Diablo 3 open Beta this weekend

bobtheskull

bobtheskull

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
417
Reaction score
70
Woot!!! After what seems like over a decade of waiting.... oh wait, it was....

Anyways, yeah.... open beta this weekend to test server loads. I'll be giving it a go. Anyone else?
 
Shit, they're letting the proletariat in. Guess it's time to uninstall.

Edeslash said:
Fewer pre-orders than expected, huh?
Click to expand...

Speaking as someone who has been playing since the FNF beta this couldn't sound more ridiculous. There's a lot of reasons for the open beta / public test weekend.

They're stress testing the servers so day 1 isn't a massive DdoS. Stress tests (which is the exact wording they're using) are a necessity for games this large, surely you've participated in one.

The game requires constant communication with Blizzard servers--for better or worse. Storage and saving is all server side now and everyone must create an account wide battletag to tie to all present and future Blizzard titles.

u.s.battle.net said:
Beginning this Friday everyone is invited to log in and help us put the game and servers through their paces in this three day stress test as we march toward the game's release on May 15.

What if the service is down/laggy/disconnecting me?

It's very possible that players connecting to the stress test could experience issues with the service. While not ideal, this is exactly why we're having a stress test. We want to catch and analyze as many bugs as possible during this stress test period, so that we can try to ensure a smooth launch on May 15.
Click to expand...

The game requires downloading, decryption, authenticating and creating entirely new bnet accounts for many Diablo fans who've been waiting to register for the release to reunite with Blizzard. Diablo draws from an entirely different audience than SC/WC and WoW.

Let's not forget the the actual online play--which can be toggled on at any moment during SP. Not to mention battlenet 2.0 features like cross-game and cellular communication. Last minute tweaks for graphics performance options not available in the closed beta will be deployed as well.

Even during the beta they had to make adjustments to the character and authentication systems to adequately manage the amount of simultaneous players.

This is a big milestone for Blizzard--they're completing the trinity of bnet 2.0 ready games, and in Blizzard fashion they're ensuring a well ironed iteration of hell.

My least sincere of apologies if you were being sarcastic, these things are hard to discern from text on the internette tubes.



WHITE KNIGHT RANT OVER AND OUT
 
Yeah I wasn't that serious. :p

I'd try the beta myself but now that I think of it I'll prefer the final product. The release is very soon anyway. :) Kinda excited.
 
I applied for the closed Beta but never got it, so I'll use this open one to try it out.

I played D2 for an obscene amount of time and it was definitely in my top favourite games. But that was a long time ago. If D3 had came out 5 years ago, I'd have given it a better reception. But from what I've seen of it so far, it doesn't look any better than, say, Titan Quest, which is now itself about 5 years old.

I'll give it a chance, but I'm not expecting anything great from it.
 
You well should expect greatness from it. It's a labor of love that has come a long, long way. They've listened so damn intently to fans both new and old. Sure, it can be played casually... but for people like us there's a lot to bite down on.

I've seen Diablo 3 shift into the most versatile and spectacular aRPG to date. It absolutely trounces other genre entries and oozes style, depth and difficulty in both SP and MP.

I almost wish people could glimpse at the internal builds--and this was before the changes to runes and recipes.

I'm well ready to break some more keyboards from HC characters dying in MP games. This time you better work as a team and have proper builds if you want to invite or join others, dust off those mics and headsets for hell and nightmare.
 
I'll take your word for it. I guess I just don't want to expect too much from it then be disappointed when I play it.

But, if it is as good as you say, then I can kiss goodbye to any social life I have!
 
In that case it's utter shit and you're better off playing free korean MMOs until your thumbs fall off.
 
See, now that's what I'm talkin about.... I had a feeling it'd be crap... now I can go play it with no expectations whatsoever... Damn you, Blizzard... DAMN YOU TO HELL!!
 
Seems really fun so far, played a demon hunter for a bit with Viper and my brother. I love how easy it is to pop into friends games.
 
After so long playing normal I'm really psyched to try Hell/Nightmare and have an HC again.


Also: Barbarian for life.
 
Finally got into try it out today... servers were packed last night so couldn't.

Seems fun enough, I'll have to play it some more methinks.... Definitely feels like a Diablo game. Took my usual Barbarian... will try one of the other later, but I always have a Barb as my primary save.
 
The mechanics seem sound - not missing skill trees - but i'm not getting on with the cartoony aesthetic. It doesn't have the stark opressive feel of the previous games. Otherwise everything seems all good :)
 
It definitely feels like Diablo, which I think is a pretty good accomplishment. I had a lot of fun playing with a friend last night. I've beaten the demo twice (Once with a Witch Doctor and once with a Monk).

