaap
France4814 Posts
I still remember when they released diablo, and claimed that if PVP was not released before automn 2012 it would be a disaster, and that they wouldn't even think about it. Every sign (mostly activity on community sites) shows that d3 was not able to keep player in the game for the long run. I think blizzard logic is that they will use PvP in order to generate hype for the game before release of the expansion. They know they will probably get better numbers with relying on short lived hype rather than a stable community, as they are not able to make a legitimately good game that keeps people playing without artificial incentives. | ||
|
Kevin_Sorbo
Canada3217 Posts
On December 28 2012 20:45 Callynn wrote: What I don't understand is why no one here realizes this means they are working on something different PvP related that could potentially make the game more fun. Anyone got an idea what that alternative might be? Are we talking about WoW-style battlegrounds (as they said that those pose less problems)? Maybe they mean some sort of PvE speedrun challenges between teams? Anyway, scrapping a poor product doesn't have to be a bad thing, the bad thing is that they make everyone wait and give us excuses. I think your attitude says a lot more about you than about Blizzard. I find it quite repulsing that you call upon people to boo at someone. that should happen though. he is the face of the franchise. the franchise sucks ballz deep. People paid for said franchise. Now they have the right to boo to their content because what they paid for sucked. | ||
|
GunSec
1095 Posts
| ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
| ||
|
FinestHour
United States18466 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Well look at it this way... Imagine if you owned a 1999 sports car of a fictional maker run by Blizzard called Endo. You loved that car in 1999 but some things were a little off. In the following years, Endo implements several recalls where they enhance the car's features. Then in 2003 they release a special GT-R version of that car. That bad boy is amazing and a huge improvement over the stock 1999 version. You follow that car for years but eventually it's 2010 and starts to feel out dated. But Endo has promised a new lineup for 2012 showcasing it with pride at the auto show. It's finally 2012 and the 2012 line up is released. You buy one and then realized that the car requires a constant GPS signal to the satellite in order to start the car. Absolutely ridiculous right? But Endo claims it's to reduce auto theft. But more people than expected buys the same car and there isn't enough server power to activate all the cars at once. You then sit around for a few days waiting for the servers and the satellite to be upgraded so you can drive your new car while Endo is already pocketing your hard earned money. Finally they fix all the connection issues and you can finally drive your car. Instead, you soon discover the car is missing a bunch of cool features the older models had. The new model doesn't have a built in CD player, no cruise control, only two settings for the windshield wiper and no manual version, all models are automatic shift. Because Endo believes drivers prefer the simplest driving experience, the only modes available on on the shifter is Drive, Reverse and Neutral. The car is designed with major incompatibilities with any third-party parts. Therefore, modding or tuning the car for extra power to race or showcase is strictly limited to whatever Endo themselves allow you to have. But hold the phone, Endo has promised to release a series of tune-up parts and accessories to make sure your new car can finally tear up some road. BUT...after 7-8 months, the lead designer goes public to tell everyone that they decided they didn't like the upgrades they had been working on so they will need more time to come up with something that all drivers will enjoy. The good news however, is that they will finally release a manual stick shift version of the car so aspiring racers and car enthusiasts can "mess around" a little bit. That is how ridiculous things would look like if Diablo 3 was a car and Blizzard was an auto-maker. | ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
On December 29 2012 01:33 FinestHour wrote: my favorite description from the bnet thread spoilered for length + Show Spoiler + Well look at it this way... Imagine if you owned a 1999 sports car of a fictional maker run by Blizzard called Endo. You loved that car in 1999 but some things were a little off. In the following years, Endo implements several recalls where they enhance the car's features. Then in 2003 they release a special GT-R version of that car. That bad boy is amazing and a huge improvement over the stock 1999 version. You follow that car for years but eventually it's 2010 and starts to feel out dated. But Endo has promised a new lineup for 2012 showcasing it with pride at the auto show. It's finally 2012 and the 2012 line up is released. You buy one and then realized that the car requires a constant GPS signal to the satellite in order to start the car. Absolutely ridiculous right? But Endo claims it's to reduce auto theft. But more people than expected buys the same car and there isn't enough server power to activate all the cars at once. You then sit around for a few days waiting for the servers and the satellite to be upgraded so you can drive your new car while Endo is already pocketing your hard earned money. Finally they fix all the connection issues and you can finally drive your car. Instead, you soon discover the car is missing a bunch of cool features the older models had. The new model doesn't have a built in CD player, no cruise control, only two settings for the windshield wiper and no manual version, all models are automatic shift. Because Endo believes drivers prefer the simplest driving experience, the only modes available on on the shifter is Drive, Reverse and Neutral. The car is designed with major incompatibilities with any third-party parts. Therefore, modding or tuning the car for extra power to race or showcase is strictly limited to whatever Endo themselves allow you to have. But hold the phone, Endo has promised to release a series of tune-up parts and accessories to make sure your new car can finally tear up some road. BUT...after 7-8 months, the lead designer goes public to tell everyone that they decided they didn't like the upgrades they had been working on so they will need more time to come up with something that all drivers will enjoy. The good news however, is that they will finally release a manual stick shift version of the car so aspiring racers and car enthusiasts can "mess around" a little bit. That is how ridiculous things would look like if Diablo 3 was a car and Blizzard was an auto-maker. Wait, that's from the thread I created :D That was one of my favorite posts in it of yesterday. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On December 29 2012 01:34 Praetorial wrote: Wait, that's from the thread I created :D That was one of my favorite posts in it of yesterday. Epic post | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Jay Wilson and Dustin Browder both deserve to be fired immediately. 8 months of development then pull it back because it isn't good enough but replace it only with a pitiful 1v1?? Seriously how difficult can it be to balance PvP, there are TONS of features you can tweak with... It's a rediculously easy task if you just give the community some time.. | ||
|
Chylo
United States220 Posts
So how does Blizzard try to solve all these complaints? They can: 1. Try to adjust all the abilities that are imbalanced. (And making a mess of the PVE) 2. Have abilities function differently in PVP. (or do a lot less damage in PVP or whatever) Blizzard has always hated this "2 games" solution for some reason. I don't think they like any of the solutions. I don't buy this nonsense that "people got bored of team deathmatch after a few hours" Ya right. Does blizz realize how many HUGELY successful games are based on this exact concept? | ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
On December 28 2012 20:32 [F_]aths wrote: ... why? Diablo 3 sold millions of copies and many players played for hundreds of hours. Diablo 3 scored 88 on metacritics. (The Diablo got 94 (topping the original Starcraft, which scored 88), Diablo 2 got just 88 too, Lord of Destruction only 87.) Wings of Liberty got score of 93. Despite declining playercound, WoW still seems to be a big game in the MMO genre. Does anyone really doubt that a yet-to-be-announced Diablo 3 expansion will do for the game what so far any Blizzard expansion did? The number of copies it sold is a testament to what people hoped it would be, not what people hope it is. The unignorable truth is that, for a game with 3 million copies sold, it seems a very, very sad few of those people actually still play the game... and while a hundred hours is a damn lot for a single-player game, it doesn't feel like a lot for a multiplayer game produced by blizzard. Is Diablo 3 blizzard's downfall? Hell no... but acting like it's a 94 to Starcraft's 88 only applies if they were released the same year. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
Have they considered that the PvP doesn't work well, because the basic mechanics are simply bad? They polished that turd for years to get PvE passable, but that doesn't really help making PvP work. Though another thing to consider is, how balanced or long-appealing PvP in D2 was? | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
Multiplayer wise however I was going to write that D3 is the worse online game experience I've endured, that is until I played WarZ, so now Diablo3 is the second worse online experience. And I'm not surprised they pulled the plug on PvP play since the team behind the game doesn't seem to be able to create a good online game in the first place. | ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On December 29 2012 01:33 FinestHour wrote: my favorite description from the bnet thread spoilered for length + Show Spoiler + Well look at it this way... Imagine if you owned a 1999 sports car of a fictional maker run by Blizzard called Endo. You loved that car in 1999 but some things were a little off. In the following years, Endo implements several recalls where they enhance the car's features. Then in 2003 they release a special GT-R version of that car. That bad boy is amazing and a huge improvement over the stock 1999 version. You follow that car for years but eventually it's 2010 and starts to feel out dated. But Endo has promised a new lineup for 2012 showcasing it with pride at the auto show. It's finally 2012 and the 2012 line up is released. You buy one and then realized that the car requires a constant GPS signal to the satellite in order to start the car. Absolutely ridiculous right? But Endo claims it's to reduce auto theft. But more people than expected buys the same car and there isn't enough server power to activate all the cars at once. You then sit around for a few days waiting for the servers and the satellite to be upgraded so you can drive your new car while Endo is already pocketing your hard earned money. Finally they fix all the connection issues and you can finally drive your car. Instead, you soon discover the car is missing a bunch of cool features the older models had. The new model doesn't have a built in CD player, no cruise control, only two settings for the windshield wiper and no manual version, all models are automatic shift. Because Endo believes drivers prefer the simplest driving experience, the only modes available on on the shifter is Drive, Reverse and Neutral. The car is designed with major incompatibilities with any third-party parts. Therefore, modding or tuning the car for extra power to race or showcase is strictly limited to whatever Endo themselves allow you to have. But hold the phone, Endo has promised to release a series of tune-up parts and accessories to make sure your new car can finally tear up some road. BUT...after 7-8 months, the lead designer goes public to tell everyone that they decided they didn't like the upgrades they had been working on so they will need more time to come up with something that all drivers will enjoy. The good news however, is that they will finally release a manual stick shift version of the car so aspiring racers and car enthusiasts can "mess around" a little bit. That is how ridiculous things would look like if Diablo 3 was a car and Blizzard was an auto-maker. Now that is an amazing post. | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:39 Pufftrees wrote: For my third post of the first page... I honestly think Blizzard's ONLY CHANCE to save face is to start firing people, like Jay Wilson. This reminds of a sports team that is just failing epicly and has all all-star players... you have to just blame someone and move on. Or else your fans really just leave (too late for d3 probably). its too late man, i mean at least from my perceptions, most the guys that i played with all have quit because the game just doesn't have that extra oomph that d2 had. I feel they are sort of giving all their games other than titan half assed jobs while they work on titan.. i really hope titan is good because otherwise im done with blizz with how their last 3 releases have been.. | ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
| ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On December 29 2012 02:58 KiWiKaKi wrote: They are completely incompetent. The reason that it will ''mess'' with PVE is a perfect example of how dumb they are. How about nerf/change spells ONLY when you enter a PVP arena and keep them like they are in PVE?? I could tell them how to fix their game in 15 minutes of talking to be fair it takes a little more than 15 of work than your 15 mins of talking ~_~ i dont doubt you could come up with better ideas but i think their issue is all the red tape they have to go through nowadays to do anything *cough* activision owns them | ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On December 29 2012 02:58 KiWiKaKi wrote: They are completely incompetent. The reason that it will ''mess'' with PVE is a perfect example of how dumb they are. How about nerf/change spells ONLY when you enter a PVP arena and keep them like they are in PVE?? I could tell them how to fix their game in 15 minutes of talking Making it so certain moves have different stats (or even effects) vs players and vs mobs is something they should have been doing, oh I dunno, like 5 years ago in WoW. It makes absolutely no sense as to why they continually refuse to adopt this style of balancing as it would be infinitely easier than trying to balance stuff for PvE AND PvP. It's not that the idea hasn't been pitched either, I used to constantly see people bring it up when they were ruining certain PvE specs to balance the PvP side of things in WoW. Point is, they could easily do this is D3, but no they won't. Maybe they just like having an excuse to leave stuff broken. I dunno, I'm done with Blizzard games anyways, they've become complete failures that only care about money. PS : Businessmen don't make good game designers. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On December 29 2012 02:06 Chylo wrote: The simple fact of the matter is that the game in PVP is going to be MASSIVELY imbalanced. So, people will go crazy about the balance. Blizzard lately has seemed to be extremely frustrated with complains about balance in pvp, both in Wow arena and SC2. So how does Blizzard try to solve all these complaints? They can: 1. Try to adjust all the abilities that are imbalanced. (And making a mess of the PVE) 2. Have abilities function differently in PVP. (or do a lot less damage in PVP or whatever) Blizzard has always hated this "2 games" solution for some reason. I don't think they like any of the solutions. I don't buy this nonsense that "people got bored of team deathmatch after a few hours" Ya right. Does blizz realize how many HUGELY successful games are based on this exact concept? How about they stop making stupid design decisions and do what ALL THE OTHER GAMES THAT PLAN ON INCLUDING PvP DO.... Step 1) Balance the abilities around PvP, THEN extrapolate the enemies health/armor/etc around those numbers, to at least get a baseline balance. Step 2) Modify the abilities stats/cc/etc for PvP with separate functionality (as you mentioned) OR with the PvP buff (that they ORIGINALLY said they are going to do). Step 3) If after all this they still can't get things balanced, give PvP a completely separate gear progression where you unlock the gear and runes through PvP similar to GW1 (NOT their horrible system from WoW arenas where each classes gear is restricted to 2-3 builds). And DO NOT force gear progression through the Ladder like WoW arena's but give the gear progression through casual games - it's horrible game design to give the top players who are already winning EVEN BETTER GEAR. That ENCOURAGES imbalance. For some reason Blizzard has always been insistent on including PvP in their games, but balancing around PvE, and then extrapolating the stats for PvP. From a design perspective this makes NO sense at all, since NPC's can be balanced around the players, instead of players balanced around the NPC's. It doesn't work like that! Case in point: EVERY BLIZZARD GAME OUTSIDE OF SC. They should have woke the hell up by now, it's common sense for a logical order of doing things. Many abilities/strategies are much stronger in PvP and ineffective or not resourceful in PvE (such as if you made a Monk blinking single target mobility build, which would be completely ineffecient in PvE but super strong in PvP) therefore you need to balance around that first and foremost. PvE by nature is going to be narrowed down to a few specific efficient methods, where PvP builds are higher in number due to the added strategy and team building. SC is the perfect example of this design theory... Was the PvE of Starcraft/Starcraft 2 hurt at ALL from the game being balanced around PvP?????? | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On December 29 2012 03:56 Spyridon wrote: How about they stop making stupid design decisions and do what ALL THE OTHER GAMES THAT PLAN ON INCLUDING PvP DO.... Step 1) Balance the abilities around PvP, THEN extrapolate the enemies health/armor/etc around those numbers, to at least get a baseline balance. Step 2) Modify the abilities stats/cc/etc for PvP with separate functionality (as you mentioned) OR with the PvP buff (that they ORIGINALLY said they are going to do). Step 3) If after all this they still can't get things balanced, give PvP a completely separate gear progression where you unlock the gear and runes through PvP similar to GW1 (NOT their horrible system from WoW arenas where each classes gear is restricted to 2-3 builds). And DO NOT force gear progression through the Ladder like WoW arena's but give the gear progression through casual games - it's horrible game design to give the top players who are already winning EVEN BETTER GEAR. That ENCOURAGES imbalance. For some reason Blizzard has always been insistent on including PvP in their games, but balancing around PvE, and then extrapolating the stats for PvP. From a design perspective this makes NO sense at all, since NPC's can be balanced around the players, instead of players balanced around the NPC's. It doesn't work like that! Case in point: EVERY BLIZZARD GAME OUTSIDE OF SC. They should have woke the hell up by now, it's common sense for a logical order of doing things. Many abilities/strategies are much stronger in PvP and ineffective or not resourceful in PvE (such as if you made a Monk blinking single target mobility build, which would be completely ineffecient in PvE but super strong in PvP) therefore you need to balance around that first and foremost. PvE by nature is going to be narrowed down to a few specific efficient methods, where PvP builds are higher in number due to the added strategy and team building. SC is the perfect example of this design theory... Was the PvE of Starcraft/Starcraft 2 hurt at ALL from the game being balanced around PvP?????? SC really isn't the perfect example as its an entirely different genre. Not to mention single player had very little to do with anything in either SC game whereas PvP balance does affect the single player game a lot in games like d3/WoW I mean i do understand your points but really you are preaching to the choir here on the forums, it wont ever be heard (rather implemented, they hear plenty) because they have it all ass backwards and pretty much ignore 99.99% of feedback they get. | ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On December 29 2012 04:21 KiWiKaKi wrote: Thats what happens when you get a WOW guy to be the lead designer of diablo I dont see why you want to bash on WoW originally WoW was actually pretty damn good and its just been a slow downhill spiral each expansion after burning crusade. | ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On December 29 2012 04:19 sc14s wrote: SC really isn't the perfect example as its an entirely different genre. Not to mention single player had very little to do with anything in either SC game whereas PvP balance does affect the single player game a lot in games like d3/WoW I mean i do understand your points but really you are preaching to the choir here on the forums, it wont ever be heard (rather implemented, they hear plenty) because they have it all ass backwards and pretty much ignore 99.99% of feedback they get. Well, SC is the perfect example from blizzard games. The fact that it's separated and has little to do with each other is kinda the point. PvP balance doesn't need to affect the single player game if the NPC's are balanced around that from the start. Heres an example: If a player balanced around PvP can do max (just throwing out numbers here I know they are low for D3) ~500 DPS and a 2k burst you can adjust health so enemies take as long as desired to finish. CC already has separate balance. If PvP balanced spellcasters can do almost as much dmg as a melee from range while kiting and have it too easy, give them higher magic resist and some abilites to force the ranged character to evade. Etc. And yeah I know I'm preaching to the choir. But it just shows how out of touch Blizzard is these days. Many MMO's have balanced this way successfully (and lets face it, D3 is balanced more like a MMO than anything else). SC was balanced this way. FPS are balanced this way. Basically EVERY game focused around PvP is balanced this way. They have so many examples of success for this type of balance in the industry, and there's many examples of balancing around PvE primarily failing. They have nobody to blame for their PvP balance issues but the root of their balance being around PvE. Let's face it - can you honestly say D3's PvE (being balanced around PvE primarily) is balanced better than any of these other games/game types I listed? D3 isnt exactly known for its amazing balance... | ||
