|
On August 23 2013 08:18 Phael wrote:
I don't get all this nostalgia over D2. I remember my first D2 experience, I rolled a sorceress. At level 1, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. Alright, whatever, rpgs start out slow right? At level 8, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. 2/3 the time I was oom. Ok, so lets put some points into warmth. Oh hey, an armor skill, cool. I'm at level 17 now, act2 dead, I have like 5 points into fireball, and it's taking me 7 or 8 shots to kill something. I then get glacial spike, whoa, good damage. Some more points there ... soon enough I'm level 30, and I realize that I realize that I've used enough points in non-vital skills that my sorc would never be good. There goes 20 hours.
Ok, lets reroll. Make a new sorc. Melee to kill stuff! Use level 1 versions of crappy pre-req skills for utility until 30! Spend the first 15 levels worth of stat points into strength despite barely having enough mana to cast two skills in a row!
... is that not retarded?
Yeah, Sorc is like...the absolute worst early game in D2, absolutely no denying that. But hitting level 24 and getting even level 1 Blizzard, or even 18 for Fireball, felt awesome. And hitting level 30 made you feel like a God.
Also find it hilarious that you had to use Sorc twice for the same example, as opposed to any of the other 6 classes that actually had skills that were usable at low levels.
Do people not remember that endgame for Diablo 2 (not LoD) consisted almost entirely of good rare gear, with a very small selection of legendaries? I remember seeing someone with a duped SoJ for the first time and drooling at it, then spending a month of free time to farm up an entire inventory worth of perfect skulls to trade for one.
Yeah...difference is that I could spend an hour farming Normal and load up on useful junk like a Tarnhelm, Treads of Cthon, Manald Heal rings, etc. that would actually last until Hell. Plus the actual requirements for "endgame" was really just LL, ML, some resists (maybe) and a half-decent weapon if you were a Barb, Paladin or Amazon. If you were a Sorc or Necro, endgame was actually just put skillpoints into tree and roll everything.
D3 is unequivocally a better game in every way with better balance, better skills, and far more enjoyment than D2 where endgame was rounding up a bunch of cows and aoeing them down. With 7 other completely random retards who may or may not be good enough to control your leveling rate.
And this is purely a Diablo 3 mindset applied to Diablo 2. Cow level was not the endgame, it was a place to level up..and it wasn't even the only place. If you were doing Cow Level, it's because you wanted that 99 for bragging rights. A lot of players in Hell just settled on 70-80 because any higher was unnecessary.
Endgame in D2 had a lot more diversity and a lot more replay value. Diablo 3...Farming, Key Farming, Leveling, and even Questing all happen in the exact same places.
|
On August 23 2013 08:36 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:27 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:Diablo III was a failure on every level design-wise, instead of trying to fix the problems with the ARPG genre/Diablo II they tried to re-invent the wheel in a terrible way. Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends. Doubt it, L4D is like 3 bucks every single time there's a Steam Sale and then some. It's also much much easier to get into and have some instant fun with friends than any RPG. The fact that it has all that mutation business going on, plus the fact that it's now Steam Workshop compatible really add to its lifespan. Hell, my friends and I have sunk well over 100 hours in L4D2 each over the course of like 3 years just playing casually and having fun. I know other people on Steam who still play it every once in a while. So yeah, really poor example right there. L4D came out in 2008 and L4D 2 game out in 2009. They are over 4 and 5 years old. I would hope they would be cheap at this point. And I have over 100 in D3 between my normal games, games with friends and playing with my GF. We also play L4D 2 from time to time. And my example is fine. I can guarantee you there are more people playing L4D/2 than there are still playing D3. ^^
Well if you guarantee it, I guess its true then....
