|
On August 14 2011 03:59 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 03:14 Tag wrote:
Can we quit discussing the offline/online no LAN thing. Its old. Its not gonna change stop bitching about it. If you don't like it then don't play, or join the 20th century and pay for your games legit and play online.
Now back on topic: What do you guys think about D2 Runes? I LOVE playing around with runes, especially for lower level characters, adding runes making combinations and having a kewl treasure hunt to find the right amount of sockets in a item you want and finding a Superior 5 socketed axe its so much fun! Has anyone heard of similar things in D3? Ive been reading around and the only use of gems or whatever are the attachments to spells to increase effectiveness. Well guess what is more fun? Actually finding a rare item that is worth something! Instead of excitement for a socketed item that will be used for a dime a dozen runeword that looks and acts the same as every other fucking guy on bnet has. How about actually finding item with every unique characteristic affix, and original APPEARANCE. Ever dreamed of having a character completely dressed in red(or purple, or blue, or green, or black, or orange, or brown) armor and weapon with fashionable styles, with name "RedBoy"? Guess what, this is impossible in LoD while remaining viable, and neither is finding original useful items possible. Because that is what expansion is, a giant joke, a scam, a circus. There is no real depth to the item system to it, its a pale shadow of what Classic Diablo2 has.
Pretty synical view... i just like the joy of finding runes and being like ooo i can make, such and such item for my barbarian! Just adds a depth to the game. I never played much of the original D2 before the exp came out.
It would be pretty cool to have a full black or red character, i dont really care that much about being viable, if i wanted to do something end game id equip those items and rape, but if i wanted to impress people id throw on my killer looking items =D I loved having 2 lightsabers on a barbarian, looks so sick!
|
On August 14 2011 03:59 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 03:14 Tag wrote:
Ever dreamed of having a character completely dressed in red(or purple, or blue, or green, or black, or orange, or brown) armor and weapon with fashionable styles, with name "RedBoy"? Guess what, this is impossible in LoD while remaining viable, and neither is finding original useful items possible.
How will I live without RedBoy...
|
Ehh.. none of this would be a problem if we had the old style battle net custom map game list.. maybe with a filter for map name. Nothing more is necessary for player to have a good and streamlined way of finding the kind of game he wants.
|
On August 13 2011 19:59 NotJack wrote:This times a thousand. I'm an immature fraternity idiot and I'm disgusted at how ungrateful people are all the time.
Don't be. People aren't ungrateful. They are passionate about the game and care. It could be worse. It could be dead silent on the forums.
|
An old pic but it just made me laugh:
![[image loading]](http://www.neverknowtech.com/storage/diablo%203.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1282367690722)
I want that t-shirt! 
|
On August 14 2011 04:17 Tag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 03:59 xarthaz wrote:On August 14 2011 03:14 Tag wrote:
Can we quit discussing the offline/online no LAN thing. Its old. Its not gonna change stop bitching about it. If you don't like it then don't play, or join the 20th century and pay for your games legit and play online.
Now back on topic: What do you guys think about D2 Runes? I LOVE playing around with runes, especially for lower level characters, adding runes making combinations and having a kewl treasure hunt to find the right amount of sockets in a item you want and finding a Superior 5 socketed axe its so much fun! Has anyone heard of similar things in D3? Ive been reading around and the only use of gems or whatever are the attachments to spells to increase effectiveness. Well guess what is more fun? Actually finding a rare item that is worth something! Instead of excitement for a socketed item that will be used for a dime a dozen runeword that looks and acts the same as every other fucking guy on bnet has. How about actually finding item with every unique characteristic affix, and original APPEARANCE. Ever dreamed of having a character completely dressed in red(or purple, or blue, or green, or black, or orange, or brown) armor and weapon with fashionable styles, with name "RedBoy"? Guess what, this is impossible in LoD while remaining viable, and neither is finding original useful items possible. Because that is what expansion is, a giant joke, a scam, a circus. There is no real depth to the item system to it, its a pale shadow of what Classic Diablo2 has. Pretty synical view... i just like the joy of finding runes and being like ooo i can make, such and such item for my barbarian! Just adds a depth to the game. I never played much of the original D2 before the exp came out. It would be pretty cool to have a full black or red character, i dont really care that much about being viable, if i wanted to do something end game id equip those items and rape, but if i wanted to impress people id throw on my killer looking items =D I loved having 2 lightsabers on a barbarian, looks so sick!
He's actually right, though. D2C was such a joy as every rare could potentially bring about an awesome item, even if you'd eventually mule it or trade it. The fact that there was no currency besides SoJs made bartering possible through rares with gosu attributes whereas when LoD was released items would be measured, and traded against, in Shafts, Gazes, TRs - mainly godly, unbeatable uniques and runes/insane items later on. The game became about farming bosses more and more, I don't quite remember being obsessed with doing meph runs or pindle runs before the Xpak hit, but then again that was never something I thoroughly enjoyed.
|
is there anyway they can just create an offline mode like sc2.. I mean i would really like to play this game at hotels or on the plane.. during travel.. why cant they include something like this.
|
are there going to be rares better than anything in the game agian??
|
I always hated sockets and runes and gems, take up too much fuckin inventory space. In torchlight to get the highest quality of a gem you need like 1500 pieces total of the shittiest quality one.
Well, I dont actually hate the idea of sockets if its better. Like always find perfect skulls or bad skulls. no inbetween and maybe take like 5-10 of the shit ones to make a good one and thats it. Or maybe just socketed effects, that are just aesthetic. Glowing blades or whatever.
|
|
|
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening.
|
On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening.
"There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole.
|
On August 14 2011 09:48 JustTray wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening. "There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole.
There WILL BE though, it's not a question of if at all. You're essentially taking away features to try and stop something that will happen anyways.
|
On August 14 2011 09:49 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 09:48 JustTray wrote:On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening. "There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole. There WILL BE though, it's not a question of if at all. You're essentially taking away features to try and stop something that will happen anyways.
You can't stop it, but you can mitigate it severely by making the game online. Just take how many hacks/bots/dupes you run into in D2, and compare it to any server-side game like WoW, League of Legends, Heroes of Newerth, pretty much every other MMO, and so on. I can guarantee that you will find infinitely more hackers on offline games like D2 than you will on WoW. It's just the nature of the beast that files you have are easier to edit than files you don't have. And if by chance you do create an online hack, you'll probably be caught within minutes since it's easy for Blizzard to detect when files are suddenly being changed when they're not supposed to.
The only reliable way to hack server-side games is to create private servers for them, and those tend to work poorly since they take a long time to make, an even longer time to perfect, and very few people play on them anyway, so they're not even worth hacking on. WoW, for example, still struggles to have any decent private servers despite being a 7 year old game. D3 will probably be similar since it's being programmed in a similar way. Nobody is saying that D3 will be 100% cheat free since no game ever is, but you can definitely stop it to such a degree that it becomes an extreme rarity, and that's what companies are gunning for.
|
On August 14 2011 09:49 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 09:48 JustTray wrote:On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening. "There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole. There WILL BE though, it's not a question of if at all. You're essentially taking away features to try and stop something that will happen anyways.
Results indicate that server side games have significantly less hacks and dupes compared to client side games. The few 'hacks' that do occur in server side games were merely bug exploits rather than actual hacks, which can be fixed much faster all thanks to server side implementation.
|
On August 14 2011 10:05 Spawkuring wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 09:49 Serpico wrote:On August 14 2011 09:48 JustTray wrote:On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening. "There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole. There WILL BE though, it's not a question of if at all. You're essentially taking away features to try and stop something that will happen anyways. You can't stop it, but you can mitigate it severely by making the game online. Just take how many hacks/bots/dupes you run into in D2, and compare it to any server-side game like WoW, League of Legends, Heroes of Newerth, pretty much every other MMO, and so on. I can guarantee that you will find infinitely more hackers on offline games like D2 than you will on WoW. It's just the nature of the beast that files you have are easier to edit than files you don't have. And if by chance you do create an online hack, you'll probably be caught within minutes since it's easy for Blizzard to detect when files are suddenly being changed when they're not supposed to. The only reliable way to hack server-side games is to create private servers for them, and those tend to work poorly since they take a long time to make, an even longer time to perfect, and very few people play on them anyway, so they're not even worth hacking on. WoW, for example, still struggles to have any decent private servers despite being a 7 year old game. D3 will probably be similar since it's being programmed in a similar way. Nobody is saying that D3 will be 100% cheat free since no game ever is, but you can definitely stop it to such a degree that it becomes an extreme rarity, and that's what companies are gunning for.
This post makes no sense its like comparing windows to commodore 64 and saying windows is better. Of course those games have better antihack theyre fucking newerand cost a monthly subwhich of course will produce a better anti hack as opposed to being a old ass year 2000 game that is free to play
|
On August 14 2011 10:15 Trowabarton756 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2011 10:05 Spawkuring wrote:On August 14 2011 09:49 Serpico wrote:On August 14 2011 09:48 JustTray wrote:On August 14 2011 09:35 xarthaz wrote:
The whole argument is a joke. I mean sure they can work on their assumptions and conditions what could possibly happen, but in real life is that SC2 gets cracked so easily, people writing AIs and shit for it since early beta, surely D3 will have bots and maphacks and shit in no time as well.
The argument is like something to fall back upon when defending the lack of offline/local/customisable features and even though people realize blizzard seems naive to present this argument they take their word for it being the reason, after all, blizzard is the game company with the ideological cover for their actions. And a lot of people go with it, as admitting the game is severely gimped just to whittle down piracy is too saddening. "There will be hacks anyway" is not a valid counter argument to server side characters. The rest of your post is nonsense hyperbole. There WILL BE though, it's not a question of if at all. You're essentially taking away features to try and stop something that will happen anyways. You can't stop it, but you can mitigate it severely by making the game online. Just take how many hacks/bots/dupes you run into in D2, and compare it to any server-side game like WoW, League of Legends, Heroes of Newerth, pretty much every other MMO, and so on. I can guarantee that you will find infinitely more hackers on offline games like D2 than you will on WoW. It's just the nature of the beast that files you have are easier to edit than files you don't have. And if by chance you do create an online hack, you'll probably be caught within minutes since it's easy for Blizzard to detect when files are suddenly being changed when they're not supposed to. The only reliable way to hack server-side games is to create private servers for them, and those tend to work poorly since they take a long time to make, an even longer time to perfect, and very few people play on them anyway, so they're not even worth hacking on. WoW, for example, still struggles to have any decent private servers despite being a 7 year old game. D3 will probably be similar since it's being programmed in a similar way. Nobody is saying that D3 will be 100% cheat free since no game ever is, but you can definitely stop it to such a degree that it becomes an extreme rarity, and that's what companies are gunning for. This post makes no sense its like comparing windows to commodore 64 and saying windows is better. Of course those games have better antihack theyre fucking newerand cost a monthly subwhich of course will produce a better anti hack as opposed to being a old ass year 2000 game that is free to play
Stop and ask yourself WHY these games are hack-free rather than just saying "they're new". Programming something in 2011 doesn't automatically make it more secure unless you actually use newer security measures. And making a program server-side is just one of the many security measures that you can use. You bring up monthly fees in your post, but the main reason why certain games have monthly fees in the first place is precisely BECAUSE games are taking place more on the company's servers than the players' computers. Obviously this won't be the only security measure Blizzard takes, but changing the game's architecture is definitely the biggest one.
|
I also loved D2C.
If you found a rare with FHR and +50HP you could consider yourself rich, or a +IAS Rune bow. I remember selling a really nice rare Cedar bow for 15 SOJ.
Also Legit BvB in classic was my favourite thing to do for a long time and making his item set so perfect was all i focused on. (Before the Life\mana leech nerf.) Also a BvX Lance barb with a Blinkbats + Hawkmail always in my inventory.
In LoD i dont think i ever had a rare that was better then a rune word or unique.
So i would rather D3 is more like Classic in that Rares can actually be valuable, and for example not every Blizz sorc wanting a Deaths Fathom.
|
On August 14 2011 08:43 VPCursed wrote:
is there anyway they can just create an offline mode like sc2.. I mean i would really like to play this game at hotels or on the plane.. during travel.. why cant they include something like this.
Don't most hotels have high-speed internet? I can't really think of the last time I went to one without it. I even went to Bryce Canyon,Utah, and watched the GSL Finals (IMNestea vs. IMLosira) on their internet. This hotel was literally miles from anything else but the canyon. The only thing on the last 2 hour drive there was small little towns, that I thought may not have internet at all.
