Diablo 3 is... fine. It's not overwhelming, but it's not a piece of garbage either. It's a fine game that reminds me more of DotA than Diablo 2. It's addictive, but it doesn't let you customize your character as much as I would like it.
I'm giving it 7/10!
|
Diablo 3 is... fine. It's not overwhelming, but it's not a piece of garbage either. It's a fine game that reminds me more of DotA than Diablo 2. It's addictive, but it doesn't let you customize your character as much as I would like it.
I'm giving it 7/10!
Yeah, lack of customization. On the other hand, as you level up, you get m ore skills, ruins, ect.. You can respec on the fly, so you can change your skill set to meet the situation. Have to think more, IMO.
When you can spend money, real or fake, to super-equip your character it's cheating. Especially in a game like Diablo where you are supposed to kill stuff to get stuff.B!$#$%#~! It makes a huge amount of difference. I only want to play single-player mode and will never use the in-house 'Cheat" storeHow is the auction house a cheat store? I can understand the idea that spending real world money to buy items is kind of cheating, but the auction house also lets you spend gold you've earned in-game. That's not cheating at all. Unless you consider buying things from a store cheating.
But you kill stuff to get gold. Which you then can use to get stuff. And you can't super-equip yourself; you're still limited by your level. It just lets you spend the gold you've earned on something useful. It's almost impossible to view this as cheating. That's no different than saying buying magic items from the in-game merchant is cheating.
Are you sure you don't want to tone back your position a touch?
You miss the key point here. You can (and should) set ground rules on speech in your own house. Metacritic has these rules - and specifically made a point of including pseudonymous reviews in a separate aggregation. So what you are essentially arguing is that you (or a fictitious "reasonable person") should have the right to set rules for what others accept as reasonable or permissible opinions in their house.
No, I'm just saying I'm disappointed that they chose the rules they did. I would not do things the same way. I never said anything like, "Metacritic should be forcibly prevented from giving those people a voice!" Let's not act like I did, hm?
Which, I hope you agree, runs contrary to the idea of any kind of freedom of speech.
I'd really rather not discuss this as a matter of freedom of speech. That's a loaded topic with all sorts of considerations to make. For instance, I don't believe in absolute freedom of speech. It's really not worth it to dive into the particulars for the sake of discussing why Metacritic shouldn't give the rabid internet hordes a voice.
Tolerance is, after all, deriving from tolerating (suffering through) adverse opinions. Even if you consider then laughable and beneath your mighty notice.
This may surprise you, but one is allowed to have opinions of others' opinions. Including and especially when they decide to share those opinions publicly, anonymously, and poorly on the internet.
Diablo 3 is... fine. It's not overwhelming, but it's not a piece of garbage either. It's a fine game that reminds me more of DotA than Diablo 2. It's addictive, but it doesn't let you customize your character as much as I would like it.
I'm giving it 7/10!
I'm curious. How would you prefer to customize your character? Lest we forget.
Also, seeing it as more DotA than Diablo 2 is kind of mind-boggling.
I just beat belial as a wizard. Took me about 8 lives to figure it out. Basically I mostly stayed in the far southeast corner (in the little stair as far as you can go). You won't have to move much, but when you do it's to either get out of the stacked green rings (the ones that let you know you're about to get the smack down) or to grab a few life lots that will spawn.
Anyway once you're more-or-less safe try to keep prism armor up and hit him with frost ray+ the glyph that goes up in damage the longer it's on. With a good Long hit you can take out about a tenth or so of his life. Rinse repeat.
Also I like the pally follower because he can heal you.
Fantasy author Scott Lynch on the issue:
I am not playing Diablo III. I don't have much time for a new game at the moment (which is also why I'm not playing The Old Republic), but I'm pretty sure I could have found some intermittent pockets of time... if not for the fact that the game's DRM requires constant online connection, even for solitaire play, making it vulnerable not only to the usual bugs and tribulations of new software but to fluctuations in connectivity at both ends of the line (and indeed, the launch-day strain on Battle.net wasn't pretty). I hear expectedly good things about the gameplay, but I don't have any interest in adding copious amounts of extra teeth-grinding to my entertainment choices when I can help it.
This isn't "a sense of entitlement" issue. When did the notion of not bending over for masochistic random aggravation in the course of our amusements become suspect? My copy of Skyrim doesn't jump out of my XBox 360 every time someone at Bethesda accidentally nudges a server. The Amber novel I was reading last night didn't burst into flames if I ceased to maintain psychic contact with Roger Zelazny's ghost. You say you've got a game that offers all the technological aggravations of an MMO, all the time, even when I'm not receiving any of the benefits? I say that makes my bookshelves look even more attractive than usual. En Taro Adun, Blizzard. For the first time since 1995, I'm watching one of your trains pull out of the station without me on it.