TLDR Version: I was not planning to get this game at all and now I'm preordering it.

Likes
- Separate loot for players.
- Gold automatically picks up.
- Town Portal is a skill.
- Health potions don't take up space.
- No real inventory management.
- Gold and Stash are shared between characters.
- Destructable environments holy shit yes.
- The party system is pretty intuitive and simple.
- Dropping health globes. I wasn't sure on this, but I find that I did still use health potions, and that fights were less of a button-mashing nightmare that left me wanting to rage-quit because I couldn't hit "potion" as many times as I needed to.

Dislikes
- Not real choices on attributes or skill trees. I understand why they made it simpler, but it should at least be more of a choice for those of us veterans that want to deal with that stuff. Right now it feels like there's very little that differentiates my Barbarian from yours. Yeah there are the runes, and you can choose which skills to use, but it's still not as varied as I'd like.

Indifferent / Undecided On
- The town has a blacksmith who can craft items. You can upgrade his skills which unlocks new things. Shouldn't bother me since it's a safer equivalent of gambling, but I don't love it. I do love that his upgrades are another thing that's stored between your characters.
- Extra experience for doing things like killing several monsters at once / in a row. Eh.
- Achievements. Eh.
 
But dude, if you kill 50 Wretched Wreaths in Fallen Star Level 2 you get a flying orc strapped to a predator missile. Kill Streaks are the wave of the future, bro.

...I'm totally guilty of liking them, in actuality.

And lo' and behold, the auth servers are appropriately DdoS'd. So much fun at Cartman Land and you-can't-come.

Indicative of poor pre-order sales amirite
 
As expected, the servers are being overwhelmed and its very hit-and-miss with connecting.

Some cant login, some cant start a game, some cant continue. The usual stuff.

I'm a bit worried about the constant connection requirement. Blizzard's servers tend to fail, and for a singleplayer experience, where's my 'I dont want to connect because I have no interest in co-op or PVP. Just store my configs and saves etc on my HD like Steam?' option?

I just hope D3's launch isnt plagued by connection problems. Blizzard's excuse will undoubtedly be the generic ''we didnt expect this much traffic.'' Oh come ON! How my betas or launches by other games do we STILL have to go through where there simply aren't enough servers to cope? As gamers, we have no RIGHT to complain, as we aren't paying to play the beta, but it will still undoubtedly put some people off.

At the same time though, I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard DID have a smooth launch, simply due to the fact that they have all the money in the world right now to make sure their servers are up to scratch.

On a happy note I completed the beta with a monk so far, and I have to say I'm extremely impressed. Still feels like Diablo, if a little too easy on normal (even with the boss, I think my health went to half at it's lowest), and looks really, REALLY pretty and runs super smooth.

And this could easily be the fastest selling PC game of all time. Maybe not the biggest, but certainly a chance for the fastest. Isnt that held by one of the WoW games though come to think of it?

The only thing I dont like about the game is the simplicity of the skills. It's nowhere near deep enough compared to almost any other RPG. They've gone the WoW route it seems. Skills you choose with each level that are affected by loot stats. Which works I guess, but still, would love to see more choice in where my points go. Then again, we need points in the first place.
 
They got it done with Starcraft 2 just fine, they're just trying to hit a sweet spot in terms of server strength and numbers and get an idea of the overhead.

Needless to say they'll probably need another building roughly the size of Buckingham Palace just to add servers for D3 to their new bnet system.
 
I'm irritated by the "online play only" since I would have been playing this morning but now have to deal with server downtime, but after playing WoW for as long as I did, I'm not exactly worried about their ability to keep up with it. Of course, if there were monthly fees, there's no way I'd be getting this.

Dynasty said:
The only thing I dont like about the game is the simplicity of the skills. It's nowhere near deep enough compared to almost any other RPG. They've gone the WoW route it seems. Skills you choose with each level that are affected by loot stats. Which works I guess, but still, would love to see more choice in where my points go. Then again, we need points in the first place.
Click to expand...

This a million times. It's too simple.
 
The builds were static, unchangeable and largely cookie cutter in D2 though--the stats system in particular with "attributes" like run speed. Might as well have been ****ing swimming in Deus Ex, man. Sure. it's an option, but it's a stupid one with no practical use because you have no dungeon master, it's outdated design.

I think it's something we'll have to experience first, at the very least it will mean less time spent making entirely new characters for players with limited play time such as myself. In actuality, I think it adds more options--at least for a player like myself.

Particularly organizing 6x abilities from a massive pool and their plethora of runes, passive abilities,various resistances, gearing for different environments, etc.

This was a good read for me when I had similar concerns--illustrating the deceptively flexible and complex system(s) present.

