Diablo III

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

TWD

Cute and Cuddly
Aug 2, 2000
7,445
15
38
38
Salt Lake City UT
members.lycos.co.uk
I think the reviewer has a point... for as long as this game was in development, how does it manage to add nothing new to the genre? It doesn't mean it's not fun or a good game, it just means it should have been out 2 years ago. That being said, the writer himself admits he's only in Act 2 when he wrote that. Perhaps his view will change in Act 3.

SC2 has been on sale for $30 in the past though, a price I am unwilling to pay for that game but more likely to pay for Diablo 3.

But again Blizzard has not been seeking to make big gameplay changes to any of its recent titles. For those of us that still played the originals that's more than enough.

However, it certainly would take a long time to generate all of the art content for the game, and I'm sure that's where the vast majority of the development costs went.

So if the complaint is "there isn't anything new or revolutionary about this game" then I would argue that you weren't the demographic that this game is targeted towards. You're playing the wrong game. It's a nostalgia trip, and nothing more.
 

Sjosz

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Dec 31, 2003
3,048
0
36
Edmonton, AB
www.dregsld.com
However, it certainly would take a long time to generate all of the art content for the game, and I'm sure that's where the vast majority of the development costs went.

I'll go ahead and disagree with you. Sure content development takes time, but this being the online-only game it is, it has to have been programmed that way from the ground up and I'd venture a guess that most of the development time has gone towards building everything to be network-supported.
 

xMurphyx

New Member
Jun 2, 2008
1,502
0
0
liandri.darkbb.com
So if the complaint is "there isn't anything new or revolutionary about this game" then I would argue that you weren't the demographic that this game is targeted towards. You're playing the wrong game. It's a nostalgia trip, and nothing more.
I would then argue, that if you're after a nostalgia trip and you want to relive the glory days of Diablo 1 or 2 you'd be playing the wrong game too, because the right game to play then would be Path of Exile..
 

Sir_Brizz

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 3, 2000
26,020
83
48
I would then argue, that if you're after a nostalgia trip and you want to relive the glory days of Diablo 1 or 2 you'd be playing the wrong game too, because the right game to play then would be Path of Exile..
Or how about Diablo 1 and 2?

I mean, it's not like Blizzard ever stops supporting their most popular games, right? Both of these games still operate just fine, even on Battle.net and brand new computers.

I still think it's a ridiculously long time to develop a game that does little to "change the game", although it does change some things that might make long time fans crazy (like always-on DRM).

And, frankly, again, I'm not saying the game isn't going to be fun, even for me. It's more of an observation than a criticism as far as I'm concerned.
 

TWD

Cute and Cuddly
Aug 2, 2000
7,445
15
38
38
Salt Lake City UT
members.lycos.co.uk
Or how about Diablo 1 and 2?

I mean, it's not like Blizzard ever stops supporting their most popular games, right? Both of these games still operate just fine, even on Battle.net and brand new computers.

I still think it's a ridiculously long time to develop a game that does little to "change the game", although it does change some things that might make long time fans crazy (like always-on DRM).

And, frankly, again, I'm not saying the game isn't going to be fun, even for me. It's more of an observation than a criticism as far as I'm concerned.

Actually not true. Diablo II was originally set up to use glide, and the online game is pointless now because of griefers. I had a lot of trouble getting Diablo II to run on my machines. It took several hours to get them working on both machines so I could play with my wife. The game needed an update to extend the life.
 

xMurphyx

New Member
Jun 2, 2008
1,502
0
0
liandri.darkbb.com
I don't know. I have Windows 7 64 bit (playing in a network with a Windows XP 32 3bit machine), a modern gpu, a multicore processor and a widescreen monitor. So pretty much all the usual pitfalls for older games. I've had zero trouble getting Diablo 2 to run flawlessly.
 

SleepyHe4d

fap fap fap
Jan 20, 2008
4,152
0
0
I've had zero trouble getting Diablo 2 to run flawlessly.