|
XerrolAvengerII
United States510 Posts
The more players you throw into action, the less impact class balance has on the game. In 1v1s, the class balance factors will be huge and deciding. In a theoretical 4v4 - 6v6, teamwork and composition makes a much larger impact and reduces the burden on balance. In playing starcraft, we all know that the best. | ||
|
Blix
Netherlands873 Posts
On December 29 2012 04:44 XerrolAvengerII wrote: Their logic is flawed as hell. The more players you throw into action, the less impact class balance has on the game. In 1v1s, the class balance factors will be huge and deciding. In a theoretical 4v4 - 6v6, teamwork and composition makes a much larger impact and reduces the burden on balance. In playing starcraft, we all know that the best. They could even make 5v5 and force 1 of each class via matchmaking. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
There are a lot of 'ugly' fixes already to balance spells between the different levels for example freezes and stuns are not as effective in higher difficulties. Why don't they simple apply these same principles to PvP.. Just create a unique class for players somewhat similar to elites (+ dmg vs elite affix working too) and give them more resistance to stuns, lower damage etc. You can easily modify spells or groups of spells to be better or worse then like making summons better vs this class or reduce ranged damage a bit whatever. Even the community can balance a bit themselves if blizzard doesn't have the time for it by not allowing some builds or forcing teams to have 1 of each character.. | ||
|
reki-
Netherlands327 Posts
On December 28 2012 07:06 Infernal_dream wrote: No they dont. Did you ever pvp in d2? Shit was inbalanced as hell, and yet it still happened. They don't HAVE to do shit about the crybabies. Those will always exist, no matter what. There's no point in even trying to please them. You might as well please the rest of the playerbase by letting us whack the crap out of each other. Of course it's "mindless" it's fucking diablo. So is farming. I just want to go in 5v5 and spam buttons and die or get kills. Why is that so difficult to understand? It's ok if I go into mp10 and just spam buttons, but not against other players? What a backward ass thought process. Internet these days cannot be compared to internet when D2 was new, the onslaught of "imba pvp" cryers would be substantially greater and probably cause alot of bad publicity if blizz really isn't going to patch/balance pvp. They would have to set up a balance team and don't want to do that most likely. | ||
|
m3rciless
United States1476 Posts
On December 29 2012 05:29 Markwerf wrote: It's just a complete show of incompetence to state lack of balance as a reason to delay this. It's just an excuse for this not being a priority and them probably working on the expansion instead. There are a lot of 'ugly' fixes already to balance spells between the different levels for example freezes and stuns are not as effective in higher difficulties. Why don't they simple apply these same principles to PvP.. Just create a unique class for players somewhat similar to elites (+ dmg vs elite affix working too) and give them more resistance to stuns, lower damage etc. You can easily modify spells or groups of spells to be better or worse then like making summons better vs this class or reduce ranged damage a bit whatever. Even the community can balance a bit themselves if blizzard doesn't have the time for it by not allowing some builds or forcing teams to have 1 of each character.. this is a good point. Its not like blizzard has managed to avoid ugly fixes so far with the extreme nerfs to cc in higher difficulty levels, theres no reason they couldnt similarly scale dmg or cc for pvp. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
| ||
|
JD413
United States18 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:16 Kickboxer wrote: In the list of top 10 most botched things of all time this game is somewhere between Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the Pepsi commercial that vaporized MJ's hair. LMFAO | ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
On December 28 2012 06:08 Logo wrote: I don't.... They promised a game that would have PvP without a concern for balance, no ladder, and under the assumption that gear was likely to play a deciding factor in who wins or loses. Why would this be desirable at all to you? Because diablo is about being overpowered as fuck and blowing shit up. I didn't expect I would be playing d3 competitively. | ||
|
JohannesH
Finland1364 Posts
On December 29 2012 06:16 Bosu wrote: Because diablo is about being overpowered as fuck and blowing shit up. I didn't expect I would be playing d3 competitively. Yeah, it's about the same simple appeal as what PvE Diablo has. | ||
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
Diablo 3 sold millions of copies and many players played for hundreds of hours. Diablo 3 scored 88 on metacritics. (The Diablo got 94 (topping the original Starcraft, which scored 88), Diablo 2 got just 88 too, Lord of Destruction only 87.) It was of course a comercial success. The fact that you used the commercial metascore rating for the game just shows you're not really up on how opinions run. Every commercial game metascore is vastly overadjusted, the best way of determining whether a game is actually good is if the user and reviewer reviews are on roughly the same level. A game where the user score is a little under the reviewer score is probably a touch overhyped. A game where the user score is a little better than the reviewer score is probably a niche jewel. Diablo II's reviewer/user score was 88/87 Starcraft II's reviewer/user score was 91/81 Diablo III's reviewer/user score was 88/38 That puts it in the same league as ME3 (89/45) and CoDMW3 (78/28), both also commercial successes but massive critical failures. The fact that a game sold a lot of copies clearly no longer is indicative that it is a good game. Success does not equal quality. | ||
|
Mahanaim
Korea (South)1002 Posts
| ||
|
Serelitz
Netherlands2895 Posts
| ||
|
i99
United States362 Posts
| ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
| ||
|
Seiniyta
Belgium1815 Posts
On December 29 2012 10:55 Thereisnosaurus wrote: It was of course a comercial success. The fact that you used the commercial metascore rating for the game just shows you're not really up on how opinions run. Every commercial game metascore is vastly overadjusted, the best way of determining whether a game is actually good is if the user and reviewer reviews are on roughly the same level. A game where the user score is a little under the reviewer score is probably a touch overhyped. A game where the user score is a little better than the reviewer score is probably a niche jewel. Diablo II's reviewer/user score was 88/87 Starcraft II's reviewer/user score was 91/81 Diablo III's reviewer/user score was 88/38 That puts it in the same league as ME3 (89/45) and CoDMW3 (78/28), both also commercial successes but massive critical failures. The fact that a game sold a lot of copies clearly no longer is indicative that it is a good game. Success does not equal quality. Metacritic user scores are even less reliable then normal reviews when it comes down to big game releases. Just because the ending in ME3 wasn't as good as they hoped people bombed Metacritic with poor 0 score reviews. ME3 was a fine game up until the lame ending. Does that deserve a 45? No, not at all. Same for Diablo 3 really. "I played 200 hours and the game is shit" I really scratch my head with those statements....why did you play 200 hours you didn't enjoy? Are you okay? It boggles my mind. | ||
|
Callynn
Netherlands917 Posts
Level 40 Poison Creeper (has no synergies): 312 dmg over 12 seconds. (26 damage instantly?) Level 40 Lightning (fully synergized): 89.000 damage instantly. Lightning does 3432x more damage than Poison Creeper does. Did anyone care? No, there were alternatives but most importantly - building a character to kill other characters was fun. In 2001, diablo pvp (im)balance wasn't a problem, why should it be a problem now? | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Deathmatch is fine though, there are people who like to show off their superior equipment always, but yeah those modes die out pretty quickly and only a few remain. Would be interesting if they would bring out 2 support classes with the expansion that basically just have one skill tree to level solo. In 2001 people that disliked it simply didn't do it. Now they would write a copy paste email with their 1000 mail accounts to complain and try to tell the world. It works to good nowadays, just on this page someone showed us how much reviewers disliked diablo3 and gave it a bad rating, as if this wouldn't be mostly hurt fanboys. | ||
|
Aceace
Turkey1305 Posts
Hell no! Thats not Diablo! We always farm for faster farm and killing our friends with our stuff. "Would be interesting if they would bring out 2 support classes with the expansion" There is NO support classes in Diablo. Everybody is Tank, everybody is DPS, everybody supoorts HIMSELF! Mate... I'm sory but this is Diablo. Not a MMO game. Not MobA game. We enter arena like gladiators, we break bones, we crush skulls, we kill others and we don't want a "supporter" for help us. Diablo is an ego game. With "support" classes that feeling will gone. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
| ||
|
Robotix
United States51 Posts
On December 29 2012 18:36 Seiniyta wrote: Metacritic user scores are even less reliable then normal reviews when it comes down to big game releases. Just because the ending in ME3 wasn't as good as they hoped people bombed Metacritic with poor 0 score reviews. ME3 was a fine game up until the lame ending. Does that deserve a 45? No, not at all. Same for Diablo 3 really. "I played 200 hours and the game is shit" I really scratch my head with those statements....why did you play 200 hours you didn't enjoy? Are you okay? It boggles my mind. Metacritic user reviews are a terrible place to look for game reviews. It is quite obvious to see that when ME3 has a 45 score from user reviews and is 15 minutes away from narrowly getting 2nd place in gamespot's people's choice video game of the year selection (currently at 49.7% compared to Farcry 3 at 50.3%). Not to mention if you go back to the very release of D3, most of the user scores are 0-2 simply because of connection errors. Gamespot user reviews give Diablo 3 a 72 even with a lot of bad scores on release because of connection problems. | ||
|
Jindo
United States1305 Posts
On December 29 2012 18:36 Seiniyta wrote: Same for Diablo 3 really. "I played 200 hours and the game is shit" I really scratch my head with those statements....why did you play 200 hours you didn't enjoy? Are you okay? It boggles my mind. 200 hours is a lot. A good, non biased reviewers should be able to produce a better, extensive review of the game with 200 hours under his belt vs someone with only 40 hours. Maybe you should focus on the review instead of whether the reviewer is in good health and enjoying the game or not. | ||
|
Seiniyta
Belgium1815 Posts
On December 30 2012 05:59 Jindo wrote: 200 hours is a lot. A good, non biased reviewers should be able to produce a better, extensive review of the game with 200 hours under his belt vs someone with only 40 hours. Maybe you should focus on the review instead of whether the reviewer is in good health and enjoying the game or not. No, I wasn't talking about reviewers (well I guess if you count the user reviews as reviews). But if a consumer plays a game for 200 hours, even though he has no actual need to do so because he doesn't get paid for it in a reliable way and afterwards says the game is shit I scratch my head a bit. I would never play a game so long I don't enjoy....ever. Of course, if a reviewer decides for whatever reason to spend 200 hours in Diablo (I think reviewers usually only play as long as the campaign and a bit of the multiplayer before moving on to review the next game) then yeah they can give a really good judgement of the game. But that applies to any game where you spent so much time in I think. | ||
|
zbedlam
Australia549 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:48 Zozo wrote: How can these people keep their jobs? We fire people over being late, let alone not working for 5 years. I lol'd. So true though. Honestly the code in the game isn't bad at all, but how the designers have their job still or at the very least haven't been transferred to somewhere more appropriate for their skill-set is beyond me. | ||
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
Metacritic user scores are even less reliable then normal reviews when it comes down to big game releases. Just because the ending in ME3 wasn't as good as they hoped people bombed Metacritic with poor 0 score reviews. ME3 was a fine game up until the lame ending. Does that deserve a 45? No, not at all. bolded for emphasis. It wasn't 'the best game of all time ever' up untill the lame ending. It was a moderately good shot at wrapping the series, worth maybe a 75 or 80 without the ending. I'm sure some people gave it 10s just because they thought the ending wasn't all that bad either. What matters is the score was 45 overall. A game is not represented by what it could have been had it not had bugs, design errors, last minute changes and false marketing. A game is represented by what happens when it is put into the wild. Any developer could design a perfect game to run on an isolated test system with ideal players. But that's not what good videogame design is about, nor is it a reasonable standard by which to judge said games. Same for Diablo 3 really. "I played 200 hours and the game is shit" I really scratch my head with those statements....why did you play 200 hours you didn't enjoy? Are you okay? It boggles my mind. ever read a book through hoping it would improve by the end, with a nice twist or good climax? ever tried to finish a bad meal just to be done with it? People have many reasons to continue to play games that aren't fun, particularly the bit where they paid $60 for it and want to get their money's worth. Videogames, in particular, have a history of making people do a lot of work to reach a distant reward. We're used to putting in the grind to get to the top level where the fun metagaming begins. I would say a *majority* of gamers (those who aren't new to the genre) would prefer to begin the game with a fully geared and kitted max level character on hand, just so they can 'take a break from serious play and have some fun'. Now in an ideal world, the journey is the reward. If you get to paragon 100, get fully geared and suddenly your character is deleted, you should be magnanimous about it, it's cool, I had fun playing. Would you be cool with that? No, because in this genre in particular, the fun comes from achievement, and achievement is reached through a lot of trivial diegetic work. Without the achievement, the work is... well, just wasted time, but you can never know that until you've done it. It's up to the game designer to make fucking sure when you get to the end of the trip you feel satisfied, and almost every design related complaint about diablo 3 has been that the game doesn't do that at all well. Metacritic user reviews are a terrible place to look for game reviews. It is quite obvious to see that when ME3 has a 45 score from user reviews and is 15 minutes away from narrowly getting 2nd place in gamespot's people's choice video game of the year selection (currently at 49.7% compared to Farcry 3 at 50.3%). Not to mention if you go back to the very release of D3, most of the user scores are 0-2 simply because of connection errors. That's kind of how it works, if you are a mainstream, experienced developer and you release a product that is untested and fails horrifically to perform smoothly in the wild, that's not a great product. Again, a game can't be rated on how good it is for the ideal user in the ideal situation. This is an incredibly arrogant and foolish attitude that developers and enthusiasts adopt and is certainly one of the reasons a lot of otherwise great games tank, because not enough effort is made to ensure they are actually good products instead of just good concepts. I agree a game shouldn't be judged entirely on that, but if it was D3 would have a user score of like 1.1. If it hadn't had such a craptastic launch it probably would have scraped 5. Barely. Still not so hot. The game of the year poll is sort of a joke, btw. The main reason is that it's a narrow demographic poll, somewhat like asking what the best dessert of 2012 is on a website devoted to chocolate. Gamespot is the most AAA culture-centric news outlet these days and it shows. The poll ultimately only shows what people bought (which in AAA directly ties into which games had the biggest advertising budget- guess which 4 had the biggest budgets of 2012. It shouldn't be too hard.), not what was good. I'm not going to rag on it too hard, and it certainly does make the point that ME3 wasn't a complete and utter failure, and given the incredible amount of media coverage and anti-hype the game got in the mass media after release I think it's fair to say that the user score IS a bit down on where it could be, with the game rebounding over time. Diablo 3 has no such mitigating factors, and I certainly don't see it in the running for any critical acclaim outside of art direction (which was admittedly stunning). | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On December 29 2012 02:06 Staboteur wrote: The number of copies it sold is a testament to what people hoped it would be, not what people hope it is. The unignorable truth is that, for a game with 3 million copies sold, it seems a very, very sad few of those people actually still play the game... and while a hundred hours is a damn lot for a single-player game, it doesn't feel like a lot for a multiplayer game produced by blizzard. Is Diablo 3 blizzard's downfall? Hell no... but acting like it's a 94 to Starcraft's 88 only applies if they were released the same year. Diablo 3 did not meet the expectation of most Diablo 2 fans. Instead Blizzard developed the game for a larger audience. My feeling about D3 is, that the game is not fleshed out yet. But the core gameplay is right. D3 fixes many, many flaws of the previous games and introduced a handful of new ones, but the actual gameplay is fun. An expansion can work with that. I am disappointed by many things in Diablo 3. It feels too linear, the side quests are worthless, buildings are new instances instead of placed in the real world (a house is inside bigger than on the outside, you don't really enter the house, you get into a new area, I experience this as a continuity issue.) Item management feels too simplistic, I always look for the same stats and almost any slot can have almost any stat. The cut scenes are a mess: We get real videos, the cheap videos, and on top of that ingame cutscenes where you no longer control your char. It feels like someone pulled my keyboard away. When I cancel the sequence, I still have to confirm and then I have to wait until the camera scrolled back. And the cut scenes don't even render the whole party, they leave out my pets and the follower. This is a continuity issue, too. However, Diablo 3 seems to be still played by enough guys to allow for an expansion. Blizzard can fix issues without the need to repair the core game. | ||