Fair comment, I think.
When you can spend money, real or fake, to super-equip your character it's cheating. Especially in a game like Diablo where you are supposed to kill stuff to get stuff.
In fairness, it's not technically cheating because everyone has the same advantage and Blizzard have built it into the underlying system of the game. You don't have to go through hint sections in magazines or something to find it (like you did with the cheat codes for WC3 and STARCRAFT).
My understanding is that the House limits what you can do by level, so it is not too unbalancing. Although in that case I don't understand why anyone in their right mind would use it.
Fair comment, I think.
If you're the sort that is reduced to "copious amounts of extra teeth-grinding" by the rare occasion of lag or lack of connectivity in your ostensibly single-player video game, then no, Diablo 3 probably isn't for you.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Fair comment, I think.If you're the sort that is reduced to "copious amounts of extra teeth-grinding" by the rare occasion of lag or lack of connectivity in your ostensibly single-player video game, then no, Diablo 3 probably isn't for you.
You know what? I inserted my CD of "Thief: The Dark Project" yesterday. Installed it, and Garret was burglarizing a noblemen's villa in no time. Fun. :)
I kind of doubt that D3 will be as much fun roughly a decade after Blizzard went out of business. The mighty "battle.net" probably won't be in that good a shape.
Fair comment, I think.If you're the sort that is reduced to "copious amounts of extra teeth-grinding" by the rare occasion of lag or lack of connectivity in your ostensibly single-player video game, then no, Diablo 3 probably isn't for you.You know what? I inserted my CD of "Thief: The Dark Project" yesterday. Installed it, and Garret was burglarizing a noblemen's villa in no time. Fun. :)
I kind of doubt that D3 will be as much fun roughly a decade after Blizzard went out of business. The mighty "battle.net" probably won't be in that good a shape.
Again, if your argument is that your $60 game will have not provided you with enough entertainment after 10+ years of ownership to justify the entry cost, then Diablo 3 probably isn't for you.
But if I try to play Diablo 3 ten years from now (which I probably would not do, since there will be even better games to spend my time on at that point) only to discover that the game is unplayable, I will shrug and move on because I will have already enjoyed hundreds of hours of quality gameplay on a $60 investment.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Some games leave an impact on you long after the company accounts any further sales in the same column as "money stolen from wishing wells". These games impact you, and leave you remembering them sometimes a decade after. For me, these games were Final Fantasy 7, Treasures of the Savage Frontier, Fallout 2 and Thief. Some others have reached similar levels since then, but these are the foremost ones.
D3 can, by design, never reach that level. It may be sound financial move (planned obsolescence), but it is a sad and somewhat disappointing result. Feels like creative bankruptcy
People have already managed to create pirate WoW servers. By the time Blizzard keels over, there will be pirate Diablo 3 servers out there.
If you've bought the game legally, is it legal to use it on a pirate server once Blizzard dies? I have no idea.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
People have already managed to create pirate WoW servers. By the time Blizzard keels over, there will be pirate Diablo 3 servers out there.
If you've bought the game legally, is it legal to use it on a pirate server once Blizzard dies? I have no idea.
Its a circumvention of copy protection, which is (sadly) illegal without any qualifications in most countries.
Fun fact: Pressing the shift key when you insert a CD rom in windows is illegal, since the "autorun application" was ruled a copy protection.
I kind of doubt that D3 will be as much fun roughly a decade after Blizzard went out of business. The mighty "battle.net" probably won't be in that good a shape.Again, if your argument is that your $60 game will have not provided you with enough entertainment after 10+ years of ownership to justify the entry cost, then Diablo 3 probably isn't for you.
But if I try to play Diablo 3 ten years from now (which I probably would not do, since there will be even better games to spend my time on at that point) only to discover that the game is unplayable, I will shrug and move on because I will have already enjoyed hundreds of hours of quality gameplay on a $60 investment.
Isn't the original Starcraft still supported on Battle.net? I predict that in 10 years A) Blizzard will still be in business and B) Diablo 3 will still be playable if you want.
|
|
Hey Scott, just wanted to pop in and say I totally agree with everything you've said here. People in all situations cannot possibly benefit from all products. The manufacturer has clearly laid out the product. If a person can't evaluate a product and determine that it doesn't meet their needs, that's on them.
