Page 2 of 51 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
12
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Darsithis View Post
    The game didn't fail, and it wasn't meant to have an "end-game" of the same style as say, WoW. Too many people didn't take the time to research just what games like the Diablo series are.

    Before I get a bunch of ridiculous posts on how D3 isn't perfectly the same as all other examples of the type, I say "Who cares?". Change is normal. I've played all those old games and I like the new D3. It comes down mainly to personal opinion, but the numbers don't lie: D3 didn't fail. Just those who are unhappy tend to be a lot more vocal than those that aren't.

    Can you name the last time you posted a thread to say "God, I love this game!!"?
    I'd post a thread like that but I'd be infracted/banned because I'd end up swearing/cursing a lot, so that I don't have to kill the fucking moron that starts crying/saying a lot of crap about the game.

    It's probably because of that thing they did, pay for 1 year of WoW get Diablo for free. The amount of idiots playing D3 is ridiculous.

  2. #22
    Diablo 3 was poorly made considering the hype and design time put into it. The story line is rather limited, there is barely any diversity in the game and most of your time will be spent browsing the auction house looking for upgrades instead of finding them out in the world. The diversity blizzard promised as far as specs of champions are concerned is bullshit, certain abilities and runes for them are worthless. Once again blizzard charges us for the game while balancing it after release which is unforgivable especially in a system where you allow people to spend real money on items, and then nerf or change those items after the fact.


    The crafting system is extremely lacking, the new design of the game sends you killing elite packs of champions instead of farming bosses. You're now juggling 5 stacks of a buff that expires in 30 minutes the entire time, its lost on spell change and log out. The game was just not well implemented, the experience is pretty lacking and you're left feeling like blizzard got more out of you than you get out of them. Again

  3. #23
    I sank over 80 hours into it. Not a failure.

    I think the anger toward this game stems from:

    - Blizzard getting additional revenue streams from the franchise outside of original game and expansion pack purchases.
    - No PVP (yet).
    - Auction house influencing drop rates.
    - The sainthood of D2.
    - No offline mode.

    Personally my enjoyment with D3 was the exact same as my enjoyment with D2. However, I wasn't really dedicated as I was not the type to continue playing after completing Hell difficulty.
    Last edited by LonestarHero; 2012-07-05 at 05:27 PM.

  4. #24
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    444
    It got me 100+ hours played into it, I wouldn't say it failed but it doesn't have long lasting playability.

  5. #25
    I love the game and have put in over 300 hours so far, it's been well worth the money and I will be playing it for some time yet.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Caiada View Post
    Why is length almost the sole determinant in your assessment of the game's quality?
    Because otherwise you're buying a car with an incredible engine and great handling that breaks down and becomes useless after 25,000 miles. Duration is one of the most important factors of a game or any other product for that matter.

  7. #27
    Senior Memb- malkara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veghel, Netherlands, Europe, World
    Posts
    873
    I was expecting:
    -A decent story. I got this.
    -A brutal gameplay experience. I got this.
    -A Diablo 2-like endgame. I got this.
    I would have liked, but this is where subjectiveness has to be kept in mind:
    -A dark-ish atmosphere. I sort of got this (end of act 1 for example).
    -A necromancer like class. Did not get this.

    Subjectiveness has to be kept in mind, however nothing concerning Diablo 3 apparently does.
    What do you think you know and how do you think you know it?

    Are you conscious in the sense of being aware of your own awareness?

  8. #28
    The game "failed" because it deviated too far from what D2 was, and went too far in the direction of an MMO. I played Diablo 2 almost every day for a 3 year period, and I never got a level 99 character. Everyone has a max level character in D3 right now. It's honestly pretty simple. Diablo 2's journey was way, way longer than Diablo 3's. And probably better, but that's just my opinion.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by sulfuric View Post
    Because otherwise you're buying a car with an incredible engine and great handling that breaks down and becomes useless after 25,000 miles. Duration is one of the most important factors of a game or any other product for that matter.
    That's a terrible analogy.

    Are you also upset when a movie isn't as long as LOTR?

  10. #30
    It fell in a weird middle ground for me, between an MMO and a regular game. Games like Batman: Arkham Asylum and the like were fun on the ride, and in the end I felt satisfied. Games like WoW had that ever persisting feeling of being able to play a character you became attached to indefinitely. But Diablo 3 kind of rode the middle ground in providing perpetual character progression through gear while having a definite end to it. So considering that, I found the completion of the game to be largely unsatisfying.