|
CROrens
Croatia1005 Posts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jay: Oh for the PvP patch? For the PvP patch, we definitely... I would say, we want to get it out within months after release. I would say, if it showed up close to the end of the year, that would be... I would say, almost a disaster. So I don’t see it slipping out of this year at all, and I think it’ll be much sooner. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On December 28 2012 06:01 Logo wrote: I don't get this at all. TDM/DM in maybe 90% of games sucks and is never played more than a passing amusement. This includes everything from say Bioshock 2 to XCOM. Generally the only games where people hang around for TDM are games designed heavily as multiplayer or have some incentive hook to keep people around (like WoW). Pretty much exactly what Jay said. To Blizzard releasing a shitty multiplayer TDM that will go largely unused doesn't count as 'having PvP' [b]and yet you people bitch about it?[/b] Yeah Blizz kinda blows and dropped the ball on a timely PvP release, but between releasing crap to fulfill their obligation and releasing a good PvP mode they're aiming for the latter. I don't know why you all would want the former. Anyways to me this indicates we're probably going to see something that borrows a bit from the MOBA genre in terms of objectives & mix of PvE content with PvP. Maybe because they had 4 years to develop it, and still NOTHING. | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
On December 30 2012 09:14 CROrens wrote: Ill just leave this here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jay: Oh for the PvP patch? For the PvP patch, we definitely... I would say, we want to get it out within months after release. I would say, if it showed up close to the end of the year, that would be... I would say, almost a disaster. So I don’t see it slipping out of this year at all, and I think it’ll be much sooner. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I thought I remembered him saying something like that, thanks for digging it up. Would like to see the rest of this article/interview probably many other hilarious statements. | ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On December 30 2012 09:14 CROrens wrote: Ill just leave this here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jay: Oh for the PvP patch? For the PvP patch, we definitely... I would say, we want to get it out within months after release. I would say, if it showed up close to the end of the year, that would be... I would say, almost a disaster. So I don’t see it slipping out of this year at all, and I think it’ll be much sooner. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Diablo 3 is on life support. The playerbase is incredibly small, and Blizz knows the only thing that is keeping anyone around is the possibility of PvP. So instead of releasing a medicore pvp system that would ultimately kill off the game entirely, they just release dueling to stall time. It's less risky doing it this way. | ||
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
This is the issue with traditional game retail models (large upfront payment for an ongoing service), there's no incentive for the designer to commit to supporting the game once 80% or so of the people who would buy it have done so. | ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On December 30 2012 09:36 Thereisnosaurus wrote: you know, I'm fairly sure you guys are misundertstanding blizzard's goals here. They don't *want* to have a sustained playerbase for diablo III so long as they can avoid massive PR trauma. They're not getting any more money from the game now the AH is laughable and main sales are concluded. Keeping the servers and support running is just a cost to them at this point. This is the issue with traditional game retail models (large upfront payment for an ongoing service), there's no incentive for the designer to commit to supporting the game once 80% or so of the people who would buy it have done so. Well Blizz taking a cut from sales on the RMAH was supposed to be that incentive, but the game flopped on its face because they forgot to make it actually fun instead of a grind fest. You could also make the argument that they didn't exactly WANT D3 to have an incredibly elaborate end game because in a way it directly competes with WoW (also look to the "buy a years worth of WoW time and get D3 for free!"), and WoW players pay 15 a month. I have a suspicion that if the the RMAH was a booming success then we probably would have gotten a badass endgame with the x-pac, but it was just too risky to make a great Diablo game without knowing 100 percent how much money they could make off it. It's all about making money these days, not making the best games possible. And people said the Activision merger wouldn't have any effect on Blizzard.... | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
are they doing? I can only imagine Blizzard pulled like almost the entire team away from the game to do other things. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Fubi
2228 Posts
I mean yea, it made a disclaimer that PvP will be added in later in a patch, but a normal customer will read that as implying it will be 1-3 months max; But it has been more than 6 months, and it doesn't look like it'll be out for another 6... so a lot of people who got the game just for PvP (i'm one of them) never got what they paid for until long after they quit So can they even do that? Sounds really shady from a business perspective. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
I can imagine the original projections were from before Blizzard pulled staff off of the project. Putting money and manpower into D3 is not a smart thing to do. Its better to give up on it and write it off as a dead franchise and make something new. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On December 30 2012 09:26 AnomalySC2 wrote: Diablo 3 is on life support. The playerbase is incredibly small, and Blizz knows the only thing that is keeping anyone around is the possibility of PvP. So instead of releasing a medicore pvp system that would ultimately kill off the game entirely, they just release dueling to stall time. It's less risky doing it this way. Wonder what will happen with all the people who grinded only for the PvP arena. Must suck being them when Jay came out with the " NO PVP ARENA FOR YOU". :/ | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On December 30 2012 10:34 Medrea wrote: What are they doing? I can only imagine Blizzard pulled like almost the entire team away from the game to do other things. I guess, they tried to get a PvP mode working but since the game was developed with PvE in mind, it turned out to be much harder than expected. The code to have duels and even team arenas is there (since years) but it isn't as much fun to play PvP. So the developers tried this, tried that, discussed with the team. Still, the core issue remained. Since the clock is ticking, no-one proposes to scrap the current PvP content, instead everyone tries to fix it. Now Jay needed to make a decision: Go further, with no good idea in sight? Or bring duels but scrap current team arena content to make way for completely new ideas? | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On December 28 2012 03:41 Spyridon wrote: Holy crap. I can't beleieve how bad the development of D3 is. All my friends gave up on the game, and I gave up on it too, but told myself that this is Blizzard and they never quit until a game is profitable, and with the state of D3 they would NEVER be able to sell an expansion until things are fixed. So (even though all my friends thought I was crazy) I thought that there may be some hope for the future. But this is just a JOKE right now. After all these months they basically are giving us no information on the PvP mode???? This also brings up the question, why the HELL was the blog delayed for a month???? "Sorry, we need a little more time to tell you NOTHING!". I guess they had to take a few extra weeks to come up with BULLSHIT to fill in the gaps of nothing. They probably had absolutely nothing to report so they planned a quick duel mode to give people something at all! This is such a bad situation that even if a brand new indie company was developing this game, most people would say that's no excuse for this. But this is fucking Blizzard, a company who made like 3 or 4 of the 5 biggest games ever!!! It's a damn shame that Blizzard isn't the same company as they used to be, and it makes me kind of ashamed that I'm actually going to be buying HotS.... These people don't deserve our money! I can say you why right now they delayed the blog. Because they never worked on PvP. All their precious time went into developing paragon levels, ubers, fixing broken legendaries, etc. They didn't plan to do those thing on release but game was so broken that they were forced to. I am really sad about arenas because they seemed really casual and fun. And dueling? This should have been implemented on Day1, I see absolutely no reason why it wasn't. In fact, duels wasn't implemented just because they wanted something "better" and now this "better" is scrapped, so we got nothing for 8 months. Now we'll get dueling which prolly took them 2 days to implement. At first i liked Jay Wilson but now i see he is a joke. | ||
|
Eschaton
United States1245 Posts
| ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
| ||
|
ShivaN
United States933 Posts
On December 31 2012 05:03 Eschaton wrote: The price of gold dropped from 0.30 USD to 0.25 USD (the minimum) since the PvP blog was posted. Looks like many are giving up hope on D3 and cashing out. Yep, I immediately went and sold all the gold I had left. Luckily I moved it when it was still at 0.37. I still kept my gear, just in case there's something redeemable about this game in the future and I'd like to return, but I'm not holding out for it. It's really sad the way this game turned out from the expectations I had for it. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Market a game with team deathmatch, then semi-cancel team deathmatch, then blame the requirement for Blizzard to produce quality games. The irony is eating away at my dumb little brain. | ||
|
Doulmaigus
France352 Posts
I think what they are trying to do now is to slowly make us understand that balancing a PvP mode in Diablo 3 is near from impossible, so that when it comes finaly out, we won't be so disapointed if it's total trash. | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3805 Posts
On December 31 2012 07:50 Djzapz wrote: Well ain't that just precious. Market a game with team deathmatch, then semi-cancel team deathmatch, then blame the requirement for Blizzard to produce quality games. The irony is eating away at my dumb little brain. Blizzard decides what is fun, and you must like it god damn it :D | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On December 31 2012 08:41 KimJongChill wrote: Any chance the gold will go up again when pvp does come out? I really don't want to sell for .25 x.x I predict that it will go up to 30 cents when dueling comes out. There will be at least a few people spending hundreds of dollars to gear themselves. | ||
|
FromShouri
United States862 Posts
Course I noticed this especially with WD gear, unless its the best of the best it won't move. Dex/Strength MF/GF gear moves....slowly but it moves at least. I can not for the life of me sell any int based gear at all =\. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On December 30 2012 10:34 Medrea wrote:I can only imagine Blizzard pulled like almost the entire team away from the game to do other things. On December 30 2012 16:08 Medrea wrote: I can imagine the original projections were from before Blizzard pulled staff off of the project. Putting money and manpower into D3 is not a smart thing to do. Its better to give up on it and write it off as a dead franchise and make something new. I like how your speculation turned into fact one post later. I know we're all upset and wondering how they screwed this up (by their own admission this is a disaster), but let's try not to spread rumors. Which really is what Jay Wilson should have done. Instead of hyping up the PvP blog he should have kept his mouth shut or maybe, just maybe said 'bad news about pvp, duels in, team deathmatch out, blog to explain why and where we go from here.' | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:06 FromShouri wrote: I knew I should of cashed out when i had the chance, instead I kept dumping gold into various avenues to gear up so i could sell stuff in the RMAH...but I noticed a week or so ago that pretty much the only things moving are godly items and items that flippers think they can sell for more. Its a shame that the mid tier player is pretty much gone now and items that would be considered decent just gather dust in my inventory. Course I noticed this especially with WD gear, unless its the best of the best it won't move. Dex/Strength MF/GF gear moves....slowly but it moves at least. I can not for the life of me sell any int based gear at all =\. I cash out the instant I find/bid/win anything remotely valuable. Do I use Radiant Gems? Nope, Star gems all the way! Just get enough balance to get SC2 expansion and then paypal the rest, and when I can't stand to log in anymore, don't feel any remorse on not cashing out earlier. | ||
|
Eschaton
United States1245 Posts
On December 31 2012 10:15 Burrfoot wrote: I cash out the instant I find/bid/win anything remotely valuable. Do I use Radiant Gems? Nope, Star gems all the way! Just get enough balance to get SC2 expansion and then paypal the rest, and when I can't stand to log in anymore, don't feel any remorse on not cashing out earlier. This philosophy makes sense past a certain critical mass of capital, I'd say around a few 100m to allow mid-level GAH shenanigans and farming. If I have 300m value of gear + gold, I don't see much added benefit from having 500m. But the difference between 100m and 300m can change the availability of opportunities, so the 200m difference is worth more in that case. | ||
|
Parnage
United States7414 Posts
And to get this? This, this is bullshit. It's a complete lack of care for a game. I am done with them. I am sure they had reasoning behind it but I don't care. I am not going to try and look at the upside, I am just completely disturbingly done with this. I've been essentially bamboozled by them and the deceit is outstanding. Props to Jay Wilson for the bravado to say this, but I am sorry this path is just folly. I've no idea why they are doing something like this but I can only hope that someday they eventually correct themselves. | ||
|
Silahsor
Turkey59 Posts
| ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On December 31 2012 18:09 Silahsor wrote: Great, final nail to D3's coffin. Now we have a better term than "epic fail" in computer gaming literature, which is simply "D3". How many times and how long have people been saying "oh this is it" "this is the final nail" and yet the game keeps living on. Not to mention they're going to release an expo, then what? It's still D3. I'm not a huge fan of the game either but it's far from being an "epic fail". There's a lot worse games out there. | ||
|
Vaelone
Finland4400 Posts
Luckily I couldn't care less anymore or otherwise I'd feel like I got scammed by Blizzard. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:17 Wuster wrote: I like how your speculation turned into fact one post later. I know we're all upset and wondering how they screwed this up (by their own admission this is a disaster), but let's try not to spread rumors. Which really is what Jay Wilson should have done. Instead of hyping up the PvP blog he should have kept his mouth shut or maybe, just maybe said 'bad news about pvp, duels in, team deathmatch out, blog to explain why and where we go from here.' You got stuck on the first sentence of the second post. The rest of the post implies a continuation of the thought instantiated in the first post. Its not rumor mongering. Its critical thinking. | ||
|
Geneq
Poland165 Posts
| ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
On December 31 2012 13:51 Eschaton wrote: This philosophy makes sense past a certain critical mass of capital, I'd say around a few 100m to allow mid-level GAH shenanigans and farming. If I have 300m value of gear + gold, I don't see much added benefit from having 500m. But the difference between 100m and 300m can change the availability of opportunities, so the 200m difference is worth more in that case. True, I stopped even occasionally trying to flip the Gold-AH market due to the sheer volume of crap that could be flipped for various levels of profit. I only check the RMAH for a few items when I get bored to flip with balance as any balance can be spent on future Blizz games and the RMAH market is less active and easier to spot the under-valued listings. A mere $50 in balance is equivalent to 200m these days anyways. | ||
|
Ario
Canada73 Posts
On December 31 2012 18:37 Infernal_dream wrote: How many times and how long have people been saying "oh this is it" "this is the final nail" and yet the game keeps living on. Not to mention they're going to release an expo, then what? It's still D3. I'm not a huge fan of the game either but it's far from being an "epic fail". There's a lot worse games out there. There are a lot of other worse games out there, but not many which had as much hype around it and as big of a reputation as Diablo (at least none that I can think of). With all the development that's gone into D3, I would certainly say its an "epic fail" Regardless of whether this is the final nail in the coffin or not, its obvious that the player base is only getting smaller and smaller. Everyone I know who got the game were disappointed and stopped playing early on, and I only recently came back to see what changes there have been. From what I can gather, a good portion of the remaining people were players hoping for PvP to come in soon, but with this blog post I'm willing to bet a lot of them have given up now too. | ||
|
insectoceanx
United States331 Posts
| ||
|
StarcracK
Canada49 Posts