|
On August 23 2013 08:36 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:27 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:Diablo III was a failure on every level design-wise, instead of trying to fix the problems with the ARPG genre/Diablo II they tried to re-invent the wheel in a terrible way. Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends. Doubt it, L4D is like 3 bucks every single time there's a Steam Sale and then some. It's also much much easier to get into and have some instant fun with friends than any RPG. The fact that it has all that mutation business going on, plus the fact that it's now Steam Workshop compatible really add to its lifespan. Hell, my friends and I have sunk well over 100 hours in L4D2 each over the course of like 3 years just playing casually and having fun. I know other people on Steam who still play it every once in a while. So yeah, really poor example right there. L4D came out in 2008 and L4D 2 game out in 2009. They are over 4 and 5 years old. I would hope they would be cheap at this point. And I have over 100 in D3 between my normal games, games with friends and playing with my GF. We also play L4D 2 from time to time. And my example is fine. I can guarantee you there are more people playing L4D/2 than there are still playing D3. ^^
How can you guarantee it if you don't source the numbers?
|
On August 23 2013 08:36 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:27 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:Diablo III was a failure on every level design-wise, instead of trying to fix the problems with the ARPG genre/Diablo II they tried to re-invent the wheel in a terrible way. Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends. Doubt it, L4D is like 3 bucks every single time there's a Steam Sale and then some. It's also much much easier to get into and have some instant fun with friends than any RPG. The fact that it has all that mutation business going on, plus the fact that it's now Steam Workshop compatible really add to its lifespan. Hell, my friends and I have sunk well over 100 hours in L4D2 each over the course of like 3 years just playing casually and having fun. I know other people on Steam who still play it every once in a while. So yeah, really poor example right there. L4D came out in 2008 and L4D 2 game out in 2009. They are over 4 and 5 years old. I would hope they would be cheap at this point. And I have over 100 in D3 between my normal games, games with friends and playing with my GF. We also play L4D 2 from time to time. And my example is fine. I can guarantee you there are more people playing L4D/2 than there are still playing D3. ^^
http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=550q500&from=1374585077
15k isn't exactly a high number. I wouldn't guarantee D3 doesn't reach that amount.
|
On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:Diablo III was a failure on every level design-wise, instead of trying to fix the problems with the ARPG genre/Diablo II they tried to re-invent the wheel in a terrible way. Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends.
I hope you're being sarcastic.
D3 is....
A Blizzard game (this produces numbers all by itself).
A game that is, by design, supposed to keep as many players grinding away for loot as possible.
It is, loosely speaking, a multiplayer game. Which in my very extensive experience, increases the lifespan greatly.
The third installment in one of the most beloved gaming franchises in history.
And you think the retention is "amazing". No. Just.... no. If more people play a CoD game that has the depth of a bathtub than play a game like D3 a year after release, it is NOT a success by any stretch.
|
On August 23 2013 08:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:30 Bayyne wrote:
You choose to remember the few bad things about D2? Do you really think people that are nostalgic consider only the bad? No. There were countless good things D2 had. There were great ideas that maybe were not implemented or done in a way that was more efficient.
Let's take the attribute and skill point system that was in place. Instead of improving upon the pitfalls that D2 had with attribute points and skill points(such as being locked into a particular build, only 2 chances to get it right, having to reroll to get it right, only a handful of cookie cutter builds were viable, etc), they completely removed the ability to allocate attribute points and gave everyone the ability to play every skill at end game without any real investment/thought put into it. There is no true character identity. Instead of improving upon said pitfalls, they essentially abandoned ship with it.
They had a great idea with the rune-word system, despite its many downsides (again, cookie cutter OP combos, etc). Instead of improving upon that to make it work, they removed it.
There were countless great features that D2 had, not to mention a better item system, that were either working well at the time or had great potential to be awesome for D3. That's what people are generally upset about.
Is D3 a fun game? Yes. Is it a worthy successor? In my eyes, absolutely fucking not. It's a step backwards in game design.
I fucking HATE skill trees that punish me for trying new things. Like FUCKING HATE them. I hate investing points in stats when too. Both these are in Torchlight 2 and I can't stand it. I didn't even play Torchlight 2 until I knew I could respec.