    It didn't fail, it just didn't deliver a euphoric, "That was a fun game" at the end for me.
    Freakin' infraction points...how do they work?!

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by La View Post
    it selling well doesn`t mean it didn`t fail in countless other ways.
    "QQ it didn't live up to my outlandish, nostalgia-based expectations therefore it failed QQ"

    Which, coincidentally, also pretty much sums up 95% of the whining about the game. The other 5% is not having an offline mode, which is at least semi-valid.

  12. #32
    It's not an MMO. It's basically an arcade game mixed some features of an mmo (levling, classes, etc)

  13. #33
    My opinion is that concep of the game just got old. Ppl are not satysifed with just item grind any more espetialy after games with much more complex and fun gameplay that came after Diablo 2 (such as WoW and other mmos). Sure there are a lot of ppl who didnt play any other game after Diablo 2 and they ll be happy with D3, but for me (and many other ppl) it is just basic concept that is not fun any more and is prety much outdated.

    p.s. sorry for my bad English

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Caiada View Post
    That's a terrible analogy.

    Are you also upset when a movie isn't as long as LOTR?
    You're giving a terrible analogy. I am upset when the life of a product is less than the product proceeding it. I don't care about your terrible comparison

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by sulfuric View Post
    You're giving a terrible analogy. I am upset when the life of a product is less than the product proceeding it. I don't care about your terrible comparison
    It's much more comparable than a car. Games don't have some predetermined length to be compared universally among all the other games that exist because every game is a different experience of different lengths. LOTR would be terrible stuffed into an hour and a half just like most action movies would suck stretched out to 3 hours. Skyrim would be godawful if it was 3 hours long just like CoD's campaign would suck (even worse...) if it was 50 hours long. The Simpsons and Family Guy should've died seasons ago. Etc. If games are some service that you're expecting some predetermined value from, I can confidently say you and anyone like you is doing it wrong.

  16. #36
    I am Murloc! Thelxi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,446
    I didn't expect it to live up to D2, especially after the whole AP deal. What I was surprised at was the extremely greedy design of the game.

  17. #37
    Stood in the Fire Gladiator2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    488
    I was expecting a game I would put years into, like I did with D2. What I got was a game I put a month into and didn't want to play anymore.

    150 hours played of decent fun for 100 bucks is not bad at all by any means, it just didn't live up what I was hoping for and simply doesn't have the replayability for me to keep playing it. So even though I feel I got my moneys worth I still felt let down.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by sulfuric View Post
    You're giving a terrible analogy. I am upset when the life of a product is less than the product proceeding it. I don't care about your terrible comparison
    Wow, didn't know you could get so butthurt over having an awful, nonsensical analogy get called out. So basically all games need to be increasing linearly in time played as time goes on, or else they're bad by default? Damn, imagine how long those games will have to be 20 years from now!

  19. #39
    I don't think D3 failed. In fact, it delivers a good chunk of fun and replayability. And to those who keep saying D2 was better... Well, it was not. D2 was "better" after several patches and an expansion - Base product was short and shallow! So before rising in arms, at least give them time to polish the game, and maybe release new content.

  20. #40
    lol, gotta love the people with statements like "wasn't Diablo 2 just like this? replaying it over and over again?". Go try out D2 and check for yourself. The fast-paced game, the variety of choice, the higher complexity on items\stats\gear and the infinite replayability on it just blows d3 out of the park. you have so much choices on d2, on what to farm\what to do. You have 15m to play? you can farm a variety of bosses very quickly, with ease of movements from acts. On d3? you have 15m, no point farming, you wouldn't get the 5 stack of NV\reach a boss anyways. Oh, and you can only farm the same segments, over and over again. act 1 jailer+butcher after running festering\cemetery\manor\tower, or siegebreaker's on act3... so much fun. not.

    The only similarities between d2 and d3 is the name and having a barbarian class. they just ruined the franchise, sadly.

    luckily d2 is still up and running!

    Plus, you needed months(years on the most extreme cases) to get the best gear, instead of farming(buying lol) gold and spending 5m on the AH (stormshield... check. helm of command, check. bla bla). It's just ridiculous what they did to the game.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •