EPTDiablo III General Discussion - Page 384
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Kulijo
Germany49 Posts
| ||
|
Heh_
Singapore2712 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:04 Kulijo wrote: So how is it compared to D2?? Metacritic says it's shitty. Go back 2-3 pages and you got your answer. | ||
|
zeehar
Korea (South)3804 Posts
| ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:04 Kulijo wrote: most mass review sites have it as a below average game, but fanbois will tell you that mass views don't count and will personally attack anyone who says the game is less than 10/10 rather than even looking at their points on why they didn't score it 10/10.So how is it compared to D2?? Metacritic says it's shitty. | ||
|
Arevall
Sweden1133 Posts
 Hm, guess I had to eat sometime... | ||
|
IMHope
Korea (South)1241 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:04 Kulijo wrote: So how is it compared to D2?? Metacritic says it's shitty. I tend not to even look at the user scores on sites like Metacritic because some people just make accounts to rate popular games down. | ||
|
Shottaz
United Kingdom414 Posts
Authenticating.... Authenticating.... Authenticating.... NOPE! | ||
|
Mango Chicken
55 Posts
On May 15 2012 19:32 Roffles wrote: Want to pray so bad, but these midterms are killin me. There is always time for God, young man. | ||
|
Mango Chicken
55 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:26 SeungHwan wrote: I tend not to even look at the user scores on sites like Metacritic because some people just make accounts to rate popular games down. If you actually read the reviews you'll see it's written by people who have actually played the game. One word of warning I can give to anyone is don't fucking buy the game if you want more than four hours of gameplay. Almost everyone has clocked it already and there's no replay value. | ||
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:04 Kulijo wrote: So how is it compared to D2?? Metacritic says it's shitty. There's no critic reviews out on metacritic yet. My rule of thumb, especially with games, is to always ignore user reviews on metacritic. User reviews on there are honestly the most useless thing ever. When Starcraft II came out, it had an average user review score of something like 4.5 because of "no LAN." I realise the lack of LAN sucks and is an annoyance (especially for esports), but the lack of LAN doesn't take an excellent game from somewhere between 8-10 to 0. Mass Effect 3 has an average user score of 3.9 at the moment because people disliked the ending. Once again, an ending you dislike can decrease the score, but you can't just ignore the rest of the game (which is excellent) and give the game 0 out of 10 because of one (relatively small) aspect. My point is, ignore game user reviews on metacritic, they are the most bandwagon-ish thing ever. Anyway, compared to D2 the game kicks serious ass. I absolutely adore D2, and D3 was clearly designed with the same philosophy they just improved on pretty much everything. Combat, while still pretty much running around fighting hordes of creeps, is much more engaging since you are forced to use multiple skills, all with different strategic uses. For example, I'm playing a Barbarian right now, and I've got 4 skills so far. I mostly hit creeps with frenzy to build up my rage, then I've got a large area AOE bleed which is very good when I get surrounded. I also have a leap skill which I can use every 10 seconds which allows me to get out of trouble or jump into the middle of things, and finally I have a chained spear skill (like Scorpion's pull skill in Mortal Kombat) which is awesome to grab summoners or archers with. So instead of just running around using frenzy the whole time (like I did in D2), I am constantly leaping around, grabbing strategic targets and deciding on what to use. The boss fights are also more fun. You can't just tank a boss while spamming health pots any more, since the bosses all have skills that will kill you damn quickly if you try that and health pots have a cooldown. What that means is that you're forced to dodge boss skills and find a way that you can maximise the damage you do while minimising the damage you take. The game is also pretty tough. My friend, who had a few hardcore characters between 50 and 80 on D2, has died twice before level 15 in D3. Obviously it's his first character and he didn't know what to expect, but even a reasonably experienced D2 player should still get frights fairly regularly. Finally, the game is beautiful and there is way better diversity to the zones. Instead of the entire Act I having the same scenery, Act I takes place over about 6 or 7 really well made zones that all look stunning. My only concern is that character specialization has been taken out to a large extent. You still have to make decisions between which skills to use and how to improve them, but you no longer make any permanent decisions like investing points in a skill tree or on stats. The game is designed so that you can change from one build to another at no cost. I understand the reasoning behind this, and I do think that the benefits outweigh the costs, but it makes the character feel slightly less unique than it did in D2. Seriously, if you were a fan of D2 you should definitely pick up D3. Time will tell if it's a classic like D2, but at the very least you'll get a few weeks of insane fun  On May 16 2012 01:29 Mango Chicken wrote: If you actually read the reviews you'll see it's written by people who have actually played the game. One word of warning I can give to anyone is don't fucking buy the game if you want more than four hours of gameplay. Almost everyone has clocked it already and there's no replay value. That makes no sense. The fastest normal completion of the game I've head of so far is 7 hours, and that's a group of players doing a speed run together. Also, that's just normal and Diablo was always meant to be played through all the difficulties. Finishing the game on normal hardly counts as completing the game. Regarding replay value, I haven't finished the game yet so I can't say for sure, but I don't see any reason it would not have replay value similar to Diablo 2. Assuming it takes you 3x7 hours to finish the game on everything up to hell (which is a very conservative estimate), you'll still want to play with multiple classes which gives you a minimum of at least 60 hours of gameplay (assuming three different classes). And that's a very conservative estimate, since that takes a speed run's time as the basis, and it ignores the fact that nightmare and hell generally take longer than normal to complete. Also, it assumes you're not doing any item farming or anything other than just finishing the game. Like I said, I haven't finished the game yet so I can't say for a fact, but 4 hours of gameplay seems like complete bullshit to me. | ||
|
shin ken
Germany614 Posts
in hindsight, I could have passed on the 4p more armor - it even had the same affix... | ||
|
Tabbris
Bangladesh2839 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:29 Mango Chicken wrote: If you actually read the reviews you'll see it's written by people who have actually played the game. One word of warning I can give to anyone is don't fucking buy the game if you want more than four hours of gameplay. Almost everyone has clocked it already and there's no replay value. ummm....... | ||
|
IMHope
Korea (South)1241 Posts
| ||
|
FaRess
Tunisia937 Posts
| ||
|
Hadley_
Germany157 Posts
| ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
prime time ftl so should i just spam it until it works or try reloging? | ||
|
Shottaz
United Kingdom414 Posts
edit - was getting 75, now 37 | ||
|
Cocacooh
Norway1510 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:38 bgx wrote: well now thats weird while i had no problems with creating my normal char 2 hours ago when i create my HC one i got the errors prime time ftl so should i just spam it until it works or try reloging? don't relog i cant get on | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
ok thanks, this fkin sucks then... i hoped that after 18 hours since start there will be no more problems... Ok made the char | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On May 16 2012 01:29 Mango Chicken wrote: If you actually read the reviews you'll see it's written by people who have actually played the game. One word of warning I can give to anyone is don't fucking buy the game if you want more than four hours of gameplay. Almost everyone has clocked it already and there's no replay value. Have you actually played this game or Diablo 2? I can understand people not liking Action RPGs, but saying it has 4 hours of gameplay is a joke. It should take around 4 hours to complete Act 2 on Normal, playing at a reasonable pace. I don't know how big the other acts are, maybe Act 4 is small like it was on D2, but it still should be at least 6-7 hours for your first playthrough on Normal. But that will leave you with a single character around level 30. The fun in this kind of game is playing through the other dificulties, leveling diferent characters, collecting items and in the future maybe PvP. If you feel the game is about finishing it a single time on normal, you probally don't really like the genre, but don't blame the game for it. Diablo 2 was pretty short as well. | ||
| ||
