What's the worst that can happen to you ...
There is a difference between the ever evolving content and a missing component that was supposed to be in the game when it was launched, would we disagree if they didn't include elite packs in act 3&4 but had PvP, or perhaps no act 3 or 4 at all, I mean the game would still be playable, right?
---------- Post added 2013-01-09 at 10:41 PM ----------
Last edited by Redblade; 2013-01-09 at 09:42 PM.
A car engine is integral for it to work with an intended purpose, which is to drive it. Of course it isn't complete or finished if they left out the engine. Unfortunately for you, Diablo 3 does work as intended without PvP. If it was a PvP ARPG, instead of a loot progression PvE RPG, then you would have had a strong case.
A house without windows or a door follows the same principle. A house is shelter. A functioning shelter prevents things from getting to you. Obviously without windows that has not been completed or finished.
I'm not trying to patronize you, because there's a chance you just picked bad examples, but your metaphor is only reinforcing my stance.
The caveat of course being that dominant historical and social perceptions (opinions) wind up creating the use of an object. Likewise, intended design can do the same. Of course we could be ridiculous and say a house and car have other purposes that can be accomplished without engines and windows, but you have enough common sense to know that argument doesn't hold up here.
The overall design of the game and a pretty large perception is that ARPG's are ARPG's whether they have PvP or not. I know you would agree on that fact, because your specific claim here is that what they said isn't what you got. Which I admit, is not good, but doesn't make what you have any less 'finished'. This is why I used a cooking metaphor.
You played D3 for a thousand hours. Grtz for your Paragon lvl 100 btw ...
That practically means 4 hours a day, every day...
The game was very much complete or you wouldn't have put a 1000 hours of your life into it...
You do realise we only have around 2500-3000 active weeks in our lives ?
Stop playing the word game and stop hurting my and your intelligence.
Last edited by BenBos; 2013-01-09 at 11:16 PM.
I think the issue could be phrased in another way than examples, since there is not always a compatible example that works perfectly with what one wishes to describe.
The main problem, as I see it, is not that PvP was not added yet. However, when you get years of previews of PvP, tons of information on how it will work, promises that it will be a part of the game at launch, then gets delayed saying that it soon will be released, and finally, more than half a year later, we now know that it will not be added, it would be a complete surprise if no one got disappointed.
For anyone who mainly wanted to PvP and play TDM as well as people wishing to do something different in the game who would like to try it out, this would be nothing else than a huge, huge disappointment. It simply would be better that they released TDM instead of scrapping years of development time in one go, which could have been used elsewhere. Just imagining how much wasted resources that must have gone into designing it makes me die a little inside.
I'm not the one who is applying my definition to the genre. The genre is already defined. It's an ARPG...it doesn't have to have PvP regardless of how they say it.
It's really as simple as saying: Neither one of us will budge, we both present metaphors, 'factual' information, yet we still share the same beliefs. Since the item in question is a philosophical argument, neither of us can be right. This means by nature that this is opinionated. It doesn't make your opinion wrong, or mine wrong, but it can't be stated as a definitive or as factual information like you (possibly..it's been a long thread) and definitely others claim it to be.
No amount of passion or displeasure with the situation can change that.
I think you can probably respectfully agree on that much, which means we have found ourselves arguing semantics in the end. I will try to remember this, even if there's some juicy tidbits that try to lure me back in. We have Tommys on one side and Benbos on the other making everything look stupid. We should probably put our intellect to better use.
IMO, game is neither complete or unfinished - its just a half-assed product.
The only reason I could think of why it was taking them so long to incorporate dueling is balancing issues. A well geared lvl 60 can easily one shot another player with the right equipment. Only reason I could think of
Yeah, Internet Explorer is great... I used it to download Google Chrome.
Last edited by Darsithis; 2013-01-11 at 06:02 PM.
Wow <3 Korra<3 Giants<3
You argue this based on your views and expectations of what the game should be instead of looking at it as any other product where a piece is missing from the complete package, if you feel that the piece is needed or not doesn't matter as looking at the whole it's simply not complete. Now if Blizzard had said during the years of development, interviews, Q&A's and so on that Diablo 3 would be a PvE game only with the possibility of having PvP down the line it would have been different, they didn't though, instead they talked about it using the same language as any other feature you think is vital to the game and it's state of completion.
However, it still does not change that they said that they had plans to include it in the game for some years now and now we will not even see it released. The whole thing was a waste of time for both the players who waited for it as well as Blizzard, who developed the feature. It was all a huge waste with no results.
If they never bothered with developing TDM or at least scrapped it earlier, we would have had actual PvP, by now. More waiting and less playing, which is never a good thing.
Last edited by Frozen Death Knight; 2013-01-10 at 03:43 PM.