just give us more content damn it. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
http://www.ign.com/blogs/rkownage/2012/12/30/the-treeter-awards-2012 http://egamer.co.za/2012/12/egamer-awards-2012-the-most-disappointing-game/ the reveal part at the bottom | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
| ||
|
ZealotOfAuir
5 Posts
I want Blizzard to add game modes such as Domination, CTF, Team Defender Domination : There are 3 or more positions or flags that needs to be taken control over. 2 teams that consists of maybe something like 6 people? CTF : Straight forward Team Defender : The two teams take turns defending a fortified location. Reaching the final gate and destroying it will result in a victory. After 2 or so rounds, the team who got the closest wins? Something similar to the PvP arena in WoW called Strand of the Ancients. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On January 01 2013 07:30 Assault_1 wrote: hey diablo won some awards! http://www.ign.com/blogs/rkownage/2012/12/30/the-treeter-awards-2012 http://egamer.co.za/2012/12/egamer-awards-2012-the-most-disappointing-game/ the reveal part at the bottom Haters gonna hate. The guy with the pindleskil bot made me wanna cry. He called that dedication – to cheat. On January 01 2013 09:44 ZealotOfAuir wrote: PvP wasn't as awesome as I wished, TDM would actually be more interesting than the "Dueling" system they got. I want Blizzard to add game modes such as Domination, CTF, Team Defender Domination : There are 3 or more positions or flags that needs to be taken control over. 2 teams that consists of maybe something like 6 people? CTF : Straight forward Team Defender : The two teams take turns defending a fortified location. Reaching the final gate and destroying it will result in a victory. After 2 or so rounds, the team who got the closest wins? Something similar to the PvP arena in WoW called Strand of the Ancients. How should that work with the current skill set of each class? Gear and skills are made for PvE, not PvP. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On January 01 2013 07:30 Assault_1 wrote: hey diablo won some awards! http://www.ign.com/blogs/rkownage/2012/12/30/the-treeter-awards-2012 http://egamer.co.za/2012/12/egamer-awards-2012-the-most-disappointing-game/ the reveal part at the bottom I never thought I would see the day that a game from Blizzard would win a "worse game of the year" award, nor would I ever believe that I would feel that it was the correct choice to give out the award to Blizzard. God knows they've worked hard for it. EDIT: special mentioning to Diablo3 Lead Designer and Deverloper Jay "Fuck that Loser" Wilson without you Diablo3 would never had gotten these amazing rewards, congrats. | ||
|
dragonsuper
Liechtenstein222 Posts
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
| ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
On January 02 2013 08:43 dragonsuper wrote: blizzard has done so many errors ... i will never buy a blizzard game in my life anymore Lmao. Like other companies are better. Go buy some ea games, so you can crawl back to blizzard who actually supports their games. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On January 02 2013 06:57 Integra wrote: I never thought I would see the day that a game from Blizzard would win a "worse game of the year" award, nor would I ever believe that I would feel that it was the correct choice to give out the award to Blizzard. God knows they've worked hard for it. ... what? Are you honestly saying that, with no hyperbole, the worst game made in 2012 was Diablo 3? Without question? However disappointing it may have been, it was still far superior to most of the crap made in 2012. You can easily find some random indie game, or even a AAA release from a studio, that is infinitely less fun than D3. Calling it "worst game of the year" is hyperbole, nothing more. Most disappointing? Maybe. But worst? Not a chance. | ||
|
Jetaap
France4814 Posts
On January 02 2013 23:20 NicolBolas wrote: ... what? Are you honestly saying that, with no hyperbole, the worst game made in 2012 was Diablo 3? Without question? However disappointing it may have been, it was still far superior to most of the crap made in 2012. You can easily find some random indie game, or even a AAA release from a studio, that is infinitely less fun than D3. Calling it "worst game of the year" is hyperbole, nothing more. Most disappointing? Maybe. But worst? Not a chance. Yeah diablo 3 is far from being a terrible game. It is just massively disapointing after all the hype that surrounded it, and the lack of follow up by blizzard. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9391 Posts
On January 03 2013 01:08 Jetaap wrote: Yeah diablo 3 is far from being a terrible game. It is just massively disapointing after all the hype that surrounded it, and the lack of follow up by blizzard. I think developing a RPG is also most more challenging than developing starcraft. Starcraft was basically a "cant fail" formula as BW was such a fantastic game. The RPG genre relies on tricking people into thinking that clicking on monsters is actually fun. D2 did that well, but it was also a different time. With WOW as the main competitor D3 had a much more difficult time. | ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On January 03 2013 01:49 Hider wrote: I think developing a RPG is also most more challenging than developing starcraft. Starcraft was basically a "cant fail" formula as BW was such a fantastic game. The RPG genre relies on tricking people into thinking that clicking on monsters is actually fun. D2 did that well, but it was also a different time. With WOW as the main competitor D3 had a much more difficult time. its the total opposite dude, your having confirmation bias or w/e.. before sc2 and d3 were out I was worried about sc2 because the bar was set so high from the first game, and its really hard to make an rts (personally I think they got lucky balancing bw.. with muta stacking, stop lurker, etc). but for D3 I never even considered it could be bad because theres no way they could mess up an rpg like that. I'm still scratching my head as to how they could go so wrong, the game is over once you kill diablo | ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
I'm honestly not that concerned about D3 pvp. I remember reading before release that they'd be keeping D3 as mostly a PvE game, with pvp tacked on as an extra element and not a driving feature of the game. While I can imagine a lot of people have high hopes for the pvp of D3, I dont know that those hopes are or ever were realistic. I don't remember being sold D3 as a competitive pvp game, so I'll have a hard time saying I'm disappointed. | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On January 03 2013 06:35 Assault_1 wrote: its the total opposite dude, your having confirmation bias or w/e.. before sc2 and d3 were out I was worried about sc2 because the bar was set so high from the first game, and its really hard to make an rts (personally I think they got lucky balancing bw.. with muta stacking, stop lurker, etc). but for D3 I never even considered it could be bad because theres no way they could mess up an rpg like that. I'm still scratching my head as to how they could go so wrong, the game is over once you kill diablo The same could be said of D2. I never ever found D2 fun. Gave it many many attempts and just couldn't understand why so many people played it day after day after day. D3 is kinda the same way to me. Randomly play it when I'm bored as hell, but no real investment. The entire game is based on being bored and grinding. Don't see how that's a legitimate excuse to remove TDM. Grinding players is more fun than mobs at least. Even if it's imbalanced as hell. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On January 02 2013 01:21 [F_]aths wrote: Haters gonna hate. The guy with the pindleskil bot made me wanna cry. He called that dedication – to cheat. How should that work with the current skill set of each class? Gear and skills are made for PvE, not PvP. I agree about the IGN blog, that guy just had a lot of conflicting things to say about the game. Bad drops, well why did you bot D2 24/7? Cuz you junked most of the drops dude... Disagree about PvP, they do have abilities and skills for PvP. Monks especially got a bunch of them - Guiding Light, Pacifism, Mantra of Retribution (yes they have minimal PvE uses, but they just scream PvP). Gear doesn't have to be terribly different to make PvP work either; you'd probably favor reduced CC gear more, but everything else you use in PvE you'd use against another player. It's just the huge damage -> hp disparity that has to be overcome (the obvious answer is a PvP aura); and CM wizards of course (but again, PvP aura reducing CC duration). Anyways; I kind of wonder how much of this stems from the Beta - not sure how many of you guys were around then. But about half-way through they announced that they were re-doing *everything*. Overhauled the skill/run system in February. Then, they basically removed half the character stats in January (and consolidated them with pirmary stats and the remaining secondary stats). That's a pretty big change to announce during Beta (among other scrapped things, like the 3rd artisan, limited reforging, changes to the crafting system - crafted blues in Beta were actually really good). The stat consolidation especially speaks to their reluctance to add new types of gear into D3. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
| ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:41 Monkeyballs25 wrote: I think Kripparian predicted this. Due to massive gear imbalances theres no way any sort of structured pvp would work out well. Anyone with half a brain predicted that... | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
But honestly who gives a shit? I would much rather be killing other players (or getting raped by them) vs. still doing the same fucking act3 run that we've been doing since the day the game came out. We literally have not gained a single thing to do. 8 months of the same shit and they say TDM is boring. Lolz. | ||
|
scDeluX
Canada1341 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:41 Monkeyballs25 wrote: I think Kripparian predicted this. Due to massive gear imbalances theres no way any sort of structured pvp would work out well. Everyone predicted it. I know I said it on the forums as well - the only way they would balance gear is if they did a Guild Wars style system of PvP specific gear. But they insisted that all it took was a simple MMR system and "somehow" things would balance themselves out, and continued to promise people they would use their PvE gear. Which was obviously a ploy just to sell gear on RMAH. As long as you use PvE gear, PvP is going to be unbalanced, but you know what? Nobody cares! Noone expects D3 to be balanced, ESPECIALLY balanced for competitive reasons? The only people who expect that are the retards who got D3 in to this mess. The PvE isnt balanced either and the game is supposedly balanced around PvE! All people want is D2 PvP functionality, because that's all they expected from the series. But apparently that's too much to ask. Instead we get 1v1... the very most unbalanced form of PvP there is.... | ||
|
Filter
Canada620 Posts
Diablo 3 is hard to call a bad game, because I like many others played it a lot on launch and had a ton of fun. Once the sheen wore off it though the problems started to really reveal themselves in a big way, which is a shame. I think it's pretty safe to say at this point that Diablo 3 is a good game, but also a game that whiffed on it's potential by a country mile and as it stands it's probably the only black mark on the entire Blizzard lineup. It's funny, when a developer known for only putting out solid gold gets away from what made their games so good and tries to appeal to a casual audience what happens. Bioware did the same thing with Dragonage 2 and that along with TOR are their big black marks, it's kind of sad in a way. Lets just hope that Blizzard has learned from D3 and moves on. | ||
|
aRyuujin
United States5049 Posts
On January 03 2013 16:22 Filter wrote: PvP should have never been associated with this game at all in the first place. If Blizzard just came out and said the game would be balanced around PvE and there would be PvP on the side (even arena's) but that they would not actively balance it things would have been fine. There's really not very many ways for a hack and slash game like D3 to be fun in PvE and balanced in PvP, and it certainly wasn't going to happen with how dumbed down the game was. Diablo 3 is hard to call a bad game, because I like many others played it a lot on launch and had a ton of fun. Once the sheen wore off it though the problems started to really reveal themselves in a big way, which is a shame. I think it's pretty safe to say at this point that Diablo 3 is a good game, but also a game that whiffed on it's potential by a country mile and as it stands it's probably the only black mark on the entire Blizzard lineup. It's funny, when a developer known for only putting out solid gold gets away from what made their games so good and tries to appeal to a casual audience what happens. Bioware did the same thing with Dragonage 2 and that along with TOR are their big black marks, it's kind of sad in a way. Lets just hope that Blizzard has learned from D3 and moves on. This is pretty much what they said in the first place. That's why everyone is so up in arms about it | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
7months, no pvp, good job /clap /clap /clap. | ||
|
Silahsor
Turkey59 Posts
However when I am being told "We are not releasing PvP because it is not fun", I get pissed. This is a plain and blatant LIE. Just like "we are nerfing Wizard's Critical Mass proc ratios because the new legendary items will have awesome abilities that procs" That was a very obvious LIE to nerf Wizard's CM. I would be OK if they simply said "Wizard is more powerful than we intend it to be atm so we are simply nerfing it". But no, they choose to LIE to us because they are so arrogant and know everything better than us that they simply cannot admit they are incapable of doing something properly. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On January 03 2013 10:24 Infernal_dream wrote: But honestly who gives a shit? I would much rather be killing other players (or getting raped by them) vs. still doing the same fucking act3 run that we've been doing since the day the game came out. We literally have not gained a single thing to do. 8 months of the same shit and they say TDM is boring. Lolz. To be fair, that was the D2 experience as well. But atleast you had a reason to level up new characters now and then, either after a ladder reset or because you wanted to try a new build. | ||
|
TOCHMY
Sweden1692 Posts
On January 03 2013 20:01 Monkeyballs25 wrote: To be fair, that was the D2 experience as well. But atleast you had a reason to level up new characters now and then, either after a ladder reset or because you wanted to try a new build. Or because your old HC char died in PvP and you wanted revenge on the SOB who killed you | ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
On January 03 2013 21:29 TOCHMY wrote: Or because your old HC char died in PvP and you wanted revenge on the SOB who killed you Oh How I miss the old "I will find and I will kill you" taken style  HC PvP so much fucking fun!!!!!!!!!!! | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
I know a lot of people would pay good money for Kripp's _____. Yep you thought it. | ||
|
Spikeke
Canada106 Posts
The Blizzcon 2010 demo of D3... Oh my what could have been. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
Now there's an idea for the expansion  | ||
|
sylverfyre
United States8298 Posts
On December 28 2012 07:36 Burrfoot wrote: So they will borrow all the WoW PvP battlegrounds and fail miserably at balancing WSG, AB, AV, etc for D3. No, that would be an improvement. A big one. | ||
|
HuffSteR
Bulgaria16 Posts
| ||
|
HuffSteR
Bulgaria16 Posts
| ||
|
justiceknight
Singapore5741 Posts
| ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
| ||
|
MiQ
Canada312 Posts
| ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On January 04 2013 01:22 justiceknight wrote: does D2 has a PvP arena? I only remembered turning on Hostile and start killing any1 i see. No structured arenas, no. I think people just went to the fields outside Act 1 for duels, and obviously ganking could happen anywhere if you weren't quick enough to flee. | ||
|
kAra
Germany1379 Posts
| ||
|
zbedlam
Australia549 Posts
On January 04 2013 03:30 MiQ wrote: I wish I could make promises and work on nothing for 8 months and still keep my job. Yeah damn, to be fair they have been doing stuff and the game is slightly better than it was at release, but not by much. I would have thought blizz would moderate their development teams better to make sure they didn't completely fuck the name of their company, a lot of people don't know that D3 is made by a completely different team to their other games. Still, when you put your company logo on something you better make sure that thing has quality, blizz didn't need this shit stain on their name and they should be more careful with who they let design and what they let them do in the future. I don't know how the design team of D3 still has their job, I guess blizz shareholders are happy that Jay managed to gouge millions out of diablo fans with this turd but the mark it leaves on their brand is going to render any gains pointless. | ||
|
YourMom
Romania565 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On January 04 2013 07:25 YourMom wrote: will there be duels for money ? Blizzard will take 15% of it. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
Lol... now that I think about it, maybe Blizz is just holding out trying to figure out a way to monetize PvP. Fantasy Diablo 3 TDM. Bet on teams/players and win money with Blizz taking a cut. Makes more and more sense now! | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On December 30 2012 04:10 Assault_1 wrote: so blizz can balance the world's most popular and complex RTS games but cant balance a battle arena? nope, ever play WoW arenas? never has been completely balanced and never will be lol. | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On January 04 2013 07:25 YourMom wrote: will there be duels for money ? in hardcore mode too imo | ||
|
zbedlam
Australia549 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 04 2013 07:45 Burrfoot wrote: Lol... now that I think about it, maybe Blizz is just holding out trying to figure out a way to monetize PvP. Fantasy Diablo 3 TDM. Bet on teams/players and win money with Blizz taking a cut. Makes more and more sense now! We already know that's the case. They insist on using PvE gear in PvP. Also they insist on it being "competitive" PvP. PvE gear + competitive will never add up successfully if you want fair, balanced gameplay. The only way that equation makes sense is if... PvE gear + competitive = monetized PvP through RMAH to be competitive. Take away the competitive format, and you will have a fun PvP mode with happy customers, but not monetized PvP. Take away the PvE gear and you will have happy customers and competitive PvP, but not monetized. Now their formula makes sense.... | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On January 04 2013 12:36 Spyridon wrote: We already know that's the case. They insist on using PvE gear in PvP. Also they insist on it being "competitive" PvP. PvE gear + competitive will never add up successfully if you want fair, balanced gameplay. The only way that equation makes sense is if... PvE gear + competitive = monetized PvP through RMAH to be competitive. Take away the competitive format, and you will have a fun PvP mode with happy customers, but not monetized PvP. Take away the PvE gear and you will have happy customers and competitive PvP, but not monetized. Now their formula makes sense.... Um, they specifically said that PvP was not meant to be competitive. At least not in the eSports sense. If you mean competitive as in you can brag about being better than other people and that it would have some semblance of balance, then ya, I guess they did insist on that. Anyways, whether they have PvP gear or PvE gear it all goes through the AH (I'm assuming) and they'll get their cut that way. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On January 04 2013 13:22 Wuster wrote: Um, they specifically said that PvP was not meant to be competitive. At least not in the eSports sense. If you mean competitive as in you can brag about being better than other people and that it would have some semblance of balance, then ya, I guess they did insist on that. Anyways, whether they have PvP gear or PvE gear it all goes through the AH (I'm assuming) and they'll get their cut that way. I love when blizzard gives those lame reasons "not meant to be competitive" means they're too lazy to balance it removing skill/stat trees is more simplified game design removing team deathmatch because once again, too lazy to balance look how simple the items are.. every class looks for the same 5 stats. this game couldve been made by a small company in 12 months | ||