As for people in the military not being able to play, they willingly give up their freedom on any number of fronts in order to serve and defend their country. I strongly doubt that not being able to play D3 represents a tipping point for any member of the military. "If I'd have known I wouldn't be able to play D3, I never would have joined the military!" The person who says that has no business in the military to begin with.
All games are going to be like this quite soon, as is being discussed in another thread around here. It's pretty much a fact. I'm not terribly fond of the idea, but have resigned myself to it.
Some games leave an impact on you long after the company accounts any further sales in the same column as "money stolen from wishing wells". These games impact you, and leave you remembering them sometimes a decade after. For me, these games were Final Fantasy 7, Treasures of the Savage Frontier, Fallout 2 and Thief. Some others have reached similar levels since then, but these are the foremost ones.
I remember both FF7 and Thief just as you describe, despite not having touched either of them in over a decade. I also remember Diablo 2 in the same way.
D3 can, by design, never reach that level.
Of course it can. I'll probably put hundreds of hours into Diablo 3. There's no way I'm going to forget that.
It may be sound financial move (planned obsolescence), but it is a sad and somewhat disappointing result. Feels like creative bankruptcy
By that logic, every MMORPG ever is creatively bankrupt. Give me a break.
Fun fact: Pressing the shift key when you insert a CD rom in windows is illegal, since the "autorun application" was ruled a copy protection.
Source? The only reference to such a thing I was able to find was SunnComm threatening to sue a student for publicizing the autorun-disable function as a way to bypass copy protection. Which, of course, turned out to be an empty threat. As far as I can tell no one has even been sued in such a manner, much less had a ruling come down declaring pressing Shift to be illegal.
All games are going to be like this quite soon, as is being discussed in another thread around here. It's pretty much a fact. I'm not terribly fond of the idea, but have resigned myself to it.
Many indie titles won't stoop to this level. Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi discovered a situation wherein they can reassure investors that they're "fighting piracy" (which is about as effective as pissing in the wind) and tell customers the constant connection is for the auction house and keep most of the information server-side. They're in a sitation where they can justify their move on several fronts and filthy (video game) publishers are scrambling to see how their future games can go that route.
Well f*!+ triple-A titles then. We do not have to buy the crap they churn out.
I've been watching one of my players run through Diablo 3 on Livestream and I'm impressed with the level design and monster sprites, but that's all. The sad thing is, this could have been an amazing game had they not worried about multiplayer components and DRM. Every game that allows these factors to influence them suffers some. I know some people like multiplayer titles--fine, play them. However, I also know that many people expect some flexibility with their games and could care less about playing with others.
I'm honestly not as angry about Diablo 3 as some people seem to be, but I expected to at least be able to play it at my own pace. Instead I'll end up going to a friend's house and playing the game for a few hours before walking away without giving Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi a dime. The game's issues actually killed a session (player vs player shouting matches discourage character creation) and I've given everyone corner-time to get them back on the same page.
My disappointment with Diablo actually began when they took the sequel to Egypt and India - I like my near-gothic-European-horror-fantasy action games to stick with European settings. Despite those gripes, it was an awesome title (yay prepatch necromancers with legitmate armies). If I happen to get nostalgic about the game, I just install the first game (without the expansion) and run through the first act two or three times. While the first Diablo was lacking in class options, I consider it the best of the series.
My point is that some of us have been disappointed for a while and this is just the last coffin nail. However when I see fans simply give into (video game) publisher policies, I want to scream out some sort of mystic Don't-just-lay-back-and-take-it war chant and lay siege to the publishers' offices with trebuchets filled with dead babies. If that would've worked I'd give it a go, but I know that it wouldn't hurt the creativity-crushing cunts a bit. At best, I'd be looking at multiple health department citations, the loss of several trebuchets, and a disturbing lack of dead babies -- so I'll just keep the infant corpses in their respective jars.
To those that hate the game: Don't give up and stop playing. Sell your game and login info to a friend for a bit more than $60. Reason that they'll have access to an existing character (hopefully lvl 20 or so). You might actually profit from the endeavor and keep the used-game market alive (albeit informally). Even if you don't make a profit, look at it as splitting the costs with a friend.
Many indie titles won't stoop to this level. Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi discovered a situation wherein they can reassure investors that they're "fighting piracy" (which is about as effective as pissing in the wind) and tell customers the constant connection is for the auction house and keep most of the information server-side. They're in a sitation where they can justify their move on several fronts and filthy (video game) publishers are scrambling to see how their future games can go that route.