Same here. He's got a point about the online bs though. I really do wish Diablo 3 was a nostalgia trip though, but what it really is is just a way to cash in on all the WoW kids or non-diablo fans (well, just a wider audience imo) looking for something different for a short period.

I have serious doubts that this game will have the staying power that D1 or D2 had (10 years daymn) or be able to build up a true fanbase like the former games did, but instead just work as a temporary distraction of sorts.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this game evolves in a year or two, knowing blizzard and their patches. Maybe will pick the game up cheaper at that time if it ends up thriving. :eek:

Square Gems are the lol.

[]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_legHoEvJM[/m]

Lolz, $60 for this? :doh:

Well, I guess there's still hell mode if that doesn't work there. :p
 
Last edited:

TWD

Cute and Cuddly
Aug 2, 2000
7,445
15
38
38
Salt Lake City UT
members.lycos.co.uk
I have serious doubts that this game will have the staying power that D1 or D2 had (10 years daymn) or be able to build up a true fanbase like the former games did, but instead just work as a temporary distraction of sorts.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this game evolves in a year or two, knowing blizzard and their patches. Maybe will pick the game up cheaper at that time if it ends up thriving. :eek:

Agreed. Back then that was all we had. It just doesn't have the same power it did back then. I even question how much staying power Diablo II really had. There's a good 300 hours of playing time in this game for the hardcore that beat it on hardest difficulty with every class, but it's not going to last for 10 years.
 

SleepyHe4d

fap fap fap
Jan 20, 2008
4,152
0
0
Yup, it does have to do with external factors too, or just being in the right place at the right time. Also fan dedication once a group gets into something specific. CoD4 and 2 still have way more people playing them than any of the newer ones where they try to add or change all kinds of stuff.

Edit: Wow though, people are going at it, but I guess it's not too surprising.

ONBhQ.jpg


Interestingly enough it hasn't cut into D2's time at all which is at 2500 hours, respectable for a 10 year old game and compared to #12 on that list, SC2 with 7800 hours.
 
Last edited:

Sir_Brizz

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 3, 2000
26,020
83
48
Maybe it was around the time that they increased the freaking price of the D2 battle chest. Been waiting to buy that forever.
 

Sir_Brizz

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 3, 2000
26,020
83
48
Region restrictions strike again................ Gotta love useless DRM. I got the Starter Edition from Firefly, but because it's a European key, the game doesn't see a license on my Battle.net account.

Way to go, Blizzard....
 

Kantham

Fool.
Sep 17, 2004
18,034
2
38
Public games are terrible anyway. You get matched up against AFK'ers or people going their own way. Get in a public game of 4 and you can expect to have the worse experience possible.

Lolz, $60 for this? :doh:

Well, I guess there's still hell mode if that doesn't work there. :p

My friend described the AH as "come here to win". It's not really arguable on normal difficulty, but you will still die on Nightmare (2/4).

This game is still fun.
 
Last edited:

Capt.Toilet

Good news everyone!
Feb 16, 2004
5,826
3
38
41
Ottawa, KS
I read this on Kotaku this morning as well.
I've been thinking about getting this game and I am a single player only type. What i want to know is would I still be vulnerable to this type of crap or is it only the ones in multiplayer. I've heard conflicting reports.

I have no idea but I would guess yes since you are constantly online, even if you choose "offline mode". I put that in quotes because you aren't really offline, you just won't be joinable.

Blizzard has responded by the way http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Diablo-3-Authenticator-Battle.net-Bashiok-Password,15724.html
 
Last edited:
So apparently, according to Blizzard, I am supposed to get an "Authenticator" to protect my battle.net account.

And of course this "Authenticator" is to be "Purchased" or I can use the free smart phone app...which would be nice if I owned a smart phone.

So basically I need to pay the Mafia (Blizzard) for protection from Hackers when in fact Blizzard should be providing the security for free. If they want online only play then it's their responsibility to provide a hack free environment.

As fun as this game looks I think I'll unfortunately have to pass. And I certainly don't see a light at the end of this tunnel considering that Blizzard is having this much trouble (and apparently trying to brush it under the rug) and the real money auction house hasn't even opened yet.