And that's fine. I fucking love them. Like, FUCKING LOVE them. 
But that's the type of gamer I am, I like punishing mechanics, steep learning curves and complex features. It forces you to plan out and think about builds, it creates more of a connection with your character, and the game itself, when you spend significant time planning/mapping out a route.
And I believe that's how many of the hardcore 'nostalgic' D2'ers are as well?
|
On August 23 2013 08:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:30 Bayyne wrote:
You choose to remember the few bad things about D2? Do you really think people that are nostalgic consider only the bad? No. There were countless good things D2 had. There were great ideas that maybe were not implemented or done in a way that was more efficient.
Let's take the attribute and skill point system that was in place. Instead of improving upon the pitfalls that D2 had with attribute points and skill points(such as being locked into a particular build, only 2 chances to get it right, having to reroll to get it right, only a handful of cookie cutter builds were viable, etc), they completely removed the ability to allocate attribute points and gave everyone the ability to play every skill at end game without any real investment/thought put into it. There is no true character identity. Instead of improving upon said pitfalls, they essentially abandoned ship with it.
They had a great idea with the rune-word system, despite its many downsides (again, cookie cutter OP combos, etc). Instead of improving upon that to make it work, they removed it.
There were countless great features that D2 had, not to mention a better item system, that were either working well at the time or had great potential to be awesome for D3. That's what people are generally upset about.
Is D3 a fun game? Yes. Is it a worthy successor? In my eyes, absolutely fucking not. It's a step backwards in game design.
I fucking HATE skill trees that punish me for trying new things. Like FUCKING HATE them. I hate investing points in stats when too. Both these are in Torchlight 2 and I can't stand it. I didn't even play Torchlight 2 until I knew I could respec.
you know you can respec in D2 LOD now right?
Everyone wants to have the freedom to chose. stats or skill points. Everyone wants to be unique. Those are the things that drives re playability and the will to farm for that item that will make my unique build work. Now D3 has no real replayability or something that gives ur character its uniqueness.
With the new paragon system they are in the right direction but still no quite there.. All they have suggested are paragon points which can be assigned to stats, cc, cd, movement speed but will those make your character unique? Not at all. If the only thing their brain can grasp are those stats then D3 will not go far.
|
On August 23 2013 08:34 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:30 Bayyne wrote:
You choose to remember the few bad things about D2? Do you really think people that are nostalgic consider only the bad? No. There were countless good things D2 had. There were great ideas that maybe were not implemented or done in a way that was more efficient.
Let's take the attribute and skill point system that was in place. Instead of improving upon the pitfalls that D2 had with attribute points and skill points(such as being locked into a particular build, only 2 chances to get it right, having to reroll to get it right, only a handful of cookie cutter builds were viable, etc), they completely removed the ability to allocate attribute points and gave everyone the ability to play every skill at end game without any real investment/thought put into it. There is no true character identity. Instead of improving upon said pitfalls, they essentially abandoned ship with it.
They had a great idea with the rune-word system, despite its many downsides (again, cookie cutter OP combos, etc). Instead of improving upon that to make it work, they removed it.
There were countless great features that D2 had, not to mention a better item system, that were either working well at the time or had great potential to be awesome for D3. That's what people are generally upset about.
Is D3 a fun game? Yes. Is it a worthy successor? In my eyes, absolutely fucking not. It's a step backwards in game design.
I fucking HATE skill trees that punish me for trying new things. Like FUCKING HATE them. I hate investing points in stats when too. Both these are in Torchlight 2 and I can't stand it. I didn't even play Torchlight 2 until I knew I could respec.