|
imJealous
United States1382 Posts
| ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
On January 04 2013 10:48 zbedlam wrote: I am honestly surprised they haven't implemented a HC hero revive for $30 or something. Come on Blizz are bad sometimes but this ain't WarZ | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 04 2013 13:22 Wuster wrote: Um, they specifically said that PvP was not meant to be competitive. At least not in the eSports sense. If you mean competitive as in you can brag about being better than other people and that it would have some semblance of balance, then ya, I guess they did insist on that. Anyways, whether they have PvP gear or PvE gear it all goes through the AH (I'm assuming) and they'll get their cut that way. Why would balance issues be one of the primary reasons to delay it if it wasn't competitive? Or better yet... If it's not intended to be competitive, then why did Jay say in the PvP blog "if TDM was casual PvP like WoW BG things would be fine"? If it's not casual PvP, then what would be appropriate to call it other than "competitive"? | ||
|
okinoki
Germany103 Posts
yes there is an alternative to 'pay to win': farm like a madman. but it's just boring. d2 for me was leveling and trading. the gold ah is a cool idea which makes trading forums not so important anymore. the 15% blizz scam keeps d2jsp alive though. ive never been a real hardcore d2 player and never really battled pvp there. but d2 was the best rpg i ever played and i always fell back to it. me and most of my friends stopped playing d3 since a few weeks/months. it's just boring and not rewarding. the game engine is freaking fantastic and beautiful and i would love to keep on playing. but leveling is no part of the game since you can get a char to lvl 60 within hours. and the loot is 99% crap. uber bosses are a waste since the ring is just too bad. paragon levels are ok, but i have no real motivation to level them. MF doesnt make the loot better. just more crap. i'd love a tdm arena thing to just battle with my friends. even if there is no real balance. would be fun and bring some players back. also there are so many ways to tweak balance. capping dmg/stats, debuffs, extra pvp gear etc etc... i dont like the dota system but i think it would be a fantastic pvp method for d3 too. and not even too hard to implement. for blizzdudes. this all makes me think that blizz doesn't put enough effort into the game. if they really worked hard on a solution there would have been one months ago. i don't really get why. no way you can call d3 a bad game. the lack of endgame is a major complaint. but it is better than most other games. just my thoughts =) | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
So don't hate on pay2win! I love it! | ||
|
Achaia
United States643 Posts
On January 04 2013 13:53 Assault_1 wrote: I love when blizzard gives those lame reasons "not meant to be competitive" means they're too lazy to balance it removing skill/stat trees is more simplified game design removing team deathmatch because once again, too lazy to balance look how simple the items are.. every class looks for the same 5 stats. this game couldve been made by a small company in 12 months I don't think you read the blog very well. They never gave the indication that they were being lazy imho. They said that TDM as it existed had a very limited appeal and rather than release something that they didn't feel measured up to their company's standards they're shelving it for now. I don't see how that makes them lazy? I'm a software developer as well and I wouldn't want my name attached to something that I don't think is the best possible quality I can produce. If they can find a way to make it fun and viable long term then I'm sure they'll add it. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On January 04 2013 23:20 Achaia wrote: I don't think you read the blog very well. They never gave the indication that they were being lazy imho. They said that TDM as it existed had a very limited appeal and rather than release something that they didn't feel measured up to their company's standards they're shelving it for now. I don't see how that makes them lazy? I'm a software developer as well and I wouldn't want my name attached to something that I don't think is the best possible quality I can produce. If they can find a way to make it fun and viable long term then I'm sure they'll add it. How can you trust the internal testers, their logic is ridiculously flawed. They let a boring key hunt for a ring get implemented but decide to scrap TDM? The people who played it at blizzcon certainly gave good feedback on it. Off the top of my head heres some of the things they couldve done - 1v1/2v2/ffa etc ladder system - betting gold on the matches before the round begins - allowing random monsters to fight with you - spectator/replay system The best part is that most of those can be taken straight from the sc2 engine. Theres no way something like that would be "boring" if done correctly. Hardly any effort was put into the D2 pvp, yet it was mad fun. When they say boring its obvious theres other reasons for scrapping it. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On January 04 2013 07:45 Burrfoot wrote: Lol... now that I think about it, maybe Blizz is just holding out trying to figure out a way to monetize PvP. Fantasy Diablo 3 TDM. Bet on teams/players and win money with Blizz taking a cut. Makes more and more sense now! Easiest way to remove PvE gear imbalance and monetize PvP: make PvP-only gear that can only be purchased direct from Blizzard in the RMAH. Edit: Probably need to make it purchasable with "PvP win points" or something too. | ||
|
bruteMax
Canada339 Posts
"not up to our standards..." Well then how did D3 get released when it did then? "... is boring and repetitive" Uhhh, well that's how you designed D3 to be, so where's the problem? Jay Wilson, lying to the public to cover his fat ass as much as he can. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 04 2013 23:20 Achaia wrote: I don't think you read the blog very well. They never gave the indication that they were being lazy imho. They said that TDM as it existed had a very limited appeal and rather than release something that they didn't feel measured up to their company's standards they're shelving it for now. I don't see how that makes them lazy? I'm a software developer as well and I wouldn't want my name attached to something that I don't think is the best possible quality I can produce. If they can find a way to make it fun and viable long term then I'm sure they'll add it. I somewhat disagree with "no indications that they were being lazy". The game mode was playable at blizzcon 2010! I'm a software developer too, and have a good knowledge of game development, and there's no way in hell you couldn't get the TDM from 2010 to be fun and playable with 2 years of work. Better yet, just take the 7-8 months since they announced the delay to PvP, in that amount of time you could easily have all the problems solved. If you are working on a TDM mode for 2 years and can't get it fun and playable, that reeks of laziness. | ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
On January 05 2013 05:59 Spyridon wrote: I somewhat disagree with "no indications that they were being lazy". The game mode was playable at blizzcon 2010! I'm a software developer too, and have a good knowledge of game development, and there's no way in hell you couldn't get the TDM from 2010 to be fun and playable with 2 years of work. Better yet, just take the 7-8 months since they announced the delay to PvP, in that amount of time you could easily have all the problems solved. If you are working on a TDM mode for 2 years and can't get it fun and playable, that reeks of laziness. maybe it just reeks of priorities? they have put a lot of effort into trying to fix the pve game since release and they also have other projects going on. i'm not really trying to defend the pvp (or lack thereof) situation, but insinuating the dev is just being lazy is a stretch to me. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 05 2013 06:11 JustJonny wrote: maybe it just reeks of priorities? they have put a lot of effort into trying to fix the pve game since release and they also have other projects going on. i'm not really trying to defend the pvp (or lack thereof) situation, but insinuating the dev is just being lazy is a stretch to me. First off, they haven't done a patch to the game at all that wasn't a bug fix in months, nor announced anything big, so who knows what their priorities are right now. More importantly (and responding to your question), they promised something "soon after launch", further went to say it would be "almost a disaster" if it didnt make it in 2012. They claimed those working on PvP and PvE were different people. Which means there should have been a number of people developing PvP the entire time. So why would a devoted number of people not be able to get TDM functional in 2 years from blizzcon, or 7-8 months since game release? Either it is laziness, or they "changed priorities" and took those developers off of PvP for all that time, and led us to believe they were working on it the entire time. If that was the case we should have been notified of it when it happened, not this many months after release. And as a respectable development company they should have not made promises before they were ready to keep them. Either situation is a betrayal to the customers. I could give a damn paragon levels, and would gladly have gave it up for what they promised me before release. Because that made a difference in me buying the game at release. I know over 10 people who bought D3 on release. Not a single one of them cared about paragon levels, and a few of them actually expressed how paragon levels were a bad idea because they don't want to grind that much. At the same time, more than half of them have said they don't plan on going back to D3 at all until PvP is implemented. Should we feel any less betrayed as customers if they are putting other things higher priority than what they promised us before release? | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
I'm not sure how much effort was really needed to do the new shrines or paragon levels. Ubers probably took a lot of work too. So they definitely decided to work on PvE over PvP for I guess the majority of the time after release (although 1.0.4 had a lot of PvP-ish stuff data-mined in the game files). At it's heart Diablo is a dungeon crawler, so I'm not surprised they did this. And after I got over my complete and total disappointment over this announcement I remember I've enjoyed the game plenty; especially the 1.0.4 and 1.0.5 patches. I do think that Jay Wilson needs to learn to keep his mouth shut and he'd stop pissing everyone off. I also think that if they were going to give up on giving us a balanced PvP system; dueling should have been available from day 1. At least that'd let them collect data on what kind of things might cause problems in PvP ya? *cough* CM wiz *cough*. | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On January 05 2013 12:08 Wuster wrote: The specifically said they re-prioritized and put a huge effort into redesigning Legendaries. I'm not sure how much effort was really needed to do the new shrines or paragon levels. Ubers probably took a lot of work too. So they definitely decided to work on PvE over PvP for I guess the majority of the time after release (although 1.0.4 had a lot of PvP-ish stuff data-mined in the game files). At it's heart Diablo is a dungeon crawler, so I'm not surprised they did this. And after I got over my complete and total disappointment over this announcement I remember I've enjoyed the game plenty; especially the 1.0.4 and 1.0.5 patches. I do think that Jay Wilson needs to learn to keep his mouth shut and he'd stop pissing everyone off. I also think that if they were going to give up on giving us a balanced PvP system; dueling should have been available from day 1. At least that'd let them collect data on what kind of things might cause problems in PvP ya? *cough* CM wiz *cough*. A CM wiz would cause problems? Are you kidding me? How about the fact that a demon hunter could two shot a cm wiz from smokescreen. Or a barb that you can't catch, or monk. I could go on for ages about what's overpowered and what's not. Fact is though we don't know what's overpowered and we wont until they release TDM. Jay Wilson doesn't need to keep his mouth shut, he needs to be fired. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 05 2013 12:08 Wuster wrote: The specifically said they re-prioritized and put a huge effort into redesigning Legendaries. I'm not sure how much effort was really needed to do the new shrines or paragon levels. Ubers probably took a lot of work too. So they definitely decided to work on PvE over PvP for I guess the majority of the time after release (although 1.0.4 had a lot of PvP-ish stuff data-mined in the game files). Your first sentence is not true at all. They never said they removed the developers from working on PvP at ANY time. In May they said exactly this: "In addition, we’re planning to just straight-out buff Legendary items in a future patch, likely the PvP patch (1.1). " Then they announced the 1.0.4 preview with the legendaries with no mention of PvP. Do a quick search on google and you will see people were surprised by the lack of mention of PvP at all when they announced the legendary patch. People just went on to assume the PvP patch being 1.1 is going to come later at that point. Heres an example from my quick search: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Blizzard-Previews-Diablo-1.0.4-patch,16828.html So things are as I said earlier. Either they were lazy enough not to put the work in to get the TDM to be playable when they had more than enough time, or they reprioritized and completely took the developers off the PvP team without telling us. Because there is no way in hell you can't make an acceptable TDM mode in the amount of time they had. Especially with the amount of resources they have. Even a couple of indie developers in a garage can make a TDM mode in months for existing character classes/gear/combat system. The majority of the work is done, the mode is the easy part... Most difficult part at that point is interface development and maps (which we know were already datamined). | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
| ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
On January 05 2013 11:52 Spyridon wrote: First off, they haven't done a patch to the game at all that wasn't a bug fix in months, nor announced anything big, so who knows what their priorities are right now. More importantly (and responding to your question), they promised something "soon after launch", further went to say it would be "almost a disaster" if it didnt make it in 2012. They claimed those working on PvP and PvE were different people. Which means there should have been a number of people developing PvP the entire time. So why would a devoted number of people not be able to get TDM functional in 2 years from blizzcon, or 7-8 months since game release? Either it is laziness, or they "changed priorities" and took those developers off of PvP for all that time, and led us to believe they were working on it the entire time. If that was the case we should have been notified of it when it happened, not this many months after release. And as a respectable development company they should have not made promises before they were ready to keep them. Either situation is a betrayal to the customers. I could give a damn paragon levels, and would gladly have gave it up for what they promised me before release. Because that made a difference in me buying the game at release. I know over 10 people who bought D3 on release. Not a single one of them cared about paragon levels, and a few of them actually expressed how paragon levels were a bad idea because they don't want to grind that much. At the same time, more than half of them have said they don't plan on going back to D3 at all until PvP is implemented. Should we feel any less betrayed as customers if they are putting other things higher priority than what they promised us before release? i'm not trying to get in a big argument here, but you just sound so entitled. calling the devs lazy because they haven't put what you want in the game is ridiculous. i wouldn't be playing still if they hadn't added paragon levels, ubers, changed drops, etc. so they have kept me in their player base. i can't answer your question of "why" they haven't made TDM (or pvp) functional yet, but i doubt it's because the dev team said "fuck it" and browsed /r/funny for 7-8 months. | ||
|
Thereisnosaurus
Australia1822 Posts
i can't answer your question of "why" they haven't made TDM (or pvp) functional yet, but i doubt it's because the dev team said "fuck it" and browsed /r/funny for 7-8 months. Depressingly, this is probably not far from the truth. Ok, maybe not to the level of pure failure to work, but I see insiders talking about the practices in big studios and it's as good as. Basically what they do is brainstorm and come up with a bunch of random ideas, implement them, find they're terrible, make up another, implement those, find they're bad and so on. In any other discipline this would be regarded as pretty much the same as browsing reddit. Utterly unprofessional and inefficient. In the games industry it is the norm, because games designers are typically too arrogant to admit they don't know shit about game design and go and do research like any other specialist. Meanwhile forumjockeys like us, even in our silly little forum debates, generate more productive ideas than these top tier design studios. I've been in several beta programs this year (Hots, Tribes, Planetfall) and in every single one the games have been pretty much clusterfucks on first beta release and only made playable because of ideas developed, polished and demonstrated by their beta testers. NOT their designers. This is because we understand we know shit all and so actually have to go to the effort of doing research and using logic or be dismissed out of hand. I want to stress that, while you'd think this would be more common in professional game designers, it is actually incredibly rare. So yes, when critiquing games, particularly ones with multimillion dollar budgets, we are entitled to call devs lazy because they haven't put what we want in games, if said things can be considered in the PFO class: pretty fucking obvious, just as we can critique a top tier architect who fails to account for plumbing in skyscrapers and to compensate installs artistic latrinehoods which encourage residents to shit out the window, or a three star chef who, for all his presentation and masterful accompaniments, can't cook a steak to order. Remember that, for all their pretentions, modern game designers aren't authors, they're moderators. the ideal game designer, the guy who comes up with amazing ideas that change how you think about playing with a keyboard, no longer exist in the AAA industry. Such visionaries have an excuse. These chumps don't. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