The design is rather brilliant in its ability to be all at once simple but, should need be, very labyrinthine and requiring a great amount of specificity and customization. For their times, the skill systems in the first two made sense and followed the convention--though I'm sure

The non-volatile nature of character builds allows me to become more attached to characters whom I've invested countless hours in. I don't think much is being sacrificed in the process. In fact I believe quite the contrary, depth is added and qualities which punished players are being benched in favor of more contemporary design philosophies which can appropriately reach wider audiences.

The paradigm is becoming less significant within games altogether--casual and hardcore is such a silly false dichotomy within contemporary game design when its executed properly.

I digress, this would fit better in a blog post at this point.
 
Everything in this game is overly simplified and I hate it. The writing is heartless and lazy, inventory management is gone (why even have tetris inventory if everything is 1 or 2 blocks?), skills are boring, limited, and overly reliant on AOE or multiple-strike effects, character stat progression is predetermined (i.e. a middle finger to the RPG genre), you still visually use your default class weapon regardless of what's actually equipped (which is ****ing bullshit), weapons determine spell strength (which reduces weapon drops to a stand-in for skill tree complexity and stat customisation), drops are local, pay2win auction house, graphics are literally weeks ahead of WoW quality on max settings (textures can only be set to Low and High, and armor is still pixellated on High), and you can be disconnected from solo play. Did I miss anything?

Thank you Blizzard for saving me $60.

[edit] I now believe that Blizzard is distinct from Activision only in terms of PR. Dead inside.
 
Like half of your complaints read as though you didn't even play it, or as though your computer is less powerful than that walnut knocking around in your skull.
 
You realize that the beta constitutes what is essentially the introduction of the game and doesn't represent anything more than a glorified tech demo and platform to test the RMAH, graphics engine and netcode?

...and that Diablo isn't exactly renown for its brilliant in-game narration, haha (as incredible as the one liners in the Den of Evil in Act I are in D2 :| ). The VOs seemed pretty good though, to me at least, and I enjoy picking up journals and hearing them narrated as I play.

The templar fellow and his having to kill his own king was a gripping little tale that entertained me through some of the mundanities of normal mode.

That being said you can just tap spacebar through every conversation or piece of spoken word if you so desire.

Read up on how the game progresses after 13 if you already paid 60 quid, you may be pleasantly surprised. Or at least willing to open the game up again.
 
Yorick said:
Like half of your complaints read as though you didn't even play it, or as though your computer is less powerful than that walnut knocking around in your skull.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry I don't like the things you like, you pleasant person.

BabyHeadCrab said:
You realize that the beta constitutes what is essentially the introduction of the game and doesn't represent anything more than a glorified tech demo and platform to test the RMAH, graphics engine and netcode?

...and that Diablo isn't exactly renown for its brilliant in-game narration, haha (as incredible as the one liners in the Den of Evil in Act I are in D2 :| ). The VOs seemed pretty good though, to me at least, and I enjoy picking up journals and hearing them narrated as I play.

The templar fellow and his having to kill his own king was a gripping little tale that entertained me through some of the mundanities of normal mode.

That being said you can just tap spacebar through every conversation or piece of spoken word if you so desire.

Read up on how the game progresses after 13 if you already paid 60 quid, you may be pleasantly surprised. Or at least willing to open the game up again.
Click to expand...
I realise all of this. I've read up on the way the game progresses, I know how the runes work. Diablo isn't known for particularly thought-provoking writing, but the narrative present in Diablo 3 is actually very slightly worse than in 2. I expected at least equivalent quality to what they produced over a decade ago, and they don't even care enough to provide that. Stat systems have been structured to directly promote use of the cash shop, and it seems the only decision you can make with any real opportunity cost - arguably the defining aspect of choices presented in RPGs - is which class you want your character to be. I have no interest in a Diablo game which chooses your stats for you. Very little in this game feels like Diablo aside from surface aesthetics.
 
Stigmata said:
I'm sorry I don't like the things you like, you pleasant person.
Click to expand...

It's not a question of taste, it's a matter of you just being plain wrong. Thing that you said such as, "overly reliant on AOE or multiple-strike effects", "you still visually use your default class weapon regardless of what's actually equipped (which is ****ing bullshit)", or even " (textures can only be set to Low and High, and armor is still pixellated on High)" are incorrect at best.
 
"overly reliant on AOE or multiple-strike effects" - This is based on video descriptions of how runes change various class skills. Wow, an AOE fire blast! An AOE bash! An AOE stun! An AOE poison dot! So much stat-strategic depth~

(textures can only be set to Low and High, and armor is still pixellated on High) - This is objectively correct at 1080p, I don't know why you'd think this is disputable unless you're running the game at 800x600.