What the fuck is the point of leveling up if you don't even get anything? You get the same fucking skills every other class makes. You cannot even make your barbarian special. Every barbarian is the same. They are all looking for the same gear, with the same points, in the same stats. Every single character of a class is a mirror image of another. That's a terrible, horrible, shitty game design. I shouldn't be looking for only intelligence and vitality in gear. I should be looking for + skills or +stats, I should be able to put points into stats so I can make a damn melee sorc if I wanted to. But instead they said fuck you, you will play our way. Fortunately enough, nobody is playing their way because nobody is playing the game.
|
On August 23 2013 08:41 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:36 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:27 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:Diablo III was a failure on every level design-wise, instead of trying to fix the problems with the ARPG genre/Diablo II they tried to re-invent the wheel in a terrible way. Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends. Doubt it, L4D is like 3 bucks every single time there's a Steam Sale and then some. It's also much much easier to get into and have some instant fun with friends than any RPG. The fact that it has all that mutation business going on, plus the fact that it's now Steam Workshop compatible really add to its lifespan. Hell, my friends and I have sunk well over 100 hours in L4D2 each over the course of like 3 years just playing casually and having fun. I know other people on Steam who still play it every once in a while. So yeah, really poor example right there. L4D came out in 2008 and L4D 2 game out in 2009. They are over 4 and 5 years old. I would hope they would be cheap at this point. And I have over 100 in D3 between my normal games, games with friends and playing with my GF. We also play L4D 2 from time to time. And my example is fine. I can guarantee you there are more people playing L4D/2 than there are still playing D3. ^^ http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=550q500&from=137458507715k isn't exactly a high number. I wouldn't guarantee D3 doesn't reach that amount.
That site doesn't seem very accurate. A lot of the games on there don't even have data (including L4D).
|
On August 23 2013 08:42 Infernal_dream wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:34 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:30 Bayyne wrote:
You choose to remember the few bad things about D2? Do you really think people that are nostalgic consider only the bad? No. There were countless good things D2 had. There were great ideas that maybe were not implemented or done in a way that was more efficient.
Let's take the attribute and skill point system that was in place. Instead of improving upon the pitfalls that D2 had with attribute points and skill points(such as being locked into a particular build, only 2 chances to get it right, having to reroll to get it right, only a handful of cookie cutter builds were viable, etc), they completely removed the ability to allocate attribute points and gave everyone the ability to play every skill at end game without any real investment/thought put into it. There is no true character identity. Instead of improving upon said pitfalls, they essentially abandoned ship with it.
They had a great idea with the rune-word system, despite its many downsides (again, cookie cutter OP combos, etc). Instead of improving upon that to make it work, they removed it.
There were countless great features that D2 had, not to mention a better item system, that were either working well at the time or had great potential to be awesome for D3. That's what people are generally upset about.
Is D3 a fun game? Yes. Is it a worthy successor? In my eyes, absolutely fucking not. It's a step backwards in game design.
I fucking HATE skill trees that punish me for trying new things. Like FUCKING HATE them. I hate investing points in stats when too. Both these are in Torchlight 2 and I can't stand it. I didn't even play Torchlight 2 until I knew I could respec. What the fuck is the point of leveling up if you don't even get anything? You get the same fucking skills every other class makes. You cannot even make your barbarian special. Every barbarian is the same. They are all looking for the same gear, with the same points, in the same stats. Every single character of a class is a mirror image of another. That's a terrible, horrible, shitty game design. I shouldn't be looking for only intelligence and vitality in gear. I should be looking for + skills or +stats, I should be able to put points into stats so I can make a damn melee sorc if I wanted to. But instead they said fuck you, you will play our way. Fortunately enough, nobody is playing their way because nobody is playing the game.
This post got me all wet. And I'm a dude. Good show.
|
On August 23 2013 08:43 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:41 SKC wrote:On August 23 2013 08:36 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:27 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On August 23 2013 08:14 Plansix wrote:On August 23 2013 08:10 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 08:02 DODswe4 wrote:On August 23 2013 07:45 ApexTrinity wrote:On August 23 2013 07:41 Zenbrez wrote:
[quote]
Depends from who's perspective. Blizzard considered it to be a success, and they're the ones making money from it. Whether you enjoyed it or not is another story. Blizzard considered it a success because it sold 12 million copies on nothing but hype and misdirection. It was a success financially, but it was still designed terribly and is a poor game. Blizzard will always release a game that works and is polished, but a polished game with terrible design is not a good game in any regard. there is still alot of players playing Diablo3... the old figure they realeased was since launch to the 1year anniversary 2.1 million people played it daily. I know I still play it with my friends because we find it fun. I find the game to be good because I find the combat to be enjoyable Edit: Source http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/21/diablo-3-one-year-anniversary-infographic-unleashes-hellishly-huge-numbers/ Which means out of the 12 million sales since launch 84% didn't continue playing. That is a VERY large decrease for a year after the game's release. That is an an amazing retention rate for a game that is a year old and is co-op multiplayer. I assume you would find similar values with games like L4D a year after launch. Most people who bought the game only went through it a few times with friends. Doubt it, L4D is like 3 bucks every single time there's a Steam Sale and then some. It's also much much easier to get into and have some instant fun with friends than any RPG. The fact that it has all that mutation business going on, plus the fact that it's now Steam Workshop compatible really add to its lifespan. Hell, my friends and I have sunk well over 100 hours in L4D2 each over the course of like 3 years just playing casually and having fun. I know other people on Steam who still play it every once in a while. So yeah, really poor example right there. L4D came out in 2008 and L4D 2 game out in 2009. They are over 4 and 5 years old. I would hope they would be cheap at this point. And I have over 100 in D3 between my normal games, games with friends and playing with my GF. We also play L4D 2 from time to time. And my example is fine. I can guarantee you there are more people playing L4D/2 than there are still playing D3. ^^ http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=550q500&from=137458507715k isn't exactly a high number. I wouldn't guarantee D3 doesn't reach that amount. That site doesn't seem very accurate. A lot of the games on there don't even have data (including L4D).
Then check Steam itself if you want. L4D2 had a 9k peak in the last 24h. L4D doesn't even show in the rankings, that's why SteamGraph doesn't have info. The lowest ranked game has less than 1k.
|
I love the D3 haters because even when a new article shows that millions of people were still playing a year later, they just say "Number are inaccurate and the rest are bots".
|
|
|
On August 23 2013 08:47 Plansix wrote:
I love the D3 haters because even when a new article shows that millions of people were still playing a year later, they just say "Number are inaccurate and the rest are bots".
That article never said millions of players were still playing it though.
|
On August 23 2013 08:47 Plansix wrote:
I love the D3 haters because even when a new article shows that millions of people were still playing a year later, they just say "Number are inaccurate and the rest are bots".
People dont get that people like different things. I think the animosity between BW/SC2 when SC2 first came out is a good indicator of the general attitudes of many here on TL though.
Nephalem Trials - http://www.diablofans.com/topic/101744-nephalem-trials/
Basically, portals will spawn randomly in the world, which the players can enter and fight for several levels, being rewarded for reaching the end and making the journey efficiently
Journalist found one of the new legendaries:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On August 23 2013 08:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:18 Phael wrote:
I don't get all this nostalgia over D2. I remember my first D2 experience, I rolled a sorceress. At level 1, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. Alright, whatever, rpgs start out slow right? At level 8, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. 2/3 the time I was oom. Ok, so lets put some points into warmth. Oh hey, an armor skill, cool. I'm at level 17 now, act2 dead, I have like 5 points into fireball, and it's taking me 7 or 8 shots to kill something. I then get glacial spike, whoa, good damage. Some more points there ... soon enough I'm level 30, and I realize that I realize that I've used enough points in non-vital skills that my sorc would never be good. There goes 20 hours.
Ok, lets reroll. Make a new sorc. Melee to kill stuff! Use level 1 versions of crappy pre-req skills for utility until 30! Spend the first 15 levels worth of stat points into strength despite barely having enough mana to cast two skills in a row!
... is that not retarded? Yeah, Sorc is like...the absolute worst early game in D2, absolutely no denying that. But hitting level 24 and getting even level 1 Blizzard, or even 18 for Fireball, felt awesome. And hitting level 30 made you feel like a God. Also find it hilarious that you had to use Sorc twice for the same example, as opposed to any of the other 6 classes that actually had skills that were usable at low levels. Show nested quote +Do people not remember that endgame for Diablo 2 (not LoD) consisted almost entirely of good rare gear, with a very small selection of legendaries? I remember seeing someone with a duped SoJ for the first time and drooling at it, then spending a month of free time to farm up an entire inventory worth of perfect skulls to trade for one. Yeah...difference is that I could spend an hour farming Normal and load up on useful junk like a Tarnhelm, Treads of Cthon, Manald Heal rings, etc. that would actually last until Hell. Plus the actual requirements for "endgame" was really just LL, ML, some resists (maybe) and a half-decent weapon if you were a Barb, Paladin or Amazon. If you were a Sorc or Necro, endgame was actually just put skillpoints into tree and roll everything. Show nested quote +D3 is unequivocally a better game in every way with better balance, better skills, and far more enjoyment than D2 where endgame was rounding up a bunch of cows and aoeing them down. With 7 other completely random retards who may or may not be good enough to control your leveling rate. And this is purely a Diablo 3 mindset applied to Diablo 2. Cow level was not the endgame, it was a place to level up..and it wasn't even the only place. If you were doing Cow Level, it's because you wanted that 99 for bragging rights. A lot of players in Hell just settled on 70-80 because any higher was unnecessary. Endgame in D2 had a lot more diversity and a lot more replay value. Diablo 3...Farming, Key Farming, Leveling, and even Questing all happen in the exact same places.
I'm fairly sure I mentioned it, but my sorc was my first experience in D2. I mean, I can't exactly make shit up, right? (unlike those who, for example, guarantee that there are more L4D players than D3) I rerolled the sorc again because I like the mage classes. My first WoW char was a mage too.
And no, getting to level 30 in classic did not make you feel like a god. You hit level 30 in act 2 nightmare if you never went back and farmed, it still took like three level 1 frozen orbs to kill a small pack of monsters.
Also, I respect the fact that you can't get end-game gear while leveling. That just doesn't make sense, why should I farm (or even be able to farm) for an end-game item in a pre-endgame area? Leoric's signet is one small example of that level of retardedness that made its way into D3.
Yes, the difficulty of D3 is why I loved it. I liked engaging inferno Diablo during week 1 in a 15 minute fight with about a half second's room for error. I liked farming act3 bridge where two spears from those goat things killed you. These are all dodgeable, skilled mechanics. Personally I think they are far superior to joining game chains of farming baal or cows or whatever that you had almost no chance of dying even if you were forty levels below recommended.
|
On August 23 2013 08:50 Phael wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2013 08:40 WolfintheSheep wrote:On August 23 2013 08:18 Phael wrote:
I don't get all this nostalgia over D2. I remember my first D2 experience, I rolled a sorceress. At level 1, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. Alright, whatever, rpgs start out slow right? At level 8, I was killing stuff by whacking them with my stick. 2/3 the time I was oom. Ok, so lets put some points into warmth. Oh hey, an armor skill, cool. I'm at level 17 now, act2 dead, I have like 5 points into fireball, and it's taking me 7 or 8 shots to kill something. I then get glacial spike, whoa, good damage. Some more points there ... soon enough I'm level 30, and I realize that I realize that I've used enough points in non-vital skills that my sorc would never be good. There goes 20 hours.
Ok, lets reroll. Make a new sorc. Melee to kill stuff! Use level 1 versions of crappy pre-req skills for utility until 30! Spend the first 15 levels worth of stat points into strength despite barely having enough mana to cast two skills in a row!