Aceace
Turkey1305 Posts
On January 05 2013 12:08 Wuster wrote: The specifically said they re-prioritized and put a huge effort into redesigning Legendaries. I'm not sure how much effort was really needed to do the new shrines or paragon levels. Ubers probably took a lot of work too. So they definitely decided to work on PvE over PvP for I guess the majority of the time after release (although 1.0.4 had a lot of PvP-ish stuff data-mined in the game files). At it's heart Diablo is a dungeon crawler, so I'm not surprised they did this. And after I got over my complete and total disappointment over this announcement I remember I've enjoyed the game plenty; especially the 1.0.4 and 1.0.5 patches. I do think that Jay Wilson needs to learn to keep his mouth shut and he'd stop pissing everyone off. I also think that if they were going to give up on giving us a balanced PvP system; dueling should have been available from day 1. At least that'd let them collect data on what kind of things might cause problems in PvP ya? *cough* CM wiz *cough*. Huge effort on legendaries? Seriously? They did absolutely nothing about legendaries.. Let me give you examples 20-40% chance to cast a Poison Nova when you are hit. 15-35% chance to explode with knives when hit by enemies. 25-50% chance to cause Shock Pulse to erupt from your enemies when you hit them. 25-50% chance to be surrounded by balls of Arcane Power when attacking. This ring sometimes calls forth a Treasure Goblin when you are hit. You drain life from enemies around you. This ring occasionally haunts nearby enemies. Chance to launch an explosive ball of Hellfire when you attack. 20-30% chance to be protected by a shield of bones when you are hit. You have a chance to be shielded when hit by enemies. Burn the ground you walk on. Are these really requires effort? Look. They didn't implent some new, exciting legendaries. They put (maybe) some tricky visual effects on items but they increased their stats. For example. New "Andariels Visage" gives more crit and Attack speed then legacy one. This forces us to think "hmm this seems good." And it is really good. But not because of Poison Nova. We don't care about poison nova. I'm using an Andy for MP0 farm. It gives 9AS and 4.5Crit. I have no idea what is Poison Nova's chance :D Huge effort on legendaries = Moar stats. Übers Need effort? Hmm. SK-Magda. At SK's chamber. Ghom-Rakanoth At Ghom's chamber Kulle-SB At SB's chamber. As you can see there is 0 effort for übers. What about others? Hmm....They also add Keywardens. Total: 4 monsters. 4 keys. 1 Machine. 1 Ring. 2 Plans. They are not lazy. They have absolutely no idea how to proceed, what should they do. But they are really good at fakeing. "Look more hidden paragon levels. Go farm..." I am hopeless for PvP. Really. There is a light at the end of tunnel but this light is moving towards us. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 05 2013 17:56 JustJonny wrote: i'm not trying to get in a big argument here, but you just sound so entitled. calling the devs lazy because they haven't put what you want in the game is ridiculous. i wouldn't be playing still if they hadn't added paragon levels, ubers, changed drops, etc. so they have kept me in their player base. i can't answer your question of "why" they haven't made TDM (or pvp) functional yet, but i doubt it's because the dev team said "fuck it" and browsed /r/funny for 7-8 months. Saying "They havent put what I want in the game" is dumbing down the reality of the situation very much and trying to displace the blame on to me, as if I did something wrong... It's not what "I want in the game". It's what they PROMISED was going to be in the game before release! I purchased the game on the pretenses that the PvP deathmatch mode was going to be added soon after release. They specifically said there was going to be a PvP deathmatch mode. They specifically said in the few months after release. Here is an exact quote from their QA: "PvP Arenas will only be a few months after release, and in that time people will be trying out classes and perfecting their gear and builds. When they do arrive they’ll be an awesome addition to the game, and players will be ready to face off in some awesome PvP action in a designed and crafted experience." You shared the type of player you are, and that's fine. But I was one of the few people who actually played D2 for the PvP, not giving a crap if it was balanced or not. I still have screenshots somewhere of my perf PvP WW sin gear I used to have, for my WW sin I remade at least a dozen times and based the stats around that gear. That's the reason I played Diablo, not for the PvE, I only PvE'ed for the PvP gear and to build around it. If they did not make those promises I would not have bought the game at all, and they took my money and then did not hold up their side of the bargain. That's not entitlement on my part, that's shady business practice on their part. Why are you even defending them and acting like I did anything wrong, when they broke their word to not just me but all of us?? | ||
|
Confuse
2238 Posts
On January 06 2013 07:45 Aceace wrote: Huge effort on legendaries? Seriously? They did absolutely nothing about legendaries.. Let me give you examples 20-40% chance to cast a Poison Nova when you are hit. 15-35% chance to explode with knives when hit by enemies. 25-50% chance to cause Shock Pulse to erupt from your enemies when you hit them. 25-50% chance to be surrounded by balls of Arcane Power when attacking. This ring sometimes calls forth a Treasure Goblin when you are hit. You drain life from enemies around you. This ring occasionally haunts nearby enemies. Chance to launch an explosive ball of Hellfire when you attack. 20-30% chance to be protected by a shield of bones when you are hit. You have a chance to be shielded when hit by enemies. Burn the ground you walk on. Are these really requires effort? Look. They didn't implent some new, exciting legendaries. They put (maybe) some tricky visual effects on items but they increased their stats. For example. New "Andariels Visage" gives more crit and Attack speed then legacy one. This forces us to think "hmm this seems good." And it is really good. But not because of Poison Nova. We don't care about poison nova. I'm using an Andy for MP0 farm. It gives 9AS and 4.5Crit. I have no idea what is Poison Nova's chance :D Huge effort on legendaries = Moar stats. Übers Need effort? Hmm. SK-Magda. At SK's chamber. Ghom-Rakanoth At Ghom's chamber Kulle-SB At SB's chamber. As you can see there is 0 effort for übers. What about others? Hmm....They also add Keywardens. Total: 4 monsters. 4 keys. 1 Machine. 1 Ring. 2 Plans. They are not lazy. They have absolutely no idea how to proceed, what should they do. But they are really good at fakeing. "Look more hidden paragon levels. Go farm..." I am hopeless for PvP. Really. There is a light at the end of tunnel but this light is moving towards us. I am also hopeless for PvP, but please do not undermine the obvious effort they put into redesigning legendaries and adding ubers in a way that made the game enjoyable for some time. I think 1.04 saved d3 from completely dying off, which is definitely not trivial. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
What I'd like to see are Legendary Goblins on MP10 only that require an absolute beast set of DPS to kill, but the caveat is they drop a random legendary every 25% health and a set item on death. | ||
|
Big G
Italy835 Posts
Sultan of Blinding Sands is just a golden Yatagan, Burning Axe of Sankis is just a bronzed Arch Axe. A skilled D3 fan could make a totally unique artwork and render it in 3D for free in some days, D3 team can not. Oh wow, belts bracers and amulets are all different... too bad they don't show up in 3D. :D (The guy that drew the rings apparently was fired after 4 or 5 artwork though, so some of them look the same) "Legendary" for the development team apparently means: a) look, we put movement speed on bracers and magic find on weapons! Which is fine I guess. b) items that overshadow 99.9999% of rares (all offhands, Manticore, Skorn, Mempo), so those of us that play at a reasonable pace can just ignore all rares. Smart move. c) a lot of "on hit" effects, most of which are just graphics (novas, summoned skeleton, etc), others are made useless in an attempt to make them balanced (5-15% freeze/blind on hit). Then some stuff like fire resistance on Fire Walkers that nobody cares about (one of many lost design chances, try to put in 100 fire res and maybe people will care...). Then we have stuff like thorns on Lacuni. Everybody knows that thorns are useless, but guess what? The D3 team reworks most of the legendaries, Lacuni included, and leaves there that pathetic affix. SoJ, Skull Grasp, IK belt... all were reworked but all still have a bonus to CC of overpower. Overpower!!!!! A skill that you can use every X seconds, where X depends on CC of other skills. Oh god, why. And I'm saying this because I play a barbarian, but I'm sure that there 3 or 4 bonus to skills totally useless for each other class. Signs of good design: - Andariel's Visage: ok, this is the ABC of design (play some Magic the Gathering to know what I mean). Andy is (or it can be) powerful, but it has a drawback. That we have to circumvent gaining EHP somewhere else. (as a side note, legendaries were designed with low durability probably in an attempt to balance their power with a drawback, but the entire repair mechanic has sunk while the gameplay progressed in arguably unforeseen directions) - Stone of Jordan: less damage against white mobs, more damage against elites, no main stat /cc/ias/cd. Tough but interesting choice. - Windforce: hell yeah, an "on hit" effect that actually matters, while the bow in itself isn't overpowered (having only 1 random affix). Cool. Too bad they make an OP Manticore at the same time, so nobody uses Windforce. - I'm done. Ok, more on topic. Everything that I just said applies to a lot of stuff, including balance, level design, and mechanics. I have 3 possible explanations for this: 1) D3 development team is absolutely lazy/incompetent/unimaginative. This is the easy answer. 2) D3 team is made of no more than 10 people, maybe because Blizzard moves the main part of a team (like, programmers/artists) to other projects when the game is done. Those few people are so burdened of work that they take months for the smallest patch. I consider this somewhat plausible for SC2 too. 3) D3 team just doesn't play D3 and is totally distant from the real necessities of hardcore players. Like, they don't even know that 90% of players are doing Alkaizer runs only since 4 months. Whichever the answer is, we can assume the same for past and future development of PvP. Sorry for the long rant. | ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
On January 06 2013 08:04 Spyridon wrote: Saying "They havent put what I want in the game" is dumbing down the reality of the situation very much and trying to displace the blame on to me, as if I did something wrong... It's not what "I want in the game". It's what they PROMISED was going to be in the game before release! I purchased the game on the pretenses that the PvP deathmatch mode was going to be added soon after release. They specifically said there was going to be a PvP deathmatch mode. They specifically said in the few months after release. Here is an exact quote from their QA: "PvP Arenas will only be a few months after release, and in that time people will be trying out classes and perfecting their gear and builds. When they do arrive they’ll be an awesome addition to the game, and players will be ready to face off in some awesome PvP action in a designed and crafted experience." You shared the type of player you are, and that's fine. But I was one of the few people who actually played D2 for the PvP, not giving a crap if it was balanced or not. I still have screenshots somewhere of my perf PvP WW sin gear I used to have, for my WW sin I remade at least a dozen times and based the stats around that gear. That's the reason I played Diablo, not for the PvE, I only PvE'ed for the PvP gear and to build around it. If they did not make those promises I would not have bought the game at all, and they took my money and then did not hold up their side of the bargain. That's not entitlement on my part, that's shady business practice on their part. Why are you even defending them and acting like I did anything wrong, when they broke their word to not just me but all of us?? i'm not blaming you for anything other than acting entitled and posting whiny rants. you bought the game and knew pvp was not a feature at release. this was a gamble on your part and i guess you lost. i am 100% sure this is neither the first or last game you'll buy and regret. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:08 JustJonny wrote: i'm not blaming you for anything other than acting entitled and posting whiny rants. you bought the game and knew pvp was not a feature at release. this was a gamble on your part and i guess you lost. i am 100% sure this is neither the first or last game you'll buy and regret. As I mentioned, that's not entitlement on my part (at least not in the derogatory sense you are using it). I have just reason for being pissed off that they did not deliver on their promises. Blizzard was a respectable company with a respectable name. You act like it was a "gamble" for something they said FOR SURE was going to be in game during that time period. It should never be a gamble to trust a respectable company on their word. As a direct result of these actions Blizzard has turned from a respectable company in to a company that has no problem with shady business practices. They were the ones that made the real mistake. They are the ones that are going to be living with their decisions. Their bad PR, the crashing of their RMAH market, and declining sales with every release outside the Starcraft series are evidence of this (maybe even the SC series will suffer too, we'll see with HotS). You can say I'm acting "entitled and whiny" all you want, but if that were true it doesn't explain why Blizzards reputation is at an all-time low when they were once the most respected company in the business, and that's due to their actions, not mine. There are millions of people who are pissed off for the same reasons I am. You are the minority, not me. It's a joke that you are actually defending them. That's just making yourself look bad since your supporting a company/development team that lied to you. Once again I ask, why are you defending them and acting like I did anything wrong, when they broke their word not just to me but to all of us? (including you) | ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:40 Spyridon wrote: As I mentioned, that's not entitlement on my part (at least not in the derogatory sense you are using it). I have just reason for being pissed off that they did not deliver on their promises. Blizzard was a respectable company with a respectable name. You act like it was a "gamble" for something they said FOR SURE was going to be in game during that time period. It should never be a gamble to trust a respectable company on their word. As a direct result of these actions Blizzard has turned from a respectable company in to a company that has no problem with shady business practices. They were the ones that made the real mistake. They are the ones that are going to be living with their decisions. Their bad PR, the crashing of their RMAH market, and declining sales with every release outside the Starcraft series are evidence of this (maybe even the SC series will suffer too, we'll see with HotS). You can say I'm acting "entitled and whiny" all you want, but if that were true it doesn't explain why Blizzards reputation is at an all-time low when they were once the most respected company in the business, and that's due to their actions, not mine. There are millions of people who are pissed off for the same reasons I am. You are the minority, not me. It's a joke that you are actually defending them. That's just making yourself look bad since your supporting a company/development team that lied to you. Once again I ask, why are you defending them and acting like I did anything wrong, when they broke their word not just to me but to all of us? (including you) typing lots of text doesn't make your point better or more clear. where did i defend them? i just said i believed your assumption of dev laziness was incorrect and that i don't like the general theme of your posts. also that i like the game and am not personally furious at blizzard for it. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:57 JustJonny wrote: where did i defend them? i just said i believed your assumption of dev laziness was incorrect and that i don't like the general theme of your posts. also that i like the game and am not personally furious at blizzard for it. You really have to ask where? 1) Saying anyone is entitled for expecting what the developers promised, furthermore going so far as calling their promises a "gamble", is defending their shady business practices that everyone should be upset about, whether they PvP or not. If developer promises are a gamble then how could you possibly say there is not some sort of shady business going on?? 2) Trying to point fingers at others saying people are upset because "they didnt put what YOU want in the game" is defending them by displacing the blame on to the customers (who were lied to) instead of where it belongs (on the developers who lied to us in order to get us to by the game, which in effect ripped us off). 3) Even arguing with the lazy comments are defending them somewhat, because that was just one of the likely scenarios mentioned. You and I both know I've said laziness was only one of the outcomes, yet you keep holding on to that and saying it was incorrect. Yet you ignore the fact that if it wasn't laziness, that's an even worse outcome for us all as customers. Now before I say more on this subject, don't get me wrong. I understand how this point could be easily debated and understand not everyone is going to agree, but I know first hand exactly how much work it takes to develop a TDM mode with their features. If you'd like you can PM me and I'll link you to a youtube video of a multiplayer game with a dedicated server where I designed the netcode/character controller/mode/scoreboard/the map/most the art, and I'm not even an artist, so creating my below-average art took longer than it would take an artist to create decent art. The entire thing only took me a few months (not even doing it full time), and the majority of the work was the character controller, netcode and physics. The mode itself was one of the smaller projects to create in mere weeks, and most of that was to get a couple of the scoreboard and stat bugs out. Considering they had their TDM mode fully playable with partly functional matchmaking years before release (even ready enough for the public to try in 2010), even a couple people could have had the mode fully playable in the time they had. So do I think it's laziness? Laziness is one of the most likely scenarios. If it wasn't laziness than we were betrayed even worse than if it was laziness. If they had even a few people working on the PvP for more than 2-3 months and they couldn't get it to be fun and playable, laziness is the only answer. If they did not have people working on the PvP, if they decided TDM wasnt going to be profitable enough for them, or if they decided "screw what we promised, lets just scratch the mode", that is just another example of shady business practice when they consistently led us to believe things that weren't true and screwed us in the end. Which is worse than laziness. Now, I know you got what made you happy and kept you playing. But you really should realize that a big majority of the people are just as pissed off as I am, or even more, and we have every right to be. Can you really deny that making a blog promising PvP TDM in a few months then not only failing to deliver, but canceling it completely, is shady business? It's only by a advertising technicality that what they did is even legal, since it was said in a blog session... | ||