Well f!@& triple-A titles then. We do not have to buy the crap they churn out.
You don't have to. But you will (and by "you" I mean gamers in general), because those games are typically fantastic, and will sell millions of copies. Most active gamers don't give half a damn about requiring an internet connection, and even the ones that do care typically buy the game anyway because the fact of the matter is that their "principled stand" against The Man isn't worth much when they realize they're talking about video games.
I've been watching one of my players run through Diablo 3 on Livestream and I'm impressed with the level design and monster sprites, but that's all. The sad thing is, this could have been an amazing game had they not worried about multiplayer components and DRM. Every game that allows these factors to influence them suffers some. I know some people like multiplayer titles--fine, play them. However, I also know that many people expect some flexibility with their games and could care less about playing with others.
Then Diablo 3 probably isn't for you. It's a fantastic, polished game. And guess what? You get your flexibility! You don't have to play with other people! Hooray!
I'm honestly not as angry about Diablo 3 as some people seem to be, but I expected to at least be able to play it at my own pace.
You can play it at your own pace. Enjoy!
Instead I'll end up going to a friend's house and playing the game for a few hours before walking away without giving Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi a dime. The game's issues actually killed a session (player vs player shouting matches discourage character creation) and I've given everyone corner-time to get them back on the same page.
Yes, that's it! Blame Diablo 3 for your players' inability to focus on what is going on at the table and your inability to keep them on task!
Good lord. The idea that anyone could get into a real-life shouting match over something like this is mind-boggling. Save it for internet forums.
My point is that some of us have been disappointed for a while and this is just the last coffin nail. However when I see fans simply give into (video game) publisher policies, I want to scream out some sort of mystic Don't-just-lay-back-and-take-it war chant and lay siege to the publishers' offices with trebuchets filled with dead babies.
No one is "giving in" to anything. Most gamers have made the reasonable decision that requiring an internet connection is essentially no big deal, and becomes less of a big deal with every passing day. I'm not exactly sure what compels certain people to throw a hissy fit, but it's really not something worth raising your blood pressure over. Go back and play the original Diablo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that Blizzard aren't going anywhere (and if they did, then parent company Activision would - hopefully - provide some kind of alternate service). The danger isn't Blizzard but smaller companies who adopt the same sort of system based on Blizzard's precedent and then go under with little warning. CDProjekt adopted a DRM system for THE WITCHER 2, rapidly thought better of it, and ditched their DRM due to this concern (amongst several others).
Most active gamers don't give half a damn about requiring an internet connection, and even the ones that do care typically buy the game anyway because the fact of the matter is that their "principled stand" against The Man isn't worth much when they realize they're talking about video games.
This, sadly, is true. When some PC gamers formed a Steam group and petition/boycott against the removal of private servers from MODERN WARFARE 2, they seemed unaware of the fact that people could then track what they were doing. When MW2 came out, a surprisingly (or unsurprisingly) high percentage of the people who'd 'boycotted' MODERN WARFARE 2...were actually playing MW2.
I'm not exactly sure what compels certain people to throw a hissy fit
Concern over the erosion of consumer rights is the core concern. This is actually a bigger problem in the USA, I believe, where your consumer rights are not as strongly-defined as ours are in the UK (which are backed up by European legislation as well). You either own something or you do not. This current DRM situation creates a grey area which, so far, legislators have been slow to clarify.
Certainly things like Steam and even the much-maligned Origins are okay (single online checks followed by the ability to switch to an offline mode) but always-on DRM requirements for non-multiplayer games is something that certainly runs counter to UK sale of goods legislation. Blizzard's arguments over the need for its game to be online all the time for the Auction House purpose would be questionable, at best. Of course, it would never go to court. A 'Digital Consumer Rights' bill of some kind is the best hope for settling the issue.
Concern over the erosion of consumer rights is the core concern.
I don't see this as an erosion of consumer rights. I see it as another step in the video game publishing industry's transition to a service-based industry rather than a product-based industry. It's been a long time coming, and I'm very happy with where video games are headed.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
By that logic, every MMORPG ever is creatively bankrupt. Give me a break.
Not to go on that tangent too much, but don't you think there might be a reason a 6 year old game is still leading that market head and shoulders above any competition?
Source? The only reference to such a thing I was able to find was SunnComm threatening to sue a student for publicizing the autorun-disable function as a way to bypass copy protection. Which, of course, turned out to be an empty threat. As far as I can tell no one has even been sued in such a manner, much less had a ruling come down declaring pressing Shift to be illegal.