Planes I believe are getting wireless internet, but I'm not sure how long it will take for them all to have it.
|
On August 13 2011 18:56 NotJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2011 17:43 NoobSkills wrote:On August 13 2011 17:34 NotJack wrote:On August 13 2011 17:24 Serpico wrote:On August 13 2011 17:21 NotJack wrote:On August 13 2011 17:15 maartendq wrote:On August 13 2011 16:57 NotJack wrote:
There's enough info and controversy based around the always-online debate to provide about four good posts, all of which have been rehashed hundreds of times.
You're all special, smart snowflakes, but your argument that more than .1% of people have bad int or some people just want offline singleplayer or some people want to lan or the idea that you're not going to buy the game don't change the fact that D3 not only should be always-online, but HAS to in order to keep a fair environment and maintain a healthy economy. You really need to understand this; SC2 didn't require online-only to be as great a game as Blizzard wants, D3 does.
Don't be shocked when people who have been participating in this thread are being condescending to you, your laziness and refusal to be informed/less stubborn has brought this thread to a halt, spinning around in a mindless, discussion-less vortex of people playing pattycake with poor ideas.
You can read this post and get mad like most mindless people do when they have no arguments to stand on, or you can just take a nice fresh breath of air and talk about something besides how Jay Wilson is the new Dark Wanderer because he's forcing you to stay online to enjoy a game we've all been excited about for years. In all honesty, I don't care about a good economy when I'm soloing. It's just not important. Yes, nerd apathy is a very common argument because you don't need to prove the point since it's opinion. Unfortunately it's not a good point because all these selfish people can't seem to understand that Blizzard is making a game for more than you, and want to make the best game possible for everyone. The argument isn't what you want that's not there, it's what should be there to make it best for all. Or they just want to try and stop piracy and in turn punish legit customers who want single player. I dont get the excuse making for cutting out features. As has been said in many, many posts, including the one you're quoting, they did it because the benefits outweighed the costs. I don't want to think there's a mental gap in this discussion but I'm being left with little other conclusions. On August 13 2011 17:29 TheGreenMachine wrote:On August 13 2011 17:18 Barett wrote:On August 13 2011 14:54 Pufftrees wrote:On August 13 2011 14:51 Barett wrote:On August 13 2011 14:29 Pufftrees wrote:
There is no offline play, why would there be? Everyone has internet, you can still play single player. The benefits of online only play greatly outweight the 0.01 percent where your internet goes down and you still want to play. What about people like me who were looking forward to playing on the go on my Laptop? Now that is not possible T_T. Pretty ignorant post. If your laptop is decent enough to run d3, and you are such an on the go guy that its going to be your main play style, then get wireless internet card. edit : why do i keep replying to the trolls -_- people really can't think like this Are you calling me a troll? I only really use my Laptop on the go for a hour a day. I cannot justify getting a portable internet access card for 15$+ a month when I don't use it all that often. But you can justify blizzard changing all of their code and everything so you can play offline? The difficulty of changing code isn't even the thing Blizzard wants to prevent, it's ruining the community and economy. It isn't about the benefits outweighing the costs though you are on the right track. Since they have to spend less time programming by not programming a single player into the game they actually save money while making sure that everyone buys their game. I really don't see many people playing offline anyway. Perhaps there are more than I think, but all 5 of them are out of luck. You think they aren't making single player to save money. Time for another break from this thread.
You misunderstood what I wrote, so I will dumb it down.
Not making single player saves them money.
Not making single player also makes them money.
Win and Win for Blizzard.
On August 14 2011 10:34 Floobie wrote:
I also loved D2C.
If you found a rare with FHR and +50HP you could consider yourself rich, or a +IAS Rune bow. I remember selling a really nice rare Cedar bow for 15 SOJ.
Also Legit BvB in classic was my favourite thing to do for a long time and making his item set so perfect was all i focused on. (Before the Life\mana leech nerf.) Also a BvX Lance barb with a Blinkbats + Hawkmail always in my inventory.
In LoD i dont think i ever had a rare that was better then a rune word or unique.
So i would rather D3 is more like Classic in that Rares can actually be valuable, and for example not every Blizz sorc wanting a Deaths Fathom.
I understand completely. Want the possibility of GODLY rares, but the safe build of standard gear. Would be nice and make it completely random who gets the best of the best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