|
JustJonny
Canada294 Posts
On January 06 2013 12:50 Spyridon wrote: You really have to ask where? 1) Saying anyone is entitled for expecting what the developers promised, furthermore going so far as calling their promises a "gamble", is defending their shady business practices that everyone should be upset about, whether they PvP or not. If developer promises are a gamble then how could you possibly say there is not some sort of shady business going on?? 2) Trying to point fingers at others saying people are upset because "they didnt put what YOU want in the game" is defending them by displacing the blame on to the customers (who were lied to) instead of where it belongs (on the developers who lied to us in order to get us to by the game, which in effect ripped us off). 3) Even arguing with the lazy comments are defending them somewhat, because that was just one of the likely scenarios mentioned. You and I both know I've said laziness was only one of the outcomes, yet you keep holding on to that and saying it was incorrect. Yet you ignore the fact that if it wasn't laziness, that's an even worse outcome for us all as customers. Now before I say more on this subject, don't get me wrong. I understand how this point could be easily debated and understand not everyone is going to agree, but I know first hand exactly how much work it takes to develop a TDM mode with their features. If you'd like you can PM me and I'll link you to a youtube video of a multiplayer game with a dedicated server where I designed the netcode/character controller/mode/scoreboard/the map/most the art, and I'm not even an artist, so creating my below-average art took longer than it would take an artist to create decent art. The entire thing only took me a few months (not even doing it full time), and the majority of the work was the character controller, netcode and physics. The mode itself was one of the smaller projects to create in mere weeks, and most of that was to get a couple of the scoreboard and stat bugs out. Considering they had their TDM mode fully playable with partly functional matchmaking years before release (even ready enough for the public to try in 2010), even a couple people could have had the mode fully playable in the time they had. So do I think it's laziness? Laziness is one of the most likely scenarios. If it wasn't laziness than we were betrayed even worse than if it was laziness. If they had even a few people working on the PvP for more than 2-3 months and they couldn't get it to be fun and playable, laziness is the only answer. If they did not have people working on the PvP, if they decided TDM wasnt going to be profitable enough for them, or if they decided "screw what we promised, lets just scratch the mode", that is just another example of shady business practice when they consistently led us to believe things that weren't true and screwed us in the end. Which is worse than laziness. Now, I know you got what made you happy and kept you playing. But you really should realize that a big majority of the people are just as pissed off as I am, or even more, and we have every right to be. Can you really deny that making a blog promising PvP TDM in a few months then not only failing to deliver, but canceling it completely, is shady business? It's only by a advertising technicality that what they did is even legal, since it was said in a blog session... straight up there is no chance i'm reading any of that. ttyl. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
- cross realm friends EU + NA - realm transfer fee EU <-> NA - IOS / Andriod Auction House Access - bazillion non-combat pets for $ and what I think they are actually working on: PvP Tournament Realm (with its only ruleset) and its own Auction House(s) | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
It's not what "I want in the game". It's what they PROMISED was going to be in the game before release! I purchased the game on the pretenses that the PvP deathmatch mode was going to be added soon after release. They specifically said there was going to be a PvP deathmatch mode. They specifically said in the few months after release. I think this is key. PvP was expected to be in the game for launch, it was listed as a feature wherever D3 was for sale. The fact that it wasn't available for launch was a major eyebrow raiser, but luckily everyone was too busy grinding for levels and gear to care too much. But at this point its beyond a joke. I have literally NEVER seen a game company pull something like this before. If you can't implement a feature properly, you tell the players that before the game is released. If you get it working afterwards, its an unexpected bonus. | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:08 JustJonny wrote: i'm not blaming you for anything other than acting entitled and posting whiny rants. you bought the game and knew pvp was not a feature at release. this was a gamble on your part and i guess you lost. i am 100% sure this is neither the first or last game you'll buy and regret. I read your posts for a past few days here johny and how you call that guy entitled and insult him for no reason, more so when he is indeed right and you just spur out some bull**** arguments and then go "im 4 sho not reading that wall of text lol i win". All i can say is good luck in life with that "bendover" mindset of yours and then even insulting people with your comically bad reasoning and stuborness. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
| ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On January 06 2013 21:24 Burrfoot wrote: So is this better or worse than every other publisher that has DLC content already on the game when you buy it, but then ask you to fork over an extra $5-$20 to "unlock it". Diablo 3 isn't subscription fee supported, so if you were angry it didn't have pvp on launch could have returned it in those 30 days heh. I can't think of any game that promised a certain feature, then locked it behind DLC once the game was released. Even if they did, its still not as bad as not having the feature at all. Furthermore, at launch they promised that pvp would be available very soon, or at the end of the year at the latest, so no I don't think the refund argument is justified. I'm not even mad at Blizzard at this point, I was never interested in the pvp. I'm just amazed anyone is defending them. | ||
|
Holy_AT
Austria978 Posts
Regarding D3 I dont believe there ever were one ... For many people the game was a dissapointment and all of the people I personally know that played it stopped after 2-3 weeks. The launch was error 37, features where not implemented regions looked unfinshed espacially in the last act. Dropprates, RMA and the difficulty levels were often discussed and crizised. And after one year of release there were only minor changes, besides the paragorn stuff. When I heard that pvp was not implemented at launch, it sounded to me that they will release it in the next weeks or after up to two month, but now one year has passed to finally even hear an announcment. This game really had potential but it was a real bust for all of the people I know. This is just a huge disappointment to me. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
If I ever hit 100 paragon, I'll be joining the offline too! | ||
|
Lokian
United States699 Posts
I'm surprised people are letting this pass by, but I guess nobody really cares since d3 declined. | ||
|
convention
United States622 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:08 JustJonny wrote: i'm not blaming you for anything other than acting entitled and posting whiny rants. you bought the game and knew pvp was not a feature at release. this was a gamble on your part and i guess you lost. i am 100% sure this is neither the first or last game you'll buy and regret. If you bought the game at a store, look at the back of your box. It says explicitly that it has PvP. That's not entitlement, that's what he purchased. If you ordered a steak with mashed potatoes at a restaurant, and they don't give you mashed potatoes, you are going to complain (in his case, they didn't give him the steak, he only got mashed potatoes). This is no different, he bought diablo with PvP, he didn't get PvP. | ||
|
oscar62
Canada417 Posts
| ||
|
Jiiks
Finland487 Posts
On January 07 2013 03:36 convention wrote: If you bought the game at a store, look at the back of your box. It says explicitly that it has PvP. That's not entitlement, that's what he purchased. If you ordered a steak with mashed potatoes at a restaurant, and they don't give you mashed potatoes, you are going to complain (in his case, they didn't give him the steak, he only got mashed potatoes). This is no different, he bought diablo with PvP, he didn't get PvP. I pretty much cashed out from the game already so i don't really care, but anyways my game box says nothing about pvp(i'm pretty sure there's no variant that says anything about pvp?), and the bnet page says it will be available post launch. Doesn't really matter if it comes 10 years from now it's still post launch  | ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
On January 06 2013 23:16 Holy_AT wrote: [...]And after one year of release there were only minor changes[...] 8 months | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/721620/diablo-3-wont-have-pvp-at-launch-will-be-released-as-a-patch/ They went on to add that, "When the PvP patch is ultimately ready, it will add multiple Arena maps with themed locations and layouts, PvP-centric achievements, and a matchmaking system that will help you and your team get into fairly matched games quickly and easily. We’ll also be adding a personal progression system that will reward you for successfully bashing in the other team’s skulls." I think with the language they're using it would have been clear itwasn't going to be something put out a few days or weeks after launch like the real money Auction House. On the other hand they're promising a lot of other stuff. Basically the same feature list as WoW's arena pvp, but without anywhere near as much of a level playing field when it comes to gear levels. | ||
|
Denzil
United Kingdom4193 Posts
On January 06 2013 17:52 Monkeyballs25 wrote: I think this is key. PvP was expected to be in the game for launch, it was listed as a feature wherever D3 was for sale. The fact that it wasn't available for launch was a major eyebrow raiser, but luckily everyone was too busy grinding for levels and gear to care too much. But at this point its beyond a joke. I have literally NEVER seen a game company pull something like this before. If you can't implement a feature properly, you tell the players that before the game is released. If you get it working afterwards, its an unexpected bonus. A bit slow on the old Blizzard fake promises train aren't you? Does no one remember the promise of battles in the air for WOTLK on the actual game case? | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
But then again, in Bli$$ards eyes i guess D3 is a success and they are already looking to the expansion since it shipped so many copies. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
On January 08 2013 04:55 Denzil wrote: A bit slow on the old Blizzard fake promises train aren't you? Does no one remember the promise of battles in the air for WOTLK on the actual game case? Nope. I do remember dance studios being promised but never delivered on, and I think the hairdressers/barbers was an expansion or two late. But cosmetic features=/a fairly big, but not quite core gameplay niche. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 07 2013 02:59 Lokian wrote: I wish there was some sort of petition or boycott or even a lawsuit that I can support to get what I paid for... Being promised pvp and not getting it for this long is absurd. Blizzard can easily avoid this mess just by implementing a free zone that doesn't affect the economy of the game. Instead, they gave a bullcrap reason in my suspicion was an entirely different situation from what we know... I'm surprised people are letting this pass by, but I guess nobody really cares since d3 declined. Well, if it was closer to release you could have reported what they said to the credit card companies and got your money back for a bait & switch. But it's too late for that now. For example when Darkfall originally was released a few years ago, the company recognized even the developers forum posts as advertisement, seen that what they promised was not in the game, and allowed the 2 copies I purchased to get refunds without any problem whatsoever. Could have done the same thing for D3, with not only the blog post, but also their QA sessions that I pasted earlier in this post but it's too late. Again, here is their exact wording from a QA session: + Show Spoiler + PvP Arenas will only be a few months after release, and in that time people will be trying out classes and perfecting their gear and builds. When they do arrive they’ll be an awesome addition to the game, and players will be ready to face off in some awesome PvP action in a designed and crafted experience. Credit card companies DO recognize that as advertisement. It's only by a legal technicality that we can't bring it to court. Although considering Amazon/gamestop's websites listed PvP as a feature and now changed it to "Dueling", there "may" be a case there, but it would be hard to win and probably not worth it. On January 08 2013 03:01 Monkeyballs25 wrote: I actually got a bit curious about what they'd been promising regarding Diablo pvp so I went searching for some old articles. Here's one. http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/721620/diablo-3-wont-have-pvp-at-launch-will-be-released-as-a-patch/ I think with the language they're using it would have been clear itwasn't going to be something put out a few days or weeks after launch like the real money Auction House. On the other hand they're promising a lot of other stuff. Basically the same feature list as WoW's arena pvp, but without anywhere near as much of a level playing field when it comes to gear levels. Refer to what I posted in the spoiler tag above. The language they used there was very specific. They specifically said a "few months" after release. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.diablofans.com/uploads/gallery/album_1609/gallery_47244_1609_35331.jpg) | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
But who knows, maybe they'll announce some sort of skill/system adjustments to allow people to duel without just one-shotting each other. | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On January 09 2013 07:19 Wuster wrote: It's the the blog for the dueling patch. I'm not sure I'd get too excited about it; unless they found a way to revolutionize dueling. But who knows, maybe they'll announce some sort of skill/system adjustments to allow people to duel without just one-shotting each other. remember how they did it with followers? they take a maximum damage of 10% of their health or w/e | ||
|
Noro
Canada991 Posts
Blizzard has to be one of the most powerful game companies but their development teams are becoming absolutely horrible. How is it that way smaller companies are just blowing them out of the water right now? Blizzard, just do what we're paying you to do. I agree, they need to take action and fire the guys that aren't getting it done. | ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
On January 09 2013 07:43 Assault_1 wrote: remember how they did it with followers? they take a maximum damage of 10% of their health or w/e Lol, fastest to land 10 hits wins, even better.. | ||
|
OblivionMage
Canada377 Posts
The D3 team at blizzard must be a giant circle-jerk of over-payed, egotistical morons who only care for their job security, sales numbers that rely on previous innovations, and washy Blizzard PR. At least amongst those making the decisions. The stupid decisions. Fuck those losers. | ||
|
Enzymatic
Canada1301 Posts
For us it comes to a few issues, one of which is depth. Simply fighting each other with no other objectives or choices to make gets old relatively quickly. What the fuck? If they say this, can they explain why world pvp in act 1 in diablo 2 was always popular and really fun, even for years? Blizzard really seems to be over-thinking things in regards to pvp and "trying too hard" with it.. Just give a place on the damn map in act 1 where people in a game can fucking set as hostile and fucking pvp. Its not that hard. | ||
|
Prox
Netherlands174 Posts
*** Sorry, just realized this is no D2JSP User was warned for this post | ||
|
theaxis12
United States489 Posts
| ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On January 09 2013 13:14 theaxis12 wrote: Such a cop out, just let us play team deathmatch with the warning that it is not balanced at all. And when people complain about balance just threaten to take it away. See problem solved in 10 sec. But... but... but then peepz will think Blizzard releases subpar content and will never buy another Blizzard product again!!!! oh.. wait... :/ | ||
|
theaxis12
United States489 Posts
On January 09 2013 13:20 FallDownMarigold wrote: But... but... but then peepz will think Blizzard releases subpar content and will never buy another Blizzard product again!!!! oh.. wait... :/ LOL I bought this RPG but it totally sucks because it is not an RTS GODDAMNEDBLIZZARD! | ||
|
labbe
Sweden1456 Posts
On January 09 2013 12:41 OblivionMage wrote: Are the lead developers like, totally, fully, incompetent? I thought this was blatantly obvious since the release of the game. | ||
|
Ricjames
Czech Republic1047 Posts
I was sad and dissapointed, now i just don't care. It will be a nice surprise if they actually manage to release some new stuff that will overcome my expectation. | ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
On January 09 2013 20:20 Ricjames wrote: Honestly... i don't care anymore. I have not touched D3 for months and i don't miss a single thing about it. Just a week after release, the truth of D3 showed up. The game was released in a disastrous condition and totally unprepared and everyone knows it. You can not expect anything good from a team that has released such a mess instead of the game everyone expected. I was sure i will be playing D3 for years and it will be the next big thing, but unfortunately Blizzard just failed hard. I was sad and dissapointed, now i just don't care. It will be a nice surprise if they actually manage to release some new stuff that will overcome my expectation. And you come and check the D3 forum because? | ||
|
CamTSU
United States93 Posts
On January 09 2013 20:53 Douillos wrote: And you come and check the D3 forum because? Because it's interesting to watch this train wreck continue to spiral downward. It's like watching the titanic 3/4's of the way sunk, you have no intention of ever boarding that ship again, but you just want to watch it go down. Plus it's kind of mindblowing in a way to watch discussion from people that still believe in the game, it amazes me that people still play or believe in this development team. | ||
|
Ricjames
Czech Republic1047 Posts
On January 09 2013 21:28 CamTSU wrote: Because it's interesting to watch this train wreck continue to spiral downward. It's like watching the titanic 3/4's of the way sunk, you have no intention of ever boarding that ship again, but you just want to watch it go down. Plus it's kind of mindblowing in a way to watch discussion from people that still believe in the game, it amazes me that people still play or believe in this development team. Thank you.. also i have some free time at work so i am reading all kinds of forums. I am still interested in the discussion and future development of D3. I also want to see opinions of other people. I just don't care about playing the game at this moment and i don't trust the D3 developer team. Also Douillos, i don't understand why do you even bother to post what you posted. Obviously trying to be a smartass... | ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