CBA to look up case numbers, but IIRC it was the german state court of Hamburg.
Instead I'll end up going to a friend's house and playing the game for a few hours before walking away without giving Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi a dime. The game's issues actually killed a session (player vs player shouting matches discourage character creation) and I've given everyone corner-time to get them back on the same page.Yes, that's it! Blame Diablo 3 for your players' inability to focus on what is going on at the table and your inability to keep them on task!
Good lord. The idea that anyone could get into a real-life shouting match over something like this is mind-boggling. Save it for internet forums.
At what point did I blame Diablo 3? I said that the issues surrounding the game led to a ridiculous lapse in rational thought between two, otherwise sane, players.
My point is that some of us have been disappointed for a while and this is just the last coffin nail. However when I see fans simply give into (video game) publisher policies, I want to scream out some sort of mystic Don't-just-lay-back-and-take-it war chant and lay siege to the publishers' offices with trebuchets filled with dead babies.No one is "giving in" to anything. Most gamers have made the reasonable decision that requiring an internet connection is essentially no big deal, and becomes less of a big deal with every passing day. I'm not exactly sure what compels certain people to throw a hissy fit, but it's really not something worth raising your blood pressure over. Go back and play the original Diablo.
MMO runs are fundamentally different from single player experiences. Bundling a single player campaign with all of the inconveniences of MMO gameplay limits the solo experience. Blizzard-Activision-Vivendi essentially told single player fans of Diablo to compromise their enjoyment and time so that MMO fans would be allowed to move seamlessly into Diablo. Add to that the fact that the compromise also includes one of the worst DRM schemes (for a single player game) we've seen to date.
For MMO enthusiasts this is not an issue, but it is for everyone else.
Not to disrupt the consumer rights argument, but about Diablo.
I'm a bit worried for my hardcore Witch Doctor. In act 2 there are a lot of creatures that can jerk her into melee. The wizard could diamond skin, force wave or teleport out of it. How does the witch doctor handle it?
By that logic, every MMORPG ever is creatively bankrupt. Give me a break.Not to go on that tangent too much, but don't you think there might be a reason a 6 year old game is still leading that market head and shoulders above any competition?
You mean a 7.5 year-old game created by the same people who made Diablo 3, and still insanely popular today because of its polish and continual design upgrades?
There have been plenty of creative MMOs. And, by the way, your argument is that the fact that they are online-based makes them creatively bankrupt somehow.
I don;t care if it's online. I care that I would not be able to play the game whenever I chose. If I lose internet connection, due to storm, local failure or I lose my job and can't pay for it, I can no longer play a 60 dollar game. I don't think this is an unreasonable stance, tbh.
|
I don;t care if it's online. I care that I would not be able to play the game whenever I chose. If I lose internet connection, due to storm, local failure or I lose my job and can't pay for it, I can no longer play a 60 dollar game. I don't think this is an unreasonable stance, tbh.
I couldn't agree more, especially since I died twice over the weekend due to internet glitches. I was fighting a bunch of mooks when the game suddenly froze on me. The next thing I know, I was surrounded and went from full hit points to dead with no time to react.
Another glitch I have found several times. I am exploring and all of a sudden my character is back where I was 2 seconds ago and I have to cover the same space again.
The thing about D3 I hate most is the time clock on the potion use. Its not so bad when you are fighting mooks and they whittle your HP down and you can continue fighting while waiting for the clock to allow you to take another drink. When I faced the boss at the end of Act 1, I was in trouble. The blasted thing could hit me for 3/4 of my HP when I got too close, and if I got hit again while the clock was still ticking, I was screwed. The only thing I could do was run around for 30 seconds until the game allowed me to drink again.
|
|
Saturday night i was playing single player. I am in act 2. I had to go into some ruins and looks for blood of someone. So I go in, fight my way through, level. Find the blood and port back to town. Right after I port back to town, the server goes down. When It comes back up I'm back at the start of the ruins because thats where the last checkpoint was. All my progress gone.
So I had to go through it again. Then It went down again. This happened 3 times in a row.
Someone on RPG.net said that because Blizzard has a stake in what they make with the real money auction house, and everything server based, Blizzard may start to control what items drop to try and control the RMAH.
I'll wait for it show up in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart in a year or two.
I don;t care if it's online. I care that I would not be able to play the game whenever I chose. If I lose internet connection, due to storm, local failure or I lose my job and can't pay for it, I can no longer play a 60 dollar game. I don't think this is an unreasonable stance, tbh.