"you still visually use your default class weapon regardless of what's actually equipped (which is ****ing bullshit)" - I equipped a two-handed bow and was still visually using a one-handed crossbow, and people on reddit are complaining that both the Monk and Wizard continue to punch/whatever regardless of what's actually equipped in their weapon slot.

So. Got anything else? Or are you just going to call me an idiot again?
 
Shit, you two just made me reach critical mass. My brain is going to explode onto this post like an over-sized neglected zit pinched by a clothes pin - and it's all your fault. God dammit. Here we go again.

Stigmata may have let his bitterness towards the other aspects of the game make its way into his opinion of combat mechanics and graphic fidelity, but I think he genuinely holds a disdain for the design direction of D3. That's fine, even respectable, subjectivity is still around somewhere. Done? Ok, done.

Personally, I love the direction they went in and have no desire to relive the past and the RMAH is inconsequential to me because Diablo was never about measuring myself next to other players, rather cooperation and bettering of my own character to the best of my extent.

We play games for different reasons, folks. I'm not trying to push some bullshit mediator "agree to disagree" shit--but I think the argument has run its course.

Just as a lot of Brood War players left when Wings of Liberty came--and a large exodus occurs during every major WoW expansion or sequel to any damn game people pursue what they want out of games. You know, a medium that relies on intimate interaction with mechanical and artistic set pieces.

I will play and enjoy D3 because I think it builds intelligently upon the foundation laid forth by a young Blizzard, and, to me, simplification is not synonymous with decadence. An idea I think has been lost in the idiotic back and forth concerning the degradation of some glorious gilded age of gaming.

When the **** was this glorious kingly age of gaming bliss? Every last sniveling forumite, including myself has a convoluted nostalgia-crazed era they fetishize. The glorious games of old and their prominence are, of course, largely based on age, impressionability and taste. The droll argument for said glorious days usually involves a time when games were more intelligent, presented more unique concepts or possessed more difficulty.

These rants are absolutely cringe-worthy shit regurgitated from folks who refuse to explore the existing cultural landscape of gaming, which is simply more vast and harder to navigate. Factually speaking, by pure volume alone within the last decade, there is more variety and products to fall in love with than ever. Nostalgia is this hilarious unrecognized beast hiding beneath these types of arguments. We're all so guilty in that department. In all types of media. The older generation will always, and is culturally obligated and programmed to resent the next big thing.

Theater before Elizabeth made you filthy, comic books made you a virginal freak, television was watched with the family lest you became a zombie no-lifer. These broad stroke ideas of media resentment can be applied to the shift in gaming culture towards different systems of engaging virtual worlds as well. Often times people hate and disregard ideas merely because they don't abide to tradition. Blizzard knows these people well and is lucky enough to have a great comfort zone, yet communities of our nature will never stop arguing frivolously about how "dumb" gaming is becoming.

The aRPG genre, ironically epitomizes this debacle, almost two decades ago (****, time flies) it was laughed off as the bastardization of RPGs, but I think time has wizened them just as we went from Baldur's Gate to Dragon Age, Wolf3D to Half-Life or Ultima to WoW.

...and just like Michael Bay still produces dumb albeit sometimes oddly compelling garbage, the graph shows trends based more on culture and age/demographic targeting than time. Though they both remain important. Especially considering the youth of interactive digital entertainment.

Intermission: In proofing these pages, I realized I never mentioned Torchlight, which I know anyone whom reads this article sized post will inevitably bring up. Here goes nothing: Torchlight is a game--and is pretty good.

Games, however, are still in their relative infancy. Even games that will one day be considered simplistic rubbish advance the genre.

Diablo III is in that middle ground, it's not Dostoevsky, nor is it Twilight. It's a game that bears a title which will pander to the audience whom grew up with it AND those who are younger and possess the most disposable video game income. Blizzard, even after the buyout, remains one of the most observant and market savvy developers in the world. I think the big mistake here would be to assume Diablo 3 is ruining the integrity of the aRPG or betraying its predecessors. The reality of it is, Blizzard cannot concern itself with "proper" sequels, they have never been 3D Realms or Id.

Diablo III, will behave as Blizzard's consummate and primary game releases always have; present a product that showcases the state of the genre and erecting a hurtle from which their contemporaries must transcend so they have material for their next release schedule

Reinventing the wheel is sloppy--but not as risky or messy as failing to acknowledge a wider audience, Blizzard is famous for a lot of things, but risk taking will never be one of them. The dogmatic nature of Blizzard's fanboys and girls, particularly Diablo fans is rivaled in media perhaps only by Star Wars junkies and followers of groups like Radiohead. Polarized, crazed and pregnant with expectations of messianic proportions. People who so badly want to relive these moments of comfort Blizzard provided for them. But developing purely on ideal over idea is, to be blunt, just stupid.