... is that not retarded? Yeah, Sorc is like...the absolute worst early game in D2, absolutely no denying that. But hitting level 24 and getting even level 1 Blizzard, or even 18 for Fireball, felt awesome. And hitting level 30 made you feel like a God. Also find it hilarious that you had to use Sorc twice for the same example, as opposed to any of the other 6 classes that actually had skills that were usable at low levels. Do people not remember that endgame for Diablo 2 (not LoD) consisted almost entirely of good rare gear, with a very small selection of legendaries? I remember seeing someone with a duped SoJ for the first time and drooling at it, then spending a month of free time to farm up an entire inventory worth of perfect skulls to trade for one. Yeah...difference is that I could spend an hour farming Normal and load up on useful junk like a Tarnhelm, Treads of Cthon, Manald Heal rings, etc. that would actually last until Hell. Plus the actual requirements for "endgame" was really just LL, ML, some resists (maybe) and a half-decent weapon if you were a Barb, Paladin or Amazon. If you were a Sorc or Necro, endgame was actually just put skillpoints into tree and roll everything. D3 is unequivocally a better game in every way with better balance, better skills, and far more enjoyment than D2 where endgame was rounding up a bunch of cows and aoeing them down. With 7 other completely random retards who may or may not be good enough to control your leveling rate. And this is purely a Diablo 3 mindset applied to Diablo 2. Cow level was not the endgame, it was a place to level up..and it wasn't even the only place. If you were doing Cow Level, it's because you wanted that 99 for bragging rights. A lot of players in Hell just settled on 70-80 because any higher was unnecessary. Endgame in D2 had a lot more diversity and a lot more replay value. Diablo 3...Farming, Key Farming, Leveling, and even Questing all happen in the exact same places. I'm fairly sure I mentioned it, but my sorc was my first experience in D2. I mean, I can't exactly make shit up, right? (unlike those who, for example, guarantee that there are more L4D players than D3) I rerolled the sorc again because I like the mage classes. My first WoW char was a mage too. And no, getting to level 30 in classic did not make you feel like a god. You hit level 30 in act 2 nightmare if you never went back and farmed, it still took like three level 1 frozen orbs to kill a small pack of monsters. Also, I respect the fact that you can't get end-game gear while leveling. That just doesn't make sense, why should I farm (or even be able to farm) for an end-game item in a pre-endgame area? Leoric's signet is one small example of that level of retardedness that made its way into D3. Yes, the difficulty of D3 is why I loved it. I liked engaging inferno Diablo during week 1 in a 15 minute fight with about a half second's room for error. I liked farming act3 bridge where two spears from those goat things killed you. These are all dodgeable, skilled mechanics. Personally I think they are far superior to joining game chains of farming baal or cows or whatever that you had almost no chance of dying even if you were forty levels below recommended.
What, you mean you didnt like farming NM andariel to get a legit SoJ in D2? Or NM mephisto to get a lidless? Or never ever seeing a zod rune EVER? If hacking and dupes didnt happen in D2, people would have a different opinion of runewords, I will say that much.
|
On August 23 2013 08:47 Plansix wrote:
I love the D3 haters because even when a new article shows that millions of people were still playing a year later, they just say "Number are inaccurate and the rest are bots".
you better read the numbers again haha
maybe its you who is deceived. 2.1 million players averaged over a whole year... learn to read please
Let me make it simpler for you, just simple math:
first 6 months lets say average 5 million players per day = 5 million x 6 months ( or 180 days) = 450 million players total
in the next 6 months they only need avg of 450,000 players to have an average of 2 million players per day average for the whole year
So....
if you make it even more specific and assume a gradual decline then you will see that there might not even be 200,000 players per day
|
|
|
You realize that 200,000 players per day still kicks the ever-living crap out of L4D which peaked at 9k players today?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/y7KWzmk.jpg)