So make an informed decision when purchasing the game. If you expect that you will lose internet access so often that you will not get $60 of enjoyment out of the game, don't purchase it. Now, for me (and I wager for most gamers watching the Diablo 3 launch), there's no difficulty in justifying that. I'm going to get dozens of hours out of this game, if not hundreds. And if my internet goes down (which it probably won't since I have a pretty reliable connection), I will be thankful that my entire life does not revolve around a single activity.
The thing about D3 I hate most is the time clock on the potion use. Its not so bad when you are fighting mooks and they whittle your HP down and you can continue fighting while waiting for the clock to allow you to take another drink. When I faced the boss at the end of Act 1, I was in trouble. The blasted thing could hit me for 3/4 of my HP when I got too close, and if I got hit again while the clock was still ticking, I was screwed. The only thing I could do was run around for 30 seconds until the game allowed me to drink again.
That's what health globes are for. If you're having trouble keeping your health up, try picking up some +health-from-health-globes gear. And there are pretty much always abilities you can select that will regenerate your health in some way.
By the way, if you've ever found yourself saying, "Man, I wish I could have both of these abilities on my action bar at the same time," guess what? You can! Just go to Options -> Gameplay -> and check the Elective Mode box. Now you can freely assign any ability you know to any slot on your action bar!
I'll wait for it show up in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart in a year or two.
Blizzard control the pricing of their games with an iron fist. I've never seen STARCRAFT 2 for more than a few pounds off the recommended price despite it being out more than two years. Hell, I've never seen the STARCRAFT or WARCRAFT 2 (let alone WC3) Battle Chest collections for less than £10 (still a third of their original price) fifteen years after release.
By the way, if you've ever found yourself saying, "Man, I wish I could have both of these abilities on my action bar at the same time," guess what? You can! Just go to Options -> Gameplay -> and check the Elective Mode box. Now you can freely assign any ability you know to any slot on your action bar!
You seriously just made my day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Diablo 3 is some very delicious koolaid.
Not to stoke any fears or anything.. but there have been rumours (as of the past two nights). Of people getting their gear stolen in public games due to individuals somehow replicating your sessionID (I believe was the reason? I haven't done a whole lot of research... but have heard from multiple players about it) (And thereby gaining access to not only your character, but also your stash!) Also, apparently it doesn't matter if you use an authenticator or not.
Inferno mode is awesome btw! Stacking 5% Gold + MF buff (up to five (5) times every time you clear an elite pack; it does go away if you change skills however!) And the loot in inferno mode is great, (bosses (Ala those quest bosses to not spoil for those who haven't gotten that far) have been dropping about 6 blues, and 2-3 rares on kills (And I use only about 28% MF gear atm)).
Those elite packs however, can almost be worse than bosses. (Especially if you get two packs at once, every elite also has an 'enrage timer' that goes off if you don't kill them fast enough. From the ones I have seen, the wandering elites is you start losing hp every second, while a certain boss with a fire floor ignites the entire room!)
I don;t care if it's online. I care that I would not be able to play the game whenever I chose. If I lose internet connection, due to storm, local failure or I lose my job and can't pay for it, I can no longer play a 60 dollar game. I don't think this is an unreasonable stance, tbh.So make an informed decision when purchasing the game. If you expect that you will lose internet access so often that you will not get $60 of enjoyment out of the game, don't purchase it. Now, for me (and I wager for most gamers watching the Diablo 3 launch), there's no difficulty in justifying that. I'm going to get dozens of hours out of this game, if not hundreds. And if my internet goes down (which it probably won't since I have a pretty reliable connection), I will be thankful that my entire life does not revolve around a single activity.
It's not a justification issue. I'm sure if I played the game I would enjoy it for more than 60 dollars worth of play time. I'm also sure that since I enjoyed Diablo and Diablo 2 immensly, and got many, many hours of enjoyment out of them, that I would probably enjoy Diablo 3 as well. No one's knocking yur game, bro.
I'm simply voting with my cash. I do not like this trend of 'must have internet connection, or no game for j00'.Again this is not an unreasonable stance to take.
|
When you can spend money, real or fake, to super-equip your character it's cheating. Especially in a game like Diablo where you are supposed to kill stuff to get stuff.
I find this rather amusing coming from this forums, since the automatic default assumption here (for Pathfinder or 3.X) is that any gear worth having should be bought at the local MagicMart branch, and anything you actually find adventuring is generally worthless crap to be sold off to fund what you REALLY want to buy.