It's not something Blizzard does despite their eons of development time. They're inspired by ideals but don't aspire to recreate magic. I admire this immensely about Blizzard. They love their properties and their fans but refuse to do the cheapened remake, the Rambo or Titanic 3D.

Instead they gut what they feel has grown moldy and disregard their cult. Sometimes it even offends me--but it's an undeniably powerful philosophy in media production, rare in any medium of consumer entertainment. Half-Life and Legend of Zelda titles similarly attempt to perfect this idea of remaining in a comfortable yet constantly evolving zone of pleasing future generations yet remaining comfortable to those who made them strong.

Blizzard teased this themselves with the rainbow shirts. The outcry when mass appeal is applied to games has more to do with individuals feeling a part of them is being stripped away. Many of these folks refuse to look in the proper places because of franchise power.

Strategy, narrative, socialization and yes, even approachability are elements which will pop in and out of various aRPG/loot games.

Action RPGs and "gaming" in general are allowed to have sub-genre, to be classified by vastly different presentations or the most nuanced of design choices.

Understandably, quite a few people will disagree or be unable to shift gears because it IS a vastly different product. Sure, in many ways one could argue Diablo III to be a less competent product than its predecessors. But I assure you critically and historically it will be cataloged as reflective and brilliant as any other paramount Blizzard release.

Blizzard is doing what they do best, defining genre through 'perfection' of consumer demand that surrounds it.

Argue through May 15th and beyond,

Let's face it, most of us who have been here long enough to see this bit of history; the release schedule and cultural impact of Blizzard games. We're jaded--we post on gaming message boards, we most certainly are not the ones with the disposable income and/or time to define the products Blizzard delivers today.

The petitions to stop constant connectivity have all but disappeared, the transition of Warcraft into an MMORPG is no longer a cardinal sin, and the cycle continues just as Kerrigan sheds her skin and becomes sexy again just in time for her upcoming magnum opus. Blizzard doesn't leave behind it's prior entries, but twelve years and the departure of Bill Roper and Blizzard North may damn well create that illusion.

Upon release the game will of course neither shock society and critics with innovation nor disappoint the typical consumer with concerns of "dumbing down." This is a paradigm created and argued in insular game communities, so hilariously circular and predictable that it seems to proceed merely out of the comfort of a rubric for argument and belittlement.

Diablo III is going to be a bloody quintessential Blizzard game, and appeal to huge amounts of people, including industry folks. It will be a staple of QA and exemplify their staying power as the most well known PC Game developer to this day.

A minority will find the product tiresome, simplified or simply dim-witted, just as with any Blizzard sequel before it. They may be correct in many regards--this should be inspiration for them to request and deliver what they believe is intelligent, and present it as eloquently as Blizzard.

Also, though placed awkwardly in this piece: let me just say I fully acknowledge the awesomeness of games like Torchlight / TQ, etc. So let me get it out of the way that I don't think Diablo end all be all (hue hue)--but this is a piece of D3 and its many cultural waves in gaming culture, so I shall commence with a brief conclusion:

I'll never be too old for a little more comfortable vacation in hell. A place I'm familiar with where clicking one button devastates opponents and empowers the player. The cogs, the fundamentals, Diablo, it's lore and sensation remain in D3, all they needed to do was provide a AAA clickfest with reasonable character progression to create a false sense of empowerment. They've already proven to have done that, and in a more contemporary sleek way, displaying intelligence in their ability to stay relevant, stay fun and remain occasionally challenging to please fans. The changes made were pragmatic ones that have always been definitively Blizzard style design decisions.

Argue until May 15th and beyond to your heart's content, but it won't change what Blizzard has already renewed its lease as the best spit-shiners in gaming history since the day they left the womb of Silicon and Synapse in Irvine California. Are they more keen to corporate interests? Yes. But for the time they have yet to deviate from their historical and admirable role in our industry as the penultimate perfectionists delivering quality well rounded products that refuse the hardcore and casual divide--and let many of us sit comfortably in the middle.

Your debate is frivolous, Diablo III will be a critical and fiscal success, and will possess, at the very least, an intelligent and inspirational presentation of development prowess within a wayward and ill-defined genre.
 
my laptop can barely run it so I won't be getting this title unfortunately
 
First of all, the Demon Hunter says some stupid shit. But I finally found another high-damage one-handed crossbow, so I'll deal with it.

I'm on my fourth play through. Going with Witch Doctor this time around. I've been playing with a few friends pretty much throughout the entire weekend. We've all agreed to buy it on release, so there's no question on whether I'm getting this or not.

The only issue I have with it is that it's so.. WoWish. The animations and textures just don't seem to be Diablo to me.
 
ray_Man, that whole posts rests on what appears to be a flawed multi-tiered premise.

D3 takes stat allocation to a whole new level. A lot of players make the argument that they are losing out on the ability to customize their character, let’s take a look at that. What did we lose? If you look at the gem distribution you’ll note that they all add a significant amount to your stats, all the way from 6-58. You’d only need 10 max level gems to have more control over your base stats than a level 99 character in d2. It’s basically Blizzard saying “okay player, instead of spending 5 per level up to 500 points, we’ll give you items which give (instead of 6 levels worth at end-game D2) 20-40 levels worth of stat points as 1 modifier on an item”. There could be an item in Diablo 3 (or multiple items) that give more stat points than the entire level 2-99 bonus (490 points) COMBINED. Now put some gems into it! Now that’s the polar opposite of a “pretty !@#$ty customization system”. The biggest lesson here is that the higher the numbers go (outside of leveling bonuses), the more control a player has over where to spend them.
Click to expand...

That being, he's equating higher stat maximums and refactored stat effects with "greater customisation". But the actual issue here is that level-up stat increases are predetermined by class. If giving greater highs to end-game stat items and reorganising how Strength and Dex affect combat is the "fix" for Diablo 2's "bad stat system", why not add that and keep custom character stats too? Then you'd have even more control over your base stats than with bigger gems alone. But no, he has to conclude that Diablo 3's system is objectively better, because, come on, it's Blizzard guys! New Diablo! Progress! Yeah!

He talks about how refactored primary stats let you build a tanky Witch Doctor, if you want. Great, but isn't there even more potential for subclasses with custom stat allocation than without?

I'm going to reiterate that this game has been purposefully designed to encourage the real money auction house, to the detriment of otherwise-existing gameplay and strategic depth. Diablo 2, in terms of actual gameplay, was about character (i.e. stat/skill points) and loot. Diablo 3 is about loot, full stop, and I simply find that distasteful, not to mention manipulative beyond what is necessary to create a game based around addiction via Skinner boxes.

Beyond that, the choices for using the stat points are now meaningful. You may note that the end of each section says "this stat is now viable for all classes". It isn’t simply “100 str, 75 dex, 400 vitality, 10 energy”. Now you have to choose, do I want to dish out the damage? Would I rather absorb the damage? Can I just avoid the damage? These are a lot more meaningful choices and they still progress along the same line as leveling. You can also a directly quantifiable return from investing these points.
Click to expand...
I mean, really. I don't even. Is he trying to say that custom stats can't do this, only stats from gems and items can? And then goes on to say that it progresses "along the same line as levelling"? Increasing my health pool by manually adding points to Vitality isn't "a directly quantifiable return from investing these points"? Hello, compartmentalism.

I don't have much to do today.
 
Played the monk and demon hunter to level 10 so far and I'm not sure which I prefer.
 
Monk seems to be the most over-powered. I like the Demon Hunter the best.
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
Shit, you two just made me reach critical mass. My brain is going to explode onto this post like an over-sized neglected zit pinched by a clothes pin - and it's all your fault. God dammit. Here we go again.

Stigmata may have let his bitterness towards the other aspects of the game make its way into his opinion of combat mechanics and graphic fidelity, but I think he genuinely holds a disdain for the design direction of D3. That's fine, even respectable, subjectivity is still around somewhere. Done? Ok, done.

Personally, I love the direction they went in and have no desire to relive the past and the RMAH is inconsequential to me because Diablo was never about measuring myself next to other players, rather cooperation and bettering of my own character to the best of my extent.

We play games for different reasons, folks. I'm not trying to push some bullshit mediator "agree to disagree" shit--but I think the argument has run its course.

Just as a lot of Brood War players left when Wings of Liberty came--and a large exodus occurs during every major WoW expansion or sequel to any damn game people pursue what they want out of games. You know, a medium that relies on intimate interaction with mechanical and artistic set pieces.

I will play and enjoy D3 because I think it builds intelligently upon the foundation laid forth by a young Blizzard, and, to me, simplification is not synonymous with decadence. An idea I think has been lost in the idiotic back and forth concerning the degradation of some glorious gilded age of gaming.

When the **** was this glorious kingly age of gaming bliss? Every last sniveling forumite, including myself has a convoluted nostalgia-crazed era they fetishize. The glorious games of old and their prominence are, of course, largely based on age, impressionability and taste. The droll argument for said glorious days usually involves a time when games were more intelligent, presented more unique concepts or possessed more difficulty.

These rants are absolutely cringe-worthy shit regurgitated from folks who refuse to explore the existing cultural landscape of gaming, which is simply more vast and harder to navigate. Factually speaking, by pure volume alone within the last decade, there is more variety and products to fall in love with than ever. Nostalgia is this hilarious unrecognized beast hiding beneath these types of arguments. We're all so guilty in that department. In all types of media. The older generation will always, and is culturally obligated and programmed to resent the next big thing.

Theater before Elizabeth made you filthy, comic books made you a virginal freak, television was watched with the family lest you became a zombie no-lifer. These broad stroke ideas of media resentment can be applied to the shift in gaming culture towards different systems of engaging virtual worlds as well. Often times people hate and disregard ideas merely because they don't abide to tradition. Blizzard knows these people well and is lucky enough to have a great comfort zone, yet communities of our nature will never stop arguing frivolously about how "dumb" gaming is becoming.

The aRPG genre, ironically epitomizes this debacle, almost two decades ago (****, time flies) it was laughed off as the bastardization of RPGs, but I think time has wizened them just as we went from Baldur's Gate to Dragon Age, Wolf3D to Half-Life or Ultima to WoW.

...and just like Michael Bay still produces dumb albeit sometimes oddly compelling garbage, the graph shows trends based more on culture and age/demographic targeting than time. Though they both remain important. Especially considering the youth of interactive digital entertainment.

Intermission: In proofing these pages, I realized I never mentioned Torchlight, which I know anyone whom reads this article sized post will inevitably bring up. Here goes nothing: Torchlight is a game--and is pretty good.

Games, however, are still in their relative infancy. Even games that will one day be considered simplistic rubbish advance the genre.

Diablo III is in that middle ground, it's not Dostoevsky, nor is it Twilight. It's a game that bears a title which will pander to the audience whom grew up with it AND those who are younger and possess the most disposable video game income. Blizzard, even after the buyout, remains one of the most observant and market savvy developers in the world. I think the big mistake here would be to assume Diablo 3 is ruining the integrity of the aRPG or betraying its predecessors. The reality of it is, Blizzard cannot concern itself with "proper" sequels, they have never been 3D Realms or Id.

Diablo III, will behave as Blizzard's consummate and primary game releases always have; present a product that showcases the state of the genre and erecting a hurtle from which their contemporaries must transcend so they have material for their next release schedule

Reinventing the wheel is sloppy--but not as risky or messy as failing to acknowledge a wider audience, Blizzard is famous for a lot of things, but risk taking will never be one of them. The dogmatic nature of Blizzard's fanboys and girls, particularly Diablo fans is rivaled in media perhaps only by Star Wars junkies and followers of groups like Radiohead. Polarized, crazed and pregnant with expectations of messianic proportions. People who so badly want to relive these moments of comfort Blizzard provided for them. But developing purely on ideal over idea is, to be blunt, just stupid.

It's not something Blizzard does despite their eons of development time. They're inspired by ideals but don't aspire to recreate magic. I admire this immensely about Blizzard. They love their properties and their fans but refuse to do the cheapened remake, the Rambo or Titanic 3D.

Instead they gut what they feel has grown moldy and disregard their cult. Sometimes it even offends me--but it's an undeniably powerful philosophy in media production, rare in any medium of consumer entertainment. Half-Life and Legend of Zelda titles similarly attempt to perfect this idea of remaining in a comfortable yet constantly evolving zone of pleasing future generations yet remaining comfortable to those who made them strong.

Blizzard teased this themselves with the rainbow shirts. The outcry when mass appeal is applied to games has more to do with individuals feeling a part of them is being stripped away. Many of these folks refuse to look in the proper places because of franchise power.

Strategy, narrative, socialization and yes, even approachability are elements which will pop in and out of various aRPG/loot games.

Action RPGs and "gaming" in general are allowed to have sub-genre, to be classified by vastly different presentations or the most nuanced of design choices.

Understandably, quite a few people will disagree or be unable to shift gears because it IS a vastly different product. Sure, in many ways one could argue Diablo III to be a less competent product than its predecessors. But I assure you critically and historically it will be cataloged as reflective and brilliant as any other paramount Blizzard release.

Blizzard is doing what they do best, defining genre through 'perfection' of consumer demand that surrounds it.

Argue through May 15th and beyond,

Let's face it, most of us who have been here long enough to see this bit of history; the release schedule and cultural impact of Blizzard games. We're jaded--we post on gaming message boards, we most certainly are not the ones with the disposable income and/or time to define the products Blizzard delivers today.

The petitions to stop constant connectivity have all but disappeared, the transition of Warcraft into an MMORPG is no longer a cardinal sin, and the cycle continues just as Kerrigan sheds her skin and becomes sexy again just in time for her upcoming magnum opus. Blizzard doesn't leave behind it's prior entries, but twelve years and the departure of Bill Roper and Blizzard North may damn well create that illusion.