On January 09 2013 21:37 Ricjames wrote: Thank you.. also i have some free time at work so i am reading all kinds of forums. I am still interested in the discussion and future development of D3. I also want to see opinions of other people. I just don't care about playing the game at this moment and i don't trust the D3 developer team. Also Douillos, i don't understand why do you even bother to post what you posted. Obviously trying to be a smartass... LoL, the guy starts his post saying: "Honestly I dont care anymore", and im trying to be a smart ass??? You said "I am still interested [...] future development of D3". So you posting makes sense, but he is just obviously trolling, and my answer was just me wanting to make sure. | ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/6297431519?page=2#38 | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On January 09 2013 23:33 Douillos wrote: LoL, the guy starts his post saying: "Honestly I dont care anymore", and im trying to be a smart ass??? You said "I am still interested [...] future development of D3". So you posting makes sense, but he is just obviously trolling, and my answer was just me wanting to make sure. Just ignore the trolls. They probably do play the game and won't admit it because they're too busy riding the "d3 is complete shit" bandwagon. It's not the best game ever, but it's playable for exactly what it is. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
| ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On January 10 2013 03:25 Infernal_dream wrote: Just ignore the trolls. They probably do play the game and won't admit it because they're too busy riding the "d3 is complete shit" bandwagon. It's not the best game ever, but it's playable for exactly what it is. Ya, I read this blog and got really upset over how stupid Jay Wilson was hyping this thing for a month and disappointed that we were going to be left hanging without PvP. But when I got over that I realized I put hundreds of hours into this game because I *liked* playing it flaws and all. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3398 Posts
I feel so bad for the people that actually play this game. The biggest factor, for me to buy this game, was that I was promised hardcore arena pvp. Why don't they make rewards for pvp, that's only sensible, people like me play pve, to then have gear to totally smash someone in pvp and say, my character is better than yours, or I'm more skilled than you. There's no profile that i would ever look at and say WAUW he beat that boss, he must be really skilled, or PvP rating's going through the roof, making me feel like this guy really gets it. There's only; wow sick gear, wonder if he bought that? | ||
|
Aceace
Turkey1305 Posts
They never promised that. Diablo 2 PvP wasn't a hardcore pvp too. Also Diablo PvP is always for fun. (I mean really fun.) No one wants to see PvP ratings or anything like that. Are you sure we talk about same Diablo? We want to fight with our friends and cut their ears. Thats all! | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On January 10 2013 07:37 Aceace wrote: Hardcore pvp? They never promised that. Diablo 2 PvP wasn't a hardcore pvp too. Also Diablo PvP is always for fun. (I mean really fun.) No one wants to see PvP ratings or anything like that. Are you sure we talk about same Diablo? We want to fight with our friends and cut their ears. Thats all! I think a lot of people agree with this. We don't care if we don't get a reward. We don't care if there's no ranking. We don't care if it's completely meaningless. It would still be hilarious and fun to have 5v5 or CTF or KoTH or whatever in diablo. Sure eventually people would only roll the imbalanced things but then they'd get nerfed and it'd be alright. Anything right now is better than another alk run. | ||
|
FromShouri
United States862 Posts
On January 10 2013 03:25 Infernal_dream wrote: Just ignore the trolls. They probably do play the game and won't admit it because they're too busy riding the "d3 is complete shit" bandwagon. It's not the best game ever, but it's playable for exactly what it is. You are correct at the beginning I "jumped on the bandwagon" to voice my displeasure with the design direction that D3 was taking. I personally thought they should of nerfed inferno just a tad bit, not turn it into this stupid candy land "you can turn it up to increase your difficulty!!" MP1-10 should of just been called something else or just increase the drop rates to reduce time you spend grinding upgrades just to go from Act 1 to Act 2. But no, they just turn everything down to nightmare level, add a small HP/Damage scaler into the game, and then called it good. Is it any wonder that people farm mp0 for exp runs? I leveled 2 characters to max level, didn't care for either of them. I have played for close to 100 hours combined across all characters because there just wasn't anything else to play at the time and my friends played D3 as well. Just looking at all the design choices and excuses they gave each month in the developer blogs just made me lose interest more and more. I played hardcore when it first came out for ~50 hours, quit until paragon was introduced, played another 50 hours and now im so sick of it I don't even have it installed on my computer. That isn't to say I won't periodically check back to see if blizzard has pulled their heads out of their asses and no it isn't "playable" for exactly what it is. The only thing I've been waiting on since i was sick of killing Act 3 Elites for the 6,000th time was pvp, yet now there is no pvp. There is a dueling system that SHOULD of been in at release. I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that it will be a DLC addition. The fact that Blizzard is turning into a lot of companies that release games way too early and then hope to keep just enough interest till the next patch comes out sickens me, then to have them try to use their past success of "not releasing till we are confident its at a state we are happy with" for why PVP isn't being released is mind blowing SINCE THEY SHOULDN'T OF FUCKING RELEASED DIABLO 3 WITHOUT PVP IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THEY ARE SO STUCK ON NOT RELEASING THINGS THEY AREN'T HAPPY WITH. I own 4 Diablo II+Lod Keys and I paid full price for them all. I own one diablo 3 copy I bought midnight release and then i bought another for 10$ for my wife when Toys R Us clearanced out the PC games they had. However unlike Diablo III Im still playing Diablo LOD years after it was released, it is fun to periodically come back, grind out levels in baal runs and then play the gear game. I can't say the same for Diablo 3, I'm just gonna have to sit around and wait and see if they make this game worth the 60$ I spent on it. I tried to enjoy diablo 3, I tried to enjoy the story line, the characters, the armors, but I'm not lying to myself anymore. The armors look like some WoW reject armor, the story line comparatively to the other Diablo Games is complete and utter shit(if you didn't see that leah wasn't going to play some massive role in reviving diablo you are just stupid or just escaped past all the cut scenes) and the characters themselves aren't even fleshed out that well. Take a look at even Vanilla Diablo II and the skills sets comparatively to Diablo III, you can't seriously tell me that there are more variety and better skills in Diablo III. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 10 2013 07:37 Aceace wrote: Hardcore pvp? They never promised that. Diablo 2 PvP wasn't a hardcore pvp too. Also Diablo PvP is always for fun. (I mean really fun.) No one wants to see PvP ratings or anything like that. Are you sure we talk about same Diablo? We want to fight with our friends and cut their ears. Thats all! They never said "hardcore PvP". But they did say they wanted to "legitimize" PvP in D3. Which could be interpreted as hardcore. | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
Take a look at even Vanilla Diablo II and the skills sets comparatively to Diablo III, you can't seriously tell me that there are more variety and better skills in Diablo III. As I recall there tended to be one killer build for each class in D2. WW Barb, Hammerdin, FO Sorc, Bowazon with Strafe or MS, Necro using IM/BG. Also due to the way the skill system worked, a lot of damage dealing abilities just didn't scale well enough to be used in the endgame. | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On January 10 2013 17:06 Monkeyballs25 wrote: As I recall there tended to be one killer build for each class in D2. WW Barb, Hammerdin, FO Sorc, Bowazon with Strafe or MS, Necro using IM/BG. Also due to the way the skill system worked, a lot of damage dealing abilities just didn't scale well enough to be used in the endgame. The only thing I liked more about d2's stat system was that it kept the Softcore economy from being completely saturated. Because if you wanted a specialized character you had to make one. Not just change the skills. That being said, Vanilla d2's skills were bad becasue of the lack of synergy. And you're kidding nobody by saying the stat distribution was good. Minimum for weapons/armors and vit dump the rest. | ||
|
Ricjames
Czech Republic1047 Posts
On January 10 2013 09:16 FromShouri wrote: You are correct at the beginning I "jumped on the bandwagon" to voice my displeasure with the design direction that D3 was taking. I personally thought they should of nerfed inferno just a tad bit, not turn it into this stupid candy land "you can turn it up to increase your difficulty!!" MP1-10 should of just been called something else or just increase the drop rates to reduce time you spend grinding upgrades just to go from Act 1 to Act 2. But no, they just turn everything down to nightmare level, add a small HP/Damage scaler into the game, and then called it good. Is it any wonder that people farm mp0 for exp runs? I leveled 2 characters to max level, didn't care for either of them. I have played for close to 100 hours combined across all characters because there just wasn't anything else to play at the time and my friends played D3 as well. Just looking at all the design choices and excuses they gave each month in the developer blogs just made me lose interest more and more. I played hardcore when it first came out for ~50 hours, quit until paragon was introduced, played another 50 hours and now im so sick of it I don't even have it installed on my computer. That isn't to say I won't periodically check back to see if blizzard has pulled their heads out of their asses and no it isn't "playable" for exactly what it is. The only thing I've been waiting on since i was sick of killing Act 3 Elites for the 6,000th time was pvp, yet now there is no pvp. There is a dueling system that SHOULD of been in at release. I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that it will be a DLC addition. The fact that Blizzard is turning into a lot of companies that release games way too early and then hope to keep just enough interest till the next patch comes out sickens me, then to have them try to use their past success of "not releasing till we are confident its at a state we are happy with" for why PVP isn't being released is mind blowing SINCE THEY SHOULDN'T OF FUCKING RELEASED DIABLO 3 WITHOUT PVP IN THE FIRST PLACE IF THEY ARE SO STUCK ON NOT RELEASING THINGS THEY AREN'T HAPPY WITH. I own 4 Diablo II+Lod Keys and I paid full price for them all. I own one diablo 3 copy I bought midnight release and then i bought another for 10$ for my wife when Toys R Us clearanced out the PC games they had. However unlike Diablo III Im still playing Diablo LOD years after it was released, it is fun to periodically come back, grind out levels in baal runs and then play the gear game. I can't say the same for Diablo 3, I'm just gonna have to sit around and wait and see if they make this game worth the 60$ I spent on it. I tried to enjoy diablo 3, I tried to enjoy the story line, the characters, the armors, but I'm not lying to myself anymore. The armors look like some WoW reject armor, the story line comparatively to the other Diablo Games is complete and utter shit(if you didn't see that leah wasn't going to play some massive role in reviving diablo you are just stupid or just escaped past all the cut scenes) and the characters themselves aren't even fleshed out that well. Take a look at even Vanilla Diablo II and the skills sets comparatively to Diablo III, you can't seriously tell me that there are more variety and better skills in Diablo III. Exactly and much more. I am sick of people calling someome who they do not a understand "trolling". What is so hard to get on "I do not care about playing D3 anymore, however i am interested in its development, opinions and discussion of other people". If they don't understand that, i recommend going back to elementary school. And stop calling people trolls you ignorants. Troll does not even mean anything. People might be trolling, they are certainly not trollls. Sigh | ||
|
Douillos
France3195 Posts
People might be trolling, they are certainly not trollls. Sigh Nice one. )))))))Enough derailing the thread... We are all pissed, we are all disappointed... But im sure we still have some faith left This is Diablo ffs :D | ||
|
Ryan307 :)
United States1289 Posts
On January 10 2013 18:32 Douillos wrote: Nice one. )))))))Enough derailing the thread... We are all pissed, we are all disappointed... But im sure we still have some faith left This is Diablo ffs :DUnfortunately not, I honestly feel like the game is beyond repair at this point. Every single thing in this game has been an absolute disaster (aside from the amazingly smooth combat). Every time I hear about a patch I get my hopes up and then I am massively disappointed. I am absolutely loving torchlight 2 at least! | ||
|
FromShouri
United States862 Posts
On January 10 2013 17:06 Monkeyballs25 wrote: As I recall there tended to be one killer build for each class in D2. WW Barb, Hammerdin, FO Sorc, Bowazon with Strafe or MS, Necro using IM/BG. Also due to the way the skill system worked, a lot of damage dealing abilities just didn't scale well enough to be used in the endgame. you remember things incredibly incorrectly. Fist of Hammer Paladins, Zeal Paladins, Hammerdins, Frenzy barbs, WW Barbs, pole arm barbs, necros had poison builds, bone builds, summoner builds(all of these can beat ubers solo). Sorc had tons of builds too(fireball meteor, FO/Meteor, Fireball/Blizzard) all of these builds used some similar items but also different items.(Chains of Honor vs Enigma for a sorc since she can get teleport through skills). Just because you've never researched builds doesn't mean there wasn't "more then 1 optimal build" for each class(except amazon....that is the only class that is basically bowzon but what do you expect when every skill basically is some sort of bow skill). Also you really have no clue about endgame with your last statement. I rest my case.(Considering every class had 3-4 builds that could solo ubers/uber diablo). On January 10 2013 17:13 Infernal_dream wrote: The only thing I liked more about d2's stat system was that it kept the Softcore economy from being completely saturated. Because if you wanted a specialized character you had to make one. Not just change the skills. That being said, Vanilla d2's skills were bad becasue of the lack of synergy. And you're kidding nobody by saying the stat distribution was good. Minimum for weapons/armors and vit dump the rest. Im not talking about back back when the game was in its infancy, that is why i have a "small" glimmer of hope that blizzard can pull their shit together. Btw, you didn't have to always "dump everything into vit" especially if you played a mana shield sorceress -.- | ||
|
Monkeyballs25
531 Posts
-skill buffs and nerfs over time -skill synergy bonuses -+skills on items Which didn't turn up for years. | ||
|
ArC_man
United States2798 Posts
On January 11 2013 06:19 Monkeyballs25 wrote: Most of the build diversity in D2 only came about because of -skill buffs and nerfs over time -skill synergy bonuses -+skills on items Which didn't turn up for years. So you're saying we should stop playing D3 and come back in 1-2 years and the game will be good right? | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On January 11 2013 06:19 Monkeyballs25 wrote: Most of the build diversity in D2 only came about because of -skill buffs and nerfs over time -skill synergy bonuses -+skills on items Which didn't turn up for years. Exactly, a lot of people remember how awesome D2 was after 10 years of patching. Or maybe you're younger than those of us who played at release and were lucky enough to start with the 'good' version of the game. I played a lot of characters and abandoned a lot of characters because the skill system was very, very bad for the first few years. Lots of dead-end paths, lots of skills that stopped scaling after normal difficulty. Synergies really made them better, but it was a long time before that came around.. The concept of a poison necro would have been laughed at for years for example. I mean, hell you couldn't even unsocket items for THREE years. How pissed would people if that was still the case... | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
Really tho, it not that D3 is a bad game, its that we expected it to be so much better. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 12 2013 06:27 Burrfoot wrote: Really tho, it not that D3 is a bad game, its that we expected it to be so much better. I didn't expect it to be D2 yet. All I expected was the features they specifically told us we would be getting. Silly me. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On January 12 2013 06:27 Burrfoot wrote: That's kind of like saying - Stop complaining about Windows 8, you know how many service packs over the years it took for Windows 3.1 to be good? Heck I couldn't Remote Desktop for TEN years and you expect that to be in the new Windows? Really tho, it not that D3 is a bad game, its that we expected it to be so much better. Wasn't really my point; just that people who compare D3 with how awesome D2 was should really consider what it took for D2 to get there. Also, there hasn't been a Blizzard game that hasn't gone through massive transformations during its lifetime. This PvP business isn't all that different than what's happened before. | ||
|
Salv
Canada3083 Posts
Diablo III has taken multiple steps backwards compared to Diablo II, and saying Diablo II needed time is a bullshit excuse because there's no reason why Diablo III had to regress on advancements made during Diablo II's lifecycle. Same thing with Starcraft II - next generation game, but it regressed really fucking bad in a lot of ways. | ||
|
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
On January 12 2013 10:27 Salv wrote: The point is that D2 was eventually awesome, so it's dumb that Blizzard has to make the same fucking mistakes over again. That's like if you designed a car and then realized, 'Oh wow, you know power steering makes driving much better and enjoyable!', so they implement it and everyone is happy. Next car model comes out, no power steering, and then people say, 'Well shucks it took them a while to figure out it was good last time!' - sure it did, but what the fuck? Diablo III has taken multiple steps backwards compared to Diablo II, and saying Diablo II needed time is a bullshit excuse because there's no reason why Diablo III had to regress on advancements made during Diablo II's lifecycle. Same thing with Starcraft II - next generation game, but it regressed really fucking bad in a lot of ways. Nice analogy! ;-D | ||
|
FromShouri
United States862 Posts
On January 12 2013 06:08 Wuster wrote: Exactly, a lot of people remember how awesome D2 was after 10 years of patching. Or maybe you're younger than those of us who played at release and were lucky enough to start with the 'good' version of the game. I played a lot of characters and abandoned a lot of characters because the skill system was very, very bad for the first few years. Lots of dead-end paths, lots of skills that stopped scaling after normal difficulty. Synergies really made them better, but it was a long time before that came around.. The concept of a poison necro would have been laughed at for years for example. I mean, hell you couldn't even unsocket items for THREE years. How pissed would people if that was still the case... so how many patches did it take d2 to have team pvp...oh...wait...... | ||
| ||