Upon release the game will of course neither shock society and critics with innovation nor disappoint the typical consumer with concerns of "dumbing down." This is a paradigm created and argued in insular game communities, so hilariously circular and predictable that it seems to proceed merely out of the comfort of a rubric for argument and belittlement.

Diablo III is going to be a bloody quintessential Blizzard game, and appeal to huge amounts of people, including industry folks. It will be a staple of QA and exemplify their staying power as the most well known PC Game developer to this day.

A minority will find the product tiresome, simplified or simply dim-witted, just as with any Blizzard sequel before it. They may be correct in many regards--this should be inspiration for them to request and deliver what they believe is intelligent, and present it as eloquently as Blizzard.

Also, though placed awkwardly in this piece: let me just say I fully acknowledge the awesomeness of games like Torchlight / TQ, etc. So let me get it out of the way that I don't think Diablo end all be all (hue hue)--but this is a piece of D3 and its many cultural waves in gaming culture, so I shall commence with a brief conclusion:

I'll never be too old for a little more comfortable vacation in hell. A place I'm familiar with where clicking one button devastates opponents and empowers the player. The cogs, the fundamentals, Diablo, it's lore and sensation remain in D3, all they needed to do was provide a AAA clickfest with reasonable character progression to create a false sense of empowerment. They've already proven to have done that, and in a more contemporary sleek way, displaying intelligence in their ability to stay relevant, stay fun and remain occasionally challenging to please fans. The changes made were pragmatic ones that have always been definitively Blizzard style design decisions.

Argue until May 15th and beyond to your heart's content, but it won't change what Blizzard has already renewed its lease as the best spit-shiners in gaming history since the day they left the womb of Silicon and Synapse in Irvine California. Are they more keen to corporate interests? Yes. But for the time they have yet to deviate from their historical and admirable role in our industry as the penultimate perfectionists delivering quality well rounded products that refuse the hardcore and casual divide--and let many of us sit comfortably in the middle.

Your debate is frivolous, Diablo III will be a critical and fiscal success, and will possess, at the very least, an intelligent and inspirational presentation of development prowess within a wayward and ill-defined genre.
Click to expand...

Yikes, tl:dr for now, but I'll read that in bed for sure tonight.

Part of me is torn over the skills now that I think about it. If you read or watch into it, and listen to Blizzard's reasoning behind it with D2 out of your mind, it actually makes sense. They wanted flexibility at all times. This way, it works. In D2 or any game where you control your stats, you make your choice, which is great, but not always what's needed in certain situations and you suffer for it, and excel in other situations.

This being a co-op focused game (maybe not, but nothing in Diablo is better than grouping up on max difficulty and clearing a boss), you NEED that flexibility as long as the game demands it.

And thats the difference. IF Blizzard have designed the areas and bosses right, you will NEED to switch your skills around in dungeons for certain areas. If Blizzard have failed to do this, then yes, the skill system is retarded.

You could control your stats in D2, but lets face it, like in any other game with stats control, you will have, what, maybe half a dozen builds that EVERYONE uses, simply because everyone else uses them, and you get 'pwned' in PVP or you feel obsolete in co-op, get laughed at for being a noob etc if you dont use those builds. Thats what gamers do. We look up the best builds and focus on them. We find exploits for damage etc and use them like it's going out of fashion, ESPECIALLY if it means topping leaderboards or damage charts or winning in PVP or any other bragging nobody actually gives a shit about.

Even in WoW, there were loads of skills I never touched, as they were useless in more situations than useful ones. I rebuilt my character maybe twice over 4 years. 2nd time was simply because I clicked the wrong skill by accident.

Blizzard say there are 'trillions' of builds over the combined classes, but lets face it, each class will have maybe 3 popular builds. Everyone will use it because it's powerful and everyone else uses it. It will take a few months for these builds to be carved out through trial and error by the select few, but they will be posted around the net and soon everyone will start adopting them. ''Best farming build. Best PVP build. Best PVE build. Best healer build. Best AoE build. Best CC build'' etc etc etc

Once we have those down, the skill system wont be whined about any more, as we will all be busy dying over and over in Inferno. Oh god. Have you seen the Blizzard video on D3's difficulty? Holy mother of...haha, Dark Souls has nothing on this.


So, wanting stats makes me think it's pointless having them due to everyone having the same ones for their build, and I like the ability to switch out skills in seconds for certain situations with the current build, BUT, I completely understand that feeling of choice being 'taken away' from us.

Though on the other hand, it's not the end of the world and the game is still great. So far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 2
Replies
0
Views
8K
Barnz
B
B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 1
Replies
0
Views
48K
Barnz
B
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
Back
Top